eee OOH A ee Aa Lf Oe yiae HHS GOV de e's Dae Lair Paks on, > Bae " 49 Dua MEE P DP Oe wy ¥ FP ho be Ae tS at) Hd hh Wu be heey teens FF Shee SEH We pas is hal Pty She Yer neq 7 EC nel 2 >» 2 Soy >> 60 be BREN " ¥ PN > Whe [APU PO heh ep WMS HE we! He ang 7 Vlew hr we Ph ep bebe ey . ay OU ECS op ony : ae hie uP h Dene yutee { . 2 2 %. <, ?, 2 ?, *; 7, cr ? te ? 2 ates eos poo) of #4 eees ae i ’ fs te: i La # a we. eae, pets So <2 a se vee J 4 ¢ , s, 7: + z. = = rt z. Fn. 2%. ima, 4 ‘¢ 4) ¥ 2%, £3 Yere: #2 Pet es ea) fp sty real _ ko nn »® hae ene Ce. an ne i trea Pen ho core ne Lee ay oh Be pe NPR Ne Peete ae ie tte * Pe aoe oom nea sopers as Apryr sd rdgigh Lose arirarw ee rbd belo Memeraal erent paren cnen et = Sree Sas a eh es Sees SA ri te Acti ty aah, are pat OF Oo 0s & Ons Org, = het pig tniy he 5 Arteta CN SCE res, ew Plast ob ote eet RA a tt tr Std Aver e ¢ ie na bet iene , Psy ‘ bye, ft Ave bes ~~ | a IVR AT Xs Phat Nae Sqn dass bh rer | pon “ane, = vo Wee piedalatobil ONS aes CNR Bee | BN AOU sal Bich 4 “ANS “ @enn ; | a he. aah uMAaa r NAA [ prime} re a tan ry, pra sense ea x deepen iit i tte sguaRAa baat . AEMINAN UE tan mie SNSAee eS Ne, Na pransrahan mira mae a2 Py ee ; \ wae i AV th ae. > aaah x a ‘eu Be = a se Ee Perea ee ps p pane” ma MA® Ys 2 >>. it oe Aken (e@a@s: TL lanl a anteen|(/THh ; pt Pingel” ol) PEL ERABeAtGe fo ». o MEe aS 14 desere LL mY ‘a yp Pt “A eenes aot a ae POLLY be aha AAA aman an Ran~Am- aa a @ A Rgaecns Tai : : kata ane pA Obhe ee | HIT TY ab f nabAal 4 he : mean oe Axa eee le Na 3 até ny Saati Peper i 4 ae a: rnga S.A “AR mi = es & 3 p. ‘ 6 | | ‘Y e Tt ble o <4 my ae “he, = ee 2 3 al B. Ine even eaatt 1 | | mg: SOE PLT) bp THAT py iss ~~ aaa » . rH araan bas a & ir - 7 Pe Bes ae ¢ Te Be nana ' Held) bt ed ff tet be. 8 an, : 1 ’ 5 : =_ Pe et lela as AanAaags , on. Mp E aA Me Rin Trek aan anse fl a ry so aS Aah er’ Aas: ani Ser Aa’ saan: HT ann he ise” ay Ay TT F\s _ an yl >a. Daa au Po] eRe -@pr 4- OL Nr ied ~s aan a Py ie ‘hi eteah | Wet Asn ahead oie aan MiAdAa -*t te bonne Tone | eA LU ry al Te a As : ARA “ti ¥. AaAm, } - an Ny | Ran ff wy A ener. E ; \ 7 Ay pm fae a Baal . LLL CTT RAY baer ip Poseee’ mn Sy Lace bight ri sabe AABN aS prose’ oe » d ad > » 7. if ai gz ; p ¥ 4 4 4 ~ > Wein. ah Wii ait! oT td bbebetd tea whey eee BB ; a - re Ley eel Weer Ag Mh a) SY Perrine reece Piainaill | > Ee ee ~ i ” 5 y. : 7% — ie ST v i, Tow ve VUReeaeneoes mest OT ay So uy 5 & re ae ' ae SA, we. MA tw ute Yo 7 mh a ee Exc = Ne pn " * Ss, weuuy , aT 14 4 5 hh . , F v yy Vextvigeey” ‘ ATT ~ =e a . a6 Vine wew ; L ; oe Ae a OO Negie 3 Cee ES +. os. se teeg” ; =F TTT Tea we server sinew te verry oy Nha wr we § ye a Be A ee Oe De Wee ate % ey ava mn oe rn bo SB Q7Re Vv | d ¢ ‘) 4 o = bc = baal Pid & ‘ \ Z » oS <¥, gree ie, Meron Be. eee Me Orne LONI NG Ta Bie ae ~ Ay oo inc i vhly A Wutweewrei cee | rveettnvens ie etvove Nibloces/iIte MENTS cuuy rere: TY gr xez MTT TTT TT et Se fn : Tl bel << | w@ on wee wee seusese sy nyt dLlltyt } He vay Nan at Nyy, ML i a ae | : hd ee Shee ay hy wei V yutey a) pes Pal weg BO) By “e va ¥ hence — te wee y* ‘yt Fa Myst \ wom ae ® Tis ; way ‘ ese sun pusupi¥ tate venicerer nem www ft yee ~ ‘@ 7 4 ie ee Mey HL Gil ges =a Se ieddt | mete + Berries sdeheld lh Weary Lee ria Va THI ELT SL HLL PUTS ae eve AL) | Sd CLL . ee Alp Pe) teeee ¥ Tie Bee erate eh : vey oe \ ws tee aD head oR | PAT te oat tlre, » I) ae prt, Py OTTT he ate 7 ewe Wt Woe: jeqee? ¢ ancient” F Bt yty ver ¥ Vir ny 1 fe ath seaport hy Oe ree’ ‘egy wor Py we reerly A , ats 3% nd @ amr a] VW wr o. wy = were Mo eet re ern pe pe HE vitiy COON apedaul eet ‘ PON UE TLE | a ee my is P a] ‘ A Te : i Te OP Eh Vad es j f ie ‘- ab { Ve Sa AP Ar wy LA tay, oa as 4 i" ‘| ; y . 4 i) 4 i” uh} oi ee ? , 1 7 heheh petal We a i Y Serer 4 tae ae fa Ole par te hoe 7 wa -- 4 Soe Re OLp SERIES, ) CONTINUATION OF THE ( New Serres, 2 Vou. XXXVIII |) BuLLerin or THE Nutratt OrniTHOLOGICAL CLUB ton, Roo The Auk H Quarterly Journal of Ornithology EDITOR WITMER STONE VOLUME Xxx ge | PUBLISHED BY | HG 10.0% The American Ornithologists’ Union 2 CAMBRIDGE, MASS. 1913 Entered as second-class mail matter in the Post Office at Boston, Mass. ——————— rl ; 4A | ll a. ae CONTENTS OF VOLUME XXX. NUMBER I. Some More Lasravor Notrs. By Charles W. Townsend, M. D. Plates I-II) d ; : : Nores on THE PANAMA THRUSH-WARBLER. By Hubert Lyman Clark EIGHTEEN SPECIES or BIRDS NEW TO THE Prior ISLAN DS, INCLUD- ING FOUR NEW TO NortTH AmeErRIcA. By Barton W. Evermann Aw Essex County OrnirHoxoaist. By Glover M. a : ConTRIBUTIONS TO AVIAN PALEONTOLOGY. By R. » Shufeldt. (Plate III) A Srupy or THE House Fivcu. By W. H. Bergtold, M.D. Birp PHOTOGRAPHY BY THE Direct CoLor Process. By Frank Overton, M.D. and Francis Harper : Tue Carouintan Avirauna In NortHEeasTern Iowa “By Althea R. Sherman A DIFFERENT ASPECT OF THE Case OF RooseEv: ELT vs. THAY ER. By Thomas Barbour ON THE GENERIC Names [bis Lacephpe, AND Egatheus BILLBERG. By Gregory M. Mathews, F. R.S. (Edin. Vie : ‘ THIRTIETH STATED MrErrina OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ Union. By John H. Sage GENERAL NOTES. PaGE 1 11 Sabine’s Gull in Massachusetts, 105; Another Bridled Tern for South Carolina, 105; Caspian Tern in Chester Co., Pennsylvania, 105; Fulmar in Massachusetts, 105; White Pelican at Savannah, Georgia, 106; The Black Duck Controversy Again, 106; The Harlequin Duck in Wyoming, 106; The King Eider (Somateria spectabilis) in Massachusetts, 107; Brazilian Tree Duck (Dendro- cygua viduata) in New Jersey, 110; An Addition to the A. O. U. Check-List, 110; Little Blue Heron (Florida cerulea) in Vermont, 111; Swimming of Young Herons, 111; Northern Phalarope (Lobipes lobatus) in Michigan, 111; Black Vulture in Vermont, 112; The Swallow-tailed Kite in DeWitt Co., Illinois, 112; The Alder Flycatcher in Colorado, 112; Arkansas Kingbird i in Massa- chusetts, 112; Yellow-headed Blackbird in Virginia, 113; The Slate-colored Fox Sparrow Breeding in Colorado, 113; Harris’s Sparrow in Eastern Ontario, 114; Magnolia Warbler in the Coast Region of South Carolina, 114; "A Few Notes on Newfoundland Birds, 114; Additional Notes to the ‘Birds of Gallatin County, Montana,’ 116; Two new records for Washington State, 116; A Correction, 116; An Item for Bibliographers, 117. RECENT LITERATURE. Forbush on the Game Birds, Wild-Fow] and Shore Birds, 118; Miller on the Classification of Kingfishe rs, 119; Reed’s ‘ Birds of Eastern North America,’ 120; Hellmayr and Seilern on the Birds of the Contents of Volume XXX. Cumbre de Valencia, Venezuela, 121; Hellmayr on Zonotrichia strigiceps Gould, 121; Nelson on New Birds from Panama, Colom- bia and Ecuador, 121; Oberholser’s Revision of the Green Herons, 122; Oberholser’s One Hundred and Four new Birds from the Barussan Islands and Sumatra, 123; Mathews’ ‘Birds of Austra- lia,’ 124; Bickerton’s ‘Home-Life of the Terns,’ 125; Shelley’s ‘Birds of Africa,’ 126; Horsbrugh and Davies on the Game-Birds and Water-Fowl of South Africa, 126; Thayer’s ‘ Concealing Col- oration, an Answer to Theodore Roosevelt,’ 126; Strong on Teach- ing a Bird Course, 127; Beal on the Food of our More Important Flycatchers, 127; Beal and McAtee on Food of Some Well-known Birds) 127: Palmer on National Reservations for the Protection of Wild Life, 128; Economie Ornithology in Recent Entomological Publications, 128; Economie Ornithology in California, 132; Some Bird Enemies of Amphipods; Injurious African Birds, 1387; The Ornithological Journals, 138; Ornithological Articles in Other Journals, 148; Publications Received, 148. CORRESPONDENCE. The Concealing Coloration Question, 146; The Scientific Value of Bird Photography, 147; The A. O. U. Check-List, Third Edition, 150; Destruction of Sapsuckers, 154. NOTES AND NEWS. New Cover Design, 158; Obituary: Bradford Torrey, 158; Obituary: Valdemar Knudsen, 160; Field Museum’s Explorations in Peru, 160; Habitat Groups in the Field Museum, 160; American Mu- seum’s Expedition to South America, 161; Expedition to the Soudan, 161; Expedition to James Bay, 161; Ridgway’s ‘Birds of North and Middle America,’ 161; The Marsh Island Bird Reser- vation, 162; Mr. Bent’s Report of Progress on the Life Histories of N. A. Birds, 162; Dawson’s Birds of California, 165; Dinner of the Linnzean Society of N. Y., 166. NUMBER II. Pace Notes on Swatnson’s Hawk (Buteo swainsoni) In MontTANA. By E. S. Cameron. Plate IV) ; 5 F P P a Aleve THE Fox Sparrow As A SonasterR. By Robert Thomas Moore. (Plate V) a) be 2 ConcEALING ACTION oF THE BrTTERN (Botaurus lentiginosus). By Walter Bradford Barrows 187 Brrp MIGRATION FROM THE STANDPOINT OF ITS PERIODIC ACCURACY. By John C. Phillips 191. Tur ReLation or Brrp MiGrATION TO THE WEATHER. By Wells W. Cooke. (Plate VI) : 205 Two New Racks or THE PIGMYy Ow. FROM THE Pactrrc Coast. By J. Grinnell i : : ; 3) 222, Ontario Birp Notss. By THe Fleming fy 225 Mors Notes ON THE MORNING AWAKENING. By Francis H. Allen . 229 Notes oN SOME OF THE RARER BIRDS OF THE PRATRIE PART OF THE Cuicaco AREA. By G. LHifrig - : : - 236 GENERAL NOTES. Holbeell’s Grebe in Concord, Mass., 267; Additional Notes on the Harlequin Duck in Wyoming, 267; White Ibis (Guwara alba) in Missouri, 268; Glossy Ibis (Plegadis autwmnalis) in Hastern Cuba: A New Record, 268; Bittern breeding in New Jersey, 268; Nest- ing of the Black Rail in New Jersey, 269; A Recent Capture of the Eskimo Curlew, 269; Hudsonian Curlew on Long Island in Win- ter, 270; A Peculiar Hudsonian Curlew, 270; Hudsonian Godwit on the Magdalen Islands, 271; The Golden Plover (Charadrius dominicus dominicus) Again on the Coast of South Carolina, 271; On the Occurrence of Columba squamosa (Bonaterre) in Cuba, 271; The Marsh Hawk Nesting in New Jersey, 272; The Sharp- shinned Hawk again in Maine in Winter, 272; First Michigan Specimen of the Three-toed Woodpecker, 272; Arkansas King- bird (Tyrannus verticalis) in Delaware, 273; The Wood Pewee as a. Foster Parent, 273; Two Flycatchers of the Genus Empidonax New to the Fauna of South Carolina, 273; A Baltimore Oriole in Winter, 274; Starlings and Turkey Vultures Migrating, 274; The Evening Grosbeak in Wisconsin, 275; The Snow Bunting (Plectro- phenax nivalis) in Chicago and Vicinity during the Fall and Winter of 1912, 275; A Strange Sparrow Roost, 275; Towhee in Winter near Steubenville, Ohio, 276; Barn Swallow in South Carolina in Winter, 276; Notes on the Loggerhead Shrike at Barachias, Montgomery Co., Ala., 276; Wintering of the Blue-headed Vireo (Lanivireo solitarius solitarius) at Aiken, South Carolina, 277; The Magnolia Warbler (Dendroica magnolia): an Addition to the Fauna of the Coast Region of South Carolina, 277; The Cape May Warbler (Dendroica tigrina) taken in the Spring on the Coast of South Carolina, 278; Catbird and Brown Thrasher in Winter in. Massachusetts, 278; Brown Thrasher Wintering near St. Louis, - Mo., 278; Random Notes from Easton, Pa., 279; A few South Dakota Records of some Western Birds, 280; Additions to a List of the Birds of Harding County, Northwestern South Dakota, 281; Birds at Sea, 281; Two Ornithological Fables from Louisiana, 282. RECENT LITERATURE. Scharff’s ‘Distribution and Origin of Life in America,’ 283; Brabourne and Chubb: ‘The Birds of South America,’ 286; Oberholser’s ‘A Revision of the Forms of the Great Blue Heron,’ 287; Torrey’s ‘Field-days in California,’ 288; Nelson on Two New Birds from Panama, 288; Bent on a New Crossbill from Newfoundland, 288; Mearns on a New African Grass Warbler, 289; Ornithology in the Smithsonian Report for 1911, 289; Horsbrugh’s Game-Birds and Water-Fowl of South Africa, 289; Hellmayr on Birds from the Mouth of the Amazon, 289; McAtee’s ‘Index to U. 8. Department Contents of Volume XXX. iii Pace BREEDING Birps oF ALAcHUA County, Fiorina. By Oscar E. Baynard . F ‘ : ‘ ; : ‘ ; = . 240 WHAT THE AMERICAN Birp BANDING ASSOCIATION HAS ACCOM— PLISHED DURING 1912. By Howard H. Cleaves. (Plates VII- VIII) é E : , é ‘ 5 ; : ; . 248 AnatomicaL Notes ON SOME GENERA OF PASSERINE Birps. By Hubert Lyman Clark ‘ 5 ; k ; : . 262 Contents of Volume XXX. of Agriculture Publications on the Food of Birds,’ 290; Craig’s Studies of Bird Behavior, 290; Tschusi zu Schmidhoffen on Aus- trian Ornithological Literature for 1911, 291; Mrs. Myers’ ‘The Birds’ Convention,’ 291; Grinnell on Conserving the Band-tailed Pigeon as a Game Bird, 291; Henshaw’s ‘ Fifty Common Birds of Farm and Orchard,’ 292; Three Important Economic Reports, 292; Economic Ornithology in Recent Entomological Publica- tions, 293; More Economic Papers by Bryant, 294; Relation of the Turkey-buzz: ard to Diseases of Live-Stock, 295; Cassinia, ‘ 298; The Ornithological Journals, 299; Ornithological Articles in Other Journals, 306; Publications Received, 308. CORRESPONDENCE. The Concealing Coloration Question, 311. NOTES AND NEWS. Obituary: Robert Collett, 318; Obituary: Chester A. Reed, 319; Obituary: William B. Tegetmeier, 319. Decennial Index to ‘The Auk,’ 319; The Wilson Ornithological Club, 320; The American Museum Expedition to South America, 321; Bird and Game Legislation, 321; Fleming Collection in the Victoria Mu- seum, 322: Bird-banding in England, 322; The R. A. O. U. List of Australian Birds, 323; Tw enty-third Annual Meeting of the ID), Wo Os Cay BBE Book Notice, 323; Ninth International Zodlo- gical Congress, 323. NUMBER III. oe Pace Birp Migration Recorps or WriiiAM Bartram, 1802— “1822. By Witmer Stone. (Plates [X—XI) : 5 aaa CONCERNING THE FLIGHT OF GULLS. By Alexander Rorbes oo List oF Brrps COLLECTED IN THE TERRITORY OF QUINTANA Roo, MeExXIco, IN THE WINTER AND SPRING OF 1912. By James L. Peters Ol Nores on Swarnson’s Hawk (Buteo swainsoni) 1x Montana. By S. Cameron. (Plates XIJ—-XIII) 5 ateill A Successrut Parr or Roprns. By Winsor M. Tyler, M.D. 394 Tue Status or Luoyp’s BusH-TiT As A BirD oF ARIZONA. By H. S. Swarth . 399 ANATOMICAL NOTES ON Topuvs. OxYRUNCUS "AND SPINDALIS. By Hubert Lyman Clark . 402 Tue Nest Lire of THE SPARROW Hawk. By Althea R. ‘Sherman . 406 AppITIONAL NoTEs FROM THE Mountains oF WESTERN NortH Carourna. By Francis M. Weston, Jr. : : 2 ; 418 Some Nortu AMERICAN Birps in Panama. By L. L. Jewel, C.H. 422 GENERAL NOTES. Holbeell’s Grebe (Colymbus holbelli) at Bedford, Mass., 429; The Dovekie (Alle alle): An Addition to the Fauna of South Carolina, 429; White Pelican in Colorado, 430; Hudsonian Godwit: A Correction, 430; Little Blue Heron (Florida cerulea) at Lynn, Contents of Volume XXX. Mass., 480; The Whooping Crane (Grus americana) in Nebraska, 430; Stilt Sandpipers (Micropalama himantopus) at Ithaca, N. Y., 430; Unusual Plumages of the Ocellated Turkey (Agriocharis ocellata), 432; The Passenger Pigeon at the Cincinnati Zodlogical Gardens still living, 433; Nesting of the Barn Ow] in Illinois, 433; An Unusual Malady and Probable Cause of Death in a Toucan, 433; Road Runner in Colorado, 434; Evening Grosbeaks (Hesperi- phona vespertina vespertina) at Manchester, N. H., 435; An Ab- normal Rose-breasted Grosbeak, 485; A Winter Record of the Brown Thrasher in Lancaster, Mass., 435; Two Rare Birds for Massachusetts, 435; Birds Observed at Bennington, Vermont, 436; Some Birds of Southwestern Missouri, 437; Birds of the Headwaters of the Gila River, New Mexico: Further Records, 438; Double Bird Tragedy, 488; A®sop as a Bird Observer, 438. RECENT LITERATURE. Ridgway’s ‘Color Standards and Color Nomenclature,’ 439; Swann’s ‘A Dictionary of English and Folk-Names of British Birds,’ 441; Chapman’s ‘Color Key to North American Birds,’ 442; Horna- day’s ‘Our Vanishing Wild Life,’ 442; Mathews’ ‘The Birds of Australia,’ 443; Official Check-List of the Birds of Australia, 445; Riley on Birds of the Mount Robson Region, 447; Riley on New Neotropical Birds, 448; Todd on the Genus Cheemepelia, 448; Cory on New Neotropical Birds, 449; Cook’s ‘Distribution and Migration of N. A. Herons,’ 450; Trotter on Faunal Divisions in Relation to Vegetation, 450; Thayer and Bangs on Chinese Birds, 451; Bangs on some Birds from the Highlands of Siberia, 451; Thayer and Bangs on a New Race of the Great Blue Heron, 452; Bangs on New Species of Birds, 452; Zimmer’s ‘Birds of the Thomas County Forest Reserve,’ 453; California Economic Ornithology, 453; Four Economic Papers by Prof. W. E. Collinge, 453; Henderson’s ‘The Practical Value of Birds,’ 454; Recent Educational Publications,’ 455; The Ornithological Journals, 456; Ornithological Articles in Other Journals, 465; Publications Received, 468. CORRESPONDENCE. Naturalists and Concealing Coloration, 471. NOTES AND NEWS. Obituary: Herbert Brown, 472; The Study of Bird Song, 472; The American Museum’s South American Expedition, 474; The Washington Biologist’s Field Club, 475; Nomenclature at the International Zoological Congress, 475; Book Notes, 467. NUMBER IV. PaGe A BrotogicaL RECONNAISSANCE OF OKEFINOKEE SWAMP: THE Birps. By Albert H. Wright and Francis Harper. (Plates XIV-XX) : ; ; ; é 7 re : : Notes on Orr Suore Birps. By John Treadwell Nichols . i et vi Contents of Volume XXX. PacE Morning AWAKENING AND EveEn-sona. Sreconp Paper. By Horace W. Wright ; : : ol 2: SomrE SEASONAL NOTES ON Lone Istanp Brrps. By Henry Thurs- ton and Howarth S. Boyle 542 NovTESs ON THE OCCURRENCE AND Nestinc or Certatn Brrps IN RuopE Isuanp. By Harry S. Hathaway . 545 Cory’s Least Birrern at ItHaca, N. Y. By Arthur A. Allen. (Plate X XI) 559 An Annorarep List or THE BIRDS OF SANBORN County, Sourn- EAST-CENTRAL SoutTH Dakota. By Stephen Sargent Visher 561 Brrps New or RARE To THE Fauna or Marne. By Arthur H. Norton : ; : : : : : P : a NOME GENERAL NOTES. The Red-throated Loon (Gavia stellata) at the Southern Extremity of Lake Michigan, 577; The Old-squaw (Harelda hyemalis) on the Connecticut Coast in Summer, 577; A Crested Canada Goose, 578; Greater Snow Goose (Chen hyperborea nivalis) in Arkansas, 579: Feeding Wild Ducks on Sodus Bay, N. Y., 579; Early Oc- currence of Rails in Massachusetts, 580; Woodcock in Ohio Co., West Virginia, 580; Eskimo Curlew (Numenius borealis) in Massa- chusetts, 581; The Golden Plover (Charadrius dominicus domini- cus) in Michigan, 581; Introduction of the Ruffed Grouse on Washington Island, Wis., 582; Actions of Nesting Red-shouldered Hawks, 582; Metallura vs. Laticauda, 583; Hummingbirds’ Eyelashes, 583; The Great-tailed Grackle in New Mexico, 584; The Night Song of Nuttall’s Sparrow, 584; Rose-breasted Gros- beak Breeding at Wheeling, West Virginia, 585; The Orange- crowned Warbler at Englewood, N. J., 585; The Louisiana Water-Thrush (Seiwrus motacilla) in Sudbury, Massachusetts, 585; Kentucky Warbler in Massachusetts, 587; Some Observa- tions on a Pair of Brown Creepers (Certhia familiaris americana), 587; Bicknell’s Thrush in Franconia Notch, N. H., 589; De- struction of Robins in a Storm, 590; Some Land Birds at Sea, 590; Method of Recording Bird Music, with a Correction, 591. RECENT LITERATURE. Regulations for the Protection of Migratory Birds, 591; Townsend’s ‘Sand Dunes and Salt Marshes,’ 593; Bailey’s ‘The Birds of Virginia,’ 594; Faxon on Brewster’s Warbler, 595; ‘The Natural History of the Toronto Region,’ 596; Mathews’ ‘The Birds of Australia,’ 596; Mearns on New African Birds, 597; Riley on the Bahama Barn Owl, 597; Shufeldt’s Studies of Fossil Birds, 597; Hahn on the Future of the North American Fauna, 598; Doolin’s ‘Field, Forest and Stream in Oklahoma,’ 598; Craig on the Stimula- tion of Ovulation in Birds, 599; Laubmann on Birds from Thian- Schan, 599; Stresemann on East Indian Birds, 599; Menegaux on Ostrich F arming, 600; Dubois’ List of the Birds of Belgium, 601; McAtee on the Relation of Birds to Grain Aphides, 601; Beal on Our Meadowlarks in Relation to Agriculture, 601; Economic Ornithology in recent Entomological Publications, 602; Collinge’s ‘The Food of Some British Wild Birds,’ 603; Big- glestone on Nesting Behavior of the Yellow Warbler, 603; Stone on Venezuelan Birds, 604; Abstract of the Proceedings of the Contents of Volume XXX. Vii Linnzan Society of New York, 604; The Ornithological Journals, 605; Ornithological Articles in Other Journals, 613; Publications Received, 615. CORRESPONDENCE Naturalists and Concealing Coloration, 618, Migration and Periodic Accuracy, 619. NOTES AND NEWS. Obituary: Philip Lutley Sclater, 621; The American Museum’s South American Explorations, 621; Annual Meeting of the A. O. U., 622; Wollaston’s New Guinea Expedition, 622; Anniversary of the Death of Alexander Wilson, 622; Protection of Birds at Light Houses, 623; Book Notices, 624. Paap INDEX , A 5 A : : ‘ : ‘ 5 : . 625 ERRATA . : - : : ; ‘ , : : : 5 elalate! Dates or Issue. ‘ : é : : : : ‘ . 658 CoNTENTS ‘ ‘ : : : 2 ; : é : 3 i OFFICERS AND MEMBERS ; . ‘ F : - : : ix vili Contents of Volume XXX. ILLUSTRATIONS. PLATES. Plate I. Natashquan River, Labrador, showing spruce forest and third falls (two views). a II. Natashquan River, Labrador and view forty miles inland. (two views). uf III. Fossil Meleagride. es IV. Nest of Swainson’s Hawk. V. Songs of the Fox Sparrow. sf VI. Diagram of spring migration at Lanesboro, Minn. ef VII. Banding Black-backed Gulls; young Gull with band (two views). «VIII. Banded Mourning Doves, Chimney Swift and Barn Owl (three views). sf IX. Portrait of Wiliam Bartram. & X. A Page of the Bartram ‘Calendar.’ ss XI. The Bartram House, Bartram’s Garden, Philadelphia. « XII-XIII. Swainson’s Hawk. XIV. Chase Prairie, Okefinokee Swamp, Georgia. a XV. Map of Okefinokee Swamp. « XVI-XX. Views in Okefinokee Swamp. « XXI. Cory’s Least Bittern. TEXT-CUTS. Pace Diagram of daily weight of young House Finches . ‘ ‘ : 68 Diagram of temperature fluctuation in relation with bird migration 221 Diagrams of wind action on boat (two cuts) . 5 ‘ 363 and 364 Map of the Yucatan peninsula. ; i : . 9869 Tables illustrating order of singing in birds a) : . opp. 532 and 536 Song of the Hermit Thrush (eight cuts) : 6 : : 538-540 A crested Canada Goose 5 ? : : : ‘ ‘ Name earaeS OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION. 1913. Expiration of Term, (Soar MAN OE RANKO IVE. President... .0.ccuss eeu saawes November, 1913. PismoR WA. Koes ss... li Were Biosa oie 7 Hunsaw, Huonny W... | WCE NCSTACTUS. atercie vie apteverele 1913. SMG AVOEIN GEL ISCCNOLATY® o-.clccw ew oo css eie ese elw bs ecw s 1913. DwicuT, JONATHAN, JR, Treasurer... sic. s... ca. cles eas fu 1913. ADDITIONAL MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. UDESVSESIE S21 GUESS ee Pdr a a November, 1913. AD EGRET WV LIMA sees, taetor ancy siiie.S eueis fo < eve 16 suetwie ed oye v eye 2 1913. ILIGKOUNSL, EGG oo \6 Wiaig t ete Og Oe cae Ie Rc ieee # 1913. OSGOOD A VALIEMREND) Dellaco era s ceels, oe Si clo, 2i 4 a) 81 4\0 oocaeysi sa war sace = 1913. RICHMOND ae © FIAGRIGIIS SWisirs ais, 015,25 a's a3! siclne @ @eie! ster el ocspanee 1913. RO BENE MSM VET OMMAS Lees se tc pacrsharei veiaie eis, acntenlorgpar's oapaver 1913. So ae Rn RIN PRMENEE ss Ste go Rs a GF! ba, vos p30 Soevaya dS if 1913. ATSIC ng 8s dale Se ) PionmEDmH, CHARGES Boise eek cee ee eC cannes ESSE EMUVERS AVY FEUIUNAINE So acata-o cycle! vysuss=!Giy es aia vias «dyn vayeee Re panera MPP INTRU AM Gra LAIST, O6e2 acs seo bienc sais cis e at Hislealewa ong Le Taebsfal ces VLE NSE Sh ES See eee eee ee a FEST) GNU PAWNoNUL GOS EMR taueiayene ates stays) Sccis) crs mie)» «tee aisles aigiale, Aa A as ie EN RPO Sims (1903)1911 Inerinea, Dr. HeRMANN von, Museu Paulista, Sao Paulo, Brazil. (1902)1911 Pycrarr. W. P., British Museum (Nat. Hist.) Cromwell Road, BRR TERE WV saife on ogo svi oles foe e Le Sens oes ee ates ge (1902)1911 * Life Fellow. xii Corresponding Fellows. ReIcHENOW, Dr. ANTON, Konigl. Mus. fiir Naturkunde, Invaliden- strassé,'! 43; Berlingo eer icine ets ens cet etera te oye s (1884)1891 Satvapor1, Count Tommaso, Royal Zoél. Museum, Turin......... 1883 Scuater, Dr. Puoitie Lutitey, Athenzum Club, Pall Mall, London, So Wie oer x yaa a ae Pale ane) Ri] © 6205 be ne Ho el Oa 1883 ScHaLow, Herman, Trauensteinerstrasse 2!, Berlin, W.30..... (1884)1911 Wauuace, Prof. Atrrep Russet, Broadstone, Wimborne, Dorset, Ringlands jy. sce i sectare saateereterrene lie oc clan eee Aiecest nee cide 1883 CORRESPONDING FELLOWS. ALFARO, ANASTASTO) Sand Ose, Costa micaae element crests s cleo 1888 ARRIGONI DEGLI Opp1, Count E., University of Padua, Italy......... 1900 BonuHoTE, JOHN Lewis, Gade Spring Lodge, Hemel Hempstead, Herts, Englarid: 2) ccs ce uot to EE oe ie ones 1911 Bureau, Dr. Louis, Ecole de Médicine, Nantes, France........... 1884 Butter, Lieut-Col. E.A., Winsford Hall, Stokesby, Great Yarmouth, Dials 9 En ive Meme Ate WEN ty Ble Nic) '6 5 ob. tot octy Sil iG Cece 1884 Birrixorer, Dr. JoHANNEsS, Zodlogical Garden, Rotterdam, Holland . 1886 BuTuRLIN, Serarus A., Wesenberg, Esthonia, Russia.............. 1907 CAMPBELL, ARCHIBALD JAMES, Melbourne, Australia.............. 1902 Carriker, M. A., Jr., Cincinnati Coffee Co., Santa Marta, Colombia (1907)1912 CHAMBERLAIN, MONTAGUE, Cambridge, Mass............ (Founder)1901 Cuvuss, Cuaruss, British Museum (Nat. Hist.) Cromwell Road, Lon- don, Bie We ee he ee ast Ty A) a cen Re 1911 Crarke, WILLIAM EAGue, Museum of Science and Art, Edinburgh. . . 1889 DaucLEIsH, JoHN J., Brankston Grange, Bogside Station, Alloa, Scotland: fviccdic tha eRe Oe Oe Coie ete 1883 Doz, Sanrorp B., Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands.................. 1888 Dusors, Dr. ALPHONSE, Museum Natural History, Brussels........ 1884 Ecut, ApotpH BAcHOFEN von, Nussdorf, near Vienna............. 1883 Evans, Artuur H., 9 Harvey Road, Cambridge, England.......... 1899 " FEILDEN, Col. Henry W., Burwash, Sussex, England............... 1884 FERRARI-PEREZ, Prof. FERNANDO, Tacubaya, D. F., Mexico........ 1885 FrekE, Percy Evans, Southpoint, Limes Road, Folkstone, Kent, England) ....<.2id ja stout eerie oe tereeE ence ee ere tyre Ua: ..- 1883 Firprincer, Prof. Max, Director Anatom. Institute, University of Heidelbero: sElerdelberoas Germanic rere eri eieieriaer 1891 Gapow, Dr. Hans, University Museum of Zoology, Cambridge, Hingland cc) «0G eRe re tee eee eae et etree dna 1884 GIETANNER; Dr, "A., St, Galle; Switzerland... -.- «200400. -6 4508 1884 Gopwin-Austen, Lieut.-Col. H. H., Nore, Hascombe, Godalming, Surrey, England! 202 ict se scren cement Bieta ee rca erpersin th eet 1884 Gog tp1, Prof. Dr. Emr. A., Zieglerstrasse 36, Bern, Switzerland..... 1903 GRANDIDIER, ALFRED, 6 Rond-Point des Champs Elysées, Paris... . . 1883 Members. xiii GurRNeEY, JoHN Henry, Keswick Hall, Norwich, England.......... 1883 HartTINnG, JAMES EpmMunp, Edgewood, Weybridge, Surrey, England. .1883 Hennicke, Dr. Cart R., Gera, Reuss, Germany.................. 1907 Panera IVs, Y OKGNAMG «oye. ean sc iilb ac a necesnacdunnys 1888 MAMRNTAN OTROS BUCAPESt, MELUNPATY.... oc ces awn cw etc ecewerecene 1908 Hupson, Witt1am Henry, Tower House, St. Luke’s Road, West- ounnle we aK HONGO Wise otccita Gd -lelcs oes otin sv a Da ew diets oe 1895 KRUKENBERG, Dr. E. F. W., Wiirzburg, Germany................. 1884 Krier, Dr. THErosap J., University Museum, Athens, Greece. ...1884 Leaeg, Col. Witt1aM V., Cullenswood House, St. Mary’s, Tasmania. .1891 LE Sovér, Dup.ey, Zodélogical Gardens, Melbourne, Australia. .....1911 MacFaruane, Roperick, Winnipeg, Manitoba................... 1886 Maparisz, Dr. Jutius von, National Museum, Budapest, Hungary. 1884 MatuHews, Grecory M., Langley Mount, Watford, Herts, England. .1911 Menzpier, Prof. Dr. Micuasst, Imperial Society of Naturalists, INIDSCO WMO eit ees riah irc ok iu Ca cide Sites S Been Mee atale 1884 Mituats, JOHN GUILLE, Compton’s Brow, Horsham, Sussex, England.1911 ANIPAUU TOYA OMY LoMRANDGy kel OePee Ns Phot RE SECs a0 Sia lectue + bio Sed qalaly Ad isla dinetan sleipie 1886 Nicuouson, Francis, The Knoll, Windermere, Westmoreland, Eng- Nort, AuFrep J., Australian Museum, Sydney, New South Wales. .1902 Oaitvie-GRANT, WiLi1aAmM Rosert, British Museum (Nat. Hist.), ironiwellukogd, AuOndOni iS.) Wass. 6 sw owas atte ae Wee cba soe 1899 PArmnna or). 0, Heleingfors, Hinland. 2... 000i. foc neln ok le wie em es 1883 HAMsuy. se. syaney, New South Wales:.....0.....2 002 ee scens 1884 UIN GE MLR MD MREC MINAMAGAKD 2 cps sce salt ee sie Aalclars ele eieye sees 1888 RotruscuHitD, Hon. LioneEL WALTER, Zoélogical Museum, Tring, THEE ie oe DO 8 ees nee Caen Se heer Soe 1898 SciatTer, WILLIAM Lut ey, 10 Sloane Court, Chelsea, London, 8. W.. 1906 SusHKIN Dr. Peter, Imperial University, Moscow...............- 1903 THEEL, Dr. Hsatmar, University of Upsala, Upsala, Sweden........ 1884 TscHUSI ZU SCHMIDHOFFEN, Vicror, Rirrer von, Villa Ténnenhof, eit eet Sa Z OUR, PAUISETIG. 5 2c.5 x0 + ole v cmhe shen siens wip ole we 1884 Waternovuse, F. H., 3 Hanover Square, London, W..............- 1889 Wince, Dr. Heruvr, University Zodlogical Museum, Copenhagen. . .1903 Wiopcinman vero: Onan ©. Manila, Pod... 2. cs ess ecce cect r sues 1903 ZRuEDON Won vose G...sam Jose, Costa Rick.....,...s-e6s««e-v+s 1884 MEMBERS. AtiEn, Francis H., 4 Park St., Boston, Mass...............- (1888)1901 Auten, Dr. Gtover M., 234 Berkeley St., Boston, Mass...... . (1896)1904 ALLISON, ANDREW, Southern Presbyterian Mission, Kiangyui, (CIN, « cube oe Se eRe ee He aC Coen ener eee (1897)1902 ArrwatecR, H: P., Box 697, Houston, Texas...............- (1891)1901 xiv Members. Battey, VERNON, 1834 Kalorama Ave., Washington, D. C....(1887)1901 Battery, Mrs. Vernon, 1834 Kalorama Ave., Washington, D.C. (1885)1901 Batty, WILLIAM .L,, Ardmore iP a Ja sere ico o> Rise eitieie oe (1885) 1901 Barsoour, Prof. Erwin H., Univ. of Nebraska, Lincoln, Neb. . . (1892)1903 BartscH, PAvt, Smithsonian Inst., Washington, D.C........ (1896) 1902 Bonn, FRANkK, 3127 Newark St., Cleveland Park, Washington, D. C. (1887)1901 BowLes, JOHN Hooprmr, Tacoma, Wash..................... (1891)1910 BRAISLIN, Dr. WILLIAM C., 556 Washington Ave., Brooklyn, N. Y.(1894)1902 Brooks, Annan, Okanagan’ ianding: B.C@r).. 223. 5...------ (1902)1909 Brown, HurBperr) Ducson Anizonieaesee erence nice (1885) 1901 Bryan, WILLIAM ALANSON, College of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaiian Mislead. sis 2° eG Ee ee dT eae ATE (1898) 1901 BURNS, PRANK ie Berwaym Weasel Cty cenit ire (1891)1901 Butter, Amos W.,52 Downey Ave., Irvington, Indianapolis, Ind.(1885)1901 CAMERON, 7 Hin Sy) Vilas nies Vio mitiain aren ne ey ees ena en (1903)1910 CuarKk, AusTIN Hopart, 1726 18th St., N. W., Washington, D. C.(1899)1901 Cuark, Prof. Hupert Lyman, Museum of Comparative Zoélogy, Cam- bridge): Whasalee ts yon eeceste recat etna ace et aes cine arate hl (1886)1902 DaaGstt, FRANK S., 2833 Menlo Ave., Los Angeles, Cal....... (1889)1901 Dawson, WILLIAM LEON, Santa Barbara, Cal................ (1895)1905 DeEANE, WALTER, 29 Brewster St., Cambridge, Mass.......... (1897)1901 DrARBoRN,. Nup) Linden, idee hin. emcee on eee ae (1902) 1907 Eaton, Eton Howarp, Hobart College, Geneva, N. Y....... (1895) 1907 EveRMANN, Prof. Barton W., Bureau of Fisheries, Washington, 1D Fn, Oe EH nrannrte Mer ae Ue We Dot HON aaa ies (1883) 1901 Finuey, WruutaM L., 651 East Madison St., Portland, Ore... . . (1904)1907 FLeminG, JAMES H., 267 Rusholme Road, Toronto, Ontario. . . (1893)1901 GAuLT, BenzAMin Tron, Glen Bllyn, Ws ec ee (1885) 1903 GotpmMan, Epwarp Atronso, Biological Survey, Washington, D. C. (1897)1902 HorrMann, Rapa, 11 W. Concord Ave., Kansas City, Mo... (1893)1901 Houutstrer, Nep, U. 8. Nat. Museum, Washington, D.C...... (1894)1910 Howe t, Artuur H., 2919S. Dakota Ave., Washington, D.C. . (1889)1902 Jacoss, J. WARREN, 404 S. Washington St., Waynesburg, Pa. . (1889)1904 JmFFRIES, WituJAM AuGustus, 11 Pemberton Square, Boston, Mass. (1883) 1901 Jos, Rev. Hersert K., 291 Main St., West Haven, Conn..... (1896) 1901 JorpAN, Prof. Davip Starr, Stanford University, Cal........ (1885)1901 KENNARD, F. H., Dudley Rd., Newton Centre, Mass.........(1892)1912 Knicut, OrA WILLIS, 81 Brighton Ave., Portland, Me........ (1893) 1907 Know ton, F. H., U.S. Nat. Mus., Washington, D.C....... (1883)1902 McArrr, Watpo Les, Biological Survey, Washington, D. C. . (1903)1910 Mackay, Grorce H., 304 Bay State Road, Boston, Mass... .(1890)1901 MAILurAkD, JOHN W., 300 Front St., San Francisco, Cal...... (1895)1901 MAILLIARD, JosEPH, 300 Front St., San Francisco, Cal....... (1895) 1901 Associates. xv Miter, Mrs. Ouive THoRNE, 5928 Hays Ave., Los Angeles, Cal. (1887)1901 MitieR, WALDRON DeWitt, Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City (1896) 1906 Morris, GEorGE SPENCER, Olney, Philadelphia, Pa.......... (1887)1903 Morris, Rosert O., 82 Temple St., Springfield, Mass........(1888)1904 Mourpocu, Joun, Public Library, Boston, Mass.............. (1883)1901 Norton, Artaur H., Mus. Nat. Hist., 22 Elm St., Portland, Maine (1890) 1902 Pearson, T. GinBerT, 1974 Broadway, New York City...... (1891)1902 PenNocK, CHARLES J., Kennett Square, Pa.................. (1888)1901 IRAInnkeSs w J OHNE C..ayvenham, Mass... 5.2.5. .0n<66..0e¥.e (1904)1912 PREBLE, Epwarp A., 3027 Newark St., Washington, D.C..... (1892)1901 RaTHBUN, SAMUEL F., 217 14th Ave., N., Seattle, Wash...... (1893)1902 RwoaDs, SAMUEL N., 81 Haddon Ave., Haddonfield, N. J...... (1885)1901 Riuey, Josppx H., U.S. National Museum, Washington, D.C. .(1897)1905 Rives, Dr. Witu1aM C., 1702 Rhode Island Ave., Washington, D. C. (1885)1901 Rosinson, Col. Wirt, U.S. A., West Point, N. Y........... (1897)1901 Seton, Ernest THompson, Cos Cob, Conn.................. (1883)1901 *SHERMAN, Miss AtrHEea R., McGregor, Iowa............... (1907)1912 STEPHENS, FRANK, R. F. D. No. 2, San Diego, Cal........... (1883)1901 Srrone, Dr. Reusen M., Dept. Zodl., Univ. of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. (1889) 1903 Swates, BrapsHaw Hatt, Grosse Isle, Mich................ (1902) 1909 Swarts, Harry S., Mus. Vert. Zool., University of California, Berke- Ae ye ict Cor Pra FE SERA cp 10 8a a VET een (1900) 1909 Taverner, Percy A., Victoria Memorial Museum, Ottawa, Canada (1902) 1909 THAYER, JOHN Etot, Lancaster, Mass.................00+5 (1898) 1905 Topp, W. E. Ciypz, Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, Pa....... 1890)1901 TownsEnD, Cuartes H., Aquarium, Battery Park, New York City (1883)1901 TownsenD, Dr. CHARLES WENDELL, 76 Marlborough St., Boston, IMIGESL 5S Gy Bed dette Gio Et ORCI Oe OR Se cree (1901)1905 Trorrer, Dr. SPeNcER, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Pa... (1888)1901 Warren, Epwarp Royat, 20 West Caramillo St., Colorado Springs, ©] ORR iaerincs os titin Sic ciara S ocaty, Cs eumsleeiotam tals em (1902)1910 Warm, AnvHon T., Mt. Pleasant, S.C. .:....0ccsaeccsanee (1905)1909 Wetmore, Atex., Biological Survey, Washington, D.C....... (1908) 1912 Woxcort, Dr. Rosert H., Univ. of Nebraska, Lincoln, Neb. . (1901)1903 Woop, Norman A., Museum Univ. of Mich., Ann Arbor, Mich... (1904)1912 Wricut, Mrs. Manet Oscoop, Fairfield, Conn............. (1895)1901 * Life Member. XV1 Associates. ASSOCIATES. Axsport, CLINTON GILBERT, 153 W. 73rd St., New York City...... 1898 Apams, BENJAMIN, 476 5th Ave., New York City.................. 1911 ADAMS.) WiATEACE: Lost Molinos @alempe sen 2 ocean miele tela ike 1901 Apams, Dr. Z. B., 43 Cottage Farm Rd., Brookline, Mass............ 1908 AIKEN, CHARLES Epwarp Howarp, 12 Pikes Peak Ave., Colorado Springs, ) Colos jae 5. ce See Nemec. .\s Cia eater ansR meee 1898 AIKEN, Hon. Joun, Orchard St., Greenfield, Mass..................- 1905 ALEXANDER, Miss ANNIE M., 92 Sea View Ave., Piedmont, Cal..... 1911 Auten, Artuur A., 707 East State St., Ithaca, N. Y................ 1909 ALLISON, WILLIAM B., 7916 Plum St., New Orleans, La............. 1905 ANDERSON, Mrs. J. C., Great Barrington, Mass.................... 1903 ANDERSON, Dr. RupotPu M., Am. Mus. Nat. History, N. Y. City... .1907 ANDREws, Roy C., Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City........ 1906 ANGELL, WALTER A., 33 Westminster St., Providence, R. I......... 1901 AntHony, H. H., Amer. Mus. Nat Hist., New York City........... 1911 ARCHBOLD, JosEPH A., 107 Hodge Ave., Buffalo, N. Y............. 1903 ARMSTRONG, EpwarD E., 125 N. Wabash Ave., Chicago, Ill......... 1904 ARMSTRONG, Mrs. E. H., Hyde Park, Boston, Mass................ 1912 ARNOLD, Epwarp, Grand Trunk R’y., Montreal, Quebec........... 1894 ARNOLD, F. E., 284 Pleasant St., East Providence, R.I............. 1909 ARNOLD, Dr. W. W., 504 N. Nevada Ave., Colorado Springs, Colo.. .1910 AVIS, HpWwARD) BoxioG;eb melds Connweae seen tare 1908 BABCOCK, DEAN, (ol Sprucelot. bouldenn Colossi eeee 1911 Basson, Mrs. Carouinge W., 182 Granite St., Pigeon Cove, Mass.. .1912 BABSON) Wie Aq, SOUthyOran ce ww Nir ee asia ceric er ree nee ae eae 1901 Baca, Eaprrt, 424 Genesee St., Utica, N. Y....2.5.4.....52..0-. 1883 BAiny, Prof. Gi Ay, Geneseo yiNenyeneeeine eae ee eee are 1910 BaiLey, Haroip H., 320 50th St., Newport News, Va.............. 1903 BatLey, SAMUEL WaLpo, Box 212, Newburyport, Mass............ 1909 Baker, FRANK C., Chicago Acad. Sciences, Chicago, IIl............ 1907 Baker, JoHNn H., 7 Holyoke Place, Cambridge, Mass............... 1911 BaLpwIn, Roger N., 3739 Windsor Place, St. Louis, Mo.......... 1904 Bauss, Dr. BLENN R., 149 W. Main St., Circleville, Ohio........... 1907 Bau, Mrs: Benner EH: Oakville, Conn... i... 02). 26. erence oan 1905 Bau, Miss HeLten Avuausta, 43 Laurel St., Worcester, Mass....... 1893 Batu, Jas. P., 5001 Frankford Ave., Philadelphia, Pa.............. 1911 BANKS: Miss MAR TEACIWiestponiy ©Glienr a ema pie vei aie enen ins 1911 Barpour, Rev. Ropert, Y. M. C. A., Montclair, N. J............. 1902 Barsour, Dr. THomas, Mus. of Comp. Zodlogy, Cambridge, Mass.. .1903 BaRNARD, Judge Jos, 1306 Rhode Island Ave., Washington, D. C.....1886 Barnes, CuaupE T., Box 1199, Salt Lake City, Utah............. 1908 Barnes, Hon. 2. -MiAcoons bacon, alll eens cee te ree 1889 Barrett, Cuas. H. M., 5 Taylor St., Medford, Mass............... 1912 Associates. BaRRETT, HAROLD LAWRENCE, 704 Centre St., Jamaica Plain, Mass.. Barry, Miss ANNA K., 5 Bowdoin Ave., Dorchester, Mass......... BartTLett, Miss Mary F., 227 Commonwealth Ave., Boston, Mass.. Batten, GrorcE, 381 Fourth Ave., New York City Brrers, Henry W., 91 Denver Ave., Bridgeport, Conn BayYNARD, Oscar E., Box 328, Clearwater, Fla......;............. Banns wns b..)Mertdens) NE. < ss occ. sans s cae d bees wees BECK ROUDOVELOWARD) palwoses IR. D. 2 Calio. oo cncs.dses coen. Peister, Enotes. Aptis Gouege, N. Ds. ..6 eked. ss cb oud eae b en BENNETTS, WiLuIAM J., 1941 Ist St. N. W., Washington, D. C.... Brererotp, Dr: W.eH., 1159 Race St., Denver, Colo............. BERIER, DE LAGNEL, 171 Monte Vista Place, Ridgwood, N.J....... Berry, Mrs. 8. JENNIE, 633 Waterloo St., London, Ontario....... Betts, NoRMAN DE Witt, Forest Products Lab., Madison, Wis...... Brppie, Miss Eminy WI LuIAMs, 2201 Sansom St., Philadelphia, Pa.. BicELow, ALBERT F., 84 State St., Boston, Mass................. BIGELOW, Hexry, Bryan, Concord, Mass... ..... 0.00. 0i. 606.5 BregELow, Homer Lang, Old Orchard Road, Chestnut Hill, Mass.. . BIGNELL, Mrs. Errts, 135 College Ave., New Brunswick, N. J...... BIRDSEYE, CLARENCE, Biological Survey, Washington, D. C........ BLACKWELDER, Extot, Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis......... Briain, Dr. Atrex. W., Jr., 1105 Jefferson Ave., E., Detroit, Mich.. Buain, MERRILL W.,1026 N. Coronado St., Los Angeles, Cal....... Buakg, Sripney F., 154 Walnut St., Stoughton, Mass............. Buatcuuey, W. §., 1530 Park Ave., Indianopolis, Ind............ BEOoD we ROnAN td. . Pepperell Mass. <2 cio ais nie crsuslete cpsiciels ele wes BLooMFIELD, Mrs. C. C., 723 Main St., W., Jackson, Mich........ BoarpMAN, Miss E. D., 416 Marlborough St., Boston, Mass........ Bogarpus, Miss CHarRLottse, Elm St., Coxsackie, N. Y........... caw eV ALE EAM Sue eons ING Wiese cis a ew oc eee ad slow elvis esate sae Boutes, Mrs. FRANK, 6 Berkeley St., Cambridge, Mass............ Bott, BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, 1421 Prospect Ave., Kansas City, Mo.. BOND a hlARR vel: eloaketields Winns). sy. 5 sc see vats cs @ mralers.olate Bons, #.,.G:, 1003 Corona St., Denver, Colo. ...2...0..6.6 0600 es Boor, sHanman M.,,Glen: Cove, Dll... 2.2.6... cece cew eens Bons, seencuny Pall River, Mass... 0.0/0. 00ceccsnevesekn veces BornANnp, Wa G., 14 Wall St., New York City.................. Borneman, Henry S., 1613 Dyre St., Frankford, Philadelphia, Pa... Bosson, CAMPBELL, 722 Tremont Bldg., Boston, Mass............ Bovuprnot, Mrs. H. R., 302 Rusholme St., Davenport, Iowa........ Owais oisy >. emarest; IN: Vin. cc es's. Vide wns chads ceeenee ened BewnisH,. Mrs, B.S.) Demarest, N.Jec. oc nice deerescncueses Bowopitrcu, Harop, 636 Beacon St., Boston, Mass..............+. Boyp, Mrs. Harriet, 17 Marsh St., Dedham, Mass............... Boynton, Cuas. T., 1005 South Sheridan Rd., Highland Park, Ill.. .. BrackEN, Mrs. Henry Martyn, 1010 Fourth St., 8. E., Minneapolis, XVil . 1909 . .1907 . 1912 1911 1910 1912 1894 1895 1912 1901 1889 1885 1909 1908 1898 1910 1897 . 1902 1911 1908 1895 . 1901 1910 1910 1895 1912 1901 1906 1909 1904 1912 .1909 1908 1912 1911 1912 1911 .1912 1906 1909 Xviil Associates. BRADFORD, Mosss B. L., Concord Public Library, Concord, Mass... . .1889 BRADLEE, THOMAS STEVENSON, Somerset Club, Boston, Mass....... 1902 BranprErn, Courranay,,Ossinmg, ANG Yach, 2's. 3c eRe ce ker 1905 BRANDRETH PR ANIGHING Ossining sw Nee Weeeae oe eile cee eee eee ee 1889 BRANTLEY, WILLIAM FOREACRE, Blackshear, Ga..................- 1912 BREwstTeR, Epwarp EveErett, 316 East C St., Iron Mountain, Mich.1893 Brewster, Mrs. WILLIAM, 145 Brattle St., Cambridge, Mass........ 1912 Bripce, EpMunp, 52 Wyman St., West Medford, Mass............ 1910 Bripae, Mrs. EpMunpb, 52 Wyman St., West Medford, Mass......... 1902 Bricurs Miss VANNAg Ua Potts valle sie ake ey ie eee eee te 1903 BRiIMiEY, VE. Raleigh) vNi Ooi meine cad sacra ake eee 1904 BrisTou, JoHN I. D., 45 West 74th St., New York City............ 1907 Brock, Dr. HENry HErRpert, 687 Congress St., Portland, Me...... 1894 Brockway, ArtHuR We Hadlyme)Conn=.) cosaneeeeee oor ores 1912 Brooks, Rev. Harte Amos, 419 N. River Ave., Weston, W. Va......1892 Brooks, GorHaM, 92 Beacon St., Boston, Mass................... 1912 BROOKS, WINTEROPES. Valtonseiassiere es eee ee 1907 Brown, Miss ANNIE H., 31 Maple St., Stoneham, Mass............ 1909 Brown, Artuur L., 119 Park St., West Roxbury, Mass............ 1908 Brown, C. Emerson, 44 Sudbury St., Boston, Mass................ 1908 Brown, Epwarp J., U.S. Nat. Museum, Washington, D.C......... 1891 Brown, Frank A., 1 Water St., Beverly, Mass.................-:. 1912 Brown, Ee Als 40) Malbot SterltowelleViass sees eee 1912 BROWN, Mrs) HENRY ey Winchester Vlassesei aie eee te 1912 BROWN, ELUBERT He ibeamsyville;;Ontanlon sean nen ener eeene 1889 Brown, Puiuur G., 85 Vaughan St., Portland, Me............... 1911 Brown, STEwARDSON, 20 E. Penn St., Germantown, Philadelphia, Pa..1895 Brown, Wn. JAmeEs, 250 Olive Ave., Westmount, Quebec........... 1908 Browninec, Wm. Hatt, 16 Cooper Square, New York City......... 1911 BRUEN,) PRANK, 65. Prospect) St, bristol Conn wane). an mn wee 1908 Busrer, Gro. M., 185 Franklin St.; Liynn, Mass:....:5.....5..05. 1911 BursBank, Cuas. O., 48 Glenwood Ave., Newton Centre, Mass....... 1912 Burcxss, Mrs. J. W., 36 Curve St., Waltham, Mass....... Charms Gat 1912 Burgess, Joon Kinasspury, Chestnut St., Dedham, Mass......... 1898 Burke, WM. BARDWELL, 130 Spring St., Rochester, N. Y.......... 1901 Burnett, WiLurAM L., State Agric. College, Fort Collins, Colo....... 1895 BuRNHAM, JOHN Birp, 111 Broadway, New York City............. 1912 Burt, H..P., 355 Union St:; New, Bedford, Mass.2...,.¢e0- © - once 1908 BURTCH, : VERDI; Branch port; alvasn one a eine oe cick cet ethene 1903 ButTLER, JEFFERSON, 121 W. Philadelphia Ave., Detroit, Mich....... 1912 Buxsaum, Mrs. Ciara E., 4822 Grand Boulevard, Chicago, Ill....... 1895 Casor,,) Louts; ) Brookline. Massage Soe 2 eo elim ene 1904 Capuc, Eugene E., 563 Massachusetts Ave., Boston, Mass......... 1910 CALLENDER, JAMES PHILLIPS, 32 Broadway, N. Y.........:.......- 1903 CauveRT, J. FLetcHER, Collegate Inst., London. Ont.............. 1912 CaRPENTER, Rev. CHARLES Knapp, 311 Park St., Elgin, Ill......... 1894 Associates. XIX CARPENTER, GrorGE I., 129 Dean St.. Brooklyn, N. Y.............. 1907 CARTER, JoHN D., Lansdowne, Pa........ Fahl a dish ale eee Oe 1907 Casez, Ciirrorp M., 7 Holcomb St., Hartford, Conn.............. 1892 Cas, Harry A., 54 Spring St., Pawtucket, R.I................... 1898 Caskey, Rogerr C., 58 Mills St., Morristown, N. J................ 1908 exami snmnen tr. (Ottseay UU ic. As eee s Se oes beet ee cen ssa 1905 CHAMBERLAIN, CHauncy W., 36 Lincoln St., Boston, Mass........ 1885 CHAWERRS We uunn, Hagle Rock, Call... 0.2. sca cess cease dave ces 1907 Cuapin, Prof. ANcrz Ciara, 25 Freeman Cottage, Wellesley, Mass.. .1896 CHAPIN, JAMES, 330 W. 95th St., New York City................. 1906 CHAPMAN iVirss BM. Hinglewood, Ni: J... i.e. once ces ssa cw alee « 1908 CuHapMAN, Roy, 507 15th Ave.,S. E., Minneapolis, Minn........... 1911 CrHASH VOID NEYe Nambucket, IMWASS:: cfs acic sc ose bus cles cclem cee su clee 1904 CuHEESMAN, M. R., 55 W. 4th St., S., Salt Lake City, Utah.......... 1911 CHENEY, Rev. Rost. F., St. Mark’s Rectory, Southboro, Mass.......1912 AOHMPNIAN RG RAGHMH Sanawichs WISSS.......2... 405 sla0 oho sails acu © 1912 Curisti£z, Epwarp H., 5069 Kensington Ave., St. Louis, Mo....... 1910 Curisty, Bayarp H., 403 Frederick Ave., Sewickley, Pa........... 1901 CxarkK, Mrs. ANNE M. L., Box 153, Lancaster, Mass............... 1912 Cusrk, EB. Preston, Box 2862, Boston, Mass...............08.0 1907 Cuark, Epwarp B., Hamilton Hotel, Washington, D. C........... 1900 CLARK, JostaH H., 238 Broadway, Paterson, N. J...............-. 1895 CLARKE, CHARLES E., 11 Chetwynd Road, Tufts College, Mass..... 1907 CuarkKE, Miss Harriet E., 9 Chestnut St., Worcester, Mass....... 1896 CuarKE, Rowena A., Kirkwood Branch, St. Louis. Mo............. 1906 CiarkE, Dr. Wm. C., 981 Madison Ave., New York City........... 1909 Cra OHAsuinvin woox coe, BuTekanC@ales |... 5 caeece se ecw eiseet he 1911 CLEAVES, Howarp H., Public Museum, New Brighton, N. Y........ 1907 CLEVELAND, Dr. CLEMENT, 925 Park Ave., New York City......... 1903 CLEVELAND, Miss Littan, Woods Edge Road, West Medford, Mass. .1906 iach bray i ghione Parke Tc 8 cee ae eed ee we 1883 Coss, Miss ANntE W., 301 Massachusetts Ave., Arlington, Mass. ....1909 Coss, Stanuey, 340 Adams St., Milton, Mass...................-. 1909 CopMAN, JouN S., Quail St., West Roxbury, Mass................ 1908 Corrin, Miss Lucy V. Baxtsr, 3232 Groveland Ave., Chicago, Ill..1905 Co.purn, ALBERT E., 806 S. Broadway, Los Angeles, Cal........... 1891 Cote, Dr. Leon J., College of Agric., Univ. of Wis., Madison,Wis. . . 1908 cConvin, WALtOR §., Osawatomic, Kan...............0.0n.eenees 1896 Commy, Antuur C., 424 E. 13th St., Chester, Pa................4: 1902 Commons, Mrs. F. W., 2437 Park Ave., Minneapolis, Minn......... 1902 Coney, Mrs. Geo. H., 859 Prospect Ave., Hartford, Conn........... 1906 Cook, Miss Littan GILLETTE, 165 W. 82d St., New York City...... 1899 Pee EAM GIs Hes IP, LIMNOCK, PA... dessa ween even evennenes 1892 CopELanp, Dr. Ernest, 141 Wisconsin St., Milwaukee, Wis......... 1897 CopELanp, Manton, 88 Federal St., Brunswick, Me.............-- 1900 Corey, Miss Auice F., 1111 Park Ave., Plainfield, N. J............1910 Xx Associates. Courtmr» Stanuny,, Wafayette, ind. cee 5 A: eee cleats =m 1912 C@rArr) Miss; LAuRA Bs 1Glen Cove; IN. w-0025 .:. ..aepieee e e cle 1912 Grates WAnuAcks Oponoy Merl i80 Sekt © oc os yee ett terete 1912 CraicMiLe, Miss Estuer A., 248. Grant St., Hinsdale, Ill.......... 1910 Cram, BR. J.) 26 Hancock Ave.,; W.,) Detroit, Mich. ier-ce's i: ee 1893 CRANDALL, C. W., 10° Third ‘St., Woodside; IN. Y.-22ee-e.. sae. = 2 1891 Grann, Miss Ciara ., Dalton, (Misc) i...) cc: eee eter atari 1904 Grane, Mrs. Zenwas, Dalton, Maser iis. ol: lente e a rer atest 1904 Cressy, Mrs. N. S8., 25 Quaker Lane, West Hartford, Conn......... 1912 Crocker, Mrs. Diva Barnstaloleys iets soe yy rere eee ieee eee 1912 Crocxrr, Mrs. Emmons, 48 Mechanics St., Fitchburg, Mass.........1912 Crossy, Maunseit §., Grasmere, Rhinebeck, N: Y.......-.......: 1904 Cummrines, Miss Emma G., 16 Kennard Road, Brookline, Mass..... 1903 Curris, Rouua P., Dept. of Agriculture, Washington, D.C......... 1895 Currier, EpMONDE SAMUEL, 416 E. Chicago St., St. Johns, Ore..... 1894 CusuMaNn, Miss Auice, 919 Pine St., Philadelphia, Pa............. 1910 Courter, Mrs. ANNIE F., 117 Washington Ave., Chelsea, Mass...... 1908 Dana, Miss Apa, 488 Centre St., Newton, Mass................... 1912 DANE, Mrs: ERNnsn Be Chestnut ivassie se sreeieriisn re setae 1912 DanieEson, Miss Epna H., R. F. D. 3, Goodhue, Minn............ 1910 Dart, Dr. Lesuie O., Curtis Court, Minneapolis, Minn............ 1898 Davenport, Mrs. Exizasets B., Lindenhurst, Brattleboro, Vt..... 1898 Davinson, Mrs. F.S., 1302 W.,S. Grand Ave., Springfield, Ill........ 1912 Davis, CHarues H., 515 Michigan Ave., Saginaw, Mich........... 1906 Day, Cuester Sessions, 15 Chilton Road, West Roxbury, Mass... .1897 Day, FRanK Mims, Mt. Airy, Philadelphia, Pas? 5.025208 see 1901 DEANE, GEORGE CLEMENT, 80 Sparks St., Cambridge, Mass........ 1899 DeLoacu, R. J. H., University of Ga., Athens,'Ga.....:..:.°..-:- 1910: DENNIS,;Davip W.;5 Riehmonds) Inds 326 2)..50. ae ccs tet «eke 1907 Densmore, Miss MaBE1, 629 4th St., Red Wing, Minn............. 1910 Dersy, RicHARD, 969 Park Ave., New York City................. 1898 Dersy, W. M., Jr., 4857 Kimbark Ave., Chicago, Ill............-.. 1908 Dericxson, Mrs. Gro. P., 1760 Hennepin Ave., Minneapolis, Minn. .1910 DeVinE, J. L., 5319 Woodlawn Ave., Chicago, IIl............. eters 1903 Dewey, Dr. Cartes A., 78 Plymouth Ave., Rochester, N. Y...... 1900: Dewinc, THomas W., 82 E. 55th St., New York City.............. 1907 Dicés;. Len) RAYMOND, (Prescott Wasi sta... siete terenictea 2 Oeier: eve: 1909: Dickerson, Miss Mary C., Am. Mus. Nat. History, N. Y. City..... 1908 Dicky, Donan R:. Box Ol sPasadena, Cals coi eo- as) acc aes 1907 Dickey, SamunnS., State: College, seat Ae ence oe ches oeiale 1905 Ditie, FrepericK M., 2927 W. 28th Ave., Denver, Colo........... 1892 Dimock, Geo. E., Jr., 907 N. Broad St., Elizabeth, N. J............ 1911 Dionne, C. E., Laval University, Quebec, Que.................... 1893 Drxon, Freperick J., 111 Elm Ave., Hackensack, N. J........... 1891 Dongs, CHARLES W., Univ. of Rochester, Rochester, N. Y......... 1900: Dopson, JoserH H., 534 Sheridan Road, Evanston, Ill............. 1909: Associates. XX1 Dosear, KaTHERINE, Clarke University, Worcester, Mass.........1912 Dorn, Prof. L., Concordia College, Fort Wayne, Ind............... 1912 Doveuerty, Gen. WiLu1AM E., 1409 E. 14th St., Fruitvale, Cal... . .1890 DRAPHR SUMNER, Readvalle, Mass... 0.0.0... 0.000%. oce eens cee. 1908 Drowne, Dr. FREDERICK PEaBopy, Warren, R.I.................. 1899 Droummonp, Miss Mary, Spring Lane, Lake Forest, Ill............. 1904 DuBois, Atex. Dawes, 327 8. Glenwood Ave., Springfield, Ill........ 1905 Bobon,pamns 0. Windsor Locks, Conn... . 6.4.00... 008s decsies vs 1909 Dup.ey, Saran H., Lyman School, Lowell, Mass................. 1912 Duemore, ARTHUR Rapctyrre, Newfoundland, N. J.............. 1899 Worn Nirss. de, 210 N. Kront St., Harrisburg, Pa... 66.25.2035 1900 Dounpar, W. Linrrep, Union Metallic Cartridge Co., Bridgeport, (COINS cn.d o oO ELE Ree ee ERAT Ie ee ee ee ee eee 1906 Dunn, Miss Harrier A., Box 45, Athol, Mass.................... 1909 DurFegE, OWEN, Box 125, Fall River, Mass..... TORRES BP o, AOL ory ae 1887 Duryea, Miss ANNIE B., 62 Washington St., Newark, N. J......... 1911 Dwicut, Dr. Epwin W., 119 Pearl St., Boston, Mass............. 1911 Grp er CUE alle oe, emai ICAMSAS Soi. ios Vesiae a2die eis ole aval pido a we we 1886 DH we WARD RAL. SOULMAINpP TOM: Ni. Vie, 2p at wakes sa aaemrs seiko 1911 Dyker, ARTHUR Curtis, 205 Summer St., Bridgewater, Mass.......1902 HARE Vass imANOR P.) Palma Sola; Ma... 0s. c5...s nesses ces tes 1910 Harty, Cas. H., 185 Fairmount Ave., Hyde Park, Mass............ 1912 HASTMAN, FRANCIS B., Plattsburg Barracks, N. Y................. 1909 EastMan, Harry D., 24 State St., Framingham, Mass............1891 Eaton, Miss Mary S., 8 Monument St., Concord, Mass...........1909 Haton, Scorr Harrison, North Bend, Ohio.....................- 1912 Epson, JoHN M., Marietta Road, Bellingham, Wash.............. 1886 RipwARDSmEhorBE bp, Brookline, Masss. 3.0... 2... 06 fs cs ee evs we 1912 Epwarps, VINAL N., Box 36, Woods Hole, Mass.................. 1912 EHxINGER, Dr. CLypE E., 100 Rosedale Ave., West Chester, Pa... ...1904 Hic Augese. Uiss © St., Lincoln, Neb. i... vos. s ens eee eek 1902 Binarc kev. VW. Guaravn, Addison, Tl... oi... et a eeane nis 1901 MIMBNGK aor Ay New Haven, Mo. ic o.c.. ace cas ees en eiey ee 1906 ExKBLAW, WALTER ELMER, care of G. Ekblaw, Rantoul, Ill........... 1911 ELDRIDGE, ARTHUR S., South Lincoln, Mass.................-....- 1912 Bron, Mrs: J. W., 124: Beacon St., Boston, Mass................. 1912 Hirer rb, WARL, 63 William St., Lions, N. Y...........-.1-.--. 1912 Pres NG MERGH Ge OTWHC, COMM... - 1911 Kizcors, Witt, Jr., 4304 Colfax Ave., S., Minneapolis, Minn..... 1906 Kitman, A. H., Ridgeway, Ontario................ ses eee eeeees 1909 Kine, Le Roy, 20 E. 84th St., New York City..............-+++- 1901 Kirxua, Mrs. James W., 275 Maple St., Springfield, Mass.......... 1904 *KirkuamM, STANTON D., 152 Howell St., Canandaigua, N. Y......-. 1910 Mirkwoon, BRAVE ©. Baldwin, Md. ........h. a5 secwe esas eee 1892 Kirrrepce, Josern, Jr., 69 Cypress St., Brookline, Mass.........- 1910 Kioseman, Miss Jesste E., 4 Spruce St., Dedham, Mass.......-.. 1909 Knarse., Ernest, 3707 Morrison St., Chevy Chase, D. C......--- 1906 Knapp, Mrs. Henry A., 301 Quincy Ave., Scranton, Pa......-..-. 1907 * Life Associate. XXV1 Associates. Kwno.uorr, FERDINAND WILLIAM, Bloomfield, N. J................ 1890 Kouier, Louis SLipELL, 98 Watsessing Ave., Bloomfield, N. J.....1910 KREMER, ROLAND Epwarp, 1720 Vilas St., Madison, Wis.......... 1909 Kusrr, ANTHONY R., Bernardsville; Nwdt) 3.2.2 Geemeeee soe oe 1908 Kusrr, Mrs. ANtHony R., Bernardsville, N. J....2252..0.-5..5.-.5: 1910 Kusrr, Jonn’ Drypren, Bernardsville; Nid. Seen eee see 1910 Kourcur, Dr. Vicror, Green Lake, Wis 2), 7 2/ aeaeee ee ee ee 1905 LAcny, Howanp Grorcn; Kerrville; Texas). ereree ein 1899 Lams, Cuas. R., 159 Brattle St., Cambridge, Mass................ 1912 LANCASHIRE, Mrs) JAMES Hm yA aac hie elem yerey ea ere 1909 LANE, Lawton W., 121 Franklin St., Lynn, Mass................. 1909 Lanc, Hersert, Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City........... 1907 Lantz, Prof. Davip Ernest, Dept. of Agriculture, Washington, D. C.1885 LARRABEE, AUSTIN P., 1540 Vassar Ave., Wichita, Kan............ 1902 Latimer, Miss Carouine P., 19 Pierrepont St., Brooklyn, N. Y..... 1898 LAURENT, Putuip, 31 E. Mt. Airy Ave., Mt. Airy, Philadelphia, Pa.. .1902 Law, J. Kucenn,; Hollywood, Cali. casccc ss bon eee eer 1907 LAWRENCE, JOHN B., 126 E. 30th St., New York City.............. 1907 Len, Howry E:, Rapid City, 5S; Dic cet. eo e eee eee er 1910 Leman, J. Howarp, 48 Beacon St., Boston, Mass................. 1912 Lemsen, Nicuouas F.., 34 Nassau St., New York City............. 1912 LENGERKE, JuUSTUS VON, 200 5th Ave., New York City............. 1907 Devny.) Wi CHARLESWORTH: -AlGOnmE aivay Nin Els ieee eee eee 1908 Lewis, Dr. Freprric T., 76 Oxford St., Cambridge, Mass.......... 1909 Lewis, Harrison F., R. R. 2 Yarmouth, Nova Scotia.............. 1912 Lewis, Mrs. Herman, 120 Grove St., Haverhill, Mass.............. 1912 LINCOLN, FREDERICK CHARLES, 3350 Shoshone St., Denver, Colo... ..1910 Linsay, Dr. D. Moors, 808 Boston Block, Salt Lake City, Utah... .1912 LINTON, CLARENCE B., 125 West Ocean Ave., Long Beach, Cal...... 1908 LINZEE, JoHN W., 96 Charles St., Boston, Mass.................... 1912 orp> Reve WikiLrannik, Oven \Vldsseee irs tern tetera re 1901 Lorine, J. Atpmn, Owego; IN. Yao ece eee ene oo ee oe ee 1889 Low, ETHELBERT T., 30 Broad St., New York City................ 1907 Luce, Mrs. Frances P., 140 Washington St., Boston, Mass......... 1912 Lom, EDWARD Hi; (Chatham, Nishi. aor = ee rete is eearetarct eela er ates 1904 LuTHER, CLARENCE H., 8 Mcllroy Bldg., Fayetteville, Ark.......... 1910 MacDovueatu, GrorGcE R., 112 Wall St., New York City........... 1890 Mackie, Dr. Wm. C., 54 Coolidge St., Brookline, Mass.............. 1908 Macuay, Mark W.., Jr., 830 Park Ave., New York City............ 1905 - Mappock, Miss EMELINE, The Drexel, Philadelphia, Pa ............ 1897 Mapison, Haroxup L., Park Museum, Providence, R.I............. 1912 Manner, J..E., Windsor Jioeks) (Conntgngy sm ae nereniie kinels scene 1902 MalIrTLANnD, RoBert L., 141 Broadway, New York City............. 1889 Mann) Enras PS Walliamstowairie Va seeerm eee ieee ieee eee 1912 Mars1e, Ricwarp M., 7 Keiffer St., Brookline, Mass.............. 1907 Marczu, Prof, Joun Lewis, Union College, Schenectady, N. Y....... 1903 Associates. Xxvii Marrs, Mrs. Kinesmi1x, 9 Commonwealth Ave., Boston, Mass..... .1903 PEAnSOEN lV, Witel Creek, Cal... i005... ck cae eeewevouvas 1904 MarsHann, Enna, M. O., New Salem, Mass....................... 1912 Martin, Miss Marra Ross, Box 365, New Brunswick, N. J......... 1902 MARIN ano. ©, boxase, Asbury Park, NuJ.. oc. c.. eeeceaeoccsen 1912 Marx, Epwarp J. F., 8 Chestnut Terrace, Easton, Pa............. 1907 Matrern, Epwin S., 105 South 4th St., Allentown, Pa............. 1912 MatTrern, WALTER, 105 South 4th St., Allentown, Pa.............. 1912 eA eee ICR Ne: AAC LIED UO RNG ceoul eo. ao ava o's, ome x alefum nistarerse gana 1910 May, Miss Apgetina, 226 Ocean St., Lynn, Mass.................. 1912 MAyYNarpD, C. J., 447 Crafts St., West Newton, Mass................ 1912 McCurntocxk, Norman, 504 Amberson Ave., Pittsburgh, Pa......... 1900 NGECONNEDEDENARRY Hy sOaGi7 OW... dite. « tes Welstie cat cee nce wh ole 1904 McCook, Puiuip James, 15 William St., New York City........... 1895 McHatron, Dr. Henry, 335 Golley St., Macon, Ga.......... .... 1898 McItHEenny, Epwarp Avrry, Avery Island, La................... 1894 MclIntirz, Mrs. HERBERT Bruce, 4 Garden St., Cambridge, Mass.. .1908 McLain, Rospert Barrp, Market and 12th Sts., Wheeling, W. Va... .1893 MoVITTAN@ Vins) GinuBERt «Gorham, IN. H...0.0.2... 2-665 snes © 1902 Maan, Mrs. E. M., 301 W.-91 St., New York City................. 1904 Means, Cuas. J., 29 Marlborough St., Boston, Mass............... 1912 Metuwus, J. T., 36 Cottage St., Wellesley, Mass................ ey Ce MInBRUAM MonAnEmS, Weston, MASE... sacs coos os eee eee epee eae 1908 Merriam, Henry F., 30 Clinton Ave., Maplewood, N. J............ 1905 MERRITT WAM BERD ep amilton, Mass... <0... ti. cence cows ces as 1912 Mirman EUARRY: Ma ameor, IMPAINIC! 5. i sveie « <0s\s cis a1 p18 vlelecsieele overs ow 1883 UEEES ETS VSS BARS S cig) 0a 5G ere 1905 Rds RES nL UGE OWE «4 ccace)s «ays x 'eeao oA vie Ja pw ed Ne 1911 Mercatr, Rost. W., 160 High St., Springfield, Mass............... 1912 Metcatr, WILLARD L., 33 West 67th St., New York City.......... 1908 Miter, Cas. W., Shawnee-on-Delaware, Pa.................++- 1909 MitiEr, Leo., Amer. Museum Nat. Hist., New York City.......... 1912 Puts. Any ©, Box 21s, Unionville, Conn,.....%...22..0 50-00: 1897 ithe wee RMB hy, Pampa, Bla. ks css pee e ene apes ewaew eee ne 1911 Mitts, Prof. Witu1am C., Ohio State Univ., Columbus, O.......... 1900 MitTcHELL, CATHERINE ADAMS, Riverside, Ill................2.005: 1911 MitcHE.L, Dr. Watton I., 603 Beacon Bldg., Wichita, Kan......... 1893 Morr, ALEx. L., 77 Hanipshire St:, Lowell, Mass... ........25000008 +: 1912 MiGonty Linn Ye bya Haddonields oN, dk oces ofscaae: sas nad ote 6 ose 1911 Mookrg, Miss Exiz. Purnam, New Jersey State Hospital, Trenton, N. J.1905 Moors, Rosert Tuomas, 46 Mansion Ave., Haddonfield, N. J...... 1898 Moorgz, WituraM G., 257 W. Main St., Haddonfield, N. J.......... 1910 Morcom, G. FREeAN, 734 Belden Ave., Chicago, Ill................-- 1886 eee oe OV EINOn, MCSASs .\<)2 wid nda su sii ep die vee ve es Spee 8 1911 Moraan, Atsert, Box 1323, Hartford, Conm..................46: 1903 Mortey, G. Griswo tp, 2325 13th St., Boulder, Colo.............. 1911 XXViil Associates. Morais, SipNwey Vir Bristol iar ect rcteren oie eee) ts sls tee 1911 WM lorisioy [Bie e (Canrweniny, Jehbarya., Olle), os 256s ,ceenocskeoaoemgew cos 1912 Mosuer, FRANKLIN H., 17 Highland Ave., Melrose, Mass.......... 1905 Mossman, Miss Mary, 1616 Blue Hill Ave., Boston, Mass.......... 1912 Mourpuey, Dr. Eugene E., 444 Tellfair St., Augusta, Ga............ 1903 Mourpny, Rosert C., 224 Angell St., Providence, R.I............... 1905 MusGravE, JoHN K., 3516 Shady Ave., Allegheny, Pa.............. 1909 MussELMAN, THoMAS Epa@ar, Gem City Business College, Quincy, [1.1910 Myers, Mrs. Harriet W., 311 Ave. 66, Los Angeles, Cal........... 1906 Myers, Miss Lucy F., Brookside, Poughkeepsie, N. Y............. 1898 Nasu, Herman W., Box 264, Pueblo,'Colo. 2 2-e. eo .sc tee ce. ees 1892 NELSON, JAMES ALLEN, Bureau of Entomology, Washington, D. C...1898 ING goies IMGs EL, Sy PEST By Sido Sten, Dulin, IMG. 5S bo oan oe 1912 NEWHALL, DANIEL S., Stratford Past... eee ee eee 1908 NEwMAN, Rev. STEPHEN M., Howard University, Washington, D. C...1898 NicHo.s, JoHN M., 46 Spruce St., Portland, Me.................. 1890 NiIcHOLs, JOHN TREADWELL, Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City. .1901 NiIcHOLSON, Donaup J., W. Church St., Orlando, Fla............... 1912 Notte, Rev. Fretrx, St. Benedict’s College, Atchison, Kan.......... 1903 Norris, J. PARKER, Jr., 2122 Pine St., Philadelphia, Pa............ 1904 Norris, Rox 'C),725.N. 10th St. Richmond. nds seen eaeen o: 1904 Novy, FRANK ORIEL, 721 Forest Ave., Ann Arbor, Mich............ 1909 NowELL, JoHN Row.anpD, Box 979, Schenectady, N. Y............. 1897 OapEN, Dr. Henry VininG, 141 Wisconsin St., Milwaukee, Wis... ..1897 Olnoyds}, Ieboivizy, Silke Syormbayeds, IMIG 5 focus ooccoobs cose os eoenacsoe 1896 *OxriveR, Dr. HENRY KemBie, 2 Newbury St., Boston, Mass........ 1900 Osporn, ArTHUR A., 58 Washington St., Peabody, Mass............ 1912 OsBuRN, PINGREE S., 189 E. Colorado St., Pasadena, Cal.......... 1910 OvprtTon; Dr; FRANK; Patchorue, ING ee erence nee ene ee 1909 *OwEN, Miss JutietTTe AMELIA, 306 N. 9th St., St. Joseph, Mo...... 1897 PACKER] JESSE Ds INOKWOOd Stallone asset an ete ernie 1910 Paine, Auaustus G., Jr., 18 West 49th St., New York City......... 1886 PauapIn, ArTHUR, N. Y. State Museum, Albany, N. Y............. 1911 Paumer, S. C., Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Pa............... 1912 Parker, Mrs. BENJAMIN W., 4 Hopestill St., Dorchester Centre, Mass.1909 ParkKER, Hon. Hersert, South Lancaster, Mass................... 1904 PARSONS, JOHN: Hi uenoxe. Vila Scan eee ee werner innit Sn ene 1912 Parsons, R. L., 158 Raymond Ave., South Orange, N. J........... 1911 Parsons, Witurdm; Box 422; Manila, Pris cscs cassette seca 1909 - Paut, Lucius H., 202 Edinburgh’St., Rochester, N. Y.............- 1908 PErABopy, Rev. Pb: Blue Rapids kane spear se ciate ae ee 1903 PEARSON, LEONARD S., 132 Beechtree Lane, Wayne, Pa............ 1907 PEAVEY, RosBert W., 791 Coney Island Ave., Brooklyn, N. Y....... 1903 Peck, Morton E., 292 N. Summer St., Salem, Ore................ 1909 * Life Associate. Associates. XXiX PEcK, WALTER M., 15 9th St., East Providence, R.I............... 1909 PENnaRD, TuHos. E., 16 Norfolk Rd., Arlington, Mass...............1912 PENFIELD, Miss Annie S., 155 Charles St., Boston, Mass...........1912 PENNINGTON, FRED ALBERT, 5529 Moncoe Ave., Chicago, Ill........ 1910 Pepper, Dr. Wn., 1811 Spruce St., Philadelphia, Pa............... 1911 Paenins woretGmo: H., Burlington, Vt... .j:. 55. ccd ls seecsecccsoen, 1912 Perry, Henry Josepu, 636 Beacon St., Boston, Mass............. 1909 Poors, Ausnar S., Lake Wilson, Minn................0.secease. 1908 BMTnRS, PAs, Wm, Plarvard; Mass..:....c..c06s sos ceucecccec ce 1904. PHELPS, FRANK M., 212 E. 4th St., Elyria, Ohio.................. 1912 Puetps, Mrs. J. W., Box 36, Northfield, Mass..................... 1899 Paiipp, Parr B., 220 Broadway, New York City............... 1907 PHILLIPS, ALEXANDER H., 54 Hodge Road, Princeton, N. J......... 1891 Puiuuies, CHas. LINCOLN, 4 West Weir St., Taunton, Mass...........1912 PIERREPONT, JOHN JAY, 1 Pierrepont Place, Brooklyn, N. Y........ 1911 PrusBury, Frank O., Box 592, Walpole, Mass..................... 1909 Pincuot, Girrorp, 1617 Rhode Island Ave., Washington, D. C...... 1910 Pitcairn, WILLIAM G., 3330 Perrysville Ave., Allegheny, Pa......... 1906 Por, Miss Maraaretta, 1222 N. Charles St., Baltimore, Md....... 1899 Pomeroy, Harry Krirxuanp, Box 575, Kalamazoo, Mich.......... 1894 Ponp, Miss ELten J., 160 Lexington, Ave., New York City......... 1909 Poon, ALFRED D., 401 W. 7th St., Wilmington, Del............... 1901 Porr, ALEXANDER, 1013 Beacon St., Brookline, Mass............. 1908 Porter, Rev. .C., 51 Howler St., Boston; Mass.................-- 1912 Lorena Guts H. Scamiord, COMM . 2.0.5.4 ns ssa s save ene cence 1893 POST MeSeo47 oth Ave. New York City........5.2..000050+ss- 1911 ROEDER UELANWISe@ameaentcNi Wise... «as oe cles as ce eae a veces ex 1912 PRAEGER, WILLIAM E., 421 Douglas Ave., Kalamazoo, Mich....... 1892 Price, JoHN Henry, Crown W Ranch, Knowlton, Mont........... 1906 Primm, Roy LEE, 113 W. Dayton St., Madison, Wis................ 1912 Proctor, Mrs. Henry H., 282 Commonwealth Ave., Boston, Mass.. .1912 PEcerwon OMG. En LOpsheld, MASS... 1... cette eek oe aee es 1912 Pusoy, JAMNG Bb kh. fb. DE 4, Plymouth, Mich........ 0... ...00.-0> 1893 Panes Pear i WW. pcamoriage, MaSS..... 25... 52sec steers ces 1912 PUABORE NV RS AL Es, SVLUIEKIPR, IMGs. cc ccs Saw eter een neve 1909 LUMP BORNE Me Ore Oermardsville, Nid jis. «ncis clases tes cle eu ees 1911 RamspDEN, Cuas. G., Box 146, Guantanamo, Cuba................. 1912 VANS O Nan ORAS Sunn ORTON MASS: 2 naa sale sieve 246 ons 8c ose tte sel phos 1912 Rawson, Carvin Luruer, R. F. D. 2, Putnam, Conn.............. 1885 HArMOND, Mrs. C. ., 21 3d St., Hinesdale, Ill................... 1910 Rea, Paut M., Charleston Museum, Charleston, 8. C.............. 1912 Reaau, Dr. Artaur Lincotn, 39 Maple St., West Roxbury, Mass.. . 1896 REDFIELD, ALFRED C., 56 Plympton St., Cambridge, Mass........1907 RepFIELD, Miss Evisa Watney, 29 Everett St., Cambridge, Mass. . 1897 OMOHME SAMUI Hr Cheshers Leo 5 cece oncsja s. 4 S00 oye om plore = oy oynieie 1912 Reep, Hueu Dantet, 108 Brandon Place, Ithaca, N. Y............ 1900 XXX Associates. REaN, JAMES A. G., 6033 B Catherine St., Philadelphia, Pa.......... 1901 1Rispasroyviysy dbieonto lie Won det, Jeb IDI, 24, Meron MVE oo tao ou Gee eee oc 1912 Ruoaps, CHARLES J., 1914S. Rittenhouse Sq., Philadelphia, Pa....... 1895 Rice, James Henry, Jr., Summerville, 8. C............. A re 1910 Ricuarps, Miss Harriet E., 36 Longwood Ave., Brookline, Mass.. .1900 RicHARDSON, WYMAN, 224 Beacon St., Boston, Mass............... 1912 Ripeovut, A. LinuiAn, 15 Farragut Rd., Swampscott, Mass.......... 1912 Rmeway, Joun, Li, ‘Chevy Chasey Mdiae..\) Geers oe 1890 RIKER, CLARENCE B., 43 Scotland Rd., South Orange, N. J......... 1885 RING, /Coark ‘L.Saginaw, Michie .7 23.1: +1: seb Rae eine ee eee eee 1912 Rietey, Cuas., 173 Harvard St., Dorchester, Mass................. 1912 Ripiey, Mrs. J. W., 112 Cedar St., Malden, Mass..........:...... 1912 Rossins, Miss AumeDA B., Y. M. Library Association, Ware, Mass. .1910 Roserts, Jonn T., Jz., 350 Main St., Buffalo, N. Y.:........-. 22. 1906 Roserts, Winn1AmM Ey, 5501 Spruce St., Philadelphia, Pa........ 1902 RoBeEeRTSsON, HowagrD, 157 8. Wilton Drive, Los Angeles, Cal....... 1911 Rosinson, ANTHONY W., 409 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa....... 1903 RoBiInsON;, Lawis)) W, Cresskall IN. sa 46 55 deine on ee ee eee 1910 Rosinson, Dr. Putup E., 102 Huntington Ave., Boston, Mass.....1908 Rocxwoop, Mrs. Gro. I., 340 May St., Worcester, Mass........... 1912 *RoarErs, CHARLES H., Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City..... 1904 Rours, ALFRED G., High School, Pottstown, Pa................... 1909 RoosEvELT, FRANKLIN Drevano, Hyde Park, N. Y............... 1896 Roper, Kenyon, 509 N. 4th St., Steubenville, Ohio.............. 1911 Ross) GEORGE ERY 23 Westrot-, Evuit and nVitqele eile ene ee 1904 Ross, Dr. Lucretius, 507 Main St., Bennington, Vt................ 1912 RossiGNot, GILBERT R., Jr., 2116 Bull St., Savannah, Ga.......... 1909 Row.ey, JoHN, 42 Plaza Drive, Berkeley, Cal...........:........ 1889 SAckErT, 'Caanuncey Rie, Nis Yoj0 20 aes es oe se eee Sener 1910 Sace, Henry M., Menands Road, Albany, N. Y.................. 1885 Sau.ey, Firzuucu, Charleston Museum, Charleston, 8.C.......... 1907 SANBORN, Cottn C., 709 E. Lincoln Ave., Highland Park, Ill........ 1911 SANEORD, | HAérrison, Taitchteld. “Conn, jen. cere ae eee ee oe 1905 Sass, Herspert RAvVENEL, 23 Legare St., Charleston, 8. C......... 1906 SAUNDERS, ARErAs Ac. (Chateaut iVioniten een Meee Reena sini 1907 SavaGcE, Jamgs, 1097 Ellicott Sq., Buffalo, N. Y.................. 1895 Savaen, Waren’ Gites, Delight, Ankle lt) erane meee oma acne 1898 ScHantz, OrpHEuS M., 5215 W. 24th St., Cicero, Ill................ 1907 ScHENCK, FREpDRIC, 52 Brattle St., Cambridge, Mass................ 1912 . Scumipt, WaxLpo, U.S. S. S. “Albatross,” Sausalito, Cal........... 1910 ScHwEDER, ArTHUR, 184 Upper Mountain Ave., Montclair, N. J... .1911 SEWALL, JoTHAM B., 1501 Beacon St., Brookline, Mass............ 1912 SHANNON, WM. Purpy, 1170 Broadway, New York City.......... 1908 SHARPLES, Roperr P:; West: Chester,Parn ce cae ea cereies eee 1907 * Life Associate. Associates. Xxxi Suaw, Cuas. F., 676 Bedford St., North Abington, Mass.........., 1912 Suaw, Dr. J. Hotsrook, 43 Court St., Plymouth, Mass............ 1912 SHaw, Wiuu1AM T., 600 Linden Ave., Pullman, Wash.............. 1908 SHEARER, AMON R., Mont Belvieu, Tex................cccceeveee 1905 SHELDON, CHARLES, 140 W.57thSt., New York City.............. 1911 SHELTON, ALFRED, 2237 Dwight Way, Berkeley, Cal............... 1911 Surras, Georce, 3d, Stoneleigh Court, Washington, D. C.......... 1907 SHOEMAKER, CLARENCE R., 3116 P St., Washington, D. C......... 1910 SHOEMAKER, FRANK H., 206 Nebraska Hall, Station A, Lincoln, Neb..1895 SHOEMAKER, Henry W., 26 W. 53 St., New York City............. 1912 SHore, Epwin W., 191 Campbell St., New Bedford, Mass......... 1909 SHROSBREE, GEorGE, Public Museum, Milwaukee, Wis............ 1899 SILLIMAN, Harper, 4 Gramercy Park, New York City............. 1902 Stmmons, Geo. F., Stewart Bldg., Houston, Texas................. 1910 SLADE, Mrs: Danten, 1D: Chestnut Hill, Mass...:........:0..¢.+<% 1912 Panny oan, PATE, Malturrias, Texas... iecic be ecelsebbecet ds 1911 Smirn, Byron L., 2140 Prairie Ave., Chicago, Ill................- 1906 Seine MisssHmrmn M5 Rome; Ohio. . 2.52... s.c, 5 ec isis one sie ays <». sysiie oueve alas o\e 00, May 19, 1885 PAS ELE Yee VV ALISIATATU CU SEIMUAIN 4 -\clcig cos ac © o,,0) #' ree eerajare * eetece March 11, 1894 oT, UOTAT Eo) |S eer Tee Se , 1905 PEER MNO ERTS EE 02) o aw Sle a cag es le Sn. Saw plete Wynn) anni chain he Noy. 6, 1902 are re Na REP ey Ny Sa ge 5, ce esd cele a) naranniqin veya wid alles June 25, 1898 BECKHAM CHARGES) WICKLIEEE . ... 5. ..cc 0c sc eece es tne ies June 8, 1888 Beet AMET RRURE TO SMIRERU ery 9 eine ch Gye) ia seg did, Slaoys heheh siwinee Siw’. nije elk April —, 1897 BIR EWEUEVHRANGCIS SOSEPH soi 6¢.0 ecco a civ 6 ele/0's ole alent June 29, 1901 BGAngpMAN NGHORGE ANGUSTUS: «5.6.06 see ies deem siones ae Jan. 11, 1901 BOUIN, JERR Ate 106 56 Oot tis Seon CE IOEIGe Tere OP Ero Erna: Jan, 10, 1894 pees GID HE ED a, Bn. Sitio rea) < os) s tone o'sdlayaieie!s im atop oan © Jan. 5, 1900 BRET SE MI VWINDANG IUAWIRIINGEH). 2). 5.15 60.0.2 0 + os « osislssraie su Dec. 7, 1889 ISBENINGOR GEORGE HRANK si 6 0). ccrdcs ce cce eu ee sa ma oe « Dec. 3, 1905 Ree eN eA NAME ARNO WE see tcl) 5 n/a eae a's s.o.9 0 2 viele wag he imam ee Mar. 21, 1907 Peaee a MBIT INN Soave S ain n sav © se Old bed wae’ MOM avin ale os Sept. 3, 1897 aE STEEN IE TMM. 5 occu sian. vie no once w o's aie oa wien a eosin Jan. 16, 1901 BHOWNE, PRANGIG CHARUMS))..5 0.50.60 2c cece ncaa me ane niret Jan. 9, 1900 PO REO 08 (ES ee ee ae eer are Sept. 6, 1909 PPE MEER MEN OMAR D Biot... oj. ions oa eicnie Oise ois nips wea cams March 16, 1904 SMES RET ts ast ai chap Coase eis a am coi ae dieses Rea wR June 10, 1895 Gear AUBRMY BRENDON... 0... 60.5.0 e cee cee reece enames Nov. 20, 1901 SOMMER ROBERT ARGYLE. »..< 5. ssc cee cneigens se ot April —, 1897 Se ETGIERG MME Rey Saath es aie do's win ce anes een eee e 5 nsw Feb. 18, 1904 TIT RUS cco ci spc cle vies ovine tree eRe ete telnle ene Nov. 15, 1907 aE TUN FEN NCS 5p Sinise nicer ons vGln ade o hei nd SOs we 1900 etme A IGABWT PADDOCK. ..... 0500 ee eecrenseaneseces Sept. 15, 1907 CHappourne, Mrs. ARTHUR PATTERSON.........-0000+0555 Oct. 4, 1908 MAR EMS WRED LUMAR. ...5 0.0205 ec cre cede eee e ae mane May 6, 1911 MCEARK, JOHN NATHANIBL... 2.2.2... 00ce cere serecrceees Jan. 13, 1903 XXXVI]11 Deceased Associates. COB URN, | WiRLEEANG Wis 35 iociantod sien termes tno ee ee Oct, Conmmrr; AvoNnso (Mies. fee seca eek Scala a ere eee Aug. 22, Gon ant: Miso Ea Os OS os cate ocine nce eee Dec. 28, CORNING, SRASTRUS; UEscm ccm isi suena cree aoe cl eee eee April 9, TD ERTING | WMG EL retayc to) cyalacecetovace ctate ie One PeTSte he eon eo eee eee April 21, TASCUN 5S ORIN AEGON 4 5). eave. ieee ova eels a teeat tera c hk eee Feb. 21, DAS, Mrs SUSAN Da. 05g iso RE as, ne ee Feb. 13, Dyatyanss VATE AGS ie es eis css Sis ie ete ore at ae ee ee April 8, DrxTBRs INE WLON Gk o ces CeO. Ce July 27, Dongey JULIAN MONTGOMERY... eee Oe ee eee Nov. 23, HiaTOTE, (SAMUEL WO WiLL. < s\2 ese Cea nee ele oe ee Feb. 11, IWATRBANICS, HRANIKEIN: /0veoretersersieie cin eleven eRe: April 24, Parwhun, Mics, Huan 8.23 222 case open eer ee as PERRY, JOHN FARWELL: och hewt. saee eee Ree eee Feb. 11, FISHER: Wiis ELUBBELI es.oie st hats Amat ee Oe eee OctiG: HOwLER JOSHUASLOUNSBURY ALE ene aoe ree eee July 11, PuLLer; CHARLES ANTHONY. )j22ccd oats o> cane ne ee Mar. 16, CHsNER PABR ARAM HERBERT: srl sieesiieierin niet een April 30, Goss SENTAMIN (PRANIKUMIN: sc hte crore ore etevcetar cain ae arene ene July 6, Haron, Jnssn’ MAURIGHci.S6s sehomn dare han eee ee ene May 1, HOADLEY; FREDERICK EIODGES).2s7.0\0 ches ete eee Feb. 26, Houmes, LARUE, KEINnG@ia 080. io ean ce eee sie eae May 10, Hoopms; JOSTAH! 0%: 7's Sh sob dae ts fee ates ei ee ee ee ee Jan. 16, How; Miss Louise 3 y2c lane 7s ere atone eee cle re ee ee Sept. 13, Howiann,; JOHN SNOWDON, <- 46.06 hen e omeet oe eee Sept. 19, INGERSOLL, JOSEPH | CARTE TONG Sen eee ne ee eter Oct. 2, JENKS) JOHN) WHIPPLE LOLTENR sehen eee eee ener Sept. 27, JHSURUN; MORTIMER.) picid Seale ene eee ee ee aoe March —, JOUY,, PImRREVLOUISNS ohio e ee meee eee Cee March 22, KeurkERr,, "Wats Ayo fuk iten see ee er eee eee Feb. 15, KNi@n? WILBUR CLINTON 25. on So ee Oe ee July 8, Knox, JoHn C..... Tate IM cece SU Rr ee es a July 9, KNox, JOHN COWING s/o. Sesto ee en ane ee June 1, Koes; sAvGuse 3 so 0 ch eee ik Oe eee ee ee ent eer Feb. 15, KOUMETEN UD WaGls 27 ee Ne A One Sar ce eR RE Pe eS Dec. 4, IGUMETEN, DURE a.com een eee Pipes Dik ee Rervta A anak St lee & Aug. 5, LAWRENCE ROBERT) HORE tee eee en eee oe ere April 27, Len LEsrin) AGE XANDER ee ene cent nec eres May 20, LINDEN; (CHARLES Siocon Ce eee Cee ene Feb. 3, Luoyp, ANDREW JAMES...... TERRE ts NIG « RENO PRUE R Ee June 14, MABBETT. (GIDEON iiiteeane aa eeo cae oo a Con na ane Aug. 15, MarruaND;) AMXANDER iy Meise seh be ineiee eee oe ae Oct. 25, MARBIR, \CHARTMS Gs i255 Maratea i an aie tL ee ONL aer nee avn Sept. 25, MARCY, OLIV: (6s .a lle eee coeels be cece cca March 19, Manis; WILLARD LORRAINE 3.054 een cae eee eee Dec. 11, McEWEN; DANTBE Cos oan aaah Mee een Onin evenreens Nov. 1, 1907 . 1893 1902 1900 1913 1907 1901. 1909 1889 1895 1912 1910 1909 1899 1906 1895 1893 1898. 1895 1906 1904 1912 1885 1898 1894 1905. 1894 1908. 1903 1904 1904 1907 1902 1888 1897 1908 1888 - 1906 1900: 1907 1900: 1899 1895 Deceased Associates. SUCRE NMG UNM MIADRUE Sato fiva iiss s 3 ve ce ola.cignas sia eca cela as visle.acle va Nov. 1, REE MIELE MUTED a le'c finns «cscs eves 0 ee ee wis oe vole wos June 19, “TROT, LES es 2a 6 Nov. 13, PRR MOO MOUARMNGIG EIMNRY sc... cece c ccc eee ccecsecccecn July 15, DirgHOUs, HOWARD GARDNUR. 65.5.6... .00cscccsswccsoes June 23, J DT i Bae eC ee re March 12, SN AIRE SE al PRETO S Ue rea hg nS ey ace vet's». seid f uysin dow te ai eid whe June 26, Ur PID DERG GST NIN ee Sept. 15, “TI JAALUISI 0 ete co eee Sept. 22, PAGCMiOR, TM REDHRICK CUARK. 5 005 sce cece see sees March 3, PERLE MAREN NMR 3 0a lol n 50% in) sss, ) en) ate 'o oe owes «on mays May 14, POAGEDATIO GMORGE EMNRY. 0.6.66. c cence cee ace es wns March 25, EGHPAT) erm Cx OR GREET ER aicee /obeVercte citever's\o.ae: ab scena.s ae disiae stalareee March 20, ACW AHMED ANCIS I VITA ct si2) ac Ais < os ce ecie acta wewie as veces ct June 12, TR DID, (CEI RnITA ING S Gen BAe ORE OC EE ISSO eon ton ear Dec. 15, PEED SON DIN INES s 1/0 z/s\e,412) 0/0 4 0101s 60sec s oldtalseleaes June 24, RSPETENIS AVE PAIN W ATED syaic sc c:/ofa\s oye) ot vise 's Gena s fnide's Asoc July 2, ST RARMEMMA IGQW)20 . oe,2 ceo s)s/sles da 0s Aug. 7, PRE ORNE MATT IVIARVING. oc cc.c0 ccs sce ccicecewece ens March 16, PpReOR, EOGMNE CARLETON: .. 00.065 0ccesceseenecnn Sept. 6, ReREAG E IVURRCNUY TIRUARE ET i, ncn nje ce nas te ce en sisle wens Nov. 29, PinmMOH, DNRY GEORGE. ...... 2.2. .c sce e ee cee ennens June 8, Warmers, HpWARD STANIBY...........0c0ccceseccesnece Dec. 26, PEARY, SAMUEL: WHLES 60.0600 e es ciec ccc cee n es veer nnees May 24, VV TSIEN, SIRDNTON? 3 Gp, bb o Ge oO ORE Oe mr RU Scere eae Nov. 22, RVR Se VWeITTAME FROWCH: 3.502. secre ccecccrrseceesses Aug. 21, TTI TEET AMM ci ce-s ce peice nance ces w wee oelew sue a Aug. 9, Wooprvurr, EpwARD SEYMOUR...........eeeeeeeceereees Jan. 15, MNES SRG AENTER SS EG oc) 5 oa 5 wieien/e vic aes cuide ceca ssa seees May 27, TOT EMI COUAY Wc ease cd ee mae ce Bodine nena cee eaen July 30, XXXI1X 1899 1901 1890 1902 1896 1903 1891 1907 1893 1906 1906 1895 1903 1911 1912 1893 1906 1906 1900 1895 1902 1884 1912 1896 1912 1908 1904 1895 1907 1910 1907 1897 1896 1912 1884 1902 1887 1911 1911 1909 1902 aia at. ie im) : DU hdl 4 ia i | 5 ras eV, i a hanks Par ie Mapes ray Cv ae Ral (oye ’ ‘ s a4 us , ¢ Patan tty | er) ‘ Lt) ea eget an Mane a " ni ha a ‘84 a Old | CONTINUATION OF THE New Series, ( Vol, XXXvIII 9 BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB / y's), Ol. The Auk H Quarterly Journal of Ornithology Vol. XXX JANUARY, 1913 PUBLISHED BY The American Ornithologists’ Union CAMBRIDGE, MASS. Entered as second-class mail matter in the Post Office at Boston, Mass. CONTENTS PAGE Some More Lasrapor Notes. By Charles W. Townsend, M. D. (PlatesI-II) . 1 Notes ON THE PaNAMA THRUSH-WARBLER. By Hubert Lyman Clark . Z t 1l EIGHTEEN SPECIES OF BIRDS NEW TO THE PrRIBILOF ISLANDS, INCLUDING FOUR NEW vo NortH America. By Barton W. Evermann . 4 E J s 15 AN Essex County OrnitTHoLoaist. By Glover M. Allen . 6 . 3 : 19 CONTRIBUTIONS TO AVIAN PALEONTOLOGY. By R. W. Shufeldt. (Plate III) . ; 29 A Srupy or THE Houses Fincu. By W. GH. Bergtold, M.D. . x : : > 40 Birp PHOTOGRAPHY BY THE DirREcT CoLoR Process. By Frank Overton, M.D. and Francis Harper . 3 es é 4 ‘ . A ; 74 THe CaAROLINIAN AVIFAUNA IN NORTHEASTERN Iowa. By Althea R. Sherman 77 A DirFrerReEnt ASPECT OF THE CASE OF ROOSEVELT vs. THAYER. By Thomas Barbour : ; " . : 4 3 A * E 5 : 81 On THE GENERIC NAMEs Jbis LACEPEDE, AND Egatheus BILLBERG. By Gregory M. Mathews, F. R. S. (Edin.) ‘ 4 é : : 4 : 5 S 92 THIRTIETH STaTED MEETING OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS Union. By John H. Sage 4 : ; 3 Fi : ; 96 GENERAL Nortes.— Sabine’s Gull in Massachusetts, 105; Another Bridled Tern for South Carolina, 105; Caspian Tern in Chester Co., Pennsylvania, 105; Fulmar in Massachusetts, 105; White Pelican at Savannah, Georgia, 106; The Black Duck Controversy Again, 106; The Harlequin Duck in Wyoming, 106; The King Hider (Somateria spectabilis) in Massachusetts, 107; Brazilian Tree Duck (Dendrocygna viduata) in New Jersey, 110; An Addition to the A. O. U. Check-List, 110; Little Blue Heron (Florida cerulea) in Vermont, 111; Swimming of Young Herons, 111; Northern Phalarope (Lobipes lobatus) in Michigan, 111; Black Vulture in Vermont, 112; The Swallow-tailed Kite in DeWitt Co., Illinois, 112; The Alder Flycatcher in Colorado, 112; Arkansas Kingbird in Massachusetts, 112; Yellow-headed Black- bird in Virginia, 113; The Slate-colored Fox Sparrow Breeding in Colorado, 113; Harris’s Sparrow in Eastern Ontario, 114; Magnolia Warbler in the Coast Region of South Carolina, 114; A Few Notes on Newfoundland Birds, 114; Additional Notes to the ‘Birds of Gallatin County Montana,’ 116; Two new records for Wash- ington State, 116; A Correction, 116; An Item for Bibliographers, 117. Recent LireRatuRE.— Forbush on the Game Birds, Wild-Fowl and Shore Birds, 118; Miller on the Classification of Kingfishers, 119; Reed's ‘Birds of Eastern North America,’ 120; Hellmayr and Seilern on the Birds of the Cumbre de Valencia, Venezuela, 121; Hellmayr on Zonotrichia strigiceps Gould, 121; Nelson on New Birds from Panama, Colombia and Ecuador, 121; Oberholser’s Revision of the Green Herons, 122; Oberholser’s One Hundred and Four new Birds from the Barus- san Islands and Sumatra, 123; Mathews’ ‘Birds of Australia,’ 124; Bickerton’s ‘Home-Life of the Terns,’ 125; Shelley’s ‘Birds of Africa,’ 126; Horsbrugh and Davies on The Game-Birds and Water-Fowl of South Africa, 126; Thayer's Con- cealing Coloration, an Answer to Theodore Roosevelt, 126; Strong on Teaching a Bird Course, 127; Beal on the Food of our More Important Flycatchers, 127; Beal and McAtee on Food of Some Well-known Birds, 127; Palmer on National Reserva- tions for the Protection of Wild Life, 128; Economic Ornithology in Recent Ento- mological Publications, 128; Economic Ornithology in California, 132; Some Bird Enemies of Amphipods, 136; Injurious African Birds, 137; The Ornithological Jour- nals, 138; Ornithological Articles in Other Journals, 143; Publications Received, 143. CorRESPONDENCE,— The Concealing Coloration Question, 146; The Scientific Value of Bird Photographs, 147; The A. O. U. Check-List, Third Edition, 149; Destruction of Sapsuckers, 154. Norges anp Nrews.— New Cover Design, 157; Obituary: Bradford Torrey, 157;_Obitu- ary: Valdemar Knudsen, 159; Field Museum’s Explorations in Peru, 159; Habitat Groups in the Field Museum, 160; American Museum’s Expedition to South America, 160; Expedition to the Soudan, 160; Expedition to James Bay, 161; Ridgway’s ‘Birds of North and Middle America, 161; The Marsh Island Bird Reservation, 161; Mr. Bent’s Report of Progress on the Life Histories of N. A. Birds, 161; Dawson's _ Birds of California, 165; Dinner of the Linnwan Society of N. Y., 165. ‘THE AUK,’ published quarterly as the Organ of the AMERICAN ORNITHOLO- gists’ UNION, is edited, beginning with the Volume for 1912, by Mr. Witmer STONE. Trrms:— $3.00 a year, including postage, strictly in advance. Single num- bers, 75 cents. Free to Honorary Fellows, and to Fellows, Members, and Associates of the A. O. U. not in arrears for dues. Subscriptions should be addressed to DR. JONATHAN DWIGHT, Jr., Business Manager, 134 West 71st St., New Yorx, N.Y. Foreign Subscrib- ers may obtain ‘THe AuxK’ through R. H. PORTER, 9 Princes STREET, CAVENDISH SquaReE, W., LONDON. Articles and communications intended for publication, and all books and publications for notice, should be sent to Mr. WITMER STONE, AcApDEMY OF NATURAL SCIENCES, LOGAN SQUARE, PHILADELPHIA, Pa. Manuscripts for general articles should reach the editor at least six weeks before the date of the number for which they are intended, and manuscripts for ‘General Notes’ and ‘Recent Literature’ not later than the first of the month preceding the date of the number in which it is desired they shall appear. THE AUK, VOL. XXX. IPE Aas Ile 1. Low SAND BANKS ABOUT FIVE MILES FROM THE MOUTH OF THE NATASHQUAN RIVER SHOWING SPRUCE AND FIR FOREST. 2. ON THE BRINK OF THE THIRD FALLS; A PIECE OF THE FOURTH FALLS CAN BE SEEN IN THE DISTANCE. > * Tats AUK: A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ORNITHOLOGY. OL; x5 Xx. JANUARY, 1913. No. 1. SOME MORE LABRADOR NOTES. BY CHARLES W. TOWNSEND, M. D.! Plates I-IT. THE following notes on the birds of the Labrador Peninsula are the result of a canoe trip some eighty miles up the Natashquan river and ten or fifteen miles up a subsidiary stream, and of the steamer journey to and from the mouth of the river. Owing to the almost continuous stormy weather during the four weeks of the trip, conditions for bird observation were unsatisfactory. In addition the start was made later than I had intended and the song season was nearly over. Leaving Quebec on July 20, 1912, I reached Natashquan on July 25 and started up the great river the next day with a compan- ion and two French fishermen. The Natashquan River empties into the Gulf of St. Lawrence about half way between the base of the peninsula and the Straits of Belle Isle. On August 1 a point was reached about eighty miles up the river, some sixty miles from the sea in a direct line. Returning about forty miles, a subsidiary stream on the west side was ascended ten or fifteen miles and three days were spent in exploring the small lakes and surrounding coun- try. Returning to Natashquan, I caught the steamer on August 10 and reached Quebec on August 14. In the paper by Mr. Bent and myself ? a description of this coastal strip of the Labrador Peninsula is given, as well as our reasons 1 Read at the meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union, Noy. 12, 1912. 2 Additional Notes on the Birds of Labrador. Auk, X XVII, 1910, pp. 1-18. 1 2 TownsEND, Some more Labrador Notes. ae for believing that the high land which we visited where it ap- proached the coast at Mingan was arctic in appearance only, and that it had been deforested by fire. The valley of the Natashquan river as far as I went was densely forested with black spruce and balsam fir. White spruces and white birches were not uncommon while a few mountain ashes, larches, and aspens were also seen, and alders and low willows oc- curred in places on the river’s edge. The forest trees were from 30 to 60 feet high but rarely attained a diameter of more than a foot. An exceptional white birch was 72 inches in circumference and a balsam fir, 64 inches. Their growth was very slow; for example, a balsam fir, which we cut for bedding, was 7% inches in diameter, 48 feet tall and showed 182 rings. The river is over a mile wide at its mouth and flows between low sand banks for twelve miles. Above this rapids and falls abound in the granitic rock, and the surrounding hills increase in size as one ascends. Glacial gouges and scratches are everywhere plain; their average direction is south 12° east, in relation to true north. Marine cliffs of sand and clay over one hundred and fifty feet high are cut by the river some seventy-five miles from the sea. The whole region has undergone recent elevation by tilting following a previous submersion. At our farthest point inland many of the hills, 800 feet or more above the river, were wooded, while others were nearly destitute of trees. As at Mingan I found the charred stumps of trees on the high land showing that it was formerly forested. Very few birds were seen along the coast — pitiful remnants of the great hosts that formerly bred there. Loons were common, Red-throated Loons uncommon. Of Puffins only two were seen off the Perroquets on the journey down and two on the return. One was seen near Piashte-bai. Black Guillemots were fairly common. Of Murres, either troille or lomvia, I saw four between Natashquan and Esquimaux Point, and fourteen between Mingan and Seven Islands. Of Razor-billed Auks I saw only two off the Perroquets on the trip down and three on the return, as well as two near Piashte-bai. A Dovekie was seen on July 21 above the region of the Labrador Peninsula near Godbout. Mr. Napo- leon A. Comeau, the veteran naturalist of this place, told me that ~~ Vol. XXX i913 TOWNSEND, Some more Labrador Notes. 3 afew Dovekies are generally to be found along the coast in summer. While these birds are called Bull-birds by the English-speaking inhabitants on the eastern coast, the French of the southern coast call them Bons Hommes. Eight Parasitic Jaegers were seen off Long Point; several of these were in the dark phase. Kittiwakes in small numbers were seen along the coast especially in the region of the Perroquets; nearly all were in immature plumage. At the mouth of the Natashquan River four immature Glaucous Gulls consorted with Great Black- backed and Herring Gulls and both of these last named Gulls were common on the coast. Terns were common everywhere but not in large numbers. Those examined carefully with glasses seemed to be all Common Terns except one seen at close range at Natash- quan that was an Arctic Tern. One Petrel, probably a Wilson’s Petrel, was seen off the Mingan Islands. No Gannets were to be seen about the Perroquets on our passage east, and but five on the return, three in adult, two in immature plumage. I was told that although a few of these birds visited the place every season, none had bred there for years. This corresponds with the results obtained here by Mr. Bent and myself in 1909. On August 10 the steamer passed near enough to a rocky island off Agwannus for me to see some fifty or sixty Double- crested Cormorants thereon. This was one of the three colonies visited by Mr. Bent and myself in 1909. Of Ducks, a few Red-breasted Mergansers and one or two Whist- lers were seen along the coast. Eiders were fairly common, but not abundant, east of Mingan. All were in the brown plumage, although an occasional male was seen with a few white feathers still remaining. The males are believed by many on the coast to dis- appear after the middle of July and this they can do effectually by dropping their conspicuous nuptial dress and donning the well named eclipse plumage. All three species of Scoters were seen in small numbers on the coast. On and near the beach at Natashquan and about the Little Natashquan River, Semipalmated Sandpipers, Sanderlings, Greater Yellow-legs, Spotted Sandpipers, Hudsonian Curlews, Semipal- mated and Piping Plovers and Ruddy Turnstones were found in smallnumbers. Of these the Hudsonian Curlews and Piping Plover 4 TOWNSEND, Some more Labrador Notes. acts are worthy of note. Of the Hudsonian Curlew I saw 25 on the beach at Natashquan on July 25 and 12 flying about the barren hills near Natashquan village on August 8. They were all very wild. Curlew berries, mountain cranberries and _ bake-apples (cloud berries) were abundant there and the natives said that the Curlew fed on them. As recorded by Allen and myself in our Birds of Labrador’! Audubon stated that the Hudsonian Curlew was ‘entirely unknown’ on this coast, but Stearns in 1880 and ’81, and Frazer in 1884, both found it not a rare migrant in the fall. Mr. Johan Beetz told Mr. Bent and myself in 1909 that le courlzs,— by which he must have meant this species,— was increasing on the coast. This is interesting in connection with the apparent increase of the Hudsonian Curlew in Essex County, Mass.” in the last 60 years. No Eskimo Curlew were seen. Mr. Bent and I found two Piping Plover on the beach at Natash- quan on May 31, 1909. This was the first record of this species for the Labrador Peninsula. On July 25, 1912, I saw two adults and two fully grown young in a family group on this same beach. So much for the water birds of this coast; their numbers are steadily diminishing for the eggs, nesting-birds and young are the prey not only of the Indians but of the fishermen all along the coast. It is to be hoped that adequate protection will be given them before it is too late. In the trip up the Natashquan River the following birds were identified, and are worth recording as so little is known of the interior of Labrador. The small number of species and of indi- viduals is partly to be accounted for by the lateness of the season and the unpropitious weather. A reason for the scarcity of ducks and other water-fowl] is the fact that the river is one of the highways of migration of the Montagnais Indians. They descend it in the latter part of May with their packs of furs obtained in the interior. After disposing of the furs to the traders, attending to their religious festivities in the Catholic Mission, and feasting on sea birds’ eggs and flesh they return up the river in August. 1. Gavia immer. Loon.— Two or three seen. 2. Gavia stellata. Rep-THROATED Loon.—A few near the mouth of the river. 1 Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., July, 1907. 2 Birds of Essex County, p. 190. THE AUK, VOL. XXX. PLATE II. 1. THe NATASHQUAN RIVER ABOUT FIFTY MILES FROM THE MOUTH. 2. CHARACTER OF THE COUNTRY ABOUT FORTY MILES INLAND, AS SEEN FROM THE HILL FREQUENTED BY THE Rep-rarLep HAwk _ a ee = TOWNSEND, Some more Labrador Notes. 2 3. Larus marinus. Great BLAcK-BacKED GuLu.— One was seen on July 26, ten miles from the mouth, and another on August 2, about fifty-five miles from the mouth of the river. 4. Larus argentatus. Hrrrinac Guii.— A few of these birds all in adult plumage were seen both along the main river and the branch stream. 5. Sterna hirundo. Common Trern.— Among the sand bars below the first fall a few Common Terns were seen and five or six from twenty to forty miles up the river. 6. Mergus serrator. Rep-preastep MrerGcanser.— A single bird was seen flying over the rapids of the fifth fall, another some seventy-five miles up, and one on the branch river. This one in female plumage flew ahead of the canoe, croaking hoarsely. 7. Anas rubripes tristis. Buack Ducx.— The only Black Ducks I saw were in the branch stream on August 5, about forty miles from the sea. Here I came upon six birds and shot one, an adult female. The others were probably young birds, but all took to their wings after acting at first as if unable to fly. The bird I secured had a pale olive-green bill with a black nail; pale dusky brown or straw-colored tarsi and feet, without any hint of red, a buffy almost immaculate throat and dark crown and nape. The bird was a typical tristis. The breast was very dark and beautifully streaked. 8. Clangula clangula americana. GoLpEN-EYE.— A young bird unable to fly with a little natal down still about its head was secured in the main river. No others were seen here. In the branch stream on August 3, I came upon a mother and four nearly fully fledged young still unable to fly. The old bird crouched low in the water — her golden eyes showing very prominently,— and uttered hoarse rasping croaks. The young, whose eyes were gray-blue and inconspicuous, at once scattered, diving repeatedly and disappeared in the bushes, while the mother kept promi- nently in view within twenty yards of the canoe leading us down stream. After repeatedly swimming and flying short distances ahead of the canoe for half a mile or so, croaking all the time, she disappeared around a bend and undoubtedly flew back to the young. Near at hand the young made no sound, but at a distance a loud beseeching peep was uttered. 9. Branta canadensis canadensis. Canapa Goosn.— Seven nearly grown young birds were found in the branch stream. They were able to progress over the water with great speed by use of the legs aided by the partly developed wings. No adults were seen. 10. Botaurus lentiginosus. Brirrern.— A single bird of this species was seen and thoroughly identified on August 3 as it jumped into the air within a few yards of the canoe on the branch stream. This is an interest- ing record as the previous ones are so meagre. Coues found a wing in the possession of a hunter in southern Labrador and Bigelow speaks of seeing two or three at Cape Francis. 11. Pisobia minutilla. Least SANpPIPER.— One was seen above the fifth falls on July 30. 6 TowNnsEND, Some more Labrador Notes. Sue 12. Actitis macularia. Sporrep SanpprpeR.— Common on _ the borders of the rivers and lakes. 13. égialitis semipalmata. SemipaALMATED PLOVER.— One seen flying south over the river on August 6. 14. Bonasa umbellus togata. Canapa RuFFED GrRousE.— A family with half grown young was seen at the third falls on July 27, and another on July 31 about 75 miles up the river. 15. Circus hudsonius. Marsa Hawxk.— A pair of Marsh Hawks were found at the mouth of the Natashquan River, and another inland from the village. This pair probably had young as one of them was very noisy, repeating the whinnying notes and launching itself to within thirty yards of me in a threatening manner whenever I entered a certain bog. This was on August 8 and 9. With the exception of the record by Mr. Bent and myself in 1909, Audubon’s and Stearns’ records are the only previous ones for this species. 16. Accipiter cooperi. Cooprr’s Hawkx.—One was seen near the fourth falls on August 7 and another, or the same bird, on July 30. Stearns is the only one who has previously recorded this bird. 17. Buteo borealis borealis. Rep-rairep Hawxk.—A very dark bird of this species was seen for three days near a precipitous hill on the branch river. Only when seen from above could the red tail be distin- guished; from below, the tail seemed nearly black. The Labrador form of the Canada Jay is somewhat darker than the same species elsewhere. This tendency to dark plumage is particularly marked in the Labrador form of the Horned Owl. It is possible that the same may be true of the Red-tailed Hawk of Labrador, although the individual that I observed may have been merely an exceptional case of melanism. This same tendency to darker plumage is suggested in the Flicker and Yellow Warbler as referred to later in this paper. Beebe has shown that a damp climate in itself, aside from other environment, tends to darkness in plumage, and the climate of Labrador in summer is damp. The piercing cry of this Hawk, well described by Chapman as suggestive of escaping steam, was continually emitted whenever we appeared in the neighborhood. No nest could be found although the bird’s actions sug- gested young. The only previous records of the bird are as follows: Audubon says “a tail feather of the Red-tailed Hawk, young, was found [near Cape Whittle]; therefore that species exists here.’’ Palmer records that ‘‘ two were seen at the Mingan Islands.” 18. Archibuteo lagopus sancti-johannis. RoucH-Leaccep Hawk. — At the fifth falls on July 30 I saw one and another on July 31 near Devil’s Mountain. As it flew towards the cliffs it was greeted by a chorus of shrill whistles. No nest, however, could be seen. 19. Falco columbarius columbarius. Pickon Hawx.— One seen on July 26 about ten miles from the mouth of the river. 20. Pandion haliaétus carolinensis. Osprey.— One or two were | TOWNSEND, Some more Labrador Notes. < seen at the mouth of the river, one about forty miles up, and one on the branch stream. 21. Bubo virginianus heterocnemis. Lasprapor Hornep OwL— On August 3, a cloudy day, a bird of this species flapped and sailed across the branch river and alighted on a spruce within easy range of the canoe. Here he sat looking straight at us with wide open eyes, and at the same time I twice heard the call of another Owl in the distance. The bird proved to be a male in the sooty plumage characteristic of this race. As far as I know there are no previous identifications of this species so far to the southwest in the Peninsula. 22. Ceryle alcyon alcyon. Berttep KinerisHer.— Common on the main river and the branch stream. The nesting hole of one was seen in a sand bank. 23. Dryobates pubescens medianus. Downy Woopprecker.— One was seen near the small river on August 5 and again on August 6. 24. Colaptes auratus luteus. NorrHern Fiicker.— A pair were seen several times near the branch river, and one was heard calling at the fifth falls. I was unable to secure a specimen. One sent me by Dr. Grenfell from Sandwich Bay in 1908 was somewhat darker than the usual New England specimens. 25. Nuttallornis borealis. OLive-sipep FiycatcHer.— A pair were seen on several successive days about some dead trees on the little river. The only previous record for Labrador is the statement of Audubon that he “‘ found this species . . . on the coast of Labrador. ’ 26. Empidonax flaviventris. YrLLOw-BELLIED FirycatcHer.— The characteristic whistling note of this species was heard several times, and an individual came on board the steamer off the western point of the peninsula on August 12. 27. Perisoreus canadensis nigricapillus. Laprapor Jay.— This bird was more often heard than seen, and was fairly common. 28. Corvus brachyrhynchos brachyrhynchos. Crow.— The only Crows seen were four on the shore of the Bay of Seven Islands. No Ravens were seen. 29. Loxia curvirostra minor. Crosspitu.— A flock of about fifty was seen on July 27. _ 80. Loxia leucoptera. WuuitTs-wINcep CrossBiLL.— One seen on July 30, and another came on board the steamer on August 12. This was a young bird with bill still uncrossed. 31. Passerculus sandwichensis savanna. SAVANNAH SPARROW.— These birds were common in the sand dune country at the mouth of the Natashquan river but were not found inland. 32. Zonotrichia albicollis. WuitTe-rHroatep Sparrow.— One or two were seen or heard singing nearly every day near the rivers. 33. Junco hyemalis hyemalis. SiaTe-coLorep JuNco.— Common; found in the thick spruce woods feeding young. Auk Jan. 8 TOWNSEND, Some more Labrador Notes. 34. Melospiza lincolni lincolni. Lincouin’s Sparrow.— Several were seen along both rivers. Two pairs acted as if they had young. 35. Passerella iliaca iliaca. Fox Sparrow.— Common at the mouth of the river and one was heard singing about 75 miles up stream. As the song season had practically ceased I may have overlooked many of these as of other species. 36. Iridoprocne bicolor. Tree SwaLtLtow.— An occasional indi- vidual of this species was seen from time to time flying over the rivers, four in all, and one was seen about the steamer off the Mingan Islands. 37. Vermivora peregrina. TENNESSEE WARBLER.— None were seen in the interior but on August 13 two in juvenal plumage came on board the steamer in a fog not far from Godbout. 38. Dendroica estiva estiva. YELLOw WarBLeR.— Two of this species were seen on July 31 and August 1 about seventy-five or eighty miles up the river and the female secured. This specimen as well as an adult male taken at Esquimaux Point by Mr. Bent on June 10, 1909, and a young bird from North West River sent me by Dr. Grenfell, taken Septem- ber 1, 1905, all appear somewhat darker and to have slightly thicker bills than those taken farther south. The number of specimens, however, is too small to afford any conclusions of value. 39. Dendroica coronata. Myrrte Warsier.— Only two Myrtle Warblers were seen on the trip. 40. Dendroica magnolia. Magnonia WARBLER.— A common war- bler along the river courses and still in feeble song up to the end of the first week in August. 41. Dendroica striata. Buiack-poLL WaRrBLER.— Only one bird was identified inland, but at the mouth of the river several were heard singing feebly on August 8 and 9. Either the birds inland had migrated, or had finished rearing their young and were moulting, concealed and silent. The season inland is earlier than on the coast at Natashquan, which is the westernmost point of the Arctic Coastal Strip. 42. Dendroica virens. BuAack-THROATED GREEN WaARBLER.— This was the commonest warbler inland, and was almost everywhere in evidence owing to the constant chipping of the young calling for food. The adults sang occasionally up to the last of July. Mr. Bent and I found this bird abundant on the southern coast in 1909, but previous to this time there had been but three records for the whole of Labrador, one taken at Esqui- maux Point by Frazar, and two seen at the Mingan Islands by Palmer. . The breeding of this bird in the same region with such Hudsonian species as the Lincoln’s and Fox Sparrows and the Labrador Horned Owl is inter- esting and surprising. The Check-List states that it is a bird of the ‘ Lower Canadian and Transition Zones.’ 43. Setophaga ruticilla. Repstrarr.— Several were seen near the landing wharf for Clark City at the Bay of Seven Islands on July 23. They were in song. eS | TOWNSEND, Some more Labrador Notes. Q 44. Sitta canadensis. Rrp-preastep Nuruatcu.— None were seen on shore, but on August 11, off Moisie, five of this species, one adult, the others immature, came on board the steamer in a fog and remained on board two days. They were extremely tame and crept about the deck, and on the ropes and spars, sometimes within a few inches of the passengers. One alighted on the coat-collar of a sailor as he was lighting his pipe, and another on my shoulder as I stood on the bridge. I put my hand near the adult Nuthatch on the rail and he picked at my finger; then he flew into the captain’s cabin and gathered insects from the window. There were many small dead moths on board that seemed to be particularly relished. I noticed two Nuthatches on the chains of the smoke stack undisturbed by the constant vibrations, and, what is still more surprising, by the deafening steam fog-horn that was blown at frequent intervals within a few feet of them. 45. Penthestes atricapillus atricapillus. CxHickapen— On an island at the fourth falls on July 28 I saw and clearly identified one of this species while I was watching a small band of Hudsonian Chickadees. The previous records for the Labrador Peninsula are few and unsatis- factory. 46. Penthestes hudsonicus hudsonicus. Hupsonran CHICKADEE. — Common inland. 47. Regulus satrapa satrapa. GoLDEN-cROWNED KinGLer.— One or two individuals only were seen. 48. Regulus calendula calendula. Rusy-crowNnep KInGLeT.— This bird, found so commonly in 1909, had evidently finished its nesting season and was rarely in evidence. On August 5, I heard a feeble attempt at song. 49. Hylocichla guttata pallasi. Hermit Tarusey.— Common all along the courses of the rivers, but not in full song. 50. Hylocichla ustulata swainsoni. OLIvE-BackKED THRUSH.— Common and in partial song. 51. Planesticus migratorius migratorius. Ropin.— Several were seen near the mouth of the Natashquan River, and two were seen near the small river about forty miles inland. In all 74 species were seen on the coast and in the interior. Additional Notes. At Natashquan, Mr. Richard Joncas, the head of the Labrador Fur Company, to whom I am indebted for many kindnesses, has a mounted Pintail, Dafila acuta, shot at that place in 1911. This is the ninth record for Labrador. I am able to give the first definite record of the Wood Duck, Aix sponsa, for the Labrador Peninsula, namely an adult male speci- 10 TownsenpD, Some more Labrador Notes. at men caught in a muskrat-trap at Long Point on July 1, 1912, and brought to Robert Smith of Mingan, who presented it to M. Johan Beetz of Piashte-bai in whose collection it now is. This brings the number of species and subspecies for the Labrador Peninsula up to 219. In letters to me from Dr. W. T. Grenfell under dates of October 4 and 17, and November 5, 1912, the following records are of interest: A female Morning Dove, Zenaidura macroura carolinensis, found dead on the beach at Spotted Islands in August, and another seen alive at Battle Harbor on October 2, 1912. There are only two previous records for Labrador. Seven Eskimo Curlew, Numenius borealis, 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 Cam- bridge where they were seen and identified by Mr. Wm. Brewster. This record of the Eskimo Curlew is of great interest for there has been no other authentic record since September 14, 1909, and the species was believed to be extinct. It was a great pity that the few survivors of this interesting species should be shot either for specimens or for food. I would suggest that the bird be put on the protected list at all times in the United States and Canada wherever it is possible to pass such a law, that all offers of money for speci- mens by collectors be at once withdrawn, and that Dr. Grenfell be asked to distribute notices along the Labrador Coast to the effect that no specimens will be paid for, and urging the inhabitants not to shoot any Curlew in order if possible to save the species from extinction. ol Cuark, The Panama Thrush-Warbler. Lt NOTES ON THE PANAMA THRUSH-WARBLER. BY HUBERT LYMAN CLARK.! THanks to the kindness of Mr. Outram Bangs, I have recently had the opportunity of examining some fine alcoholic material of the Panama Thrush-Warbler, Rhodinocichla rosea eximia Ridgway. Mr. Bangs called my attention to the fact that the systematic position of this bird is still unsettled and he suggested that a study of some of the anatomical details of its structure might throw light on its relationships. For his kindness in placing the material in my hands, without restrictions, and for the loan of skins of several -other genera which I wished to examine, I desire to express here my hearty thanks to Mr. Bangs. I should be rash indeed if I expected to actually settle, by these notes, the systematic position of Rhodinocichla for like many -another genus of Passerine birds, this one approaches more or less nearly several different families and with which one it is most closely affiliated is largely a matter of opinion. All I hope to do is to point out some features of the anatomy not previously known, ‘summarize those which have been described, and express my own opinion as to the relationship which these facts seem to indicate. Bill. The bill is rather slender, about 18 mm. long, 5 mm. wide at base and 8 mm. deep at the same point. The upper mandible is distinctly curved but the lower is remarkably straight. The tomia are entire with neither tooth nor notch, and the same is true of the edges of the upper mandible except near the tip, where there is a large, rounded notch. This notch is exactly like that which is found in the same position in the bill of certain tanagers, Eucometis, Mitrospingus, etc. Indeed, the bill of Rhodinocichla is more like that of Mitrospingus than like that of any other bird with which I have compared it. Nostrils. The nostrils show no distinctive character. They are ellipsoidal, longer than high and quite bare; the skin back of 1 Read at the meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union, November 13, 1912. 1 CriarK, The Panama Thrush-Warbler. aus them is free from feathers for a couple of millimeters. There is no projecting ridge or fold above them such as occurs in many Mniotiltide. In Hucometis and Mitrospingus, the feathers come close up to the posterior end of the nostril. Tongue. The tongue ends in two points, one on each side; there is a series of fine teeth or serrations on each side, each tooth being larger than its proximal neighbor, so that the terminal tooth is the largest. Sometimes the two terminal teeth on each side are of equal size. This sort of a tongue occurs in many Passer-- ine birds which have no close relationship, as the Catbird and the Scarlet Tanager. It is not therefore in any way distinctive. Pterylosis. The head is fully feathered with no special apteria nor is there any unusual arrangement of feathers in longitudinal series. The upper cervical tract is narrow at first but becomes. broader and more densely feathered between the shoulders and then becomes narrow again before joining the dorsal tract. This enlarge-- ment of the cervical tract is the only characteristic feature of the general pterylosis. It has not been reported for any other Passer- ine bird so far as I know, but a somewhat similar arrangement is found in the kingfishers. The cervical tract anterior and posterior to this enlargement is, in Rhodinocichla, only three or four feathers wide but the enlargement .is six feathers wide. The rhombic dorsal saddle is well-marked and symmetrical and resembles that of Piranga erythromelas and many other Passeres. The pterylosis of the lower surface shows no peculiarities save that the ventral tracts are unusually short, narrow and ill-defined. The primaries are rather short and the secondaries long, giving the wing the short, rounded shape characteristic of the genus. The really remarkable fact here is the shortness of the eighth and ninth pri- maries. In the Mniotiltide (with few exceptions) and in most tanagers, the eighth primary is one of the longest and the ninth is little shorter and is longer than the fourth, but in Rhodinocichla. the eighth and ninth primaries are the shortest and the ninth is even shorter than the secondaries. A very similar arrangement of primaries is however found in Mitrospingus which has the ninth primary shortest and the eighth only a little longer, though it exceeds. the first. In Eucometis, the ninth is longer than the first and second, while the eighth is not much shorter than the fifth, sixth Vol. XXX 1913 Cuark, The Panama Thrush-Warbler. 13 and seventh. In Pzranga, the wing is pointed by the ninth, eighth and seventh primaries, the other extreme from Rhodinocichla. The latter has nine secondaries and a quintocubital wing of course. There are twelve rectrices which are successively shorter from the middle pair outward. These feathers are notable for their breadth and softness; it is interesting to find the tail feathers of Mitrospin- gus similar. Alimentary Canal. The arrangement of the intestine and the appearance of the entire alimentary canal is so similar to that of several other Passerine birds examined, Dumetella, Piranga, Seiurus, that no distinctive characters were found. The contents of the stomach were examined in two specimens and while much of the material was unrecognizable to my untrained eye, three items were determined; beetles of at least four species, one of which was a eurculio; seeds, of which the most common was the hard gray achene of some sedge; large, irregular grains of sand, with rounded angles and of a bright ochre color. This combination seems to show clearly that the birds are chiefly ground feeders. Palatine Region. The bony palate of Rhodinocichla yields what seems to me the best indication of its relationships. If one compares this part of the skull in tanagers and in wood warblers, two points of difference are shown which seem to be important. In the tana- gers, the palatine processes are long and well developed while in the wood warblers they are short and rudimentary. In the tanagers, the maxillo-palatines are parallel for a short distance, about the length of the inflated portion, but in the warblers they are parallel for a considerable distance and the increasing diver- gence isless marked. Parker! examined and figured several species of each family, and I have examined Piranga erythromelas and Seiu- rus noveboracensis in addition, and these differences while not ex- 1 Parker, W. K., 1878, Trans. Zool. Soc. London, vol. 10, pp. 251-314, pls. 46-54. Compare especially figs. 1—6, pl. 46 and figs. 1-3, pl. 48. It may be remarked in passing that Parker makes no reference to a ‘‘secondary palatine process’’ in Piranga, although he examined Piranga rubra. Shufeldt figured these processes as found in Habia (Auk, Vol. 5, p. 439; 1888) and gave them a name. I find them very conspicuous in Piranga erythromelas and on consulting Lucas’ figure (Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 18, p. 505; 1895) it will be seen that he indicates them al- though he makes no reference to them. There is no trace of them in Seiurus or Dumetella, nor in Rhodinocichla. They appear to be associated with a strongly conirostral beak, though Shufeldt says they are lacking in Coccothraustes. 14 Cuark, The Panama Thrush-Warbler. pas traordinary seem fairly constant. They show more clearly in specimens than in Parker’s figures, especially the position of the maxillo-palatines. Now in both these particulars, Rhodinocichla is a tanager. The palatine processes are well-developed though not as slender as in Piranga, nor as spike-like as Parker figures them for Tanagra. The maxillo-palatines are almost exactly like those of Piranga erythromelas both in form and position. Sternum. Some years ago Shufeldt (1888, Auk, vol. 5, p. 442) made the statement that true tanagers “have an osseous bridge extending across the top of the manubrium to the anterior margin of the body of the sternum.” He adds that it is absent in Icteria and in such Fringillidee as he had examined. This seems such a trivial character and so unlikely to be constant or clearly shown, that I was inclined to give little heed to it. Nevertheless I made some dissections with the result, surprising to. me, of finding this osseous bridge very clearly defined in Piranga and totally wanting in Dumetella, Habia, Passerella and Sevurus. 1am forced to believe therefore that it is a character of no little importance, and it is interesting to find that in Rhodinocichla, this osseous bridge is as clearly shown as it is in Prranga. Conclusions. In the British Museum catalogue (1881), Sharpe calls Rhodinocichla the “rose-breasted wren” and places the genus in the Mimine near /Harporhynchus, remarking that it is one of several genera which appear to connect the mocking-thrushes and the wrens. It was not until 1901 that Ridgway called attention to the important fact that there are only nine developed primaries in Rhodinocichla and that it must therefore belong in some one of the nine-primaried groups. He placed it finally at the end of the . Mniotiltidee with the comment that although it “is very aberrant as a member of the Mniotiltide, I do not know where else to place it.’ When Mr. Bangs placed the alcoholic specimens in my hands, he called my attention to the resemblance to Mitrospingus and sug- gested the possibility of Rhodinocichla being a tanager. The evi-' dence which I have presented seems to me to justify the belief that this suggestion has revealed the probable relationships of the genus. The structure of the bony palate and of the sternum are characteristically tanagrine, while the wing and tail show a close relationship to Mitrospingus, which has quite generally been re- | EvERMANN, Birds New to the Pribilof Islands. 15 garded as a tanager. It is true that the bill is not typically tana- grine but here again there is a close resemblance to Mitrospingus. It is a natural conclusion therefore that Rhodinocichla is to be regarded as a tanager which has become more or less specialized for a particular manner of life. As the stomach contents indicate a ground feeder, it may be that that method of finding its living has been the factor associated with its specialization. EIGHTEEN SPECIES OF BIRDS NEW TO THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS, INCLUDING FOUR NEW TO NORTH AMERICA.! BY BARTON WARREN EVERMANN. Wirt the appointment of a naturalist in the fur-seal service July 1, 1910, and the organization, in the Bureau of Fisheries, of the Alaska Fisheries Service, July 1, 1911, the Bureau at once began the formation of plans for a comprehensive and thorough study not only of the life history of the fur seal but also of the scientific management and conservation of the fur-seal herd that has its breeding grounds on the Pribilof Islands in Bering Sea. The plan is broad in its scope and contemplates a thorough study of all the species of animals and plants found on or about those islands. Dr. Walter L. Hahn, at that time head of the department of biology in the state normal school at Springfield, South Dakota, was ap- pointed naturalist in the summer of 1910. He arrived at St. Paul Island August 24 and immediately entered upon his duties with an energy and intelligence which could scarcely be excelled. His untimely death on May 31, 1911, from exposure in the ice-cold water of the village lagoon, resulting from the capsizing of a boat, was a severe loss to the fur-seal service and to biological science. During his few months on St. Paul Island Dr. Hahn, from the 1 Published with the permission of the U. 8S. Commissioner of Fisheries. 16 EVERMANN, Birds New to the Pribilof Islands. a voluminous notes and records which he left, appears to have been indefatigable in his field work and marvelously painstaking in recording his observations. His notes, typewritten up to noon of the very day of his death, record a vast number of new and impor- tant observations on the fur seals and blue foxes. They also teem with records of interesting observations on the birds and other animals of the islands. Mr. Millard C. Marsh, pathologist of the Bureau of Fisheries, was appointed to the vacancy caused by the death of Dr. Hahn. He reached St. Paul Island, August 23, 1911, and took up and continued with commendable industry and intelligence the work so ably begun by his predecessor. Among the observations that are of special interest to the readers of ‘ The Auk’ are those relating to birds. In this communication I desire to record the species which their observations have thus far added to the Pribilof Islands and to the avifauna of North America. In Palmer’s ‘Avifauna of the Pribilof Islands,’ ! 69 species of birds are recorded. To these, one species, the Northern Flicker, Colaptes auratus luteus, has since been added by assistant fur-seal agent James Judge, and recorded by Mr. Austin H. Clark.? To this number I am now able to add 18 species, four of which are new to North America. All the specimens mentioned are now in the United States National Museum. For assistance in verifying the identifications of these specimens I am under obligations to Mr. Harry C. Oberholser of the Bureau of Biological Survey. 1. Rhodostethia rosea (Macgillivray). Ross’s Guti.— A _ fine example in adult plumage was shot on one of the small freshwater lakes of St. George Island, May 25, 1911, by one of the natives. The specimen was preserved by Assistant Agent A. H. Proctor who forwarded it to the Bureau of Fisheries. This species was first obtained in Alaska by Nelson, October 10, 1879. Since then it has been recorded by Murdock from Point Barrow.’ 1The Fur Seals and Fur-Seal Islands of the North Pacific Ocean, Part 3, pp. 355-431, 1899, Government Printing Office. 2 Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., Vol. 38, p. 60, 1910. 3 Nelson, Report upon Natural History Collections made in Alaska between the years 1877 and 1881, Government Printing Office, 1887. Vol. XXX , = i913 | EVERMANN, Birds New to the Pribilof Islands. 17 2. Mergus serrator Linneus. Rep-BREASTED MERGANSER— A female (No. 55)! shot by Dr. Morgan December 16, 1910, on the lagoon, St. Paul Island, and preserved by Dr. Hahn. Although a common species in many parts of Alaska it had not been previously noted on the Pribilof Islands. 3. Chaulelasmus streperus (Linneus). Gapwatu— A female in good plumage (No. 101) was shot on the lake near Polovina, St. Paul Island, November 13, 1911, by Mr. Marsh who thinks the species is proba- bly not uncommon, but that most of the natives do not distinguish it from the female Mallard. Among the ducks collected by Dr. Hahn is also a fine male (No. 66) of the European Widgeon, Mareca penelope, taken April 30, 1911, which, however, had been previously recorded from these islands. 4. Spatula clypeata (Linneus). SHoverteR— A male (No. 74) in excellent plumage obtained May 24, 1911, on St. Paul Island, by Dr. Hahn. Stomach contained larvze and small seeds. 5. Dafila acuta (Linneus). Prntrar.— Two males (Nos. 178 and 179) in perfect plumage, were obtained by Mr. Marsh May 24, 1912, at the village pond, St. Paul Island. 6. Marila marila (Linneus). Scaurp Ducx.—A fine specimen, a male (No. 153) of the Scaup Duck or Big Bluebill, was secured on the village pond, St. Paul Island, by Mr. Marsh, April 27, 1912. 7. Marila fuligula (Linneus). Turrep Duckx.— This interesting duck I am now able to add to the North American avifauna. A female (No. 69) was obtained on St. Paul Island May 9, 1911, by Dr. Hahn who was at first inclined to identify it as an example of the Little Bluebill or Lesser Scaup Duck, Marila affinis. Dr. Hahn states that the stomach was full of grass, cress (?), small seeds and a few larve. There was but little fat. The eggs measured 4 mm. in diameter. The bird was accompanied by the male which escaped. 8. Marila ferina (Linnaeus). EuroprEAN PocHarp.— A male (No. 158) in excellent plumage obtained on St. Paul Island by Mr. M. C. Marsh May 4, 1912. Mr. Marsh states that this duck is “‘ seen occasionally by natives not all of whom recognize it.” It is not improbable that they confuse it with other species. This is the first North American record for this species. 9. Somateria spectabilis (Linnaeus). Kina Emrr.— Although the Pacific Eider had been recorded from these islands, not until now has the King Eider been known to occur there. The collections sent down by Mr. Marsh contain 3 fine specimens of this species, male and female, (Nos. 129 and 132) taken February 4, 1912, and a male (No. 128) taken March 9, 1912, all on St. Paul Island. 10. Pelidna alpina sakhalina ( Vieillot). Rep-BACKED SANDPIPER.— One specimen a male, (No. 42) was shot on St. Paul Island, October 30, 1 The numbers in parentheses are the collector's original numbers. [an. 18 EVERMANN, Birds New to the Pribilof Islands. 1910, by Dr. Morgan. On December 11, 1910, Dr. Hahn saw three others which he believed to be this species. 11. Machetes pugnax (Linneus). Rurr.— A young female (No. 22) was secured on St. Paul Island, September 7, 1910, by Dr. Hahn. This is not only the first record of this common European bird for the Pribilof Islands but it is the first for the west coast of America. 12. Cryptoglaux funerea funerea (Linneus). TENGMALM’s OwL.— A female (No. 59) in good condition caught alive in the village on St. Paul Island, January 26, 1911, by a native who brought it to Dr. Hahn. The stomach was empty save for a few hairs. This is the first record for Amer- ica of this interesting little Owl. 13. Cryptoglaux funerea richardsoni (Bonaparte). RIcHARDSON’S Ow..— A male (No. 111) was shot with a rifle on St. Paul Island February 2, 1912. Although previously known from Alaska this is the first record for the Pribilof Islands. 14. Euphagus carolinus (Miiller). Rusty Buackpirp.— One speci- men a male, (No. 99) was obtained near the lake at Northeast Point, St. Paul Island, October 20, 1911. It was shot with buckshot by one of the native watchmen, who brought it to Mr. Marsh. The bird was unknown to the natives. 15. Coccothraustes coccothraustes japonicus Temminck & Schlegel. JAPANESE HawFincu.— A fine example (No. 100) of this interesting Finch new to the American fauna was shot at the village landing on St. Paul Island, by a native, November 1, 1911. It was a new bird to the natives, none of them recognizing it as anything they had ever seen before. 16. Plectrophenax nivalis nivalis (Linneus). Snow Buntina.— In 1887 Mr. Ridgway described the Snow Bunting common on the Pribilof Islands as Plectrophenax nivalis townsend. It was therefore with considerable surprise that, among five specimens of Snow Buntings received from Mr. Marsh one (No. 172) proves to be the typical species. It is a male caught alive in the village of St. Paul March 31,1912. The other four specimens are typical P. n. townsendi. 17. Zonotrichia leucophrys gambeli (Nuttall). GAmBEL’s SPaR- Row.— An adult male (No. 180) in fine plumage was obtained by Mr. Marsh, May 24, 1912, on St. Paul Island. 18. Passerella iliaca insularis Ridgway. WKap1aK Fox Sparrow. — One male, (No. 15) was shot among the rocks near Gorbatch rookery, St. Paul Island, September 7, 1910, by Dr. Hahn. High northeasterly winds had prevailed for several days. On October 4, another was seen near where the one was killed a month earlier. Still another was seen the same day among the rocks back of Reef rookery, and on October 15, one was seen among the rocks at Kaminista, St. Paul Island, by Dr. Hahn. Mr. Oberholser identifies the single specimen as P. 7. sinuosa Grinnell which is not regarded as separable from insularis in the A. O. U. Check-List. pare 2 ae ALLEN, An Essex County Ornithologist. 19 AN ESSEX COUNTY ORNITHOLOGIST:! BY GLOVER M. ALLEN. In 1905 the Nuttall Ornithological Club published as No. 3 of its Memoirs, Dr. Charles W. Townsend’s ‘Birds of Essex County,’ the most extensive monograph that had up to that time appeared on the birds of so limited an area of North America. The large number (319) of species which it includes, bears witness not only to the many observers whose notes were available but also to the variety of conditions obtaining in this favored portion of Massachusetts whereby so great a multitude of birds is attracted. Certain species (as the Orchard Oriole, Yellow-breasted Chat, Long- billed Marsh Wren) whose habitat lies chiefly to the south are here at about their northeastern breeding limit, while others, characteristic of more boreal conditions (as Solitary Vireo, Hermit Thrush), find local spots suited to their needs. The present paper is a further contribution of notes on Essex County birds, gleaned from the records and collections of the late Benjamin F. Damsell, of Amesbury, in the northernmost part of the County. Although a life-long student of birds, he was practi- cally unknown among ornithologists for he published nothing and carried on his studies by himself in a quiet way. At his death, his collections and his note books covering nearly thirty years of continuous observation in the vicinity of his home, passed into the hands of his nephew, Mr. Howard D. Kenyon, of Sharon, Mass., through whose kindness I have been permitted to examine them. Many of the notes are of much local interest and it has seemed worth while to place on permanent record such of these as add to what has been published in the ‘Birds of Essex County,’ that his labors be not altogether lost. Of Mr. Damsell’s life, Mr. Kenyon has most kindly written the following brief sketch. “Benjamin F. Damsell was born Sept. 6, 1854, in Amesbury, Mass., the son of Thomas and Jane Damsell. He was educated in the public schools of Amesbury and early showed a taste for 1 Read before the Nuttall Ornithological Club, May 6, 1912. 20 ALLEN, An Essex County Ornithologist. ae drawing. His sketches of birds and mammals gave indication that the boy was a good observer with unusual artistic ability. His father was a taxidermist on a small scale and from him Benja- min gained his inspiration for collecting and mounting specimens. His first attempt to stuff a bird seems to have been at the age of twelve years. “Both parents died in 1866, the home was broken up, and the boy went to a farm to live. Here among the hills where Massa- chusetts joins New Hampshire, Mr. Damsell started his collection and began the study of ornithology. Among his first books on the general subject of bird-lore was Cassell’s ‘Book of Birds.’ While at the farm his outings took the form of tramps through the woods, for the purpose of studying the birds and adding to his collection. His early advantages were few, but his natural ability, his love for the subject, and his determination to do good work knew no obstacles. In his early days in taxidermy, he bought stuffed specimens and took them apart to study the methods of those who were considered expert. While yet a farmer’s boy his pencil sketches of birds and squirrels were replaced by successful efforts at oil painting. “Tiring of the limitations of farm life he learned the carriage builder’s trade. In 1881 he married Miss Emma F. Day, of Ames- bury, and continued to reside in his native town. “For years he reserved Saturdays for hunting trips. Oftentimes when business was dull a large portion of his time was given to taxidermy and painting. All his work seemed to combine the skill of the mechanic with the touch of the artist. He bought the best books, studied the best methods, with the result that his knowledge of birds was comprehensive and exact. “Most of his hunting was done in the vicinity of Amesbury and on the great meadows of Salisbury and of Hampton, N. H. For forty years he continued to study, collect, and mount specimens. His collection was reasonably complete in those birds that frequent northeastern Massachusetts and his notes were kept until within a few weeks of his death. He was well known as a taxidermist in the nearby towns of Newburyport, Haverhill, Hampton, and Exeter. “ After an illness of several months he passed away June 8, 1911. Vol. XXX ~ 1913 ALLEN, An Essex County Ornithologist. 21 His attainments were such that had he not chosen to live the quiet, retired life of his native hills, he would have won distinction in the artistic and mechanical side of taxidermy. By those who knew him he will ever be remembered as a man of unusually lovable qualities and nobility of character.” The notebooks, from which the following items are abstracted, cover the period from 1880 to 1911, and though at first confined to records of birds shot, became later more systematic, with entries of all dates on which the different species were seen or killed. Beyond this there is rarely more than an occasional remark con- cerning some unusual circumstance, except for dates when birds were seen mating or when eggs were found. In addition to the notes on birds, several pages in some years are given to lists of local trees with dates on which they first bloomed or put out their leaves, when the first thunder shower occurred, the first frogs were heard, and the like. The bird records seem to be made with much caution and as they are frequently substantiated by the actual specimen, may in most cases be deemed wholly trustworthy. Part of the collection was destroyed but the remainder is in good condition and consists of several hundred mounted specimens, some of the more interesting of which have been acquired by the Boston Society of Natural History for its New England collection. In the paragraphs which follow, it is to be understood that unless definitely mentioned, the locality is Amesbury, Mass., or the im- mediate vicinity 1. Uria lomvia lomvia. Briinnicn’s Murre.— An unusually early date of appearance is November 9, 1901. Late November is the usual time for this bird on our coast. The first fall arrival is noted on Novem- ber 24, 1890, and November 28, 1893. 2. Sterna hirundo. Common TrerN.— The increase in numbers of this species on our coast of late years due to the protection afforded the breeding birds is evidenced by the entries in the notebooks. Although rarely recorded in summer previous to 1906, yet after that date it regularly appears during late July and in August. 3. Oceanodroma leucorhoa. Leacu’s Perrer.— On October 16, 1887, one was shot at Kimball’s Pond, a large body of fresh water a short distance inland. It is a striking fact that the inland records for this bird in New England are mainly of specimens seen on ponds or rivers during the middle of October. Possibly these petrels are then in active migration south and at that time more frequently wander or are blown inland. 22 ALLEN, An Essex County Ornithologist. een: . 4. Phalacrocorax carbo. Cormoranr.— An interesting case is wecorded of a Common Cormorant that was seen to be hazassed by two Kingbirds at Amesbury on June 18, 1895. It sought refuge man oak tree ‘cand fell to the ground where it was captured. An examinatiomshowed that ‘one wing had been broken but had healed. The bird was a male. 5. Phalacrocorax auritus auritus. Dowsib-cRESTED CaRMORANT. — A midsummer bird is noted as shot at Kingston, N. H., July 49,1891. 6. Pelecanus occidentalis. Brown Prexican.— An immature bird, taken May 1, 1907, off Great Boar’s Head, Hampton Beach, N. H., was mounted by Mr. Damsell, and later purchased by Col. John B. Thayer who presented it to the Society, It has not apparently been reeorded. 7. Anas platyrhynchos. Ma.iuarp.— Oceasionally taken, in one instance a late male, on December 2, 1904. A pair shot at True’s Pond, October 16, 1893, weighed —the drake 23 pounds; the duck 2 pounds. 8. Nettion carolinense. GREEN-WINGED TEAL.— An early record is of one shot March 23, 1889. In 1898, one was killed on December 2. 9. Querquedula discors. Buvur-wincep TEaL.— The only spring specimens noted are: one on March 21, 1898, and a male, April 24, 1897. 10. Spatula clypeata. SHovELLER.— This unmistakable species is twice recorded, once in spring, April 6, 1893, and once in fall, September 3, 1894. Both dates extend those recorded for Essex County. 11. Aixsponsa. Woop Ducx.— A late bird is noted on December 16, 1903. 12. Marila americana. RepHEap.—A single specimen was taken October 14, 1893. 13. Marila collaris. Ring-NEcKED DucK.— But one record Is given for Essex County in Dr. Townsend’s memoir. Mr. Damsell, however, has a record of a bird on April 7, 1889. 14. Somateria dresseri. AmrriIcAN E1per.— The collection contains several specimens of this duck, and the notebooks record it once as early as September 20, 1903, an unusually forward bird. 15. Somateria spectabilis. Kina Erprr.— The single record for Essex County is the specimen taken at Marblehead, November 24, 1889, It is therefore of interest to find that a second was shot at nearly the same time by Mr. Damsell, namely on November 29, 1889. It was a young male. 16. Chen hyperboreus hyperboreus. Lesser Snow Goosr.—A Snow Goose, shot October 7, 1888, is among the birds whose measurements | are entered in one of the notebooks. The wing length is there recorded as. 143 inches, which indicates the Lesser Snow Goose. In the notebook for 1902, isthe entry: ‘‘ Albert Shaw shot a Snow Goose,” but the exact date, if known, was not recorded. A further entry records, February 18, 1902, “ Saw a flock of Snow Geese.”’ 17. Anser albifrons gambeli. Wuitn-rRoNTED GoosE.— Previous to 1905, there were no records of this bird for Essex County. Mr. Damsell Vol. XXX 1913 ALLEN, An Essex County Ornithologist. 23 notes two, however, that were killed on the Salisbury marshes October 5, 1888. 18. Ixobrychus exilis. Least Birrern.— Records for this elusive bird are few in the northeastern extreme of its range. Mr. Damsell’s notebooks record it twice in fall: September 21, 1887, and September ly 1888. 19. Herodias egretta. American Ecret.— A ‘white heron’ shot September 19, 1887, is recorded, together with measurements of the bird. The wing, 16 inches, and tarsus, 6 inches, indicate that it was H. egretta. The notebooks also record another white heron at Salisbury, August 5, 1907. 20. Ralluselegans. Kine Rait.— A specimen is noted on August 14, 1902. 21. Gallinula galeata. FLormpa GaLiiInuLe.— Most of the few records for Essex County are of October birds. Mr. Damsell’s collection contained two birds, one taken September 14, 1887, the other October 3, 1903. 22. Lobipes lobatus. NortTHern PHALAROPE.— Data on the occur- rence of these birds are alwaysinteresting. I find one spring record, May 18, 1904; and one of a bird ‘in full plumage’ (and so perhaps a care free female) on July 31, 1905, a rather early date. 23. Recurvirostra americana. American Avocet.— The collec- tion contains a fine adult female of this species, taken May 23, 1887, doubt- less on the Salisbury marshes. That it was a locally obtained specimen there can be no doubt, as it was skinned, sexed and measured by Mr. Damsell. His notebook simply makes record of it as the first of its kind observed, for in these earlier days of his collecting he seems not to have been aware of the rarity of his capture. The specimen has been acquired by the Boston Society of Natural History for its New England Collection. There are but three other instances on record of the appearance of this species in Massachusetts, one of which is indefinite and the others of fall birds. That this straggler should have appeared in spring is therefore of unusual interest. 24. Philohela minor. Woopcockx.— The notebooks contain a num- ber of records of late fall birds, as follows: November 20, 1886, December 10, 1887, November 21, 1880, November 18, December 6, 1890, Novem- ber 30, 1893, December 5, 1903. 25. Gallinago delicata. Wutson’s Snipr.— Dr. Townsend indicates that this bird is occasional in winter in Essex County. Mr. Damsell notes one November 24, 1896, at Amesbury; and records one shot at Newbury- port on February 8, 1889. 26. Micropalama himantopus. Stivr Sanprrrer.— The notebooks extend somewhat the limits of the fall migration of this species as recorded for Essex County, viz., July 22 to September 16. Thus I find entry of specimens shot September 15, and 17, 1893, and October 2, 1895. 24 ALLEN, An Essex County Ornithologist. aus 27. Limosa fedoa. Marsiep Gopwit.— This bird is now so rare as to be considered ‘ accidental’ in Essex County. It is therefore worth noting that one was shot July 28, and another July 30, 1888. 28. Limosa hemastica. Hupsonran Gopwit.—‘ Large flocks’ are recorded September 7, 1891, and single birds shot August 24, 1889, August 31, and September 2, 1903. 29. Bartramia longicauda. Upitanp PLover.— A very late bird is one shot by William Thompson on October 26, 1901. In 1896, there are records of this species at Amesbury on July 10, and in August, but in other years rarely more than once in the late summer. 30. Numenius americanus. LoNnc-BILLED CuRLEW.— There are two records for this bird in the notebooks, namely of specimens taken probably on the Salisbury marshes, July 21, 1887, and July 25, 1891. Although the Hudsonian Curlew is often mistaken for this species by gunners, I am confident that these records may stand. 31. Numenius hudsonicus. Hupsonrian CurLtEw.— The notebooks contain frequent mention of this species among birds shot in August and early September. A flock of thirty was seen August 2, 1907. 32. Numenius borealis. Eskimo CurLtew.—A_ few additional records for this nearly or quite extinct species are: August 31, 1889, ‘ shot one in the marsh’; August 28, and 29, 1893, specimens shot. There are no records in the books of later date. 33. Charadrius dominicus dominicus. GoipEN PLoverR.— The only spring record is May 18, 1903, and may, I think, be accepted as the bird was thoroughly familiar to Mr. Damsell. 34. Oxyechus vociferus. KiLipEER.— The memorable winter flight of these birds in 1888 was noticed at Amesbury, where on December 4, four were shot, and two the following day. In 1884, a bird was shot on the marsh in August, and in 1895 one is recorded November 25. 35. Colinus virginianus virginianus. Bos-wuitn.— Essex County is close to the critical limit for this species in its northeastward range. In the notebooks, it is entered nearly every year among the birds seen about Amesbury, but after 1905, it appears no more. 36. Ectopistes migratorius. PasseNGrER Pickon.— Mr. Damsell was quite familiar with this species and the Mourning Dove, and his col- lection contains specimens of both, locally obtained. Of the Pigeon, a male and a female were shot on August 24, 1886. In 1887, the species is entered twice, on April 23 and November 29. The year 1888 is the last year in which the Passenger Pigeon was observed, a flock of five on May 6. This was about the year when the bird practically disappeared from New England. 37. Zenaidura macroura carolinensis. Mourninac Dove.— One is recorded February 24, 1890, and another January 9, 1892; the extreme dates for this bird are, with these exceptions, March 31 to November 2, (1894). Vol. XXX - : pe 1913 | ALLEN, An Essex County Ornithologist. yA 38. Buteo lineatus lineatus. Rep-sHoutperep HawK.— The occa- sional gathering of this species into large companies during migration, was noticed on September 18, 1886, when a ‘ flock of about 300’ p at Amesbury. 39. Halizetus leucocephalus leucocephalus. Barty Eacir— The notebooks contain several winter records for this bird, whose occasional appearance is always a matter of interest. In 1890, ‘one dark and two white-headed birds’ were seen March 1, and a single bird May 30. In 1891 there are records for February 7, July 15, August 3 and 11, December 20. In 1903, one was seen, January 5, at Hampton, N.H. These winter records are of interest as showing the bird’s occasional presence on the coast during the winters, while inland among the mountains and lakes of New Hampshire they are summer visitors. 40. Scotiaptex nebulosa nebulosa. Grear Gray Own.— An unrecorded specimen of this rare owl was in Mr. Damsell’s collection, and has been acquired by the Boston Society of Natural History. It was shot January 6, 1894, in the Great Swamp at Amesbury. 41. Cryptoglaux funerea richardsoni. Ricuarpson’s Owt. Two mounted specimens obtained in the vicinity of Amesbury are in the collection; the first was taken February 25, 1889, the second, a male, on January 5, 1903. 42. Nycteanyctea. Snowy Owu.— Although generally considered a very irregular winter visitor, it is worthy of note that it is almost yearly recorded in the notebooks. The years and dates are given in full in case they may have value in connection with the notices of flights recorded by Mr. Ruthven Deane. They are: 1886, November 26, December 10; 1887, February 10; 1889, November 8; 1890, January 23, February 13 (Hampton River, N. H.), November 28, December 6, 11, 20, 24; 1891, December 16; 1893, November 7; 1896, November 16, @; 1901, Decem- ber 26, two, December 28; 1902, January 3, 11, 18, 25, February 3, 4, April 3, October 18, 23; 1903, March 12; 1905, November 21. 43. Coccyzus americanus americanus. YELLOW-BILLED Cuckoo. — The Black-billed is the Cuckoo commonly represented in Essex County, while the Yellow-billed species more rarely reaches northern Massachusetts and southern New Hampshire. This is shown well by Mr. Damsell’s records, in which the latter bird is entered but five times in seventeen years. In 1884, one was shot May 23, and asecond on June 14. In 1901 anest and eggs were found on June 24. A bird was taken August 24, 1903, and the final one noted May 17, 1906. 44. Dryobates villosus villosus. Hairy Wooprrcker.— Although this bird breeds sporadically in Essex County and in general is considered a resident species wherever found, a tabulation of all the entries in the notebooks, covering twenty-six years, brings out very strongly the fact that on the coast in the vicinity of Amesbury, at all events, the Hairy Wood- pecker appears very regularly during October and November in small assed 26 ALLEN, An Essex County Ornithologist. ee numbers, but only rarely in the winter and spring months. Thus out of the twenty years in which it is recorded, there are but two September entries; in eleven years it was noted in October and in five years not until November. During these two months there are sometimes as many as five or six records for each month. In four years there are from one to three December occurrences; one record each for January and February, two for early April, and one for May, all in different years. The last is of one seen May 30, 1890, a date that indicates perhaps a nesting bird. With us in central New England there is unquestionably a slight movement of these birds in late fall into woodlands from which they are absent in summer, but during the winter most of them seem to disappear again. 45. Picoides arcticus. Arctic THREE-ToED WoopPpECKER.— The measurements of a bird taken November 24, 1883, are recorded in one of the notebooks. Another specimen is entered October 28, 1887, both no doubt from Amesbury. It is interesting that though both species of the Three-toed Woodpecker are found together in the White Mountains as residents, the Arctic is the more given to wandering, and is the one oftener noted in fall and winter outside of its summer range, while the American Three-toed Woodpecker much more rarely appears as a visitor south of its breeding range. 46. Sphyrapicus varius varius. YELLOW-BELLIED SAPSUCKER.— Although a July and an August record for Essex County are given by Dr. Townsend, he does not adduce any evidence of its breeding. Mr. Damsell’s notes contain several mentions of this woodpecker in May and June, as follows: a male May 5, 1887; a bird shot at ‘ the farm’ May 4, 1889; one shot at True’s Pond, May 6, 1893; one June 12, 1891; one May 18 and 21, 1907. Perhaps an occasional pair nests in the swampy woods of thisregion. A late bird is noted on November 4, 1890. 47. Phleotomus pileatus abieticola. NorTHERN PILEATED Woop- PECKER.— So rare is this bird in the eastern part of Massachusetts that the only specific mention of its occurrence in Essex County relates to one at Manchester in December, 1885. Two additional instances are supplied by Mr. Damsell’s notes, namely, a young male shot July 8, 1886; and a bird shot by one Moses Tewksbury at Kimball’s Pond, October 4, 1895. Both these were mounted, and the measurements of the former are entered in one of the notebooks. Probably these were wanderers from central Massachusetts or New Hampshire. 48. Melanerpes erythrocephalus. Rrp-HEADED WooDPECKER.— One was shot at Hast Salisbury, August 30, 1884. 49. Antrostomus vociferus vociferus. Wuip-poor-wiLL.— Mr. Damsell’s notes extend slightly the extreme dates recorded for the presence of this bird in Essex County. In 1902 it was first noted April 28, and in 1891 a late bird is entered October 3. 50. Chordeiles virginianus virginianus. NigurHawK.— On May 30, 1890, is the interesting note that Nighthawks were seen ‘in flocks,’ evidently late migrants bound still farther north. Vol. XXX , . — 1913 ALLEN, An Essex County Ornithologist. 27 51. Chetura pelagica. Cuimney Swirr.— In 1898 Swifts remained unusually late and are entered almost daily till October 4. 52. Empidonax traillialnorum. A.prr Fuycarcuer.— On June 8, 1890, a nest and four eggs were found near Amesbury; the bird is again recorded May 30, 1892, July 2, 1894, and May 25, 1901. 53. Perisoreus canadensis canadensis. Canapa Jay.— One was taken February 13, 1904, at Newton, New Hampshire, not far from the Massachusetts boundary. 54. Sturnella magna magna. Mrapowiark.— The notes make but few records of the Meadowlark in January and February, namely February 10, 1894; January 15 and 25, 1902; February 23, 1910. Of late years it seems as if this bird was more regularly found in winter than before along the coastal marshes of the northeastern part of its range. Previous to 1905 Dr. Townsend had but a single January record for Essex County. 55. Icterus spurius. OrcHarp Or1oLte.— The breeding range of this bird extends in a narrow strip along the Essex County coast, and at Ipswich it has been found with some regularity. North of the Massachusetts line it has been rarely found as a straggler only. In Mr. Damsell’s notes cover- ing twenty-six vears of observations at Amesbury it is entered three times, namely, July 4, 1883, one seen at Newburyport; May 12, 1891, and May 21, 1900, one noted at Amesbury. 56. Icterus galbula. Battimore OrioLe.— An interesting note records that on November 29, 1897, one was seen in Dover, N. H., ‘ with English Sparrows.’ 57. Quiscalus quiscula eneus. Bronzep GrackLe.— November 6, 1890, a ‘ large flock’ was seen, a late date for such numbers. One was shot February 6, 1897, which may have been a wintering bird. 58. Calcarius lapponicus lapponicus. LarLanp Lonaspur.— Although prior to 1902 there were apparently no records of this bird in Massachusetts during winter, Mr. Damsell notes one shot January 10, 1885, probably on the seashore at Amesbury. 59. Cardinalis cardinalis cardinalis. Carpinau.— On September 27, 1889, one was shot at True’s Pond, Amesbury. It is interesting that Dr. Townsend records a pair at Amesbury on May 19, 1901. 60. Piranga erythromelas. Scarter Tanacrer.—‘A male in full plumage,’ August 26, 1897. 61. Bombycilla cedrorum. Crpar Waxwina.— Usually the note- books do not record this species at Amesbury until May. There is com- monly a well defined movement of Waxwings in southern or central New England during late January and February, when they appear with Robins, presumably from farther south. This early migration reaches southern New Hampshire, but apparently with considerable irregularity. At Amesbury, Mr. Damsell records two Cedar birds February 1, 1887, and a flock on February 19, the same year, but in other years this early flight is not mentioned. On September 10, 1889, old birds were seen still feeding their young. 28 ALLEN, An Essex County Ornithologist. (gue 62. Vireo griseus griseus. WHITE-EYED VIREO.— This vireo bred at least till lately in Essex County, but mainly in the more southern and eastern portions. Mr. Damsell records that on July 1, 1890, he shot one at Amesbury. Possibly a pair bred near there that year. 63. Dendroica coronata. Myrtim Warsier.— For how many years this bird has wintered to the north of Cape Ann, seems now beyond dis- covery. Mr. C. J. Maynard did not know of them in winter at Ipswich from 1868 to 1872, and the recent increase in the area of evergreen trees in that region may account for the numbers of wintering birds to be found there at the present day. At East Salisbury, Mr. Damsall shot one on January 23, 1884, and in several of the succeeding years he records it at Amesbury, namely, February 10, 1887, a flock of five or ten; December 17, 1887; December 28, 1891; December 30, 1893; February 10, 1894; Janu- ary 1, 1901. These sporadic records do not seem to indicate that the Myrtle Warbler winters at Amesbury and vicinity with anything like the regularity that it does at such favored localities as Ipswich or at Cape Elizabeth, Maine. 64. Dendroica fusca. BLAcKBURNIAN WARBLER.— A rather early date of arrival is May 5, 1886, when two males are recorded. 65. Oporornis agilis. Connecticut WarsiER.— Mr. Damsell’s notes make mention of a specimen shot September 27, and another Septem- ber 28, 1893, while a third was killed October 2 of the same year. 66. Oporornis philadelphia. Mourninac Warsier.— There are two instances in the notes when this rare warbler was seen at Amesbury — May 30, 1888, and May 30,1892. I saw a bird at Ipswich on June 3, 1912. These seem to be the only definite dates published for Essex County. 67. Icteria virens virens. Y®LLOW-BREASTED CHaT.— One was shot at Amesbury on September 30, 1882 — of interest both on account of the late date and the locality. There is little probability that it had bred in the vicinity but may have wandered from the breeding stations in the southern part of the County. 68. Anthus rubescens. Pirit.— The single spring note of this species in Mr. Damsell’s books refers to one observed May 9, 1904. Dr. Townsend’s spring records for the County are May 9, 1893, May 10, 1903, and June 8, 1878. The fall dates in the notebooks extend from September 10 (1887) to December 1 (1891.) 69. Mimus polyglottos polyglottos. Mockinepirp.— Of late years, records for this bird in eastern New England have multiplied and should be. gathered together to determine if this species is not becoming increasingly more common asa visitor and resident. That even a large part of the many recorded are escaped cage-birds seems unlikely. In Mr. Damsell’s notes a Mockingbird is entered as seen at Amesbury, November 7, and again December 16, 1893, perhaps the same individual on both occasions. 70. Regulus calendula calendula. Rusy-crowNepD KINGLET.— A late bird was shot at Amesbury, November 26, 1885. Vol. XXX : ; : 913 | +SHUFELDT, Contributions to Avian Paleontology 29 71. Hylocichla guttata pallasi. Hermir Turusy— The Hermit Thrush breeds regularly along the coast of New Hampshire in the white pine woods, but in Essex County it becomes local and less common as a summer resident. Thus Dr. Townsend records its breeding at Lynn, North Beverly, between Gloucester and Magnolia, and in Essex, George- town, and Boxford. Judging from Mr. Damsell’s notes it breeds with some regularity in the vicinity of Amesbury. Thus he found its nest and eggs on May 30, 1888, and again on June 1, 1894. In 1893 the bird is noted throughout May, and several times in June, July and August, 1898. A late bird was seen December 2, 1891. 72. Sialia sialis sialis. Biursirp.— An early arrival was noted on February 16, 1902, and a male on the 27th of the same month. CONTRIBUTIONS TO AVIAN PALEONTOLOGY. BY R. W. SHUFELDT. I. Tse Stratus or Extinct MELEAGRIDAE.! Plate III. Up to the present time, there have been but three species of fossil Meleagride described and recorded, and these are correctly listed — in so far as their names go — on page 388 of the third edi- tion of the A. O. U. Check-List of North American Birds. Two of these, namely M. antiqua and M. celer, were described by Marsh,— the former being from the Oligocene (White River) of Oregon [?], and the latter from the Pleistocene of New Jersey. It may be of interest, but surely of no importance, that Marsh also described other fossil remains of a bird as M. altus from the “Post-pliocene”’ of New Jersey, which has since been discovered to be but a synonym of Meleagris superba of Cope. M. superba is the third species listed in the A. O. U. Check-List, and is said to have come from the Pleistocene of New Jersey. On 1 The Illustrated Outdoor World and Recreation of New York City will soon publish in serial form a ‘“ History of the North American Turkeys" by E. A. Mcllhenny, to appear as a book Jater on. The present article forms, in part, one of the chapters on Prehistoric Turkeys. 30 SHuFELDT, Contributions to Avian Paleontology. aa the 25th of April, 1912, Dr. George F. Eaton wrote me that the material, upon which M. altus is based, “is in the Peabody Museum (type) with other types of fossil Meleagride.”’ Cope’s description of M. superbus occurs in the Trans. Amer. Phil. Soc. (N. S. xiv. Pt. 1, 1870, 239); it being a very careful and detailed piece of work, based on the material before him, which is said to have consisted of “a nearly perfect right tibia, an imperfect left one, a left femur with the condyles broken off, and a right coracoid bone, with the distal articular extremity imperfect.” In my opinion, there would be ample here to establish a fossil spe- cies of bird, especially if placed in the hands of a good comparative. avian osteologist. Personally, I have never seen the material upon which M. superba was established; but, judging from its character and its amount, I am strongly inclined to believe that Professor: Cope had a fossil American Turkey before him,— at least the fossil remains of one. Professor Marsh would never allow me to examine and compare the fossil bones which he described as those he suspected of belong- ing to extinct turkeys, and I never did so during his life-time. Several years after he had attempted to establish M. altus (now known to be only a synonym of M. superba Cope), I informed him that I was not prepared to accept his conclusions in the matter; and finally it came to pass that I published in a paper what I desired to set forth on the subject. This paper was entitled “On Fossil Bird-bones Obtained by Expeditions of the University of Pennsylvania from the Bone Caves of Tennessee” (American Naturalist, July, 1897, 645-650); and, in connection with other things said in it, I pointed out that among the bones found, many of them belonged to M. g. sylvestris. Admitting the establishment of Meleagris superba of Cope, we have now to discuss the two other species. These are, as stated above, Meleagris antiqua (1871), and Meleagris celer (1872), both recorded by Professor O. C. Marsh. In my above cited paper: on the Tennessee fossil bird-bones, p. 648, I have commented on the validity of these species as follows: “Professor Marsh at different times has described three species of alleged extinct Turkeys, viz., Meleagris antiquus, M. altus and M. celer; but I am very sceptical indeed in regard to the validity of the first-named,.. 1s0S VAIS, WON, 2OO.e Fosstt MELBAGRIDAE. | : 4 . XXX Sabot 5 : Neves | SHUFELDT, Contributions to Avian Paleontology. 3] i. e., Meleagris antiquus; or, in other words, I doubt the propriety of basing a new species of fossil turkey upon “the distal end of a right humerus,” as Professor Marsh has done in this case. Nor do the characters he describes for this species, as being diagnostic, hold true. It is a positive detriment to science, in my estimation, to create new species of fossil birds upon the distal ends of long bones; and surely no assistance whatever to those who honestly endeavor to gain some idea of the avian species that really existed during prehistoric times. So far as MW. altus and M. celer are con- cerned, I can only say that I know nothing of them from personal examination of the material upon which the species are based, and this has been refused me.” “In the case of Meleagris altus, Professor Marsh says that the length of the tarso-metatarsal is equal to 176.5 mm. (p. 261), and the present writer says that it is by no means uncommon to find the same bones in adult specimens of M. gallopavo fully of that length, if not longer. The other characters Professor Marsh enu- merates, may each and all be due to sexual and individual variations.” “Tn the case of Meleagris celer, this likewise holds true; and in regard to the statement that the “remains preserved indicate a bird about half the bulk of M. altus,” may be said with equal truth of M. gallopavo, in which species a similar discrepancy in size also exists between sexes and between the old and young.” “Tn other words, I am of the opinion, so far as I am able to judge from his descriptions, that when Professor Marsh described his three extinct and new species of Meleagris, he had nothing more or less before him than the very meagre and fragmentary remains of M. gallopavo.”! As pointed out below, these birds may not have been true turkeys at all. It is clear, from Professor Marsh’s description, that he attempted to establish Meleagris antiqua upon an imperfect distal extremity of a right humerus, and I. celer upon the fossil bones enumerated below. It has already been pointed out in a previous paragraph that I found not a few fossil bones of Meleagris g. silvestris in the material which was taken from the Bone Caves of Tennessee, 1The American Journal of Science, ser. 3, ii, 1871, 126. (Meleagris antiqua.) The title is on page 120. Auk 32 SHUFELDT, Contributions to Avian Paleontology. RPE while no such bones occurred in the great mass of fossil bird bones from the Oregon desert. Believing that things might have changed a little since the time Professor Marsh declined to allow me to examine the fragments of fossil bones upon which he had attempted to establish three extinet species of Meleagris,— a matter of some fifteen years ago,— I wrote a letter to Dr. George F. Eaton (April 19, 1912) of the Yale Uni- versity Museum. This brought a reply next day, and in this he kindly stated that he would bring my request before Professor Charles Schuchert, curator of the Geological Department of the Peabody Museum of Natural History of Yale University. With great promptness and marked courtesy, Professor Schuchert (May 2, 1912) sent me, by registered mail, Marsh’s type specimens, which he had used in his descriptions of Meleagris antiqua and M. celer. On the third of May, 1912, this material came safe to hand, and I immediately made a complete set of photographic negatives of the specimens. I desire to express my thanks for the courtesies and privileges extended to me in this matter by Dr. Eaton, Professor Schuchert of Yale University; Drs. James E. Benedict and Charles W. Rich- mond of the U. S. National Museum, and Mr. Newton P. Scudder, Librarian of the same institution. Through their aid, I was enabled to examine and compare, with Marsh’s fossils before me, a mounted skeleton of a wild turkey (J. g. silvestris), taken many years ago by Professor Spencer F. Baird at Carlisle, Pennsylvania, and to consult all the existing literature on the subject. Upon examining the material forwarded me by Professor Schuchert after it came into my hands, I found first, in a small tube closed with a cork, the distal end of the right humerus of some large bird. The cork was marked on the side “Type”; on top “ Mel. antiquus. G. Ranch. Col. G. B.G. Aug. 6th, 1870.’ The specimen is pure white, thor- oughly fossilized, and imperfect. The second of the two specimens 1 Shufeldt, R. W. ‘A Study of the Fossil Avifauna of the Equus Beds of the Oregon Desert.’ Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., ser. 2. IX. 1892, pp. 389-425, Pls. XV-XVII. Advance abstracts of this memoir were published in ‘The Auk’ (Vol. VIII, No. 4. Oct. 1891, pp. 365-368). The American Naturalist (Vol. XXV, No. 292, Apr. 1891, pp. 303-306, and Ibid.) No. 297, Sept. 1891, pp. 818-821) and elsewhere. Although no turkeys were discovered among these fossils, there were bones present of extinct grouse. Vol. XXX ah . 1913 | SHUFELDT, Contributions to Avian Paleontology. 33 received is in a small pasteboard box, marked on top “ Birds. Meleagris, sp. nov. N. J. Meleagrops celer (type).”’ The speci- men is the imperfect, proximal moiety of the left tarso-metatarsus of a rather large bird. It is thoroughly fossilized, earth-brown in color, with the free borders of the proximal end considerably worn off. On its postero-external aspect, written in ink, are the words “M. celer.”’ On the cork of the vial containing the end of the humerus, the initials G. B.G. are, without doubt, those of Dr. George Bird Grinnell; and, as he there states that the specimen was collected at G. Ranch, Colorado, it is clear that the locality given (Oregon) in the last edition of the A. O. U. Check-List is in- correct. Besides, Marsh states in his article that the fossil was from Colorado; and this is further evidenced in the fact that the fragment is pure white, which is so characteristic of such fossils found in the White River region of Colorado. My comparisons of Marsh’s specimens of his alleged fossil turkeys with the corresponding bones of the skeleton in the case of Meleagris gallopavo silvestris, were most critical and thorough. Everything to make such comparisons complete were at my disposal for several hours, and no pains were spared to do the subject justice. Marsh, in his article, evidently attached but little or no impor- tance to the “other fragments” which were found with those upon which he based his descriptions; and from this fact it is fair to presume that they must, indeed, have been very fragmentary. It has been unfortunate for science that Professor Marsh in his life-time was enabled to pay such scant attention to the osteology of existing birds; his weakness in this particular is evidenced in not a few places throughout his writings, as I have elsewhere pointed out.! 1Marsh, O. C. Odontornithes. ‘‘The Struthious characters, seen in Hesper- ornis, should probably be regarded as evidence of real affinity, and in this case Hesperornis would be essentially a carnivorous, swimming Ostrich."’ (!) Shufeldt, R. W. On the Affinities of Hesperornis. Nature, Vol. 43, No. 1104, London, December 25, 1890, p. 176. Review of Professor D’Arcy Thompson's paper, showing the true affinities of Hesperornis with the Colymbida@, and not with the Ostriches. See also Shufeldt’s ‘‘Comparative Osteological Notes on the Extinct Bird Ichthyornis’’ (Jour. Anat. and Phys., Vol. XXVII., N.S., Vol. VII. Part III. Art. 2. Lond. Apr. 1893, pp. 336-342) where it is shown that Marsh entirely overlooked the relationships existing between Ichthyornis and Rhynchops, and for the reason that he was not familiar with the skeleton in the latter existing genus of birds. 34 SHUFELDT, Contributions to Avian Paleontology. es In the case, then, of Meleagris antiqua of Marsh, I am of the opinion that we have not sufficient evidence before us to establish the fact that any such bird ever existed in prehistoric time; my reasons for so believing are the following :— 1. The existing material upon which the species is based is alto- gether too fragmentary to pronounce with anything like cer- tainty that it ever belonged to a Meleagris. 2. The material is not only fragmentary, but very imperfect (see Plate III, Figs. 1 and 2). 3. The fragment does not present the “Characteristic portions” of that end of the humerus in a turkey as Professor Marsh states that it does. In any event, an imperfect distal frag- ment of the humerus of any big, gallinaceous bird is a very unsafe bit to establish a new species upon, and especially a supposed-to-be extinct one. 4. It is open to serious question whether the genus Meleagris, as the genus Meleagris, existed at all at the time the “ Mio- cene clay deposits of Northern Colorado” were deposited. In no way do I question that this fragment may have belonged to the skeleton of some long ago extinct galline fowl, about the size of an adult existing turkey; but that it was a true Meleagris, I very much doubt. It is just as likely to have belonged to many another kind of gallinaceous species, or even to some entirely different kind of bird in no special way related to the turkey. Coming next to the material representing Meleagris celer of Marsh, as described above and here figured in my Plate (Figs. 3-5), a still greater uncertainty attaches to the supposition that it belonged to the skeleton of an extinct species of Meleagris. As above pointed out, this is likewise an imperfect, much worn fragment of the proximal half of a tarso-metatarsus. I am not taking the tibize mentioned by Marsh into consideration, for of them he says himself that they only “probably belonged to the same individual” (see antea). There is no uncertainty about it at all. Upon comparing this proximal moiety of a tarso-metatarsus of an alleged extinct species of turkey — Meleagris celer of Marsh — with the corresponding part of that bone in the skeleton of an adult 1. XXX : : : vo ] SHUFELDT, Contributions to Avian Paleontology. 35 Meleagris g. silvestris, it is to be discovered at once that the com- parable characters by no means agree. In the existing species of turkey, there is but a single median groove marking the hypotarsus posteriorly. In Marsh’s M. celer, the hypotarsus of this tarso-metatarsus is thus twice longitudinally grooved. In M. g. silvestris, there is a pronounced ridge of bone extending some distance down the shaft, it being the continuation of the thickened, inner border of the hypotarsus. In the case of the fossil fragment here being considered, this ridge is only indicated, and, if it were ever present at all, it is here broken off and missing. It is a dangerous practice to describe parts and characters in fossil bones that are not present there. Again, in the case of this fossil fragment, its general appearance or facies is quite unlike the corresponding part of the tarso-meta- tarsus in M. g. silvestris, or that of any other existing wild turkey. Indeed, off-hand I would say that it never came from the skeleton of any meleagrine fowl at all,— existing or extinct. And, as in the case of the alleged M. antiqua, it may have belonged to the: skeleton of the tarsus of some other kind of a galline fowl — not a meleagrine one — while it is quite as likely to have belonged to: the skeleton of some heron (Ardea) or other large wader as it did. to a turkey. For example, in some of the herons “the hypotarsus of the tarso-metatarsus is 3-crested, graduated in size, the outer being the smaller; the tendinal grooves pass between them.” ! It has just been pointed out in the last paragraph that the hypo- tarsus of the tarso-metatarsus in Marsh’s Meleagris celer is 3- crested, and the tendinal grooves pass between these crests, as in certain Herons. Mind you, I am not saying that Marsh had the bone of an extinct heron before him; but this is a significant fact, especially when we find, in the case of M. g. silvestris, the hypo- tarsus of the tarso-metatarsus is but 2-crested, having the median groove passing between them. From fossil material to positively establish an extinct spec’ of Meleagris, one should have at least a sufficient part «~ 1Shufeldt, R.W. Osteological Studies of the Subfamily Ardeinz Med. and Surg. Vol. X, No. 4, Phila., Oct. 1899, pp. 287-317. 36 SHUFELDT, Contributions to Avian Paleontology. aus sternum, to pass with certainty on the missing portions; one or two of the long bones complete — or very nearly so — and, if possible, a few skulls and pelvic fragments. Lacking the last, a more or less complete coracoid and scapula are great aids in the matter of establishment. A complete furcula is of the utmost importance in a great many birds, and to this the gallinaceous ones are by no means exceptions. But, as in the case of Meleagris antiqua for example, Marsh had no such material before him; only the imper- . fect, fragmentary distal end of a humerous, that was all! When Professor Cope was good enough to turn over to me several hundred fossil bones of birds for description,—had I made new species of all that I might have done, there would have loomed up in the list of fossil birds in the A. O. U. Check-List quite an exten- sive and varied fauna of extinct species and the higher groups; but I passed such fragmentary evidence by, and recommended that it be allowed to stand until some more material came from the same horizon and locality. This is what should be done in the case of the two imperfect, fragmentary bits that Marsh had, and upon which he proposed to establish two extinct species of Meleagris. PLATE III. Fig. 1. Anconal aspect of the distal extremity of the right humerus of “Meleagris antiquus” of Marsh. Fig. 2. Palmar aspect of the same specimen as shown in Fig. 1. Fig. 3. Anterior aspect of the proximal moiety of a tarso-metatarsus of Meleagris celer of Marsh. Fig. 4. Posterior aspect of the same fragment of bone shown in Fig. 3. Fig. 5. Outer aspect of the same fragment of bone shown in figures 3 and 4. All figures natural size. Reproduced from photographs made direct from the specimens by Dr. R. W. Shufeldt. II. Srupies oF THE FosstL BrrDS OF THE OREGON DESERT. Some twenty years or more ago, Professor E. D. Cope of Phila- delphia placed in my charge for description a large collection of fossil vertebrates, that had been collected by himself and his assist- ants at Fossil and Silver Lakes in the Oregon Desert. To this collection were added numerous other fossils of a similar description, Vol xX] Suurexpt, Contributions to Avian Paleontology. 37 which had been collected in the same region by Professor Thomas Condon of the University of Oregon, he being the first naturalist who discovered and collected any of the remains of fossil birds in that interesting locality. Professor Cope’s chief assistant at the time was Mr. C. H. Sternberg, now known as one of the veteran fossil collectors of this country. Ex-Governor Whitaker of Oregon was also an early collector of fossil birds at Fossil and Silver Lakes, and it was he who first discovered the remains of the now extinct swan, named by Cope Olor paloregonus. This remarkable collection, as it came into my hands, consisted principally of the fossil bones of birds, as Cope had already de- scribed and published the mammals, fish and other forms. To the birds, then, I gave especial attention, working the material up in great detail and with all possible care. Later on, the results of my labors were published as a quarto in the Journal of the Acad- emy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia,— a paper which presents what we knew of that region at the time the memoir appeared, together with very full descriptions of all the genera and species of birds I found in the material, of existing as well as extinct forms. These have, long ago, passed into the literature of the subject, and are more or less known to paleontologists everywhere. Most of this work was done early in the year 1891, at a time when but com- paratively few skeletons of existing birds were available, and con- sequently many of the fossil species remained over,— either not referred to the species they represented, or described as species now extinct. Nevertheless, some very interesting forms were brought to light, and the character of the ancient avifauna more or less clearly ‘defined. When the collection came into my possession, Professor Cope had already published an account of some of the fossils of birds he had found in it; for example, among the Grebes he was enabled to make out from the numerous fossils such species as Aichmophorus occidentalis, Colymbus n. californicus, and Podilym- bus podiceps. He had also described an extinct Cormorant, Phala- crocorax macropus, and an extinct Swan and Goose, but had done little else with the collection. 1Vol. IX, Pls. XV—XVII, Phila., Oct. 1892. 38 SHUFELDT, Contributions to Avian Paleontology. we As will be noted in my Philadelphia Academy memoir, to these I added a Pelican; nine Gulls and Terns, two of the former being new and now extinct; a Phalarope; two Coots, one of which was new and extinct; five Grouse, including a new and extinct genus and two new and extinct species; a large number of Ducks, Geese and Swans; a new and extinct Flamingo; also a Heron; two ex- tinct Eagles; an Owl, and, finally, two new and extinct passerine birds. It is not my intention to refer to any of these here, beyond what has already been said,— the object of the present paper being to set forth the facts that during the summer of 1912 the entire aforesaid collection, with added material from the same localities, likewise a small collection from the U. S$. National Museum — also from the Silver and Fossil Lakes region — again came before me for examination. The entire Cope collection now belongs to the American Museum of Natural History of New York City, and it was through the authorities of that institution that I was per- mitted to review these valuable fossils, and to prepare them for cata- loguing. Upon undertaking this, by no means easy task, I found that the collection of bird skeletons at the U. S. National Museum, of existing species of American birds in particular, had been very much increased since the Cope collection first came beforeme. Asa result, far more extensive comparisons could be made, and, nat- urally, new species and a number of previously unrecognized species came to light. The enumeration of these will sufficiently account for publishing this brief advance abstract; while the reader, at the same time, is assured that the now completed memoir, covering the entire sub- ject and presenting complete descriptions of all the new discoveries, will appear later under other auspices. This abstract will list only such additional birds as I have been enabled to add to our lists of fossil forms through the above noted revision. Among the Pygopodes 1 find two new species of Grebes, both now extinct, and neither apparently very abundant during Pleisto- cene time,— the first being a Grebe smaller than Holboell’s but larger than our existing smaller Grebes; while the other was a Dabchick bigger than the present existing one in our fauna. I find numerous bones of Centrocercus wrophasianus, in no way ae | SHUFELDT, Contributions to Avian Paleontology. 39 differing from the corresponding ones as they occur in the skeletons of the species of the present day. Among the Anseres, I have to announce the discovery of Mergus serrator and other fossil bones, which appear to have belonged to specimens of Mergus americanus; also an undetermined form. Among the Ducks, I find fossil bones — more or fewer of them — representing, for the first time, Marila americana (?) M. valisineria; M. marila (?); M. affinis (?);and M. collaris (?). Some of the material belongs to fossil examples of Charitonetta albeola, His- trionicus histrionicus, Polysticta stellert and Erismatura jamaicensis. This last duck had already been found by Mr. L. H. Miller of San Francisco, and published by him in the Proceedings of the Cali- fornia Academy of Sciences. Some of the bones point almost with certainty to the presence of Branta c. hutchinsi, Branta c. minima, and with absolute certainty to Branta bernicla. Among the Swans, I find fossil remains of Olor colwmbianus, Olor buccinator, and a very large species of a new and now extinct Swan. Further, I find fossil remains of Botawrus lentiginosus and Ardea herodias; and those of another heron I have to still consider. It is, however, a true Ardea and probably an extinct one. Finally, I have to make the interesting announcement of having found fossil bones of two species of Eagles, both of which still oecur in our existing avifauna; these are Aquila chrysaétos and Halieetus leucocephalus. 40 Brercrotp, A Study of the House Finch. ae A STUDY OF THE HOUSE FINCH. BY W. H. BERGTOLD, M. D. Tue characteristic native bird of the cities and towns of Colorado is the House Finch (Carpodacus mexicanus frontalis) ; notwithstand- ing its sweet and characteristic song, it is commonly mistaken by the average citizen and visitor for the English Sparrow. Previous to the advent of the English Sparrow in Denver (about 1894, according to the writer’s notes) the only bird at all common about the buildings of Denver was this finch. Before the present extensive settlement of Colorado, the House Finch was, so far as one can gather from the reports of the various early exploring expeditions, to be found mainly along the tree covered ‘bottoms’ of the larger streams, along the foot hills, to a small extent up the streams into the foot hills, and possibly along the streams as they neared the east line of the state. For the past six years, the writer has systematically and par- ticularly studied this species, bearing in mind several problems concerning it; the data secured in this work is now published for the first time. It seems desirable to say here that the writer alone is responsible for each and every note, observation, and conclusion given in the following paragraphs, the same having been drawn entirely from his personal studies: everything herein following is published without prejudice to past observations and conclusions. METHOD oF STUDY. Under this caption are included the usual general observation of the bird whenever seen in and about the city, and special arrange- ments at the office and home of the writer, designed to facilitate minute observations, and to bring about a more intimate acquain- tance with the bird. The office is on the sixth floor of a building situated in the heart of the business district of Denver, and provided with suitable food and drinking trays on the window sill. At the house, besides as | Bererotp, A Study of the House Finch. 41 similar food and drinking dishes, there are special nesting facilities arranged for the birds. During the first year of this special study the nesting boxes were nailed to the house wall, and were very shallow. While such boxes gave the Finches ample opportunity for nesting, and were well patronized, it was soon seen that the shallow character allowed too easy access to the nest, a condition promptly utilized by the English Sparrow, to the great distress of the Finches, and the detriment of their nests, eggs, and young. It was also soon learned that boxes fastened to the house did not lend themselves to close and rapid inspection of nests, eggs, or young. Consequently, after the first trials, such nesting boxes as were under a small sharply pitched overhanging eave, were of flat cigar boxes, placed on shelves firmly fastened to the house, provision being made to prevent the box being blown from the shelf, and the whole structure so placed that there was only enough room above the nest-box to admit a small bird, and no more. By this arrangement the boxes could be lifted off the shelf from a near-by window, and taken into the house for a brief inspection. It also gave the Finches some advantage in fighting off the destruc- tive English Sparrow in its persistent raids on their nests. Those nesting boxes which were placed under a broad horizontal overhanging eave were made in two sections, a smaller inner nest- ing box telescoping from below into a large outer box, the latter being securely attached to the wall of the house. The inner box sliding upward into the outer box formed for it a false bottom, as it were, and was kept from dropping down by suitably arranged hooks. The top of the assembled box was partly closed over by a cover, an arrangement quite necessary in order that the Finches might put up a better fight against the English Sparrow when it entered from above. These first deep boxes were provided with small holes in the sides for ventilation, but this was later found not only unnecessary, but positively harmful, as it permitted late snow or cold rains to beat in on the eggs or young, causing consid- erable loss of both. These deeper nesting boxes were also of advantage in preventing the young from flying too early and by the time they were able to fly from the nest to the box top (about 6 inches), they had learned pretty well how to manage their wings, and were able to go, on the first flight from the nest, to nearby 42 Bereroip, A Study of the House Finch. an trees or buildings with certainty and safety. During and after the summer of 1908, there were nine of these boxes attached to the house, all in pretty constant use by the Finches. Drinking places or pans are strikingly necessary in Colorado’s dry climate, and our birds visit any accessible water very frequently; hence artificial supplies of water have been peculiarly helpful in the present investigation. The Finches soon learned that no harm was done to them when the nesting boxes were taken into the house for examination, and soon ceased to fret if a nest was temporarily absent from its usual place. Unless constantly frightened or really harmed, these birds have short memories for minor disturbances. This is well illustrated by one occasion, when a persistent fluttering in a box, located near the writer’s sleeping porch, called attention to a nesting female Finch caught and entangled in some string which it had used to construct the nest, the string having become firmly entangled about the bird’s foot. The bird would have perished had it not been freed, but in less than fifteen minutes after it was again building as busily as before, notwithstanding the han- dling incidental to its liberation. This occurrence also shows how well the House Finch lends itself to study. It is not essential for ordinary study that the boxes be taken down daily and brought into the house, as much can be accomplished by inspection with a hand mirror held above the nest. ABUNDANCE. In 1881 when the writer first visited Colorado, Denver was a small city of about 30,000 inhabitants, spread over a rather limited area, and built of houses and blocks of very modest dimensions. The House Finch had, however, already taken advantage of the opportunities afforded by the nooks in, and sheltered projections of, houses, barns, and other buildings, to construct nests thereon. The bird was then only fairly numerous, yet its engaging song indelibly impressed itself upon the writer’s memory. In the interval since 1881, the multiplication of these birds in Denver has been enor- mous and it seems reasonable to assume that this increase has or x | Beretoup, A Study of the House Finch. 43 ‘been due largely, if not entirely, to the enlarged facilities for nesting brought about by the presence of buildings erected, and trees and vines introduced, through civilization; and to a larger food supply .afforded the birds, resulting from the great increase of seed bearing weeds which has followed the plowing of the virgin prairies on which the city grew. Furthermore the waste food products of this city form a large source of food for these birds, and have added to the other factors leading to the increased abundance of this species. It would appear from this that we have here another example of man’s unconscious aid in the multiplication of an indigenous bird population and fortunately for Denver, this species has probably ‘been largely, if not wholly, beneficial, thus making for the com- munity’s good. The House Finch is resident in Denver, though some facts relat- ing to its seasonal incidence lend color to the idea that it may be locally migratory. During August and September of each year there is a noticeable diminution of Finches about the city. This is the time when the burdens of nesting and raising of young are practically over, permitting young and old to flock on the prairies to feed on weed seeds:— numerous records of flocks seen in the -suburbs about this time, and later, would confirm the above idea. It is exceedingly difficult to determine if the same individuals remain in one’s neighborhood throughout the entire year. During the summer of 1908 an effort was made to throw light on this -question. Sixteen young birds, all raised in the writer’s nesting boxes, were tagged with a light brass band, the same having been placed about the right tarsus of each bird before it left the nest. With the exception of one, which was found crushed in the alley ‘the day after it flew from the nest, none of these 16 birds was ever again identified about the premises. This might be taken as mean- ing that the young did not remain permanently about the nest neighborhood, but it may be that such tagged birds did remain in the neighborhood, but were undetected. In the summer of 1909, several young birds were tagged with brass bands on the left tarsus, and in 1910 some with brass bands on both tarsi, with the hope that such marking would aid in deter- mining how old a Finch might grow to be if left to nature, and all ithe vicissitudes of bird life. This tagging has shown definitely 44 Bereroup, A Study of the House Finch. au that some, at least, of the Finches remain in one’s immediate vicin- ity the entire year; e. g., o’, marked October 2, 1909, was seen all the following winter, and again in the succeeding spring, and another, co’, marked by bands on both tarsi, has been noted about. the office building for more than two years. WINTERING. Winter in Denver seems to have no terrors for this species. It appears to the writer that the cold season does not trouble the House Finch much so long as the bird is well fed, though many, doubtless, suffer frosting of feet during extremely cold spells, resulting in mutilations referred to later on. The birds roost at night, whenever possible, close to buildings, in vines next to a wall, in a nook or on a moulding under an overhanging eave, and in the folds of awnings, for which places the birds have many fights until all are located for the winter, each going to its accustomed place a considerable time before sunset. The young birds sleep in trees after leaving the nest. They have never been observed to sleep two or more together, but appear, on the contrary, to desire sepa- rate places, each by itself. It has seemed odd to find that the birds never use the nesting boxes to sleep in, after the nesting season is over. In December they go to roost early, 4.15 P. M. and sleep with the head under the wing, puffed up like little feather balls. CENSUS. Can one form any definite idea as to how many House Finches there are in Denver? This question imposed itself on the writer early in this study, because of the relation of this species to the English Sparrow, and while it is self-evident that any estimate along these lines must be approximate only, it is however, not without interest to try to answer it. There are in the city of Denver 3500 blocks whereon are to be found buildings of one kind or another. If two Finches are allowed for each block there would appear to be 7000 Finches in the city, a number seemingly reasonable as a minimum estimate. At one ae Brretoip, A Study of the House Finch. 45 time during the summer of 1908, at least fourteen pairs of Finches were known to be nesting in the block in which the writer lived; thus there were twenty-eight Finches living in this block at that time. It is possible that the unusual nesting facilities at the writer’s house may have increased the Finches in the block beyond normal numbers, yet a careful survey of many blocks in other parts of the city justified the writer in feeling that the number of Finches in his block was what one might call “average common.” This would give us another estimate, counting only the built up blocks, to wit, 98,000 for the entire city. The writer has actually counted in April more than one hundred Finches congregated on the tele- phone wires leading to one building, near his office, a structure ornamented with many ledges, lintels, arches, etc., and lending itself well for night lodging places for the House Finch. This date is well on in the early incubation period of the year, and one feels justified in assuming that these birds were not young of the year, or old birds gathered together from a wide area to roost only, but were most likely males going to rest near their nesting locations. This is, furthermore, made more probable by the fact that all of these birds seemed in full spring song, characteristic, practically, of the male only. There could not have been less than 200 birds about this building at the time mentioned, and there were almost as many more on the building on the opposite side of the street, showing that these birds are extraordinarily abundant about the business parts of the city, an abundance which can well compensate for any possible scarcity in the outskirts, though it is readily evident that in the outskirts too, the Finches are quite numerous. If we estimate 200 Finches to each ‘built on’ block, we would have a Finch population of 700,000, a number to be considered as a maxi- mum, and probably a considerable overestimate, though the writer is by no means convinced that it is actually an overestimate. Averaging the Finch population in another way, one can say that there are four Finches for each of the 35,000 houses (or other build- ings) in Denver, resulting in a total of 140,000 House Finches in the city. No portion of the territory within the corporation limits is with- out its Finches, and after studying the question with care for years, and considering every way of making an estimate, the writer feels 46 Bereroitp, A Study of the House Finch. ewe that it is very reasonable to assume that there are ten House Finches to each platted block within the city, which would give a total of 130,000 Finches, there being 13,000 platted blocks in the city, 3500 of which are built on; this estimate of 130,000 House Finches for the city of Denver is probably far below the actual number. Sone. Both sexes sing, though the female’s attempts are modest and rather infrequent. That the females sing is indisputable since nesting females have been noticed singing, an observation which precludes mistaking an immature male’s singing, for a female’s attempt at song. The female’s is, however, a weak imitation of the male’s vigorous and sweet song, which is best and richest, as with other song birds, during the breeding season, yet there is no month of the year when this song is not heard. During the cold months the birds are comparatively silent but they frequently burst into song on bright sunny winter days, which, with us in Colorado, are very common. ‘The association between these clear bright mild winter days and the singing of the Finches is too obvious to be overlooked. The song is poured forth in volumes while the bird is on the wing, and also when at rest, and reminds one in parts, of that of the Pine Finch. From the middle of January onward, the singing increases with the lengthening days, hushed now and again by extreme cold, and this generous song makes the bird a delight and a joy, one to be harbored and protected. By attracting the birds to one’s windows, one comes so closely in touch with them that opportunities for detailed study are unsur- passed, while the bird’s abundance and fearlessness give one the most intimate acquaintance possible. Furthermore, the varied calls and notes of both sexes are of exceeding interest, heard to great advantage in this way through their propinquity. There is a dis- tinct and recognizable difference in the alarm note over the sight of a dog or a cat if it be near the drinking place, and the alarm when one examines the nest. The writer has learned to know when the young are ready to leave the nest by the peculiar coaxing notes of the old birds. During nest building, the male often feeds his busy ee Berctoitp, A Study of the House Finch. 47 mate, as he would a young bird, and at such times the notes uttered by the female are peculiar to this part of the nesting habits. Dur- ing August and September the song is at ebb, but starts afresh, on a subdued scale, in October. The young of the year have frequently been heard trying to sing in late summer, a song small in volume but with unmistakable characteristics. Foon. The House Finch will eat almost anything vegetable, though it prefers seeds, and experiments with different seeds show that hemp is selected to the exclusion of all others. Nevertheless it feeds in our streets and alleys, gathering bread crumbs, eating from pieces of bread, apples, oranges, and, in fact, from almost any piece of table refuse. It will consume large quantities of fat, more especially suet. In winter when the ground is unusually deeply covered by snow, these birds wander far and wide over the prairie and vacant city lots, eating weed seeds, particularly those of the so-called Rus- sian Thistle (Salsola tragus). It was, to the writer, a most satisfy- ing discovery to find that the nestlings were, whenever possible, fed as soon as hatched and thereafter, on dandelion seeds. Each succeeding year has confirmed this observation and young birds not more than two hours out of the egg have been noted with crops stuffed to repletion with dandelion seeds. At this period of the bird’s growth the neck-skin and the crop covering are almost wholly transparent, so much so that one can readily distinguish the dan- delion seeds within. The old birds are to be seen at this time busily gathering these seeds for the nestlings, selecting those dandelion blossoms which have matured but are not yet open enough to permit of the seeds being dispersed by the wind. Such blossoms are deftly dissected by the old birds, and each seed taken from the blossom, the pappus being nipped off close to the seed. To insure certainty to the correctness of this observation, the writer has examined the crops of several nestlings killed by English Sparrows, and has been able to say definitely that the crop content, in these instances, was formed wholly of dandelion seed. If not fed on dandelion seeds, the nestlings are given such food 48 Brratoutp, A Study of the House Finch. aude as the old ones usually consume but the writer has never detected any animal food in the crops or stomachs of House Finch nestlings. This Finch has never been seen feeding from the horse manure of the streets. The House Finch exhibits, in common with many other birds, a fondness for maple sap, sipping it as it oozes from the cut branches of a spring pruned tree. The only objection my friends hereabout have against the House Finch is that it eats in the spring, leaf and blossom buds from bushes and trees — for example, lilac bushes and apple trees. VARIATION. The tameness of the bird and one’s proximity to it lent by this method of study make it possible to note and realize the great and marked variation to be found amongst the House Finches: one can learn, not only to recognize different individuals by some pecu- liar differences in color or marking, but can also notice and recognize shades and extent of color that have been spoken of, and described as forming various races of this species. This impresses one as though there were spread out before him a large series of skins to study; one feels much as a closet naturalist must feel when he takes in hand such a series and has the satis- faction of elaborating a new geographical subspecies. The extremes in color of feather, bill, tarsus and foot, and the presence or absence of tail emargination become so patent through one’s study of the bird in this way that, though these are here seen in birds known to be all of the same subspecies, one is almost persuaded to believe the birds are specifically different. One is impressed, too, by the differences in color, pattern and marking in birds coming from the same brood. Mature males have been seen with bright yellow throats and rumps, and every shade in the mandibles has been seen, varying from coal black to a gray so light as to be easily mistaken for white. The more one studies this interesting bird, noticing its extreme variability, the more one muses over the validity of species, realiz- ing more clearly than ever before that species exist for man only; or, if one wishes, one can feel that one is in the presence of the making of species. In the course of these observations, several birds have been ee ae =| BerGToutp, A Study of the House Finch. 49 noticed showing distinct melanistic phases, one female being almost black above, and not from city soiling, as the bird was still black after bathing: as mentioned below, an albino female has been seen during two succeeding seasons, having returned a second time to successfully build a nest in the locality where first observed. A female with a long decurved upper mandible has been watched through several months. This mandible was shaped very much like that of a Cross-bill and was probably not deformed through injury as it closed perfectly in apposition to its fellow of the under side, and was perfectly functional. It may well have been an example of mutation. Many characteristics, other than physical, of each individual come to light as one watches the birds at closerange. Many females are quite tame from the onset, and become steadily more so, allow- ing one to examine them with a mirror overhead as they are setting, showing no alarm, and even some degree of curiosity. The quarrel- someness of some, and the gentleness of others are especially patent. The water dishes are as often desired for bathing as for drinking, causing as many disputes over the bath privilege as the birds have over food in the feeding trays. Some are so tame that they come through the open windows into the office during severely cold weather, and perch on the steam radiator which is next to the window sill. MATING. The writer suspects that this species mates permanently: it is apt, in all seasons of the year, to come to the food and drinking dishes in pairs. After one becomes well acquainted with this spe- cies, one learns that a series of indescribable notes and chirrups betokens a mated pair, and these notes have been heard many times outside the usual mating season, 2. e., in the late fall and winter. It is a common thing to see a pair examining nesting boxes, and other eligible nesting sites, in December and January. In the winter of 1906-1907, a pure albino female Finch was observed on the writer’s home premises, accompanied by a normal male, which paid particular attention to the albino, being, without doubt in the writer’s judgment, the latter’s mate, notwithstanding the distance of the ordinary season for pairing and nesting. 50 Beratoup, A Study of the House Finch. ous Nests AND NESTING. The House Finch nests in vines about houses, in sheltered cor- ners and awnings of buildings, in baskets hung on houses, and, in fact, in any place of vantage about a building. It also, though rarely, builds in trees, as high in one instance as twenty feet above the ground; in bushes; and in years past (1894) when the electric arc street lights were covered by a conical metal hood, a number of nests were seen on the cross piece under the hood. Nests have been observed in globes, when partly broken, sur- rounding incandescent lamps hanging under verandas and portes- cochéres. These nests were frequently found in very noisy and conspicuous places, 2.e., the busy entrance to a large hospital. A pair had a nest, during the past spring, in one of two old-fashioned square lantern-shaped entrance lamps on the University Club, in each of which were two incandescent lamps burning brightly until past midnight. The incubating female was not disturbed in the least by this light, nor by the numerous visitors to the club going by her nest. The writer has only once noticed the species use an old nest of some other species for nesting purposes, in which case a pair of House Finches relined an old Robin’s nest and used it to raise a brood. It will thus be seen that there is a considerable degree of flexibility in the House Finch’s nidification traits, a flexibility which probably has helped very largely toward the bird’s great increase in Denver. The writer is fully convinced that nesting bears a large relation to the weather conditions, being controlled largely, perhaps entirely, by the temperatures prevailing over a more or less extended time. Very frequently in Denver, October and November are remarkably mild, and during such mild spells young Finches, in pairs, have been observed inspecting the bird boxes on the house, and on a few o¢ca- sions in October and November a pair of young of the year have been seen making abortive attempts at nest building. This sug- gestion — the effect of warm weather on the nesting instinct, is made more probable by the actions of the birds during warm spells in mid-winter, when the males begin to sing vigorously, the song ao Beretoup, A Study of the House Finch. ol exhibiting many easily recognizable nuptial characters — all these indications of the awakening of the nesting instinct are at once si- lenced if cold weather supervene. Cold weather has a positive deterrent effect on egg laying, a fact clearly established by the writer’s records. On the other hand pairs of House Finches, un- questionably mated, have been observed looking for eligible nesting sites in every month of the year, not excepting the period from September to February. The earliest active nest building noted by the writer was on January 30, and the latest July 23; while pairs have been noticed gathering material as late as December 22, these attempts have been classed, however, by the writer as due to a fleeting spell of warm weather. The birds grow very tame if the nest be closely associated with man and his doings: they seem to be bothered in no way by slam- ming of doors or by passers in and out of a door close to a nest. The nest is a shallow cup-shaped affair, roughly about four to five inches in diameter, which varies, however, according to the space in which it is built, and has a depth within its cupping of from two to two and a half inches. If built in a box it never completely fills the whole of the floor space unless the box be very small otherwise the nest will be of the usual diameter, and placed, in the majority of cases, in the end of the box farthest away from the light. The materials used in nest building vary according to loca- tion: one found in the business district was made entirely of dried freshly cut grass, evidently gathered from the lawns surrounding the municipal buildings, and had a lining of cotton batting. An- other nest from the business district was made of rootlets, cow hair, and also lined with cotton batting. Nests found in the outskirts of the city have the outer portion ‘made of straw, hair, string, small twigs, weed branches, grass and rootlets, and have as a lining some good non-conductor of heat, 2. €., cotton wool or string. One nest was built over a large mass of wool which seemed to have attracted some variety of fly, which later had deposited its eggs in the wool, producing maggots that did not bother, so far as one could determine, the young finches growing above them. One can expedite and encourage the nest building by putting fine straw or dry grass in the nesting box, arranging the material 52 Beretoip, A Study of the House Finch. aur roughly in the shape of a nest just begun. The first nests of the year are usually built very slowly, three to six days being consumed in the work, which is done wholly by the female, though the male often brings pieces of nest material, which are, however, never accepted by his mate. This performance of the male always impresses one as being a ‘bluff.’ He dances constant attendance on the female as she works, cheering her continually with vigorous song, at its best at this time. Later in the season a nest, if it be what one may term ‘an emergency nest,’ may be completed in a single day, and an egg laid in it on the second day. After a nest is finished, if it be not an ‘emergency nest,’ the builders almost invariably leave the neighborhood and are not seen again for a few days, at the end of which absence they reappear, and egg laying begins. If the birds be undisturbed, and the old nest left in situ, it may be used to rear a second brood, without its being renovated in the least; but this use of an old nest is not usual. More often an old nest, if used for a second time, is partly covered by a new one, to avoid, it may be, insects, or the soiled condition of the old one. In only one instance has the writer seen the same nest used for three successive broods. On several occasions a new nest has been built over an old one, in which there were abandoned eggs: whether or not the builders of the first and second nests were the same birds, the writer is unable to say. Vig- orous nest building begins early in March, unless the weather is too severe. The earliest date on which a completed nest, with an egg in it, has been noted was March 12, though there were many nearly completed nests in the same neighborhood on the same date, or earlier. By the last of March, nesting is in full swing all over the city, but the flood tide of nidification is in April and May (taking the egg laying as an index), there being little difference between these two months, as the following table will show, the data being from the nests about the writer’s home premises :— vel x = Berctoip, A Study of the House Finch. de TaBLE No. 1. Number of nests completed and containing at least one egg. 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 Total March - 2, 2 2 2 8 April — 4 9 0 5 18 May 24 5 6 4 2; 19 June 3 Ss 3 2 2 13 July 2 1 2 3 0 8 Unrecorded 1 1 0 0 0 2 Total 8 16 22 11 11 68 The materials used in nest building are not always gathered in the neighborhood of the nest, for the females often go consider- able distances for nesting stuff, though suitable material could be gathered closer at hand. The chances are that a pair uses an old nest more than once, though this is not easy to determine, simple as it might seem. One pair, the female of which had a white feather in its tail, selected a new site for their second, and also for their third brood, which establishes, in any event, that this easily identified pair did not use the old nests for new broods. On several occasions, when English Sparrows have so harried a pair of Finches as to stop incubation before the writer could dispose of the invaders, the same Finches, presumably, have built a second nest over the first one and its eggs; that, however, the builders of the first and second nests were identical, the writer has never been able to determine beyond doubt. Four attempts, extending over a period of sixteen weeks, at nest building in the same box were observed by the writer in 1908, the birds seemingly being identical in all four attempts, but not identified with certainty. One and the same pair, identified positively, has been detected building in one box for a while, only to stop and begin anew in another; probably due to interference by English Sparrows. 54 Bererotp, A Study of the House Finch. raed Jan. Eacs. The average number of eggs in a set estimated on’ sixty-six ‘sets, having a total of two hundred and eighty-one eggs,, is four plus, the largest being seven, and the smallest two,. the latter however may not have been a completed set, though it went on to full incubation. In emergency sets, 2. e., comple- ments of eggs laid after a previous set had been destroyed by English Sparrows or storms, smaller numbers prevail. The average weight of a first egg was found to be 36 grains (13: weights averaged), the extremes of weights being 32 grains and 40 grains. Some sets are extremely variable in the weight of the eggs therein, one set of four eggs giving weights of 32, 33, 35 and 35 grains, while another complement of eggs weighed 35, 35, 35,. 35 and 36 grains respectively. The average length was .77 inch, and the diameter .54 inch, the extremes in length being .81 inch for the maximum and .68 inch for the minimum, while the extremes in diameter were .57 and .51 inch respectively. The earliest date on which an egg has been detected in a nest was. March 12, and the latest (counting the date on which the egg was. laid) was July 27. After a female begins to lay, one egg is laid each day until a set is completed. It is quite rare that the daily eruption of an egg is disturbed or intermitted; in 68 sets recorded durmg five years there have been but two in which this orderly succession of an egg a day has not obtained, and it is quite possible that on one of these occasions the interruption was due to the sudden onset of extremely cold weather. So far as the writer has been able to determine, the eggs are always laid at night, 2. e., between the hours of 7 p. M. and 7 A. M., many nests having been examined repeatedly at short intervals during the day with special reference to this particular point. With the larger sets (five or more), one often finds an egg outside the nest, presumably accidentally crowded out, because of lack of room. Several times infertile or undeveloped eggs have been found in the box outside the nest, the other eggs of the set having gone to successful incubation. Whether the old or young birds have accidentally pushed out such eggs, as they move about in the nest fel | BerGTOLD, A Study of the House Finch. 5d is not determinable. The writer suspects that the old birds may remove from the nest, eggs which have failed to hatch, because such eggs have frequently disappeared when the nest has in no way been disturbed by English Sparrows, which would be the only other cause in explanation of this disappearance. The female has a peculiar and unmistakable cry when laying, a call which is answered promptly by her mate. The writer has frequently been led to discover new sets of eggs in a nest through hearing this peculiar ‘egg cry’ of the laying female. The female also calls to her mate in a different, yet characteristic, way when incubating. She-is then often fed by the male, the feeding being precisely similar to the feeding of a young bird, even to the flut- tering of wings, etc. The average length of incubation is fourteen days: occasionally it may be a few hours or even a day shorter, but more frequently it is longer. In one set the first egg laid apparently took fifteen days to hatch, and the fourth egg seventeen days, the other two eggs of this set being failures, one from infertility, and one dried after being partly developed. It is somewhat difficult, in studying the incubation period, to estimate the amount of incubation effected by the laying female. In some sets the first egg laid can be seen to be partly incubated before the whole set is completed, taking the newly formed red blood channels which show clearly through the shell in the develop- ing ovum as an index of incubation. This may, and probably does, explain the irregularity which has frequently been noticed in the hatching of a set of eggs; almost every possible combina- tion of hatching having been noted — all on the same day, though this is not common; two on one day and the remainder at regular intervals etc., etc. The female, while incubating, has been seen during daylight asleep on the nest. The eggs sometimes under- go a surprising amount of cooling without being spoiled. One set, when partly incubated, was successfully hatched after being un- covered all of a cold rainy night, the female having been frightened from the nest at about 11 p. M., not returning until daylight. Several sets have been hatched despite the occurrence of several snow storms during incubation. An attempt was made, several times, to mark and number each egg as laid, in the end to determine 56 Brretoutp, A Study of the House Finch. ous which egg was hatched first, but each effort, except one, was a failure because the pencil marks became blurred or effaced by the rolling of the eggs in the nest as the setting female moved about. This method of investigation, by marking the eggs, has not been pushed as far as might have been possible, because of the fear of breaking the eggs, which accident happened once in the early at- tempts at marking. The writer has also been unable to determine whether the largest or the smallest egg hatched first, or whether the size of the egg bore any relation to the length of incubation. In the single exception mentioned above, the egg laid first, hatched first. It is possible that the eggs, as laid, could be colored by ana- line dyes, and thus be distinguishable one from the other; but this method was not used through the fear that the dyes might be detri- mental to the development of the eggs. Only once, during five years of systematic observation on 68 nests, have empty egg shells been found in a nest, an observation which may reasonably be held to show that the old birds remove the empty egg shells, as they do the fecal sacs during the first days after the eggs are hatched. Two broods are probably raised each summer, and, on one occasion at least, three were raised by the same female. The record of this particular female is interesting: the first egg of brood No. 1 was laid May 14, of brood No. 2, June 28, and of brood No. 3, July 9. In brood No. 1 there were five eggs, in brood No. 2, four eggs, and in brood No. 3, three eggs, this diminuendo scale meaning, perhaps, a gradual slowing of the ovarian energy for that year. Of these twelve eggs, one was infertile, seven were hatched successfully, and the nestlings left the nest in due season; and though the four of the second set were hatched successfully, English Sparrows raided the nest, and killed all the nestlings when they were two days old. It is highly probable that this female was stimulated to raise a third brood by the early loss of the second one. INFERTILE EaoGs. The number of infertile eggs out of a grand total of 283, was 25, a percentage of infertility of about 9. It is rather difficult to estab- lish a certain index of infertility, and, to be safe, the writer consid- ered as infertile only such as could not have been chilled, or such eas “eal Breratotp, A Study of the House Finch. OT as failed to hatch when others in the same nest were successfully incubated. All eggs which failed to hatch were examined to de- termine if any development had occurred, and when any least trace was found, such egg was not counted as infertile. The infertility varied considerably from year to year as the following table will show: TaBLE No. 2. 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 | Total eS) : pease Sterile eggs 1 | 8 3 9 + | 25 Total laid 33 | 64 87 52 ep |) 988 The male feeds the young for a considerable period after they leave the nest, often so long that he will also be feeding at the same time the young of a second brood. The female is most devoted to her nest, leaving it with extreme reluctance, and returning as soon as an alarming disturbance ceases. The nest is kept under close surveillance, and a female may even show signs of anxiety if an empty nest (after the young have flown) be examined. The incu- bating bird will stay on a nest under very distressing conditions, i. e., during a severe snow storm; and on one occasion a female was noticed brooding a nest full of young which had frozen during the previous night. FEATHERS. The feather development and growth occur with amazing rapid- ity, even twenty-four hours making surprising changes, especially during the first few days after hatching. The appearance and growth of the various feather tracts differ, apparently, in differ- ent broods and individuals. It is approximately as follows: — the young up to the fourth day seem naked, but are really partly covered by a minute down which appears in streaks, there being four lines on the head, 7. e., one along the skull in the long axis of the body, one over each eye, and one over the occiput, transverse to the long 58 Brereroip, A Study of the House Finch. aie axis of the head. There is also one along the dorsum of each wing, one over each scapula parallel with the vertebral column, an inter- acetabular dorsal patch, a streak down the outside of each thigh, and a sternal streak which bifurcates, one fork going under each wing, and on the second day an interscapular vertebral streak appears. All these areas grow rapidly and soon appear to coalesce; and by the fourth day the body seems to be covered all over with down, except the belly, and, by this time, the wing quills are just budding. On the fifth day, the wing quills are one eighth of an inch long, while the back and side streaks of down show a stubby growth of feather tubes. The wing quills, on the sixth day, are three-eighths of an inch long, the tail feathers are one quarter of an inch long, and the back and neck stubs are now clearly distinguishable as feathers. On the seventh day, the wing feathers are five eighths of an inch long, but are not wholly delivered from their casings, and the shoulder stripes show as true feathers. On this day, the wing, tail and back feathers are long enough to be preened by the young bird. On the ninth day, the back is ‘entirely covered by true feathers; and on the twelfth day, the whole bird appears feathered as an adult, with, however, this difference, that a good deal of the original down persists, and stands out beyond the true feathers, most noticeably on the head. It was of especial interest to the writer, while taking notes on the feathers of this bird, to see how slowly and how late the head became covered, a condition which may perhaps be taken as a tendency to persis- tence of the primitive avian pterylosis, in which the head was long naked. (Scott — Introduction to Geology, p. 698.) NESTLINGS. The young remain about fourteen days in the nest, which is kept perfectly clean by the old birds for four or five days after the eggs are hatched. When the young birds have developed enough to voluntarily move about, and arrange themselves in the nest, which usually is about the fifth day after hatching, the nest edge then exhibits the first signs of fecal soiling, which comes about in a manner common co Brercroip, A Study of the House Finch. 59 to many other nestlings, that is to say, the young birds void back- ward over the nest edge, after each feeding, leaving the nest centre unsoiled. The young are fed by the parent bird during the whole of nest life by regurgitation. If the season be that of dandelion seeding, which in Denver is a continuous performance from April to November, the crops of the nestlings are seen to be full of dande- lion seeds. When the nestlings are very young (one to three days old) the regurgitation act of the parent is very prolonged; indeed it is very much longer at this time than when the young are more fully developed. Both old birds share the work of feeding the young, and the intervals between the feeding are comparatively long, much longer than with nestlings fed on animal food, as a Robin, for example. An interval of fifteen or twenty-five minutes between feeding visits by the old birds to the nest is not at all unusual. This may be due to the obvious fact that it takes longer to gather a crop full of seeds than it does to get a bill full of worms. The old bird in- variably goes to the drinking dish for water, immediately after feeding the young. Different pairs vary very much in their atten- tions to the young and it is noticeable that the old birds are less as- siduous in feeding the young toward the time when they ought to leave the nest, a neglect which may tend to make the nestling ven- turesome and leave the nest. The newly hatched birds make no noise, and not until about the third day can one detect any sound coming from them; and then it is but a faint peeping, which, how- ever, rapidly increases in vigor and strength, so that on the seventh day in the nest, the young birds make considerable noise when the old birds visit them. If a bird only twenty-four hours old be placed outside the nest, it will crawl about using its wings as a pair of anterior legs and a nestling three days old will, if placed on the nest edge, crawl back into the nest, and arrange itself according to a fixed way, rump in, and bill extending toward or on the edge of the nest. The young preen themselves quite early during nest life, as they have been seen arranging and cleaning their feathers when seven days old. During the first three days after being hatched, the young seem to have closed eyelids, but a close and careful scrutiny reveals a narrow slit through which the birds probably notice their surroundings. 60 Beratotp, A Study of the House Finch. our Not infrequently a very small nestling (7. e. 24 hours old) has been found uninjured outside the nest proper, it is possible that the old bird in trying to remove egg shells may have pulled the little bird out of the nest. The old birds remove the fecal sacs as they are voided by the young after each feeding, up to the fifth day, the nest remaining perfectly clean during all these days. From this time on the nest edge becomes progressively more and more encrusted with the fecal sacs which are voided by the nestlings over or on the nest edge. If the nestling be taken from the nest and fed by hand, an excremental sac is voided at once after the food is swallowed, the bird backing as though going to the nest edge, the action impressing one as being due to an irresistible impulse. One can see at once, from the soiled edge of a nest, if it has sheltered a successfully raised brood. On several occasions one of a brood has died in the nest, and afterward disappeared. It is assumed by the writer that the old birds have thrown out the dead one, but he has never been able to verify this assumption; on the other hand, dead nestlings have been found mummified in a nest in which the others of the brood have gone to full development. The nestling is able to hold up its head and open its mouth as soon as it is free from the egg and dry. It can squirm about with considerable force within two hours after hatching, and when two days old will crawl feebly about and try to place its head well up on the nest edge. When eight days old, the young ones are attentive, vigorous and alert, but not yet timid, and if the nest be taken down for examination the little birds will squeak and open their mouths to be fed. If lifted from the nest at this period, they cling most tenaciously to it with the feet, and when put in the scale pan to be weighed, they are very active and crawl about in a lively manner. At this time, too, they arrange themselves very definitely in the nest, each seemingly having its place, and each tries at once, if disturbed, to get to its place and rest its bill on the nest rim. On the tenth day, they seem ‘conscious’ of their surroundings, appear to be ‘studying’ the nest, and each other, and have acquired a noticeable degree of timidity. From this time until the nest is deserted, they move about in it, mounting to the edge where they frequently stand and energetically use the wings in a fanning man- ve x | BeretToip, A Study of the House Finch. 61 ner, an ‘exercise’ which undoubtedly leads to growth and develop- ment of the great pectorals. Many can fly well on the twelfth, and some leave the nest on the thirteenth day, though the time of leaving the nest is quite irregular. All may leave on the same day, which is most commonly the fourteenth, yet some remain in the nest until the sixteenth day after hatching. One finds almost invariably, in a large brood of five or six, that one or two of the birds have gotten a good start on the others through having been hatched earlier, and that such birds fly before the others do. Without an exception, the writer has found that the nestling’s note changes, a day or so before its first flight, from the peeping sound characteristic during nest life, to the ery of a young bird able to follow its parents, and the writer has been warned a number of times by this unmistakable change in note, that some of the young in his nesting boxes were ready to leave them. About this time also, the young birds take instant heed of the old bird’s cry of warning, if danger be near. The first flight is fre- quently a long and vigorous one, many nestlings having been seen to leave the nest and at once fly two hundred feet to a tree or house. Several times when this has occurred the little one has been ac- companied in its initial flight by the parents, both old birds flying as close to it as possible. Contrary-wise, many times these nestlings on the first attempt at flight will drop to the ground. Under such circumstances they crawl into corners, or under bushes, or amongst leaves. How they there escape the ubiquitous cat is hard to understand, yet they do, and one can watch them about one’s yard gaining strength and self-reliance from day to day. They always try, by climbing, to get as far from the ground as possible and by dint of short jumps and flights, mount from ground to bush, bush to fence, and fence to tree, where, once well estab- lished, they remain several days, being fed regularly by the old birds. It is astonishing how much cold and exposure, soaking by rains and wet snows, these young birds will stand. The mortality is very great, however, after such exposure, especially if it comes soon after they leave the nest. Many perish, too, by hail storms. When one can study daily several developing broods of House Finches, the individuality displayed by particular nestlings is 62 Beretoip, A Study of the House Finch. que startling: one, for example, will early show a tendency to be a ‘fighter,’ resisting handling, and pecking one’s hand, while all the rest in the brood may be quite submissive. The color-identifica- tion scheme, hereinafter to be described, often permits ‘one to follow and study a certain bird for some days after it leaves the nest, and has made it possible to ascertain that the young birds feed themselves at least as early as seven days after leaving the nest, though at this time they still follow the parents about, begging most persistently to be fed. Hence it follows that, if a young bird were thrown wholly on its own resources at this time, only five weeks would have elapsed from the laying of the egg until the embryo had become fully grown and able to shift for itself, this period of five weeks including two weeks of incubation, two weeks of nest life, and one week of post-nest life. It is surprising how large a number of broods will take just about this period for all their members to mature and shift for themselves. The progress of these events seems swift to the writer, inasmuch as the House Finch cannot be considered in any way precocious. It has seemed to the writer that those birds hatched last in the brood are not so vigorous as those out first; 1t is possible that this. notion may have arisen in the writer’s mind because the first hatched have a considerable start in growth and vigor by the time the last ones break through the shells. This notion is not supported by the data accumulated by weighing the developing nestlings, if weight be taken as a criterion of vigor. The combination of cold and wet is most disastrous to the young, and the writer has often put them from the ground into bushes during cold rainy nights, covering the overhanging branches with newspapers, giving him the satisfaction of saving several young birds, while those not covered have perished. The young soon learn where the food trays are located and go to them often, stuffing themselves to repletion. There is a great deal of difference in the color pattern of the young birds in a given brood, one having the breast and belly markedly streaked with blackish, while in another these areas are almost pure grayish. The back may exhibit parallel variations. Once all the young in a nest of four were thrown out of it by English Sparrows; three had died before being discovered, but the fourth a Beretotp, A Study of the House Finch. 63 seemed to recover fully on being warmed and sheltered. It was put into another nest, the young of which were of almost identical age with it, in the hope that it might be adopted and fed by the old birds of the second nest. They, however, paid absolutely no attention to it and it perished. The young of the year are often, by September, distinctly reddish on head and throat and if we as- sume such birds to have been hatched in the previous April, it becomes apparent that this secondary sexual character appears within the first six months of life. SpectaAL DeraiL STupy. Comparative physiology is of interest and importance both to the biologist and to the zoologist. With a desire to furnish data to both, and in the end that some light might be shed on the nutri- tional processes of developing young birds in a wild state, a scheme of weighing young House Finches from day to day was undertaken by the writer. There are in the literature of ornithology records on the weight of young birds, the daily gain in weight of such young birds, and the amount of food consumed by them — facts apper- taining especially to young Robins in captivity; but there are no such facts known to the writer relating to free wild birds. In order to learn something concerning the weight of a fresh laid egg, the weight of its embryo on hatching, the daily gain in weight of a nestling, the weight of the same bird on leaving its nest, and, finally, the weight of an adult bird of the same species, the writer carried out an interesting study bearing on these points. With House Finches nesting in boxes, as described above, it is extremely easy to take a nest once a day, into one’s house, and examine or weigh the eggs or young, without in the least interfering with the regular process of incubation or feeding. In order to identify each bird in a particular nest, each one was marked somewhat as follows:—by using analine dyes dis- solved in alcohol such birds could be colored in areas, on parts, and with such colors, as one desired; for red, fuchsin, and for blue, methylene blue was used. These dyes are readily soluble in alcohol, which quickly evaporates when applied to the young bird, and does 64 Beratoip, A Study of the House Finch. aus the bird no harm. The first bird hatched had its right thigh and side colored red, one or two applications sufficing for the whole period of nest life: the second bird had its left thigh and side stained blue, the third its right thigh and side stained red, and its left thigh and side blue, and so on. Combinations of parts and colors numerous enough to identify several birds will readily suggest themselves to the reader. The plan worked admirably, and made it possible for the writer to follow a young bird’s career from its ‘hatching’ until some time after it left the nest. In determining the weight of egg or bird, it was placed in the pan of an accurate balance, and the weight recorded in grains (avoirdupois). Grain weights were used, not through choice, but because they are most familiar to English readers, and most easily carried in mind by them. We have already seen that the average egg weight is 36 grains, and that the extremes were 32 and 40 respectively. It then became necessary to secure the weights of adult males and females for purposes of comparison: the only ways to learn these weights were, either to catch parent birds which were nesting about the house, obviously interfering with the study of the young in the nest, or to kill old birds known not to belong to a box nest; and the writer was unwill- ing to employ either of these means. Fortunately, however, an adult female, known not to belong to a box nest was caught by accident, and was found to weigh 289 grains, which is the only datum in the writer’s possession to use as an adult normal. One young bird, able to fly well, was caught on the premises, and, on examination, proved not to have come from any of the study nests. It weighed 259 grains. Before it was liberated, its breast was marked with bright red, through which characteristic it was afterwards easily recognized. It lingered about the premises for over three weeks. Two nests of young House Finches, both sets of eggs hatching almost simultaneously, were selected and studies as to the initial, the daily gain in, and the final weight of their nestlings. The fol- lowing table gives the data thus obtained, together with the meteor- ologic conditions prevailing during the period of study: 65 Beretoitp, A Study of the House Finch. ] Vol. XXX 1913 ‘moryeyIdroeid jo 9081} Suruvaut ,, J, 9) ‘480U JOT = *poululieyap you Bsa 0} Surpyyseu jo yYStaM Jo uoryepory "Yowe SUIGIS OF pure 6E ‘BE ‘2E-,,20-D-G,, seu — (a[fqteyur ou0) ‘siB gg puw ‘cg ‘cE ‘cE ‘cE-..10-G-F,, JSeU—sBde Jo yySIOA\ —:0}0N LT 0 0 0 0 0 0 fle © | (0) 0 Gilson enl Ow LOM nO xeL | 88° | — ‘ul uolye41d1de1g os | ZZ | OOT | 66 16 | OOT | ¢8 | OOT | 69 ES es) kee eos 0s 22) ae e9 — % f, 4 9eurysung GQ SS) EZS ESS CS OS OSS EPS es EGP Gy alevr | OGm IMGT em | trp (Opeulltnstn lee ery AT euny 92 OL 248 98 $8 ¢8 €8 GL 89 1 9L GL PL TZ Sz) Wey — | xey| -eiodumay Alreq —}— * GL | 09% | €9% | 89Z | OLE | 2Gz | 6Fe | GES | GOS | OGL | SFT | OZI | F6 €9 ¥ — x | 89% | 79% | GOS | BGe | BPs | 9% | OSZ | FEST | OZ | TOS’ | GOT | SET | ZOT | Gz 6F € 10-0-8 —|— * €LZ | L9G | S9% | G9% | OLE | FGz | Sze | 60% | 98ST | OOT | Tet | g6 | 69 er z st ty —|— x | 98% | 642 | 824Z | ZLe | GSz | ThZ | 91z | Sst | O9L | Ost | Ze | 89 C| «Ge og I 6c | SEG | SEC | Zoc | SET | Z8T | €or | OSGi | Ost | S&é | vZ- | 09. | cr | ee | — |= — t 6he | SS@ | 9c | 09% | Sha | SEs | Tes | SIz | Sst | Sst | ost | zor | ez | of | 6e | — — € 10-4 — * | 89% | €9% | cSz | GFZ | OFS | SEs | ZIZ | SST | SST | PEL | F8 | Gz | OS | EF ~- be - de 6FG | 8hG | 19% | LEZ | SES | LES | 9TS | T1Z | Sst | FEL | OST | GOL | FZ | ZO | OF | GE — T 9I CT FI €I rat Il OT 6 8 ey, 9 ¢ r € %%5 T Ts | ‘ON —_—_|——___ BEING ‘LO6T ‘oun ACTA | PATE ‘ssul[}sou JO (Sureis ut) Aep yoRe yYySIO MA 'g ‘ON Wavy, 66 BeERGTOLD, A Study of the House Finch, ous This table of weights is of considerable interest, and, it is hoped, also of value as establishing, with these eight nestlings, a pro- visional curve of weights for growing House Finches. It will be seen that the least weight, at hatching, was 30 grains, and the greatest 63 grains. This wide variation may be explained on the assumption that the high weight was partly due to this nestling’s having been fed by the old birds prior to the weighing. If we assume that the egg is hatched at night, which seems always to have been the case in the writer’s experience, it is probable that the incubating female fed the young bird during the night, or shortly after dawn, both periods being before the writer took the daily weights (viz., 8 A. M. each day) and one or two feedings will materi- ally increase a very young nestling’s weight. The average initial weight of eight nestlings was 42 grains, and the average last weight (before flight) was 262 grains. If taken by broods this last average was 249 grains, and 275 grains (disregard- ing fractions), extremes which show considerable divergence, a difference which might almost be predicted a priort, when one recalls the marked difference existing between pairs of parent birds in their attention to the young. A number of other young birds have been weighed, these young House Finches having been caught about the writer’s premises, and in neighboring yards, and identi- fied as not being from nests Nos. 4 and 5. Of these young birds, two were from a nest which was attended by two old birds noticeably careless in their attentions to the young. It was apparent for days that they paid unusually infrequent visits to the nest; the two nestlings in it, on the last weighing, were found to be far below the average, one standing at 181 grains, and the other at 209 grains. Including these two obviously under weights, the average weight, determined from eleven birds able to leave the nest (not in- cluding birds from nests Nos. 4 and 5) was 250 grains. Excluding the manifestly underweight nestlings, the average of the remaining nine was 262, an interesting correspondence to the similar weight averaged from the nestlings of nests Nos. 4 and 5. The weights from nests 4 and 5 show that a House Finch will grow to within 92% (or more) of the adult weight before it is three weeks old, which, is a surprisingly rapid growth. The extremely low weight (181 grains) exhibited by one nestling able to leave the nest proves vi a Berctoup, A Study of the House Finch. 67 that a young bird attaining but 62 % of its normal weight can shift for itself, or can, at least, try to do so. On the other hand, one nestling in “nest 5-C-07” reached within thirteen days after hatching 99 % of the adult weight (viz., 289 grains: 286 grains). Brood “4—B-07” shows us that a bird may be hatched two days before another and yet weigh when leaving the nest but 3°% more than does the latter, an observation which seems to point to the fact that various members of a brood follow very closely a certain level of growth and this level of growth is also shown by the weights of each bird in relation to the weights of the others, when all left the nest. There is, however, a noticable difference in the “ flight weights of the members of brood “5-C-07,” though it appears small when expressed in percentages, 2. ¢., 6 % between the heaviest and lightest (286: 268). It is to be noted that this difference occurred in the birds of brood “5-—C-07”’ notwithstanding that all four birds were hatched within twenty-four hours; and the weights of the various eggs in this nest were too close to each other to presuppose a better start for any given ovum because of greater egg weight. Toward the close of nest life some birds lose in weight, which may be, and probably is, due to the parents’ slacking up on feeding, in their efforts to coax the nestlings to fly. A loss in weight may be due, in some instances, to an alvine discharge having occurred just before the bird was weighed, an incident noted several times during this study. Such a discharge may amount to 5 grains, actual weight. The following percent gain curve shows, as one would expect, a very large percentage gain in weight during the first days of nest life, the gain then going on a diminuendo scale to zero, or even to a loss. It is surprising to learn that a nestling may gain 60 % in weight in twenty-four hours. A singular feature shown by the percent gain curve is the spurt upward shown on the fourth day, the mean of the eight birds in broods “4—B-07” and “5-C-07” showing this spurt unmistakably. It is highly possible that this peculiarity in the weight gain would not obtain in a large series of weighing. The writer was unable to determine whether a larger egg gives its embryo a better start than does a small egg its embryo. The weights of these eight nestlings ” 68 Brrctroitp, A Study of the House Finch. aur seem to show that the method of obtaining them had no untoward effect on the growth of the birds. The meteorologic conditions prevailing during the nest life of broods “4—B-07” and “5-C-07” TABLE No. 4. Average daily gain in weight of eight nestlings, gain given in percent. DAY 12 5 Re 8S) tou ee seemed to have little or no influence on the development of the individuals of both broods, though the temperature went, on several nights, below 50 F. CONCLUSIONS AS TO WEIGHT. 1. Average weight of House Finch egg — 36 grains. 2. Average weight of newly hatched House Finch — 42 grains. 3. Average weight of young House Finch on leaving nest, 262 grains. 4. Weight of an adult House Finch — 289 grains. 5. Average weight of 17 House Finches (juv.) was 92 % of adult bird’s weight. 6. A young House Finch when leaving the nest may weigh within 99 % of the adult weight. eae *| Breretouip, A Study of the House Finch. 69 7. A young House Finch may weigh 99 % of adult weight within two weeks after hatching. 8. A young House Finch may weigh only 62 % of adult weight yet be at large and able to fly about. 9. The House Finch nestlings may lose in weight just before leaving the nest. PARASITES. The young and the nests of the House Finch are always infected by a minute parasite, some of which were collected and sent to an entomologist, who determined that they were not true bird lice (Mallophaga) but mites, probably belonging to the family Gama- side, subfamily Dermanysside. Further than this, no study of the House Finches’ dermal parasites has been made. ALBINO HousE FINcH. On March 12, 1907, the writer and his family observed a snow white House Finch, which was evidently a female as it was plainly mated to a normal male which accompanied it. This albino was entirely white except a suspicion of dusky encircling the base of both mandibles. Another albino female House Finch was seen the next year in a neighbor’s yard. It was assumed to be the one observed the previous year. INJURIES. The propinquity of this species at the office and house has per- mitted such close observation that many of these bird visitors have become known by deformities which they had sustained from injuries; a surprisingly large number of crippled House Finches has been noted, none of which seemed to be any the worse for its handi- cap. Eleven crippled House Finches exhibited the following mu- tilations or deformities: 1 & Right foot missing. 1 9 Right leg missing, 1S ol eo Left 3 1 2 One foot and one-half of tarsus missing, 70 Berctoip, A Study of the House Finch. fa 1 9 Left tarsus and foot crippled and drawn up. 1 & Right foot permanently doubled up. 1 o& Left leg paralyzed. 1 Q With crooked leg, 1 & Right tarsus bent. Every one of these aforesaid birds was well nourished, and seemingly quite able to care for itself. Those with but one leg were a little awkward in perching on the drinking dish, or food tray, as were also those with markedly deformed legs or feet. One with but one half a tarsus on one side used it as a stump, and did so with ease and agility. It is rather difficult to explain these mutila- tions; the most reasonable explanation being that the missing members were lost by being frozen. In extremely cold weather this species does suffer from cold feet, and it has frequently been seen standing on one foot while warming the other drawn up in its feathers. These crippled birds prove that considerable mutila- tion may occur with a wild House Finch, without soon eliminating it in the struggle for existence. Mortality. The following tabulation shows the ultimate fate of all the eges laid in the nests under observation: TaBLE No. 5. Cause of loss: — By Result at 2 a | 2 6 cee x wou Total a 4 8 g3/ se) gs ay Year 2 = B Oo A i (S| S é x ea ee a FA a < Sipe : 1906 0 6 4 0 1 22 33 1907 13 7) 2 1 8 38 64 1908 15 18 5 0 3 46 87 1909 1 9 4 0 9 29 52 1910 Poet) 10 2 0 4 31 47 Total 29 ie es 1 ear ata 283 % 10% | 16% | —6%— 9% | 59% er ee BerGtToutp, A Study of the House Finch. rg! Counting fertile eggs and hatched young as potential additions to our House Finch population, we find that the mortality is very large with this species, even if estimated only to include the first four weeks after the eggs are laid. Over forty percent of the eggs laid were ultimate failures, the largest factor in the loss being destruction of the eggs and young by the English Sparrow, a condition to be considered shortly. About ten percent loss is caused by late spring storms, climatic conditions lasting but a short time, yet long enough to cause that much loss. There are a few minor accidents which have been re- corded during this study: thus one nestling perished because it could not be, or was not, freed from the sticky egg shell; another became entangled in the fibrous nesting material, and, unable to leave the nest when full grown, was abandoned by the old birds; once a box was blown down and the eggs destroyed by the fall. One young bird, recognized by its brass anklet, was found crushed in the street the same day it left the nest. ENGLISH SPARROW vs. House FINCH. There remains at least one point in the data accumulated during this study of the House Finch, which, while not relating wholly to it is of so much importance in relation to its future that it rightfully must be examined here. The question is, namely, the relation of the House Finch to the English Sparrow. Cooke suggested (Birds of Colorado, March, 1897) that this sparrow in its westward march would perhaps “meet its first real foe” in Colorado in the House Finch. The information gath- ered in this study will shed some light on this question, which must be examined not only concerning the contact of adult forms, but also with regard to the nesting habits, fertility, ete. The relative length of the nesting and breeding periods is of first importance. In Denver English Sparrows are commonly seen fighting each other for nesting sites in November, December and January, and the earliest date when this sparrow has been noticed taking up material for a nest, was January 8, on which date a pair of English Sparrows was seen breeding; and also by this time of the year completed nests have often been observed. While both House Finch and 72 Breretoip, A Study of the House Finch. ES English Sparrow seem stimulated to mating and nesting by mild warm weather, yet the second species seems much more suscep- tible to this stimulus, and responds much earlier. At the. other extreme of the year parallel conditions obtain: The House Finch has never been seen, by the writer, building a nest or having eggs in one, after August, while the English Sparrow habitually con- tinues egg laying and incubation during this month, in September, and fresh eggs of this species have been taken during the third week in October. It would thus appear that the English Sparrow’s season of nidification extends throughout almost the entire year, exceeding that of the House Finch by many weeks. It thus is apparent that the English Sparrow gets its young into the field earlier and during a much longer period than does the House Finch, which, in itself, would almost certainly cause it to win against the House Finch in a struggle between the two species. The male English Sparrow does as much of the nest building as its mate, while the male House Finch does nothing in this way to help its mate, a difference which may hasten and facilitate the completion of an English Sparrow’s nest in a shorter time than that of the — Finch. The Sparrow’s large bulky nest, wherever situated, with its usual lining of feathers, is far more resistant to snow or rain than is the open Finch nest, another factor tending to promote the multiplica- tion of the English Sparrow, under conditions in which the young House Finches perish. The English Sparrow’s greater adapta- bility is also in its favor. This flexibility of nesting exhibited by the English Sparrow comes into prominence in its habit, in Denver, of using abandoned nests of Bullock’s Oriole (I. bullockz) in which to raise its young. The loss of nests, eggs and young of the House Finch cheGuen direct destruction by the English Sparrow is very large. It was 16% in some of the nests studied by the writer, and, moreover, this 16 % loss of eggs does not include the very large potential loss of House Finch eggs and young brought about by destruction of nests by English Sparrows before the House Finch eggs are laid in them. One should remember also that there must be a loss of House Finches greater than 16% through the English Sparrows when they are not prevented from harassing the House Finch. as | BreretToup, A Study of the House Finch. 73 Sixteen percent of the eggs and young of the House Finch were lost on the writer’s premises through destruction by the English Spar- row, notwithstanding the writer’s constant and persistent attempts to destroy the latter species in his neighborhood. The writer has personally witnessed English Sparrows going into the House Finches’ nests, and has seen them throw out the young, these nestlings having the heads pecked open by the Sparrows before they were thrown out. The House Finch will often put up a mild fight against the invaders, giving at the same time a very characteristic squeak but the Finch is almost invariably beaten in these battles. In many years’ observations on this phase of the Finch question, the writer has but once seen a Finch whip a Spar- row. In the early years of this study, before it was undertaken systematically, the writer lost a great many nests, eggs and young of the House Finch through the depredations of the English Spar- row, and despite many and various schemes to drive away the English Sparrow and help the House Finch, he did not succeed until a powerful air gun was secured, with which the Sparrows were finally decimated in his neighborhood. The first English Sparrows seen in Denver by the writer were noted at the Union Depot in 1894, and then a few pairs only. Today, the writer believes, there are in this city, estimating along lines similar to those used in estimating the House Finch (comparing numbers for numbers) more than one half a million English Spar- rows. It would thus seem self-evident that this exotic sparrow has flourished in Denver since 1894, and has been in no way prevented by the House Finch from increasing. On the contrary, the evidence gathered by the writer is overwhelming that the English Sparrow overcomes, and is superior to, the House Finch in the biologic struggle. That it is the winner in this fight, many of our citizens realize; but they do not realize that it brings about aretardation of the spread of a native species, whose help to the community asa weed destroyer is of far greater value than is any benefit accruing from the English Sparrow as a scavenger, or through its habit of feeding its nestlings partly on animal food. Auk 74 OvERTON AND HarpEr, Bird Photography. (Fae BIRD PHOTOGRAPHY BY THE DIRECT COLOR PROCESS. BY FRANK OVERTON, M.D. AND FRANCIS HARPER. Many photographs that show the home life of wild birds are objects of great interest and beauty, but black and white pictures fail to reveal the most striking of all the characteristics of a bird — its color. Photography affords an almost perfect means of record- ing other important characteristics, such as size, shape, and habi- tat; but until recently it has been almost a total failure in record- ing the color of the plumage. Hitherto the colors of birds have been represented by means of paintings and their reproductions or by means of hand-colored lantern slides. But bird-painting is an extremely slow and difficult process. The artists who are capable of adequately portraying birds are surprisingly few in number, and to satisfactorily reproduce the paintings on the printed page is almost as difficult as to make the original pictures. Consequently many of the printed pictures in color are merely keys, and few painted portraits, however pleas- ing their composition, are accurate in every particular. Hand- colored lantern slides are valuable and beautiful, but most of them fail to represent the bird subjects accurately or in desirable detail. Therefore, any additional means of recording vividly and minutely the natural colors of wild birds is worthy of careful study. Sucha means is afforded by the use of the Lumiére autochrome plates. Photographs taken upon these plates are transparencies, having the qualities of good lantern slides, with the additional quality of showing the colors in their natural tones and in pleasing detail. An autochrome photograph may be reproduced by engraving and printing in the same way that a painting may be reproduced. But an autochrome is much fuller of microscopic detail than a painting done by hand, and this detail is too fine to be brought out by the engraver’s art at the present time. An autochrome, therefore, cannot be reproduced satisfactorily upon the printed page unless it happens to be made up of masses of color without ae je OveRTON AND Harper, Bird Photography. 10 variegated detail. But an autochrome may be used as a lantern slide, and herein lies its greatest field of usefulness. It is more dense than an ordinary slide, but a good lantern will project an autochrome photograph upon the screen with nearly all the bril- liancy that the plate exhibits when held in the hand and looked through by daylight. The colors will be slightly affected by the color of the light in the lantern, but not to a greater degree than the colors of a painting are affected when seen in an artificial light. An autochrome plate differs from an ordinary photographic plate chiefly in that a single layer of transparent, microscopical starch grains, dyed orange-red, green, and violet, and mixed in even pro- portion, is interposed between the glass and the sensitive coating or film. This coating is extremely thin, and is made of a panchro- matic emulsion. The plate is exposed in the camera with the glass side toward the lens, so that the rays of ight must pass through the colored starch grains before reaching the emulsion. Each starch grain is about g¢g5 of an inch in diameter. An autochrome thus bears some resemblance to a half-tone plate, but the dots upon it are only about one fifth as large as the smallest dots upon the best half-tone plate. The density of the plate is due to the fact that the starch grains intercept a considerable amount of light. Any plate camera may be used in taking an autochrome, and a special yellow screen, fitted to the lens, is the only extra piece of apparatus needed. If a screen is not used, the photograph will show a dominant purplish tone, owing to the excessive actinism of the violet and blue rays of ordinary light. The main difficulty of autochrome photography lies in the length of exposure required, which is 100 times as long as is necessary for an ordinary plate. This is owing to the absorption of light rays by the color screen and by the colored starch grains. An auto- chrome of a wild bird is taken in the same way that an ordinary negative would be made of the same bird, except that the exposure is greatly prolonged. The fastest time in which we have taken a bird autochrome is one quarter of a second, which would corre- spond to qg5 of a second with an ordinary plate. On the other hand, a brooding Blue Jay in a dark thicket has posed for as long as two minutes. The development of an autochrome is not especially difficult, Auk 76 OVERTON AND Harper, Bird Photography. [san although some experience and skil] are required to secure the best results. The factorial method of controlled-time development, as described in the directions accompanying the plates, enables one to control the density and contrast of the picture. The image formed by the first development of the plate is reversed in a reduc- ing solution, and the plate is thereby converted from a negative into a positive. The first development, reversal of the image, second development, and washing, may be completed in less than fifteen minutes, and the thin emulsion may be dried in ten minutes more. An autochrome, therefore, possesses a still further advan- tage over a hand-colored slide in the much shorter time required for its completion. An autochrome plate is a positive, and no satisfactory method has yet been devised for making colored prints from it directly upon photographic paper. It is well within the bounds of proba- bility, however, that experiments which are now being conducted in this direction may eventually be successful. Fortunately, any number of duplicates may be made by photographing the first plate upon other autochrome plates, in much the same way that lantern slides are made by the use of a camera. The reproduced auto- chromes are not so brilliant as the originals, but they may be shown with good effect in a lantern. We have taken several dozen bird authochromes that may be considered successful. The list includes the Laughing Gull, Com- mon Tern, Black Skimmer, Bob-white, Fish Hawk, Flicker, Night- hawk, Blue Jay, Song Sparrow, Purple Martin, Yellow Warbler, Catbird, Brown Thrasher, and Robin. The number of our failures to secure good pictures has not exceeded the number of our successes. Our experience justifies us in stating that the autochrome method of photography affords a practical and definite means of securing brilliant and useful photographs of normal wild birds in their natural haunts, poses, and colors. haem =| SHERMAN, Carolinian Avifauna in Northeastern Iowa. ~I ~I CAROLINIAN AVIFAUNA IN NORTHEASTERN IOWA. BY ALTHEA R. SHERMAN. THE map of the life zones of North America shows that a north- ward projection of the Upper Austral Zone extends up the Mis- sissippi River to latitude 44 degrees. The northern boundary of this narrow strip very nearly coincides with that of the so called “ driftless area,’ embracing a territory of 10,000 square miles, which geologists tell us was an island in the sea of ice during the glacial epoch; that through it the Mississippi River flows in the old chan- nel cut by its waters ages before the glaciers came. Here and there, cut out by erosion of wind and water, still stand vast piles of rocks, often of picturesque forms with their ancient pinnacles and barti- zans, saved by their insular situation from the grinding forces of the ice. Thus near the river was left a rugged country over which travel is laborious; portions of the woodlands remain in their original wildness in which some of the solitude seeking species of birds still find a home. It is a territory in which ornithological research has been very slight, the workers being too few to make a general survey, yet for future reference notes on the occurrence of southern forms of bird life in this region may be of some value, and it is the purpose of this article to give my note-book records for ten years in this field. For the most part the field of observa- tion lies a few miles on either side of the forty-third parallel of lati- tude, and extends back a dozen miles or more from the Mississippi River. As stated before the land nearest the river is bluffy; the belt of hardwood forest that originally covered it varied in width from five to ten miles, beyond which the country is rolling prairie. In addition to those species, which in the strictest classification are termed Carolinian, a few words may be in place concerning the abundance of four species that in the Mississippi valley range a hundred miles or more beyond the northern boundary of the Upper Austral Zone. Of these the King Rail, Rallus elegans, and the Florida Gallinule, Gallinula galeata, are occasionally met. In some years the Grasshopper Sparrow, Ammodramus savannarum austra- lis, may be estimated as a tolerably common summer resident, ; at é < Aw 78 SHERMAN, Carolinian Avifauna in Northeastern Iowa. a while in others it is not found at all. Equally variable are the numbers of the Dickcissel, Spiza americana, except that this species varies from tolerably common in some years to abundant in others. Misfortune falls heavily upon it; arriving late, incubation is still in progress when the mowing machines begin their work. The first nests having been destroyed the birds leave, there apparently being no attempt made to build second nests. The summer records for the Red-bellied Woodpecker, Centurus carolinus, show that it has been found in every woodland ravine visited, also found on one out of every three visits to its habitat, indicating that it is not a rare summer resident. In April, 1909, I saw one that had wintered on a farm near Steuben, Wisconsin, and the following winter two were boarders at that place. During the past winter in McGregor, Iowa, two Red-bellied Woodpeckers came daily for food to the adjoining yards of Mrs. M. EK. Hatch and Mrs. M. A. Jordan. For the past two seasons the Orchard Oriole, Icterus spurius, has not been seen on our place. In 1910 an old male was here on three consecutive days, and the same thing was true for three days in May, 1907. None was seen in 1905, nor in 1906. A female was here one day in May, 1908, and on the 17th of that month a male, wearing the plumage of the second year; appearing again on June 1 was a bird of this description, which remained until the 3rd of July. Very similar were the records for six weeks or more of the presence of a second year male in the spring of 1903, also in that of 1904. Late one summer previous to the decade under consider- ation a nest was found evidently built by an Orchard Oriole. It was beautifully woven of green grass, which was still quite fresh, but as no eggs were laid in it, nor the owner ever seen near by it was adjudged the “busy work”’ of an isolate female. In the past ten years there have been numerous accounts from the Atlantic sea-board and westward of the northern advance of the Cardinal, Cardinalis cardinalis cardinalis. Judging from these reports it appears that this northward movement has been all along the line of its range from northern Massachusetts to the Mississippi River. Unfortunately the number of observers in this region is small; if there were more this report of the Cardinal might show that it is of more frequent occurrence. ms Pas | ‘SHERMAN, Carolinian Avifauna in Northeastern Iowa. 79 On April 17, 1908, I saw a pair of Cardinals at the mouth of Sny Magill Creek, both male and female were singing. This creek is a small tributary of the Mississippi River, emptying into that stream six miles below McGregor. Until very recently, I had believed this to have been the first identification of the species in Clayton County. This credit, however, belongs to Mrs. Hatch, who caught a fleeting view of one in McGregor some time prior to this date. In the last week of December, 1908, a male Cardinal appeared at the food table spread for birds in the yard of Mrs. M. A. Jordan of McGregor. It remained as a regular boarder for upward of three months. Barring the brief glimpse of the Cardinal previously mentioned, this bird was of a species never before seen in that place as is established by the testimony of Mrs. Jordan, who had resided there for fifty years, and by that of several other old time residents. Similar testimony came from Blue River, and Boscobel, Wisconsin, villages situated on the banks of the Wiscon- sin River nearly due east from McGregor; in them for the first time it is said that Cardinals appeared that winter, two spending the cold months in the former place, and in Boscobel one was seen in March of 1909. In the following winter the species again appeared in new fields. On November 26, 1909, a female Cardinal spent several hours in our yard in National, Iowa. This place has a prairie location, and is on the water shed between the Mississippi and Turkey Rivers; it is the only place outside of bottom lands or near streams from which the species has been reported. Sixteen days later a male came to its former boarding place in McGregor, spending one day there. On February 10, 1910, feeding with the chickens in the yard of Mr. Harry Barnum of St. Olaf, Iowa, was discovered a female Cardinal, the next day a male joined her, the pair remain- ing until spring weather came; four weeks or more. St. Olaf on a tributary of the Turkey River lies directly west of the mouth of Sny Magill Creek, distant ten miles in an air line. It is the most westerly point in this region from which this species has been reported. All records for the succeeding two winters were made in McGregor so far as has been learned. In November, 1910 a pair appeared and were seen at intervals during the winter. Late the following 80 SHERMAN, Carolinian Avifauna in Northeastern Towa. aut November one Cardinal returned to his old winter quarters, and before many weeks was joined by two females, the trio spending the long cold winter there. Possibly the amount of cold these birds survived was greater than that endured by Cardinals elsewhere. They experienced on twenty-six mornings in the first six weeks of 1912 zero weather or much colder than that, the mercury falling to 38 degrees below zero on two mornings, while 30, 24 and 25 de- grees below were marks reached on other mornings, the averages for the twenty-six mornings being 13 degrees below zero. The summer of 1912 is the first summer in which a pair has been in evidence. ‘We have not missed seeing them for more than two weeks at a time”’: is the statement of Miss Eva R. Jordan. That the Cardinal is increasing in numbers, and has become a permanent resident seems to have been established beyond question. No nests of the species have been identified. The finding of them, probably, will be by accident, since hereabout the Mississippi is crowded with many islands, offering ideal summer habitats for these birds: places rarely visited by mankind in which search for a nest would make that for the proverbial haystack needle too simple a matter for comparison. In the wooded ravines in which occur the Red-bellied Wood- peckers is to be found the Louisiana Water Thrush, Sevwrus mota- cilla. Wheresoever the swift waters of a brook wash for some dis- tance the base of a well shaded bluff, there in masses of drift-wood may be found nesting a pair or two of this species. Where the forest has been cut away, and thickets of underbrush have sprung up on several occasions I have thought I saw the Yellow-breasted Chat, Icteria virens virens, yet always so far away that identification was not positive. It remained for May 7 and 8, 1912, to become red-letter days for the Chat. On those days one was seen in our yard, was viewed through binoculars and without them as it ap- peared at various times from twelve to twenty feet away. Asa species it must be counted quite rare. Perhaps the northern invasion of the Carolina Wren, Thryothorus ludovicianus ludovicianus, has been as great as that of the Cardinal, if so it has not been noted. There is but one positive record for this species. It was on December 2, 1911, in the same yard in McGregor in which the Cardinal appeared, that the Carolina Wren ih rs _ Barsour, The Case of Roosevelt vs. Thayer. S1 was first seen by Miss Jordan, and it was viewed for several minutes at very close range by herself and Mrs. Hatch. Another rare species is the Blue-gray Gnatcatcher, Polioptila - cerulea cerulea. An individual of this species was here on August 31, 1908, and for some time was watched through powerful bin- oculars when no farther distant than twenty to fifty feet. The last case may possibly be considered by some people as a hypothetical one. It was outside this decade and before the days of the binoculars; but the strange, little, gray bird that through long, hot, August days so constantly sang the unfamiliar notes of ‘peto, peto’ will always be thought by me to have been a Tufted Titmouse that had wandered north of its customary range. A DIFFERENT ASPECT OF THE CASE OF ROOSEVELT VS. THAYER. By Tuomas Barsour.! Mr. Francis H. Allen, in ‘The Auk’ of last October, has pub- lished some comments on the ‘case of Roosevelt vs. Thayer, with a few independent suggestions on the concealing coloration question.’ Mr. Allen’s remarks are very unfair to all those who are unable to agree with Mr. Thayer’s conclusions. His independent sugges- tions are, for the most part, unimportant, and add little to the arguments for either side. In the beginning of Mr. Allen’s recent paper, we find ourselves compelled to take issue with him on the question of what is ‘com- mon sense.’ He says, “In Columbus’s day common sense declared the world was flat.”’ This was a dictate of science, and was as worthy of being believed at that time and in that state of knowledge 1This would probably have been a paper written jointly with Dr. J. C. Phillips had he not left a short time ago for the Sudan. [I assume soJe respon- sibility for it, as it stands. A'large part is written from notes which we made together some time ago, and for the permission to make free use of these I thank Dr. Phillips very heartily. 82 Barsour, The Case of Roosevelt vs. Thayer. [ao as the fact that the world is round is of being believed now. Again “more recently it [common sense] carefully protected the consump- tive from ‘night air.’”” Here Mr. Allen is unfortunately unable to distinguish between superstition and common sense. Some of us have had great-great-grandmothers who were so unfortunate as to have lived in Salem. There they were hanged as witches, and yet this somewhat common practise can hardly be laid to the door of the ‘common sense’ of those times, but rather to superstition, which is, as yet, often persistent. We absolutely disagree in be- lieving that common sense is “still an obstacle to the spread of scientific education.” We consider it science’s most powerful ally as superstition is her worst enemy. We agree heartily with what is said regarding the “arrogant attitude he [Thayer] seems to take in regard to the relative claims of the artist.and the biologist to be entitled to form an opinion on the subject of coloration,— even more prejudicial, if less irritating, is the — shall I call it cocksure? — way in which mere conjectures are stated as facts.”” We also agree with Mr. Allen absolutely that a fair attitude towards Mr. Thayer must begin by admitting that he is an expert colorist, and that his per- ception of color and the value of light and shadow is probably as far ahead of the average scientific person’s perception as night is from day; yet we must remember that Mr. Thayer knows nothing of any other than human color perception, and his haphazard assump- tions that mammals, birds, reptiles, and insects see in the same way as human beings do, is just what grates most harshly upon the in- telligence of the average scientific person. We read later “I have detected in Roosevelt’s paper and the reply to Thayer’s criticism, appended thereto, upwards of fifty instances of misquotations, misrepresentations and perversions of Thayer’s statements, and pieces of faulty reasoning in matters of detail.” These are serious charges, but we must point out that the offences vary greatly in magnitude. It is a great pity that Mr. Allen did not state how many misquotations and how many pieces of ‘faulty reasoning in matters of detail’ he found. A misquotation would probably be wilful, while a bit of ‘faulty reasoning in a matter of detail’ might be an instance of where Mr. Roosevelt’s opinion was at least worth as much as that of either Mr. Thayer or Mr. Allen. Later Mr. Allen says, “Then, on page 162 we are told that the . a Barpsour, The Case of Roosevelt vs. Thayer. 83 Scissors-tailed Flycatcher is conspicuous in shape, but we are not informed, how a bird can be conspicuous in shape.”’ I can answer this question easily by simply stating that a bird can be conspicuous in shape by being like a Scissors-tailed Flycatcher. I strongly mistrust that Mr. Allen has never seen one of these birds in life; their conspicuous shape and their still more conspicuous method of displaying it in their open Plains habitat would have saved Mr. Allen from making such a naive display of his ignorance, had the opportunity for observation ever been presented to him. Mr Roosevelt is absolutely correct, when he says that the bird is con- spicuous ‘in color and in habit, has no concealing coloration, and never conceals itself.’ Mr. Roosevelt has obviously seen the bird in life. I also have had the good fortune to observe it. This is not a case where Mr. Roosevelt can be called ‘stupid.’ In a later paragraph we are given another example of ‘Roosevelt’s dogma- tism.’ His statement that the typical red fox and the cross fox are ‘equally successful in life’ is challenged, and we are asked if equally successful, why is not the cross fox as common as the red fox. We can answer that we have no evidence to show that the cross fox is shorter lived, less vigorous, or less well able to catch food than the red fox, or that it is in greater danger from its enemies. The reason why it is less common is purely and simply determined by laws of heredity, which govern the numerical re- lationship which a ‘sport’ bears to the parent stock, when no artificial factor steps in and provides for ‘sports’ only, mating together. We disagree absolutely with Mr. Allen’s absurd quib- ble that “a very little reflection would have shown... .that no two species ever live under precisely the same conditions.”” Why not? We believe that very many birds and, indeed, that many animals of all groups live under conditions so near alike that slight differences could not possibly prevent the same biological forces working equally upon all of them. In the matter of color gradation and counter shading, we admit that Mr. Thayer has made great discoveries in optics. Counter shading is certainly not universally existent. Mrs. Barbour, however, has recently called my attention to its frequency among such garden vegetables as melons, cucumbers, gourds and the like and how ineffectually it conceals them. Its effect is certainly destroyed in many in- 84 Bargsour, The Case of Roosevelt vs. Thayer. stances by an animal’s crouching or lying down, but the most important of all seems to be the fact that it does not seem as effective for an animal seen from end view as it is in one seen from the side, and yet, of course, the animal is in as great danger from enemies which may come head on, or from behind, as from those approaching from the side. Mr. Thayer has perhaps never thought of this: Mr. Roosevelt probably has. Mr. Allen is evidently blessed with that type of mind which wants to see things definitely settled one way or another once and for all. From his writings we presume that he believes that a de- finite theory is, by the fact of its being definite, worth more than a vague theory. The truism ‘I don’t know’ certainly does not appeal to Mr. Thayer, and apparently it does not to Mr. Allen. Both want to swallow the theory of natural selection reduced to its lowest terms, hook, bait, and sinker, and bring us to believe that this is an universal law, all powerful in its results or effects. No scientific man, or at any rate very, very few, will follow their ridicu- lously cocksure attitude in regard to this belief. Mr. Thayer’s declaration for ‘natural selection, pure, simple, and omnipotent’ is a dogmatic statement more jarring to scientists in our present incom- plete state of knowledge than Mr. Roosevelt’s assertions are irri- tating to Mr. Thayer. Sexual selection is an entirely different problem. It has been observed in actual operation, and if Mr. Thayer cares to study the habits of many birds and animals, he ean see it working for himself,— if he is open minded. We believe that coloration is found to be a negligible factor in the life economy of an immense number of species, of which the crow is an excellent example. Keen wits, in this case, make other protection un- necessary. If we mistake not, Darwin has said that sea birds need no protection, hence their conspicuous coloration; and when we are advised to distribute a number of skins of “forest birds and sea birds impartially in the tree tops in some thick wood and see whether there actually is any difference in their conspicuoustiess or not,’ we only say that birds of the field or marsh, if put in the forest in some such way as this, would be equally well pro- tected with the forest birds so far as their coloration goes, and that the conspicuous color of the sea bird is well matched by species of the family Cotingide which live in the green woods of South America. Kor ee Barsour, The Case of Roosevelt vs. Thayer. 85 1913 We have been advised by Mr. Allen that ridicule is a powerful weapon and sorely as we are tempted, we are trying to keep away from this sharp-cutting blade. When Mr. Allen says, “the fact that Mr. Thayer may have been mistaken in regard to the habitat of the Peacock does not vitiate all of his experiments,” he should have added, truly it does not, yet it certainly does vitiate the one that had to do with the Peacock, and this was all that we expected it todo. We must take a crack at the now famous Blue Jay, and his shadow on the snow. The jays are a tropical family, species of jays with blue or green coloration occur wide-spread in both tropi- cal and temperate regions. The Florida Blue Jay is almost exactly similar in plumage to the species hereabouts. It lives where there is no snow, as does our Blue Jay a full half of the year. We are frank to admit that our Blue Jays hereabouts do occasionally match the shadows on the snow if seen in exactly the right posi- tion, but ‘common sense’ tells us that this fact has absolutely no biological significance whatever. In regard to the white rump of the deer, I must add just this suggestion to what may be said regarding deer and their enemies. Deer are hunted by wolves more than by other species of animals. Wolves hunt in packs. The deer’s white rump might, under certain rather rare circum- stances, fool one wolf out of a pack for a short moment during the pack’s pursuit. It might at vastly rarer intervals fool all the indi- viduals of the pack were all their eyes at the right level at exactly the right time, but that it could fool all the members of a keen- nosed pack of hungry wolves long enough to allow of the deer’s escape is again a matter where I think ‘common sense’ must certainly be called in. Personally I have experimented with captive deer under wild conditions; 2. e. in a large park. I have had excellent opportunity for observing them carefully under many conditions with Mr. Thayer’s theories in mind. I have also had color varieties of the European fallow deer, which were both counter shaded and solid colored, some pure white, some deep chocolate brown all over, and some with brown backs shading to light bellies. In every case, the solid colored, chocolate brown individuals were the most difficult to see, especially at dusk, the regular time when the wild deer begin to move about and feed. Mr. Allen backs water very hard when he says, of the possibility 86 Barpsour, The Case of Roosevelt vs. Thayer. fee that foxes and dogs may locate their prey by scent, that this may militate seriously against Mr. Thayer’s contention that the final spring on all occasions is directed by sight alone. I think the important point here really is that we find no evidence that beasts of prey are unable to maintain themselves perfectly successfully in spite of the operation of all these supposedly adverse conditions. If an animal can get all the food it needs, what more does it want? So much for our remarks on Mr. Allen’s paper. They are some- what disjointed and perhaps prolix. We could pick him up on many other points, but this serves to show that his desire to simply bolster up the arguments of a friend would have been more con- vincing had they been more impartially conceived. Some time ago, Dr. Phillips and I reviewed Mr. Thayer’s book (Auk, April 1911). We put a number of direct questions to Mr. Thayer at that time which we hoped he would answer, both for his own sake and as an evidence to naturalists in general of his sincere desire to really keep this discussion going, to open up the whole matter of coloration so far as possible, to suggest fields of inquiry and experimentation, and not simply to sit down on the top of a heap of facts, which he claims to have discovered and take the attitude that the whole business is settled. Mr. Thayer claims to be interested only in what he terms facts, whys and wherefores receive practically no attention. Franklin did not discover lightning, but he proved its causation through its connection with electrical phenomena, and for that reason became very great. The least increment to our knowledge of how differences are brought about by evolution, actual endeavours to prove experi- mentally, if possible, the working of evolution relating to the origin of coloration would be worth more than many pages devoted to proving that an oryx’s head may be well concealed in a pine tree. Since Mr. Thayer published his book, he has given us a figure (Pop. Sci. Mon., July 1911, p. 21) showing a lion approaching three antelopes uphill. The ‘lion’s horizon line’ and the level of the plains, ‘appearing to meet the level of the lion’s eye,’ make an angle with each other of about 20 degrees, and under these conditions, according to the ‘great optical principle’ which ‘IT have discovered’ the antelopes are rendered invisible to the lion through their counter shading. Supposing, however, that the LS oReprce | Barpour, The Case of Roosevelt vs. Thayer. 87 light was coming from the direction of the antelope towards the lion, or that the ground sloped in the opposite direction; i. e. from the lion towards the antelopes, or supposing that the ground was level or undulating, or supposing, again, that the lion was watching for its prey from some eminence, overlooking the feeding ground of the antelopes, then the protecting value of this coloration would be nil. As a matter of fact, lions kill nightly, or whenever they care to. No traveller has ever found them starving to death or unable to provide as much food for themselves and their young as they needed. The rabbit’s greatest enemy in England is the stoat, in New England, the weasel. These enemies hunt by scent alone. They are the only enemies which the rabbits have that would have a visual horizon line low enough for the rabbits white tail etc. to act in an obliterative manner. Every game keeper in England will tell Mr. Thaver, if he asks, that once a stoat takes up a rabbit’s trail, the rabbit is absolutely sure to die. Of course, experiments made with dummies and dead skins do not bring out this fact. Using no living animals Mr. Thayer does not realize that color perception and the range of vision vary widely among different organisms. We call his attention to the enormous mass of past and current literature in animal psychology, having to do with experimental work in just such matters as the color perceptions of animals. Could he not correspond with some of these workers, Prof. R. M. Yerkes of Cambridge, for example, to their advantage and to his. The question is not always are all organisms protectively colored, but do protective colors protect? This, perhaps, is capable of being tested by carefully controlled experiments conducted with living animals under conditions as nearly as possible natural. We do not wish for interpretations in terms of human vision. We do not care to know what is perceptible to the splendidly trained artist but rather what animals themselves see and how other organisms appear to them. So far, our meagre knowledge permits us to say that we have no direct conclusive proof of the efficacy of special coloration. Davenport, in investigating the number of fowls killed by vermin, i. e., weasels, etc. thought that there was the greatest mortality among the solid colored birds, but Pearl, with Auk 85 Barpour, The Case of Roosevelt vs. Thayer. ia, a larger set of figures, found that there was no relative immunity among the ‘pencilled birds.’ In fact, his figures rather favored the solid colored birds. He shows (Amer. Naturalist, Feb. 1911, p. 117) that “ever since the first description made by the Nurenburg miniature painter, Rosel, in 1746 of a case of presumably protective coloration, we have been prone to argue that because an organism was colored or formed in such a way as to be inconspicuous, it was therefore necessarily protected from attack by its enemies to a greater or less degree. The logic of such reasoning is flawless; rt ought to be protected, but a conclusion may be perfectly logical and still not true. In a study of protective coloration, including mimicry, it is essential that a discovery that an organism is to human eyes in- conspicuous, or not readily distinguishable from some other organ- ism, shall not be considered the final goal. Let such a discovery be supplemented by an experimental or observational determination of whether this inconspicuousness really helps the organism in actual practise in avoiding elimination by natural enemies.” In many cases we have no theories to substitute for those of Thayer, but we do not hesitate, however, to say that the burden of proof rests on him. The evidence is all against him, though it is for the most part of a negative sort. Meagre and negative as it is, how- ever, it is worth a great deal more than pure, unfounded speculation based upon what is seen by a trained man’s eye interpretating animal vision. Thayer’s color experiments are not really scientific experiments in any biological sense. They are mathematical demonstrations in human optics, pure physics and nothing else. As aesthetic, physical demonstrations, they are of great interest, but as to their interpretation in terms of the organic universe they are of little interest and of no value. Thayer’s point of view is summed up in one sentence of his own words (Pop. Sci. Monthly, July 1911, p. 35) “TI have been studying for years to find out the exact scene that each costume best represents, and I now beg my readers to come to Monadnock and let me show them the results.” The evidence in Sumner’s paper (Jour. Exp. Zool. May 20, 1911) regarding the color response of flat fish, when placed on different background both natural and artificial, is a model which Mr. Thayer might well study. Sumner, though he has seen at first oo BarBour, The Case of Roosevelt vs. Thayer. S9 hand perhaps the most remarkable case of protective coloration on record is careful not to generalize or to force on the reader any such protective value to account for the facts. He concludes his discussion by saying that his few statements illustrate the paucity of our direct evidence on the whole question of protective colora- tion, and remarks that most of our conclusions are entirely of an inferential nature. The results of Prof. J. Reighard’s studies, at the Tortugas Islands, of the coloration of reef-fishes are very important in this connection and worthy of careful examination. Will Mr. Thayer inform us whether or not he has seen this work? As to mimetic resemblances our best theories have been entirely inferential in nature. We have jumped at conclusions, obvious enough though they seemed at first sight. In his “ Darwinism of Today”’ Kellog calls attention to a case of overspecialization as an argument against natural selection. He describes the well known Kallima butterfly. After showing how unnecessarily perfect the butterfly’s resemblance is, he says “ When natural selection has got the Kallima along to that highly desirable stage where it is so like a dead leaf in general seeming that every bird sweeping by sees it only as a brown leaf clinging precariously to a half-stripped branch, it was natural selection’s bounden duty in conformation with its obligation to its makers to stop the further modifying of the Kallima, and just to hold it up to its hardly won advantage. But what happens, Kallima continues its way, specifically and absurdly dead leaf-wards, until today it is much too fragile a thing to be otherwise than very gingerly handled by its rather anxious foster parents, the Neo-Darwinian selectionists.”” My own experience has been that Kallima often, perhaps even generally, rests with wings open or fanning. It seems a pity to return to the case of the zebra. We draw the following conclusions from the observations of careful naturalists: I The zebra is one of the most plentiful of all the plains’ dwellers. II That he and the hartebeests form in many regions almost the sole food of the lions. III The lion kills at will and with little effort. This is shown by numberless actual observations. IV The zebra shows little concern in the lion’s presence. He 90 Barsour, The Case of Roosevelt vs. Thayer. aoe feeds down wind to water holes and thick covers, and, in fact, takes not the slightest precaution for his own safety. These observations seem to be absolutely all that we know regarding the relations which the habits of the lions and the zebras bear to one another. It is hard to fit in any clause relating to pretective coloring which would seem to be capable of support by observations, to account for more than, the fact that Mr. Thayer has been able to conceal dummy zebras successfully in New Hamp- shire under various conditions of his own arrangement. We are all mentally prone to inferential methods, this is a common failing of the human mind, and one to which an artist dealing with physical and mechanical phenomena naturally would be very prone. The artist dealing only with the visible and the superficial would naturally turn to the arguments of pure logic rather than to animal experimentation. He lives in an Arcadian land where no conflict of facts or deeply concealed natural laws concern him in the least. The obvious and the all embracing theories are the ones that appeal to him most. We have often pondered on how color patterns may _ have originated. Mr. Thayer has doubtless done the same thing. His theories demand that we should admit the existence of a con- stant inter-specific struggle and a selectional value for incomplete color schemes, but we feel grave doubts as to the efficacy of natural selection alone in bringing about the species of the present time. Mr. Agassiz often said that natural selection probably explained the survival but not the arrival of species. One cannot account for the arrival of a new organ nor the loss of an old one by Darwin- jan selection alone. The question of the origin of new characters in general is a problem of the greatest depth and importance, and one that is here out of place, yet how especially difficult is it to imagine with Thayer’s reasoning the origin of a new color pattern of doubtful value when complete, and of no selectional importance in its elemental state. We find birds of such varying types of colorations, living under the same conditions as far as the operation of broad selectional principles are concerned, that it is fair to assume that all cannot be equally protected. There are in the upper leaf zones of the tropical forest, birds of which the following are but a few of the colors displayed in their plumages. One may find white birds and black ~~ ae ee Barsour, The Case of Roosevelt rs. Thayer. 91 birds, pink birds, green and yellow, and black and red, and black and green, and magenta birds, sky blue birds and brown birds of many shades, and many with a bewildering number of conspicuous shapes. We use these words advisedly. Can these birds all be equally protected under the same or almost the same conditions? We ask Mr. Thayer frankly to tell us that if such and such types of coloration are concealing. as he says they are, are not perhaps such and such other types of coloration equally conspicuous; and then let us see whether in the environment under discussion, we cannot perhaps find these or similar types of coloration displayed by birds apparently as successful as those supposedly protected by colora- tion. In other words, we ask Mr. Thayer to answer our questions, to meet our arguments fairly and squarely, and not simply to fall back on dogmatic assertions, based upon his interpretation of the physical laws of human optics. It may seem futile to keep bandy- ing words back and forth. The subject is one, however, which is well worth the opening up it is just beginning to receive. We have been severely criticised by Mr. Thayer for our previous review of his work. We hope now that he will come forward and meet our arguments, not with other examples of his own discoveries, but with definite answers to the questions which we have put to him, now and hitherto. Why should flamingoes be pink, if they lack enemies? Why should sea birds be protected when many of them apparently have no enemies at all? How can black birds, white birds, green birds, and brown birds all be equally protected in the same forest by the same light rays filtering through the same green foliage? 92 Martuews, Ibis Lacepéde and Egatheus Billberg. (ae ON THE GENERIC NAMES IBIS LACEPEDE, AND EGA- THEUS BILLBERG. BY GREGORY M. MATHEWS, F. R. S. (Edin.). WueEn Lonnberg (Journ. fiir Ornith., 1906, pp. 581-533) intro- duced Billberg’s work to the notice of twentieth century Ornitholo- gists, he showed Egatheus Billberg, 1828 was equivalent and anterior to Plegadis Kaup, 1829 and should therefore replace the latter. Fora time this was accepted, but when Richmond examined the work he recorded (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., Vol. XX XV, p. 607, 1908) that Egatheus on tab. A. was a “ New name for [bis Lacepéde (used for Tantalus falcinellus on p. 158)’’, with a footnote quotation giving Billberg’s reason for its introduction: “ Dissentientibus auctoribus, quenam esset Egyptiorum [bis; hoc nomen avis in historia insignis justius ut specificum conservari credidimus, adeoque Egatheum a greco nyaveos, sacer, preetulimus.” Consequently, Plegadis Kaup was continued for P. falcinellus by American ornithologists (A. QO. U. Check-List, 3rd Ed., p. 92, 1910). When I made up my ‘Reference List’ I was not satisfied as to the rights of the cases and allowed the use of Egatheus Billberg until such time as I should have occasion to monograph the birds in my ‘ Birds of Australia.’ However, under date Oct. 3rd, 1912, my friend Dr. Chas. W. Richmond wrote me as follows: ‘ Egatheus will never do in place of Plegadis Kaup 1829. Billberg used Hgatheus as a classical substi- tute name for [bis Lacepéde. The name occurs on table A, which is (with tables B & C) designated at the bottom as ‘ante pag. 1,’ so the contents of the tables are to be dealt with before the body of the work. Billberg did not intend to separate Egatheus from Ibis, but in the body of the work (p. 158, not 166) he only had the Glossy Ibis to deal with and called it Egatheus, because [bis was not classi- eal.”” This was followed by a letter dated Oct. 5th, 1912: “I think a further note on the subject of Zbis Lacepéde may be of interest to you, inasmuch as what I wrote you about Egatheus did not cover the whole case. I am not able at this moment to clear ene | Maruews, [bis Lacepéde and Egatheus Billberg. 93 it all up, but I think /bis Lacepéde will prove to be a synonym of the Tantalus of Cuvier’s Tabl. Elém., 1798, or in other words will have for its type the Tantalus ibis, and thus will replace Pseudotantalus Ridgway, and remove Jbis from the family of Ibises! This will result as follows :— Tantalus ibis will become Ibis ibis, with Pseudotantalus and Egatheus as syn. Tbis aethiopica will become Threskiornis aeth. The family name of the Ibises will become probably Plegadidae. “Tn Lacepéde’s Tableaux, 1799, you will find no mention of Nu- menius, but the ‘Courlis’ group is called Tantalus, and the ‘ Ibis’ is given the new generic name Jbis._ In Cuvier’s Lecons, 1800, the ‘ibis’ is called Tantalus, and the ‘courlis’ Numenius. To settle - the question it will be necessary, I think, to consult the introductory part of Lacepéde’s 1799 paper (not accessible here) and see if he did not take his vernacular group names from Cuvier’s Tabl. Elém., 1798, also to consult the ‘ Didot’ edition of Buffon (Sherborn knows all about this work) and see if either Lacépéde or Daudin did not deal further with bis there. The Didot edition is not to be had here.” Such an interesting problem deserved immediate attention and herewith are given the results of my investigations. To deal first with Lacepéde’s Tableau, 1799. The introduction does not give any clue to the origination of Lacepéde’s divisions; no references to contemporaries are included. From a comparison of the tables in Cuvier’s Legons, I suggest that Cuvier borrowed from Lacepéde, rather than vice versa. The Cuvierian (1800) groups seem to approximate quite closely to the Lacepéde (1799) groups and not as closely to the Tabl. Elém. (1798) ones. It seems that Cuvier framed his tables after Lacepéde had laid his before the Paris Institute in 1798 (Sherborn, Natural Science, 1899, pp. 406-409), where Cuvier would see them. It does not matter much, however, as there is nothing yet known to decide either way. In the ‘Tableau’ the diagnosis of [bis reads “ Le bec long, fort, tranchant, et émoussé A son extrémité, des places dénuées de plumes sur la téte.” 94 Maruews, Ibis Lacepede and Egatheus Billberg. ae This is too broad a definition for exact work, so that it is satis- factory to have more data given almost simultaneously by Daudin. An edition of Buffon was apparently printed off by Plassan in 1799 and not issued completely; it was then taken over and issued by Didot. The full history of this complex transaction has been un- ravelled by Sherborn (loc. cit.) and Richmond (Auk, 1899, pp. 325- 329: also Auk, 1900, pp. 166-167). According to the latter the XIVth volume of the Quadrupedes was not issued until 1802, and included in that volume were Tableaux des Mammiféres....et Oiseaux. The latter is entitled “Tableau | des | Sous-Classes, Divisions, | Sous-Divisions, Ordres | et Genres | Des Oiseaux, | par le C™ Lacepéde; | Avec Vindication, de toutes les espéces | décrites par Buffon, et leur distribution | dans chacun des genres, | par F. M. Daudin.” On p. 334, we find the genus bis and thereunder are included: Le Couricaca Ibis loculator XIV, 182 L’Ibis blane candidus XV, 188 VL’ Ibis noir niger 193 Le Courlis rouge ruber 212 Le Courlis des bois cayanensis 222 L’acalot mexicanus 225 Le grand courlis de Cayenne albicollis 228 Le matuitui des rivages griseus 227 Le courlis brun a front rouge fuscus 221 Le courlis blane albus XV, 219 Le courlis verd, ou courlis d’ Italie falcinellus 204 Le courlis brun manillensis 206 Le courlis a téte rue calvus 208 Le courlis huppé cristatus 210: The reference is to the volume of Birds where the bird is described under the vernaculars given. From among these then I conclude a type of [bis Lacepéde must be selected. It may be that the better reference would be to [bis -Daudin but it matters little. It will be at once noted that aethiopica Latham is missing and consequently so far Richmond’s conjecture is correct and Ibis Lacepéde (or Daudin) cannot be used any longer in the general acceptance of that name. i? aaa | Maruews, Ibis Lacepéde and Egatheus Billberg. 95 Though the majority of the species above belong to the family Ibididae (auct.), only two are called in the vernacular by Buffon Ibis, L’Ibis blane and L’Ibis noir. Moreover, under the generic heading L’ Ibis, Buffon had written “ Nous avons dit que les Anciens distinguoient deux espéces d’ibis, ’une blanche & l’autre noire.” Further, L’Ibis blanc is the Tantalus zbis of Linné; consequently, by tautonymy, this becomes the type and Richmond’s suggestion is confirmed; therefore [bis Lacepéde, 1799 (or Daudin, 1802) must replace Pseudotantalus Ridgway (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., p. 550, 1883). Hgatheus Billberg was absolutely introduced as a substitute for Ibis Lacepéde and must therefore follow that name and disap- pear as an absolute synonym. I was not certain of this before, but Dr. Richmond has satisfied me that such was the case. It might be noted that in the Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XXVI, p. 4, 1896, Zbvs was used as of Cuvier, 1816; that was an altogether different introduction, the type being I. aethiopica (Latham) by tautonymy. But there was a prior /bvs of [lliger, 1811, which was overlooked if Ibis Lacepéde was ignored as unidentifiable, and Illiger quotes 7bis Lacepéde in his synonymy. Gray, in the Appendix List Genera Birds, p. 13, 1842, introduced Threskiornis for Tantalus aethiopicus Latham, and in the Cat. Gen. Subgen. Birds, p. 115, 1855, noted ‘Ibis Cuv. 1817’ as a synonym of this group. This name must now be resumed. It will there- fore be seen all of Richmond’s suggested changes are necessary: Ibis Lacepéde, Tableau Oiseaux, 1799 (or Daudin Hist. Nat.). Type (by tautonymy), [bis candidus Daudin, 1802 (= Tantalus ibis Linné). Synonyms: Jbis Illiger, 1811 and Egatheus Billberg, 1828, will replace PsEuDoTANTALUS Ridgway, 1883. Threskiornis Gray, Appendix List Genera Birds, p. 13, 1842. Type (by original designation), Tan. aethiopicus Latham. Synonym: Ibis Cuvier, 1816 not [bis Lacepéde, 1799, etce., will replace Ip1s (Cuvier) Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., Vol. XXVI, p. 4, 1896. PLEGADIS Kaup, 1829, will remain as used in the Check-List North Amer. Birds, 3rd Ed., 1910, p. 92, but the Family name of the Ibises, 2bid., p. 91, will become PLEGADIDAE. 96 SaGce, Thirtieth Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. a THIRTIETH STATED MEETING OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION. Tue Thirtieth Stated Meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union convened in Cambridge, Mass., Monday evening, November 11th, 1912. The business meeting was held in Mr. William Brewster’s museum, and the public sessions, commencing Tuesday, November 12th, and lasting three days, were held in the Geological and Zodlogical Lecture-rooms of the University Museum. Business Session. The meeting was called to order by the President, Mr. Frank M. Chapman. Sixteen Fellows were present. The Secretary’s report gave the membership of the Union at the opening of the present Stated Meeting as 929, constituted as fol- lows: Fellows, 46; Retired Fellows, 2; Honorary Fellows, 16; Corresponding Fellows, 59; Members, 77; Associates, 729. During the year the Union lost sixty-six members, five by death, twenty-three by resignation, and thirty-eight for non-payment of dues. The deceased members include two Corresponding Fellows, one Member, and two Associates, as follows: Prof. Alfred Dugés,t a Corresponding Fellow, who died in Mexico, January 7th, 1910, in the 84th year of his age; Dr. Wilhelm August Blasius,? a Corresponding Fellow, who died in Brunswick, Germany, May 31st, 1912, aged 67 years; Bradford Torrey,’ a Member, who died in Santa Barbara, Cal., October 7th, 1912, aged 69 years; and the following Associates: Mrs. Ellen Sheldon Farwell, who died at Lake Forest, IIl., August 6th, 1912, in her 53d year; and Capt. H. W. Small, of Staunton, Va. The report of the Treasurer showed the finances of the Union to be in a satisfactory condition. All of the officers were re-elected, as follows: Frank M. Chapman, President; A. K. Fisher and Henry W. Henshaw, Vice-Presidents; John H. Sage, Secretary; Jonathan Dwight, Jr., Treasurer; Ruth- ven Deane, William Dutcher, F. A. Lucas, Chas. W. Richmond, 1 Ror an obituary notice, see Auk, xxix, p. 434. 2For an obituary notice, see Auk. xxix, p. 571. For an obituary notice see ‘ Notes and News’ below. Pgs | Sacn, Thirtieth Stated Meeting of the A. O. U, 97 Thomas S. Roberts, Witmer Stone, and Wilfred H. Osgood, mem- bers of the Council. Edward Howe Forbush, Westboro, Mass., Louis Agassiz Fuertes, Ithaca, N. Y., and C. William Beebe, of New York City, were elected Fellows; M. A. Carriker, Jr., of Santa Marta, Colombia, was elected a Corresponding Fellow; Frederic H. Kennard, Newton Centre, Mass.; Dr. John C. Phillips, Wenham, Mass.; Norman A. Wood, Ann Arbor, Mich.; Alexander Wetmore, Lawrence, Kansas, and Miss Althea R. Sherman, National, Iowa, were elected to the class of Members, and the following one hundred and eighty-six persons were elected Associates: Edward Raymond Adams, Washington, D. C. Mrs. Emily C.Hall Armstrong, Hyde Park, Mass. Mrs. Caroline Wheeler Babson, Pigeon Cove, Mass. Chas. H. M. Barrett, Medford, Mass. Miss Mary F. Bartlett, Boston, Mass. Ernest Harold Baynes, Meriden, N. H. Prof. W. B. Bell, Agricultural College, North Dakota. Rolan H. Blood, Pepperell, Mass. Mrs. Elizabeth Quincy Bolles, Cambridge, Mass. Miss Louise Bond, Fort Wayne, Ind. F. G. Bonfils, Denver, Col. Spencer Borden, Fall River, Mass. Henry S. Borneman, Frankford, Pa. Mrs. Harriet T. Boyd, Dedham, Mass. Charles T. Boynton, Highland Park, IIl. Prof. M. A. Brannon, University, No. Dak. William Foreacre Brantley, Pine Knoll, Ga. Mrs. William Brewster, Cambridge, Mass. Gorham Brooks, Boston, Mass. H. A. Brown, Lowell, Mass. Mrs. Henry Temple Brown, Winchester, Mass. Charles O. Burbank, Newton Centre, Mass. Mrs. J. W. Burckes, Waltham, Mass. John Bird Burnham, New York City. Jefferson Butler, Detriot, Mich. Joseph Fletcher Calvert, London, Ontario. Rey. Robert Francis Cheney, Southboro, Mass. Grace E. Chipman, Sandwich, Mass. Mrs. Annie M. L. Clark, Lancaster, Mass. Laura F. Craft, Glen Cove, N. Y. Mrs. Nettie S. Cressy, West Hartford, Conn. [Jan 98 Sacer, Thirtieth Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. Stanley Coulter, Lafayette, Ind. Wallace Craig, Orono, Me. Mrs. David Crocker, Barnstable, Mass. Mrs. Emmons Crocker, Fitchburg, Mass. Mrs. H. P. Cross, Providence, R. I. Miss Ada Dana, Newton, Mass. Mrs. Helen P. Dane, Chestnut Hill, Mass. Mrs. Frances Stillman Davidson, Springfield, Ill. Prof. L. Dorn, Fort Wayne, Ind. Sarah H. Dudley, Berlin, Mass. Charles H. Early, Hyde Park, Mass. Scott Harrison Eaton, Lawrenceville, Ill. Miss Phoebe Palmer Edwards, Brookline, Mass. Vinal N. Edwards, Woods Hole, Mass. Arthur 8. Eldredge, South Lincoln, Mass. Mrs. Mary L. Eliot, Needham, Mass. Mrs. Mary Van Everen Ferguson, Providence, R. I. Miss Mary B. Ferry, Norwalk, Conn. L. H. Fingley, Providence, R. I. Laurence B. Fletcher, Boston, Mass. Alexander Forbes, Milton, Mass. Dr. Augustus M. Ford, Providence, R. I. Miss Fanny Ford, Mesilla Park, Agricultural College, New Mexico. Mrs. John R. Freeman, Providence, R. I. N. W. Frasure, Lancaster, Ohio. Ira N. Gabrielson, Marshalltown, Iowa. Severin Gertken, Collegeville, Minn. John T. Gibson, Southborough, Mass. Mrs. John R. Gladding, Providence, R. I. Alfred D. Gleason, Gleasondale, Mass. W. Vernon Godshall, Rio Piedras, Porto Rico. Lewis 8. Golsan, Antangaville, Ala. Dr. Alfred M. Gould, Malden, Mass. Miss Isa E. Gray, Boston, Mass. Caroline 8S. Greene, Cambridge, Mass. Herbert Spencer Grimes, Branchville, Conn. Henry Rice Guild, Boston, Mass. Mrs. Harriette L. Hemenway, Readville, Mass. Alexander Henderson, Chestnut Hill, Mass. Henry Charles Higgins, Uxbridge, Mass. William H. Hill, Brookline, Mass. Miss Julia R. Hotchkiss, New York City. N. F. Lenssen, Englewood, N. J. George Lyman Hinckley, Boston, Mass. Henry Hersey Hinckley, Boston, Mass. Florence A. Howe, Indianapolis, Ind. ea | Sace, Thirtieth Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. 99 J. C. Hvoslef, Lanesboro’, Minn. H. David Ives, Southampton, N. Y. Ida G. Jenkins, Roxbury, Mass. Charles W. Jenks, Bedford, Mass. Jens Knudsen Jensen, Westwood, Mass. Chas. Eugene Johnson, Minneapolis, Minn. Prof. Morris Johnson, Valley City, No. Dak, Lombard C. Jones, M. D., Falmouth, Mass. F. W. Jones, Somerville, Mass. Frank Louis Kemerling, Denver, Colo. William Filmore Kendrick, Denver, Colo. Allan Keniston, Edgartown, Mass. Bernard W. King, New York City. Charles R. Lamb, Cambridge, Mass. J. Howard Leman, Boston, Mass. Harrison F. Lewis, Yarmouth, Nova Scotia. Mrs. Herman E. Lewis, Haverhill, Mass. Prof. O. G. Libby, Fargo, North Dakota. Stokley Ligon, Pecos, Reeves Co., Texas. Dr. D. Moore Lindsay, Salt Lake City, Utah. John William Linzee, Boston, Mass. R. B. McLain, Wheeling, W. Va. Mrs. Mary B. Luce, Boston, Mass. Elias P. Mann, Williamstown, Mass. Harold Lester Madison, Providence, R. I. George Castor Martin, Frankford, Pa. Ella M. Ormsby Marshall, New Salem, Mass. Edwin Stuart Mattern, Allentown, Pa. Walter I. Mattern, Allentown, Pa. Miss Adelina May, Lynn, Mass. Charles Johnson Maynard, West Newton, Mass. Charles Johnson Means, Boston, Mass. W. C. Mells, Columbus, Ohio. John T. Mellus, Wellesley, Mass. Albert Rowe Merrill, Hamilton, Mass. Robert W. Metcalf, Springfield, Mass. Leo E. Miller, New York City. Harry Gilman Morse, Huron, Ohio. Frank M. Phelps, Elyria, Ohio. Miss Lillian P. Richards, Boston, Mass. Alexander L. Moir, Lowell, Mass. Miss Mary Mossman, Boston, Mass. Mrs. H. 8. Newell, Duluth, Minn. Henry H. Simpson, Fanlew, Florida. Donald J. Nicholson, Orlando, Florida. Arthur A. Osborne, Peabody, Mass. 100 SaGcE, Thirtieth Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. es Jan. Samuel Copeland Palmer, Swarthmore, Pa. John EK. Parsons, Lenox, Mass. Mrs. Cora E. Pease, Malden, Mass. Thomas E. Penard, Arlington, Mass. Miss Annie S. Penfield, Boston, Mass. Dr. George Henry Perkins, Burlington, Vt. Rev. Edward C. Porter, Boston, Mass. Julian K. Potter, Camden, N. J. Charles Lincoln Phillips, Taunton, Mass. Alfred E. Preble, North Abington, Mass. Roy Lee Primm, Madison, Wise. Mrs. Henry H. Proctor, Boston, Mass. Thomas Emerson Proctor, Topsfield, Mass. Prof. Frederic Ward Putnam, Cambridge, Mass. ‘Charles R. Ramsden, Guantanamo, Cuba. ‘Charles Irving Rawson, Oxford, Mass. Paul M. Rea, Charleston, 8. C. ‘Samuel E. Beecher, Chester, Il. Mrs. Ellen T. C. Rockwood, Worcester, Mass. Theodore Eric William Reynolds, Kent, Washington. Wyman Richardson, Boston, Mass. A. Lillian Rideout, Swampscott, Mass. A. A. Ringwalt, Fort Wayne, Ind. - Clark L. Ring, Saginaw, Mich. Mrs. James W. Ripley, Malden, Mass. Charles Ripley, Dorchester, Mass. James O. Roberts, Utica, N. Y. Lucretius H. Ross, M. D., Bennington, Vt. Frederic Schenck, Cambridge, Mass. Prof. C. C. Schmidt, University, No. Dak. Jotham B. Sewell, Brookline, Mass. Charles Frederick Shaw, North Abington, Mass. H. A. Shaw, Fargo, No. Dak. Mary E. Shaw, Andover, Mass. Henry W. Shoemaker, Riverside, Conn. Henry H. Simpson, Fanlew, Florida. J. Holbrook Shaw, M. D., Plymouth, Mass. Mrs. Daniel D. Slade, Chestnut Hill, Mass. Gilbert M. Stark, Saginaw, West Side, Mich. Frank Everden Stevens, Somerville, Mass. Herbert Lee Stoddard, Milwaukee, Wisc. Allan James Stover, Corvallis, Oregon. Francis A. Strater, Brookline, Mass. John N. Summers, Melrose Highlands, Mass. M. W. Tanner, Saginaw, West Side, Mich. Henry Thurston, Floral Park, N. Y. ee | SaGce, Thirtieth Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. 101 Franklin Tomlinson, Shelton, Conn. Mrs. Helen M. Tower, Cambridge, Mass. Harry Trippet, Montclair, N. J. John G. Tyler, Fresno, Calif. Windsor M. Tyler, M. D., Lexington, Mass. Prof. J. William Votey, Burlington, Vt. _ Henderson Wallace, Washington, Iowa. Annie L. Warner, Salem, Mass. Mrs. Elizabeth W. Waite, Cambridge, Mass. Mrs. Mary Clark Waite, Medford, Mass. Mrs. W. G. Webber, Bedford, Mass. Harvey Wheeler, Concord, Mass. Myron L. Whitcomb, Haverhill, Mass. Dr. David Day Whitney, Middletown, Conn. H. V. Williams, Agricultural College, No. Dak. George Willett, Los Angeles, Calif. Arthur Melvin Winslow, Worcester, Mass. Drs. Allen, Dwight, Merriam and Richmond, and Messrs. Brewster, Ridgway and Stone were re-appointed ‘Committee on Classification and Nomenclature of North American Birds.’ Dr. A. K. Fisher, E. W. Nelson and Dr. Chas. W. Richmond were re-appointed ‘Committee on Bird Protection.’ It was voted to publish an additional Index to ‘The Auk’ cover- ing the years 1901 to 1910, inclusive. The following amendments to the By-Laws, proposed at the last Stated Meeting of the Union, were adopted. Article IV, Section 5, now reads: “Elections to the classes of Fellows and Members shall be held in the following manner: The number to be elected shall be first decided by a majority vote of the Fellows present at the Stated Meeting at which the election is to be held, but not more than five Fellows nor more than five Members shall be elected in any one year. At each ballot each Fellow present may vote for nominees not exceeding the full number of vacancies to be filled, and the person receiving the highest number of votes shall be declared elected, provided that he receive the votes of at least three-fourths of the Fellows present, and so on until the vacancies are filled. Any candidate who, in each of ten successive ballots, fails to receive the votes of half of the Fellows present, shall cease to be a candidate during the remainder of the Stated Meeting. The election of either Fellows or Members may be suspended at any time by a majority vote of the Fellows present. During election a discussion of the merits of nominees will be in order.”’ 102 Saae, Thirtieth Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. aulk Article V, Section 1, now reads: “The annual dues shall be for Fellows five dollars, for Members four, and for Associates three dollars. No dues shall be required of Retired, Honorary or Corresponding Fellows.” Section 6 of Article IV was eliminated. Pusuic Sessions. First Day. The meeting was called to order by the President, Mr. Chapman. The papers read during the morning session were as follows: ‘Some Labrador Notes’ by Dr. Charles W. Townsend. ‘The Red-winged Blackbird: A Study in the Ecology of a Cat- tail Marsh,’ by Arthur A. Allen. Illustrated by lantern slides. Remarks followed by Mr. Nichols, Prof. Barrows, Mrs. Chapman, and the author. ‘On the Present Status of the Bobolink, or Rice-bird, in the South,’ by Edward Howe Forbush. Remarks followed by Dr. Bishop, Mr. Francis, Prof. Pearson, and the Chair. ‘Queer Nesting Sites of the House Wren,’ by Wilbur F. Smith. Illustrated by lantern slides. “A new Subspecies of Crossbill from Newfoundland,’ by A. C. Bent. Illustrated with specimens. ‘Notes from Northern Labrador,’ by A. C. Bent. Remarks fol- lowed by Messrs. Murdoch, Arnold, Pearson, and the author. “The Nest Life of the Sparrow Hawk,’ by Miss Althea R. Sher- man. Remarks followed by Mr. Bowdish. The first paper of the afternoon was: ‘Informal Notes on the Work of the Field Mrieannn in South America,’ by W. H. Osgood. The remaining papers, both illustrated by lantern slides, were: ‘Further Observations on Colombian Bird Life,’ by Frank M. Chapman. ‘Propagation and Restoration of American Wildfowl,’ by Her bert K. Job. Immediately after adjournment an informal reception was ten- dered the members of the Union and their friends, by Mr. and Mrs. Charles F. Batchelder at their home on Kirkland Street. In the evening the men of the Union were invited by Mr. Brewster to a reception at his Museum. Vol. XXX] Sacn, Thirtieth Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. 103 Second Day. The meeting was called to order by President Chapman. The papers of the morning session were: ‘The A. O. U. Check-List,’ by Dr. Louis B. Bishop. Remarks followed by the Chair. ‘Notes on the Panama Thrush-Warbler,’ by Prof. Hubert Lyman Clark. ‘Report of Progress on the ‘Life Histories of North American Birds,’ by A. C. Bent. Remarks followed by Mr. Cleaves, and the author. ‘Some Notes from Sheepsbead Bay and Manhattan Beach, New York City’, by George E. Hix. Remarks followed by Messrs. Smith, Cleaves, Bowdish, Fuertes, and the author. ‘Concealing Action of the Bittern,’ by Prof. Walter B. Barrows. Remarks followed by Messrs. Allen, Brewster, Arnold, Francis, Cleaves, Fuertes, Bowdish, Osgood, Peters, and Dr. Wright, Profs. Tuttle and Jones, and the author. The following papers, all illustrated by lantern slides, were presented at the afternoon session: ‘What the American Bird Banding Association has accomplished the Past Year,’ by Howard H. Cleaves. Remarks followed by Messrs. Grant, Bowdish, Nichols, Bent, Baynes, and the author. ‘A Biological Reconnaissance of the Okefinokee Swamp: The Birds,’ by Dr. Albert H. Wright and Francis Harper. Presented by Dr. Wright. ‘Notes on the Migration and Habits of some Long Island Shore Birds,’ by Francis Harper, and John Treadwell Nichols. Presented by Mr. Nichols. In the evening the members of the Union, and their friends, met at dinner at Mifflin Hall, Brattle Square. After the dinner an informal reception was held. Third Day. The meeting was called to order by President Chapman. The papers of the session were: “The Flight of Birds,’ by Alexander Forbes. Remarks followed by Messrs. Bigelow, Brewster, Nichols, Fuertes, Grant, Batchelder, Pennock, and Webster, Prof. Barrows, Drs. Townsend and Elliot, and the author. ‘A Glimpse at the Home Life of Larus marinus,’ by Howard H. Cleaves. Illustrated by lantern slides. 104 Sacu, Thirtieth Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. ee “The Present Status of the Heath Hen,’ by Dr. George W. Field. Illustrated by lantern slides, and a living specimen. Remarks followed by Messrs. Bigelow, Forbush, the Chair, and the author. The following papers, in the absence of their authors, were read by title: ‘Notes on the present Breeding Range of White Egrets in the United States,’ by Prof. T. Gilbert Pearson. “Passenger Pigeon: Report of the Year’s Work,’ by Prof. C. F. Hodge. ‘Problem of Domesticating the Ruby-throated Hummingbird,’ by Miss Katharine E. Dolbear. “The Value of Bird Study in a Limited Area,’ by Mrs. Alice Hall Walter. “Two Flycatchers of the Genus Empidonax new to the Fauna of South Carolina,’ by Arthur T. Wayne. ‘Eighteen Species of Birds New to the Pribilof Islands, includ- ing Four New to North America,’ by Dr. Barton W. Evermann. “A Study of the House Finch,’ by Dr. W. H. Bergtold. “The Status of the Extinct Meleagride,’ by Dr. R. W. Shufeldt. Resolutions were adopted thanking the Museum authorities of Harvard University for the use of the Lecture-rooms; to the Nuttall Ornithological Club for the very cordial welcome and most generous hospitality extended to the visiting members and friends of the Union; to Mr. and Mrs. Charles F. Batchelder, and Mr. and Mrs. William Brewster, for the kind attentions shown the members and friends of the Union, and to Col. and Mrs. John E. Thayer for the polite invitation to the members of the Union to visit their home and Museum at Lancaster, Mass. Thursday afternoon, November 14th, Mr. William Brewster gave the ladies of the Union an opportunity to see his collection of birds at his Museum on Riedesel Avenue. On Friday, November 15th, after adjournment of the Union, some seventy members and friends of the Union visited Lancaster, Mass. The party was most cordially received by Col. and Mrs. John E. Thayer, and several pleasant hours were spent in an in- spection of their fine museum and valuable ornithological library. The registered attendance of members at the Stated Meeting just closed was larger than ever before, and the number of new a | General Notes. 105 members elected exceeded anything in the history of the Union, due in a great measure to the active interest of one Fellow. The social features at Cambridge will long be remembered. The next meeting of the Union will be held in New York City, the date to be determined later. JoHN H. SaGeE, Secretary. GENERAL NOTES. Sabine’s Gull in Massachusetts.— On September 2, 1912, two Sabine’s Gulls (Xema sabini) were taken at Chatham, Massachusetts, and sent to me in the flesh. Both were males in adult winter plumage and the skins are now in my collection. This is, I believe, the fourth record of the occur- rence of this species in the state.— F. Stymour Hersey, J'awnton, Mass. Another Bridled Tern for South Carolina.— During the early part of September, 1912, a specimen of Bridled Tern (Sterna anetheta) flew into the ventilator of the Ocean Steamship, City of Memphis, while en roule to Savannah. The Tern was caught and brought to Savannah and presented to Mr. Troup D. Perry, and is now in his collection; it was an adult bird in fine plumage.— G. R. Rosstenou, Jr., Savannah, Ga. Caspian Tern in Chester Co., Pennsylvania.— Two Caspian Terns, (Sterna caspia) were shot at Lenape Park, on the Brandywine, near West Chester, on September 28, 1912, and were taken to the Philadelphia Acad- emy of Natural Sciences for identification. One had the black summer crown, and the other the gray one of winter, or immature plumage. The two birds were together and no others were with them. They were a female and young male and were doubtless blown inland by the three days easterly storm which prevailed at the time. This I believe is the first record of this bird for Chester County. I have heard of no one having seen them previous to the time they were collected.— RoBprrt P. SHARPLES, West Chester, Pa. Fulmar in Massachusetts.— On September 23, 1912, Mr. Daniel E. Harrington picked up on the beach at Monomoy Point, Chatham, a fine adult specimen of Fulmar (Fulmarus glacialis glacialis) and brought it to me for identification. It was perfectly fresh and in perfect condition, it has been mounted and is now in Mr. Harrington’s possession— C. EMERSON Brown, Boston, Mass. 106 General Notes. ar White Pelican at Savannah, Georgia.— I am glad to report the cap- ture of a White Pelican (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos), that was shot at the wharves in the Savannah River, the date of capture was October 9, 1912, the specimen is now in the hands of a taxidermist and is the property of Mr. Cord Asendorf, Jr— G. R. Rossienot, Jr., Savannah, Ga. The Black Duck Controversy Again.— During the last two years, 1911 and 1912, I have been much interested in a pair of wild Black Ducks, apparently adult birds, that nested near a shallow pond back in the woods at my place, Newton Centre, Mass. In 1911 they raised a brood of ten young flappers, and while in 1912 they again nested there, I am unable to say what became of the young, as I was forced to let the water out of the pond before the time of their hatching. The old birds from their habits were very apparently the same pair that returned each spring, and they were of the so-called green-legged kind. While at Monomoy Island, Mass., during the last two weeks of October, 1912, with a couple of friends, we shot a number of Black Duck of the red- legged kind (there were no green legs), among which were several that were apparently young birds; and on October 25 there fell to one of our guns a female, which from its size, plumage, and general characteristics, was so evidently young that there could be no possible doubt about it. I person- ally skinned and sexed this specimen, which showed its immaturity in all those ways familiar to those who handle birds. it must have been one of a very late brood, for its upper mandible was a steel gray, and had not yet begun to show those shades of light olive green of the adult bird, and the ‘nail’ at the end of the upper mandible was hardly darker than the rest of the bill, and nothing like the dark and glossy black of the adult bird. The lower mandible was pinkish and still quite soft and pliable, as in the case of very young ducks, and the bird had red legs. Let us hope that this is the final nail in the coffin of the Black Duck controversy, and that it may hold so securely that even Dr. Dwight may not again resurrect the corpse in some post-mortem or pre-cherubic plum- age.— F. H. Kennarp, Boston, Mass. The Harlequin Duck in Wyoming.— On September 15, 1912, while stopping at Moran post office near the north end of Jackson Hole, Wyoming, I noticed two flat skins of the Harlequin Duck ( Histrionicus histrionicus) hung in the dining room of Teton Lodge. The proprietor of the Lodge, Mr. B. D. Sheffield, informed me that these birds had been shot in the vicinity, on Jackson Lake, in May about four years ago, probably in 1908. Both specimens were males in full plumage. This species is not included in Knight’s ‘ Birds of Wyoming,’ but Prof. W. W. Cooke has kindly called my attention to a record in Coues’ ‘ Birds of the Northwest,’ p. 579, of a pair of these ducks collected by Prof. F. V. Hayden, May 31, 1860, on ‘Mount. Stream.’ The female contained an egg nearly ready to be laid. Examination of the records of other specimens in —— areal General Notes. 107 the same collection shows that this ‘ Mountain Stream’ was in the Wind River Mountains near the head waters of the Gros Ventre River east of Jackson Hole. Both of the Hayden specimens are now in the U.S. Na- tional Museum. The Harlequin Duck has long been known to breed sparingly in the Rocky Mountains in Montana and Colorado. In 1874 Coues! found young in August, unable to fly, on the streams which flow into Chief Mountain Lake, Montana, and two adult females collected by the expedition at this locality on August 22 are in the National Museum. In 1881 Dr. Merrill? found several pairs breeding near Fort Custer almost exactly on the Mon- tana-Wyoming boundary, although he failed to discover their nests. The notes of the Biological Survey contain records of a flock of eight or ten seen on St. Mary Lake by Vernon Bailey and A. H. Howell in May, 1895, and of a female seen by the same observers June 19, 1895, at Java, on the line of the Great Northern Railway between Belton and Summit in Flathead County. In Colorado Carter * collected eggs June 3, 1877, in Middle Park and also found the bird breeding in the same general region in Summit County, on Blue River just below Breckenridge, at an altitude of 9,200 feet. In 1881 Drew ® recorded it as common in San Juan County, where it was said to breed. Morrison ® reported in 1888 that he had often seen it through the winter at Fort Lewis on the Ute reservation and believed that it bred both in San Juan and La Plata counties. The bird is evidently a rare breeder in the Rocky Mountains south to latitude 37, but the only records seem to be those in 1860, 1874, 1877, 1881, about 1888, 1895 and 1908. It is interesting to note that the records show that it breeds in Wyoming as well as in Montana and Colorado. The first specimens collected half a century ago and so long overlooked were in reality from Wyoming and the two records from that State are both from the Jackson Hole region, one at the north end and the other in the moun- tains east of the valley — T.S8. Parmer, Washington, D. C. The King Eider (Somateria spectabilis) in Massachusetts — Four _years ago I had, for the first time, the pleasure of seeing this boreal species alive, and of closely examining in the flesh a male in nearly full plumage. It seemed to me then, as at present, the most beautiful of the Fuliguline of North America. I became interested in its past and present status in Massachusetts, and made some investigations, the results of which are appended. 1 ‘Birds of the Northwest,’ p. 579, 1874. 2 Orn. and Ool., VI, p. 44, 1881. 3 Allen, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, IV, p. 50, 1879. ‘ Cooke, ‘Birds of Colorado,’ Bull. 56, Agri. Exp. Sta. Colo., p. 195, 1900. 5 Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, VI, p. 142, 1881. ‘Orn. and Ool., XIII, p. 165, 1888. 108 General Notes. tae: The earliest writers refer to the species as rare or very rare in Massachu-- setts. Alexander Wilson, according to Bonaparte was not even aware that it was a member of the North American fauna. Audubon speaks of its rare occurrence in the vicinity of the ‘ Bay of Boston,’ and further states that “‘ I have, however been assured by old and trustworthy gunners that. the King Duck, about thirty years ago, was by no means of rare occurrence there during winter.’’ Curiously enough I also have received the same sort of information within a year from the same type of observer. It is marvelous how many statements get into literature from fishermen, etc., a type that in my experience has proved to be exceedingly unreliable as a rule. I am aware of one market gunner dwelling on the Atlantic seaboard who is exceedingly dishonest in most of his dealings with men, yet many of his statements have worked their way verbatim into American ornithology. The query naturally suggests itself: Will a man of naturally dishonest pro- pensities in the pursuit of a livelihood, furnish ornithological data fit to be handed down to posterity? The King Eider, as we know it, is apparently during the winter an ‘ off- shore ’ bird, and its previous reported occurrence near the coast would indi- cate a change in habits. Mr. A. H. Norton (Auk, Vol. XVII, No. 1, Jan., 1900, p. 18) states that Somateria spectabilis feeds largely on Holothurians. (Pentacta frondosa), hence their feeding in deeper water than dresseri which as far as I know, prefers in our waters, the common mussel (Mytilus edulis Linné) and perhaps Modiolus modiolus (Linné). On the other hand two King Eiders shot at Long Island on three to four fathoms of water were- said by Mr. William Dutcher to be gorged with Mytilus edulis (Auk, Vol. V, No. 2, April, 1888, p. 174). If at former times they were near the coast it is reasonable to believe that they might have fed on Mytilus edulis, which is now and undoubtedly has been, abundant along our shore. That they were driven off shore before Audubon’s time by the persecution of man seems unreasonable, for I am assured by a friend who has killed many Eiders in the far north that they exhibit no more fear than the other - Eiders which are notably fearless. Mr. A. C. Bent of Taunton tells me that the gunners at Westport, Mass., state that these birds are common in that vicinity during winter, frequenting the outer rocky islands and reefs. ‘Common’ seems a strong statement, but the fact that eight were killed in one day would lead one to believe that they may be ‘ not rare.’ They apparently know the King from the American Eider as they refer to the former as ‘Cousins’ and the latter as ‘Wamps.’ The species is un- doubtedly more common than present literature and accurate observations would indicate, as systematic offshore work is a difficult problem for most ornithologists. Until further investigations are made however, it must be considered a very rare visitant in Massachusetts. The majority of the specimens taken have been shot during the fall, but this, I think, is not due to the migration routes or periods, but to the fact that they were procured largely by gunners engaged in ‘ cooting,’ a sport that in most localities where Scoters did not ‘bed,’ ceased by the first... as x General Notes. 109 of December. The spring flight of Scoters would bring the sportsmen out too late for King Eiders as the latter go north very early, even leaving southern Greenland late in April (W. W. Cooke, Bull. 26. Biol. Survey, p. 59.) The fact that most of the specimens noted in Massachusetts have been juvenal males and females is no doubt due to the fact that the adult males do not migrate so far south as the females and young, a phenomenon noted in other species of birds. The following records are all that have come to my notice, and I am greatly indebted to those who have kindly furnished me with such records as have not been previously published. Adult male in the collection of the Boston Society of Natural History taken by Dr. Samuel Cabot, Jr., and labelled ‘ Massachusetts.’ This bird was probably taken some sixty years ago at least. Female ditto. Juvenal male taken Nov. 6, 1871, at Cohasset. Now in collection of Mr. William Brewster. Juvenal male taken during Nov., 1871. Exact locality not known. Collection of Mr. William Brewster. Female taken Dec. 1, 1875. No exact locality. Collection of Mr. William Brewster. Male shot at Chelsea on Jan. 6, 1875. Collection of Mr. William Brewster. Female taken during Jan., 1875 at Chelsea. Collection of Mr. William Brewster. Female shot by Mr. W. 8. Bryant at Cohasset, Nov. 1, 1885. This specimen is now in the collection of the Museum of Comparative Zodlogy at Cambridge, Mass. Adult male taken during the autumn of 1888 at Manomet, South Ply- mouth. It was alone in the cove just south of Manomet Point. (H. K. Job, Auk, Vol. XIII, No. 3, July, 1896, p. 203.) Unsexed specimen taken at Marblehead, Nov. 24, 1889. Now in the collection of the Peabody Academy of Science at Salem. (Birds of Essex County, C. W. Townsend, p. 142.) Juvenal male shot at Salisbury by Mr. Benj. F. Damsell on Noy. 24, 1889. (MSS. of Dr. G. M. Allen.) The species was observed at Wood’s Hole, April 10, 1893, by Capt. V. N. Edwards. (Prof. W. W. Cooke in litt.) Juvenal male taken at Muskeget Island, April 5, 1890. (Ornith. & Ool, Vol. 15, No. 7, July, 1890, p. 110.) Juvenal male taken at Nantucket, Jan. 15, 1891. Collection of Mr. William Brewster. The species observed at Wood’s Hole on April 10 and Noy. 16, 1893, by Capt. V. N. Edwards. (Prof. W. W. Cooke in litt.) Two females shot on Lower Mystic Pond, Arlington on Dec. 4, 1893, by Mr. Geo. B. Frazar. (Birds of the Cambridge Region, William Brewster, p. 122.) 110 General Notes. ns The species noted by Capt. V. N. Edwards at Wood’s Hole on April 10 and Nov. 11, 1894. (Prof. W. W. Cooke in litt.) Adult male taken Nov. 15, 1895, at Manomet Point. (H.K. Job, Auk, Vol. 13, No. 3, July, 1896, p. 203.) Juvenal male taken at Nippenicket Pond, Bridgewater on Oct. 21, 1899, by Mr. Joseph E. Bassett. According to Mr. Bassett’s journal there was a northeast storm on the 20th shifting to.a cold N. W. gale on the 21st. The specimen is now in the collection of Mr. Arthur C. Dyke of Bridgewater from whom I learned these details though the capture of the bird has been recorded. (A. C. Bent, Auk, Vol. XIX, No. 2, April, 1902, p. 196.) Female taken at Monomoy, April 8, 1905, by Mr. C. Otto Zerrahn of Milton, and now in his collection. It was in a flock of about ten American Eiders. Male in nearly full plumage taken by a gunner at Manomet Point, Novy. 26, 1908, and now in my collection. It was in company with two females or juvenal males of apparently the same species for they passed near enough to me to note that they seemed more stockily built and had shorter heads than the American Hider with which I am familiar. Four juvenal males and 4 females shot on Feb. 3, 1909, near the Hen and Chicken reef off Westport. Four of these are in the collection of Mr. A. C. Bent of Taunton, and the rest in the collection of the Bristol County Acad- emy of Sciences at Taunton. (Mr. A. C. Bent in litt.) Twa specimens taken at Martha’s Vineyard on Nov. 17, 1911. There were four birds in the flock. These specimens were sent to Mr. Owen Durfee of Fall River.— W. SpracuE Brooks, Milton, Mass. Brazilian Tree-duck (Dendrocygna viduata) in New Jersey.— Early last October I learned of the receipt, by Thomas Rowland, taxidermist, of New York, of an unrecognized Duck, reported to have been killed in New Jersey and sent to the taxidermist for preservation. The specimen is a Brazilian Tree-duck killed on the Hackensack Meadows in New Jersey, by Hon. John W. Griggs, of Paterson, N. J. Governor Griggs was returning down the Hackensack River from a shoot- ing excursion, when he saw this Duck resting on a drift log at a place where the tide overflowed the meadow, about a mile and a half above the village of Hackensack. As the bird was at once seen to be unusual, Governor Griggs shot it. It was not at all shy. The specimen showed no signs of ever having been in captivity, but in any event its occurrence at liberty in New Jersey seems worth recording.— GEORGE BirD GRINNELL, New York City. An Addition to the A. O. U. Check-List.— Through the kindness of Mr. Gardner Perry of Dedham, Mass., I am able to record the following interesting capture. In March, 1912, while shooting at Cape Canaveral, Florida, Mr. Perry secured a Bahama Duck (Pecilonetta bahamensis (Linn.)). Unfortunately vor a General Notes. Veh the specimen was not sexed though its coloring and size would favor its being a female. The bird was in company with a small flock of Green-winged Teal, and the wind at the time was southeast. It seems a strange fact that this bird has not been recorded from Florida before, a region that has so long received the attentions of sportsmen and naturalists. Mr. Perry has generously presented this specimen to the Museum of Comparative Zoélogy at Cambridge.— W. Spracur Brooks, Milton, Mass. Little Blue Heron (Florida cerulea) in Vermont.— While on Mon- tebello Hill, Newbury, Vt., on August 16, 1912, between 5 and 6.30 P. M., I was looking down upon a swampy meadow which lies below and in which the Bittern makes its home, and saw something unusual moving about. Using my field glasses I saw that it was a white heron wading slowly in the water. It was not so large at the Great Blue Heron with which I was familiar and was pure white except the tips of the wings which were a soft gray —evidently the Little Blue Heron in immature plumage. I could not see the legs as the water came nearly up to the body. It moved very slowly and deliberately feeding among the plants which grew in the water. I watched it for half an hour or more until it passed out of sight around a curve. It made no call of any kind.— Anna E. Coss, Providence, R. I. Swimming of Young Herons.— In his excellent article, ‘ Bird Gene- alogy,’ (Auk, X XIX, 1912, pp. 285-295), Dr. Charles W. Townsend speaks of the ease and grace in swimming shown by a young Green Heron when placed in the water. It may be of interest to note that young herons of several species sometimes take to the water voluntarily. On a trip to the breeding island of Snowy Herons near Charleston, S. C., on July 4, 1912, I found most of the young of all of the five species of herons which breed there well able to fly. Many, however, could only scramble about in the branches of their nesting trees or fly short distances to keep out of my way asI passed. As I walked around to the windward side of the island, driving numbers of young herons before me, I saw a young Louisiana Heron, which had flown a few yards up the wind, resting quietly on the water. I thought it had fallen there, and was surprised to see that it was swimming with truly swanlike grace. While I watched, about a dozen others — Louisianas, Little Blues, and, I think, one or two Snowies — flew out from shore and deliberately alighted on the water. I waited for some minutes to see how they would make back to land, and soon found that, after a short rest, they could rise with ease from the surface of the water and fly back to the trees on shore.— Francis M. Weston, Jr., Charleston, S. C. Northern Phalarope (Lobipes lobatus) in Michigan.— The status of this Phalarope as a Michigan species has been somewhat in doubt. Prof. Barrows states (Mich. Bird Life, 1912, 166), ‘‘ I do not know of an actual Michigan specimen preserved anywhere.” I can add one unimpeachable record — there is a female in the U.S. National Museum, No. 170,517, 2 General Notes. fons taken on September 14, 1899, in Lenawee County by Dr. C. M. Butler that I examined last winter. In the University of Michigan Museum there is a mounted bird, an adult female labeled ‘ Michigan,’ No. 1172a. A search in the original catalogue reveals no further data but I am in- clined to believe that this specimen came from Mr. Jas. Hobson, at one time taxidermist at the Museum in the late seventies. Mr. Hobson did considerable collecting at the St. Clair Flats, and the bird may have been secured there. Mr. W. E. Saunders of London, Ont., has two specimens taken at Rondeau, Lake Erie, by Mr. Phillip Burk and sent to him— one secured on October 10, 1906, and a female on October 20, 1906.— B. H. Swates, University of Michigan Museum. Black Vulture in Vermont.— On July 7, 1912, a Black Vulture (Catharista urubu) was shot in Pawlet, Vt., a town adjoining this but just across the New York line. It was brought to me for identification and is being mounted by a local taxidermist. It seemed to be an old bird in fine plumage and the wonder is that it should be taken several hundred miles north of its summer home.— F. T. PremsBEr, Granville, N. Y. The Swallow-tailed Kite in DeWitt Co., Illinois— Early in June, 1906, I observed a bird of this species circling about over the open hills along Salt Creek, about 5 miles southeast of Clinton. The bird was per- fectly unconcerned by my presence, and continued its soaring flight within easy gun range, making its identification a certainty.— Epwin D. Hutt, Chicago, Ill. The Alder Flycatcher in Colorado.— I beg to record two specimens of the Alder Flycatcher (Empidonaz trailli alnorum), for Colorado. They constitute the second and third records for the state, the first being a speci- men taken by C. E. Aiken, near Limon, Colorado, May 27, 1905.1. The identification of my birds as of Aiken’s is by H. C. Oberholser of the Bio- logical Survey. The first is an adult bird taken in the Clear Creek valley, west of Denver, June 4, 1911, and the second an immature male taken in same locality August 6, 1911. The dates of collection somewhat suggest breeding birds and it is by no means unlikely, that we may be able to add this species to our list of summer residents. Both of the above specimens are now in my collection.— F. C. Lincoun, Colorado Museum of Natural History, Denver, Colo. Arkansas Kingbird in Massachusetts.— On October 20, 1912, at Monomoy Island, Chatham, Mass., and just off the heel of Cape Cod, I shot an immature male Arkansas Kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis). The bird was flitting about some clumps of bayberry bushes, among the sand dunes near our club house, and first attracted the attention of our club attendant by its bright yellow belly. 1A History of the Birds of Colo., by W. L. Sclater, p. 275. ane =| General Notes. 113 I was unable to get near enough to the bird to examine it closely, for while by its actions evidently lost and confused, it was still shy, and I shot it on the supposition that it would prove to be in all probability a stray Crested Flycatcher. This species has been but seldom seen east of the Mississippi River; being, I believe, reported in Wisconsin, New York, New Jersey, and Maryland, and once only in New England, a specimen having been shot at Elliot, Maine, in October, 1865, by Mr. George E. Brown, as reported by Henry A. Purdie in the ‘ Bulletin of the Nuttall Ornithological Club’ Vol. 1, no. 3, p. 73.— F. H. Kennarp, Boston, Mass. Yellow-headed Blackbird in Virginia— On August 29, 1912, about 6 a.M., Capt. Wm. T. Abbott, of Chincoteague, Accomac Co., Va., saw two Yellow-headed Blackbirds (Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus), male and female, in some willow trees along the margin of a fresh water pond on Wallop’s Island. The birds were unknown to him and he shot one, the female, which he presented to me. The place where he found these birds was near his truck patch, where there are scattered pine trees and many wax myrtle bushes about marshy spots and fresh water ponds. In this same locality the Boat-tailed Grackles were numerous, and I also saw sev- eral Red-winged Blackbirds there. The male Yellow-headed Blackbird remained about the place for several days, as Capt. Abbott saw him on two occasions before I left on the 9th of September. The stomach of the female was sent to the Biological Survey, Washing- ton, D. C— B. H. Warren, Everhart Museum, Scranton, Pa. The Slate-colored Fox Sparrow Breeding in Colorado.— Records of this bird (Passerella iliaca schistacea) for Colorado are not plentiful and its whole status is rather unsatisfactory; no doubt due to some extent to its retiring habits and preference for dense and practically impenetrable wil- low and alder thickets. It was formerly supposed that the type specimen was collected in Colorado, but this was found to be an error.!. Mr. Ridg- way ' states that it breeds in Colorado along ‘streams of the mountain parks’; and for some time this constituted the only record. Since then a number of specimens have been taken, most of them recorded as follows:— “an adult male taken July, 1889, at Florissant, by Dr. J. L. Goodale,” “Mr. David Bruce of Brockport, N. Y., took one on the Grand River near Glenwood Springs during June, 1897.2. This bird was seen several times and was thought to be breeding. ‘There was also a mounted specimen in the ‘‘ Carter collection taken near the mouth of the Blue River in Grand County, July 5, 1877, at nearly 7000 feet.” 3 These records, together with an unrecorded pair from the Carter Col- 1 Birds of Colorado, Part I, W. W. Cooke, p. 107. 2 Birds of Colorado, Part If, W. W. Cooke, p. 167. 3 Birds of Colorado, Part ILI, W. W. Cooke, p. 216. 114 General Notes. outs lection, now in the Colorado Museum of Natural History, taken near Breckenridge, July 5 and 9, 1877; and one taken in Deer Park, Routt County, April 18, 1911, by Dr. L. J. Hersey, confirm to a great degree this bird’s residency in Colorado during its breeding period. It was, however, the pleasure of the author to remove any existing doubt by collecting an adult female with one fledgling, June 24, 1912, on the Grand River, in Grand County, at an elevation shghtly over 8000 feet. The fledgling had unquestionably been raised in the immediate vicinity as it was just able to support itself for short flights. I believe this is also the highest altitude from which it has yet been taken. This will un- doubtedly supply the evidence Mr. Sclater required to include it in his list of Colorado breeding birds and save straining the point Prof. Cooke mentions in ‘ The Condor.’ !— F. C. Lincoun, Colorado Museum of Natural History, Denver, Colo. Harris’s Sparrow in Eastern Ontario.— It gives me pleasure to record the capture of the first specimen of Harris’s Sparrow (Zonotrichia querula) for eastern Ontario. The bird was taken from a mixed flock of Song Sparrows and Juncos which were feeding in a garden on the outskirts of London, Ont., about eight a. m., March 18, 1907. My attention was attracted by a single long drawn note of the same pitch and quality as that of the White-throated Sparrow and on searching through the flock I found this large dark-colored bird which was very soon secured. It is a male in immature plumage spotted irregularly on the upper breast giving a hint of the black coloration which was to come. The specimen is now number 1797 in my collection. This species has occurred in Ohio and a number of times in Michigan but has not previously been captured in lower Ontario although it is probable that it is a regular migrant through the northwestern corner of the province. — W. E. Saunpers, London, Ont. Magnolia Warbler in the Coast Region of South Carolina.— On October 1, 1912, I saw and positively identified a female Magnolia Warbler (Dendroica magnolia) at the Navy Yard near Charleston, 8S. C. It was feeding in the undergrowth in pine woods, and I was able to examine it carefully at short range with my glasses. While this Warbler is an abun- dant migrant in the upper counties — one hundred and fifty miles and more from the coast — this is, to my knowledge, only the second record of its occurrence in this region. As the specimen was not secured, this record has perhaps no scientific value; and I am noting it simply as a matter of interest — Francis M. Weston, Jr., Charleston, S. C. A Few Notes on Newfoundland Birds.— The following notes may be of interest as supplementing Mr. Arnold’s paper (Auk, Jan., 1912, pp. 1 Present Status of the Colorado Check-List of Birds. W. W. Cooke, Condor, XIV, No. 4, 153. aa General Notes. 115 72-79). I arrived in Newfoundland at Port aux Basque on July 7, 1911, and proceeded at once to Stevenville Crossing on St. George’s Bay. Here I remained one week returning to Cape Breton Island on July 14. Though my interests were mainly botanical, I made notes and observa- tions on all the birds that came directly under my notice of which the following seem worthy of note. I was particularly anxious to study the Veery, its habits and notes, since I described it as a variety in ‘The Auk’ (Vol. XVII, 270, 271, 1900), based on material collected in this portion of the island. My friend, Dr. Geo. C: Shattuck of Boston has also lately given me some notes made on the Humber River between September 13 and October 4, 1912. Mergus americanus. AmerRIcAN Mrercanser.— Two seen by Dr. Shattuck. Histrionicus histrionicus. Hartequin Ducx.— Dr. Shattuck was told that this species breeds regularly on the Bay of Islands. Botaurus lentiginosus. AmericaN BirrerN.— One seen by Dr. Shattuck. Ardea herodias herodias. Great BLurk Hreron.— One seen by Dr. Shattuck. Philohela minor. Woopcock.— A young chick, I think undoubtedly of this species, was closely observed running on a swamp and tree grown wood road near Indian Head on the 12th. It took at once to the under- brush, and from the locality, position of its eye, ete., I felt little doubt of its proper identification. fEgialitis meloda. Piping PLover.—A pair was seen continually on the beach at the Crossing. Though I did not find their nest, they were evidently breeding and showed much anxiety at my presence when I crossed a certain portion of the beach. I believe this species has not been reported except as a migrant from this island. Sphyrapicus varius varius. Sapsucker.— One scen by Dr. Shattuck. Hylocichla fuscescens fuscescens. Wutson’s THrusH.— Though it is not my desire to question the ruling of the American Ornithologists’ Union, yet the long sought opportunity to hear the bird inhabiting New- foundland has at last been gratified, and I am more strongly convinced than ever that my fuliginosa is distinct. Its darker coloring leads one at sight to confuse it with the Olive-back, and I had to shoot the bird in one case to be positive of my identification. Its call note pheu has what seems to me quite a different quality, and its song, if my birds were not peculiar, instead of being an uninterrupted performance is divided into three dis- tinct parts, and unlike any Veery song I have ever heard in New England. I listened to several birds singing near the mouth of Harry’s Brook, and I believe the difference would be noted by any one familiar with the stereo- typed song.— R. Heser Hows, Jr., Thoreau Museum, Concord, Mass. 116 General Notes. ae Additional Notes to the ‘ Birds of Gallatin County, Montana’.— These notes form an appendix to my paper published in ‘ The Auk,’ Janu- ary, 1911, pp. 26-49. The numbers are those of my list. 37. Gallinago delicata. Wutson’s Snire.— This species appears to be fairly common and regular as a winter resident in warm swamps near Bozeman. I observed seven birds on December 26, 1911. 43. Catoptrophorus semipalmatus inornatus. WersTeRN WILLET. — Mr. W. L. Thomas of Belgrade found two nests of this species during the summer of 1911. 120. Hesperiphona vespertina montana. WESTERN EVENING GrosBEAK.— I observed a small flock in Bozeman on January 2, 1911. The species is evidently occasionally a winter resident, though much commoner as a migrant. - 126. Leucosticte tephrocotis littoralis. Hrpspurn’s Rosy Finca.— I observed this subspecies in company with L. ¢. tephrocotis in Bridger Cafion, March 17, 1911. Large flocks were seen and about 10 percent. of the birds were of this form. 170. Vermivora celata lutescens. LutTrescenr WarsBLer.— I ob- served a male of this species in song, in an aspen grove near Bozeman, July 4, 1910. It probably breeds in the region and the breeding bird is probably V. c. celata, but it was neither secured nor observed closely. 199. Cyanocephalus cyanocephalus. PiNon Jay— A _ flock of about 40 birds was observed flying over the western part of Bozeman on Sept. 11, 1911. This adds a new species to the county list, and to my knowledge, is the most westerly record for this species in Montana.— Aretas A. SAUNDERS. Two new records for Washington State.— The following birds appear to be new to the State list. Ceryle alcyon caurina. NorTHWESTERN BELTED KINGFISHER.— A specimen taken September 17, 1896, was recently identified for me by Mr. Oberholser as this new form. It was collected by me on Puget Sound, in the vicinity of Tacoma, Wash., which I believe extends their range this much southward. As I have no other specimens, some further collecting must be done in order to prove this to be the resident form. Zonotrichia albicollis. Wuire-rHroaTep Sparrow.— At Sherlock, in Thurston County, on October 13, 1912, I was so fortunate as to collect a female of this Sparrow. My bird was with a very large company of Nut- tall’s Sparrows (Zonotrichia leucophrys nuttalli), which had begun to arrive the previous evening, but a careful search failed to reveal any more albi- collis. An interesting feature of this migration, possibly of some signifi- cance, is that the local breeding nuttalli had long since left for the south, and the migration in question was a considerable surprise to me. I believe my bird forms a new record for the state, if not for the Pacific coast north of Oregon.— J. Hooper Bowes, Tacoma, Wash. pS aad General Notes. Hy A Correction.— In ‘The Auk’ Vol. XXVI, Jan., 1909, p. 9, under the heading of ‘Some Birds of Baker Co., Oregon’ the record of Certhia familiaris montanus should read Certhia familiaris zelotes. Since making the list three years ago more specimens have been taken and a skin recently sent to the Biological Survey was identified by Mr. H. C. Oberholser as C. f. zelotes — STANLEY G. JEWETT?T, Portland, Oregon. An Item for Bibliographers.— A paper dealing with American birds, which is seldom or never referred to is the following: Relation succincte d’un voyage fait aux bords de l’Oostanaula en Géorgie, Etats-Unis,! par Julien Deby. All of the matter relating to birds is included in the following extract: “‘T am unable to describe in detail the pleasures of a search for Unios along the flowery banks of the Oostanaula, the pleasing Indian name of which means the great waters coming from the west. “ The exhilarating sunshine of this delightful clime; the sky of azure blue, rarely flecked with clouds; the thousands of turtles grouped upon every old log and rock that overhangs the water; the Kingfisher (Alcedo alcyon), with piercing cry, which constantly crosses from bank to bank, and perches upon some dead or denuded branch, where it watches for its aquatic prey; the palmipeds which jump into the air, frightened by the appearance of a. boat and boatman; the buzzards (Cathartes atratus et aura), those vultures: of the new world which soar overhead in lazy circlings, on the watch for some dead animal; all these new experiences make an ineffaceable impres- sion upon the naturalist. “The bushes and trees teem with life; birds of bright plumage abound everywhere; the mockingbird, the nightingale of America, enchants us with its sweet notes...” This effusion which might well be mistaken for a description of Paradise, while a good advertisement for Georgia, was written, we must conclude, in retrospect, when distance lent enchantment to the view. Upon what other supposition are we to account for the author’s failure to mention the mosquitos; ticks and redbugs, the deer flies, fleas and bedbugs, those satel- lites which oft attend travellers in Dixie, to journey’s end.— W. L. McAtex, Washington, D. C. 1 Bul. de la Soc. Malacologique de Belgique XII, 1877, pp. XXI-XXV. Sepa- rates paged 1-7. The word voyage in title replaced by the word excursion. Bruxelles, 1877. 118 Recent Literature. alte RECENT LITERATURE. Forbush on the Game Birds, Wild-Fowl and Shore Birds.! This excellent report on the Water-Fowl and Game Birds of the Atlantic coast has been written, the author tells us, with a purpose — namely to set forth in an authoritative publication the facts in connection with the alarming decrease in the numbers of these birds in recent years and the imperative need of concerted efforts for their preservation. Those who read Mr. For- bush’s report,— and everyone interested in game protection should do so — will agree that his purpose has been admirably accomplished. Not only in Massachusetts but in all of our eastern maritime states this book will be available as an incontrovertible argument against those who come for- ward to oppose legislative restrictions to gunning privileges, and who claim that game is not decreasing or that spring shooting has nothing to do with the problem. Mr. Forbush cites reliable authors from early colonial times to the present day in sketching the history of each species, and in the majority of cases it is a history of decrease in numbers and abandoning of former breeding grounds, if not of threatened or actual extinction over at least part of the former range. In addition, scores of reliable correspondents have supplemented the accounts, by furnishing valuable unpublished information drawn from their personal experiences. Besides the history, each species is fully described in all the plumages in which it appears on our coasts, and a résumé is given of the time of occur- rence and present abundance in Massachusetts. The nomenclature fol- lows that of the last edition of the A. O. U. Check-List but the various vernacular names of the species are added, while the general range, usually that of the Check-List, is given. One unfortunate error in the Check-List which is copied by Mr. Forbush, should have been corrected in the re- cent supplement —— namely the use of the name ‘Red-legged Black Duck’ in the Hypothetical List in connection with Anas rubripes tristis. The name tristis was not proposed for the red-legged bird but for the ‘ordinary’ Black Duck. The former name obscura being untenable, the oldest name for any form of Black Duck is rubripes; if there be but one form it should 1A History of the | Game Birds, Wild-Fow] | and Shore Birds | of ! Massachu- setts and Adjacent States | Including those used for food which have disappeared since the | settlement of the country, and those which are now hunted | for food or sport, with observations on their | former abundance and recent decrease | in numbers; also the means for | conserving those still | in existence | By Edward Howe Forbush | State Ornithologist of Massachusetts | Illustrated with Drawings by W. I. Beecroft and the Author | and Photographs by Herbert K. Job and others | Issued by the | Massachusetts State Board of Agriculture ! By Authority of the Legislature, 1912. Roy. Svo, pp. i-xiv + 1-622, plates I-XXXVI, text figs. 1-26 [+ 82 not numbered]. ae | Recent Literature. 119 be called Anas rubripes but if there be two then the Red-legged form is Anas rubripes rubripes and the dusky-legged form A. rubripes tristis. The systematic treatment of the species constitutes Part I. Part II of the report comprises histories of the species which are extinct or extirpated in Massachusetts; the Great Auk, Labrador Duck, Eskimo Curlew, Passenger Pigeon, Trumpeter Swan, Whooping Crane, Sandhill Crane, and Wild Turkey. Part III is an admirable discussion of the conservation of Game Birds in which every element receives careful consideration. The problem is a serious one and one that must be considered promptly and exhaustively in every state in the Union, if we are to save many of our birds from the fate which has overtaken those mentioned above. Mr. Forbush suggests seventeen steps, all or most of which must be taken if we expect to increase the supply of game birds. These include the following: establishment of (1) bird reservations, (2) systems of federal control of migrating birds, and (3) systems of town wardens in addition to state wardens; prohibiting of (1) sale and export of game, (2) sale and use of ultra-destructive firearms, (3) shooting from boats; registration of native hunters and raising of fees for alien hunters, so as to be practically prohibi- tive; limiting of each day’s bag; reducing the number of stray dogs and cats; checking forest fires; making the open seasons as nearly uniform as possible; encouraging the propagation and sale of such game as can be raised on game farms; and more important than all the establishment of a better attitude among the public at large toward the game laws. If the laws are wilfully disregarded as is frequently the case at present all hope for improved conditions might as well be abandoned. In this very field, more perhaps than in any other, Mr. Forbush’s work will do an enormous good.— W.S. Miller on the Classification of Kingfishers.'— Work of the kind that Mr. Miller has here presented is most weleome. Whether the multitude of bird genera that have been proposed of late years is to stand or fall there can be no question but that we need light upon both internal and external characters of the species to guide us in our final judgment, and this so far as the Kingfishers are concerned is provided in the paper before us. The treatise is divided into two parts. I. The Subfamilies of Alcedinidze and IJ. The Genera of Ceryline. In the former Mr. Miller reaches the conclusion that three subfamilies should be recognized: Ceryline, Al- cedinine and Dacelonine, the last two being more closely related to each other than is either to the Ceryline. Ceyx, Ceycopsis, Ispidine and Myio- ceyx he regards as members of the Alcedinine rather than of the Dacelonine where Sharpe placed them. In the association of these four genera with the other short tailed genera Alcedo, Corythornis and Alcyone, and the ex- 1A Revision of the Classification of the Kingfishers. By W. DeW. Miller. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, XXXI, pp. 239-311. New York, September 12, 1912. 120 Recent Literature. tan clusion of Ceryle we think that Mr. Miller is right and that the three sub- families recognized represent natural phylogenetic groups. The latter half of the paper deals with the subdivision of the old genus Ceryle and voluminous data are presented to show the necessity for recog- nizing Megaceryle Kaup for the crested blue-gray species, and Chloroceryle Kaup for the neotropical bronze-green forms, as distinct from the’ black and white Afro-Indian birds which constitute true Ceryle. Here again Mr. Miller’s action appears to be fully justified in so much as these groups are quite as distinct as the other genera of Kingfishers,— certainly more so than some of them, but it is unfortunate that the material was not avail- able for a thorough investigation of the status of the genera in the other two subfamilies some of which we think rest upon very slight characters. Incidentally Mr. Miller calls attention to the necessity, on grounds of priority, of substituting Choucalcyon Lesson 1831 for Sauromarptis Cab & Heine, and Lacedo Reichenbach 1851 for Carcineutes Cab. & Heine. — W.S. Reed’s ‘Birds of Eastern North America.’!—This volume of 456 pages. is, as we are told in the preface, ‘but an extension of, an enlargement upon and a combining of’ the ‘Bird Guides for Land and Water Birds’ by the same author. We do not think however that the additions in anyway compen- sate for what has been lost. The ‘ Bird Guides’ held a place of their own in our ornithological literature as they were truly pocket guides whereas the present book, though just as useful as a work of reference, is no longer a. pocket edition being both too large and too heavy. As a reference book too it comes directly into competition with numerous other works of similar scope, in some of which the additional information presented here is treated much more satisfactorily. A curious feature is the use of the bird’s name in the plural in almost every instance, the significance of which is not clear. ‘Parula Warblers’ obviously is intended to cover the two eastern races, while ‘Cape May Warblers’ must refer merely to several individuals of the species, but the statement that ‘Sennett’s White-tailed Hawks are southern species’ leaves us in doubt as to just what idea the author desires to convey. There is but one form of Sennett’s White-tailed Hawk and even that is not a species. but a subspecies of Buteo albicaudatus! The attempt to explain the sig- nificance of binomials and trinomials on page ix moreover is not very happy. While the colored pictures which appear on every page and which formed the distinctive feature of the ‘Bird Guides’ will still aid many students in identifying the birds they see, we trust that the handy smaller edition will » not be withdrawn.— W. S. 1 Birds of Eastern North American. By Chester A. Reed, S.B. With colored Illustrations of every Species common to the United States and Canada from the Atlantic Coast to the Rockies. Garden City, New York, Doubleday, Page &. Company. 1912. ae 2 Recent Literature. Lt Hellmayr and Seilern on the Birds of the Cumbre de Valencia, Venezuela.'— This important contribution to neotropical ornithology is based upon a collection of 1200 skins made by Mr. 8. M. Klages in 1909 and 1910, and comprises annotations upon 172 species or subspecies, while a list of 39 species reported by other writers of this region but not obtained by Mr. Klages is added. The following forms are described as new either from the collection itself or from other material examined in connection with its study: Tangara guttata bogotensis, Bogota; Xanthoura yncas andicola, Merida, Venezuela; Myiodynastes chrysocephalus venezuelanus, Cumbre de Valencia; Pseudocolaptes boissonneautii striaticeps, Cumbre de Valencia; Sittasomus griseus virescens, Cumbre de Valencia, Premnoplex brunnescens rostratus, Cumbre de Valencia; Drymophila caudata klagesi, Los Palmales, Anden von Cumané; Chameza brevicauda boliviana, Yungas, Bolivia. CAMBRIDGE, MASS. : { : : Entered as second-class mail matter in the Post Office at Boston, Mass. CONTENTS Notrs ON Swarnson’s Hawk (Buteo swainsoni) In Montana. By E. 8S. Cameron. asa (Plate IV) , : i ; : : ‘ i : ; ; h pest Yr THE Fox Sparrow as A SonGstTER. By Robert Thomas Moore. (Plate V) . : 177 CoNCEALING ACTION OF THE BITTERN (Botaurus lentiginosus). By Walter Bradford Barrows 2 ‘ # 2 é 3 . 3 = : . 5 5 187 Birp MIGRATION FROM-THE STANDPOINT OF ITS PERIODIC AccuRAcY. By John G. Phillips 3 2 0 5 4 s : 2 5 : rc 4 191 THe Revation oF BiRp MIGRATION TO THE WHATHER. By Wells W. Cooke. (Plate VI) : : ; : ; 205 Two New Races or tHE PIGMY Ow. FROM THE Pactric Coast. By J. Grinnell 222 Ontario Brrp Notges. By J. H. Fleming ! ‘ A : ; 225 More Norves on THE MORNING AWAKENING. By Francis H. Allen . m = ee Noves ON SOME OF THE RARHR BIRDS OF THE PRAIRIE PART OF THE CHICAGO ARBA. By G. Eifrig é 2 % 2 5 . F : f 236 Breepine Brrps or Atacnua County, Froripa. By Oscar E. Baynard 240 WHat THE AMERICAN Birp BANDING ASSOCIATION HAS ACCOMPLISHED DURING 1912. By Howard H. Cleaves. (Plates VII-VIII) . 5 * 248 AnaTomicaL Notes ON SOME GENERA OF PAssERINE Birps. By Hubert Lyman CLARK . z : 0 : : : 5 3 ; a c 4 - 262 GereneRAL Noves.— Holbeell’s Grebe in Concord, Mass., 267; Additional Notes on the Harlequin Duck in Wyoming, 267; White Ibis (Guara alba) in Missouri, 268; Glossy Ibis (Plegadis autumnalis) in Hastern Cuba; A New Record, 268; Bittern breeding in New Jersey, 268; Nesting of the Black Rail in New Jersey, 269; A Recent Capture of the Eskimo Curlew, 269; Hudsonian Curlew on Long Island in Winter, 270; A Peculiar Hudsonian Curlew, 270; Hudsonian Godwit on the Magdalen Islands, 271; The Golden Plover (Charadrius dominicus dominicus) Again on the Coast of South Carolina, 271; On the Occurrence of Columba squamosa (Bonaterre) in Cuba, 271; The Marsh Hawk Nesting in New Jersey, 272; The Sharp-shinned Hawk again in Maine in Winter, 272; First Michigan Specimen of the Three-toed Woodpecker, 272; Arkansas Kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis) in Delaware, 273; The Wood Pewee as a Foster Parent, 273; Two Flycatchers of the Genus Empidonax New to the Fauna of South Carolina, 273; A Baltimore Oriole in Winter, 274; Starlings and Turkey Vultures Migrating, 274; The Evening Grosbeak in Wisconsin, 275; The Snow Bunting (Plectrophenax nivalis) in Chicago and Vicinity during the Fall and Winter of 1912, 275; A Strange Sparrow Roost, 275; Towhee in Winter near Steubenville, Ohio, 276; Barn Swallow in South Carolina in Winter, 276; Notes on the Logger- head Shrike at Barachias, Montgomery Co., Ala., 276; Wintering of the Blue- headed Vireo (Lanivireo solitarius solitarius) at Aiken, South Carolina, 277; The Magnolia Warbler (Dendroica magnolia): an Addition to the Fauna of the Coast Region of South Carolina, 277; The Cape May Warbler (Dendroica tigrina) taken _in the Spring on the Coast of South Carolina, 278; Catbird and Brown Thrasher in Winter in Massachusetts, 278; Brown Thrasher Wintering near St. Louis, Mo., 278; Random Notes from Easton, Pa., 279; A few South Dakota Records of some Western Birds, 280; Additions to a List of the Birds of Harding County, Northwestern South Dakota, 281; Birds at Sea, 281; Two Ornithological Fables from Louisiana, 282. Recent Lirprature.— Scharff’s ‘Distribution and Origin of Life in America,’ 283; Brabourne and Chubb: ‘The Birds of South America,’ 286; Oberholser’s ‘A Revision of the Forms of the Great Blue Heron,’ 287; Torrey s ‘ Field-Days in California,’ 288; Nelson on Two New Birds from Panama, 288; Bent on a New Crossbill from New- foundland, 288; Mearns on a New African Grass Warbler, 289; Ornithology in the Smithsonian Report for 1911, 289; Horsbrugh’s Game-Birds and Water-Fowl of South Africa, 289; Hellmayr on Birds from the Mouth of the Amazon, 289; McAtee’s ‘Index to U. 8. Department_of Agriculture Publications on the Food of Birds,’ 290; Craig’s Studies of Bird Behavior, 290; Tschusi zu Schmidhoffen on ‘THE AUK,’ published quarterly as the Organ of the AMERICAN ORNITHOLO- qists’ UNION, is edited, beginning with the Volume for 1912, by Mr. Wirmer STONE. Terms: — $3.00 a year, including postage, strictly in advance. Single num- bers, 75 cents. Free to Honorary Fellows, and to Fellows, Members, and Associates of the A. O. U. not in arrears for dues. Subscriptions should be addressed to DR. JONATHAN DWIGHT, Jr., Business Manager, 134 West 71stSt., New York, N.Y. Foreign Subscrib- ers may obtain ‘Tum Auk’ through R. H. PORTER, 9 PRINCES STREET, CAVENDISH SQuaRE, W., LONDON. Articles and communications intended for publication, and all books and publications for notice, should be sent to Mr. WITMER STONE, AcapEMy oF Natura Scrences, LoGan SQuare, PHILADELPHIA, Pa. — Manuscripts for general articles should reach the editor at least six weeks before the date of the number for which they are intended, and manuscripts for ‘General Notes’ and ‘Recent Literature’ not later than the first of the month preceding the date of the number in which it is desired they shall appear. ‘(MosuWwMs OajNG) MMV]T S,NOSNIVMG JO LSaN “AJ ALVId YOO AIOM SO 0801. — ieAih, AUK: A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ORNITHOLOGY. WO: x APRIL, 1913. No. 2 NOTES ON SWAINSON’S HAWK (BUTEO SWAINSONI) IN MONTANA. BY E. S. CAMERON. I. NESTING. SomE twelve years ago Swainson’s Hawk, or the Common American Buzzard, was one of the commonest birds breeding in — eastern Montana, but has, since then, been greatly reduced in numbers. At the period mentioned, despite incessant persecu- tion, half a dozen inhabited nests might easily be found during any year in my own neighborhood alone; but at the present time the numerous unoccupied nests in the white ash and cottonwood trees, to which their dead or disheartened owners have never returned, bear pathetic testimony to the gradual disappearance of this hawk as a nesting species. Swainson’s Buzzard is locally called ‘Hen Hawk,’ yet the term is a complete misnomer, for in my twenty- three years’ experience with the bird I have never observed it to take poultry of any kind, nor have I obtained the slightest evidence that it ever does so. However, if you give a dog a bad name you may hang him, and the unfortunate buzzard, being credited with the misdeeds of the Prairie Falcon, Goshawk, or Harrier, is in a like case. Here, at all events, the parent birds are shot and the young ruthlessly stoned on sight. As I have already stated in ‘The Auk’ (Vol. XXV, p. 468) Swainson’s Hawk is often most indiscreet in its choice of a building site, selecting a low tree by the roadside, 167 freee 168 CameRON, Notes on Swainson’s Hawk. April or within a fenced pasture, for its nest, which thus becomes forth- with the cynosure of hostile eyes. My own study of buzzards in their haunts has from this cause been considerably hindered — sometimes abruptly terminated for the time being — by the de- struction of the eggs or young of the very birds I wished to keep under observation. Swainson’s Hawk, when seen flying in the distance, resembles a small Golden Eagle, and there are not a few attributes which are common to both species. Among the latter may be mentioned the facts that both pair for life, both shade their young from the hot sun, and both possess a sense of ornamentation which leads them to decorate their nests. The above characteristics are quite probably shared by all members of the sub-genus Buteo, but the further fact remains that neither the Golden Eagle nor Swainson’s Hawk ever seems to drink water— at least in captivity —, and this exceptional peculiarity suggests a close affinity between them. Like all buzzards, Swainson’s Hawk has a lazy, apathetic tempera- ment, usually preying upon the humblest quarry, and permitting unprovoked attacks upon itself by small and weak tormentors. On occasions, however, when hunger presses, or its eyrie is menaced, the bird can display unexpected dash and ferocity. In May, 1905, a Swainson’s Hawk that nested by the Yellowstone near the Terry ferryboat crossing, became so bold as to swoop at the passers-by. A prominent flockmaster, owner of the land, was much annoyed by the bird’s threatened assaults, and instructed the ferryman to shoot the assailant. Hearing of this, I interceded successfully with the latter, and secured his co-operation to protect the hawks: but we were unable to save their three eggs from a meddlesome. shepherd, who removed and ate them. In the Lake District of Cumberland, England, during the summer of 1910, a Common Buzzard (Buteo buteo) which differs but little from B. swainsoni, also made frequent attacks upon visitors to its haunt. A corre- spondent of ‘Country Life’ for June 25, 1910, contributed an account of his experience, describing how he had to take refuge successively under a tree and behind a wall to avoid the “tre- mendous swoops” of the bird. As the present article is very long, I forbear to give a detailed description of the remarkable buzzard flocks which occur at the Vol. ee] 1913 CAMERON, Notes on Swainson’s Hawk. 169 migration periods. Those interested can find a full account in ‘The Auk’ (Vol. XXIV, p. 262) of a buzzard invasion which I witnessed on the Powder River, numbering nearly 2000 birds, probably the largest aggregation of these hawks ever recorded. Since the above event, which happened in April 1890, other ob- servers, as well as myself, have seen many smaller flocks of varying numbers, while a small party of only seven birds was observed by me on Sept. 27, 1911; but it may be hoped that the decrease in size of the Montana migration does not afford a true indication of the rate at which this species is diminishing. The earliest date at which I have noted the spring arrival of a Swainson’s Hawk was March 14, 1911, and the latest fall lingerer was observed on Novem- ber 25, 1910. The nests of B. swainsoni are made entirely of sticks, or of sticks combined with’ other materials, such as sage-brush, wild- rose brambles, and cottonwood or cedar twigs. There may be an elaborate lining of green weeds, or quantities of wool — perhaps only a scanty layer of grass. Some birds line their nests with fresh leaves, which are renewed at intervals, but, in my experience, this does not occur until after the full clutch of eggs has been laid. The parent birds roll back the eggs and replace them on the leaves, which is not a difficult feat, as many nests are almost flat. As the hawk apparently mates for life, the nest, which is very strongly put together, increases in size with the yearly repairs. In my own experience I have known disused nests to be practically intact after a period of seven or eight years. Since 1889, I have seen a great many occupied nests, but only kept notes of fourteen. Of these six were in ash trees, six in cottonwoods, one in a low cedar, and one in a wind-swept pine-top. This last, on a dominant scaur of the pine hills, was the most picturesque of all, but could not, of course, endure long without renewal, and is the only nest I have seen thus exposed.! The number of eggs in seven nests was three, in a couple of others two only: one nest was deserted after a single white egg had been laid, and of four the contents were not examined as I did not climb to them. Two fledglings seen in the tree do not necessarily indicate two eggs, as in about half the clutches of three 1A photograph of this country was reproduced in ‘The Auk,’ Vol. XXV, 1908, p: 251. [Apri 170 Cameron, Notes on Swainson’s Hawk. eggs one is infertile, and may be found in a perfectly intact state after the young are flown. The color of the eggs is variable, but in all sets of three that I have seen, one egg has been entirely white. In a single instance, two of the three eggs were unmarked, greenish white. Some of the other eggs in the eight nests were blotched with chestnut or umber brown, the remainder being merely flecked with scattered dots of these colors. JI never found but one heavily marked egg, and that had the whole ground of its upper half almost completely obscured by umber brown. The first part of June is the usual time to find Swainson’s Hawk sitting on eggs, but that depends largely on the weather. I have seen an early incubating bird on May 7, and a late one on June 27. The time of incubation is about twenty-five days, but as with the Marsh Hawk, Hoot Owl, etc., the young are often hatched at intervals, so that the eldest may be full-fledged while the youngest is in the fluffy stage. The cock bird will occasionally sit upon the eggs, and I have twice flushed him from them; but, in my experience, such action is unusual, as the male is generally absent foraging for the female. There are recorded instances of Swainson’s Hawk occupy- ing the deserted nests of other birds, but all the pairs which I observed built their own nests, and declined to appropriate old nests of their own species. In one case, where a pair were shot at the nest, a second pair built another nest exactly above the first in a succeeding year. This appeared to me to be a curious coinci- dence, and it was a no less curious sight to see the two great nests, one above the other, in a small ash tree. If bereft of all their eggs, or nestlings, the discouraged hawks desert that nest forever; but, when deprived of the eggs only, they construct a new abode in which the female lays again. Early in May, 1906, a shepherd robbed a Buzzard’s nest in a cottonwood of the three eggs, and the Hawks built a new one in a similar nearby tree. On June 1 the pertinacious hen-bird again sat upon three eggs, which were subse- quently unmolested. In this respect these hawks differ from a - pair of Golden Eagles, which will never forsake an established eyrie save upon the death of one of them. Of the fourteen nests which I have kept under observation at different times, not one received such close attention as a nest - built early in June, 1908, in a distant ranch pasture. This was not hii Fe sal Cameron, Notes on Swainson’s Hawk. Lfl due to my occasional visits, but to the fact that during the whole summer a boy herded a large bunch of horses outside the fence — a part of which had been taken down to enable the animals to come to water. In a cottonwood tree, directly above the water, the buzzards had placed their nest, and in ordinary circumstances would have enjoyed a welcome shade. As it happened, however, this particular tree had been blighted by the unprecedented bliz- zard of May 20, and remained almost leafless till August, when to my great surprise it was again covered with foliage. Until this happened the buzzard family suffered terribly from the sun’s rays, and convincing testimony was afforded of the parents’ devotion in shading their offspring. The nest was made entirely of cotton- wood sticks, lined with grass roots. With characteristic indiscre- tion the birds had chosen a decidedly perilous situation, as the herd-boy above mentioned passed directly by the nesting tree, often with a companion, four times a day, besides spending nearly all his time in its immediate vicinity. He naively informed me that, before I discovered the nest, he had frequently stoned the incu- bating Hawk, but without causing her to forsake her eggs. She began to lay about June 14, sat on three typical eggs — two of them brown marked, one pure white but infertile — and on July 9, two nestlings were hatched. A fortnight later, black feathers appeared amidst their white down, and by the end of July they were full feathered except for their downy heads. The young birds as soon as they were able, sat about in the branches, but returned to the nest at night, and also on hot days, during which the parents shaded them. The presence of my wife and self beneath the low tree, or our loud talking, made no difference to the mother’s solici- tude for their comfort. In my experience the female Swainson’s Hawk is one of the boldest and tamest birds at the nest, in marked contradistinction to her timid partner, which can seldom be ob- served at close range in the breeding season. The nestlings have enormous appetites, and consume more in proportion to their size than any other raptorial bird which I have studied or kept in con- finement. When hungry they set up a piercing kitten-like cry until they are supplied with food. In 1909, the same boy herded the horses, and exactly the same conditions prevailed for the hawks, which commenced nesting [Apa April 172 Cameron, Noles on Swainson’s Hawk. operation earlier than in 1908. On May 15, I watched the cock bird trampling down material in the nest, and soon his mate came to his assistance. After a time, disturbed by my presence, the pair took wing to an almost invisible height, crossing and re- crossing each other in circles. The female began to lay on May 24, and I observed her deposit her third and last egg on May 26. After sitting hard for about twenty minutes, she stood on the nest edge, spread her wings, and gently glided off. Aided by the high wind, she soared in ascending gyrations until lost to view. I now had a good opportunity to examine the nest, which was much en- larged by the addition of cottonwood and choke-cherry sticks. It was thickly lined inside with cottonwood bark, which falls off in great layers from dead trees. The hawks could easily obtain the soft, fibrous, interior strips, and it was this substance that I had seen both birds arranging in the nest. The latter was also adorned at one end with a bunch of green weeds after the fashion of the Golden Eagle. In color two eggs were unmarked greenish white, but the third egg had a large yellowish brown blotch. The immense nest was out of all proportion to the eggs which were placed in one corner. On June 3, the eggs reposed in exactly the same position upon a thick layer of green cottonwood leaves. I cannot leave this part of the subject without referring to the persecution of this hawk by Kingbirds (Tyrannus tyrannus) which frequently nest in close proximity to the site chosen by it. In one instance during 1899, a pair of Kingbirds had built their nest in some choke cherries immediately below that of the hawk, which was in an ash tree growing amidst them. Yet another Swainson’s hawk, nesting close by, was so unfortunate as to have a pair of Sparrow Hawks (Falco sparverius phalena) domiciled alongside. Neither of the Swainson Hawks could flap out of the nesting tree without being immediately attacked by one or other of these ag- gressive birds — sometimes by all of them together. In this con- nection it is interesting to read the following, as quoted from Capt. Charles E. Bendire by Dr. A. K. Fisher,' “Lieut. Benson writes me that, after the Arkansas Kingbirds (T'yrannus verticalis) began to build, he invariably found one of their nests in any tree that 1 Hawks and Owls of the United States, p. 73. iby? @:@ r : ‘ ior 7 Cameron, Notes on Swainson’s Hawk. 173 contained a Swainson’s Hawk’s nest. In one case a pair of these birds had placed their nest directly under and but eight or nine inches from that of the hawk.” Judging from my own observa- tion, whenever these unlucky hawks left their nests they would be remorselessly harried by the intrepid Arkansas Kingbirds. I have seen one of the latter strike down a young Sparrow Hawk on the wing, which I took home and kept until it had recovered. The buzzard’s peculiar flight upon catching the wind gives these small tormentors their opportunity, as she mounts in slow graceful spirals until a mere speck in the blue. When his mate was sitting, I have seen a male Kingbird (Tyrannus tyrannus) alight on the hawk’s back and be carried round for several seconds, while he vented his rage by pecking at her. No matter how high the hawk might soar, the small aggressor would keep above her, renewing his attacks at intervals until both were lost to view. The hawk re- sponded to each assault by merely giving four sluggish, downward flaps after which she would sail on motionless wings as before. These measured, floating gyrations, with wide expanded wings and tail, induced Forster to call the Common Buzzard of Europe spiralis, as pointed out by Seebohm.! My brother-in-law once informed me that he had seen a Swainson’s Hawk strike in midair an aggressive Kingbird which had thereupon fallen dead to the ground. At the time this seemed to me an incredible assertion, and I supposed he had mistaken the species of hawk; but since witnessing the bunting flight, described later, I am inclined to believe it. It was my desire to keep these young buzzards of 1909, in con- finement and make observations upon them, more especially as regards the spring moult. Accordingly on August 6, I rode to the tree for the purpose of capturing them, but when I was ascend- ing it, they both took wing. The female fledgling flew some dis- tance down the creek, but fortunately the day was too calm for her to rise again from the long grass, and the less active male fluttered into a deep water hole. While I was engaged in capturing and securing the two fledglings in a sack, their distressed mother appeared on the scene, swooped towards me, or hovered above, 1 British Birds, Vol. 1, p. 121. 174 Cameron, Notes on Swainson’s Hawk. Ast uttering long-drawn tremulous mews. When I rode away, bearing her offspring, she followed at a great height. On the morrow we coaxed the young buzzards to sit on the branch of a tree for photo- graphic purposes. An example was then afforded, if it were needed, of the difference made by wind to a bird’s flying powers. The strong wind which arose enabled the female to fly clear away, nor could she be recaptured, even on horseback, as she rose easily from the level. I regretted having disregarded my wife’s advice to anchor the Hawk by a pair of jesses; which, although rendering her portrait less effective, would have at least prevented her escape. She was presumably rejoined by her mother, who had been seen floating above the ranch. The male made no attempt to emulate his sister, for although hatched at the same time, she surpassed him in development by a week — a parallel case to that of young Golden Eagles. As observed in this instance, the female buzzard acquired the power of flight in twenty-eight days, and the male only after thirty-five days. The remaining young buzzard was kept in the barn and soon became exceedingly tame. His varied bill of fare consisted of grasshoppers, beef, mice, small birds which the cat happened to catch and frogs. The last he greatly preferred to any other food, and, upon my entering the barn with a frog, flew eagerly to snatch it from my hand without giving me time to shut the door. So voracious was the bird’s appetite that he would account for six large frogs at a meal, and was often compelled to disgorge those which he had swallowed whole to avoid being choked. I have known him to devour an entire rattlesnake at one time. The buzzard’s manner of feeding is to fly into a corner with his prey, which he conceals from outside curiosity by presenting his back and spreading his wings and tail over it. At the same time he so completely ruffles his feathers that their white bases on the head and neck cause the parts to appear mostly white, and he screams defiantly if approached. In spite of all this precaution, however, as soon as he had finished his meal he would fly to me for a further supply, when he would repeat his antics as before. The above appears to be a characteristic habit of all eagles and buzzards which become tame in captivity, although I have never observed it in wild, nor in freshly caught birds. The buzzard ejects castings Vora Cameron, Notes on Swainson’s Hawk. 175 from the mice, birds, and frogs in twenty-four hours after consum- ing them, but never drinks water — a peculiarity which he shares with captive Golden Eagles as above mentioned. The young buzzard’s cry differed according to his age. When he was quite young it resembled a kitten as stated, but by the end of August, when he was seven weeks old, it became loud and shrill like the scream of a sea-gull, though more piercing. At two months old he developed a musical cry, the appealing tone of which never failed to create a deep impression upon all who heard it. It con- sisted of four notes insistently repeated like E U, E U, the second E being a half tone lower than the first, and may be described as long sustained wails followed by short staccato notes. While these four notes are difficult to express in words they could be easily reproduced upon the violin, and are not unlike the plaintive but shriller tones of the British Lapwing (Vanellus vanellus) when hover- ing over its breeding grounds. The buzzard commenced this lament whenever my wife or I were present, and continued it as long as either remained with him. The ornithologist Coues did not fail to notice it, and writing of two captive birds remarks: “Both this and the younger one before him had a peculiarly plain- tive whistle to signify hunger or a sense of loneliness, a note that was almost musical in intonation.” ! As all the Hawk’s wants were supplied, we considered that this must be a baby ery to express recognition of friends and apprecia- tion of their company. This piteous cry only lasted for a month, as on October 5, before the buzzard was quite three months old, he became entirely silent, moped, and fasted for six days in suc- cession. His despondent mood lasted for five weeks, and only once in all that time would the Hawk come to me for food, although he occasionally ate what was brought to him. He seemed quite indifferent to the society of a young Ferruginous Rough-leg (Archi- buteo ferrugineus) which was confined with him. Here was indeed a change in the former screaming, voracious bird, which, if at liberty, flew boldly to me and clung to my clothing when I appeared with meat. He now shrank into himself, ceased all friendly overtures, and watched his companion feed unmoved. Not until November 1 Birds of the Northwest, p. 358. [ Auk April 176 Cameron, Notes on Swainson’s Hawk. 12th did he regain his high spirits and enormous appetite. I, of course, attributed the change to the migration impulse, but although the dejected buzzard escaped during this period he allowed me to retake him after three short flights. From three months old on- wards his ordinary call was a very soft low whistle, nor did he ever scream except when pretending to guard his food. During the winter the buzzard was kept in the house in a large cage, as I thought the barn would be too cold for him. The bird had engaging ways, and when anxious for food, which would be taken either by day or night, descended from his perch to that corner of his cage nearest the kitchen, where he stood whistling softly until supplied. Every evening at sundown he became restless for a few moments, flapped his wings, and made efforts to fly, which is, I believe, a characteristic of most cage birds at roosting time. In sleeping it was quite exceptional for him to put his head under his wing. On calm fine days the buzzard was liberated for out-door exercise but seemed afraid of wandering too far from home. Until he was a year old he had never been known to fly further than about two hundred yards, and only once into a tree when frightened by a dog. In 1909, I noticed the first appearance of Swainson’s Hawk on March 28, and on March 30, my tame bird again became subject to a fit of depression. (To be continued.) Vol. | 1913 Moore, The Fox Sparrow as a Songster. Vie THE FOX SPARROW AS A SONGSTER. BY ROBERT THOMAS MOORE. DurineG those brief March days, when he slips through our thickets, the Fox Sparrow sings so sweetly that we conclude he is doing his best. Not until we have heard his finished songs leaping out of the Canadian woodlands and sounding a riot of pure joy, as they are tossed from hill to hill, do we realize how much injustice we have done him. For those migrant strains, even at their best, are mere beginnings, the timid tuning up of the vocal instruments for the great song-fest to come. The fact is the migrant songs, which I have heard, lack nearly every quality which makes the finished product the great song it is. Loud as the former seem, their power is as nothing compared to that which propels the northern challenge, even the tone quality is defective, lacking in full depth and roundness, and most vital of all the dancing rhythm with its powerful central accents, which gives the northern songs the expression of irrepressible joy, is entirely absent. To appreciate this, one must go as far as the Magdalen Islands in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, for these islands mark the southern limit of nesting Fox Sparrows. With this purpose in view, I found myself on June 15, 1911, at Pictou, N. S., ready to take the biweekly steamer across the eighty miles of gulf waters. Much to my surprise neither there nor in Souris, Prince Edward Is., did I happen on a single individual of this species, vet the following day in the Magdalens, only sixty miles farther north, I found it one of the most common birds, exceeded in abundance only by the Savannah Sparrow and the Blackpoll Warbler. From June 16 until July 5, with the exception of six days on Bird Rock, several hours of each twenty-four were spent with the Fox Sparrow and some days were given up to him entirely. During this period we went to various portions of the islands from East Point to Grindstone, a distance of forty miles and more, and the records secured are therefore representative. Each new region brought to light some variations, but these were slight, the main features remaining unchanged. Wherever we hes 178 Moorr, The Fox Sparrow as a Songster. April went, as long as we kept to wooded districts, we were bound to find this robust sparrow and there he would be the loudest, most constant and most conspicuous songster. Ubiquitous as he was, it was not an easy matter to secure complete records of his songs. The difficulty was not with his pitch, which is very true, nor with his tones, which are free of “burred notes,” but with the contrast of intensity in the songs themselves. These consist of such a variety of extremely loud and soft sounds that one must get within ten feet of the bird to hear every one distinctly, a difficult prob- lem with any songster, especially one rather shy of intrusion near his song-site. Despite this I secured a number of records, most of which (Nos. 4 to 12 inclusive) are exact representations and the rest lacking only insignificant notes. I have also a large number of fragments such as No. 1, which are of almost equal value in determining universal characteristics. Besides these I heard a great number of songs, which so closely resembled records 2, 5 and 9 that it seemed useless to note them. ‘These three records are the most distinctive and are typical of the great majority of Magdalen songs. To this class belonged some of the most beautiful and longest ones I heard, in fact the records do not represent the length of the best Fox Sparrow songs. Some of them were quite intricate and were purposely avoided until the shorter ones had been mastered. At this point the expedition to Bird Rock intervened and our return on July 1 found the song-season on the wane and the songs curtailed to their central themes. Records 6, 7 and 11 are instances of this and all, except 4 and 5, were obtained during this waning period. Nevertheless they are adequate for the pur- pose of this article, which is to give by the help of their illustrative value some idea of general characteristics, rather than exact musical representations of the best this finch can do. The song-sites of the Fox Sparrow are conditioned by his habitat. Wherever there are low evergreens massed in dense clumps — and this is the condition of a large part of the Magdalen woodland — there he will be found. It makes no difference whether those clumps abut on inland fields or front the storms on some precip1- tous headland, out along their edges these sturdy finches are bound to be and will be heard at all times of the day, be it sunlit or foggy. Each individual has his own particular clump and one DE AUK VOlLe Soo CA re i Ta 2-8va FF 2s! Fox SPARROW. 7 u OF THE ) 1 x Sone Vol. Cea 1913 Moort, The Fox Sparrow as a Songster. 179 or more song-sites in that clump, so that it is possible to go out day after day and find the same songster and hear the same song. Sometimes his favorite tree is five feet high and sometimes twenty, ordinarily it is ten, and whatever its height, it is usually a spruce and is always on the edge of the clump, now facing an inner open space, or again the outer world and other songsters. His favorite song-position on the tree is its tip. A point a foot below may be chosen, but never the lower branches and by no means the ground. The last place is the region of his nest and from there no sounds are issued except call-notes. These consist of two kinds quite different from each other and neither musical. The most common is an explosive aspirate, which may be indicated by the syllable ‘chech’ and is as loud as the call of the Hermit Thrush. The second is a fine, high-pitched note, which closely resembles the call of the Savannah Sparrow. The former is heard much more fre- quently and in conjunction with the latter is employed to protest against intrusion near the nest. It is to protect his treasures that he drops to earth or else to help his mate in solving nest-problems, but he cannot stay there long; the impulse towards expression is too strong and he is soon back on his song-site. On the other hand he does not like to sing alone and, if his first three or four efforts are not answered, he will dive back to his mate. In like manner, when several birds are singing, and one suddenly stops, the rest become discouraged and one after another follow him to earth, although they may be a long distance from each other. Down they go together and after a bustling ten minutes with their mates, almost together they return. On several occa- sions I watched a single bird start a whole song-group. Cautiously he flitted upwards from limb to limb taking a minute to reach the top, then, when a careful survey had convinced him of safety, the bill raised, the eyes filmed and out across the valley rang the dane- ing challenge. The last note tossed off, the bill dropped again, the eyes brightened to alertness and the head cocked sidewise into a listening attitude. A minute might pass without the challenge being answered, when it was sent once more ringing over the hills so powerfully, that even a human might have heard it a half a mile. Almost always the second challenge brought a response from the opposite hill and thereafter reply and answer shot back 180 Moore, Jhe Fox Sparrow as a Songster. [ fess and forth, allowing plenty of time for pause and effect. Soon a third bird seized a moment of silence and turned the duo into a three-cornered affair and once I noted four rusty-coats shooting up their songs alternately like so many rockets from as many hills. This was not a single instance, but the customary way in which after an intermission song was resumed. Of course I do not mean to assert that Fox Sparrows are always so decorous and never interrupt each other, for they do at times during the day and more often at sunset, when there are too many songsters for each to be respectful. Even then the singing is not chorus fashion, for the tendency toward alternation is still preserved, though one bird often begins before another has finished. What I wish to state is this, that each Fox Sparrow is influenced by all others of his kind within hearing, that he certainly listens to their performance, and that this habit of listening has tended to produce an alterna- tion of song, which generally results in the antiphonal effect of answer and reply. That this influence is something more than mere accident or sentiment, is brought to light when the songs are studied from a musical standpoint. Records 2, 3, 4, 5 and the fragment 1 were sung from the hills surrounding one valley near Grosse Isle by five different birds. No two of these were more than a third of a mile from each other and therefore, if birds have even as good ears as man, within easy hearing distance. Three of their songs, Nos. 1’, 2 and 3, were secured the same afternoon, when these three birds were taking part in an alternating trio, during which each bird sang, listened and waited his turn.- On other afternoons the authors of songs 4 and 5, were heard answering each other for long periods of time and on still others No. 5 answered members of the first trio. Now the interesting fact is this, that all five of these songs are in the same key, Db, and three of them use pre- cisely the same sounds for their three most important notes, those marked by brackets. This phrase, as will be shown later, is the backbone of every song, its loudest portion, and therefore being 1 This phrase was only a small portion of the song, the rest of which could not be obtained on account of the bird’s shyness. However it was the most impor- tant part and, as it is identical with the similar portions of Nos. 2 and 5, it seemed worthy of insertion. 1, XXX Mea Moore, The Fox Sparrow as a Songster. 181 heard farthest, is most likely to be exactly imitated. The follow- ing day at Grindstone, twenty-five miles from Grosse Isle, songs 6 and 7 were heard in close proximity, using likewise a common key E6 minor. In this case the same time and almost identical notes were employed, and yet both notes and key were totally different from those of the Grosse Isle birds. This sort of thing I noticed a number of times, in fact every time the birds of a group sang long enough for me to pitch their songs and secure evidence. For instance records Nos. 8 and 9 are also in a common key and were rendered by birds whose song-sites were close to each other, though the birds were not heard on the same occasion. In the case of bird No. 8 I was witness of an interesting incident. As I was writ- ing down his notes, another Fox Sparrow flew up to a spruce oppo- site and answered him in the same key and with almost the identical song. After singing it three or four times in an uncertain fashion, he broke out confidently into an entirely different melody, more resembling No. 2, but still keeping in key D of song 8. Unfortu- nately he stopped singing before I had time to record his song. This was the only occasion when I heard a Fox Sparrow sing two songs, for unlike the Song Sparrow, the Fox seems to have but one and is content to repeat it over and over, making slight additions at the height of the season or reducing it at the end note by note to its melodic skeleton. This case was probably not a clear in- stance of two songs, but a momentary lapse, merely indicating how one bird is influenced by another and his songs gradually modified. One other case is enlightening, that of Nos. 10 and 11, whose authors answered each other constantly. These two birds did not sing in the same key, yet their songs contain common sounds and are so closely related that one makes a beautiful finish ! to the other. Furthermore both of these songs contain trills, very unusual features in the songs of this species. In each of these four groups there were more birds whose songs I was not able to record. Here then were four sets of Fox Sparrows, each set separated by several miles of territory and each exhibiting remark- able similarities within the group and variations without. Just 1 To show this relation I have placed Song 10 between two renditions of No. 11 and have added an accompaniment which, of course, was not sung by the birds! fess 182 Moore, The Fox Sparrow as a Songster. April as we would expect, the most distant groups display the greatest divergences, the songs of Grindstone, for instance, manifesting a tendency toward ornamentation, such as trills, rests and grace notes and being rendered in four time, whereas the songs of Grosse Isle are plainer and usually in three or five time. Having noticed these similarities within the groups, we are next concerned to discover those characteristics which are constant in all Fox Sparrow songs. It has already been intimated that he is not at all particular whether there are 2, 3, or 5 eighth notes in a measure; equally indifferent is he to the use of grace notes, dotted notes, staccato notes and trills, which may or may not be present. Sometimes he will satisfy the demands of human music by return- ing at the close to a note of the common chord, with which he started, or again he will end aimlessly as in records 6 and 7 or ask a positive question as in No. 8. Furthermore he occasionally slips into minor keys (Records 6, 7, and 11), a most unexpected lapse, when one considers what dancing movements of joy his phrases are. But despite this inconstancy there are certain fundamental char- acteristics which never change. First, the quality of tone is always round and full, like the sound of a clear flute-note. It is not rendered ambiguous by what Mr. Schuyler Matthews calls “burred tones,” on the other hand it is not enriched by those over- tones, which make the notes of the Wood Thrush so ethereal. It is decidedly human without touch of heavenly rapture, just a clear full tone, which is precisely the best medium for a message of joy and the most invigorating imaginable. A second invariable characteristic is the medium pitch of the songs and here the Fox Sparrow differs from the Hermit Thrush and many of our greatest songsters, who climb to such shrill heights that one sometimes doubts their sense for beauty.!. Our more sensible finch does not sing a note which a human being cannot whistle and all of them are pitched in those last two octaves of the piano, which seem to be the most satisfying region for the expression of bird-music. In the third place every song is extremely loud at least in its funda- mental sounds, so that it can be heard half a mile. Sometimes the 1 Nevertheless we must not forget that what is beautiful to our ears, may not be to a bird’s, and vice versa. = Vol. | 1913 Moore, The Fox Sparrow as a Songster. 183 whole song is loud, as in No. 2, but as a rule only the central phrase while the beginning and end are soft. A fourth characteristic is subject to little change: the rate of time is always fast, and I say this notwithstanding that record No. 9, my slowest record, was sung only about half as fast as No. 13, for the former was in great contrast with the majority of the songs, which ran nearer to the speed of No. 13. Some of the songs, which were not secured, went even faster and were rung off at such extreme speed that they could hardly be imitated by a human whistler. It is this speed which gives the songs their lively character. There is then practically no variation in these four relations,— quality of tone, pitch, in- tensity and time and these are the fundamental relations of music. When we come to the study of more general characteristics, we find there are others which are practically constant. As a whole the Fox Sparrow’s song may be described as follows: it opens with two ‘chechs,’ the low call-note, much like the Hermit Thrush’s beginning, then the main song starts high and soft and bursts forth into extremely loud sounds, accenting heavily a characteristic falling phrase of three notes and finally ends as soft as it began, but usually at lower pitch. It may also close with two high call- notes of poor musical quality. The opening and closing call-notes are indicated as near as possible to the proper pitch in record No. 5. All the songs of Grosse Isle, at the height of the song-season, except No. 4, possessed them. Their absence from records 2 and 3 is due to the fact that in these the exact pitch could not be determined. These notes are not, however, important, but the central phrase is. It is the most noticeable part of the song and always consists of a sharp drop in pitch from the first note to the second and a subse- quent slight rise from the second to the third. The drop may be a ‘fifth,’ ‘fourth,’ or ‘second,’ but the rise is almost invariably a half tone. Each one of the three is accented just as heavily and sung just as loud as the other two and, except in No. 1, each tone is given the same amount of time. Throughout the records this phrase is indicated by brackets above the score. Ninety-five per- cent of the songs have it, I should judge, and the rest rudimentary traces. In fact it was so characteristic that I got in the habit of disregarding songs that possessed it and recording all that evinced tendencies to do away with it. The result is, I have such records [ Auk April 184 Moore, The Fox Sparrow as a Songster. as No. 7, where the drop is turned into a triplet of three sounds, Nos. 3 and 12 where it is doubled, and Nos. 4 and 8, where it has almost disappeared. These are the only instances and against them I heard hundreds, which were all rendered in the positive way No. 9 is. Indeed all my fragments consist without exception of this fundamental phrase and whatever else could be secured before the bird ceased singing. This phrase was obtained invari- ably before other sounds, because it stood out so conspicuously. It is always the loudest portion of the songs, if there is any change of intensity, and yet the preluding soft notes never approach it by means of crescendo. When they have danced the melody up to this point, it simply bursts with startling suddenness into the phrase, showering extravagant accents on all three notes. Mr. Cheyney has used the rocket illustration to record his impyession of the Hermit Thrush’s song, but it can be more fitly applied to the Fox Sparrow’s, though the rocket in this case travels horizontally. It starts in mid-sky and darting along with scintillating but sup- pressed power, suddenly flares out with the accompaniment of dazzling light and triumphant sound; then there is a mighty drop and exultant recovery and a final sputter as it leaps into silence. To use a term of psychology this central theme is the song’s point of orientation or the part which invariably compels attention first. One might call it the recognition-phrase of the species, certainly for human ears, and possibly for birds’. Over and over again I heard Fox Sparrows’ songs far across the hills and always this phrase alone had sufficient carrying power to be audible, yet it was adequate for the immediate identification of the song. And I think it would be an unconscious recognition-note even for bird- students, who are not musical and could not define it in musical terms. Of course more obvious to them would be the loudness of the song, its speed and the flute-like quality of tone. To the birds also it seems fundamental, for as I have shown, it is the only phrase of the song which remains constant. But I have another bit of . evidence, which ought to be convincing. During July when all other notes are dropping off with the waning song-season, this central phrase is kept intact to the very last. Records 6 and 7, secured July 3, show this and more so No. 11, obtained the same afternoon. The last contains only one sound more than the three Vol. | 1913 Moore, The Fox Sparrow as a Songster. 185 of the phrase, and yet that one was sung very soft, while the others were propelled with the same power they had been in June. In connection with this I might mention an incident, which may or may not be considered evidence, though it does prove how birds are influenced by songs about them. I had been endeavoring to get near enough to record the softer tones of the shy author of fragment 1. This bird and some of his song-group not recorded, were singing the central phrase in a peculiar jerky fashion, giving the first note twice as much time as the second. After a few minutes a new songster entered the group, who sang these three notes in a hoarse, hard tone and in lower pitch (see record 1A), and sang no other notes whatever. Stealing up, I was astonished to see a Robin uttering the rasping sounds. Instantly he flew away to the next clump of trees and sang the rollicking song of his kind, but still in hoarse quality. To me the Fox Sparrow stands out as the singer of joy. Many birds are of this kind, but few are to such a degree as this inhabitant of the stunted woodlands of the North. The musical construction indicates it, for instance the dancing rhythm, the major keys, and the speed with which it fairly shoots through the central phrase. But deeper than these are certain qualities in his physical being and character, which make for happiness: his robustness and virility, his excessive activity in all his waking hours. As evidence of his energy it has been stated that he sometimes scratches with both feet in concert, but my observations indicate that he always does this and that this accounts for the clatter he makes among the leaves. At any rate his energy is quite as strenuous as that of his cousin, the Chewink, whether he is tossing the leaves in search of food or defying the northern fog with his buoyant song. Under no circumstances is he depressed! Evidence of this we obtained repeatedly in the Magdalens. Most every day it rained and even when the sun shone, it was a common occurrence for fog to creep in from the sea and resume full sway. Other birds stopped singing, but not the Fox Sparrow! His song rang out just as buoy- ant and golden as when sunlit; indeed there was a suppressed eagerness about it, as if it were contesting the supremacy of the mist. Now this is surely optimism and, when one takes him all in all, it is as an optimist that he attains highest rank. As such one 186 Moore, The Fox Sparrow as a Songster. Fees must compare him with birds like the Mockingbird, Thrasher and Winter Wren, all of them singers of the joy of life. None of these, famous as they are, possess as fine a tone as the Fox Sparrow’s or revel in such matchless melodies. The Mockingbird and the Thrasher repeat over and over insignificant phrases of from*two to five notes, until one wearies of waiting for a real melody. Even the rippling melodies of the Winter Wren are spoiled by jerking rhythm and acrobatic antics. But the Fox Sparrow is almost beyond criticism. His is a dignified manner, a big voice, a fine tone, a consummate sense of rhythm and a splendid series of danc- ing melodies. Having praised him so much, one must compare him with his great relative, the Song Sparrow, our finest melodist. And here our larger finch must take second place in one thing and that important: he lacks versatility. Each individual has but one song and any song however fine it may be, is bound to weary after much repetition. The Song Sparrow on the other hand is master of innumerable melodies and every one of his kind has a large repertoire. In no other department of music, however, is the Fox Sparrow inferior. His tone is finer, his voice is bigger and pitched lower, so that it is a more mellow medium for the expression of sentiment, and finally his melodies themselves, though not so vari- ous, are more elaborate, interesting and affecting. To tell the truth the Fox Sparrow’s song is not at all sparrow-like and bears only a faint resemblance to the larger finches. In nearly every way he is more like the Thrushes, particularly the Hermit, with whom he has a remarkable affinity. He chooses the same sort of song-site, he mounts to it in the same cautious way, throughout the song-period he exhibits the same calm dignity and his rusty coat and large size contribute to the striking similarity. The song itself opens with almost identical call-notes, is followed by a simi- lar contrast of soft and loud tones and in a general way is the same sort of prominent, ringing compelling music. Strangest of all the . tone quality, though not quite so rich, is so similar that the first few days in the Magdalens, I mistook it at a distance for the Her- mit’s! Later study of song-construction made it possible for me to distinguish this song at any distance. It is in song-construction that the Hermit is his undoubted master, as he is of all other birds. Vol. | 1913 Barrows, Concealing Action of the Bittern. 187 The marvelous harmony of his many phrases places him at once in a rank by himself and forces us to drop a dubious comparison. Still the Fox Sparrow is likely to win a more affectionate regard from the majority of bird-lovers, on account of his brighter music, dancing forth as it does in a perfect abandon of joy. At any rate he is the master songster! of the Magdalens and _ particularly acceptable in that sea-world, whose history is bound up with ship- wreck and whose customary music is the buzzing of Savannah Sparrow, rasping of Rusty Blackbird, quavering of Wilson’s Snipe, pumping of Bittern, rattling of Rail, croak of Raven, and mocking laughter of the Loon. CONCEALING ACTION OF THE BITTERN (BOTAURUS LENTIGINOSUS). BY WALTER BRADFORD BARROWS. THE adaptive, concealing or protective coloration of the common Bittern is so well known to all ornithologists and to most other bird lovers that it hardly needs mention here. It is also a matter of common observation that this remarkable bird has the habit of standing motionless for minutes at a time with its legs, body and outstretched neck all in the same line, the bill pointing directly toward the sky. In this position, with the wings and feathers of the trunk pressed closely to the sides, and perhaps the body itself somewhat flattened, the bird, at least from the usual point of view, closely resembles a weather beaten strip of board, a dead and bleached stub, or even a rather bulky last year’s stalk of cat- tail flag. In my own experience this attitude of the Bittern seems to be assumed most often immediately on alighting, and then after holding this rigid position for a few moments it rather quickly 1The Hermit Thrush is only locally distributed and uncommon in the Mag- dalen Islands. 188 Barrows, Concealing Action of the Bittern. Avail draws down its head and neck into the more graceful position of a feeding heron and proceeds to walk about deliberately in search of food. A few years ago I had an opportunity of observing closely one of these birds which exhibited a refinement of this concealing action which ‘was entirely new to me and seemed indeed so remarkable that I hesitated to publish it until the literature of the subject had been searched with some care, and effort had been made to detect other individuals using the same device. The observation referred to was made on the campus of the Agricultural College, in Ingham County, Michigan, in August, 1905, on a Bittern which was found in an artificial pond in which water lilies, wild rice, narrow leaved cattails, sedges and some other water plants were growing. The pond was something less than one hundred yards in length and of irregular form, the widest parts, however, not more than fifteen or twenty yards across. While at work in my office, in the middle of the afternoon, Mr. U. P. Hedrick, then professor of horticulture, came in breathlessly with the information that a large water bird had alighted in the lily pond and could be collected readily if wanted for the museum. Hurrying back with him to the edge of the pool the bird was no- where to be seen, although we looked carefully in the place where it had been standing less than five minutes before. Skirting the water with some care and scanning every cluster of water plants on the way, we passed completely around the pool, returning at length to the point where we had first reached it, still without dis- covering the bird. The afternoon was bright and warm with a rather fitful breeze, there were few shrubs about our end of the pond, the water plants were not thick enough to hide a blackbird; it seemed certain that the bird had flown away. As we stood talking about its disappearance, however, and while I was questioning my friend who is not an ornithologist as to its size, color and action, it suddenly appeared standing motionless - and in plain sight at a distance of less than fifty feet, in water only a few inches deep and among scattered cattail flags which were nowhere close enough together to offer any real concealment. The bird, an adult Bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus) was in the char- acteristic erect and rigid attitude already described and so near to us that its yellow iris was distinctly visible. Vol. XXX y : ; 2 > 1913 Barrows, Concealing Action of the Bittern. 189 Apparently both of us discovered the bird at the same instant and involuntarily gave exclamations of surprise that it had not been seen before, while my companion at once declared that it was within a few feet of the spot where he had left it when he came to call me. I told him what the bird was and called his attention to the protective coloration and posture; then, as we stood admir- ing the bird and his sublime confidence in his invisibility, a light breeze ruffled the surface of the previously calm water and set the cattail flags rustling and nodding as it passed. Instantly the Bittern began to sway gently from side to side with an undulating motion which was most pronounced in the neck but was partici- pated in by the body and even the legs. So obvious was the motion that it was impossible to overlook it, yet when the breeze subsided and the flags became motionless the bird stood as rigid as before and left us wondering whether after all our eyes might not have deceived us. It occurred to me that the flickering shadows from the swaying flags might have created the illusion and that the rippling water with its broken reflections possibly made it more complete; but another gentle breeze gave us an opportunity to repeat the observa- tion with both these contingencies in mind and there was no escape from the conclusion that the motion of the Bittern was actual, not due to shadows or reflections, or even to the disturbance of the plumage by the wind itself. The bird stood with its back to the wind and its face toward us. We were within a dozen yards of it now and could see distinctly every mark of its rich, brown, black and buff plumage and yet if our eyes were turned away for an instant it was with difficulty that we could pick up the image again, so perfectly did it blend with the surrounding flags and so accurate was the imitation of their waving motion. This was repeated again and again, and when after ten or fifteen minutes we went back to our work, the bird was still standing near the same spot and in the same rigid position although by almost imperceptible steps it had moved a yard or more from its original station. During the seven years which have elapsed since this occurrence I have improved every opportunity to watch for a repetition of this action, but thus far in vain. Many times I have had Bitterns 190 Barrows, Concealing Action of the Bittern. Na within sight and at short range, but the conditions never have been such as to favor the recognition of such motion had it existed. In one instance, in July, 1911, I watched a family of three young Bitterns more than two thirds grown which assumed the upright and rigid attitude as perfectly as the adults, except that they walked about more freely but without relaxing the strained posi- tion in the least. All the time, however, they kept their bodies almost completely hidden in the coarse grass and even the necks were so obscured by the tips of the grass that when this was set in motion by the wind I could not tell whether the neck remained quiet or not. The birds in this case occupied a little grass covered island in a muddy pool so that I could not readily get nearer than about thirty yards, and even with a six-power field-glass it was impossible to settle the question. A somewhat careful examination has been made of American bird literature without finding any reference to this peculiar action, but the search has been by no means thorough. I have also ex- amined such accounts as I could find of the action of the closely related European Bittern (Botaurus stellaris) without finding any reference to a similar performance, although the accounts and fig- ures would lead one to believe that in voice and attitude as well as in general habits this bird closely resembles our own. Vol. XXX 3 : an ae 7913 Puituips, Migration and Periodic Accuracy. 191 BIRD MIGRATION FROM THE STANDPOINT OF ITS PERIODIC ACCURACY. BY JOHN C, PHILLIPS. OnE must confess to a feeling of trepidation on entering into such a dangerous field of discussion as bird migration, especially in its theoretical aspect, for perhaps no scientific subject has been so flooded with wild speculation, dogmatic assertions and poetical fancy. This is natural, because the facts cannot fail to come to the notice of every. lover of nature, and their esthetic quality makes them attractive material for thought and discussion. Bird migration touches many interesting provinces of science, such as zodgeography, geology, meteorology, evolution and com- parative psychology. What has recently excited the writer’s curiosity is the meaning of the time sense of certain species of birds, especially where such an accurate sense does not seem to be war- ranted; in a word, where it seems more highly developed than is compatible with adaptive necessity. In the past decade many of the facts of migiation have become common knowledge, but when these facts are completely grasped, and even when the movements of the individual bird have been thoroughly studied, the great problem of migration is likely to remain as much unsolved as ever, for the sense on which distant orientation depends, and the instinct which starts the travellers are beyond the reach of our present methods of investigation. Instinct itself is of course the fundamental problem, a problem as deep and obscure as any in the realm of philosophy. Bergson says: “The intellect is characterized by a natural inability to com- prehend life. Instinct on the contrary is moulded on the very form of life. While intelligence treats everything mechanically, instinct proceeds so to speak organically. If the consciousness that slumbers in it should awake, if it were wound up into knowl- edge, instead of being wound off into action, if we could ask and it could reply, it would give up to us the most intimate secrets of life.”’ 1 Bergson, Creative Evolution, p. 165. ae 192 Puiwuips, Migration and Periodic Accuracy. April But though the nature of instinet is so far beyond us, the direc- tion of its efforts can be studied, and as far as the writer can see they are held by students of animal behavior to be of a purposeful and adaptive nature; if not for their present needs, then possibly through persistence they may show a glimpse of what was their past necessity or specialization. Comparing instinct with intuition Bergson says again: “Without intelligence, it (intuition) would have remained in the form of instinct, riveted to the special form of its practical interest and turned outward by it into movements of locomotion.”’! (Italics mine.) Holmes says: “Salmon begin their up-stream migration, the male frog develops his tendency to clasp the female, birds herald the advent of the breeding season with courtship and song, and the males of many mammals show at this season an unusual degree of belligerency. The change in instinctive behavior during the breeding season may be due to the production of internal secretions which influence the irritability of certain parts of the nervous system, but however caused, it is, like the varying responses to food, water, ete., pretty closely subservient to the needs of the species.’”* (Italics mine.) In the same vein we might quote from Lloyd Morgan who in contrasting reflex with instinctive actions, says of the latter: “Tnstinetive activities are those organized trains or sequences of co-ordinated activities which are performed by the individual in common with all members of the same more or less restricted group, in adaptation to certain circumstances, oft-recurring or essential to the continuance of the species.’ * (Italics mine.) Whether we regard migration as the operation of a pure instinct, or complicate it with reflex action brought about by various tro- pisms, and even influenced by a certain element of choice (intelli- gence), we must admit, I think, that its foundation is adaptive and useful. It is true that it is often difficult to see why bird migration has been so persistently carried on, especially in cases where part. of the individuals of a species are local in their habits and part are migratory, for no reason that seems a necessity, but this is very ldo. p. 178. 2 Holmes, The Evolution of Animal Intelligence. 3J.. Morgan, Animal Life and Intelligence, p. 422. Vol. a | 1913 Puituipes, Migration and Periodic Accuracy. 193 likely analogous in a certain way to evolution of form, which as embryology shows us so well, is forced into the repetition of ancient and disused types. Professor Wheeler in his book on ants gives a very concise discussion of instinct, with some excellent definitions. He points out various grades of degenerating instincts in these animals, some of which can be brought back into activity under proper conditions. According to him, instinct, “the combination of complexity with automatic fixity,” has been studied from four different points of view, ethological, physiological, psychological and metaphysical. We are naturally concerned now mostly with the physiological side. We must bear in mind that the regularity of instinctive behavior has probably been somewhat exaggerated, and as Jordan says, an instinctive action is subject to variation like all other characteristics of animals. Individual birds show peculiarities of behavior in nest building, song and other actions. Hodge has shown that a great difference in power of orientation exists for homing pigeons. Also, in animals as high in the scale of life as birds, there cannot fail to be some “power of choice” in almost every stereotyped activity. This brings us back to our enquiry into the mechanism by which birds are enabled to arrive each year at a given locality at almost exactly the same time. From a physico-chemical standpoint the accuracy of time sense in certain species is little short of marvelous and is well shown in the familiar Baltimore Oriole and the Bobolink, which are both late arrivals in the north. Mr. Brewster very kindly allowed me to see his notes on the arrival of these species at Concord, Massachusetts, for long periods of time. From 1900 to 1911 his earliest record for the Bobolink is May 3, and his latest May 11. For three years the arrival was May 8, and for two years May 7; the average being May 7. Just as remarkable is the Oriole at Concord. From 1900 to 1911, the earliest is May 3 and latest May 14. The average is May 8, and the species appeared twice on this day, twice on the 9th, once on the 7th, and once on the 6th. An earlier period including the years ’86, ’89, ‘90, ‘91 and ’93, gives the average date of the Oriole near Boston as May 6, with the greatest variation at six days. [ Auk April 194 Puiuuires, Migration and Periodic Accuracy. Examples of this great potential accuracy could be multiplied indefinitely, but we will confine ourselves to some of-the most striking. Cooke’s report of Bird Migration in the years 1884 and 1885 bear out the wonderful uniformity of progression of the Oriole. Cooke says !: “ Were the surface of the earth level and the climate absolutely uniform, birds would arrive at a given place on approxi- mately the same day each year. . . .In the records of the Biological survey the best example of uniformity in arrival is that of the Chimney Swift at New Market, Va., as noted by George M. Neese. The dates of each year from 1884 to 1906 are respectively, April 16, 16, 15, 16, 16, 11,9, 15, 21, 14; 15714, 125 7,16; 14 Ao, 125 ae Cet Oe Dixon? quotes the case of the Puffins which arrive at St. Kilda very regularly on the first day of May, while the Bartailed Godwits reach the south coast of England so near a certain date that the twelfth of May is known as ‘ Godwit-day.’ Think for a moment what this means; a start from a more or less changeless climate, where environmental stimuli can hardly account for any of the accuracy we have pointed out, with a - journey of two thousand miles or more, fraught with innumerable variations in wind, precipitation, food supply, ete., and in the case of these first instances, an arrival at Boston, estimating the total journey to occupy about two months, with an average error of only 9%. This is comparable to a train being thirteen and one- half minutes late in a journey of one hundred miles at forty miles per hour. Yet if we take into consideration that the bird has no watch to start on, we ought really to figure its possible error of spring arrival as the per cent of its total sojourn in winter quarters, plus the time of its northern journey, which total period must be reckoned to be nearly eight months. This gives us an error of only 2.4%. With the case of the Chimney Swift the actual average error as Cooke remarks is only 2.2 days in the whole period of twenty-three years. It is natural that a very exceptional season, such as the cold May of 1907, may have a very marked effect on bird arrivals. 1 The Migratory Movements of Birds in Relation to the Weather. Year-book of Dept. of Agric., 1910, p. 386. 1 Dixon, The Migration of Birds, 1897. p. 134. a vor] 1913 Puruips, Migration and Periodic Accuracy. 195 Eifrig’s observations at Ottawa, Canada,! show that this excep- tional season delayed some birds, like the Hummingbird, for two weeks, while other species were very little affected. This, however, only means that the racial accuracy of the species was forcibly interfered with from outside, in some cases far more seriously than in others. We must, however, now consider another side of the question. So far we have been dealing with ‘first arrivals.’ What we should like, of course, would be individual arrivals, but until we have some definite information on this point, which can only be supplied by the return of banded birds to nesting sites, we must content our- selves with the consideration of the possible errors in recording first arrivals, and also with the highly interesting ‘bulk arrivals,’ or dates of greatest frequency of transient migrants. The question of the error of first arrivals has been discussed by Messrs. Stone and Cooke. Stone found? that many eyes were better than one, and Cooke ® states that where one observer was ‘operating, his dates of first arrival were apt to be over a day late on an average. Cooke’s method of averaging migration arrivals 4 consists in throwing out dates which are more than six days out of the way, his experience teaching him that “birds seldom vary on account of the season more than six days either way from the average date of their arrival.’”’ This method may seem to some, as to the writer, rather arbitrary. Mr. Stone gives a good discussion of the problem of recording early arrivals in the ‘ Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia’ for 1908. Init he shows that to get at the actual date we must combine the records of many observers at different points a few miles apart, and combine them in certain definite ways, so as to throw out stations in which individual error or in- compatibility of surroundings delayed the detection of the species in question. By ‘bulk arrival’ Mr. Stone means the date on which the species has arrived at half the stations in a given restricted area. He regards the bulk arrival, or greatest frequency as recorded only 1 Auk, 1908, p. 1. 2 Stone, W., Condor, 1906, p. 88. 3 Cooke, W. W., Auk, 1907, p. 346. 4 Cooke, W. W., Auk, 1908, p. 485. [ Auk April 196 Puituips, Migration and Periodic Accuracy. by a single observer, as much too variable a quantity to be of practical use. By his methods of estimating the dates from year to year he obtains an extraordinarily slight arrival variation. _ Thus it is probable that ordinary dates of arrival as given by single observers increase rather than diminish our knowledge of the actual potential accuracy of the species. In ‘Cassinia’ for 1911 arrivals in the Philadelphia region are tabulated for the years 1906-1911. Below are given in a table four species which are remarkable from our point of view. The figures are the actual departure in days from a ten year average for the species. They are based on Mr. Stone’s ‘bulk arrival.’ 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 Yellow Warbler 0 0 +4 —2 0 0 Ovenbird 0 0 +4 —1 0 —2 Baltimore Oriole +2 —5 +4 —1 —3 —2 Canadian Warbler 0 0 —1 +1 —3 +1 In glancing down the ‘Cassinia’ table one sees immediately that groups of species arriving at nearly the same time are often very similarly affected by the season, and will be either late or early according to the year. Within the same year, however, the early or March migrants may be affected in an opposite direction from the late migrants; thus early species may be late and late species early, for the same season. This is merely more evidence to show that at least some of the observed arrival error is meteorological rather than instinctive; and external instead of internal. In the same paper Mr. Stone notes that in computing the ten year averages it is interesting to see how the average of ‘bulk arrivals’ based on the method given above, coincides with the average of first arrivals at stations where there have been a number of accurate observers. On page 47 is a table which shows the 10 observation stations near Philadelphia, with dates of arrival for 9 common birds. The ‘bulk arrivals’ here are either the same or only one day later than the average first arrivals. . Taking a single species, the Brown Thrasher, a bird easily seen and almost impossible to identify wrongly, the ten year arrival records are given in detail. For this period there are 10 stations and 22 observers at work. Each of the stations has its own average and the greatest error is +2 days at George School, and —3 days Vol. xx] 1913 Puituirs, Migration and Periodic Accuracy. 197 at Concordville. The Grand Total is April 22 for first arrival, while the grand computed ‘bulk arrival’ is April 23 for the entire period. This shows that first arrivals are not mere strag- glers, for if they were, the records of the different Philadelphia stations would not give such uniform results. In Stone’s ‘The birds of Eastern Pennsylvania and New Jersey, 1894’ are given lists of arrival at Germantown, Pa., for 50 species from 1885 to 1892. Those showing great constancy are the Chimney Swift, Baltimore Oriole, Barn Swallow, Yellow Warbler, Blackpoll Warbler, Oven-bird, Redstart and Catbird. These records of course are not the work of so many observers as the “Cassinia’ records. For the period 1893-1900 there is another set of arrival records ! which shows as very accurate birds, the Chimney Swift, Baltimore Oriole, Barn Swallow, Wood Thrush and others. We note that the same species come up with accuracy performances at different times and in different localities. Mr. Brewster ? has called attention to the probable dependence of species upon each other for purposes of guidance. He shows how flocks are made up of many species and how rare stragglers are always found in the company of other species. He also men- tions the case of lost birds, that is, rare stragglers, almost always turning out to be the young of the season. It is of course apparent | that many species migrate together. On the great May rush sev- eral species arrive each day on an average. From the ‘Cassinia’ table of 1911 we get 4 species on May 4, 2 May 5, 2 May 6, 1 May 7, 5 May 8, 2 May 9, 1 May 10, 2 May 11 and 2 May 12. This refers to common species only, exact dates for rare birds being much harder to compute. But however dependent species are upon each other during their journeys, we cannot escape from the fact that each has its characteristic time period, for if it did not, we would get a very different picture of migration. The birds would then come in great scattering waves, transient migrants would be longer in passing a given point, and the whole phenomenon would lose much of its present orderliness. Of the 14 common Hunga- 1 Cassinia, 1901, p. 37. 2 Memoirs of the Nuttall Club, No. 1, 1886. 198 Pures, Migration and Periodic Accuracy. esi rian migrants to be referred to later, no two fall upon the same day. They begin with Alauda arvensis on February 28 and end with Coturnix coturniz on April 29. There is much to be learned as to the nesting localities of late and early arrivals inside a given species. It is certain that some birds wintering in Central America arrive in temperate summer haunts and begin nest building almost before others of the same species start from winter quarters bound for sub-arctic regions, the north bound birds starting later and traveling faster. As Cooke remarks in speaking of the Robin! “The first robins that reach a given locality in the spring are likely to remain there to nest, and the advance of the migration time must await the arrival of other birds from still farther south. Therefore each robin undoubtedly migrates at a faster rate than the apparent movement of his species as a whole. This is true of most, if not all, of the other seemingly slow migrants.” We may now refer to the most elaborate study of migration yet attempted, that outlined by Otto Herman in Hungary ” and given in ‘Aquila’ from year to year. Enormous numbers of stations are in use and stress is laid on the common species. It must be confessed however that the actual significance of these records from our point of view is hard to determine because most of the observers appear to have been masters of elementary schools and others not skilled in field work. It is more than likely that many stations would show a delay in arrival not actually present. In Vol. XII, 1905, p. 226, there is, however, a table showing the com- bined dates of arrival of 16 species from 1894 to 1903. The average yearly error, as compared with a ten year mean date of arrival, has been computed, and shows as very constant birds the following species: Turtur turtur and Oriolus oriolus with an error of 1.5» days and Coturniz coturniz with an error of only 1.4 days. I have computed the average error of these same species for a later period, 1904 to 1910, using the ‘Aquila’ tables and find it to be 2.2 days for Turtur, and 2 days each for Oriolus and Coturnix. Vol. XVIII, 1911, of ‘Aquila’ gives on p. 138 a large table show- 1 Yearbook of Dept. of Agriculture, 1903, p. 383. 2 Proc. 4, International Ornith. Congress, p. 163. — eae ae - ee ~ Vol. J | 1913 Puituips, Migration and Periodic Accuracy. 199 ing 15 years of work summed up, with actual numbers of individuals included in five day intervals. A rough idea of dates of greatest abundance is thus obtained. These 15 year bulk arrivals are compared directly with the results of the previous year 1910. On the whole this table shows a pretty orderly invasion and de- parture for each species, although of course the country covered is a large one with much mountainous territory, naturally tending to lengthen out the passage of migrants a great deal above what it would be if a small area had been used for tabular work. Another way of getting some light on the orderliness of the species in migration is by comparing in a long series of years actual first arrivals with average first arrivals. In Cooke’s various papers in ‘Bird Lore’ on the migration of N. A. Sparrows there is a large number of such records. We will take only a few of the most striking cases where observations extend over a long period, so as to get the greatest possible chance for departures from the normal. Rose-breasted Grosbeak at Wasington, D. C., 18 years; earliest, May 1; average May 5. For the same species observed at Engle- wood, N. J., 12 years; earliest, May 1; average May 6. Ballston Spa, N. Y., 14 years; earliest, May 4; average May 10. St. Johnsbury, Vt., 12 years; earliest, May 6; average May 10. Chicago, IIl.,21 years; earliest, April 25; average May 3. Warter- loo, Ind., 11 years; earliest, April 28, average May 2. Aweme, Manitoba, 16 years; earliest, May 12, average, May 16. For the White-crowned Sparrow at Ottawa, Ontario, 24 years; earliest, April 30; average, May 7. For the White-throated Spar- row at Ottawa, Ontario, 27 years; earliest, April 15; average, April 26. For the Blue Grossbeak at Raleigh, N. C., 21 years; earliest, April 25; average May 2. St. Onaga, Kan., 15 years; earliest, May 1; average May 5. Indigo Bunting at Raleigh, N. C., 23 years; earliest, April 23; average, May 1. Renovo, Pa., 16 years; earliest, May 2, average May 9. In thus considering a biologic problem such as migration, it is as well to remark here that we are laying ourselves open to the just criticism which biometricians incur when they rely solely on figures. This we realize fully. Perhaps data from individual birds, which [ Auk 200 Puiuurs, Migration and Periodic Accuracy. April will one day be forthcoming, will show us that: we have greatly exaggerated the individual potential accuracy, but on the other hand may it not be possible that in some cases we have under- estimated the case, for as suggested above the first arrivals of a species flight may prove to be always the same birds, bound for a definite latitude and locality. From Cooke ! we get the impression that birds cannot in any way predict weather conditions, as has so often been claimed for them, and that such birds as the ducks and geese are much more liable to take advantage of weather conditions, open water, etc., than are the passerine birds. And were this accuracy of the passerines correlated in any way with an increased intelligence, we would certainly expect to see it manifested in birds like the Canada Goose and the ducks, whose superior mental endowment none can doubt. But here we seem to see it least, for in the migration of these inde- pendent fowl there is often an error of weeks as contrasted with days among their more trustful and less intelligent brethren. Has not this very intelligence tended in some subtle way to deliver the geese from the bondage, so to speak, of a hide-bound time sense, and allowed them a greater scope to grapple with seasonal condi- tions? This has nothing to do with the evolution of the species considered: it simply means specialization in a given direction. So also it seems to the writer that the ‘potential accuracy’ of birds like our Bluebird is probably much greater than we think, but the species is subjected to such a grave variation in season on account of its early arrival in the north, that it, so to speak, does merely the best it can. Another question occurs at this point, which is really not within our enquiry, but may be mentioned, and that is the reason for the widely different migration times of different species. Loomis” saw in this phenomenon an indication of an orderly depopulation of the North in order to prevent over-population, and he attributed all’ that we see now to an equalization of dis- tribution through diversity in the time of southern migration, evolved by the progress of ages and perpetuated by the require- 1W. W. Cooke, Yearbook of the Dept. of Agriculture, 1910. 2 Auk, 1894, p. 94, Loomis, L. M. Vol. ze 1913 Puituires, Migration and Periodic Accuracy. 201 ments of winter. In other words, a huge and far-extending altruism, with nothing left to chance or to orthogenetic tendencies. This view is, I think, farfetched, for one cannot see how the earliest spring movements are the necessary outcome of a rush to occupy all available territory. We should suppose that many more birds could migrate at the same time without disturbing the geographical economy of seasonal dispersal. Loomis saw in the case of the Canada Goose a continuous migration, not subject to a sudden arousing of the migratory impulse. The impelling force came in this case, he thought, more from without. But here it seems he is only partly right, for this species is certainly subject to great and sudden migratory impulses, only, as we have mentioned above, there is added an element of choice, or an ability to profit by external conditions which is not often easy to see in other birds. Loomis’s various papers in ‘The Auk,’ in so far as they refer to the erratic movements of birds, and peculiar periodic dispersals, are very interesting, but cannot be considered here. See also an instructive paper by Whitaker on the great invasion of southern Europe by Crossbills in 1909.1. Even such cases of sporadic in- vasion of new territory may show an orderly progress and just as orderly retirement. Many theories of course have been put forward to account for the start of vernal migrants from winter quarters. An ingenious one is that of Taverner 2, who saw in the breeding of tropical spe- cies an actual stimulus to wintering migrants. This stimulus was, he thought, brought about by pressure of numbers and lack of food owing to increase in resident numbers by their early breeding, the pressure extending outwards (northwards) to the limits of popu- lated ground. Other writers have seen in the failure of the food supply in the South after the advent of the dry season, a sufficient inciting cause, but it is hardly probable that any of these reasons could account entirely for the orderly procession of different species, and their appearance at allotted times. It remains to search for other examples of a physico-chemical 1 Whitaker, J. I. S., Auk, 1910, p. 332. 2 Auk, 1904, p. 322. [ Auk April 202 Puiuurrs, Migration and Periodic Accuracy. periodicity to compare our time sense with. ‘There occurs to one immediately the phenomenon of ovulation and menstruation in man, and the appearance of rut in other mammals. But such appearances are notoriously liable to time error, and easily affected by changed conditions, disease, season, etc. Variation in periods of gestation and incubation are, it is true, extremely close to the mean for the species, but these periods are coupled and timed by very marked changes in circulation and metabolism, and are scarcely comparable with the migrating period of the bird, which has nothing but the very doubtful stimulus of the developing sex glands to check and control the migration once it has started, and even this is sometimes not present at all. I use the word ‘nothing’ as meaning nothing that we know of at present. It would indeed be interesting if we could subject castrated birds to experimental conditions in order to test the strength of their migratory impulses, but this could hardly be accomplished. All we know is that young birds belonging to migratory species, though they do not them- selves breed during their first year, come north with the others, perhaps by imitation. We acknowledge the dominating power of sexual ‘hormones’ in instituting spring migration in birds, for the instinct of repro- duction is the dominant instinct in animals, and all others may be classed as secondary to it. What we cannot account for is the controlling and regulating power which must be constantly at work once the journey is begun, in order that a certain latitude may be reached at a certain time. For instance among warblers Cooke tells us! that the Black and White Warbler, an early migrant, occupies a whole month in going from North Carolina to Massachusetts, averaging only 13 miles per day, while the Blackpoll Warblers that nest in Alaska make the last part of their journey, 2500 miles, in not over two weeks, or about 200 miles a day. Some Yellow Warblers accomplish the last part of their journey to Great Slave Lake more than twice as fast as the average advance of spring over the same region. From New Orleans to Great Slave Lake they are continually meet- ing colder weather. Even the same species shows very different rates of advance in different parts of the country. 1 Chapman’s ‘ The Warblers of North America.’ 1907. Vol. ae 1913 Puiuurps, Migration and Periodic Accuracy. 203 We have, it must be said, various other periodic reflexes, depend- ent on feeding habits, the diurnal movements of lower organisms following the light, and the tidal movements of various littoral creatures, with very likely a host of others. But none of these so far as I am aware exactly fits our case in birds. In fish, it is true, especially in the salmon family, we see an accurate periodic move- ment, often begun months before the spawning time, and therefore hardly carried out alone by a direct stimulus from developing eggs or milt. Ocean fish, like the herring of Europe, show character- istic spawning times and spawning places for each closely related race. Bats and fur-seals among mammals are other examples but as to the accuracy of arrival of these animals I am not informed. I think it is plain, then, that the migratory impulse in birds is not to be explained on the basis of a purely physico-chemical response to an internal secretion, at least not that phase of it which pertains to potential accuracy. This may be a part but not the whole story. Nor does one wish to drag in by the heels any ques- tion of intelligent effort, for this would not help us in the least, and would tend to diminish rather than increase the time sense. I say diminish because instinct appears so much more mechanical, regular and blind than intelligence ever does. If one accepts Darwinism in so far as it applies to the selective value of useful variations, it seems hard to see how this chro- nometer-like accuracy can have been evolved; or even assuming it to have arisen through an adaptive necessity, it is still harder to see why it should remain in its present perfection, for the most enthusiastic Darwinian could scarcely picture it as a matter of great moment to the species if it arrived one week early or one week late, with the whole season before it. We must grant of course one great source of error in our conception of potential accuracy, for as stated above, we are forced to deal with groups instead of individuals; still with a long series of years it seems as if one might gain a pretty correct impression of the accuracy of the individual bird itself. The writer is familiar only in a general way with the subject at hand, and has merely attempted to call attention to an aspect of migration which does not seem to have been much discussed. Whether it is even worth discussing in the light of our scant knowl- [ Auk April 204 Puruurres, Migration and Periodic Accuracy. edge of instinctive actions and their causes is doubtful. With the masses of facts being brought constantly to light relative to bird travels, we are perhaps a little apt to lose sight of some of the old time mystery of the subject. The modern tendency seems to be to sniff at the word ‘mystery’ as applied to any phenomenon of bird migration. This is merely a question of where the word is applied; if to the actual facts, then it is hardly warranted, but if to the causes, then it is certainly as applicable now as ever. Supposing the facts all at hand, what would the student know about the actual inherent impetus, the heritability of instinct, or the powers of orientation and their mechanism? Would he be one whit better off than the present day systematist who with all his finely cut races does not really know how or why a new species arises? Mystery there certainly is, and mystery there will always be as long as the great biologic problems remain unsolved. The formation and maintenance of this time sense is only one of those activities of nature which tend to make the sternest advocate of mechanism doubtful of its all-sufficiency. It is so much easier to find behind that clock-like movement a vital impetus, ‘a guiding unity.’ “Tt (the evolution of life) is a creation that goes on for ever in virtue of an initial movement. This movement constitutes the unity of the organized world —a prolific unity, of an infinite richness, superior to any that the intellect could dream of, for the intellect is only one of its aspects or products.” (Bergson.) ed Cooke, The Relation of Bird Migration to the Weather. 205 THE RELATION OF BIRD MIGRATION TO THE WEATHER. BY WELLS W. COOKE. THE belief is quite general that there is a close connection between the weather and bird migration; that if the weather is not the cause of migration, it is at least the most important, indeed the governing, factor in determining the time of the bird’s arrival, and particularly in causing the variations from year to year. The intimate relation supposed to exist between the weather and the bird’s movements is thus promulgated by a very acute migration observer who wrote me: “I have collected such a large number of dates for our common birds that if you give me a good account of the weather conditions, I can give you the dates of arrival and movements of many species without going into the field.” After an exhaustive study and comparison of bird arrivals with the accompanying weather, the results were found to be so utterly at variance with the above quoted opinion, that they were summarized as follows: “The weather encountered en route influences migra- tion in a subordinate way, retarding or accelerating the birds’ ad- vance by only a few days and having slight relation to the date of arrival at the nesting site. Local weather conditions on the day of arrival at any given locality are minor factors in determining the appearance of a species at that place and time. The major factors in the problem are the weather conditions far to the south- ward, where the night’s flight began, and the relation which that place and time bear to the average position of the bird under normal weather conditions.” The above quotation is from an article that was written for the yearbook of the Department of Agriculture for 1910. In its necessarily condensed form, there was opportunity for nothing more than a mere statement of conclusions, without any of the data on which those conclusions were based. It seems advisable that a synopsis of the more important of these data should be published as a contribution to knowledge of the phenomena of bird migration. For the solution of the proposed problem it is necessary to have the notes of a thoroughly reliable and competent observer, who is 206 Cooke, The Relation of Bird Migration to the Weather. Resi constantly in the field so as to note the birds immediately on their arrival; it is also necessary that these observations be continued long enough to make possible the computation of reliable averages. A great advantage would be to have these records taken in a dis- trict free from mountains, valleys, or any other physical features that would tend to interfere with the free and uninterrupted north- ward movement of migration. The fulfilment of all these condi- tions was found in the work of Dr. J. C. Hvoslef at Lanesboro, Minnesota. An ardent student of bird life, a close observer with a good knowledge of birds, his profession as a physician with a large country practice, kept him daily in the field and made it probable, that few birds would escape his acute observation. Dr. Hvoslef contributed migration records for ten consecutive years, 1884-1893. At the same time notes were received from several towns in Iowa — notably Grinnell, Iowa City and Coralville — whose records are especially valuable as supplementary and corrobo- rative evidence. As is well known the weather comes usually in alternate cold and warm waves. If therefore the weather is the controlling factor in bird migration, then the progress of migration should be in waves corresponding to those of the weather, birds arriving freely when the temperature rises above normal and checking their advance when it falls below. While a sort of general correlation can be noted between the waves of weather and migration, the exceptions are many and striking. The accompanying chart gives the course of the weather and migration for three years at Lanesboro, Minne- sota. The first year, 1885, shows two pronounced waves of bird arrival coinciding with two waves of decided warm weather; it also shows the biggest migration wave of the whole season coming at the coldest part of a sharp cold snap that sent the temperature far below normal. The second year, 1889, shows a close agreement between the larger waves of migration and the warmer waves of temperature. The third year, 1892, shows all the large bird move- ments as occurring not on account of the weather but in spite of it. The bird wave of May 7, 1885, is particularly to be noted. On this day a storm of snow with a north wind forced the temperature below the freezing point, yet on the morning of May 7 “the woods and river bottoms seemed to be almost alive with small birds.” Among these were the following seen for the first time: 50° ia 170° + + T+ - + +* + + if Tolle eer a ret ica Spring V Migration at Lanesboro, Minn. The heavy l’nes show fluctuations in temperature, The crosses show bird arrivals. ~ et + semen Each cross represents the arrival of a species not previously noted that year. be an yf can f cane J ae ly THE AUK, VOL. XXX. PLATE VI. MARCH APRIL ae 26 31 10 20. 30 ! Spring V Migration at Lanesboro, Minn. The heavy lines show fluctuations in temperature. The crosses show bird arrivals. Each cross represents the arrival of a specres not previously noted that year. Se << — °° _— Lat Vie 5 ee } tae 1 f , wr Me MeN ae J Fae | oi a La eee ee WES RE. 9 red ~ a nocls aaa a mentee ee * Vol. XXX : ; ; 75913 | Cooke, The Relation of Bird Migration to the Weather. 207 Catbird average date of arrival May 6 Water-Thrush ‘ Ns we «6 Black-throated Green Warbler ae ROO i Sie ace oon Wilson’s Warbler &e ‘ 15 e i “tee arm temmperature..........02eeesee: 21 Arrivals do not agree with theory........-----++ere reer rrreees 148 Here is no evidence at all that the temperature has either stimu- lated or retarded bird migration. A slight connection may be noted by comparing the total num- ber of arrivals in warm and in cold weather. During the spring days of these nine years, when the temperature was above the normal, 243 arrivals of birds were noted, and when the temperature dropped below the normal, only 182 birds were recorded as arriving. This shows that whether or not the warm weather causes them to come earlier, they prefer on the average to advance when the weather is warmer than normal. 210 Cooke, The Relation of Bird Migration to the Weather. [ Pee Birds prefer to migrate in spring during a rising temperature. This preference is strongly marked as will be seen by the following table based on the records of 1885-1893 at Lanesboro, Minnesota. Number of instances that the mean temperature of the day of arrival was — Year. Three or more Within two degrees Three or more degrees warmer than or less of that degrees colder than that of the of the that of the previous day. previous day. previous day. 1885 20 10 18 1886 19 32 8 1887 | 37 6 11 1888 | 3l 17 13 1889 28 13 17 1890 =| ey 28 12 1891 41 14 5 1892 16 21 21 1893 25 19 10 Total 234 160 115 It will be noticed that the instances of arriving during or just after a rising temperature are just about twice as numerous as the oppo- site. Moreover it is to be remembered that out of these latter, there are 36 that occur on a pronounced cold day following just after a pronounced warm day, and it may easily be that many of these actually arrived on the warm wave of the day previous and were not detected until the following day. The temperature of the day of arrival is on the average higher than the average temperature of the two days before the bird is noted. This is another way of saying that on the average birds move north when a rise of temperature occurs. Vol. XXX x r ; i913 ] Cooke, The Relation of Bird Migration to the Weather. 211 Average temperature | Average temperature Species. of the day of the two days of arrival. previous to arrival. degrees F. degrees F. Lanesboro, Minnesota Robin 41 35 Fox Sparrow 46 42 Towhee 56 52 Brown Thrasher 57 56 Rose-breasted Grosbeak 59 56 Baltimore Oriole 58 55 Wilson Warbler 56 55 Magnolia Warbler 58 56 Searlet Tanager 58 56 Grinnell, Iowa. Robin 35 28 Fox Sparrow 46 42 Towhee 49 43 Brown Thrasher 57 52 Rose-breasted Grosbeak 57 52 Ovenbird 55 51 Baltimore Oriole 55 53 Searlet Tanager 56 55 Average 53 50 Let us next consider the very wide range of temperature under which birds migrate. The temperature at the time of the bird’s arrival is easily ascertained, since it is probable that most night migrants begin their flight soon after nightfall, and accomplish the larger part of their journey before midnight, so that the tempera- ture at ten o’clock in the evening would be close to the average temperature for that night’s migration. This ten o’clock tempera- ture can be calculated for any part of the Mississippi Valley from the permanent records of the United States Weather Bureau, and in the prosecution of this research, unlimited access was given by the Bureau to their original data. To ascertain whether any relation exists between the arrival of the birds and temperature, eight common birds were selected, species so common, well known, and conspicuous, that they would Zi CooxE®, The Relation of Bird Migration to the Weather. [ pees probably be seen immediately on arrival; these eight birds were also selected from early, medium, and late migrants, so as to have the test made during all parts of the migration period. | 10 Pp. m. temperature of the day before Average | the bird was first seen. Species. es aoe a Bannan a arrival. ean Ex- | Extreme | Average verase- | tremes | variat’ns. variation. Lanesboro, Minnesota, deg Hy mdercnhe | deg. F. | deg. F. 1885-1890. Robin March 16 40 28-47 19 4 Fox Sparrow April 4 44. | 33-58 25 7 Towhee April 16 54 41-67 26 8 Brown Thrasher April 24 57 38-69 Sill 10 Rose-breasted Grosbeak | May 4 59 36-67 31 8 Ovenbird May 4 56 35-72 37 11 Baltimore Oriole May 4 54 46-66 20 6 Searlet Tanager May 10 54 36-69 33 wal Average | 28 8 Grinnell, Iowa, | | | 1885-1890. | Robin March 6 32 24-41 ily 5 Fox Sparrow March 26 46 33-51 18 8 Towhee March 21 46 34-51 17 5 Brown Thrasher April 15 55 44-71 27 i Rose-breasted Grosbeak | April 29 60 48-74 26 8 Ovenbird April 29 55 48-67 19 5 Baltimore Oriole April 29 56 49-71 22 a Scarlet Tanager May 2 60 52-71 19 a Average 1 6 Average of both localities 24 7 The average variation in the time of arrival of these eight spe- | cies is 3.8 days and the average variation in the temperature is 7° F. During the months of March, April, and May, the temperature in the Mississippi Valley rises about one degree for each two days, so that a variation of 7° F. would be equivalent to about fourteen days Vol. ol 1913 Cooxe, The Relation of Bird Migration to the Weather. 213 variation in the time of migration. Thus the temperature under which the birds are migrating is about four times as variable as the day of arrival of the birds. The above table representing the temperature at 10 Pp. mM. of the night during which the birds arrived is probably the nearest approxi- mation that can be obtained to the actual temperature at the time the birds arrived. Since the birds have undoubtedly flown many miles during the night, it might be that the temperature of the place where the evening flight started would have a controlling influence. 10 p.m. temperature, 150 miles south Average of Lanesboro, on the evening before date of the bird was first seen at Lanesboro. Species. arrival 4 at Lanesboro. ae | Ex- | Extreme | Average verase-| tremes. | variat’ns. | variation. deg. He | deg. F. | deg. F. | deg. F. Robin March16| 45 | 3457 | 23 7 Fox Sparrow April 4 49 40-57 | 17 6 Towhee April 16 58 47-73 | 26 9 Brown Thrasher April 24 59 39-66 | 27 7 Rose-breasted Grosbeak |May 4 61 | 40-70| 30 7 Ovenbird May 4 58 40-71 | 31 10 Baltimore Oriole May 4 57 =| 49-64 | 15 4 Scarlet Tanager May 10 58 | 40-76 | 36 4 Average | 26 7 The average of these last two tables is probably the best statement obtainable of the actual temperature at which the birds migrated. It is difficult to see how the mean temperature of the day when the bird was first noted could have had any great influence on its migratory movements of the previqus night, but as these condi- tions under which we first see the bird are the ones we are most likely to associate with the bird’s arrival, they have also been calculated. Mean temperature of the day the bird Average was first seen. A date Species. of ival. Ex- Extreme | Average cai PASS tremes. | variation. yanlaticns Lanesboro, Minnesota, | deg. F. | deg. F. | deg. F deg. F. 1885-1890. | Robin March 16 Al 31-52 21 i Fox Sparrow ¢.). April 4 46 38-52 14 4 Towhee April 16] 56 38-66 18 8 Brown Thrasher April 24 57 45-67 22 8 Rose-breasted Grosbeak |May 4 59 36-73 aM 10 Ovenbird May 4 55 36-73 30. 10 Baltimore Oriole May 4 58 44-73 29 9 Searlet Tanager May 10 58 36-69 33 9 Grinnell, Lowa. 25 8 1885-1890. Robin March 6 | 35 12-24 32 4 Fox Sparrow March 26 46 38-56 18 6 Towhee March 21 49 38-58 20 6 Brown Thrasher April 15 57 45-67 22 6 Rose-breasted Grosbeak | April 29 57 49-71 22 6 Ovenbird April 29 55 47-62 15 4 Baltimore Oriole April 29 55 49-70 21 6 Scarlet Tanager May 2 56 47-71 24 8 Average 22 6 Average of both localities 24 7 Other temperatures were also compared as follows: Temperature. Ee veg variation. variation. deg. F. deg. F. Mean temperature of the day before the bird was first seen ; ” : Average mean temperature of the two days before the bird was seen = : Average mean temperature of the second and third days before the bird was seen ne 2 Mean temperature, 150 miles south of the ) place of observation, of the day before 21 6 the bird was seen ) ea | Cooke, The Relation of Bird Migration to the Weather. 215 The ahove temperatures probably include all that would influence the bird in the flight which brought it to the place of observation. A careful examination of these tables will convince anyone that these temperatures with their great variations could not have been the cause of the migration. A bird that arrives with an average temperature of 50° F. may appear one year when the temperature - is below 40° and is just as likely to be seen for the first time the next year with a temperature far above 60°. Even omitting the extreme variations, yet the average variations are far more vari- able than the movements of the birds and demonstrate that tem- perature alone does not cause the birds to move northward. Conversely these figures show that no one of these birds is re- stricted to any single temperature for the performing of its migra- tion, but that each one can and does migrate with a wide range of temperature. It is interesting to note in passing, the wide differences between the average temperature of the day of arrival, and the average of the temperatures of the days of arrival. Thus the average date of arrival of the Robin for the years 1885-1890 was at Lanesboro, Minn., March 16, and the average temperature of March 16 at Lanesboro is 31° F. But the average of the temperatures of the days during 1885-1890 on which the Robin was first seen at Lanes- boro was 41° F. This indicates that the Robin had varied its arrival both before and after March 16 so as to arrive on those days that were warmer than the average. An extreme difference of 10° was found in the case of the Robin which is an early migrant and often encounters severe storms. With birds like the Brown Thrasher which move about the middle of the season these differences are only about half as great, while in the case of late migrants like the Baltimore Oriole and the Scarlet Tanager these differences disap- pear, since in the latter part of the season few storms are severe enough to interfere seriously with migration. In addition to all the local temperatures at the time of arrival, it is possible that the total heat for the previous month or the total heat of the whole spring might be a determining factor. All of these different temperatures were examined and to show how they work out in detail, all these temperatures are given for a single species; the bird selected is the Baltimore Oriole because that [ Auk April Cooke, The Relation of Bird Migration to the Weather. 216 WOT}eIIB A Ig 6S 6¢ | 249 | 6S | #9 | 9S | 6F OlOqseuvy 4B pojou st pq oy} esojoq Avp ay} Jo yxodueaeq ye onyesodute, ‘ut -d QT le | 29 | #% | 2 | 0G | Of | 09 | 9g | $9 | 09 | 9g | ¢€9 OlogsauL'T 4B pozOU St pq Oy} OoJoq Aep oy} Jo Jroduoaeq 4v omMyeedt, uve] Or | 99 | # | 8G | TS | OG | 6G | #9 | 99 | 6G | GE | T9 OLOGSIUBT JB pPejOU SI pA 94} o10jeq Avp oq} Jo onbnqng 4e smyeseduie} uvoy\y 9¢ | 9g | | pG-| 99 | eG | 99 | 99 | SF [wale ar1ojoq Aep oy} JO O1OqsoueyT ye ammyesodurs} ‘ur “d CT | | Ge 7d | Bh] 19 | 1S | ep ag | Te) 20 | Le | 1g | <89 [BAe erojaq Avp ay} Jo osoqsouv’y] 4B oINyeIoduo} ULvayy sp | 9¢ | og | 9p |~og | #¢ | 89 | of | ez | oo | e9 | ag | payou 481g sea soroads ey} Aep oy} JO OIOqsauB'T ye ounyesodme} ULayy at | 09 | 2h | 2h | eo | €¢ | tg | og | eg | ao | GP | og | qoduaaed 48 [Udy Jo emjpesadure, oseiaay | | a 6p | St | oF | 19 | TS | Of | SF | 19 | Ig | 2b | SP | anbnqng 78 [dy jo eanqeseduie, oseseay | | 6r ly | &h | tH | Gh | Of | 6h | FF | Bh | co | OF | OF osoqsauey] 48 [dy Jo emyriedue, osvi0ay gt | gt9z | 1692 | s8gz | g9sz | o2gz | Prog | 9892 | #192 | GTSe | Go8e | T06z OJOGSOURT JV [BALE s10joq Ap 0} T YOUR Wosy yroduoARC] 4B }eaY [BYOI, | | i | | 02 | L68S| FOSS | ASH | LOST | AIFS | HHES | S7GS | ZEIT | TZLZ | 86 | L022 | OroqsauRT 78 [BAlLIe e10joq ABp 0} YOrEIT WoIZ oNDNGn 4B yeey [eyo], og | c9ez| eave | zene | sun | 22¢2 | 0908 | esze | enge | #182 | SBSz | FF9C | [vAtse Jo Aep 0} [ Yor WoIy yeoy Jo Sdatcap [e}O], 1g (ere Le0€ | POSE OTLE | 9L¢e | FOGE | OSE | cee | eeRe | cere | Loge | [eAtuae jo Aep 0} [ Arwnuep w1OIy 4BoY JO SeoLdep ]B}O], tile elle et tl al eet ae fea ee |p ola fe ec ce epee NG Ri et raed eg ee oe rT aT ° $ | wm | om] ow] co | wm | co | o | om a} a] o | homo | | | —— = 4 — = = Bae! | | | | | | SORE COST. TORE C681. ORBIT REET LER ENORBT | SBT A BQI | ae ent ete ae Seg Se ee eek E | | : | | | | “DIOSAUUA Jy ‘OL0QSAUDT 2D 9]0ULQC) ALOUD G IY} fo [PULL OY} PUD 4aYIDA AY AY} UaaMNjaq UOUYDIIY ee =| Cooke, The Relation of Bird Migration to the Weather. 217 has the smallest variation in its time of arrival of all the birds that were recorded at ‘Lanesboro. In the matter of the total amount of heat received in the spring the variations are 30 percent whether estimated from the first of January or from the first of March, moreover the largest variations from 2283° in 1888 to 3060° in 1889 occur with but a single day difference in date of arrival. The same result is obtained if the date of appearance is compared with the total heat received in the vicinity of Dubuque, eighty miles south of Lanesboro, or at ‘Davenport, .a hundred and fifty miles farther south, though the percentage variations are not so great, that at Davenport being only 15 percent. Parenthetically it may be remarked that the temperatures during the winter and previous to March 1 have seemingly no effect on plant or animal growth and it is the degrees of heat after March 1 that determine the advance of the season. This was strikingly shown at Washington, D. C., the spring of 1912, when after a winter of unusual severity in January and February, the growth of plants became fully up to normal as soon as the heat after March 1 had risen to its normal and long before the total heat counted from January 1 had reached the average. The bird arrivals averaged earlier than usual notwithstanding the cold winter. The variations in the time of the arrival of the bird from year to year do not agree with the variation of the season. The spring of 1889 is the warmest, March and April together, at all three places; indeed that spring is one of the warmest the Mississippi Valley has ever known, but the Oriole does not arrive so early this year as the average of the ten years. But little relation can be traced between the changes in temperatures and the changes from year to year in the time of arrival. It is true that in 1893, when the Oriole arrived at its latest date — May 6— the temperature is the coldest at all three places, and in 1887 when the date of arrival is the earliest — May 1 — the temperature is also the highest at all three places. But here the agreement ends, for the Oriole also arrives on May 6 in the years 1884, 1885, and 1888, that are both cold and warm years and on May 2 in 1890 that is among the colder years. During spring migration the direction of the wind seems to have [ Auk April 218 Cooke, The Relation of Bird Migration to the Weather. little if any effect on the arrival of the birds. There were 253 days when arrivals were noted at Lanesboro, Minn., 1885-1893, and the wind the night before had been from the following directions: west, 29 times, northwest 45, north 29, northeast 22, east 18, southeast 27, south 51, southwest 24, calm 8 times. Combining the directions, the sum of the northwest, north, and northeast winds is 96 times and the sum of the southeast, south, and south- west, 102 times. Thus the birds migrated with the wind blowing against them just about as frequently as with a favorable wind. It is especially to be noted that the percentage of each of the winds in the above table is very close to the average percentage of the time in the spring that the wind is in that direction. Thus the birds arrived with a south wind, 51 times or 20 percent of the times observed. During the 828 days of March, April, and May, 1885-1893, the wind was south 161 days or the same 20 percent. The birds arrived with a northwest wind 18 percent of the times and the wind blew from the northwest 19 percent of the time. Percent of days the wind blew from this direction. Percent of times the birds arrived with a wind from this direction. Direction of the wind. West 13 11 Northwest 19 18 North 13 Till Northeast 9 9 East 5 7 Southeast 10 11 South 20 26 Southwest ! 8 10 Calm 3 3 These figures show that when birds are moving north in the spring they pay little attention to the direction of the wind. The same conclusion was reached after an extended investigation of the date of migration as observed at the lighthouses of southern Florida. The Biological Survey has the records for many years of each night in spring on which birds were noted passing the lights. These birds are fresh arrivals in Florida after a flight over the ocean Leer a Cooke, The Relation of Bird Migration to the Weather. 219 from Cuba. One would expect these birds, if any, to wait for a favoring wind before starting to sea, but the records indicate that they pay no attention to the direction of the wind. If the birds preferred a south wind, there should be a large number of arrivals during south wind periods, or if they disliked a head wind, there should be only a few north wind records. As a fact neither of these conditions is found and the percentage of migration with a south wind is no greater than the average percentage of south wind that occurs there during the spring months, and the birds fly directly against a north wind as often proportionally as north winds occur. Spring migration consists of a series of rapid advances followed by days of inactivity or possibly of retrogression. After a check to the northward movement and a period of rest, when the next advance occurs, it does not merely proceed far enough to make up for the lost time, but the birds are quite apt to make a long flight forward until they are in advance of their normal position. A striking example occurs in the migration notes from Lanesboro, Minnesota. During the spring of 1888, the temperature dropped on March 22, thirty-four degrees below the normal and migration was suspended for about two weeks. The temperature rose gradu- ally and when the warmth was almost to normal on April 1, a great arrival of birds occurred. The Phoebe, Bronzed Grackle and Killdeer appeared after a delay of five, four, and three days respectively; the Song Sparrow was present just on time, while the Fox Sparrow was three days in advance of his usual date, the Brown Creeper four days, the Ruby-crowned Kinglet, Yellow-bel- lied Sapsucker, Field Sparrow and Purple Martin, seven, nine, nine, and ten days earlier than usual. This early arrival is the more strange in this particular case, because the temperature, while it rose decidedly, did not quite reach normal, so that these last six species flew far north at an early day and during cold weather. It seems probable that in such cases some abnormally warm weather to the south of the place of arrival is the real cause of the phenomenon, but in the present instance one must look far south for the warm wave. The course of the weather during the three days previous is shown in the accompanying chart. Lanesboro 220 Cooke, The Relation of Bird Migration to the Weather. [ A TEMPERATURE AT 10 P.m., Marcu 27-31, 1888. a a en ee Vel Cooke, The Relation of Bird Migration to the Weather. 221 is so near LaCrosse that the temperatures of the two places were probably not much different. The evening of March 28, the temperature is lower than normal throughout the Mississippi Valley. During the next day the temperature at both Keokuk and St. Louis rises above the normal bringing on a large migration at St. Louis with clear weather and a south wind all the way from St. Louis to the Gulf. The night of March 31 is clear over all the Mississippi Valley from St. Paul to the Gulf, with a light south wind from the Gulf to Cairo, and a light east and northeast wind the rest of the way to LaCrosse. The temperature at St. Louis is far above normal, Keokuk, a little above, Davenport slightly below and LaCrosse about five degrees below normal. Conditions for migration were therefore very favorable from the south to about Keokuk and thence northward not unfavorable. Hence it may be considered that these six species — the Fox Sparrow, Brown Creeper, Ruby- crowned Kinglet, Yellow-bellied Sapsucker, Field Sparrow and Purple Martin — had arrived by the night of March 29 in southern Iowa (judging from the weather and from the notes contributed by the observers in Iowa) and during the evening of March 31 they started north again. The individuals that were noted at Lanesboro the morning of April 1 had therefore traveled the night before from at least as far south as Davenport and probably from Keokuk. 222 GRINNELL, New Pigmy Ouls. eer TWO NEW RACES OF THE PIGMY OWL FROM THE PACIFIC COAST. BY J. GRINNELL. (Contribution from the Museum of Vertebrate Zodlogy of the University of California.) SrupENTs of Californian birds have long been aware of the existence within this state of two readily distinguishable races of the Pigmy Owl. One inhabits the humid coast belt south to Monterey County, the other occupies the relatively much more arid Sierra Nevada, and mountain ranges of southern California. The first-indicated subspecies has borne the nv .ne Glaucidium gnoma californicum; the second, having been assumed to be the same as the Rocky Mountain bird, was called, in common with the latter, Glaucidium gnoma gnoma. Beyond a haunting suspicion that the Californian interior bird might prove different, upon comparison of actual specimens, from that of the Rocky Mountain region, the situation remained un- changed until, in 1910, E. W. Nelson (Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., Vol. XXIII, p. 103) named the Rocky Mountain Pigmy Owl as dis- tinct from the true G. g. gnoma at the southern end of the Mexican Tableland. The northern bird received the name Glaucidiwm gnoma pinicola. In Nelson’s description of it comparison is made with not only,true gnoma but also with californicum, the latter name being clearly used for the small, reddish-brown humid coast race. These comparative remarks at once aroused a query as to the relationships of the Californian interior bird; and the writer for- warded to Mr. Nelson two southern California specimens for criti- cal examination. These he pronounced to be not his G. g. pinicola, but probably representative of a distinct new subspecies. Since the only question in the writer’s mind was in regard to the dis- tinctness between the Californian interior race and Nelson’s pinicola of the Rocky Mountains, the course of action seemed to be perfectly clear, that is, to formally name the southern California Umea GRINNELL, New Pigmy Ouls. 223 bird. It would have been more proper for Mr. Nelson himself to have described the race, in view of his work in the genus; but claiming to be engrossed with work upon newly arrived Central American material, he courteously insisted upon the writer’s assuming the not distasteful function of describer. In order that comparisons in both directions might be verified, seven examples of G. g. pinicola from the Biological Survey col- lection were, through the kindness of Mr. H. W. Henshaw, for- warded to the writer as a loan. These, together with the west coast material in the California Museum of Vertebrate Zodlogy and in the private collections of F. S. Daggett, H. S. Swarth and J. Grinnell, form the basis for the following characterizations. The assembling of this material unexpectedly pointed to the expediency of further nomenclatural action. Mr. H. S. Swarth has already pointed out (Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., Vol. 10, 1912, pp. 31, 32) the peculiarity in coloration of four Pigmy Owls from Vancouver Island. There now seem to be sufficient grounds for recognizing an extreme northern humid coast race, the range of which is to be split off from that previously accorded to G. 9. californicum. The latter name is thus restricted to the subspecies inhabiting the coast belt from Washington to central California. Close study has resulted in the conclusion that there is a depend- ably constant tone of coloration in Pigmy Owls from any one faunal area, in other words that much of the variation which strikes one at first glance as being extraordinary, is accounted for by differ- ence in wear and age. Only adults have the top of head uniform in shade with the dorsum, juvenals, even though full-grown and full-feathered, having the top of the head slate gray of varying shades conspicuously contrasted with the brownish of the back. The writer is unable to find any so-called “phases”’ of coloration in this species. The designation of three forms of Glaucidiwm from the Pacific Coast district may seem a surprising innovation to some, but it is nothing more than might be expected after a review of the facts as already worked out in other genera of resident birds. The reader should recall the present systematic treatment throughout the same area, of Bubo, Otus, Dryobates, Cyanocitta, Certhia, and Thryomanes. [ Auk 224 GRINNELL, New Pigmy Ouls. April Glaucidium gnoma vigilante, new subspecies. SrerrRA Piegmy Ow. Typr.— @ ad., no. 379, coll. J. Grinnell; foothills at 2250 ft. alt., 4 miles north of Pasadena, Los Angeles County, California; February 18, 1894; collected by J. Grinnell. Dracnosts.— Nearest like Glaucidium g. californicum, but size slightly larger and coloration much paler, broccoli brown dorsally and laterally, instead of warm russet brown; light markings slightly more increased in extent. Differs from G. g. pinicola in smaller size, and distinctly browner coloration; white flecks on back circular in shape rather than of transverse trend. DistripuTion.— Mountain ranges of southern California, and southern Sierra Nevada, at least from Bear Valley, San Bernardino County, north to Lindsay, Tulare County (probably throughout the Sierra Nevada north to Mount Shasta). Glaucidium gnoma swarthi, new subspecies. VANCOUVER Picmy OwL. Typr.— @ ad., no. 15637, Calif. Mus. Vert. Zool.; Errington, Vancou- ver Island, British Columbia; September 11, 1910; collected by H. S. Swarth. Draenosts.— Nearest like Glaucidium g. californicum, but much darker colored throughout, inclining to bistre dorsally, and white markings much reduced in extent; feet and legs heavily suffused with sepia; streaking below nearly black; size as in californicum. Differs from G. g. pinicola in smaller size, very much darker and browner coloration, and restriction of light markings; the remnants of the latter are pervaded with deep clay color. DistrrpuTION.— Vancouver Island (and, probably, adjacent mainland of British Columbia and coast belt of Washington). Remarks.— The name selected for the subspecifie appellation of this new race serves as a merited means of signalizing the painstaking field and systematic research devoted to northwest coast ornithology by Mr. Harry S. Swarth during his incumbency as Curator of Birds in the California Museum of Vertebrate Zoology. MEASUREMENTS. G. gnoma pinicola, 9, no. 203634, U. S. Nat. Mus., Jamez Mts., New Mexico: Wing 105 mm., tail 79, tarsus 23. G. gnoma vigilante, 9, type: Wing 96.4, tail 73, tarsus 20.8. G. gnoma californicum, 9, no. 4396, Calif. Mus. Vert. Zool., Marin County, California: Wing 93.4, tail 65, tarsus 20.7. G. gnoma swarthi, 9, type. Wing 92.3, tail 67.7, tarsus 20. a FLEMING, Ontario Bird Notes. 225 ONTARIO BIRD NOTES. BY J. H. FLEMING. Since my ‘Birds of Toronto’ was published in‘ The Auk’ ! the manuscript list of Toronto birds written about 1885 by Mr. Ernest Seton has been found in the records of the Biological Survey at Washington, and though the annotations are as brief as possible, it is of considerable value. A greater part of the portion dealing with the water birds is based on information supplied by the late Wm. Loan, a professional shooter whose information is known to have been reliable. The list supplies definite records for two species that were in my hypothetical list. Since 1906 several species have been found breeding at Toronto that were not known to do so then, and additional records of several rare birds are given in this article, together with other unpublished Ontario records. Sula bassana. Gannet.—An immature male freshly killed was found floating in Lake Ontario outside Toronto on December 19, 1908; it was in good condition and had recently swallowed a herring seven inches long; the bird is now in my collection. Another immature bird taken near Ottawa on October 14, 1909, has been recorded by Mr. J. M. Macoun,? and I am informed by Mr. E. G. White that a second specimen was taken at Ottawa about the same time and mounted by Mr. Henry. Hydrochelidon nigra surinamensis. Buiack Tern.— No breeding records for Toronto till 1906 when Mr. W. R. Humphreys took a set of two eggs on May 30 in Asbridge’s Marsh. This tern has since become a not uncommon breeder; a pair seen at Toronto Island on July 18, 1911, had downy young, and were not themselves in full plumage, both having a good deal of white on the head and under parts. Pelecanus erythrorhynchos. Wuite PrLican.— The only definite Toronto record is from Seton’s manuscript list as follows: ‘‘ Wm. Loan killed one in 1862, has seen at least a dozen in all.” Marila collaris. Rinc-Neckep Ducx.— A female taken on Septem- ber 24, 1906, by Mr. O. B. Spanner at Wassy Lake, Coleman Township, Parry Sound District, is in my collection. Ring-necked Ducks are not 1 Auk, 1906, pp. 437-453, 1907, pp. 71-89. 2 Ottawa Naturalist, 1910, p. 192. 226 FLemMiInG, Ontario Bird Notes. [ ree common in southern Ontario and the following records are of interest: in 1906, I examined three females (?) that were taken about October 15, and five full plumaged males that were taken about November 6, the exact locality could not be ascertained except that they were from southern Ontario and probably at no great distance from Toronto. In 1907, I examined two that had been taken probably at Toronto Island on October 12, and saw two more on the 22d, from somewhere in southern Ontario. On April 9, 1909, I saw a single pair in a large flock of mixed ducks that were sheltering in Toronto Bay from a westerly gale. The rarity of this species is interesting when compared with Mr. Loan’s statement in Seton’s manuscript list as follows: ‘‘ Marsh Bluebill, uncommon migrant, first week of April to last of September, years ago it was our commonest duck.” Chen hyperboreus hyperboreus. Snow Goosr.— In Seton’s manu- script list the following Toronto record is given based on Mr. Loan’s information. ‘‘ Very rare fall migrant, four killed in 1875, several seen since.” Olor columbianus. Wuistiinac Swan.— A flock of six were in Tor- onto Bay, from April 8 to 18,1909. They were seen by a number of ob- servers and were identified by Mr. J. H. Ames on the 18th. The birds were driven in by a heavy westerly gale. Mycteria americana. Woop Ipis.— One taken in November, 1892, near Simcoe, Norfolk County, by a farmer, name unknown. The record is based on a drawing of the dead bird made by a correspondent of Mr. C. W. Nash, to whom I am indebted for permission to publish this first Ontario record. Rallus elegans. Kine Rar.— A male taken at Toronto on April 24, 1907, is in my collection. Gallinago delicata. Wutson’s Snrpz.— A nest containing four eggs was found in Ashbridge’s Marsh on May 12, 1910, by Mr. R. Buchanan; the eggs were undisturbed and later the young were photographed by Mr. J. A. Munro. This is the first definite Toronto breeding record. Limosa fedoa. Marsiep Gopwir.— An adult female taken on the Eastern Sandbar, Toronto, on September 20, 1906, is the first Autumn record. An immature bird taken at the same place on August 13, 1909, is the first. young bird recorded from Toronto. Charadrius dominicus dominicus. GoLpEN PLover.— The follow- ing records show that this Plover is again increasing on Toronto Island: 1906, September 3, one shot by Mr. H. H. Mitchell, September 8, two seen , by Mr. Mitchell; 1907, September 30, three taken; October 2, one taken, October 12, several taken; 1909, September 20, one seen; 1910, Septem- ber 26, a number taken (I examined twelve, one of which was an adult), October 21, one taken, the latest record. All were young birds except the one noted. Aigialitis meloda. Prernc PLiover.— Though breeding at Point Pelee and other places on Lake Erie and possibly: in Prince Edward County ———— i on Vol. eaal 1913 FLEMING, Ontario Bird Notes. 224 on Lake Ontario, the Piping Plover has never been more than a migrant at Toronto till 1907, when Mr. W. R. Humphreys found two young and two eggs on the Eastern Sandbar on June 23. In 1908, a number of pairs bred along the whole lake front of Toronto Island, — a set of three eggs was found on July 1, and a downy young was taken by a boy on the same date, and another downy young was seen on June 10. I saw three pairs of old birds on July 6. Cathartes aura septentrionalis. Turkey VuLturn.— A young male taken at Scarboro near Toronto, November 17, 1908, was mounted by Mr. O. Spanner. Another unpublished Ontario record is copied from the journals of the late J. Hughes Samuel, December 2, 1895, Peterboro: Ontario: “‘ Called on Elcombe the local taxidermist, he has a fine specimen of Turkey Buzzard taken on the banks of Indian river at Warsaw, 14 miles from Peterboro during the summer by a man named Spencer, the hotel keeper Morgan of Warsaw tells me that Spencer winged this bird and kept it alive for several weeks.” Astur atricapillus atricapillus. Gosnawx.— A large flight occurred in 1906, from October 13 to November 26. I examined over a dozen from Toronto and heard of as many more that had been taken, all full plumaged birds. The flight extended east to Ottawa and a few remained about Toronto during the winter. I received one from Oakville, 19 miles west of Toronto, on January 4, 1907. Buteo borealis krideri. Kriper’s Hawxk.— An immature bird taken at Pickering, 23 miles east of Toronto, on August 19, 1901, by Mr. W. B. Rubidge, is in my collection; this is the first Ontario record. Buteo swainsoni. Swarnson’s Hawx.— One taken at Toronto on October 16, 1909, an immature bird in the dark phase with yellowish markings, mounted by Mr. O. Spanner. Scotiaptex nebulosa nebulosa. Great Gray OwL.—A flight appears to have passed eastward along Lake Ontario in 1907. On January 8, I received one from Port Credit, 13 miles west of Toronto, on January 4, one from Mimico, 7 miles west, and on February 1, one from Toronto and on March 8, one from Trenton, 100 miles east of the city. Besides these I heard of a number of others that were taken. I examined two taken at Toronto, February 11 and 15, 1911. Cryptoglaux funerea richardsoni. RicHarpson’s Ow._.— A male picked up dead but quite fresh at. Toronto on June 11, 1907; the bones of both legs were crushed and gangrenous, and death was due to starvation. The bird had probably been trapped and released as it showed no traces of captivity. A female taken at Toronto January 13, 1910, is in my collec- tion, as is the June bird. Bubo virginianus subarcticus. Arctic Hornep Owi.—I ex- amined a female of this form of Horned Owl taken together with two small downy young about April 24, 1911, at Heaslip, 123 miles north of North Bay. This breeding record explains the presence in winter of this Owl in southern Ontario. 228 FLEMING, Ontario Bird Notes. heer Nyctea nyctea. Snowy Own. The majority of Snowy Owls that migrate into southern Ontario in winter are birds of the year, but in 1906, a flight of adults, males as far as I examined them, appeared on October 13. A very white one was taken at Toronto, on November 1, three more males were taken, two of them almost spotless, the other very white. I examined between November 19 and 26, several more exceptionally white birds from the city and three from Bradford, 40 miles north of Toronto, these were also very white birds. Otocoris alpestris hoyti. Hoyt’s Hornep Larx.— One male taken at Port Sydney, Muskoka, May 17, 1909, by Mr. Alfred Kay in whose collection the bird now is. Thisis probably a non-breeding bird, and was shot, together with one Horned Lark and one Prairie Horned Lark, from a small flock that had been for some time about Mr. Kay’s yard. Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina. HEventnc GrosBEAK.— Small flocks visited Toronto in March, 1907, and February, 1909, and from November 23, 1910 to January 29, 1911, flocks were in and about the city. I counted twenty, many of them old males, in one mountain ash. Calcarius pictus. Smirx’s Loncspur.— An immature female taken by Mr. Geo. E. Atkinson, at Port Arthur, Ontario, in September, 1892, is in my collection and is the first Ontario record. It is due to Mr. Allan Brooks’ keenness that the bird was recognized in my collection, and I have since checked the identity with the aid of Dr. J. Dwight, Jr., and Dr. Louis B. Bishop, as the stage of plumage is a little known one. Progne subis subis. Purpite Martin.— There has been a noticeable increase in the number of Martins about Toronto since 1906. In 1909 one pair returned to the old nesting box in my garden that had been abandoned for several years, and bred, and in 1912, seven pairs brought off broods in the same box. Gat Gp ee ae ee ee Vol. rid 1913 ALLEN, Morning Awakening. 229 MORE NOTES ON THE MORNING AWAKENING:! BY FRANCIS H. ALLEN. Mr. Wricut’s paper on ‘Morning Awakening and Even-Song’ (‘The Auk,’ July, 1912, XXIX, p. 307) has interested me not alittle, and the more so that for many years I have been making occasional observations along that very line. My notes, which began in June, 1883, were made chiefly at different places within thirty miles of Boston, but I have also the record of a single morning near Mt. Katahdin in Maine. They are more fragmentary than Mr. Wright’s because they often include only a few of the very earliest singers. For some birds I have more records than Mr. Wright, while for others I have much fewer and for still others which occur on his list I have none at all. My excuse for presenting a few of my own notes after his very careful and thorough records have been published is that, for one thing, they were made in different locali- ties from his and therefore give different results in some particulars, and for another, my deductions from the evidence are at times some- what at variance with his. 3 I must explain that my observations were made on various dates during these last thirty years, ranging from May 29th to July 26th, and that before computing my averages I have in every case re- duced the time to terms of the summer solstice, subtracting from each record the number of minutes by which the sun rose on that date later than the time of earliest sunrise. Thus on July 26, 1906, at Weston, Mass., the Robins began singing at 3.36, but the sun on July 26 does not rise till 24 minutes later than at the sol- stice; I therefore deduct the 24 minutes and set the Robin’s be- ginning at 3.12. It may also be worth while to say that the time used in this paper, as in Mr. Wright’s, is Standard Time, which at Boston is 16 minutes behind the local time. To get the actual local time, therefore, for purposes of comparison with other places, 16 minutes should be added to each of these averages. The local time at Jefferson, N. H., is about 14 minutes ahead of the Standard, 1 Read before the Nuttall Ornithological Club, October 7, 1912. 230 ALLEN, Morning Awakening. Fes so that that amount should be added to Mr. Wright’s figures to reduce them to the local time. The time of earliest sunrise is 4.07 (Standard) at Boston, and, as Mr. Wright states, 4.02 at Jefferson, where his observations were made. In the first place I find it necessary to differ with Mr. Wright as to the order of the first three species on his list, or rather as to the high rank he accords the first two, the Song Sparrow (Melospiza melodia melodia) and the Chipping Sparrow (Spizella passerina passerina), which, so far as my observations show, belong farther down. He places these two sparrows before the Robin (Planestv- cus migratorius migratorius) on the ground that though “the lusty character of the Robin’s song from the time of its beginning throughout its first forty-five minutes’ period of singing constitutes it the conspicuous early singer and makes it appear to be the earli- est singer of all,” yet “the Song Sparrow and the Chipping Sparrow both precede the Robin in a few earlier expressions of song.” Mr. Wright admits that both these species occasionally awake and sing in the night, but he says that this early morning singing — this ante-Robin singing — is differentiated from the casual night singing by the fact that a second, third, and perhaps fourth bird follows the first singer. This reasoning does not seem to me con- clusive, because, for one thing, I am pretty sure I have heard the same thing happen in the middle of the night, and moreover it seems natural to infer that if a considerable period of silence ensues after a first song, then the bird has dropped off to sleep again and has not experienced his actual ‘morning awakening.’ It may be pertinent to call attention to the fact that Mr. Wright’s earliest time of beginning to listen was 2.35 and his earliest Song Sparrow 2.40 and Chipping Sparrow 2.45. If he had himself got out a quar- ter of an hour earlier, might he not have heard the two sparrows correspondingly earlier also? I also suspect that Mr. Wright's Jefferson Song Sparrows and Chippies may be somewhat excep- tionally wakeful birds. My own notes record not a single day when . the Chippy began before the Robin and only one occasion when the Song Sparrow preceded the Robin and at the same time came near enough to get into the list at all. That was on June 11, 1885, at West Roxbury, Mass., when the Song Sparrow was heard at 2.55 a ee ee | 1913 ALLEN, Morning Awakening. Dot and the Robin not till 3.05. The Chipping Sparrow that morning did not begin till 3.20, and I am now pretty confident that this early effort of the Song Sparrow’s should have been set down as a night song. My average of eighteen records of the Robin, makes his first song at 3.04. Mr. Wright’s average of twelve is 3.02, approximately the same, though it should be remembered that the earliest sunrising at Jefferson, N. H., is five minutes earlier than at Boston. My average, therefore, is actually three minutes earlier than his, but the difference is so slight that I think the two may be considered identical. This makes the contrast in our averages for the two sparrows in question the more remarkable. My aver- age of twelve records for the Song Sparrow is 3.17 as against Mr. Wright’s 2.56 for the same number; and for the Chipping Sparrow my thirteen observations average 3.21, while his twelve average 2.08. Mr. Wright notes the hurried manner of the Chipping Sparrow’s singing after he gets warmed up to it in the morning. This habit is a striking one, and I do not remember to have seen it mentioned in print before. The trills at that time are much shorter than at other times of the day and follow one another in quick succession with hardly a breath between. If we assume that my averages of the Song Sparrow’s and Chip- ping Sparrow’s beginnings are correct and that the former starts thirteen and the latter seventeen minutes after the Robin, then these two species should appear after the Veery in Mr. Wright’s list, as numbers 11 and 12. There are, however, two other species which I am sure Mr. Wright would have accorded earlier places if he had had better opportunities to hear them. One of these, the Kingbird (Tyrannus tyrannus), he himself suspects. His two observations, coming at 3.22 and 3.24 respectively, seemed to point to 3.23 as a safe assumption for an average, but he admits that “it is not improbable that if other records had been obtained, the Kingbird might rank somewhat earlier in the list.’”’ With me the Kingbird ranks next after the Robin. My average of ten records when I have had one in the near neighborhood places it at 3.10. I cannot tell from my own observations just how it would rank in relation to the Alder Flycatcher, the Barn Swallow, the White- throated Sparrow, the Wood Pewee, and the Vesper Sparrow, be- [ Auk April 232 ALLEN, Morning Awakening. cause my records of these birds are too scanty, but reckoned as six minutes after the Robin it would follow the Vesper Sparrow on Mr. Wright’s list. On one occasion during the present year I heard the Wood Pewee before the Kingbird and not long after the Robin’s beginning. It may be worth while to call attention to this early-morning song of the Kingbird, for it is a true song but seems to have escaped the notice of most bird-biographers. Though heard occasionally at all times of the day, it is characteristic only of the early morning. It resembles the flight song but is usually given, I am confident, froma perch. At any rate I have often seen the bird singing while perched, and the regular early-morning performance sounds like a stationary one. It is a prolonged, ecstatic, unmusical utterance which introduces a phrase suggestive of the word phebe at frequent intervals among the chattering. I observed a Kingbird in song at 6 p. M., July 16, 1911, at West Roxbury, Mass., and made the following notes on the performance: “He was perched in the top of a tall elm. The song may be written as follows: De-de-de-de- dzip’-de-de-de-de-dzee-dzec'~it. The de-de-de-de part is delivered in a stuttering fashion. Sometimes the stutter and dzip are given twice before the other part, or climax [the phebe part] of the song is given. The song is repeated over and over continuously for an indefinite period. With the dzecit the tail is spread wide. Some- times I thought the spreading of the tailed followed the dzeevt immedi- ately instead of being simultaneous with it, but it was hard to be sure of that at the distance I was from the bird. The tail seemed to be spread a little all the time, but the spreading at the climax was abrupt and pronounced. The dzip note is somewhat emphatic but the dzeeit much more so.” The other bird that deserves an early place on the list is among those listed in a group after Mr. Wright’s main list, as one that “apparently had not spent the night close by, but came within hearing in an adventitious way.” This is the Tree Swallow (Irido- procne bicolor), for which Mr. Wright has the single record of 4.40. As a matter of fact, the Tree Swallow is one of the very earliest singers in the morning concert. Indeed, I am not sure but he is the first of them all; for, of the three mornings when I have been favorably situated to hear the first of the Tree Swallow’s singing, Vol. taal 1913 ALLEN, Morning Awakening. 233 on May 29, 1904, both that bird and the Robin were singing when I awoke at 2.53; on May 28, 1909, the Tree Swallow was heard at 3.25 and the Robin not till 3.30 (unusually late, probably because it was a cloudy morning with drizzling rain); and on June 4th of the same year the Tree Swallow was singing at 3.03 and the Robin was not heard till 3.07. Other observers have noted this habit of early rising on the part of the Tree Swallow. Mr. Ralph Hoffmann, in “A Guide to the Birds of New England and Eastern New York’ states that “near a breeding-site the male may be heard singing before dawn, either from the box, or as he flies to and fro in the darkness.” The birds I have heard singing thus have been flying. It is really a remarkable performance regarded as an exhibition of endurance. As I am not aware that it has been described in full, I venture to quote from my journal the notes made May 29, 1904, at Wrentham, Mass. The bird, as stated above, was heard sing- ing when I awoke at 2.53. He “sang continuously, apparently without interruption, from the time I first heard him till 3.40. The song came and went, as the Swallow flew about over the pond, now nearer, now farther away, now to the right, now to the left, but never stopping,— a constant tsip-prrup, tsip-prrup-prrup, tsip-prrup, tsip-prrup-prrup- prrup, tsip-prrup-prrup, tsip-prrup-prrup-prrup-prrup, varied only by the varying number of bubbling notes following each tsip. The ending of the performance seemed to come gradually. After a period when I heard no song from him,— he may have been singing somewhere out of my hearing, however,— I came upon him, or another of the same species, flying about over the land in full song at 3.56. The song was then kept up till 4.05, when I saw the bird perched high on an oak tree, still singing, but after that he allowed 1 Dr. Charles W. Townsend, in ‘Birds of Essex County, Massachusetts,’ gives notes on the night singing and morning awakening of the birds on the freshwater marshes of the Ipswich River at Wenham, Mass., in which the singing of the Tree Swallow is recorded. This bird began on May 22, 1904, at 2.58, thirteen minutes after the first Robin song, which was heard at the very early hour of 2.45, the sun not rising on that date till 4.16. Another note, kindly furnished to me by Dr. Townsend, makes the Tree Swallow begin five minutes after the Robin at Ipswich, Mass., June 3, 1906. On June 1, 1906, at Newton Highlands, Mass., Dr. Town- send heard the Kingbird begin singing at 3.08, two minutes after the first Robin. Dr. Townsend, by the way, permits me to say that he agrees with me as to the preéminence of the Robin over the Song and Chipping Sparrows. 234 ALLEN, Morning Awakening. Rear his voice short intervals of rest till 4.08, when he flew off and im- mediately started up the continuous performance again; and I left him still at it.” When one considers that not only the voice but the wings are in constant use thus for over three quarters of an hour at a time, one can only marvel at the wonderful energy and endurance of the little bird. Mr. Wright calls the Crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos brachyrhyn- chos) “a comparatively late riser’ and gives the average time of his first call from fourteen records as 3.44. My average of thirteen records is 3.33, and I suspect that the wildness and comparative scarcity of the Crow in the White Mountain region, as contrasted with its abundance and familiarity in the country about Boston, may account for this difference. With the exception of the Oven-bird, of which I have only four records, and the Redstart, Black-throated Blue, and Blackburnian, of which I have none, my Warbler observations indicate earlier rising than do Mr. Wright’s. For the Maryland Yellow-throat (Geothlypis trichas trichas) my six records average 3.44 as against Mr. Wright’s five at 3.51. For the Black and White Warbler (Mniotilta varia) I have two records averaging 4.03, while Mr. Wright’s single one was at 4.04. Three records for the Black- throated Green Warbler (Dendroica virens) give an average of 3.38, as against Mr. Wright’s average of 4.13 for the same number. For three other species I have only single records made at Hurd Pond, near Mt. Katahdin, Maine, June 27, 1897. These are rather surprisingly early. They are: Myrtle Warbler (Dendroica coronata), 3.03 (Mr. Wright’s average of three is 4.25); Nashville Warbler (Vermivora rubricapilla rubricapilla), 3.04 (Mr. Wright’s aver- age of two is 3.53); and Magnolia Warbler (Dendroica magnolia), 3.09 (Mr. Wright’s average of seven is 3.55). This morning at Hurd Pond was fine and calm; the light first showed in the east at 2.15, and the rays of the sun struck the farther shore of the pond at 3.58.1. About 13 minutes should be added to the Hurd Pond . 1It may be of interest to record the other awakenings noted at Hurd Pond on this date. In the order heard they were: Olive-backed Thrush (Huylocichla ustulata swainsoni), 2.52; White-throated Sparrow (Zonotrichia albicollis), 2.52; Herring Gull (Larus argentatus), calling, 2.57; Olive-sided Flycatcher (Nuttall- ornis borealis), calling, 3.05; Golden-crowned Kinglet (Regulus satrapa satrapa), 3.54. See ears | ALLEN, Morning Awakening. 235 figures for purposes of comparison with Mr. Wright’s, in order to allow for the earlier sunrise at that latitude and longitude, than at Jefferson, N. H., just as five minutes should be subtracted from my records made in the neighborhood of Boston to allow for the later sunrise there. Another early-rising warbler, which Mr. Wright has not recorded, is the Yellow Warbler (Dendroica estiva estiva). My average of five records is 3.24.' It will be seen that I cannot from my own experience endorse Mr. Wright’s conclusions as to the late awaken- ing habits of the Warblers as a family. These remarks of mine are not to be taken as in criticism of Mr. Wright’s admirable paper, which he clearly states to be the result only of his own records and individual experience in a single locality. They are intended, rather, to be supplementary to his records and conclusions, and they may serve to emphasize the fact that more observations from a number of different localities are needed in order to enable us to generalize with safety upon this subject of the Morning Awakening. For myself, I will simple say in recapi- tulation that, so far as my own observations show, the Song and Chipping Sparrows are much later risers than the Robin, the King- bird is one of the very earliest of the early birds, the Tree Swallow is still earlier and may be the earliest of them all, the Crow is not a late riser, and neither are the Warblers as a family. 1 Dr. Townsend has a record of 3.10 for June 13, 1908, at Ipswich, Mass., five minutes before the Song Sparrow and twelve minutes before the Chipping Sparrow. ree 236 Eirric, Some Birds of the Chicago Area. April NOTES ON SOME OF THE RARER BIRDS OF THE PRAIRIE PART OF THE CHICAGO AREA. BY G. EIFRIG. DurinG the three years of my residence in the small prairie town of Addison, Du Page County, Illinois, I have observed a number of birds that are rare nearly anywhere, or at least rare in this part of the state, some being first records for the county or even the so- called ‘Chicago Area.’ I had intended to send these observations as ‘General Notes’ to ‘The Auk’ from time to time, but lack of time prevented me, until now it seems best to put them together into one article. Addison is situated about 20 miles west of Chicago, in undulating prairie, the highest point of which is about 350 feet above sea-level. The land is highly cultivated, except where imperfect drainage leaves spots too wet in spring. Here small remnants of the original prairie, with its interesting flora of shooting star, hawk- weed, wild onion etc., may be seen. There is a large piece of woodland, containing about two square miles, but otherwise there are no trees here, if we except the usually large cotton-woods found around most farm yards. Beside the above mentioned wet spots between fields, there are some sloughs, large and small, but usually not large enough to entice ducks or Black Terns to breed, while on the other hand the King Rail, Least Bittern, Long- and Short-billed Marsh Wrens and the inevitable Redwing find even the smallest of them to their liking. Salt Creek, which flows into the Desplaines River, is the only stream of the neighborhood, but, though rich in small fish, it harbors almost no Kingfishers along its course, at least here. In fact, the absence or rarity of certain species, which should be common, as the Chipping Sparrow, Whip- poorwill, Cedarbird, Least Flycatcher, Sparrow Hawk, Mourning - Dove and others, is very puzzling — Now to the notes proper. While gulls are a very usual sight along the lake and river in Chicago, they are rare here in Du Page County. However, two Ring-billed Gulls (Larus delawarensis) alighted near the out- buildings in my garden on February 26, 1910. It had been Vol. A 1 913 Errric, Some Birds of the Chicago Area. 237 raining and storming, and there was much water standing on the ice and snow. At such times, and during high water in the spring, Herring Gulls (Larus argentatus) sometimes follow the course of the then rather formidable Salt Creek as far inland as this. Of terns, I have so far seen but one Black Tern. It lingered for a few moments over a rather large slough on July 20, 1910. A rarity for this part of the country was captured on November 11, 1911, in the shape of a Cackling Goose (Branta canadensis minima). It mingled with the ducks of a farmer on the creek, and, when these wended their way homeward in the evening, this northern visitor came along and was caught by the farmer’s sons. I secured it and kept it alive until April 18. During this memorably cold winter, it preferred standing on the snowdrifts in its yard to staying on the straw in its hut. It refused all food except chicken feed of cracked corn, oats, etc. Later, when the flocks of geese were flying to and fro overhead — this is evidently on the highway of goose migration — the little cackling member of the tribe would signal from below, whereupon. the flocks would often halt, break ranks, apparently hold a consultation, and then pass on. Its repertoire of notes — call notes and low chucklings — was quite extensive; some of them were decidedly musical, reminding one of the Redwing, Cowbird or Bobolink in late summer, others were somewhat chicken-like. When in April that particular cracked corn etc: could not, for a time, be had, the little cackler refused the choicest whole corn, or food from the kitchen and deliberately starved to death. It proved a female; a large pellet of shot was lodged against one of the wingbones, which explains the seeming lack of shyness on the day of its capture. The length was 214 inches, wing 14 inches, tarsus 2% inches. Canada Geese (Branta canadensis canadensis) pass through here from January 19 (1912) to April 22 (1910). Last fall a Snow Goose (sp. ?) was taken out of a flock of 26 in a nearby slough. In the above mentioned piece of timber the Black-crowned Night Herons (Nycticorax nycticorax nevius) have a nesting colony of about thirty pairs. The nests are from thirty to fifty feet up in ash and oak trees. On May 10, 1910, while walking —or rather stumbling — through a slough, I took a Wilson’s Phalarope (Steganopus tricolor). 238 Eirric, Some Birds of the Chicago Area. [ Agi While this species is not so rare in Cook County, even nesting in the extensive Calumet marshes, this is the first record, so far as the writer is aware, for Du Page County. What birds are able to go through occasionally, without suc- cumbing, was illustrated by a Pectoral Sandpiper (Pisobia macu- lata) which came into my hands April 20, 1910. One leg above the tarsus must have been broken some time previously, but the bones had grown together, with the foot and tarsus turned around, so that the bird was walking with one foot directed for- ward and the other backward. On the abdomen was a scab over an old wound with a cleft in the center an eighth of an inch deep! This must have been done by a shot or by flying against a barbed wire fence. During the extremely hot summer of 1911 flocks of northern shore-birds were here early in July, frequenting the pastures along the creek or around the sloughs. They then were still in their almost perfect nuptial plumage and thus unusually hand- some specimens of Pectoral, Red-backed and Solitary Sand- pipers, of Greater and Lesser Yellow-legs, and of the Least and Semipalmated Sandpipers were to be seen. It is surprising how late the Greater Yellowlegs remain here on their northward journey — into the last week of May — and how soon they are back again, namely by the end of June and beginning of July. These are undoubtedly non-breeding birds, that do not go very far north. On May 10, 1910, I saw a flock of about fifteen beautiful Golden Plover (Charadrius dominicus dominicus), also three on May 9, 1912. They are becoming rather rare in this region. The Bob-white (Colinus virginianus virginianus) has become very rare in this immediate vicinity, and of the Prairie Chicken (7ym- panuchus americanus americanus) there is but one small covey ona farm nearby, where they are protected. When we come to the Fringillide, however, the outlook brightens for this section, although here too the rarity of the Chipping Spar- row militates against it. Redpolls and Pine Siskins are plentiful some days in autumn, winter or spring, and even the northern Gros- beaks put in an appearance from time to time. But it is for Long- spurs that the region is a veritable paradise. On the exposed, vole x Errrig, Some Birds of the Chicago Area. 239 wind-swept fields they may be seen from October to May, although they sometimes seem to disappear for a few days or weeks when the winds of winter are at their highest. I said, they may be seen; that is however only partly true, for when they are on the ground, busily gleaning seeds, their color is so obliterative, that one does not see them before they are almost stepped upon and take wing. When, however, in May they have their almost perfect nuptial plumage, the males are more conspicuous, owing to the deep black throat, but even then only when moving, as the white band on the side of the neck serves to break up the outline of the form of the bird. May 4, 1912, the fields, especially newly sown oat-fields, were literally alive with thousands of Calcarius lap- ponicus lapponicus, most in their fine breeding dress. Next day the clouds of them had disappeared; a few stragglers, however, were seen as late as May 9. Among the hordes of C. lapponicus now and then a Smith’s Longspur (Calcarius pictus) may be seen, a male of which I took May 1, 1912, the first record for the county. A greater surprise awaited me on April 20, 1912, when, in walk- ing over the old fields nearby, I saw among the many lapponicus, five Chestnut-collared Longspurs (Calcarius ornatus). I was with- out a gun, but they let me approach to within fifteen feet, where I watched them at leisure through the glass. I hurried home and looked at a skin of the species in my collection, from their breeding grounds, took my gun and hurried out, but did not see them again. The buffy throat of ornatus can, of course, not be con- founded with the deep black of lapponicus, especially after one has seen thousands of the latter, in all plumages, and they were even then present in numbers. Nelson’s Sparrow (Passerherbulus nelsoni nelsoni) I have taken twice, on August 31, 1910, and on September 16, 1911. There is only one previous record of this species for Du Page County, by Mr. B. T. Gault, who writes me that a female was taken at Glen Ellyn on October 2, 1893. For Henslow’s Sparrow (Passerherbulus henslowi henslowi) I have an earlier date than that given for this species in Woodruff’s ‘Birds of the Chicago Area,’ namely March 28, (1910), while it is there stated to arrive about the middle of April. 240 BaynarpD, Breeding Birds of Alachua Co., Florida. [ heen While the Dickcissel (Spiza americana) was very common in 1911, it was absent here this year (1912). The Lark Sparrow (Chondestes grammacus grammacus) is very rare; the only small breeding colony I have seen in three years I discovered in a clearing, adjoining some fields, on April 27, 1912. Of the rarer warblers, I have once seen the Prothonotary (Pro- tonotaria citrea), a female, on May 27, 1910. The Cerulean (Dendroica cerulea) and Golden-winged (Vermivora chrysoptera) have been seen once or twice each, the former in June, indicating breeding. For the Prothonotary it is the third record for the county, according to Mr. Gault. The Connecticut Warbler (Oporornis agilis), so rare in most places, is rather common on some days during spring migration. The same holds good for the Gray-cheeked Thrush (Hylocichla alicie alicia). On certain days during the last week or ten days in May, they may be seen by hundreds in the woods, which would seem to indicate that we are here on one of their highways of spring migration. BREEDING BIRDS OF ALACHUA COUNTY, FLORIDA. BY OSCAR E. BAYNARD. ALACHUA County in middle Florida is one of the richest parts of the State so far as its bird life is concerned. This is due to the diversified character of the county. The middle and western parts are rolling with plenty of pine forests, while in the southeastern part is the low lake region with dense hammocks and cypress swamps and higher tracts of pine forests. The greater part of my observation and collecting has been carried on within a radius of twenty miles of Micanopy with several trips to the Suwanee River region. Owing to the tropical character of the lake region this County is apparently the northern breeding limit of several species. | BayNarD, Breeding Birds of Alachua Co., Florida. 24] Out of about one hundred and forty birds that breed in the State, I have found, during the past nine years, ninety-eight breeding in Alachua County, and on my place about two miles east of Micanopy sixty-six. These I have marked with a * in the list. Bird Island, Orange Lake Reservation of the National Associa- tion of Audubon Societies is situated in this county as well as one other protected reservation, and one other large rookery will in all probability be guarded next year. There are probably more Egrets in the county than in all the rest of the State and with the vigorous protection that they are now receiving here it is hoped that they may be the means of repopulating the State with this showy and valuable bird. Water birds are now as plentiful on our flooded prairies and ponds as in the old days that we all thought had passed. In the following list I have added at the end of each paragraph the dates when I have found eggs in the nest. *1. Podilymbus podiceps. Pirp-BirLepD GreBy.— Resident through- out the year. Not very abundant, however, in the breeding season. Nests about June 1. *2. Anhinga anhinga. ANHINGA, WaTmER TuRKEyY.— Resident in great numbers. Begins to lay as early as March 10. Usually rears but one brood, but a persistent layer if disturbed, laying as many as five sets. 3. Phalacrocorax auritus floridanus. FLormma Cormorant.— A regular visitor but an irregular breeder. Have only known of its breed- ing here on two occasions; once in large Cypress Swamp and once on Bird Island in Orange Lake. Nests April 10. *4. Anas fuvigula fuvigula. FLortma Duckx.— Unknown in this county to all the old duck hunters until 1906 when it appeared on Paines Prairie and other similar places and began to nest. Resident now and appears to be increasing in numbers. Builds on islands or tussocks in the lakes and also out on the edges in the tall marsh grass and dry sedge. A specimen we have in confinement, caught when young, has mated for two years with. a wild Mallard drake and has laid many eggs, none of which however have hatched. Fresh eggs about April 15. *5. Aix sponsa. Woop Dvucx.— Resident throughout the year. Breeds during April and May. This beautiful Summer Duck is becoming yearly scarcer here owing to the summer shooting when the young are anable to fly well. I believe they sometimes rear two broods. 6. Guara alba. Wuite Isis, Curtew.— A regular summer visitor until 1909 when they came in the early spring and began to nest on Bird Island in Orange Lake, where they have increased steadily. Arriving about April 1, they immediately begin nest building. Usually lay three eggs, rarely four. The young are considered good eating and many fall to the guns of the so called hunters. 242 Baynarp, Breeding Birds of Alachua Co., Florida. Freee 7. Plegadis autumnalis. Guossy Ibis, BLhack CurLEw.—I first found this rare and beautiful bird breeding here in 1909 on Bird Island in Orange Lake. Nests April 1 to May 1. Will lay two to three sets if disturbed. 8. Mycteria americana. Woop Isis, Fuint Heap.— The last breeding record I have for this County is 1906, when they bred in num- bers in a Cypress Swamp in the northeastern part of the county. This rookery of about 1500 nests was nearly exterminated by men and boys who shot the young from the trees, evidently just to see them fall. After the nesting season they come here and feed all summer on our lakes. Fresh eggs about March 15. 9. Botaurus lentiginosus. Birrern.— Resident throughout the year but a rare breeder. One nest found June 15, 1911, near Micanopy by H. H. Simpson. *10. Ixobrychus exilis. Least Brrrern.— An abundant resident. Commences to nest in early April, and usually rears two broods. *11. Ixobrychus neoxenus. Cory’s Least Birrern.— Very rare and found only during four years of the nine I have lived in the county. Almost always found in or near small saw grass patches on two certain lakes. Probably more abundant than would appear from its fondness for the almost impenetrable saw grass. Fresh eggs April 20. 12. Ardea herodias wardi. Warp’s Hrron.— Abundant and resi- dent. Nests in large numbers in rookeries in cypress swamps in Febru- ary and early March. Have found a few, however, nesting with the small Herons and Eegrets in willow ponds and on Bird Island. 13. Herodias egretta. Ecret, Lona Wuite.— This beautiful bird was fairly abundant when I first came here, but is now limited to about 300 pairs, nearly all of which are in our protected rookeries. April 1 to 15. *14. Egretta candidissima candidissima. Snowy Ecrer.— Never very abundant during my residence here. Our protected rookeries here shelter the remnant of this showy bird. Not over 250 pairs now left and these have increased from the four pairs that I began guarding three years ago. March 25 to April 10. *15. Dichromanassa rufescens. ReppisH Earet.— Abundant during 1907 and 1908. Found about 1500 pairs on Bird Island and many straggling pairs in many other localities. One pair only nested in 1911, and have only seen one pair this year. *16. Hydranassa tricolor ruficollis. Lovuistana Heron.— Abun- dant and breeds in great numbers throughout the county. March 20 to April 10. *17. Florida cerulea. Lirrte BLur Hreron.— Abundant, in fact the most numerous of all the Herons, breeding in all parts of the county in small ponds in woods, fields and swamps and _ islands in the lakes. March 20 to April 10. *18. Butorides virescens virescens. GRrEEN Heron.— Found in all parts of the County, occasionally breeding alone, but more often in rook- eries with other Herons. April 1 to 30. ce | BaynarpD, Breeding Birds of Alachua Co., Florida. 243 19. Nycticorax nycticorax nevius. BLuack-crowNep Nicut Heron. — This heron, locally called the * Night Scrooglin,’ is abundant and breeds usually earlier than the other herons. Builds in a cypress swamp as a rule, but many are found on Bird Island. March 1 to 15. 20. Nyctanassa violacea. YELLOW-crowNED Nicut Hreron.— Not as abundant as the preceding species. Have found them nesting in the same swamp, but never with them. Nests March 25 to April 10. 21. Grus mexicana. SanpHitt Crane.— Resident but rare. Nests in late April on the flooded prairies of two lakes. 22. Aramus vociferus. Limpxin.— This strange bird was fairly abundant here formerly, but is now a very rare breeder and in only one swamp to my knowledge. Breeds from November to June, the height of the breeding season being in April and May. I fear that this bird will soon be extinct in the State. 23. Rallus elegans. Kina Raiu.— Resident but only tolerably common. Nests in early May in the marshes of our lakes. *24. Creciscus jamaicensis. Brack Ram— Summer resident but very rare. Never found a nest but saw an adult with three young on one occasion in early June. *25. Ionornis martinicus. PurpLe GaLuInuLe.— An abundant resident, and breeds on all the lakes and ponds where the Bonnetts (Nuphar advena) is abundant. Nests from March to August and usually rears two broods. *26. Gallinula galeata. FLoripa GaLirnuLe.— Common resident, but not as abundant as the preceding species. Nests from March to July. Inhabits practically the same localities as the Purple Gallinule but usually nests nearer to the water and in the floating masses of Penny-wort ( Hydro- cotyle ranunculoides), the eggs being sometimes wet. 27. Fulica americana. Coot.— Here in thousands during the winter and many remain during the entire year. A very rare breeder, found one nest being occupied but eggs were not laid in it for some reason. Killed two females in June of this year, full of eggs that would have been ready to lay in a week’s time. I have no doubt but that it does nest here occasionally. 28. Philohela minor. Woopcock.— Resident, but rare. Two nests found this year on February 4, by H. H. Simpson, near Micanopy. One nest contained a set of three eggs, the other had been brokenup. This is the second breeding record I know of for Florida. *29. Oxyechus vociferus. Kituprer.—— Abundant resident, nests here in fields near some pond or lake in early April. *30. Colinus virginianus floridanus. [F.Loripa Bos-wuite.— An abundant resident and despite the great numbers killed annually, seems to be more than holding its own. Nests in early April and usually rears two broods. Have found nest with eggs as late as Sept. 15. 31. Meleagris gallopavo osceola. Fiorina Witp TurKkey.— This noble game bird is rapidly nearing extermination in this section, due not so 244 BAayNARD, Breeding Birds of Alachua Co., Florida. ees much to hunting, as to the cultivation of the hammocks and woods where it nests. Full sets are found here about April 15. *32. Zenaidura macroura carolinensis. Mournina Dove.— Resi- dent and seems to be increasing notwithstanding it is a game bird. ‘This is due to the education of our farmers who are beginning to realize the great worth of the Dove. Fresh sets May 1. *33. Chemepelia passerina terrestris. Grounp Dove.— Abun- dant and resident. Known locally as the “Moaning Dove.’ Have found them breeding every month of the year except December and January. Builds as often in orange trees as on the ground. 34. Cathartes aura septentrionalis. Turkey VuLrure.— Com- mon resident and breeds here to some extent in April and early May. *35. Catharista urubu. Biack VuLTurE, Carrion Crow.— An abundant, resident species, nesting in the county by the thousands in the thick swamps, hammocks, and saw palmetto patches. Nests from Febru- ary to June. Young are about fourteen weeks old before they can fly. *36. Circus hudsonius. Marsa Hawx.— A common resident and pretty generally protected by the farmers who know it as the * Rabbit Hawk.’ — Nests here on our lakes on the high tussocks of saw grass and Sagittaria in May and early June. 37. Accipiter velox. SHarp-sHINNED Hawx.— Every man’s hand here is against the ‘ Blue Darter,’ and it is not as abundant as formerly when it bred in great numbers from April 15 to May 1. 38. Accipiter cooperi. Coopmr’s Hawk.— Rare. Have found only two nests in the county in nine years. Fresh eggs about March 15. 39. Buteo borealis borealis. Rep-Tainep Hawx.— Resident but rare. Nests in very tall pines early in March. *40. Buteo lineatus alleni. FLoripa ReEp-SHOULDERED HawK.— Resident and fairly abundant. Nests from February 15 to March 25. 41. Buteo platypterus. Broap-wincep Hawx.— A very rare bird for this section and found only one nest with two young on May 28, 1909. 42. Halizeetusleucocephalus leucocephalus. Ba.tp Hacue.— Resi- dent and formerly tolerably common, having known of 20 occupied nests in one year. Not holding its own now as every hog raiser in the county kills every one he can on account of the Eagle’s perverted taste for razor back pig. Nests about the 10th of December in the tallest pine trees we have and often lays a second set if first is disturbed. Usually lays two eggs. *43. Falco sparverius paulus. Lirrte Sparrow Hawk.— A com- ° mon resident and pretty evenly distributed throughout the county. Seldom molested as its great love for grasshoppers is well known to the farmers. Usually nests about April 15. 44. Pandion haliaétus carolinensis. Osprey.— Abundant and increasing rapidly. Very erratic in its nesting, and fresh eggs can be found from early February to late May. + =< oF - mm Vol. XXX , : BS 5) 1913 | BaYNARD, Breeding Birds of Alachua Co., Florida. 245 45. Aluco pratincola. Barn Own.— A very rare resident and only found near Paines Prairie. Nests in early November. *46. Strix varia alleni. FLorma Barrep Own.— A common resident and abundant in the hammock regions. Seldom molested as their fondness for rabbits is well known. Nests about January 10. *47. Otus asio floridanus. F.Lorima Screece Owni.— An abundant resident and breeds April 10 to 25. : 48. Bubo virginianus virginianus. Great Hornep Ow1.— Resi- dent but our rarest owl. Breeds here about January 15, usually in an old Eagle’s nest. ' *49,. Coccyzus americanus americanus. Yr.LLow-Bi~tep Cuckoo. — A common breeder and pretty evenly distributed. Nests from late April to August. *50. Ceryle alycon alycon. Brxtrep Krinerisner.— Common resi- dent and nests in early April in holes in dead trees and stubs over water. Never found them nesting in cavities in banks as in the north. 51. Campephilus principalis. Ivory-B1tep WooprecKker.— Very rare. Found one nest in the County that contained young. Fresh eggs about February 15. 52. Dryobates villosus auduboni. SourHerRN Hairy WoopPEcKER. — Rare; nests here in very limited numbers in late April and early May, 53. Dryobates pubescens pubescens. SouTHeRN Downy Woop- PECKER.— Regularly nests here in limited numbers in May. *54. Dryobates borealis. Rep-cockapED WoopprcKeR.— Not very common until the last three years, but now a common breeder. Nests about May 1. *55. Phlceotomus pileatus pileatus. PineareEp WooppEckrer.— The ‘ Lord-God,’ as he is known in this section, is one of the commonest woodpeckers in the county nesting in the hammocks and cypress swamps in early April. *56. Melanerpes erythrocephalus. Rep-HEADED WooDPECKER.— Abundant, nesting from early May to late June. *57. Centurus carolinus. ReEp-BELLIED Wooppecker.— Common resident and nests April 1 to May 15. *58. Colaptes auratus auratus. Fuicker.— Abundant and nests from March to June. *59. Antrostomus carolinensis. CHuck-wiLL’s-wipow.— Common and nests from April 10 to June 1. *60. Chordeiles virginianus chapmani. FiLorma NIGHTHAwK.— An abundant summer resident and nests from April 15 to late in May. *61. Chetura pelagica. Cummney Swirr.— Summer resident but only tolerably common. Nests from May 15 to June 10. *62. Archilochus colubris. Rusy-raroarep HuUMMINGBIRD.— Common and nests from May 10 to June 25. *63. Tyrannus tyrannus. Kinaprrp.— Very abundant, nesting about May 10. [ Auk April 246 BayNarD, Breeding Birds of Alachua Co., Florida. *64. Myiarchus crinitus. Crestep FrycatcHer.— Abundant, nest- ing about May 10. *65. Myiochanes virens. Woop PEwrre.— Rare, nests in early June. *66. Cyanocitta cristata florincola. FLoripa Buue Jay.— Abun- dant, nesting from early March to July. 67. Aphelocoma cyanea. Fuiorma Jay.— Very rare and only found nesting in the county once. April 16. *68. Corvus brachyrhynchos pascuus. FiLorma Crow.— Resi- dent but in limited numbers, nesting from late March to April 15. *69, Corvus ossifragus. Fish Crow.— Abundant, large numbers using Bird Island for a roost. Nests in late April in tall slim pines on edges of the lakes. *70. Agelaius phceniceus floridanus. Fiorina Rep-winc.— Very abundant resident and nests from March 15 to July 15. Raises two and three broods. 71. Sturnella magna argutula. SouTHERN Mrapow.LaRK.— Lo- cally abundant in some parts of the county. Nests late in April. *72. Icterus spurius. OrcHARD OrrioLe.— A rare summer visitor nesting in early June. *73. Quiscalus quiscula agleus. FLorma GrackLe.— Abundant resident breeding in April and May in orange and pear groves and occa- sionally in a small pine on the edge of some lake. *74. Megaquiscalus major major. Boat-rarLeD GRACKLE, JACK- paw.— Our most abundant blackbird, resident, and nests from March 1 to July, usually rears two broods. 75. Ammodramus savannarum floridanus. Forma Grass- HOPPER SPARRQW.— Very 1are and probably nests in May as found one pair with young that could barely fly late in June on Paines Prairie. *76. Peucea estivalis estivalis. Pive-woops Sparrow.— Tolera- bly common and nests from April 15 to 30. *77. Pipilo erythrophthalmus alleni. Wauire-ryep Towues, Jo- REE.— Abundant resident and nests in April, May and June. Some years apparently more abundant than others. *78, Cardinalis cardinalis floridanus. Ft Loria CarpINnaL.— Abundant resident, breeding from April to September. Found nest with young September 15, 1910. *79, Pirangarubrarubra. Summer TaNnaceR.— Common and nests in early May. *80. Progne subis subis. PurpLE Marrtin. nests from April 1 to May 1. *81. Lanius ludovicianus ludovicianus. LoccrERHEAD SHRIKE.— Abundant resident, nesting from early February to July. Rears two to three broods. *89. Vireosylva olivacea. Rep-ryepD VirEo.— Common, nests in Common breeder and early May. +83. Vireo griseus griseus. WHITE-EYED VirEo.— Abundant, nest- ing from April 1 to May 15. Ape s€ “ 7 - vo “a BAYNARD, Breeding Birds of Alachua Co., Florida. 247 *84. Compsothlypis americana americana. ParuLta WARBLER.— Abundant and nests in early April in the cypress swamps. *85. Dendroica vigorsi. Pine Warster.— Common, nesting in early March in the highest pines in a bunch of the pendant Florida Long Moss. *86. Geothlypis trichas ignota. FLorma YrLLow-TrHrRoat.— Very abundant around lakes and swamps and nests in late April and early May. *87. Dendroica discolor. Prarris WArBLER.— Not common, nest- ing in late April. *88. Mimus polyglottos polyglottos. Mockrnaprrp.— Abundant, resident, nesting from March to August. *89. Dumetella carolinensis. Carsirp— Common winter resi- dent, but a rare breeder. Nests about April 15. *90. Toxostoema rufum. Brown THRASHER.— Common winter resident and breeds in small numbers about April 16. *91. Thryothorus ludovicianus miamensis. [FLoripa Wren.— Abundant and bred here in great numbers until past two years, when, for some cause, they moved further south. Still common, however. Nests from March to July and rears two or more broods. One set of eggs I collected at Micanopy are typical eggs of the Carolina Wren, and the bird as seen at very close range I took to be the Carolina Wren. I note, however, that Mr. Ridgway regards all our county birds as the Florida Wren and Mr. Stone also assures me that the Carolina Wren does not nest in Florida. 92. Sitta carolinensis atkinsi. FiLorma Wuite-sreastep Nut- HATCH.— Rare; breeds here in early March in small numbers. 93. Sitta pusilla. BrowNn-HEADED Nursatcu.— Abundant and breeds from February to May, usually rearing two broods. *94. Beolophus bicolor. Turrep Trrmouse.— Abundant and nests from early February until April. *95. Penthestes carolinensis. Carotina CxHIcKADEE.— Common breeder from early February until June. *96. Polioptila czrulea czrulea. BuiurE-GRay GNATCATCHER.— Common resident and breeds in early April. *97. Sialia sialis sialis. Buuesrrp— Common resident and nests from March to June. 98. Passer domesticus. ENauisn Searrow.— This pernicious nui- sance is abundant over the entire county. ; : : aii. Auk 248 CLEAVES, American Bird Banding Association. [ April WHAT THE AMERICAN BIRD BANDING ASSOCIATION HAS ACCOMPLISHED DURING 1912.! BY HOWARD H. CLEAVES.” SINCE it is obvious that this report will fall into the hands of many who are not cognizant of the facts relating to the origin, growth and present status of the bird banding movement in America it might not be amiss to devote a brief space at the outset to a review of that phase of the subject. The mystery of bird migra- tion has tickled and agitated the lay mind and engaged the atten- tion of the ornithologist for we know not how long, and although much has been ascertained by field observers with regard to dates of arrival and departure at given points of the majority of migra- tory species, practically nothing is known of the movements of individual birds. Even Audubon became interested in this prob- lem, for we read that he placed silver wire rings about the tarsi of a brood of young Phoebes and was rewarded the following year by discovering two of these birds nesting in the same vicinity. Whether through reading of this interesting incident, or hearing of the splendid efforts put forth by certain Europeans who began banding birds as early as 1899, or by reason of a spontaneous desire to investigate, it would be difficult to tell, but the fact remains that not later than 1902 individual experimenters in this country engaged themselves in earnest and comparatively extensive efforts to cast light on the wanderings of birds by the use of inscribed metal bands or rings. Not until 1908, however, did anything approaching a concerted bird banding movement develop. During that year certain mem- bers of the New Haven (Conn.) Bird Club did a small amount of banding, but, realizing how unavailing were the efforts of so few, decided to carry the cause before the Congress of the American | Ornithologists’ Union at Cambridge, Mass., in November. There 1¥or previous reports of bird banding work in America see “The Auk,’ Vol. XXVI, No. 2, pp. 137-143, April, 1909, and ‘ The Auk,’ Vol. XXVII, No. 2, April, 1910. 2 Address communications to Howard H. Cleaves, Sec’y—Treas., Public Museum, New Brighton, N. Y. Vol. | 1913 CLEAVES, American Bird Banding Association. 249 it met with favor and the demand by members of the Union for bands became so pronounced that 5000 were issued prior to the close of the nesting period in 1909. Of this number approximately 1000 were actually placed on birds, and there resulted from these about 30 return records by the end of the year. With interest aroused, the time seemed ripe to give the movement a more con- crete form than it had hitherto assumed, the result being that some thirty members of the A. O. U. assembled in New York on the evening of December 8, 1909, and organized the American Bird Banding Association. Dr. Leon J. Cole, who had been so successfully pushing the work, was chosen President, and together with four able colleagues made up the Executive Committee. In the spring of 1910, however, Dr. Cole was permanently called to Madison, Wis., and partly as a result of his absence, and also on account of the pressing business affairs of all members of the Committee and their widely separated places of residence, the activities of the Association were destined to meet with a serious setback. Practically nothing was accom- plished during 1910 nor in 1911, but in the fall of the latter year the Linnean Society of New York offered to foster the work, much to the relief of those previously encumbered with it. A com- mittee (consisting at first of three and subsequently of five) was appointed and a campaign to raise funds in preparation for the nesting season of 1912 was inaugurated and carried forward with considerable success. At the outset a change in the type of bands seemed advisable and after inquiring among as many as six different European bird banding organizations the style used by Country Life, London, was adopted. Seven thousand five hundred of these bands, of eight different sizes and bearing the inscription ‘NOTIFY AM MUSEUM N. Y’ instead of ‘NOTIFY THE AUK N Y’ were ordered. For the purpose of keeping an exact record of every band issued a special ledger was designed and a filing cabinet for record cards and cor- respondence was purchased. As the spring of 1912 approached post cards were sent out requesting that applications for bands be submitted. So vigorous was the response resulting from these cards and from notices in ‘The Auk,’ ‘ Bird-Lore,’ ‘Country Life in America’ and elsewhere, that four thousand one hundred and 250 [ Auk Cuireaves, American Bird Banding Association. April seventy-three bands were distributed among forty-four persons residing in various parts of the country, and representing such widely separated territories as Nova Scotia, Montana and Florida. All told, eight hundred of the bands issued this year (1912) have been actually placed on birds and some of these have already yielded return records possessing a high degree of interest. The total number of species banded during the past season is seventy- three, of which the following is a summary: No. banded Species. in 1912. Black Guillemot 2 Great Black-backed Gull 41 Herring Gull 72 Least Tern 7, Leach’s Petrel Pal White Ibis 28 Glossy Ibis 10 Bittern 1 American Egret 145 Snowy Egret 30 Louisiana Heron 2 Little Blue Heron 17 Green Heron 2 Black-crowned Night Heron 10 Spotted Sandpiper 19 Killdeer 2 Piping Plover 3 Mourning Dove 4 Marsh Hawk 4 Barn Owl 6 Short-eared Owl 8 Screech Owl 2 Yellow-billed Cuckoo 3 Yellow-bellied Sapsucker 1 Red-headed Woodpecker 2 Flicker 25 Chimney Swift 5 Arkansas Kingbird 10 No. banded in 1912. Great Crested Flycatcher 5 Phoebe 19 Olive-sided Flycatcher Blue Jay Western Crow Bobolink Cowbird Red-winged Blackbird Thick-billed Redwing Meadowlark Western Meadowlark Orchard Oriole Brewer’s Blackbird 18 Purple Grackle 1 House Finch th Chestnut-collared Longspur 1 it 1 Species. ae oOInwnor Nor WW © to Western Vesper Sparrow House Sparrow Savannah Sparrow 20 White-throated Sparrow 1 Chipping Sparrow 6 Field Sparrow 4 Slate-colored Junco 9° Song Sparrow 15 Towhee 2 Cardinal 3 Rosebreasted Grosbeak 1 Indigo Bunting 3 ‘LOO NO GNVQ HLIM TINY) GAMOVE-MOVIGE DNDOK “% ANOIOD “GQ 'N ‘d)uOdy) TMV] AHL NI STINK) GAMOVA-MOVTG ONIGNVG “] “HA dLV Id XXX “110A ‘ANY FHL —— ss 5 ad CLeAveEs, American Bird Banding Association. 201 No. banded No. banded Species. in 1912. Species. in 1912. Dickcissel 2 Louisiana Water-Thrush 3 Scarlet Tanager 2 Catbird 7 Purple Martin 3 Brown Thrasher 9 Barn Swallow 49 Chickadee 5 Red-eyed Vireo 3 Wood Thrush 4 Black and White Warbler 1 Robin 22 Yellow Warbler S Western Robin 12 Myrtle Warbler 1 Bluebird 16 Black-throated Green Warbler 1 The activity of certain of the banders in the field has been remarkable and their observations often noteworthy. For in- stance, Mr. Oscar E. Baynard, in charge of Bird Island in Orange Lake, Florida, writes that in placing some two hundred and fifty bands on White and Glossy Ibises, Egrets, and Louisiana, Black- crowned Night and Green Herons it was necessary for him to wade about up to his knees in soft mud and guano while the temperature averaged ninety-four degrees in the shade. Mr. Baynard says further: “T note a White Ibis that I banded last year is nesting here this year, although I cannot determine the number. Have noted two long whites nesting here this year that were here last year — one adult with deformed leg and a youngster with a deformed foot. This last year’s youngster has a nest of its own this year and the old one has built in the same bush she used last year. Next year I'll probably be able to note a lot of banded birds returning here to nest.” Mr. A. A. Saunders, of the Forest Service of Montana, is practi- cally the only person doing any banding work in the west, but he is a host in himself and loses no opportunity to put his bands to good use while ranging over his territory. In a letter dated June 25, 1912, Mr. Saunders says: “T was recently told of an incident of a marked bird returning to the place where it was born, and got as many of the facts as possible, as I believe they will be of interest to the association. The incident was told me by Mr. E. A. Woods, a Forest Ranger on the Lewis and Clark National Forest, and while this information [Apri 252 CLEAVES, American Bird Banding Association. comes second hand, I believe it is correct. A lady living near Mountain View, Alberta, just north of the United States boundary, found the nest of a Canada Goose and hatched out the eggs under ahen. The young geese lived in the barnyard that summer, and one was marked, by fastening a bell around its neck. In the fall, when a flock of migrating geese flew over, the geese left the barn- yard, and joined this flock. Two years later, in the spring, the goose wearing the bell returned and stopped in the barnyard for a few days.” Mr. Ernest Harold Baynes, of Meriden, New Hampshire, is one of the most energetic and faithful banders at present engaged in the work, notwithstanding his many. other activities. He tells . of a flock of 125 White-winged Crossbills that fed near his home last winter. The birds were so tame that Mr. Baynes had but to stoop and pick them up when he wished to place bands on their legs. Members of the Meriden Bird Club have put up many nesting boxes for Chickadees, Bluebirds, etc., and numbers of these small birds have been banded. Indeed, it goes without saying that any bird that falls into the hands of Mr. Baynes wears a ring on its leg when released. Mr. Harrison F. Lewis, of Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, is another who has accomplished much in the matter of banding the smaller birds. Mr. Lewis told me that when the school children living in the country near him heard of his banding work they all set out to find birds’ nests and report them to him. Thus a double end was accomplished — Mr. Lewis was enabled to band dozens of birds without spending much of his own valuable time in looking for nests; and, best of all, the children of the countryside suddenly took a rousing interest in bird life, although perhaps unwittingly. What these children were really keen about was to watch the placing of the tiny aluminum bands on the birds’ legs, but to locate the young birds the nests had to be found and in order to find the nests it was necessary to follow the movements and watch the habits — of the old birds. It is often difficult to induce children simply to observe things if they think you are trying to make them acquire some knowledge by doing so, but here was a new idea, a material end to be accomplished — something to do. There is no reason why the work of banding birds should not work a similar miracle among Vol. a | 1913 CLEAVES, American Bird Banding Association. 253 adults — it adds a vigorous interest to bird study; arouses latent interest; or even preserves interest when it tends to wane. These few cases of the activities of field agents are cited as examples of what hundreds of ornithologists should be doing throughout the continent of North America. Bird banding is not the work of a limited circle but the duty of many, and it is only by extensive banding that results of value can be obtained. Realizing these facts, it has been thought best to welcome the cooperation of all competent bird lovers, regardless of the matter of contributions or annual dues. Any one deemed properly quali- fied by the Committee may apply for bands and will receive them. On the other hand it is hoped that there are enough people who sufficiently appreciate the value of the work to sustain the neces- sary financial burden. A year ago many persons declined to support the work of bird banding on the grounds that not sufficient results had been obtained to establish its practicability. The following return records of banded birds, received within the past twelve months, should rob this objection of its foundation. On June 7th, 1911, an adult Chimney Swift fluttered down a chimney into the study of Mr. Ernest Harold Baynes in Meriden, New Hampshire, and was promptly banded and released. The band was of the old style and bore the number 6326. At eight o'clock Pp. M. on June 15, 1912, two Chimney Swifts flew from the chimney into the same room of Mr. Baynes’ house where the bird had been caught a year and eight days before. And lo! when these birds were taken in hand and examined one of them proved to be 6326. Remarkable as it may seem, this diminutive creature, less than six inches in length, had travelled hundreds of miles to Central America or elsewhere in the tropics where he spent the winter and then had made the long return journey at the approach of summer and found again the chimney of his choice in a village of far-off New Hampshire. And throughout his journey- ings the little aluminum ring had travelled with him and had pro- duced not the least effect on the bird’s leg. Two French Canadians were gunning along a small river near the hamlet of Whitebread in southwestern Ontario, Canada, on August 5, 1912. Blackbirds, their intended booty, were not 254 CLEAVES, American Bird Banding Association. [ meee numerous and the men were about to return to camp when one suddenly touched the other on the arm and said “ You cannot hit him!” In answer to this challenge the second gunner wheeled quickly about and took a difficult chance shot at a fast disappear- ing Common Tern. There were many terns flying up and down the stream, hovering in the air and plunging for minnows, and it seems strange that the one shot should have borne a band on his leg. The finding of that band resulted in the following letter: “Dear Friends As I have never seen you’s before but I am writing a few lines to tell you about a ring or piece of tin I found on a sea gull or sea bird. There is thousands of them here but I will not try it again. In examining the bird I found on the left leg ‘ Notify the Auk or Ark 4590 New York.’ So I am doing so to let you know how far this bird travelled. Well I will close. Please write back and let me know if you got this scribbling. from August 5th, 1912. Leo Salois, Box 14, Whitebread, Ont.’’ On referring to number 4590 among the original banding records it was found that the bird in question had been marked when about two weeks old at Saint Clair Flats Canal, Michigan, on August 13th, 1909, by Mr. S. A. Courtis. By correspondence with Mr. Salois it was learned that the terns were apparently not nest- ing at Whitebread, Ontario, and it is not unlikely that the birds seen there had bred at Saint Clair Flats and were indulging in a little roving after the nesting season. However this may be, the facts remain that the dead Tern had worn the aluminum anklet for three years minus eight days; had likely made three round trips to the Gulf of Mexico or some other place in the tropics to. spend the winter each year since 1909; and was shot but a com- paratively short distance from the spot where he was hatched. A farmer by the name of August Schilling of Evansville, Illinois, was walking across his fields on April 1, 1912, when he frightened a Butcher-bird from a fence post where it had been feeding on what proved to be a Bluebird. On picking up the victim and scrutiniz- ing it Mr. Schilling was astonished to discover that the bird wore a ring on its right leg, and that the ring bore an inscription. He Vol. XXX : : : 1913 | CLEAVES, American Bird Banding Association. 255 wrote a letter to ‘The Auk,’ New York, giving the number of the band, and asked for information, saying: “Please let me know when the band was put on. There are lots of people would like to know.” This particular Bluebird was one of a brood banded by Dr. R. M. Strong, of the University of Chicago, at West Allis, Wiscon- sin, on July 5, 1909. The band had been carried for two years and nine months and had apparently caused no inconvenience. It is probable that this Bluebird had made two complete migrations to the south and was about to complete the last lap of a third when he was so unfortunate as to cross the path of Lanius borealis. The letters sent in by persons who have come into possession of banded birds are often intensely interesting, containing informa- tion regarding the conditions under which the bird was secured that makes a story of unique character when one goes to the filing cabinet, picks out the banding record and puts the two halves of the tale together. The following is a good example: The owner of a rice plantation on the Lower Cambahee River, Colleton County, South Carolina, sent in word that on November 2, 1912, his ‘bird minder’ (a man stationed with a gun in the ‘rice yard’ for the purpose of keeping birds away from the grain) had shot a number of Red-winged Blackbirds and was preparing them for a pot pie when he came upon one wearing a small metal band on its leg. What could be more fraught with interest? The man had, of course, given the number of the band and we at once picked out the card bearing the record of banding and supplied the other end of the story. We found that the bird was banded as a fledgling by Mr. Harry S. Hathaway at Quonochontaug, Charles- ton, Rhode Island, on June 8, 1912. On being notified of the ‘return’ Mr. Hathaway wrote: “T well remember this young Red-wing. I was wading through a small cattail swamp looking for Red-wings’ nests when I spied him clinging to a cattail about 2 feet from the water. I made a grab and had him in my hand and a band on in a jiffy. A toss in ‘the air and he awkwardly flew some 20 feet and suceeeded in grasping an upright cattail and clung there while I went on.”’ Who would have supposed that the young Red-wing, reared in a Rhode Island cattail swamp in June, would end his career in a pot pie in South Carolina five months later? [ Auk April 256 CLEAVES, American Bird Banding Association. Almost every record that has come in is characterized by some distinguishing feature and would furnish reading matter as inter- esting as the several returns cited above. Lack of space, however, prevents the publication of these embellishments, although the reader may gather much from the banding and return records in their condensed form at the end of this paper. The percentage of returns, contrary to the predictions of some, has indeed been encouraging; and the point that should be emphasized in connec- tion with these is that they have not in a single instance been due to the handicapping of the birds by the bands. This is proved, firstly, by the fact that the bands have been carried by the birds for such long periods; secondly, by reason of the very conditions attending the taking of each bird; and thirdly, by the fact that the presence of the band on the bird’s leg was not in a single case de- tected until the bird was taken in the hand and examined, and there- fore could not possibly have-prompted any one to kill the bird for the purpose of recovering the band and satisfying his own curiosity. This sort of thing, by the way, is and should be strongly denounced and discouraged. It is rather the interest in watching for banded birds and even photographing them that should be encouraged. It would not be wise to spring at conclusions with regard to the significance and meaning of the return records that have thus far been secured. The fact that Mr. Baynes’ Chimney Swift returned to its old stand after an absence of nearly a year in the tropics is significant in itself; but before stating that, barring accident, Chimney Swifts invariably return year after year to the same chim- ney it would be advisable, not to say necessary, to obtain a dozen or even a hundred similar records as corroborative evidence. Beyond a doubt the greatest progress in the work of banding birds in America has been made during the year just past, but the pace established in that time must be not only maintained but greatly increased. Our interest and enthusiasm must not decline for a moment; the work and aims of the American Bird Banding Association must receive the most zealous support that American ornithologists are capable of imparting. THE AUK, VOL. XXX. PLATE VIII 1. Young Mourninc Doves, BANDED AT STaren Isianp, N. Y. City. 2. CxHimney Swirt, Banpep at Muripen, N. H. 3. Barn Own, Banpep at Straten Isuanp, N. Y. iN ae aa ta ty Vol. | 1913 CLEAVES, American Bird Banding Association. bo or ~] Return ReEcorps. (a) The returns in this division are from the old lot of bands issued by Dr. Cole in 1909. 7287. Herrine GULL. Banded at Falls Pond, Hamilton County, N. Y., by Francis Harper. June 27, 1910. Downy young. 4590. Common TERN. Sterna hirundo. Banded at Saint Clair Flats Canal, Mich., by S. A. Courtis. August 13, 1909. About two weeks old. ‘On bare sandy island left from dredging of new canals. Birds from one to four weeks of age found there.’ §. A.C. 6625. Sporrep SANDPIPER. Banded at House Is. (Four Bros. Islds.) Lake Champlain, N.Y. by Francis Harper. July 7, 1910. Downy young ‘caught on July 8 and July 9, examined and found to be in good condition.’ BH 5557. NORTHERN FLICKER. Banded at Logan Park Cemetery, Sioux City, Ia., by Prof. T. C. Stephens. June 11, 1910. Male nestling, one of a brood of seven. Larus argentatus. Recovered at Barnegat Inlet, N. J., by William H. Lewis. September 11, 1911. Found alive but apparently sick, on the shore. Recovered at Whitebread, Ontario, Canada by Leo Salois. August 5, 1912. Shot: birds did not seem to be breeding here and _ probably wandered over from Saint Clair Flats, after the breeding season. Actitis macularia. Recovered at Squantum, Mass., by Hayden Crocker. September 6, 1910. Shot among a flock of smaller sandpipers ‘on a mudbank in a salt marsh. Did not notice band on leg until I was dressing bird.’ H.C. Colaptes auratus luteus. Recovered at Bayard, Kas., by I. Decker. November 20, 1910. Captured in a barn; injured in capturing and afterwards killed. Band was not noticed until the bird was dead. 258 CLEAVES, American Bird Banding Association. Fe April 6326. CuHimney Swirt. Chetura pelagica. Banded at Meriden, Sullivan Co., N. H., by Ernest Harold Baynes. June 7, 1911. Adult: ‘This bird and another came down the chimney and into my study at 8 p.m. It was almost dark when we liber- ated them.’ EK. H.B. Recovered at Meriden, Sullivan Co., N. H., by Ernest Harold Baynes. June 15, 1912. Caught in a room. ‘The leg to which the band was at- tached appeared normal in every way.’ E.H.B. 955. RED-wWINGED BuackBIRD. Agelaius pheniceus pheniceus. Banded at Berwyn, Chester Co., Pa., by Leonard 8. Pearson. June 6, 1909. Fledgling: ‘had just left nest.’ Tete: Recovered at Lansdowne, Dela- ware Co., Pa., by H. L. Henry. September 1, 1909. Shot. 5838. Fretp Sparrow. Spizella pusilla pusilla. Banded at Sioux City, Ia., by Prof. T. C. Stephens. June 11, 1910. Fledgling. 3429. Western House WREN. Banded at Milwaukee, Ore., by William L. Finley. July 31, 1909. Nestling. Recovered at Sioux City, Ia., by A. Kirkegaard. May 28, 1911. No information as to how it was obtained. Troglodytes aédon parkmant. Recovered at Woodburn, Ore., by Son of J. G. Martzoff. June 26, 1910. Found in watering tank. Wood- burn is about 30 miles south of Milwaukee. 251. Rosin. Planesticus migratorius migratorius. Banded at Kingston, R. I. (Or- chard of Agricultural College) by Leon J. Cole and Wm. F. Kirkpatrick. August 4, 1908. Half-fledged bird from ‘nest about 10 ft. up in an apple tree.’ 1 Dye ek Oe Recovered at Kingston, R. I. (Poultry plant of Agricultural College) by Wm. F. Kirk- patrick. April 9, 1909. ‘Presence of band was unknown. until bird was in the hand. Specimen taken to aid in pathological work at station. Band had caused no abrasion or other injury to _ foot.’ Le dG: Vol. XXX 1913 } Cieaves, American Bird Banding Association. 259 1212. Rosin. Planesticus migratorius migratorius. Banded at Bangor, Me., by Ora Willis Knight. July 8, 1910. ‘Young bird found on ground barely able to fly. Banded and released.’ O. W. K. 2376. Rosin. Banded at Westbrook, Cumber- land Co., Me., by Arthur H. Norton. July 21, 1909. Nestling. 1271. Banded at Portland, Me., by Ora Willis Knight. July 29, 1912. Fledgling just out of the nest. 2816. BLUEBIRD. Banded at West Allis, Wis., by Dr. R. M. Strong. July 5, 1909. Nestling; ‘one of a brood of sev- eral.’ R. M.S. 6302. BLUEBIRD. Banded at Meriden, Sullivan Co., N. H., by Ernest Harold Baynes. June 3, 1911. About two weeks old ‘one of a family of five in an unpainted wooden box, on the corner of an old shed.’ E. H. B. Sialia sialis sialis. Sialia sialis sialis. Recovered at Nashville, Tenn., by J. G. Jenkins. February 21, 1911. ‘Captured.’ Planesticus migratorius migratorius. Recovered at Westbrook, Cumber- land Co., Me., by Arthur H. Norton. July 27, 1909. Killed by a cat at night, bird left the nest July 27. Rosin. Planesticus migratorius migratorius. Recovered at Portland, Me., by Chas. E. Foss. August 3, 1912. Killed by a cat on a lawn ‘two and a half blocks north of spot where bird was _ banded.’ Oo W. Ks Recovered at Evansville, Randolph Co., Ill., by August Schilling. April 1, 1912. Killed by a Northern Shrike, Lanius borealis. Recovered at Berlin Md., by son of a millhand in the employ of Charles W. Tingle. January 20, 1912. Shot together with others of a flock of Bluebirds. (b) The following have resulted from the new lot of bands issued in the spring of 1912. 260 5804. Banded at Lake George, Yar- mouth Co., N. 8., by Howard H. Cleaves. July 23, 1912. Fledgling. 5830. GREAT BLACK-BACKED GULL. Banded at Lake George, Yar- mouth Co., N. 8., by Howard H. Cleaves. July 26, 1912. Fledgling ‘a few of these birds (about three dozen were banded) were seen later from my blind. They paid no at- tention to the bands.’ H.H.C. 5832. Banded at Lake George, Yar- mouth Co., N. 8., by Howard H. Cleaves. July 27, 1912. CLeaves, American Bird Banding Association. GREAT BLACK-BACKED GULL. GREAT BLACK-BACKED GULL. [ Auk April Larus marinus. Recovered at Mavillette, Digby Co., N.S., by Frank S. Doucet. December 18, 1912. Caught alive ‘Bird seemed half tame, due probably to some ail- ment. Band moved easily up and down the tarsus.’ F. D. Larus marinus. Recovered at Cape Negro Is., Shelburne Co, N. S., by Ashley Smith. October 4, 1912. Shot by Mr. Smith when gunning. Larus marinus. Recovered at Prout’s Neck, Cum- berland Co., Me., by G. Clifford Libby. December 6, 1912. Found dead on the beach. Fledgling. 7115. Pipinc PLover. Afgialitis meloda. Banded at Katama, Martha’s Vineyard, Mass., by Howard H. Cleaves. July 3, 1912. Three days old, one of a family of three. 12. RED-wWINGED BLACKBIRD. Banded at Quonochoutaug, Charleston, R. I., by Harry S. Hathaway. June 8, 1912. Fledgling, ‘caught with the hands and when released alighted on a cattail HS. Recovered at South Shore of Martha’s Vineyard, Mass. August 2, 1912. Shot by a boy. Agelaius pheniceus pheniceus. Recovered at Green Pond, Colle- ton Co., S. C., by Thomas Grant. November 2, 1912. Shot by a ‘bird minder.’ (‘A small Blackbird known as the Red-winged blackbird, in the fall very destructive to rice.’ D. J. Chaplin (owner of planta- tion). Vol | 1913 Cireaves, American Bird Banding Association. 261 6261. Pua@sen. Sayornis phebe. Banded at Meriden, Sullivan Co., Recovered at Meriden, N. H., by N. H., by Ernest Harold Mrs. Ernest Harold Baynes Baynes. June 6, 1912. July 14, 1912. Adult, nest in old house in Corbin Found dead beneath nest; ‘could Park. assign no cause for death. As far as I could see the presence of the band had had nothing to do with the case. The bird had laid one egg of the second Set: sEnoee bs EXPLANATION OF PLATES. Prats VII. Fig. 1. Banding young Black-backed Gulls (Larus marinus) in the Lake George, Nova Scotia, Colony, July 25,1912. Photograph by G. K. Noble. Fic. 2. Banded young Black-backed Gull, Lake George, Nova Scotia, 1912. Puate VIII. Fic. 1. Two young Mourning Doves (Zenaidura macroura carolinensis) banded at Staten Island, N. Y. City, May, 1912. Game birds or others shot for food are most likely to produce return records. Fic. 2. Chimney Swift (Chetura pelagica) banded at Meriden, N. H., in June, 1911, and returned, after wintering in the tropics, to his old chimney in New Hampshire, June, 1912. Photograph by Ernest Harold Baynes. Fic. 3. Old Barn Owl (Aluco pratincola) and her five young banded at Staten Island, N. Y. City, June, 1912. Only one pair of these birds is known to nest each year on the island and banding is likely to east light on the problem of dispersal of the young. 262 CuarKk, Anatomical Notes. [ fee ANATOMICAL NOTES ON SOME GENERA OF PASSERINE BIRDS. BY HUBERT LYMAN CLARK. THERE are many genera of Passerine birds, the relationships of which are still more or less uncertain, largely owing to our lack of knowledge of their anatomy. Thanks to the kindness of Mr. Outram Bangs, and his interest in having our knowledge along these lines extended, some alcoholic material has already been placed in my hands and more is promised, which will enable me to study the anatomy of some of these genera of doubtful affinity. Through the kindness of Dr. C. W. Richmond and the authorities of the United States National Museum, to whom I here express - my hearty thanks, representatives of the three following genera have been sent me, and I venture to present here the results of my studies. Such studies can only be carried on with profit, where large collections of skins and alcoholic birds are accessible for comparison, and I am therefore indebted to Mr. Henshaw and Mr. Bangs for the freedom with which I have been permitted to use the collections in the Museum of Comparative Zodélogy. SALTATOR. An adult male specimen of Saltator atriceps Lesson, from Mexico, lacking wing and tail feathers, but otherwise in good condition, preserved in alcohol, has been carefully studied in comparison with Pipilo and Piranga. The characters of the bill and feet of Saltator are too well known to need any comment from me, while the tongue shows no distinctive character. It is so similar to that of Pipilo that the only difference is its slightly greater fleshiness. Pterylosis. The general pterylosis of Saltator is like that of. most oscinine birds and reveals no really distinctive feature. The upper cervical tract is long and narrow, only three feathers wide for most of its length, but the dorsal tract has the usual rhomboidal form. Other specimens show that the wing is pointed by the sixth primary, which is nearly equalled by the fifth and Vol. | 1913 CLARK, A natomical Notes. 263 seventh; the fourth is longer than the eighth which is about equal to the third; the second is longer than the ninth which may be either longer or shorter than the first. This arrangement of the primaries is quite different from that shown by Piranga but is almost exactly like that found in Pipilo erythrophthalmus. The tail is very much graduated and is made up of 12 soft, broad rectrices. Alimentary Canal. No notable characters are shown by the intestine or stomach, which are not distinguishable from those of Pipilo. The intestine measures about 225 mm. in length, or rather less than the total length of the bird, but one and a half times the length of the bird, if the rectrices are not included. The stomach contained seeds and the pit of a small, cherry-like fruit, as well as much undetermined vegetable matter; no insects were noted. Palatine Region. The palatine processes are long and conspicu- ous as in the finches and tanagers generally. There is a well- developed “secondary palatine process” on each side much as in Habia, although not so long or conspicuous as in that genus. They are rather better developed than in Piranga. The maxillo- palatines are not peculiar. Sternum. There is no trace of an ‘osseous bridge’ from the anterior margin of the sternum to the manubrium, such as occurs in Piranga and Rhodinocichla. Back of the anterior margin which is vertically very much thickened there is a bony roof over the small space contained between the anterior margin and the ‘sloping sides of the sternal floor. This bony roof is present in many finches and tanagers but shows great diversity in its extent and appearance. In Saltator, it is perforated by a conspicuous, circular, median foramen, posterior to which is a second much smaller opening. There are no openings in this bony roof in Pipilo but in Habia, there are two as in Saltator although they are very much smaller than in that species. In Piranga, there are, in the male, two very large foramina side by side and a smaller opening may be seen in the posterior face of the anterior margin; in the female, the large foramina seem to be wanting. Whether this bony roof and these foramina have any special significance I am not prepared to say, but their appearance in Piranga (male), Habia and Saltator is striking. Conclusions. The resemblance of Saltator to Pipilo in its ana- 964 CuarK, Anatomical Notes. Lai tomical features is striking, while in two details (secondary pala- tine process and foramen in osseous roof above sternum) in which it differs from that genus it resembles Habia. It lacks the ‘ osse- ous bridge’ of the sternal manubrium so marked in Piranga and Rhodinocichla. It seems to me therefore that Ridgway is right in placing Saltator in the Fringillide. CHLOROPHONIA. An adult male of Chlorophonia callophrys (Cabanis) from Costa Rica has been at my disposal. It has been compared chiefly with Piranga and Euphonia. Unfortunately alcoholic specimens of other Tanagridz have not been available, excepting Rhodinocichla. The characters of the bill and tongue need no comments from me but the tarsi show a certain character which does not seem to have been noted hitherto. Tarsus. Examination of the alcoholic specimen revealed the interesting fact that the tarsi are distinctly booted. The three scales which usually cover the front of the tarsus in tanagers are fused together so that there is hardly a trace of the lines of division. On noting this fact, | examined a large number of skins of Chloro- phonia (5 species), Pyrrhuphonia, and Euphonia (10 species) and several genera of more typical tanagers, with the result, which was surprising to me, that a booted tarsus, as perfect as that of a thrush, is by no means rare among these tanagrine birds. [| find it occurs in Pyrrhuphonia constantly in both sexes and may well be con- sidered one of the generic characters. It is also fairly constant in Chlorophonia callophrys, longipennis, viridis, frontalis psittacina, and occipitalis but is less frequent in typical frontalis and in pretri. In all these cases adult males generally have the tarsus booted, but in the females as a rule, and in the young the divisions between the scutes are still to be seen. In Huphonia affinis, both sexes are, as a rule, booted but in most species of the genus, the scutes on the front of the tarsus are quite distinct. Booted tarsi are also found, at least in adult males of Calospiza, Poecilothraupis, Hemithraupis, Chlorospingus and Mitrospingus. Very probably they will be found in other genera and their occurrence throughout the Tana- gridee deserves detailed investigation. Vol. | 1913 CxiarkK, Anatomical Notes. 265 Pterylosis. 'The general pterylosis of Chlorophonia deserves comment because of the noticeable width of the tracts and the density of their feathering. This is particularly true of the upper cervical tract. The dorsal tract (‘saddle’) is not as broadly rhombic as In most oscines but the outer angles are rounded. The posterior end of the ‘saddle’ is almost completely separated from the remainder of the dorsal tract, which is at first narrow and with few feathers but becomes broad and well-feathered at the oil- gland. The sternal tracts are abruptly contracted where they pass into the ventrals. There are nine primaries and nine secondaries in the wing; the sixth, seventh and eighth primaries are nearly equal, the seventh a trifle the longest perhaps; the ninth is next, with the fifth, fourth, third, second and first in regular succession. There are twelve rectrices of approximately equal length, though the outer ones are of course (since the tail is nearly square-cut) really the longest. Alimentary Canal. The stomach is small but quite distinct. One can distinguish a proventriculus about six mm. long and a gizzard of about the same length. The latter has thin walls but the inner surface is hard and corrugated, so there is no reason for refusing to call it a gizzard. Forbes states (P. Z. S. London,1880, p. 145) that in Chlorophonia viridis there is “the same non-develop- ment of a gizzard” as in Euphonia. It is curious that there should be a noticeable difference on this point within the limits of a single genus, but certainly in Chlorophonia callophrys the gizzard is far better developed than in Euphonia. The intestine in Chlorophonia is extraordinarily long; in the specimen before me it measures 340 mm. or more than 23 times the total length of the bird. Naturally in its arrangement within the body cavity we find two more folds than is usual among tanagers. The stomach contains seeds and indeterminable vegetable matter and remains of at least one insect. Palatine Region. The bony palate is remarkable for the very short palatine processes. They are as short and blunt or rounded as in many Mniotiltidee, so that the palate is not at all tanagrine in appearance. There is no secondary palatine process and the maxillo-palatine bones show no peculiarities. The vomer is notice- ably broad and thick, with the anterior margin not deeply notched. Sternum. There is no trace of the osseous bridge nor of foramina 266 CuarK, Anatomical Notes. [ peer in the bony roof of the space back of the anterior margin of the sternum. In all particulars, the sternum appears to be typically fringilline. Conclusions. The details of anatomy.here given throw very little light on the affinities of Chlorophonia but there is no special relationship to the tanagers shown. The palatine structure and the peculiarities of the alimentary canal both tend to separate it from that group. EuUPHONIA. An adult male of Euphonia minuta from Costa Rica has been available for study and comparisons have been made chiefly with Chlorophonia. The bill and feet need no discussion here; the character of the tarsal covering in Euphonia has been described above under Chlorophonia. Tongue. The tongue of Euphonia is strikingly different from that of Chlorophonia or any of the tanagrine birds I have examined and resembles that of some of the Coerebidee. It is almost tubular, the sides being rolled inward but not quite meeting. The tip is brushy. Pterylosis. The general plan of the pterylosis is not peculiar. The dorsal saddle is more nearly rhombic than in Chlorophonia and the other tracts are not so broad nor so densely feathered as in that genus. The arrangement of the nine primaries is essen- tially the same, but the eighth is slightly the longest and the ninth is a trifle longer than the sixth. There are twelve nearly equal rectrices. Alimentary Canal. The genus Euphonia has long been noted for the apparent absence of a stomach. The specimen at hand does not seem to differ essentially from the one figured by Forbes (1. c.). The intestine is very long, about 180 mm., or twice the total length of the bird, and is much convoluted, as in Chlorophonia. Palatine Region. The palate of Euphonia has been figured by Parker (Trans. Zool. Soc. London, vol. 10, pl. 46, fig. 3) and the specimen before me agrees well with that figure except for the apparent absence of maxillo-palatines. Parker indicates these bones rather indefinitely and I have found nothing that seems to wea | General Notes. 267 me to correspond with them. The palatine processes are remark- ably long and pointed, a very characteristic feature of the skull and strikingly different from the condition found in Chlorophonia. The vomer is deeply divided anteriorly as Parker has shown and thus is quite different from that of Chlorophonia. Sternum. The sternum shows none of the tanagrine peculiarities of Piranga but is almost exactly similar to that of Chlorophonia. Conclusions. The differences between Euphonia and Chloro- phonia in the tongue and palate are so marked as to make one hesi- tate before asserting that the two genera are nearly allied. Differ- ences in the alimentary canal and in the feet also, may not be ig- nored. In all of these features Euphonia approaches some of the Ceerebide and the possibility of its relationship to some members of that family should not be ignored. It is however possible that Euphonia minuta is not representative of the genus and that some other species may show more tanagrine affinities. GENERAL NOTES. Holbeell’s Grebe in Concord, Mass.— On December 15, 1912, Bate- man’s Pond froze over with black ice, but a thaw and rain resulted on the 17th in covering the ice with nearly an inch of water. During the moon- light night that followed a Holbeell’s Grebe (Colymbus holbelli) attempted to light in the pond and I believe settling on the ice and was unable again to take wing. On the following morning, it having turned cold during the night, the bird was found with its breast feathers frozen in the ice. The wrists of its wings were badly lacerated by beating against the ice to free itself, but in other respects the bird was uninjured. After much piteous squawking, its feathers were cut from the ice and the bird liberated. Its wings, however, were injured so badly that it was killed and is now pre- served in this Museum.——- R. Heser Howe, Jr., Thoreau Museum, Concord, Mass. Additional‘Notes on the Harlequin Duck in Wyoming.— In “The Auk’ for{January, 1913, pp. 106-107, I recorded two male specimens of the Harlequin Duck which I saw at Teton Lodge (Moran Post Office), in Jackson Hole last September, and which were supposed to have been 268 General Notes. Weer killed in May, 1908. Efforts were made at the time to obtain further details in regard to the capture of the specimens but without success. Since the appearance of the note a letter has been received from Mr. B. D. Sheffield, of Moran, Wyoming, the owner of the birds, who states that they were killed on April 20, 1907. He adds that there were but two of these ducks which appeared during the latter part of March and were seen every day as they stayed on Snake River in front of the Lodge just below the outlet of Jackson Lake. He has never seen any since. In view of the rarity of the Harlequin Duck in this part of its range, it seems desirable to correct the supposed date and to place on record the exact date of capture —T.S. Patmer, Washington, D.C. White Ibis (Guara alba) in Missouri— On July 10, 1910, two White Ibises were killed at Old Monroe, Mo., a town in Lincoln County, fifty-two miles north of St. Louis, by a well known St. Louis banker. The two birds taken were in adult plumage out of a flock of about one hundred. The birds were mounted by Mr. J. Kirk Keller, a St. Louis taxidermist, and one of the specimens now adorns the “‘ Old Monroe Club.” This I believe is the first record of the White Ibis in Missouri. Mr. Otto Widmann, in his book ‘ A Preliminary Catalog of the Birds of Missouri,’ states that two specimens in immature plumage were killed near Quincy, Ill., but gives no instance of the bird being identified in Missouri.— H. C. Wituiams, Sf. Louis, Mo. Glossy Ibis (Plegadis autumnalis) in Eastern Cuba; a New Rec- ord.— On January 25, 1913, I took an adult male of Plegadis autwmnalis (Linn.) in winter plumage in the lagoon at ‘ Manati’ on Guantanamo Bay, Oriente Province, Cuba. There were a pair of this Ibis feeding together with Little Blue, Louisiana, and Great Blue Herons, on small fish, in a nearly dry puddle of the lagoon. This is the first record for Eastern Cuba for this species; the only other records for Cuba are those of Dr. Gundlach from ‘ La Cienaga de Zapata’ and a lagoon (unnamed) near Cardenas, in Matanzas Province. I had seen a specimen some five years ago flying over the bay near ‘Manati,’ but was unable to secure it; since then none have been seen till this year.— Cuas. T. RamspEN, Guantanamo, Cuba. Bittern Breeding in New Jersey.— To the few breeding records of the Bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus) in New Jersey, I desire to add two more. A set of four far incubated eggs is now in my collection, taken near the coast in Atlantic County on June 11, 1911, and on June 29, 1912, I ex- amined a nest of this bird containing four full fledged young. It was placed flat on the ground, poorly concealed and was built of a mass of reeds and sedges.— RicHarp C. Hartow, Siate College, Penna. ame General Notes. 269 Nesting of the Black Rail (Creciscus jamaicensis) in New Jersey.— The Black Rail has been recorded as nesting in southern New Jersey in 1810, 1877 and 1886, and judging from these data and the secretive habits of the bird, it always seemed to me probable that it bred regularly in suitable localities where original conditions had not been altered. Inquiries among friends who do considerable gunning along the coast between Cape May and Asbury Park brought forth the fact that at least two of them had shot Black Rail in the fall, and one told me that he had seen young birds at rare intervals on the salt meadows. I requested him to make a special search for the bird during the breeding season of 1912, and on June 22 I was rewarded with a letter, announcing the discovery of a nest containing seven eggs on the edge of the marshes back of Brigantine, which he had collected for me on June 20. On the 29th I visited the nest from which the set had been taken. It was built in a low marshy meadow, overgrown with salt grass and sedge and very skilfully concealed in a thick mass of mixed green and dead grass, so that it was com- pletely hidden from above. In composition, it was better built and deeper cupped than the nests of the Virginia, Sora, King and Clapper Rails that I have seen. In size the nest was little larger than the average structure of the Robin, but deeper-cupped and built entirely of the dry, yellowish stalks of the sedges, and there in the lining, clung several black feathers. Think- ing that there might be other nests in the vicinity we began searching every thick clump of marsh grass that we saw, and presently came upon another also containing seven eggs. It was placed among thick clumps of marsh grass and was quite invisible until the grass was pa.ted from above. It was an inch above the salt meadow and was interwoven on all sides with the surrounding stalks. We tried hard to flush the birds but without success, although I once heard a prolonged call or succession of short quick notes, ‘ kic, kic, kic, kic, kic.’? The first set of eggs was partly incu- bated while the second was fresh. It is possible both were laid by the same pair of birds. The eggs show great similarity and in each set one is peculiar being discolored with a yellowish stain. This points to their being laid by the same bird but the short space of time, nine days, seems too short a period for the building of a new nest and the laying of seven eggs. The ground color of the eggs is creamy white, well sprinkled with fine dots of reddish brown and a few larger spots. The speckling is nearly like that seen in certain types of eggs of the Meadowlark, but the ground color is entirely different. In size they are noticeably smaller and less pointed than any of our other Rails’ eggs, averaging 1.02 by .78 ins — Ricwarp C,. Hartow, State College, Penna. A Recent Capture of the Eskimo Curlew.— I wish to place on record the capture of an Eskimo Curlew (Numenius borealis), taken at Fox Lake, Dodge county, Wisconsin, ten miles northwest of my home, on September 10, 1912. Sex, male, adult, fat and in good plumage. Number 7660, collection of W. E. Snyder. 270 General Notes. [ Apri I was away from home for the day, following a threshing crew. The day had been a hot one, and returning to my home about 9 o’clock my wife greeted me thus: “ I’ve got a rare bird for you now I know.” Unwrapping the bird the reader can imagine my feelings when I saw the prize. It had been left for me by a party who has repeatedly refused to give me any information as to who shot it, fearing to do so because it had been killed out of season — nor can I learn anything as to whether the bird was alone, flying over decoys, on lake shore, or anything further than that it was shot at Fox Lake. Being about worn out by the hard and hot day’s work I could not muster enough courage to mount the bird, so hurriedly I skinned it and that night drove to town and left the skin, duly packed for shipment, with a friend, with orders to mail it on the early morning train, to my friend, the skilled Chicago taxidermist, Mr. Karl W. Kahmann, who has done an artist’s job on the bird. I have carefully compared the bird with descriptions of the species as given in the works of Coues, Ridgway and many other ornithologists. The culmen measures 2.50 inches, wing 9 inches, tarsus 2.62, neck and breast marked evenly and densely with dusky streaks, primaries uniform dusky.— W. E. Snyprr, Beaver Dam, Wis. Hudsonian Curlew on Long Island in Winter.— On the evening of December 24, 1912, during a heavy snow and wind storm, a Hudsonian Curlew (Numenius hudsonicus) was found in an exhausted condition in the backyard of an apartment house at Rockaway Beach, Long Island. After spending the night in a basket it recovered sufficiently to fly away at seven-thirty o’clock the following morning. The owner of the house who discovered the bird would not allow it to be taken but it was identified beyond question. I have not been able to find any previous record of the occurrence of Numenius hudsonicus at this time of the year on Long Island.— Cuar- LOTTE BoGarpus, Coxsackie, New York. A Peculiar Hudsonian Curlew.— I had supposed that a Curlew with a bill less than 3 inches in length might safely be put down as an Eskimo, but it seems that this is not the case. A bird was shot at Northeast Harbor, Me., September 5, 1912, by Mr. Lynford Biddle of Philadelphia, which was supposed by several persons who saw it in the taxidermist’s shop to be an Eskimo Curlew. Upon writing to Mr. Biddle for inform- ation he very kindly presented the specimen to the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. It proved, as he himself had determined it, to be a Hudsonian Curlew (Numenius hudsonicus) but with the bill, which appeared perfectly normal in other respects, only 2.25 inches in length. This is three quarters of an inch shorter than the minimum given in Ridgway’s ‘ Manual,’ -and exactly equals the minimum for the Eskimo Cur- lew. This incident emphasizes the importance of making a careful ex- or riamall General Notes. 271 amination of supposed Eskimo Curlews and not depending too much upon bill measurements.— Witmer Stone, Academy of Natural Sciences. Philadelphia. Hudsonian Godwit on the Magdalen Islands.— The Hudsonian Godwit (Limosa hemastica) is becoming so rare that every occurrence is worth publishing, particularly as it seems to be following the Eskimo Curlew into oblivion. ’ On the 18th of February, 1911, a hunter got after a flock of six birds, pre- sumably all of the same species, and of these he secured four. Three of these were eaten but the fourth was mailed to me by my friend Mz. J. B. Boutilier with the above information. It was a new bird to him and was also new to my collection. The specimen is now No. 2570 in my cabinet.— W. E. Saunprrs, London, Ont. The Golden Plover (Charadrius dominicus dominicus) Again on the Coast of South Carolina.— In ‘ The Auk,’ Vol. XXIX, 1912, p. 101, I recorded a specimen of this bird taken by me on November 4, 1911. I now wish to announce the capture by the writer of two birds taken on November 27, 1912, on Oakland plantation, Christ Church Parish. According to Prof. Wells W. Cooke (Distribution and Migration of North American Shore Birds, Bull. No. 35, Biological Survey, 1910) this date of capture is the latest for the United States. Since I obtained the first specimen in December, 1880 (Birds of South Carolina, 1910, p. 59) only four more have been seen, three of which I secured— Arruur T. Wayne, Mount Pleasant, S. C. On the Occurrence of Colwmba squamosa (Bonnaterre) in Cuba.— During the first days of December, 1912, I was advised by a native that there was good ‘ Torcaza’ shooting on the ‘Sierra del Maquey’ Range five miles to the east of the ‘San Carlos’ Sugar Estate near Guantanamo. I was unable to get away till the 10th, by which time the natives had had a good ten days’ start, having shot probably an average of 300 pigeons aday. Still I found plenty of pigeons, Columba squamosa (Bonn.), and got 69 specimens in a few hours, unfortunately very few were worth keeping as great quantities of feathers were knocked off by the branches while falling. In fact only one specimen turned out really good. The pigeons, were feeding on the berries of ‘Come-Cara’ and ‘ Juan Perez’. By keeping still I could hear the berries dropping through the leaves to the ground when they slipped from the pigeon’s bill, as also their soft, low ‘cooing,’ thus indicating where to find them. During their stay on the ‘Sierra del Maquey ’ — some three weeks — I can safely say that over 5000 pigeons were shot by natives for eating and selling. The custom is to cut out the breasts, fry them slightly and put them-away packed in lard in earthenware vessels when they will ‘ keep’ 272 General Notes. Presi indefinitely, or if the cash is needed, as it often is, the pigeons are strung through the nostrils with wire to be peddled about the streets, this latter was done last December to such a degree that the butchers of Guantanamo complained that the consumption of beef decreased. This pigeon has the habit of moving about the country in search of food, which when once found they will not abandon for any amount of shooting so long as the supply of food lasts. During May of each year they congre- gate in huge numbers at certain places on the coast, where they nest on the Mangroves in colonies known as ‘ Pueblos’; and where unfortunately they are shot by the thousand, very often before the young are able to take care of themselves, and therefore must perish. Fortunately some of their nesting colonies are in inaccessible swamps, where they are safe, for the present at least.— Cuas. T. RamspEN, Guantanamo, Cuba. The Marsh Hawk Nesting in New Jersey.— During the past twenty years, the impression seems to have steadily increased that the Marsh Hawk (Circus hudsonius) is a rare breeder in the state of New Jersey. This is not in accordance with my experience. It is true, that not many nests have been found, but during a number of trips taken to various points in Cape May, Atlantic, Burlington and Ocean Counties during the last five years I have always noted this bird as present during the breeding season. It is never as common in one place as such birds as the Fish Crow or Green Heron, but not many hawks are. On the 29th of June, 1912, I examined a Marsh Hawk’s nest with five young and saw another pair of birds undoubtedly nesting, not far from Atlantic City.— Ricnarp C, Hartow, State College, Penna. The Sharp-shinned Hawk again in Maine in Winter.—I saw a Sharp-shinned Hawk (Accipiter velox), apparently a male, circling at a height of about seventy-five yards over upper Spring Street, Portland, on the morning of January 27, 1913. The bird has thus been five times re- corded! as a winter visitor in Maine after relatively little observation — NaTHAN CuiFrorD Brown, Portland, Maine. First Michigan Specimen of the Three-toed Woodpecker— While enroute to the northern peninsula on the Shires Expedition to the Whitefish Point Region, Michigan, the writer examined a collection of mounted birds in the high school at Sault Ste. Marie. In this collection there is a speci- men of Picoides americanus americanus labeled ‘‘ Soo, October 1, 1910; C. E. Richmond, collector. Although Mr. Richmond has not been located, — Mr. M. J. Walsh, Superintendent of Schools, Sault Ste. Marie, states that Mr. Richmond was at that time instructor in biology in the high school, and that there can be no reasonable doubt of the correctness of the locality record. 1Auk, XXVIII, p. 265. ena = General Notes. 273 This is apparently the only Michigan specimen of this species that has been preserved. It should be pointed out that at Sault Ste. Marie the northern peninsula is only separated from Canada by the width of the Saint Mary’s River, so that northern forms may enter our limits most easily at this place— Norman A. Woop, Museum of Natural History, University of Michigan. Arkansas Kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis) in Delaware—— On Decem- ber 31, 1912, while on a collecting trip with M:. Charles J. Pennock at Rehoboth, Delaware, we fell in with four individuals of this species, two of which were secured. The birds weie apparently engaged in catching some kind of small insect near the ground over an old corn field, darting down from the tops of the stiipped stalks and returning to the same perch in the regular Kingbird manner. They were rather wild and difficult to approach. On examination the stomach was found to contain numerous fragments of some small beetle-like insect. The specimens secured were an immature male and female. The occurrence of this species so far to the east of its normal range is further attested by the specimen captured by Mr. F. H. Kkennaxd on October 20, 1912, at Monomoy Island, Chatham, Mass., “‘ just off the heel of Cape Cod” (The Auk, Vol. XXX, Jan. 1913, p. 112). All of these individuals were thus close to the sea, our birds being just back of the beach, with a strip of salt marsh and narrow tangle of green- brier intervening. It seems reasonable to believe that these were all birds that had bred or been raised in the northern portion of the species’ range, possibly somewhere in the Saskatchewan region, and that they went adrift in some westerly gale far to the southeast of their regular track at the outset of the fall migration, reaching the coast of New England and moving to the south- ward along the shore, lingering, without doubt, on the prairie-like stretches of the Coastal Plain in Long Island and New Jersey.— SpENcER TROTTER, Swarthmore College, Penna. The Wood Pewee as a Foster Parent.— The past season a pair of Kingbirds reared a brood of young in a burr oak standing near my parlor window. In my yard all summer long a lone Wood Pewee took up its headquarters. This latter bird, so far as I could learn, was not breeding — at least there was no nest within a half mile of the house. Early in July we had a severe wind and electrical storm. A few days later I failed to find the parent Kingbirds, though three young, just from nest were about the yard, very noisy all the while. On July 20, when within 100 feet of them, I saw a lone Wood Pewee feeding these young Kingbirds — and was an interested spectator of the act for a full half hour — and the same thing was observed daily for about ten days, when the Kingbirds left for other quarters — W. E. Snyper, Beaver Dam, Wis. Two Flycatchers of the Genus Empidonax New to the Fauna of South Carolina.— Since my ‘ Birds of South Carolina’ was published in O74 General Notes. [ Ane 1910, I have identified two Flycatcher’s near Mount Pleasant which I wish to place on record. On October 8, 1912, a young female Yellow- bellied Flycatcher (Empidonax flaviventris) was taken in a large deciduous swamp, which is the first specimen I have ever seen or taken during the past 30 years of almost uninterrupted observations. When first seen I, of course, supposed the bird to be an example of the Green-crested Fly- catcher (£. virescens) and, as it was 16 days later than I had ever detected the latter species, I concluded to obtain it. Upon securing the specimen I realized at once that I had a prize and thoroughly explored the entire swamp with the hope of finding others. But in this quest I was disap- pointed, as no Flycatcher of this genus was seen after that date. In ‘ Birds of South Carolina’ I listed the Alder Flycatcher (EZ. t. al- norum) as the form which occurs here in late summer and autumn. Upon looking over some of these Flycatcher’s, which I had packed away ever since 1900, I came across a very brownish bird that I secured on September 14, 1900. In comparing it with an example of Z. trailli trailli from British Columbia, kindly loaned to me by Dr. Louis B. Bishop, I found no difference between them, while all the other specimens I have are apparently true alnorum for they agree with birds from North Dakota sent to me by Dr. Bishop. This specimen of Empidonaz trailli trailli evidently migrated from Ohio or Illinois—— ArtHur T. Wayne, Mount Pleasant, S. C. A Baltimore Oriole in Winter.— On January 15, 1913, I observed a male Baltimore Oriole (/cterus galbula) in first year plumage, at the home of H. D. Rymer, a farmer living near Columbiana, Ohio. The Oriole first appeared a few days before Christmas and has been feeding there regularly ever since. While I was observing him, he went from the suet to an o1chard where he was eating apples that remained on the trees. Mr. Rymer informs me that when he first appeared his feathers were ruffled, and he did not seem to be in nearly as good condition as at the present time. I am inclined to think the bird was disabled at migration time and could not leave for its usual winter home with the other migrants. I judge this from the fact that the left wing appeared to be about an inch lower than the right when the bird was perching with the wings folded to his body.— Gro. L. Forpycr, Youngstown, Ohio. Starlings and Turkey Vultures Migrating — On January 3, 1912, the weather became bitter cold — following an open winter to that date, and January 4 found a flock of Starlings in Warwick Co., Va., January 6, there . was a heavy snow for this section, and on the 8th a large flock was seen again in Warwick Co., while birds were killed by local gunners in Elizabeth City and Norfolk Counties. Cold weather continued until January 24 when a bright warm day induced a big flight of Turkey Vultures to recross. James River at a point opposite my house — their numbers being in the hundreds. The night of March 5 it snowed again, and on the 6th a small Vol. = in| 1913 General Notes. 275 flock of Starlings was noticed. From that time until the present writing I have seen no Starlings in this section. During the cold spell they were also taken near Richmond, Va.— Harotp H. Batter, Newport News, Virginia. The Evening Grosbeak in Wisconsin— On October 21, 1912, my mother, entering her poultry yard to feed her flock, found an adult female Evening Grosbeak ( Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina) lying dead on the ground. On skinning the bird for my collection I found it to be in good condition of flesh, with a few moult feathers on head and neck, but could find no trace of any injury sustained, nor discover any clew whatever as to the cause of its death. JI had previously seen none others here this season, and at the present date, December 16, it is my only record for 1912.— W. E. Snyper, Beaver Dam, Wis. The Snow Bunting (Plectrophenax nivalis nivalis) in Chicago and Vicinity during the Fall and Winter of 1912.— On account of the ir- regular occurrence of this bird so far south, the following records, showing its status in Chicago and vicinity, as I have observed it during the fall and winter of 1912, may be of interest. It is the more interesting because ‘ Bird- Lore’s’ Christmas census for 1912 (Bird-Lore 15:20-45. 1913) seems to indicate an absence of boreal species in the Middle States, the Snow Bunt- ing not being recorded outside of Canada, except in the eastern states of Vermont, Massachusetts and New York. October 23 one was seen about the beach at Jackson Park. This bird arrived three days earlier than any previously reported from this region (W. W. Cooke, ‘The Migration of North American Sparrows.’ Bird-Lore 15:17. 1913). October 24 there were two in the same locality. November 2 twelve were seen feeding on grass seed on the beach at Lincoln Park. November 30 two were seen flying along the beach at Miller, Indiana. December 20, ten were seen about the rocks forming the breakwater where land was being filled in at Lincoln Park. Frequent excursions after Decem- ber 20 failed to reveal any more of the birds, and they probably migrated still farther south. All the birds observed were tame, allowing a close approach, thus making their identification a very easy matter—— Epwin D. Hutu, Chicago, IIli- nois. A Strange Sparrow Roost.— Early in the fall of 1912 the European Sparrows in the City of Utica, N. Y., established a roost in the tops of the elms in the yard of a church in the most busy part of the City. At dusk every evening they assembled to the number of several hundred to spend the night in these unprotected trees. Early in January, Mr. James O. Roberts, a young observer called my attention to the fact that there were some strange birds among the sparrows, and after some difficulty in identi- fication it was discovered that they consisted of a Starling (Slurnus 276 General Notes. ess vulgaris) — a new record for central New York — and a number of Cow- birds (Molothrus ater ater); as many as ten being seen at one time. These are strange birds for mid winter in this locality. The winter had been very mild up to this date and there was very little snow at the time.— EGpert Bace, Utica, N. Y. Towhee in Winter near Steubenville, Ohio. While taking an all day walk on December 26 I was surprised to find a flock of from fifteen to twenty Towhees (Pipilo erythrophthalmus). There were both males and females in the flock. There were several inches of snow on the ground with the thermometer at about 60° F., and a strong sun. As this is a late date for this species I thought it worth reporting. The birds were seen three or four miles south of this city on the West Virginia shore.— Kenyon Roper, Steubenville, Ohio. Barn Swallow in South Carolina in Winter.— The Barn Swallow ( Hirundo erythrogaster) is an abundant migrant in the coast region of South Carolina, occurring regularly through the middle of October. Mr. Arthur T. Wayne (Birds of South Carolina, p. 139) says, “a belated specimen was observed on Oct. 29, 1906.’ On Dee. 17, 1912, while passing through the Navy Yard at Charleston, 8. C., I had a glimpse of a Swallow which I recognized at once as belonging to this species. Hoping to get a closer view, I waited. The bird soon reappeared and passed low over my head several times, showing distinctly its color and its deeply forked tail. The correctness of the identification is, therefore, beyond question. As the use of firearms is prohibited within the limits of the Navy Yard, I was not prepared to secure the specimen.— FRaNcis M. Weston, JR., Charles- fons Oe Notes on the Loggerhead Shrike at Barachias, Montgomery Co., Ala.— On Jan. 10, 1912, the men felled a tree in the grove and in sawing it into three foot lengths turned out quite a number of large, white, blue- bellied grubs. Most of these were placed upon one of the ‘ cuts’ but a few were left upon the ground and soon attracted the attention of a Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus ludovicianus). I seated myself beside the stump only six feet from the grubs on the ground, but the Shrike came and fearlessly removed them, one by one, paying little attention to my presence, so I decided to try a photograph. Securing my camera I focused it at six feet upon the grubs on one of the ‘ cuts,’ while I sat upon another, but soon I had worked the instrument up within eighteen inches of them and still the Shrike came with very little hesitation and removed the very last one, regardless of the click of the shutter, while I still sat there. The grubs were impaled upon the thorns of several different trees. After hastily snatch- ing one the Shrike nearly always alighted upon some nearby branch to get a firmer grip upon the grub before flying away to impale it. Jan. 16, 1912, everything was frozen hard and the bright sun did not Mors = General Notes. QT seem to relieve matters. I was returning from a visit to a trap in the grove when my attention was attracted by the cries of a bird in the broom sedge near me. Advancing cautiously I discovered a Shrike throttling a Mock- ingbird which it had pinned down on its back on the ground. I watched until the Mockingbird was killed and then noticed another hovering about with drooping wings, but it made no attempt to drive the Shrike away. I picked up the dead bird then and found that its neck was broken and a Jarge patch of skin missing from its occiput. Evidently it was killed by its neck being broken, which the Shrike accomplished by repeated blows with its hooked beak. I squatted perfectly still and held the dead bird in my right hand, which was gloved, and the Shrike came and endeavored to take it from me, alighting on it and tugging at its head with all its might. Putting the bird down I returned to the house for my camera but when I got back I found the Mockingbird disemboweled and the Shrike nowhere in sight. The entrails were removed through a small hole in the bird’s back, about over the kidneys. The measurements of the dead Mocking- bird exceeded those given in Coues’ ‘ Key’ for the Shrike, althoagh I judge that it was a young one. It is my opinion that the Shrike attacked such a large bird only under stress of hunger, everything being frozen. IT am almost sure that this is the same bird I photographed Jan. 10.— Ernest G. Hout, Barachias, Ala. Wintering of the Blue-headed Vireo (Lanivireo solitarius solitarius) at Aiken, South Carolina.— On January 28, 1913, I saw a Blue-headed Vireo (Lanivireo solitarius solitarius). The bird was flitting about in the branches of a long-needled pine (Pinus palustris) in company with two Brown-headed Nuthatches, two Brown Creepers, and a Golden-crowned Kinglet. The bird was tame, allowing me to approach within a few feet before paying any attention to me. As this species is not credited with wintering as far north as this point, I consider it a note worth recording.— JoHN DrypEN Kuser, Bernardsville, New Jersey. The Magnolia Warbler (Dendroica magnolia): an Addition to the Fauna of the Coast Region of South Carolina.— On September 29, 1912, I shot on Oakland plantation, Christ Church Parish, a superb young male of this species. There was a tremendous migration that morning and, although Sunday, I thought I would take a short walk and see if there were any rarae aves among the thousands of Warbler’s which had arrived. When first seen I was satisfied that the bird was a young male Cape May Warbler ( Dendroica tigrina), as the morning was dark without sunlight, and it was not until I had the bird in my hand that I realized I had made a mistake and had taken a bird that I had never seen before. One shot was fired, but it brought to me a new bird for the coast of South Carolina. Dr. Eugene Edmund Murphy has taken this species in the autumn at Augusta, Georgia, but he has found it excessively rare there — ArTHuR T. Wayne, Mount Pleasant, S. C. [ Auk April 278 General Notes. The Cape May Warbler ( Dendroica tigrina) Taken in the Spring on the Coast of South Carolina.— Dr. Louis B. Bishop, while paying me a visit in the spring of 1912, shot two Cape May Warblers — a male and a female — on April 23, 1912, and, on the same day and at the same place, I took three of these birds. The Cape May Warbler has not been seen or taken in the spring by the writer in the past thirty years and he is in- debted to Dr. Bishop, who took the first specimen, for finding the birds.— Artuur T. Wayne, Mount Pleasant, S. C. Catbird and Brown Thrasher in Winter in Massachusetts.— On Christmas Day, 1911, in the Arnold Arboretum at Jamaica Plain, Massa- chusetts, I saw a Catbird (Dumetella carolinensis) in some shrubbery about three hundred yards from the museum. It was quite lively though silent and rather shy. Twenty days later, on January 14, 1912, I again saw what was probably the same bird. This time it was apparently sunning itself in the vines on the museum. After allowing a rather near approach it flew across the road into some bushes, where it remained still seeking the sunshine and as before, silent. The weather was clear and cold with a minimum temperature of one degree below zero and the Catbird acted, as it well might, as if it was half frozen. The bird was not observed after this date and as shortly afterwards some Catbird feathers were seen strewn around about the museum it probably came to an untimely end. While walking in the Arboretum on the morning of December 22, 1912, I saw a Brown Thrasher (Tozxostoma rufum) on the ground very busily at work poking among the leaves with its bill. The bird was very tame and I approached to within four feet of it, hardly any notice being taken of me. It did not utter a note of any kind neither did it leave the ground while I was there. It has not been seen since, the snowstorm of Christmas Eve probably driving it southward— Haroxip L. Barrert, Jamaica Plain, Mass. Brown Thrasher Wintering near St. Louis, Mo.— The winter of 1912-13 has been remarkably mild with very little precipitation. The ground has not been completely covered with snow this winter in the brush- covered portions of the bottomlands, and the lowest temperature was four above zero, on February 1. On Feb. 2, 1913, at Creve Coeur Lake, in a well sheltered area of thick underbrush in the Missouri River‘ bottomlands fourteen miles north of St. Louis, I had the good fortune to observe at close range a Brown Thrasher (Toxostoma rufum). It was the day after our coldest weather | and a light snow was falling. The bird was scratching in the dead leaves in search of food and from all appearances was in excellent condition. It flew from bush to bush as I pursued it and seemed very much at home in its surroundings. Mr. Widmann gives no record of the bird wintering near St. Louis and gives March 13, 1882, as the earliest date of spring arrival. H. C. Wiuutams, St. Lowis, Mo. ¥ ae | General Noles. 279 Random Notes from Easton, Pa.—Ceryle alcyon alcyon. Brttrep KineFrisHeR.— I saw a Kingfisher flying along Bushkill Creek calling lustily on January 4, 1911. Colaptes auratus luteus. Norrspern Fuicker.— One was seen on February 13, 1909. This is the first and only winter record I have for the species. Archilechus colubris. Rusy-rHroatep Humminasrrp.— A female or a bird of the year was seen in an orchard here on October 3, 1908. The Hummingbird usually leaves more than a week earlier. Loxia curvirostra minor. Crosspitu.— On April 13, 1912, I saw two Crossbills in a small maple tree, apparently feeding on the buds. They were quite fearless; so I was able to approach very near to them. Spizella pusilla pusilla. Fre.p Sparrow.— On November 27, 1908, two Field Sparrows were seen in a tangled briar thicket. Another one was observed on January 9, 1909. Compsothlypis americana usnez. NorrHerN PAaruLA WARBLER. — In 1907 I saw this warbler on October 17; while in the following year one was seen on October 10. These are late dates. Dendroica virens. BLAcK-rHROATED GREEN WARBLER.— An im- mature bird was seen as late as October 31, 1907. Setophaga ruticilla. Repstrarr.— Hither a female or an immature bird was observed along the edge of a woods on October 27, 1909. This species breeds here occasionally. On June 8, 1907, an occupied nest was discovered above twenty feet above the ground in an upright crotch of a vine, pendant on a tree. At the time the female was on the nest. Sitta canadensis. Rep-sreastep Nursatcu.— This bird is a very erratic visitant here. During the fall of 1906 it was very abundant from September 25 until October 30, when the last one was noted. In 1907 but ,one individual was observed. Then the species disappeared from here ‘and for three years none was seen. But on October 11, 1911, a solitary bird was noted; while on October 17 and 18, 1912, several were observed. Regulus calendula calendula. Rusy-crowNep JKiINauer.— On February 27, 1911, a male Ruby-crowned Kinglet was seen and positively identified. The bird was flitting about in the undergrowth of a woods giving its wren-like call. This is not the first winter record for this locality, for during January and March, 1908, this species was observed several times. (Cassinia, 1908, p. 64.) Hylocichla guttata pallasi. Hermir THrusu.— Again I wish to report the presence of this species here in winter (Auk, Vol. X XIX, p. 250). On December 25, 1912, I saw an individual of the species in the under- growth of a woods on a sunny hillside. The biid was watched some time and closely observed. Its call, habit of nervously jerking the tail up and down with an accompanying flap of the wings, and the coloration, which was characteristic of the Hermit Thrush, left no doubt as to the true iden- tity of the bird.— Epwarp J. F. Marx, Easton, Pa. 280 General Notes. [Apri A few South Dakota Records of some Western Birds.— A short time ago I went over the bird skins in the museum here and sent a number which promised to be of interest to the Biological Survey for identification by H. C. Oberholser. In a letter recently received from Wells W. Cooke ‘he states that, among others, the following records are extensions of pre- viously established ranges. It is therefore thought that the publication of the known data concerning these records would be desirable. The Grebe was collected by H. E. Lee of Rapid City, the Savannah, Grasshopper and Tree Sparrows by E. H. Sweet of Sturgis and the remaining numbers by the writer. ZEchmorphorus occidentalis. WrstrerN GrREBE.— Hamlin County, northeastern 8. D., Nov. 10, 1911, immature. (Mr. Lee states that he has found nests of this species and seen young in all stages upon Lake Norden in that county.) Otus asio maxwelliz. Rocky Mountain ScrEEcH Owx.— Oelrichs, Fall River County, southwestern 8. D., Aug. 5, 1911. Considered by Cooke to be a notable extension of range. Dryobates pubescens homorus. BaTcHELDER’s WOODPECKER.—— Willet, Harding County, northwestern 8. D., Sept. 4, 1912, Myiochanes richardsoni. WrsteERN Woop Prwen.— Fall River County July 27, 1911, Lawrence County, northern Black Hills, July 25, Harding County, Sept. 4, 1912. (Abundant in the pine forested areas of western S. D.) Cyanocephalus cyanocephalus. Pivyon Jay.— Buffalo Gap, Fall River County, July 24, 1911. (Quite frequent in the coniferous regions especially the Black Hills, Cabe Hills and Pine Ridge.) Pocecetes gramineus confinis. WESTERN VESPER SPARROW.— Forest- burg, Sanborn County, southeast-central 8. D. July 15, 1906. Passerculus sandwichensis alaudinus. WrsTeRN SAVANNAH SPAR- row.— Menno, Hutchinson County, southeast-central 8. D., Apr. 28, 1902. Ammodramus bairdi. Barrp’s Sparrow.— Harding County, July 12, 1910, Sept. 3, 1912. (Breeds quite abundantly in the extreme northwestern corner of the state.) Ammodramus savannarum bimaculatus. WrsTeERN GRASSHOPPER Sparrow.— Menno, Hutchinson County, Aug. 15, 1900. Spizella monticola ochracea. WrsTERN TREE SPARROW.— Hutchin- son County, Dee. 27, 1900. Spizella passerina arizonz. WESTERN CHIPPING SPARROW.—Oelrichs, Fall River County, Aug. 4, 1911. Guiraca czrulea lazula. WersterN Biur GrospnaK.— Carter, : Tripp County, south-central S. D., Aug. 16, 1911, immature. Breeds frequently in the Pine Ridge country as far east as the 100° of longitude. Myadestes townsendi. TowNsENp’s SouiTaAirE.— Minnekahta, Fall River County, July 27, 1911, a fledgling. Breeds regularly and _ plentifully in all sections of the Black Hills. , = y, se eatin ar tex. a anne : anaeles, % aS se Le 40771 @ LEROES. jet M Lasley f F ean y F som “#- Soe ae < Be fe ae a Clearec 5 re ee « ats Ee F PL iniifel pwr ae Lfeile Eos Ff ere | Sy a, rene, ocrtharty @ 5 fos 7 J- CFG Pd #, D3 Aa ty eee / « ™“ na cation Kee , Loy I oe ra 7 i es i a et. ae me 4 = ey ee te ieee LP. Se. Doth bhi ee 1g Phan neh Sze te an tn Se % Pe: Woe emai es S109 Larisa ly at blag teatrre/ Ss ¥: pe i otsem Next Miu drum: | Dro a» bya Ss Bu Hin tees (409 ae 3 ee pai oft i“ Sx womens 4 have His alt of fi.. Darth arias Stn gg (00 o rap wh R xd b ; ee Ds unde Li 122 le L6r a7 (snunrpau suaosaqnd sajnqohiq) Jayovadpoo\y AuMoq 2G so a Ler or | dtr 6 (njoaja1gD snynapid snwuojoM)Yyq) ayedpoo A peyeoig UlayyION 9G eo - lot | Jot | tor Te (SISUAULJOLDI SISUAUIJOLDI DUG) YoyeyNN poysveiq-ayiq Ay Gg a7 > | fot | 9 de Or (varbopad vunjoy,)) IMG AouuYD Hg ‘- > 161 8S le cal (sniomzfiso xhuoysyog) yujoqog = eg 7 ‘> IZ 6 1z & (wohay uofiozp ajfisay) rzaysysury peyeg zg v P 1g ] 9 4T Vx (wnlo.pas Dypofiquiog) SUIMXB\\ Tepe 1g a v 0 r1 g v1 (szs247 8182.4 snuypbouysy) Youyploy OG ¢ “¢ \T GT i 6% (sniuna sniswa snoidnsfiydy) Jayonsdeg paljfaq-Mo][a x 6F 3 “e real 1 iy ie) ae oe (suosfiuny suotfrun] UWopyayI0.}2d) MOTTCAS YQ 8h $ € 8 LE LI Vx (sysuappund vg) YO YINN peysvoiq-poy LF “e "¢ 91 Ze IZ 9 (DaUDISDI DILOIPUAT) Jo[GIBM peysvoig-Avgq OF P'S € él te GG ol (srqpdnoryy snppdnoiuo sajsayjuaq) B@PBANGD Gh Toppy] LOplV % —7 OS tz | UE TOL ta GL €6 8 9 (sua.a saunyoovi fy) BMA POOM T soa en e iad ; 6 eS : B 3 : > : =Mes| cr} Ee eZ : | 68 bea Ra rs @ ch 2g te ® oss B & 2&5 om i} B LIS rhe © o 3 S zo = ae go. | Pes 8 ‘sawed = ES eS =e. ob | S58 2. sawadg fo sawn jy ao ae a aB | $2 [ash] 3 Pe ES 8 &. g 2 5 eae ins es 2 e ES E ES 3 = PB. Be m BR Be a : SE 2° ee 4 73 “ONINGMVMY JO WAduc— Meee thr). . . iy - are. Me ‘estzums Joiyy 4 *O10U-T182D « 11z le 161 P (snupipau suassaqnd sayngohiq) Jayvadpoo \ AUMOG 1a ¥ Cae 4 el'v LV 41 or | 4II 6 (njoayarqn snyoayud snwojonqyq) 1249edpoo \\ peyeo|tq WIyWION ol'¥ ov for | Jor | +01 Tx (stsuaUugpoi9 s1sU9Ur}O1D9 DING) YOYEYINN Poeysvorq-ayry MA L0'¥ 1) 8 7 461 9 4g Or (vabojad viunjwyD) yang SouuryD 0°97 L0'% 461 82 | te ial (snuoarzfiso xrhuoysyoq) yAoqog ¥0'F ¥0'F IZI 6 1g ioe (woo uofisp apiisag) raysysury peed £0'°F £0°F le 9 ly Fx (wnsorpas DIWfquiog) BUIMXB \\ Tepe 4a°§ | 90°F 0 mam 13 v1 (sust17 syst. snugpbossy) YOuUyploH cG'¢ 6¢°@ MT cI i 6x (sniipa snisva snodpifiydg) Jaxyonsdeg pot[[oq-Moy[e x GP's LYE a 1G LT Ve (suosfiun) suoLfvuny UOPY2YI0.YIq) MOTTEAS WUD SPE 6 € 8 LG LI Px (sisuappuDd DIS!) YOYYINN Peysvorq-poy we EP's oT ze IZ 9 (Daunjsva DIWLpUa) Ia{qXE\\ poysvoiq-AEg ore | &h'é cr | se |-a Io (snyrdvoiyw snypdnoiuyy saysayjuad) 2PBAYD 622 we Zo CZ 4 Pe (snaysaulop SnIYjsaUop LassDq) MOLIEdY osno}y{ 8E°E OF & 4Z 6P VG G (DJDUO.LOI VIVO.IPUATT) IO{GAEN AAT LE°€ 6b & 1G & GZ & (sypwmary sypoUay SNUUD AT) WOIA\ TOFUT A Sé's 8E°E G && LG € (mpdvarugn.s Dypdvoiqns Dioavuta A) I{QIe\ e[tAqSeN cee Ore eG re LZ 6 (odv.yns vdn.ynos snpnbagy) Yo|SULy{ PeUAO.10-uBp[OY) ges Ws (a G€ LG i (DLuDa DYYOVUTY) AUC M PITTA PUB Wv[g PES 8E°€ GS && 8% L (suana vavoupuad]) 1a[qIv M\ WET) Poyvormyy-Woel_y FEE 66 °& 1 SF 86 8 (SNAID}YOS SNALDIYOS CAMAUDT) OBTLA Popvey-on]|g ee'¢ 8e'e €Z GE 62 Il (mausn nunniaun sidfiqyjosdwo)) taqre A ene U1IyyL0 ee 7; 228 % | OF.) C8 1 6 (nouns Dboydojag) 4.164SpIy Té€ PEs £&% aa 1é G (vaavayo vaphisoan A) Oat, pedo-pey 08's PEs 16 GP c& L (stsuapouns DiUuos]? 4) Jo[qIBM BpeUeA) 66°& £68 LE Ip && FL (vosnf voVoupua) Aa]|qUe A WeraANgyoel gy 6z2'¢ 62° IZ Gh Ee 9 (snaindind snaindind snovpodiog) youry ejding 82° eee LT #9 rE 61x (soysufiyshyooig soyouhywiyonig snasog) MOI) Go's cee 8Z IF 1g 6 (Suaasajnioa SUaISANLDMI DIOIPUA) IB{GIBA\ ON] Peyworyy-3poeyg gas | ze's | a Y Je aks (naydpopopryd syusosodg) 1oqxe \\ SuLumno jy SBE 86° & cs &F LE 6 (nyoubou vovoupuaq]) Ia{qUE NM BIOUsE Go'€ e's 9% og L2 9 (Dudjaysnue DIYIWOIA FT) YSNAYT, POO 6 '€ wae iS IF se y (vovunapisuad povospuad) Ia{qre MA Pepts-ynuysayD, 9's 61'e 9& Tg OF 9 (sypes syms DyMLY) PIGON XOL'€ 06'€ cP $¢ OF 9 (spyarg spya. SUdfizyjoayy) YeOIYY-MOT[aX puepAre yy or'é 06 °€ OF 09 OF GI (sypuahy syouahy oounp) oounf pelo[oo-eyR[g 1s €&1'€ LP ¥S 1S ve (snunui xpuopidwu) 1oyoyeos] J 4SBI'T Ile 1o'€ GP 1g 1g F (sppamowyjisa DBUDMT) IBEUBY, YO[LBIG Il'€ I OF #9 1g L (snuupnshy snuuvshiZ) praqsurysy Olé gs a 6¢ AS 91 (suaosaosnf suaosaosnf Djyowopifz) K192 A 10) Vice GP €9 cg FI (vaupfia puiwasspg) Suryung ostpuy 60°¢ Sis cP €9 €G QI (aspyod nynynb vpyyovojfiz7) Ysnayy, WwuaAIEP 60°¢ ore CP 89 eG OL (aqayd svusofivg) aqayd 80°¢ 9 LY €9 ¥S I (1wosuiDns DIDINJsN KIYNIOPA FT) YSN.UYT, PPYVG-eAl[O SO'€ FO'€ PP TZ 1S Z (s¢ypasog StUsLozDIN AT) JIYOYBOAT YT PEps-eaAl[O S0°€ 40°€ 0€ GL Lg § (snupoyyydosyjhisa snzfis009) OOYPND pelq->yoP1q £0°€ 90°€ OF cy 6S OL (DuuDaws sasuayoINpuUDs snyna1assDq) MOIIedg YeuUPAeg c0'€ GOs SP 9) 09 OT (snaunuvib snaurums6 sajaon0g) Mosredg tadso A toe 10'€ 8) 89 T9 9 (10j09029 aus0idoprt]) MOT[BAG 901], 10'€ c0'€ cP és 19 ial (vyspbosyjyhisa OPUNUFT) MOTTEAG UIeg 83'S 00°¢ 9S 18 +9 9T (snasopoibr sniwoposbru snoysaunjq) Utqory Lo 69°% Og L8 g9 9 (syjoorqy wryot.youoZ) MoLredy poyCoryy-71] M 99°% 8S°% SF 18 99 OI (vuwassod nuasassod pyazulg) Moisedg surddryy oS'S GS'% bs 16 OL 9T (sngpdvo0iny snaniag) parq-u2eAQ, 6h S S'S GG 06 @, | 2 (nupojam vipojau vzidsojayy) Moiedg Bu0g SEG 64'S €9 68 LL Or (wnsouo yoy xouoprdus) IYyoyeos[J IOplV OP'S OFS GL £6 Zs 9 (suasa saunyr0vi Jy) VOMIT POOM se > =) EB : a Beh ce | oe | ee | eels Ge | cf | @@ | &F | see) 3 nme rao of 93 ES aes Ze: Sp af 2 ‘sawadg fo sawp fe | ge | 8 | $6 [285] 3 se | 26 | BE | BE | ES] 2 SE £ |] F ‘DNINGMVAY JO waduO BN MW NONM OOO Sn oe Surmeqeas JO pio aAyElay < kalles Bi? inca eda eee aia } 7 1 2 i r ' , A ye ae i 1S ve { 4 ¥ ¥ iy . eae, t ? ) by , Te | ¥ i ¥ 7 i 1 ea D RP f . vl 4 TY deta “ Bo) x F ‘ acre "ti Loe Phy hy i ig toby mt ters es we ~< “d uu Pe Vi) " . 1 : i AS is ie a oat, ta ee s 4 ay fi ey ea i " os ; 4 Bi] ff @ 3:3 i he | ran k ' ‘ \ i Neet nf roe * f oh ax 23 Wricut, Morning Awakening and Bven-song. aoe the time of its last song is thus known. And when the record of the evening has been completed, the species are ranked in their true order. The earlier records of the season were begun about 6.30, or an hour before sunset; the later about 6.45, or from thirty to forty minutes before sunsetting. A few species always dropped out almost at once. Other species continued their songs for some time, either singing constantly or after intervals of rest resuming their songs. Still others sang from the beginning to the close. All the species which entered into the morning awakening records are included in even-song, except House Sparrow and White- breasted Nuthatch, a full quota of voices having been heard by visiting the several locations. In the season of 1913 thirty evening records were taken, covering a wider range of location, between June 2 and July 8 inclusive. These have been combined with the records of 1912 in drawing up the averages presented in the table of even song. Records previous to these two seasons have been only exceptionally retained. As stated in the first paper, all these records show that even-song does not extend as long after sunset as matins precede sunrise. For while the earliest nine singers in morning awakening precede sunrise by an hour to an hour and twenty minutes, the latest nine singers In even song cease singing from twenty-seven to thirty- seven minutes after sunset, a shortening of thirty-five to forty minutes. And it also continues to hold true by the records of 1912 and 1913 that the order of the awakening, generally speaking, is reversed in the evening. So the flycatchers, the sparrows, and the thrushes are the latest singers, just as they are the earliest in the morning. The thrushes, however, are invariably the last of all, Wood Pewee, Alder Flycatcher, and Scarlet Tanager only ranking with them. Five of the thrushes, Wood, Hermit, Robin, Veery, and Olive-backed, continue to sing from twenty-seven to thirty- seven minutes after sunset. The Bluebird’s record does not extend as late by ten minutes. Black-billed Cuckoo’s, Belted Kingfisher’s, and Olive-sided Flycatcher’s calls cease about the time of the Blue- bird’s song. The Barn Swallow’s record is twenty-seven minutes after sunsetting. Five common sparrows, Savannah, White- throated, Vesper, Chipping, and Song, and the two flycatchers, the Least and Phoebe, cease singing just earlier, or from twenty- (aue 004 Wricut, Morning Awakening and Even-song. Oct. seven to twenty-two minutes after sunset. Indigo Bunting and Junco records and those of the Kingbird do not extend as late. All the warblers end their songs before the sparrows and these flycatchers during the preceding twenty-seven minutes or from twenty-two minutes after sunset to five minutes before, Myrtle Warbler, however, ceasing earlier. Blue-headed Vireo ranks among the later singing warblers, while Golden-crowned Kinglet and Red- breasted Nuthatch rank with the earlier-ceasing warblers. Chim- ney Swift, Tree Swallow, and Bobolink become silent immediately after the going down, of the sun. Cliff Swallows keep in the air some minutes later. The Crow gives its last calls a few minutes before and seldom are any heard after sunset. At the same time, just before sunset, Purple Finch and Goldfinch end their songs, and Cedar Waxwings cease to call. . Red-eyed Vireo ceases to sing fourteen minutes before sunset; Winter Wren and Chickadee still earlier. The voices of the woodpeckers are lost first of all soon after the recording has begun, or from half an hour to an hour before sunsetting, as in the morning their first calls are seldom heard until after sunrise; the Sapsucker, however, detaches itself somewhat from the group by being less late in the morning and later im the evening than the others. Averages have been drawn in the same manner as for morning awakening, and the number of minutes before or after sunset of the last song of each has been adopted as the basis of ranking the species, as was done in matins. The average clock-time of the records, as appealing more naturally to the mind, is also named. But this is not exact, if it be unrelated to the time of sunsetting. The probable time of last song of any species for any date, however, may be easily reckoned, when the time of sunset on that day is known. For while there is not an exact gradation in a series of records of any species following the gradation of earlier sunsetting, there is a close approximation to this. So, as the sun comes to set earlier evening by evening, the record closes proportionately earlier. But, as has been already stated, it has been found when a species is nearing the end of the season of its singing that the weakening spirit of song tends to bring the birds less promptly into song in the morning and to lead them to cease singing somewhat earlier in the evening. Thus late July records usually indicate this waning Jol. XXX - : ~ oP yon | Wriacat, Morning Awakening and Even-song. 535 spirit and a still earlier close of even-song, except, it may be, in the case of a few species like Wood Pewee, Red-eyed Vireo, Indigo, Bunting, and Hermit Thrush, which continuing their singing well into August are vigorous singers throughout July. The Oven-bird in even-song not infrequently makes the flight song its last utterance. When this is not its last song, it often has been given several times during the final hour of singing. On July 7, 1912, three flight songs were given at about ten minute intervals, 7.18, 7.27, and 7.37 o’clock. In 1913 on nine evenings out of seven- teen a flight song was the final song and was given at 7.32, 7.35, 7.35, 7.08, 7.43, 7.44, 7.44, 7.56, and 8.01, the variation in minutes after sunset being from 9 to 16, except on the two occasions of latest song, when the rendering of the flight song was 31 and 35 minutes after sunset, corresponding in some degree to the quite usual very early song in morning awakening. Song Sparrow and Chipping Sparrow at the close of the day also give infrequent repetitions of their songs as their earliest songs in morning awakening are infrequently given. In the case of Song Sparrow in the evening of July 24, 1912, there were but eight repetitions of the song in the last twenty-five minutes of the bird’s singing. Chippies sing no hurried trills in the evening as they regularly do in the morning awakening. Three records of the Wood Thrush in 1912 average 27 minutes after sunset and 7.55 o’clock; the latest is 34 minutes on July 5. On this occasion, as I entered the woods at 6.48, the thrush was singing, and he sang much. of the time up to his last song a half- minute after 8.02, then gave a few calls which ceased at 8.03 o'clock. Twenty records of Hermit Thrush average 33 minutes after sun- set and 8.02 for calls as well as the song; the latest are 40 minutes on two occasions when the calls extended to 8.09 and 8.10, the song having ceased at 8.07 and 8.05, respectively. On one other even- ing the song also extended to 8.05 o’clock. Twenty-five records of the Robin average 33 minutes after sun- set and 8.01 for calls as well as song. Calls are usually given for several minutes after the birds have ceased to sing. Sometimes the song ends much earlier. The latest record is 45 minutes and 8.15 for last calls, when the song ceased but one minute earlier. The variation in time of last note is fifteen minutes, but if the latest 536 Wricut, Morning Awakening and Evem-song. rte record of 1913 be excepted, it is but eleven minutes in the sixteen evenings. The difference in the amount of the Robin’s even-song is very wide. On one occasion there was no song the entire time of the record which began at 6.30, and only infrequently was a call heard. During the time of even song on several occasions Robins have sung but little, voicing themselves intermittently only, which is very unlike their jubilant and continuous singing for forty or forty-five minutes in the morning awakening. On the other hand occasionally one of the Robins of the neighborhood becomes. a very free singer in the evening. Nineteen records of Veery average 35 minutes after sunset and 8.03 for calls as well as song. The latest record for the song is 40 minutes at 8.08 on July 8, 1913; there is a similar record for the eall on June 10 at 8.05, 40 minutes. The variation in time of last song is fifteen minutes, but on fourteen of the evenings is but three minutes, constituting the Veery one of the most regular of all the species in retiring to rest. Thirty-two records of Olive-backed Thrush average 37 minutes after sunset and 8.05 for the song; for calls one minute later. The latest is 49 minutes at 8.10 on June 4, 1913, for the song. Four other records for the song are just earlier, at 41 and 42 minutes. The variation in time of last song on twenty-seven occasions 1s but seven minutes, constituting the Olive-backed Thrush as well as the Veery one of the most regular of all the species in its final song before rest. These species were only casually recorded: Sharp-shinned Hawk (Accipiter velox) pursued by a pair of Tree Swallows, 7.21; Barred Owl (Strix varia varia), 7.40; Northern Flicker (Colaptes auratus luteus), 7.18; Whip-poor-will (Antrostomus vociferus vociferus) singing from 7.28 to 7.43; Nighthawk (Chordeiles virginianus virginianus), 7.32 to 7.384; Ruby-throated Hummingbird (Archi- lochus colubris), 7.20 to 7.42 o’clock. The Hummingbirds visited an apple-tree in blossom in the evening of May 31, 1913. One of the pair was seen hovering over the flowers at 7.20; the second appeared five minutes later, and the two together were busily en- gaged sipping and humming for four or five minutes, when one flew away and the other remained until 7.42, or 24 minutes after sunset, at which time the light had become rather dim. ‘ SAREE: SO et ert saan oat pet (mMeBERStaereses woasevegegsessea ee aes: at eA ed (wd ised HD foto? ed ed fod ped od pe et, ee ee) Od re ! eae oe nee : Wreblajessecazecztsrsace ately | 4 i - ; Ce i eee ms nn oh led ee neue ial et Sle scenieesscetaksetes eee higt pls saingidee see. ee idee < sae he 17° oe Z ogre Hy emt shinee 7 eager la eC eo tpt: Ba eiEreNs me 0's soe Te tee % 5s ‘paitewegy ager) 0h, os << er iy pp MAL ea "i ra) inborn Wvcncerrsipiecw ny 8) ae re appara ie fan, apcTe2 9) ee. AEM ek ay (eaters Can warily ye Ege Git apitan (op yy (= poner ‘qosuns Q10JO"N #* ‘qgosumns JoIsV t ‘9700-118 * 1 ae of (uosuroms vpppnIsn vpn) USVAGL PHPCTAANO 8 i | 4 na (suaosaosnf suaosaasnf pyyoropipy) S109A FS 92 | 6¢ Fe y | (mnsouyo Uo] xouoprdurg ) rayoywoAT A JOPTY ES ee ee GZ (snasopo.ubue sni.oyo.1bVU snoysaun}d) UGoYy TS = a ee 0z | (aspyyod vyoynb ppypwopiy) ysnayy, We TS . ! I @ ¢ (sppamosyjfisa pbup.iid) wBKuUB], WBS OF yi i og oz (suai saunyooui fy) AMX POOM 6F “ | ee 1z £ (nugpysnue 0yyor9oyfi ) ysnay, POOM 8F Ht | €F LZ I (s4j092q1? Duyjat.4OuoZ) mouedg poyworgy-ondM LP I Fe 1Z or (puupans s1sUayILMpUds snnasasspg) MoLEdg YBUABANS OF es (vysvbo.1yphisa opunirz]) MOYES Ww SP (snaurwn.sb snauvupiB 8aj9900,]) mouredg 1adsaA $F (sna xpuoprdmy) Ayo VCoS| WSBT EP (vursasspd puwassod nppzdg) mouedg durddiqy Gh FI 68 €Z Zo (mipojaue DYpO|IUL pzudsopyy) Moiweds su0og IP (aqnyd susofivg) eqPUd OF (spyors soyarg sudfiqyjoay) YEOTG MOT? A pupAiwyy 68 (snugoyzydouypfisa snzfiv209) OOYOND PITLIPPVIA 8 (oyoubou povospuad) TLGQLeM eyouseyy Le G (symis syors vyES) PArqonia 9 (nypdvoriqns Dydvorigns DLONULLA A) TGIE A PAYSEN SE (uofiaqp uofiaqn apfisa)) raysysury pea FE (sngpdvoounn snaniag) PUG-WAQ FE 9 ine 9% ¥1 19059 082 38 JosuNs 489}n] 04 Iurpucdsazz00 aust} z ce €1 KG £1 €1 €I I (syoa.og s1uLo7]D".N’) JOY BOAT PEPIS-OANO GE G sypouiatiy syouatiy ooun ) ooung pelojoo-a}8[S Tf G 61 ZI g (S17 pouanhy Th f eat Il Zz (sisuappuDs DYUOS]L M) JIB BpBUBy OF ee: Zz suosfiunp suosfruny UopyjaYy9e.t}a ) MOTTE Bl 6% 8 el I Ge ( pyayojad) MOTTBMS HO e os 62 OL g (sntapjyos snrupjyOs OALUUUD'T) OATA PIPBay-eN[ 8S : I LL Ol Il (vasnf va01pued) I{GIe M UBLUINGAOV] Ee LZ 1 oz | 6 I (vauvfia vursasspg) Bayung os1puy 9% sel LI L el (nypouyns vboydojag) WABISPOY GZ z£ 2 ~ 4 fanaa mnannannas se’ TRV TITAN 8s wor Be wens eee — we eery “PEF em me FS * td VG 009 LI ¢ OL (snuunshy snuuowiZ) prqauryy €% é ol c £ (wausn punaiiaun svdfjqyjosduo)) Ia[qIe My BNIB] UWIOYJION ZZ vee AI b g (SU99SANLDI SUIISAINLDI DINOIPUIC]) JA|GIV AA ONL PIyVoIgy-YoelE 1 #*9 FI £ ¢ (snsonziso xfiuoysyoqd) yayoqog = 0z : mt e Ge (sniuma sniima snoudnsfiydg) rayonsdeg peyfeq-MoyjaxX 61 1 | : ; 3 (1010019 ausosdoprty) MOTEMG CT, RT “| ze G . (vaun}spo n210.1puaq) IIIB MA poysvaiq-Aeg LI Me ED Bia, (vovbopad nanjayy) YM KouuYyD 9T 2 jasuns wa fy .f pe 0 , (Sua DILOLpPUAT]) JB[GIB\\ UIIF) poyworyy-yovyq_ = ST sa ie ss z = se (syst) sysiy snuyoboysy) Youyploy FT .: ae : ; (odv.yns vdo.yos snynbay) Ja|suryy PeuUMOID-UaPfOr) ET og | ier | + | gz Coaeipomeneys spuenletey) Saige is ORO 0z Ge (soyoufiysfiyonsg soyouhiyshiyon.g snasoy) MOI TT = ps b FL (snaindind snaindind snovpodiny) yout efding OT A ; ; : (vovuvapisuad vovospuaq]) Ja{QAvA\ PapIs-jnuysoyD 6 6 ¢ , “ (sisuapouDs DLS) YOYByINN, poysvaiq-pay gs cz [ie | a | on (eaeesnapee SRCRIMER) HULME MRED 2 a] af at] t _ Cxnaty ome 4) an pole 9 ee | Je oe ie (sypmary sypmary snuuDNy) UIA TEVA, G ” oF & | % (snppd Reagior: PUOPET) SE EF 6§ &@ T€ G (snunipau ae nd a ome, Ri ty 6¢ 6¢ 6¢ if (D]001,22qD snqoond snuojo: : eet ese be od : DO) 4d) Jayoad poo peyeoatg woyWION [| ide § qasuns a.ofa Le ty a al se | OE) ie [eis] = Es 2 go = ze | gt | dp [fed | & 3 fe. $ Fy Be Sze & Fi es zB ss | Efe SZ “saved g ar we Be | se8 3 wad fo sau 33 ee | a= | Be lect] a8 es BB | 82 | See] ¢ jw ae. ec i=] = 5 s = R = > a Ea g “SNOG-NUAQ JO YAGUO : ae {ON OL “fait jogos Wh, EER groan) Cytey ORME (asiye wt eneee fi ® re tev bine ma ee a ey ete eee ae eee ener San, \ezinpes welsh = a 7 ahh isan ae (okosilaidas sxssuat sy aarinGlors SWAP: Thad: ghos" f 7. paiaslid gid (rine eprscvsodane, — a 39 sighoe ‘qrnotl— = : whe Tay: F ; peda Eo (alors ies cay dss et altel. alive iM SS 4 thrash 4 leew uh Age ai) Vid SRONE wala -¢. _tontnatle. opens Vv} asset. teitrhesl 2. i (agacsinbas wide vet RuWAG: id whe | Ree Syed eat iat dete say ; : ANDES Sas ensel fi fee A feiia aad € LEMS INE Cees sey 2S Aste i. ay rf: Ae Pahyw wierd te tenet - ? Gan pees dD) eee ee ee eee ee ne ee cs Dee oe cero : : | ohare ea oles mn nee ee ene nee . vel =a Wricat, Morning Awakening and Even-song. oat Of the fifteen occasions of even-song in the season of 1912 Olive- backed Thrush was the latest singer on eleven, Veery on two, and Hermit on two. Holding position next to the last singer was Wood Pewee on seven occasions, Veery on five, Olive-backed Thrush on two, and Wood Thrush on one. Of twenty-three occasions of 1913 Olive-backed Thrush was the last singer on thirteen, Robin on five, Veery on three, and Hermit Thrush on two. Holding place next to the last singer was Veery on seven occasions, Olive-backed Thrush on six, Robin on five, and Hermit Thrush on five. With the western sky clear and the sunset glow remaining late, even-song has extended once to 8.15 o’clock and 45 minutes after sunset, an un- usually late Robin singing a few times at 8.14 and giving final calls one minute later. The last song of all as recorded on ten occasions in 1912 was given with a variation in time of only three minutes, namely, from thirty- seven to forty minutes after sunset, or between 8.07 and 8.10 o’clock. Twenty-three records of 1913 average 40 minutes after the latest sunsetting or 8.10 for the last note. This indicates how regular in relation to the setting of the sun is the close of even-song, and how unfailingly one of four species of thrushes ends the singing, either the Olive-back, the Veery, the Robin, or the Hermit, with twenty-four chances in thirty-eight that the Olive-back’s voice will be the last. One waits in the silence for a time and then withdraws. The birds’ night has closed around them. 538 Oxtpys, A Remarkable Hermit Thrush Song. lee A REMARKABLE HERMIT THRUSH SONG. BY HENRY OLDYS. Wuite filling a lecture engagement at Hanover, N. H., early in May, 1913, I was the guest of Dr. Frederic P. Lord, of Dartmouth College. On the morning of the 6th my host and I visited a point near Pompanoosuc, Vt., where a pair of Pileated Woodpeckers nest annually. We were only partly successful in our quest — we heard one of the birds we were seeking, but failed to catch even a momentary glimpse of either of the pair. This disappointment, however, was far more than compensated for by the fact that as we sat in the mossy woods waiting for the woodpeckers I heard one of the most remarkable bird songs that has come to my ears during my twenty years’ study of bird music. The singer, a Hermit Thrush, was in plain sight not more than forty or fifty feet away and gave ample opportunity for careful noting of the song. The ordinary song of the Hermit Thrush is made up of different phrases each consisting of a sustained basal note followed by a run of higher, more rapid, and lighter notes composing a broken chord whose fundamental tone is the preceding sustained note. The second part of the phrase,— the running notes — suggests the thought that a material chord of glass has been shattered into fine bits and that the crystalline fragments come tinkling down through the leaves. Sometimes other notes than those of the chord are introduced in the run but without destroying the char- acter of the sustained note as the fundamental tone. Illustrations will make this description clearer — In this song the chord is — Vol. rama 1913 Oupys, A Remarkable Hermit Thrush Song. 539 This example is from a record I secured at Hebron, Me., in 1905. Another, taken from a Hermit Thrush in the New York Zodlogical Park — shows the introduction of a passing note, F, without destroying the idea of the chord — Interspersed with these phrases are very high, light, short phrases that punctuate the others somewhat after the style of the refrain so common in old songs and poems. Thus, the Hebron thrush sang, after the phrase quoted — J= 108. Bi tS which might be interpreted as taking the place of Fa-la-la-la. It must be further explained that the basal notes of the songs are usually more or less unrelated to each other — at least such has been the case in the comparatively few Hermit Thrush songs Ihave heard. Thus, the consecutive basal notes in a record I had made at Hebron a few days before my visit to Pompanoosuc were — and so on. It will be noticed that there is no indication here of any normal order of utterance of these notes and the phrases based on them, and that the harmonic progressions of the different chords involved are not such as we commonly find in our own music. This is not to say that the music of this thrush was not attractive there was a wild beauty in it that was delightful to the ear,— but merely that it shows no close relationship in its modulations to our own music. 540 Oxtpys, A Remarkable Hermit Thrush Song. ees In the song heard at Pompanoosuc, however, there was a very perceptible normal order of the basal notes and their dependent phrases, and that order made a harmonic progression such as com- pletely satisfies the requirements of human music. The basal notes, together with the chords founded on them, arranged in what was palpably the normal order were — Here we have a very attractive, and at the same time a very human, harmonic progression — from B to E minor, then to A with the minor seventh (C# being the basal note), which leads naturally into D. If this combination of chords be played over and over, with the fact borne in mind that it represents the untaught musie of a wild bird, its remarkable character will be well under- stood. The principal phrases were interspersed with the light refrain previously mentioned, which did not differ substantially from the form of those noted at Hebron and many other places. The fact that the order of the harmonies here given was the normal one is abundantly shown by the following extract from a long record I made of the basal notes as the bird sang them — this extract also shows the frequency of the light refrain, which is indicated by the letter r (not noted during the singing of the first eight phrases and last four) — I may have failed to note the light refrain occasionally during the singing of the above; but the record shows the minimum fre- quency with which it was uttered. I have included in bars the four phrases when sung in normal order. In one instance, it will be observed, the E was repeated, but this does not affect the se- quence of harmonies. In respect to having a normal order and departing from it freely this song resembles several rhythmical songs of Wood Thrushes I have secured, in which the normality of a certain order was very her ee Oupys, A Remarkable Hermit Thrush Song. 541 evident, though variations were frequent. In every case the singer seems to maintain the normal order more steadily after it has gotten into the swing of its singing, so to speak, and when it is not disturbed in the slightest degree — a very little disturbance, such as the distant barking of a dog, is sufficient to disarrange the se- quence. The remarkable character of the song of the Pompanoosue Her- mit Thrush is sufficiently evident to anyone who has any but the dullest ear for music. But I wish to call special attention to the additional proof it offers of the relationship between bird and human music. The chance that the bird happened upon this human progression of harmonies by coincidence is no less remote than that a wild bird— say a Purple Grackle — should utter with perfect pronunciation and inflection the words “My appetite is excellent this morning” through an accidental grouping of articu- late sounds. In the case of the grackle we should without hesita- tion discard the theory of accidental coincidence and assert that the bird expressed itself in human speech. So, too, in the case of the Hermit Thrush must we discard the untenable theory of coinci- dence and declare that the bird expresses itself in human music. The notes recorded were sung with great accuracy of intonation— my ear is very keen to detect variations from the true pitch. They were truer to the scale than those of nine human singers out of every ten, and were recorded exactly as given. The song is doubt- less exceptional — though I judge that fuller study of the singing of Hermit Thrushes than it has yet received would disclose other songs showing similar harmonic correspondence with our own musi- cal requirements,— but any such resemblance to our musical forms as it displays, though but a single instance, would serve to establish relationship between bird and human music, while the large number of recorded instances so far as other species are concerned, makes the principle absolutely impregnable. A little thought will show that coincidence is as much out of the question as in the case of the hypothetical blackbird above mentioned, and that imitation, as an explanation, has as little standing. Astonishing and revolution- ary as it may seem, there is no escape from the conclusion that the evolution of bird music independently parallels the evolution of human music and that, therefore, such evolution in each case is not fortuitous, but tends inevitably toward a fixed ideal. 542 THURSTON AND Boyt, Long Island Birds. lace SOME SEASONAL NOTES ON LONG ISLAND BIRDS. BY HENRY THURSTON AND HOWARTH S. BOYLE.) On the 22d of October, 1907, the Linnaean Society of New York published an abstract containing “A List of Long Island Birds.” by Dr. Wm. C. Braislin. Though this list, for which every Long Island bird student feels indebted to Dr. Braislin, is the most complete and best list of Long Island birds that has yet appeared, we have made several observations that more or less extend the seasonal occurrence of certain species as there given and offer them herewith together with certain other notes that may prove of interest to investigators of avian life in this vicinity. Our notes that extend dates recorded by Dr. Braislin are marked by an asterisk. Pisobia fuscicollis. WuHitrt-RUMPED SANppPIPEeR.— I had a fine chance to see an individual at Mastic, L. I., on August 24,1912. Mr. J.T. Nichols and I observed another on August 26. (T) Numenius hudsonicus. Hupsonran CurLtEw.— Unusually abundant this (1912) season. A flock of fifty by actual count, were seen at Freeport, L. I., on August 4, 1912. The largest flocks were seen earlier. In company with my brother on July 27, 1912, I saw three large flocks, one composed of one hundred and fifty birds. (T) Zenaidura macroura carolinensis. Mournina Dovr.— On the sixteenth of March, 1913, on the Flushing Meadows, Flushing, L. I., I observed one of these birds which I studied for ten minutes or more. Upon clapping my hands the bird flew, disappearing in the mist. (B) *Circus hudsonius. Marsa HawKk.— This bird is a winter resident at Flushing. I have records as follows all from Flushing Meadows: Feb- ruary 24, November 3, November 24, 1912, and January 1, 1913. (B) Falco sparverius sparverius. Sparrow Hawx.— This little falcon is. a winter resident; my note book shows records as follows: December 30, 1911, January 10, November 24, December 7, 8, and 29, 1912. These ob- servations were also made at Flushing Meadows and near vicinity. (B). *Asio wilsonianus. LonG-EarRED Owi.— While walking over a frozen birch swamp two miles back of Flushing, L. I., on February 8, 1913, I un- expectedly stumbled upon a roosting place of the Long-eared Owls. As we 1 Observations made by Mr. Boyle are followed by a B; those by Mr. Thurston. have a T appended. Vol. XXX ™ . 5 1913 | THURSTON AND Boye, Long Island Birds. 043 approached the tree in which they were roosting, the birds flew. We re- mained quietly seated on the roof of a musk-rat house, which was situated beneath the tree and I heard one of the owls give a warble-like note. Presently they began to return. I counted twelve and my companion saw fifteen. We made our exit from under their roost without further disturb- ing them. The Owls were also seen on February 9 and 15, 1913. (B) Cryptoglaux acadica acadica. Saw-wuer Owx.—I got my first record for the Saw-whet Owl at Floral Park, L. I., on November 24, 1912. A boy brought in a beautiful immature specimen which he had found dead in the woods. (T) *Ceryle alcyon alcyon. Brtrep Kinerisoer.— At North Beach, a ~ sandy strip near Flushing, L. I., on the twenty-sixth of February, 1911, I saw a Kingfisher. (B) *Archilochus colubris. Rusy-THROATED HummMiNnGBiIrRD.— While sail- ing out of New York Harbor on the tenth of May, 1912, a Ruby-throated Hummingbird flew aboard the boat while off the lower Staten Island shore and hovered a few minutes around the awnings, finally flying toward the Long Island shore. It was a male bird and undoubtedly made Long Island as I had a strong pair of glasses and was able to follow its flight, which was direct for that shore. (T ) Tyrannus tyrannus. Kincpirp.— At Mastic, L. I., on August 24, 1912, while walking with Mr. John Treadwell Nichols near his home we observed straggling flocks of migrating Kingbirds that numbered about three hundred individuals. The birds seemed to be following a fixed route as every one would first approach us by flying along the banks of a small stream near which we were standing and upon reaching a point a little above our station branched off and took an inland course. Kingbirds seemed unusually common on Long Island during the fall season of 1912. (T) *Corvus ossifragus. FisH Crow.— A common resident this winter, if not every one. Early in the frosty mornings from my window I can see them journeying with their common black cousins to a garbage dump that lies east of Floral Park. On December 25, 1912, I collected one from a mixed flock of about three hundred birds that descended on our grounds. About seventy-five of this flock were C. ossifragus. More were also seen on February 28, 1913, at the same dump. (T) Sturnus vulgaris. European Srariina.— On the 19th of February at Floral Park, L. I., I saw a flock of Starlings, conservatively estimated to contain five thousand birds. A habit of Starlings which might be of interest to those who have not witnessed it is that of indulging in mid-night serenades. Several times in the evening, once or twice rather late, I have passed at Hempstead, L. I., a couple of churches with old-fashioned towers that make fine roost- ing places for numbers of these birds and have always heard them squeak- ing, hissing or whistling. On March 4, 1913, one was sounding his rich melodious call at the top of his voice, at 10.30 P.m. (T) 544 THURSTON AND Boyte, Long Island Birds. boon Dolichonyx oryzivorus. Boso.inc.— My first Long Island Bobo- links were seen, in company with Mr. Nichols at Mastic on August 24, 1912. We arose about 4. a. M. and started for a sniping trip in his canoe and it did not take us long to realize that a large migratory flight was on. The air was full of bird calls, shadowy forms of Nighthawks and Whippoorwills dashed by, but chiefly noticeably above all other sounds was the sparkling, silvery “ link, link, link ” of hundreds of Rice Birds. As dawn approached we could begin to see the flocks pass and most of them were very high. We calculated that eight thousand birds passed over us. The flight was over by 8.30 a.m. (T) *Zonotrichia leucophrys leucophrys. WHITE-CROWNED SPARROW. In a large berry patch at Floral Park, L. I., on October 22, 1912, I saw some strange looking sparrows and immediately collected one which proved to be a juvenal White-crowned Sparrow. There were about thirty birds in this flock and they stayed with us quite late; so late in fact that I collected another, now in Dr. Dwight’s collection, on the fifth of November! Dr. Braislin’s latest record for Long Island seems to be October 21 and he also quotes this bird as ‘“‘rare.’’ I wonder if this is not due to the fact that the immature plumage is not half so well known as that of the adult. The numbers seen this fall would make the species anything but rare, though of course there may have been an unusually large flight this season. (T) *Spizella monticola monticola. Tree Sparrow.—I have the fol- lowing late records for the Tree Sparrow on Flushing Meadows: April 13, 14, 20, and 21, 1912. Newtown Swamp, April 7, 1912. (B) *Spizella pusilla pusilla. Firtp Sparrow.— Several were seen at Floral Park, L. I., on February 15, 1913. This extends either the early date of arrival or, what is more probable, establishes the bird as a winter resident on Long Island. I fail to see why this should not be the case as they reside in New Jersey all winter at practically the same latitude. (T) *Melospiza georgiana. Swamp Sparrow.— On the salt marshes at Flushing, L. I., the Swamp Sparrow may be found on almost any day during the winter. The short bushes that cover the higher places form ex- cellent shelters for the birds. Dates as follows: December 7, 8, 29, 1912, and February 15, 1913. (B) *Passerella iliaca iliaca. Fox Sparrow.— During the winters of 1911 and 1912 the Fox Sparrow was often seen. Some records from Flushing Meadows: Feb. 22 and 26, December 3, 1911, January 20, December 7 and 8, 1912. These sparrows were also seen at Jamaica, L. I., on January. 20, 1912. (B) *Lanius ludovicianus migrans. Micranr S#rike.— Unusually common around Floral Park during the fall migration of 1912. I collected three individuals and several others were seen. The dates of collection ” were September 13, October 1, and October 22, 1912. (T) *Vermivora chrysoptera. GOLDEN-wINGED WaARBLER.— One _ ob- served at Flushing, L. I., on May 12, 1912. It was watched for nearly a half an hour. (B) eerie fal Hatuaway, Notes on Rhode Island Birds. 545 *Dumetella carolinensis. Catsirp.— On November 2 and 10, 1912, a Catbird, apparently in fine condition, was seen at Flushing, L.I. (B) *Regulus satrapa satrapa. Rusy-crowNnep KinGLer.— On Sep- tember 30, 1911, a large flight of these Kinglets was observed in a patch of woods near Forest Hills, L. I. (B) NOTES ON THE OCCURRENCE AND NESTING OF CER- TAIN BIRDS IN RHODE ISLAND. HARRY S. HATHAWAY. During the interval which has elapsed since the publication of the ‘Birds of Rhode Island’ by Howe and Sturtevant in 1899, and the Supplement thereto in 1903, many records of rare and interesting birds have accumulated and are herewith published as a contribution to our knowledge of the avifauna of this state. The Western Willet, Arctic three-toed Woodpecker, Evening Gros- beak, and Nelson’s Sparrow have been added to the list of the birds of the state. The breeding of Henslow’s Sparrow, Black-throated Blue Warbler, Pine Warbler, Water Thrush, Winter Wren and Hermit Thrush has been established, while an increase in numbers of the Laughing Gull, Common Tern, Sparrow Hawk and Carolina Wren has been noted. I am greatly indebted to Messrs. Charles B. Clarke, of Newport, Harry S. Champlin of Point Judith, Israel R. Sheldon of Pawtuxet, Miss Elizabeth Dickens of Block Island, and others for specimens and valuable notes, and I take this opportunity of expressing my sincere thanks to them. Gavia stellata. Rep-THRoATED Loon.— Adult birds are rarely seen on our coast. A male in full nuptial plumage was taken off Newport on the late date of May 21, 1908, by Mr. C. B. Clarke. Cepphus grylle. Buack Guittemor. An extremely rare and irregular winter visitant. Additional records are as follows. A male shot January 1, 1906 off Sakonnet Point, a female December 30, 1906, at Newport and a male November 28, 1909, at Cormorant Rock off Newport. These birds, all in the gray winter plumage, were collected by Mr. C. B. Clarke and [oct: 546 HatHaway, Notes on Rhode Island Birds. the last two are in my collection. Mr. Clarke writing of their habits says, “T shot five birds in all in 1909 at Cormorant Rock, all single birds shot over duck decoys. They decoyed readily, but I do not know whether they would alight to them as I never gave them a chance. I have, however, before this, seen them swimming in the water, resembling a grebe very much but they are somewhat quicker in diving. One that I shot was under water before the shot got there and when he came up he was flying. He did n’t go very far for the next shot brought him down.” Alca torda. Razor-BriLteEp AuK.— A male was sent me in the meat, shot by Mr. C. B. Clarke at Newport on January 9, 1909. This bird was minus a tarsus and foot lost in early life. Upon skinning I found eighteen “Silver sides ”’ (MWenidia gracilis) a small fish two to three inches in length, in its gullet. Stercorarius pomarinus. PoMarINE JAnGER.— One seen chasing a Tern on August 9, 1909, at Quonochontaug. Jaegers were fairly common during August and early September, 1910. The first ones noted were seen August 18th, at Quonochontaug, and three or four followed the Terns every day, making them drop the fish they were carrying to their young, which the Jaegers quickly secured. Eight were the most seen in a day, on August 26th. I have referred them to this species as being the commoner one in our waters. Two immature birds and an adult in fall plumage, shot at Point Judith on September 13, 1910, by Mr. H. S. Champlin, were sent to me in the meat. Stercorarius parasiticus. Parasiric JarGER.— An additional record for this uncommon migrant is one taken by Mr. C. B. Clarke at Eastons Pond, Newport, on the late date of November 27, 1909. It was sent to me in the meat in a very emaciated condition. Larus atricilla. Laucuina Gutu.— Formerly a rare migrant, this bird has rapidly increased in numbers since 1909 and during August and early September of 1912 it was fairly common along the south coast of this state, most of the birds being in immature plumage. An adult bird ap- peared off Quonochontaug on August 7, 1909, and up to the 27th of that month seventeen individuals were seen at various times in company with the Common Terns with which they mingled on the sand flats in Quono- chontaug Pond. I shot a young female August 21, 1910, in this locality. Eight birds, the first noted in 1912 at Quonochontaug, were flying west along shore on August 4th. On the afternoon of August 19th a flight of Herring Gulls occurred on our coast and among them I saw about twenty Laughing Gulls in bunches of twos and threes all flying in a southwesterly direction toward Long Island Sound. Mr. Israel R. Sheldon reported that there were on August 22, 1912, about one hundred Laughing Gulls with at least two thousand Common Terns at Point Judith. An adult male and female were shot May 17, 1908, at Point Judith by Mr. C. B. Clarke and on May 26, 1912, I saw three adults on the Sakonnet River near Tiverton. Sterna hirundo. Common Trern.— The protection given the Terns on their breeding grounds has led to a notable increase in their numbers along ‘ogee | ‘Hatuaway, Noles on Rhode Island Birds. 547 our coast since 1907. Early in August of each year since, both old and young birds appear.in daily increasing numbers, coming to the sand flats in Brightman, Quonochontaug and Charlestown Ponds and the breakwater at Point Judith where they find safe roosting places. Adult birds are flying back and forth all day over the ocean and ponds bringing small fish to the young birds congregated on the flats, and as the young get stronger of wing they accompany the adults on their fishing trips. On August 17, 1910, there were about a thousand birds on the Quonochon- taug flats, and from information gathered from others, I estimated that there were at least seven thousand birds between Point Judith and Watch Hill daily during August, 1910. They all departed between September 5th and 8th. A large flight occurred on September 2, 1911. From early morn- ing until sunset flocks of from five to sixty coming from the east, were flying continuously over the ocean and Quonochontaug Pond in a south- westerly direction. After this but few were noted, a lone individual being seen on November 5th. There must have been a great many thousand birds in this flight. During 1912 they were not as abundant as in the two previous years, but still were very plentiful. Sterna fuscata. Soory TrerN.— A male in immatnre plumage was shot by Mr. C. B. Clarke on January 8, 1908, at Coddington Point, New- port, and is now mounted in my collection. This is the fourth record for this state. It is rather remarkable that a southern bird should stray so far north in winter. Hydrochelidon nigra surinamensis. Buack Trern.— A flight of this species occurred on September 3, 1906, at Point Judith lasting nearly all day. The wind blew about thirty miles an hour from the southwest accompanied by rain. Small flocks were flying over the Point every few minutes coming from the northeast and flying into the wind. Late in the afternoon the wind shifted to light northwest and the flight ceased, but with the change in wind the terns commenced to appear in great numbers over the ocean coming from the southwest and leisurely feeding between Point Judith and Newport. The next morning none were seen, all having de- -parted in the night. I shot a male in nearly adult plumage, the only one seen, all the others being immature birds. Puffinus borealis. Cory’s SHparwaTer.— Six of this species were shot from the deck of a tug boat between Watch Hill and Point Judith in Block Island sound on October 14, 1907, by Mr. C. B. Clarke. One was shot at Point Judith by H. 8S. Champlin on September 13, 1910. Mr. Champlin informs me that they were quite numerous in August and early September in company with Jaegers, inside the breakwater. Anas rubripes. Biack Ducx.— A nest containing nine fresh eggs was found in the marsh at Point Judith on May 7, 1911. The female a small bird with green legs, flushed when I was about eight feet from her. On May 29, 1910, I found five young about three weeks old in the same marsh, two of which were caught with the aid of a dog and after banding, were liberated. Miss Elizabeth Dickens of Block Island informs me that she 548 Hatuaway, Notes on Rhode Island Birds. acE had a pure white albino in her flock of twenty-three domesticated Black Ducks. Chaulelasmus streperus. GapwaLu.— This is one of the rarest ducks that visit us in the fall there being but two or three records of its occurrence in the state. An immature male was shot in a small fresh water pond at Point Judith on November 11, 1909, by Mr. Leon Champlin, from whom I secured it in the meat for my collection. The bird was alone at the time. Mareca americana. Ba.ppate.— While a few of this species are taken every fall on our coast it is uncommon in winter and early spring. A male and female in full nuptial plumage were shot by Mr. C. B. Clarke near Newport on March 19, 1909. Both birds were added to my collection. Mr. Harold N. Gibbs shot a female at Barrington on January 21, 1913. Spatula clypeata. SHoveELLeR.— The following records of this rare migrant are of interest. A young female was shot at Point Judith, Sep- tember 24, 1908, and an immature male at Newport, November 7, 1908, by Mr. C. B. Clarke. A male and female in full nuptial plumage were shot in a small fresh water pond at Point Judith on April 29, 1911, by Mr. Leon Champlin who sent them to me in the flesh. They had been observed for a week previously in this pond in company with a pair of Black Ducks. Marila valisineria. Canvas-Back.— A few are taken every fall in Charlestown Pond in company with the large flocks of Redheads that occur there more or less regularly in November. Two males in adult plumage were shot in a fresh water pond in Middletown, R. I., on November 18, 1905, one of which is in the Park Museum in Providence and the other in my collection. Histrionicus histrionicus. Hartequin Ducx.— Mr. C. B. Clarke informs me that he saw a bunch of a dozen in December, 1904, in the vicinity of Cormorant Rock, Newport, and that he shot two immature males on December 17, 1905, at the same locality. He had a very good chance to watch this pair as he lay concealed behind a rock. Speaking of their habits he says, ‘‘ they are the most graceful birds in the water that I ever saw. They have a very peculiar way of swimming, moving along in a zigzag manner with their heads bobbing up and down as if in search of food. The rougher the water the better they seem to like it. Most ducks will dive through a breaker but the Harlequin swims right through as if the breaker did not exist.”” Mr. C. M. Hughes of Newport informed me that an adult male, two immature males and a female were shot at Cormo- rant Rock, Newport, on February 9, 1911. I purchased the adult male which is in full nuptial plumage. Somateria spectabilis. Kina E1prpr.— This species occurs rarely among the flocks of American Eiders that resort to the vicinity of Cormo- rant Rock, Newport. Mr. C. B. Clarke during some fifteen years shooting at this locality has taken three specimens in that time. Two of these are in my collection, a male in post nuptial plumage of a mature bird probably two years or more old, shot January 21, 1909, and a female taken February 16, 1911. yor Hatuaway, Notes on Rhode Island Birds. 549 Chen hyperboreus hyperboreus. Lesser Snow Goosr.— One of this species in immature plumage was shot on January 10, 1909, near a spring on Hope Island in Narragansett Bay and is now in the collection of Dr. Horace P. Beck of Newport, mounted on a panel as a “‘ dead game” piece. The bird was in a very emaciated condition with its stomach empty, and when skinned was found to have one of its wings recently broken, and while it was quite well knit together, probably accounts for its being in this locality in midwinter. It measured as follows: wing 16 inches, tarsus 3.37 inches, bill 2.25 inches. Olor columbianus. WuistLinc Swan.— Two were seen by one of the Life Saving Crew at the Quonochontaug Station flying west over the ocean in October, 1908. Mr. Frank D. Lisle of Providence, on September 7, 1910, saw a swan in Trustom Pond in South Kingstown, gray in color with reddish head and neck. He watched it for some time through field glasses until it flew away. Mr. C. B. Clarke wrote me that during the first week of September, 1910, a swan flew over the marsh at Point Judith. In all probability the above were of this species. Miss Elizabeth Dickens of Block Island has given me the following information in regard to six swans that were shot on November 16, 1911, in Fresh Pond, the largest fresh water pond on the island. She says, ‘“‘ the wind was blowing at least 50 miles per hour from the west and they had alighted in the pond. Mr. Howard Stedman shot two of them, young birds which still retained a part of their gray plumage. L. Lewis Littlefield shot the remaining four, which had flown to the farther end of the pond when the first two were killed. He ended the lives of two adult birds with the first shell. The two that were left arose, but soon alighted beside the dead ones on the surface of the pond where Mr. Littlefield killed them also. Two of the six were sent to New- port, one of which was mounted and is in the possession of Mr. Clarke Burdick. The others were plucked and eaten. A seventh bird was killed in Harbor Pond, Block Island, December 28th or 29th, 1911, by Lycurgus Negus. It is a nearly adult bird still retaining gray feathers on the head and neck.’”’ This one was mounted and is now in the Park Museum at Providence. Ardea herodias herodias. Great BLur Heron.— A very interesting account of the flights of this heron on Block Island was recently given me by Miss Elizabeth Dickens. ‘‘On November 12, 1910, a flock of twelve appeared about 8:304.m. After circling awhile like gulls playing in air, they dropped down on the edge of the bluff, and they were a sight. Of course the gunners got after them and they departed. All the forenoon they came from the west in flocks of from two to sixty. I counted forty in one flock and sixty in another, that were in sight at one time. The Life Savers said this was one flock until their shooting divided them. Last fall, 1911, there was a similar flight though not so large, at about the same time.” Rallus elegans. Kina Raiu.— Three records of this large rail all taken in winter are given by Howe & Sturtevant in their ‘ Birds of Rhode Island.’ Ho) Hatuaway, Notes on Rhode Island Birds. lace Since these were recorded a number of specimens have been taken all in summer and fall, as follows: a male and female were shot May 3, 1904, and a male May 9, 1904, all at Eastons Pond, Newport, by Mr. C. B. Clarke. On October 13, 1907, Mr. H. 8. Champlin of Point Judith, while searching in the long marsh grass for a duck he had just shot, stepped on and caught a female of this species. This specimen was sent to me in the meat. Mr. C. B. Clarke sent me four birds in 1909 from Point Judith shot on the fol- lowing dates, August 26th, a female, September 3rd, an adult male which was moulting, patches of chestnut being mixed with worn gray feathers on the throat and breast; September 12th, a male and December 12th, a male. With the exception of the one that was moulting the others were in fresh plumage and I think were birds of the year. Mr. Clarke informed me that they were all shot in the ‘ cattails” in the vicinity of a fresh water puddle and from the manner of their occurrence is led to believe that a pair nested. Rallus virginianus. Vircinta Raii.— This rail nests much earlier than is usually supposed. On June 4, 1906, I found a nest at Quonochon- taug with one young and three eggs pipped, which were empty upon my return in an hour. May 26, 1907, a nest was found at Point Judith with eight eggs, four of which were within two days of hatching, three would have hatched in four days and one was infertile. May 29, 1910, at Point Judith, with the aid of a dog I caught two young at least two weeks old and another was seen running through the cattails. The eggs from which they were hatched must have been laid late in April. Porzana carolina. Sora The Sora is rarer than the Virginia Rail in the breeding season in this state. A nest with fourteen eggs was found June 17, 1906, at Point Judith by H. 8. Champlin. The nest was visited again on the 19th when it was found empty, the eggs having hatched in the meantime. On May 29, 1910, I found a nest with nine fresh eggs at Point Judith near a small fresh water pond. It was built in a small clump of “‘ cattails ”’ in a very open spot and readily seen from all sides. Coturnicops noveboracensis. Yretuow Rat— The Yellow Rail occurs quite regularly during the fall migration. The following records of birds all secured at Point Judith are of interest. Mr. C. B. Clarke shot two October 10, 1908, and Mr. William T. Bowler took two more on October 15th of thesame year. These birds were not saved. October 15, 1909, Mr. Clarke took a male which he sent to me and it is now in my collection. Four were killed in October, 1910, by Mr. William T. Bowler. September 30, 1911, a female was shot by Mr. Charles L. Knowlesin a fresh waterrun, : and on October 1, 1911, another specimen was caught by a dog and one other seen. The last two birds were sent to me in the meat by Mr. I. R. Sheldon who writes as follows. ‘I do not think the Yellow Rail is any- where near so rare as recorded. Out of thirty rails that I have seen this fall at Point Judith, four were this species, ten Virginias and sixteen Soras. They are very hard to flush and for this reason I think less rare than sup- posed tobe. I have caught two birds with my hands.” Mr. W. T. Bowler shot one, October 15, 1911, at Newport. ~ Meo cal HatHaway, Notes on Rhode Island Birds. 551 Steganopus tricolor. Wuitson’s PHataropre.—I took a male of this rare Phalarope at Quonochontaug on August 28, 1909. It came into my decoys at dusk, and alighted among them. Macrorhamphus griseus scolopaceus. Lonc-sintep DowircHER.— A female of this rare shore bird was shot on September 25, 1908, by Mr. C. B. Clarke at Point Judith, which he sent to me in the meat and it is now in my collection. It measured as follows: wing 5.87 inches, tarsus 1.65 inches, bill 2.87 inches. Mr. Clarke informs me that twelve or fourteen years ago he shot a bunch of eleven of this species in the spring of the year on the Eastons Beach marsh at Newport, and that the above ae is the only one he has seen since that time. Micropalama himantopus. Stitt. Sanpprper.— Some years this species occurs quite commonly during the fall migration and in others itis rare. During a flight at Point Judith on September 1, 1906, several were shot, all young birds. I shot a male in adult breeding plumage that came to my decoys on July 30, 1911, at Quonochontaug, R. I. Pisobia maculata. PrcroraL SAnppipER.— I took a very late bird at Point Judith marsh on November 2, 1902, the only one seen. Pisobia bairdi. Bartrp’s SaNnpprperR.— As this is one of our rarest Limicolae, individual records are of interest. I took a male August 14, 1907, and a female August 30, 1912, both at Quonochontaug. The latter was alone and came to my decoys when I imitated the call notes of the Pectoral Sandpiper. Ereunetes mauri. WersTeRN SAaNpPIPER.— Occurs sparingly among flocks of Least and Semipalmated Sandpipers. Out of a flock of a dozen “peep ”’ I shot a young male on September 7, 1908, at Point Judith. At Quonochontaug in 1912, I shot three, a female August 23, a male each on August 24 and 26. These were all immature birds which were easily identified by their longer bills as they searched for food on the sand flats, among the flocks of ‘‘ peep.” Limosa fedoa. Marsiep Gopwit.— An extremely rare straggler in this state. One was shot by a gunner named Merritt on September 7, 1908, at Sakonnet Point. The specimen was mounted and is in his posses- sion. Catoptrophorus semipalmatus inornatus. WesrerN WILLET.— The western form of the Willet has never been recorded. as occurring in Rhode Island, yet doubtless all that have occurred in recent years belong to this subspecies. It occurs as a regular fall migrant, some years more abundant than others. The first bird that I have a record of, I shot on August 9, 1905, at Quonochontaug. A flock of eight came to my decoys on August 18, 1907, at the same place, two of which I shot, both females. In August, 1912, they were more abundant than I have ever seen them, some eighteen having been seen between the 9th and 23rd on the Quonochontaug marsh. Mr. I. R. Sheldon informed me that he saw twenty-five August 23 on the Point Judith marsh. All of the birds that I have shot were in immature plumage. Earliest bird noted on August 5, 1906. I have 552 Haruaway, Notes on Rhode Island Birds. ous never seen one of the eastern form in this state and do not know of any in local collections. Machetes pugnax. Rurr.— Mr. William T. Bowler shot an immature female on September 7, 1909, on the Point Judith marsh, which was in company with two Pectoral Sandpipers. This is the third record for the state and is now in my collection. Tryngites subruficollis. Burr-Breastep Sanpprper.— Additional records for this rare fall migrant are as follows: Mr. I. R. Sheldon shot one near the ‘‘ causeway ”’ on the island in Point Judith Pond on September 2, 1905. Mr. C. B. Clarke shot a female September 23, 1904, at Little Comp- ton, which I purchased of him for my collection. He took another specimen at the same locality on the early date of July 22, 1906. Charadrius dominicus dominicus. GoiprEN Piover.— This fall migrant is fast becoming one of our rarest shore birds. In August and September of 1909, quite a number were taken on the Point Judith marsh. I have two females, shot August 21, and a male and female shot August 30, of that year which are in worn breeding plumage and moulting. About half of the feathers on the throat and belly are black, the rest white, giving the bird a mottled appearance. Mr. C. B. Clarke who obtained the birds informed me that during fifteen years shooting he has seen but very few in this plumage. ZEgialitis meloda. Piprinc PLover.— The Piping Plover is an ex- tremely rare summer resident and migrant in this state. A pair have bred for five years on a pebbly beach in Newport County. I was informed of their presence at this spot in 1908, and visited the locality on June 4, 1909, readily found the adults and judged from their actions that they had young. In 1910 I paid them a second visit on June 19, and after a wait of an hour under a blind, I saw three young a few days old running along the beach. June 4, 1911, I found them in the same spot and the female led me a chase of a hundred yards, acting as if she had a broken wing. I spent an hour under the umbrella blind, and at last saw two young less than a week old feeding along the sandy beach. The old birds did not come near the young at any time and were very wary. My last trip was on May 26, 1912, found the birds as usual, and hiding under the blind, in less than three minutes the female ran up the beach beyond high water mark and vanished from sight among the pebbles, which she so closely resembled in color. It took me but a moment to reach the spot where I saw her fade from sight, and there in a slight hollow in the sand on a few pieces of broken shells were four eggs, which I photographed. It is remarkable, that one of the Limicol family, which has to run the gauntlet of such a host of gunners in their migration, should safely return to nest year after year in the same identical spot. Ectopistes migratorius. PAassENGER PiGron.— There is no definite breeding record that I can find of this bird though it formerly bred here in abundance. In Forbush’s ‘ History of the Game Birds, Water Fowl and Shore Birds’ on page 346 I find ‘‘ Roger Williams (1643) says that the Wore sal Harnaway, Notes on Rhode Island Birds. 553 Pigeons bred abundantly in Rhode Island in the Pigeon Countrie.’”’ Mr. F. T. Jencks of West Barrington, R. I., our veteran ornithologist, has written me as follows: “‘ Once in West Greenwich, a Wild Pigeon flew from a pine tree to another near by and I shot it, a beautiful male. I went and looked where he flew from and found a nest with one egg which I took. I don’t remember what disposition was made of these specimens. It was close to 1880, probably in May, but more likely before 1880 than afterward. Shooting Wild Pigeons and Mourning Doves are two different propositions, the first was easy the latter generally not.’’ I have in my collection a mounted adult male taken on the “‘ Whittaker ”’ grounds in Cranston in October, 1854, by Percia Aldrich and mounted by him. What is undoubt- edly the last one shot in this state is a young bird taken by Walter A. Angell November 2, 1886, in Cranston, now in my collection. Mr. William A. Sprague, of Providence, saw one sitting on a telegraph wire in Glocester on September 25, 1888, which allowed a near approach and remained on the wire until he was some distance away. This is the last instance that I know of its occurrence here. Cathartes aura septentrionalis. Turkey Vu.trurr.—TI have a mounted specimen in my collection shot by Le Roy Knowles at Point Judith on June 16, 1908. When first seen the bird was perched on a stone wall and appeared to be much interested in Mr. Knowles’ chickens. Fearing that the vulture might molest them, Mr. Knowles shot him. Miss Eliza- beth Dickens has written me that one was shot on Block Island, April 12, 1912, and was mounted and in the possession of Lycurgus Negus. Falco peregrinus anatum. Duck Hawx.— The following very inter- esting account of the occurrence of this species on Block Island was given me by Miss Elizabeth Dickens. ‘‘ Grey Bonnet” the tyrannus falcon, appeared here April 26, 1912. He is a foeman worthy of my steel, but I’ve never been able to kill one yet although I have made the feathers fly a number of times. One can’t but admire his wisdom and cunning, and the wonderful feats he performs in air. They are very common with us both spring and fall. Have recorded forty-six during the fall of 1912.” Falco sparverius sparverius. Sparrow Hawx.— Recorded by Howe & Sturtevant in ‘Birds of Rhode Island’ as an uncommon summer resident. There has been a decided increase in their numbers during the last ten years, and now they may be called a regular summer resident, breeding locally and often wintering. I took a set of four fresh eggs on May 26, 1903, in Warwick which were laid in a hollow cavity in a dead tree. A pair occu- pied an old woodpecker’s hole in the side of an ice house in Cranston and on May 24, 1907, I found a set of five eggs incubated ten days. The female would not leave the nest and I had to remove the eggs from under her with a scoop net. Another pair were in an old flicker’s hole in a telegraph pole eight feet up, beside a much travelled highway in Cranston. It con- tained four fresh eggs on May 14, 1911. The bird was in the nest and would not leave. Inserting a scoop net she struck at and grasped it with her feet and was pulled out clinging to it. I saw two individuals in Janu- Jt 0 O04 Hatrnaway, Notes on Rhode Island Birds. [aus ary, 1911, and a pair which were apparently mated, on February 22, of the same year, all in Warwick. Cryptoglaux acadica acadica. Saw-wHer Owu.— An additional record of this rare winter visitor is a female taken on November 1, 1910, at Point Judith by Mr. H. 8. Champlin. Picoides arcticus. Arctic THREE-TOED WooprecKEeR.— An adult male was shot in Barrington on December 25, 1905, by a boy from whom it was purchased by Angell & Cash, taxidermists in Providence. While in a grove of pitch pines on Potowomut Neck in Warwick on February 22, 1911, I saw one of this species busily engaged in digging out a grub from the trunk of a dead pine tree. JI fired at the bird but he flew off unhurt. I re- turned to this tree later on and found the bird at work, fifteen feet up the trunk. He did not mind my presence in the least and let me approach the foot of the tree. Another attempt to collect it was unsuccessful and I did not see the bird again. These are the first two instances of their occurrence in this state. Nuttallornis borealis. O.ive-sipep FLiycatcHeErR.—I saw one perched on the topmost limb of a large dead white pine in Charlestown on June 5, 1910. When some distance from the tree I heard its loud call notes and upon approaching, it flew out of sight. This is the first one I have ever seen and it is an extremely rare migrant with us. Corvus brachyrhynchos brachyrhynchos. Crow.— Dr. H. P. Beck of Newport kindly permits me to record an albino that was killed on Prudence Island in December, 1910. The bird is mounted in his collection. Sturnus vulgaris. Srariina.— This old world species first introduced into New York City made its appearance in this state at Silver Spring in East Providence in the summer of 1908. I was informed of their presence here by Mr. I. R. Sheldon who saw seven or eight birds and said they had nested there that summer. I saw a flock of thirty-two in an elm tree in Warwick on December 17, 1911. Prof. H. E. Walter of Brown University told me of seeing seven on April 2, 1912, in East Providence and that he saw two enter holes in trees. During December of 1912 about a dozen were reported as roosting in the steeple of the church in Rumford. Miss Elizabeth Dickens wrote me that her father saw the first Starling on Block Island on October 2, 1912, and on November 23, 1912, a flock of twenty were seen. Molothrus ater ater. Cowsrrp.— A male and female were seen on Block Island, January 10, 1913, by Miss Elizabeth Dickens. The weather had been very mild up to this time. Euphagus carolinus. Rusry Buacksrrp.— Two of this species were - feeding along the banks of a running brook in Warwick on February 4, 1912,. one of which I secured, a male now in my collection. The weather had been very severe during January, and all nature was encased in snow and ice. This is the first record for this bird wintering with us. Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina. Eveninc GrospEak.— Miss Anna E. Cobb reported having seen a male on January 7, 1911, in Meshanti- Jol. XXX r ; , i ae ee | Hatuaway, Notes on Rhode Island Birds. rayoT9) cut Park, Cranston. A flock of five females and two males were observed in Woonsocket on January 13, 1911, and for several days thereafter, as recorded in the March-April 1911 “‘ Bird-Lore.’’ These are the first in- stances of its occurrence in this state. Loxia leucoptera. Wuitr-wiNcep Crosspitt.— A flock of forty of this uncommon winter visitor were reported feeding on hemlock cones in Johnston, November 20, 1906. I visited this locality on November 24 and secured three females from a flock of twenty-four. On December 22 I shot two males at the same place and saw twelve others. They were last seen on January 13, 1907. Five females were on the ground under a large hemlock picking up the seeds that had fallen from the cones. They were very tame and allowed me to come within two feet of them before they flew into the lower branches of the tree. Passerherbulus henslowi henslowi. Hernstow’s Sparrow.— A rare local summer resident occurring only in the southern part of the state but principally in the town of Charlestown. Perched on a weed stalk, fence, stone wall or rock in some old pasture grown up to weeds and briers, its plain little song resembling the words “ se-lick’? may be heard at all hours of the day during the breeding season. I heard two males singing at Bridgetown, May 10,1903, one August 5, 1905, near Niantic, two at Quonochontaug May 11, 1906, one May 9, 1909, at Kingston, and May 13, 1910, in afield of some twenty acres in extent in Charlestown I heard seven singing. On June 5, 1910, I visited the Charlestown locality, and with the aid of my son C. H. Smith Hathaway we dragged the fields with a rope in an endeavor to find a nest, but with no result other than to collect two males. In 1911 on May 28th, my son and I again dragged the old pasture, and we had not proceeded more than a hundred feet when a female flushed from a nest containing three fresh eggs and one of the Cowbird. We left the eggs unmolested, continued our dragging and in about two hours flushed another female from a nest with four eggs in exactly the same situation as the first one, set in a cluster of dead grass and very open to view. The nests were built entirely of grasses lined with fine dead grasses, quite deeply cupped. I endeavored to collect the last female but was unsuccessful. She led me a long chase, flying low from one clump of bayberry bushes to another and instantly diving out of sight, finally disappearing. One very distinctive character noted was the chestnut brown color of the bird in flight. The last set found was incubated some seven or eight days. Returning to the first nest I carefully approached and succeeded in getting within two feet of it. The bird was on, in plain sight, and I could see the olive green feath- ers of the nape and the chestnut brown of the back with black streaks. In attempting to touch her she sprang six feet into the air flirting and spreading her sharp pointed tail feathers, and flew in a zigzag manner into a nearby bayberry bush. In each instance the males were singing within a hundred feet of the nest. These are the first records of its breeding in this state. Passerherbulus nelsoni nelsoni. Netson’s Sparrow.— Nelson’s Sparrow occurs rarely during the fall migration in company with the 906 Hatuaway, Notes on Rhode Island Birds. es Acadians. One which I shot October 15, 1905 in the Charlestown Beach marsh was kindly identified by Mr. William Brewster as “ nearly typical” of this subspecies. I am indebted to Dr. C. W. Richmond of the U. §. National Museum for the identification of a male which I took at Quono- chontaug on October 17, 1909. These are the first records for this state and both specimens are in my collection. Passerherbulus nelsoni subvirgatus. AcapDIAN SHARP-TAILED SPAR- Row.— A common fall migrant along the coast occurring in all the salt marshes. I have two males and a partial albino which I shot October 15, 1905, in the Charlestown Beach marsh, and a male shot October 8, 1911, at Quonochontaug. It doubtless occurs as a spring migrant, but I have no record. Passerherbulus maritimus maritimus. Srasipe Sparrow.— Oc- curs as an uncommon summer resident in nearly all of the salt marshes on our southern coast, variable in numbers in different years, due no doubt to the flooding of the marshes by rain. Two nests were found at Quonochon- taug, June 16, 1907, one containing three eggs nearly ready to hatch, and the other with four eggs incubated eight days. The latter set is in my col- lection. The nests were well concealed in the short coarse dead marsh grass, just above the surface of the shallow water that covered a small part of the marsh to a depth of three or four inches. I took a female October 3, 1909, at Charlestown Beach, and a male October 12, 1912, at Quonochontaug. Zonotrichia albicollis. Wuirr-THRoATED Sparrow.— Winters oc- casionally. I saw five at Apponaug on February 12, 1911, feeding on the fruit of the barberry (Berberis vulgaris). Two were seen in a “ cattail ” swamp in Cranston, December 25, 1912, in company with a small flock of Tree Sparrows. Progne subis subis. PurpLte Martin.— The cold rainstorms of June, 1904, nearly exterminated the martins in this state. They have never re- gained their former abundance and I know of but few that nest with us. Doubtless, they would increase if suitable houses were put up to attract them. — In the continuance of his great, work, Mr. Mathews treats of the Limicole. We note the following new genera, Anteleotringa, p. 274, type Totanus tenuirostris Horsf.; Ditel- matias, p. 282, type Gallinago hardwickit Gray; Parascolopax, p. 290, type Scolopax saturata Hodgs.; Chubbia, p. 291, type Gallinago stricklandi Gray; Homoscolopaz, p. 291, type G. imperialis; Neospilura, p. 293, type Scolopax solitaria; Eugallinago, p. 294, type G. macrodactyla Bonap. and Subspilura, p. 295, type G. megala Swinhoe. New subgenera are: Nesopisobia, p. 245, type Totanus damacensis Horsf.; Macrodura, p. 294, type G. nobilis; Odurella, p. 294, type G. brasiliensis Sw. 1The natural History of the Toronto Region | Ontario, Canada | edited by | J. H. Faull, B. A., Ph.D. | Associate Professor of Botany, University of Toronto | Toronto | Published by the Canadian Institute |1913. Svo. pp. 1-419, seven halftone plates and five maps. William Briggs, publisher, Toronto, Ont. $2. 2The Birds of Australia. By Gregory M. Mathews. Vol. III, part 3, pp. 205-300. August 18, 1913. Witherby & Co., 326 High Holborn, London, W. C. — Vol S| Recent Literature. 297 Some changes in nomenclature affect North American birds, for instance Pisobia aurita (Latham) must become P. acuminata Horsf. since Mr. Mathews states that Sharpe was clearly in error when he claimed that Wat- lings drawing 244, upon which Latham based his name, represented this bird. It is obviously Actitis hypoleucos. Mr. Mathews moreover divides the genus Pisobia and places this species in Limnocinclus; Actodromas being a synonym of true Pisobia with P. minuta as its type. The name of the Pectoral Sandpiper must change also, since Tinga maculata Vieill. is rendered invalid by 7’. maculata Linn. 1766, we therefore return to pectoralis of Say. The American Knot is separated as Canutus canutus rufus Wilson while the Japanese race is described as new under the name C. c. rogersi— W.S. Mearns on New African Birds.'— In working over the rich collections of African birds in the U. 8. National Museum obtained mainly by himself, Dr. Mearns finds the following new Weaver-birds and Thrushes, Estrilda rhodopyga polia, from the Gato River, Southern Abyssinia, 2. rhodopyga hypochra, Granatina ianthinogastra roosevelti, Planesticus helleri, P. oliva- ceus polius, Geocichla piaggie keniensis and G. gurneyi raineyi from British East Africa. While Dr. Mearns’ first aim is naturally the description of the new forms obtained by him, ornithologists will await with interest a general account of the collections made on the Smithsonian and the Childs Frick Expeditions which he accompanied as naturalist— W.S. Riley on the Bahama Barn Owl.2— While accompanying the Bahamas Expedition of the Geographic Society of Baltimore a few years ago, Mr. Riley obtained a specimen of a peculiar looking Barn Owl which in the light of additional material now available he describes as new, under the name of Tyto perlatus lucayanus— W.S. Shufeldt’s Studies of Fossil Birds.*— In the former of two recent pub- lications on North American fossil birds, Dr. Shufeldt presents the results of a reéxamination of the Cope and Condon Collections and a study of 1 Descriptions of three new African Weaver-birds of the Genera Fstrilda and Granatina. By Edgar A. Mearns. Smithson. Misc. Collns., Vol. 61, No. 9, pp. 1-4. July 31, 1913. Descriptions of four New African Thrushes of the Genera Planesticus and Geocichla. By Edgar A. Mearns. Smithson. Mise. Collns., Vol. 61, No. 10, pp. 1-5. August 11, 1913. 2 The Bahama Barn Owl. By J. H. Riley. Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, XXVI, pp. 153-154. June 30, 1913. 3 Review of the Fossil Fauna of the Desert Region of Oregon, with a Description of additional Material collected there. By R. W. Shufeldt. Bull. Amer. Mu- seum Nat. Hist., Vol. XXXII, Art. VI, pp. 123-178. New York, July 9, 1913. Further Studies of Fossil Birds with Descriptions of New and Extinct Species. By R. W. Shufeldt. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., Vol. XXXII, Art. XVI, pp. 285-306. New York, August 4, 1913. [oct: 598 Recent Literature. other material belonging to the U. S. National Museum and the American Museum of Natural History.! A large amount of material is illustrated in half-tone, comprising 578 figures of bones or fragments arranged on 35 plates. Colymbus parvus, Polilynbus magnus, Phalacrocorax macropus and Olor matthewst from the Oregon Pleistocene are described as new. In asecond paper additional collections belonging to the same institutions are described. Ninety-six specimens are figured on nine plates. Diatryma ajax, and Palwophasianus (gen. nov.) meleagroides from the Wasatch of Wyoming, are described as new, also Aquila antiqua, A. ferox, and A. lydekkeri from the Bridger Formation, Wyoming, and Proictinia gilmorei, from the Loup Fork of Kansas.— W. 8. Hahn on the Future of the North American Fauna.?— The late Dr. Hahn whose unfortunate death was mentioned recently in ‘ The Auk’ has contributed a suggestive paper under the above title. While he has in mind animal life as a whole most of his remarks refer equally well to birds and he constantly quotes birds as examples. We cannot do better than to quote his own résumé in order to give an idea of the manner in which he has treated the subject. ‘ Briefly the tendency of the North American fauna is toward mediocrity. Large species are giving way to small; bizarre species to commonplace. Marsh-loving and forest-loy- ing animals disappear with the advance of civilization, and grass-loving species that are able to exist in fence rows and pastures survive. Animals that yield products of value vanish before the hand of man; likewise his enemies are destroyed unless protected by small size and great fecundity. Courage and the social instinct are at a discount and cunning and timidity at a premium.’’— W. 8. Doolin’s ‘ Field, Forest and Stream in Oklahoma.’ ’— In this attrac- tively printed and well illustrated volume, Mr. Doolin sets a high standard for game wardens’ reports. As he says in his ‘ foreword’: ‘“ An annual report which recorded merely receipts and expenditures would convey no information such as might lead the public to an understanding of the prob- lems and difficulties that confront those who are desirous of saving all useful forms of wild bird and animal life from extermination. It is especially the purpose of this report to ask the people of Oklahoma for their fullest co-operation in the protection and conservation of disappear- ing wild life in this state.” 1Cf. ‘The Auk,’ 1913, pp. 36-39, for a preliminary review of this study. 2The Future of the North American Fauna. By the late Walter L. Hahn, Ph.D. Pop. Sci. Monthly, August, 1913, pp. 169-177. Cf. p. 3 Field, Forest and Stream in Oklahoma. Being the 1912 Annual Report of the State Game and Fish Warden, John B. Doolin, to the Governor of the State of Oklahoma, the Honorable Lee Cruce. Roy 8vo. pp. 1-159. Vol. XXX . 5 °T913 | Recent Literature. 599 Following out these lines the author presents a number of interesting and readable chapters describing the beauties of field and forest in his state; fishing and hunting experiences and anecdotes of white man and Indian; and through it all is brought out the necessity for united effort’ in cultivating a proper appreciation of nature and in saving the wild life from extermination. Beside chapters on Water-fowl and Wild Turkeys there is a ‘ tentative list ’ of the birds of Oklahoma compiled by Prof. George W. Stevens of the Northwest Normal School and Oklahoma Geological Survey, which consists of 227 species with brief notes as to the character of their occurrence. This we believe constitutes the first Oklahoma ‘ state list.’— Wes: Craig on the Stimulation of Ovulation in Birds.'\— Largely from a study of pigeons the author finds that egg-laying can be induced without the true sexual stimulus and comes to the conclusion that it is the result not of a single stimulus but of a complex in which environmental conditions play an important part. He cites the mating of two female pigeons with ovu- lation by both, and the influence of the nest and eggs in restraining the incubating pigeon from further sexual activity, in presenting his conclu- sions.— W. 8. Laubmann on Birds from Thian-Schan.? — This paper is based upon a collection of 1234 skins obtained by Dr. Gottfried Merzbacher in the Thian-Schan Mts., Turkestan in 1907-8. 198 species are listed with notes as to their relationship, distribution, etc. and synonymic references to other papers dealing with the same general region, a list of which is given in a bibliography. No new forms are described, but the paper forms a valu- able contribution to the ornithology of the Chinese Empire.— W. S. Stresemann, on East Indian Birds.’ — Mr. Stresemann in a recent contribution to the ‘ Novitates Zoologicae’ continues his miscellaneous notes on Indo-Australasian birds. These are as follows, numbering con- tinuously with his previous instalment. XIX. The forms of Artamus leu- corhynchos (L.); A. 1. hwmei subsp. n. from the South Andamans. XX, Some forms of Hypothymis azurea (Bodd); H.a. symmizxta Alor Island. and H. a. oberholseri, Formosa, are described asnew. XXI. The forms of 1The Stimulation and the Inhibition of Ovulation in Birds and Mammals. By Wallace Craig. Jour. Animal Behavior. May—June, 1913, pp. 215-221. 2 Wissenschaftliche Ergebnisse der Reise von Prof. Dr. G. Merzbacher im zentralen und 6stlichen Thian Schan, 1907-8. I. Végel. von A. Laubmann. Abhl. Konig. Bayern. Akad. Wissensch. Math.-phys. Klasse. XXVI Band 3. Abhandl. pp. 1-105. January 11, 1913. 3 Ornithologische Miszellen aus dem Indo-Australischen Gebiet. Von Erwin Stresemann. Nov. Zool., vol. XX, pp. 289-324. June, 1913. Die Végel von Bali. Aus den Zoologischen Ergebnissen der II. Freiburger Molukken-Expedition. Nov. Zool., Vol. XX, pp. 325-387. June, 1913. [oct 600 Recent Literature. Eurystomus orientalis (L.), EZ. 0. gigas, subsp. n. S. Andamans, E. 0. con- nectens subsp. n. Moa Isl. XXII. The forms of Amaurornis phenicura (Forster). XXIII. The forms of Baza subcristata (Gould), B. s. pallida, Kei Islands, and B. s. megala Fergusson Island described asnew. XXIV. The forms of Cinnyris clementie Less., C. c. keiensis subsp. n. Kei Islands. XXV. The forms of Macropygia ruficeps (Temm.), M. r. nana subsp. n. Kina Balu, Borneo. XXVI. The forms of Alcedo ispida in eastern and southern Asia and the Indo-Australasian Archipelago, A. 7%. pelagica subsp. n. St. Aignan, Isl XXVII. The forms of Thriponar javensis, T. 7. confusus subsp. n. Mt. Arayat, Luzon. XXVIII. The forms of Centropus sinensis (Steph.), C. s. anonymus, Tawi-tawi and C.s. parroti, Ceylon, are described as new. The method adopted by Mr. Stresemann in his ‘ Miscellany’ is to be commended as instead of merely describing a lot of new forms, he gives us the benefit of his study of all the related forms, presenting as it were a series of little monographs. In Another recent paper, he treats of the birds collected on the island of Bali on the second Freiburger Moluccan Expedi- tion, additional species previously obtained on the island are also listed bringing the total to 149. The following are described as new: Hemi- procne longipennis harterti, Surniculus lugubris brachyurus, Phenicophais curvirostris deningert, Phylloscopus borealis examinandus, Pachycephala grisola secedens, Criniger gularis balicus, Oreosterops javanica elongata, Aplonis panayensis gusti and Aplonis panayensis leptorrhynchus are de- scribed asnew. ‘There is also a valuable discussion of the plumage changes of Centropus. At the close of this paper the author presents some zoogeographical con- clusions regarding the relationship of the avifauna of Bali, Lombok, Java, Sumatra and Sumbawa which are of much interest. In an effort to meet the problem that confronts all students of geographic distribution —i. e. the relative value to be given species and subspecies in contrasting faunas — he differentiates between species which are broken up into closely related geographic races and well marked species which are not. The latter he terms ‘ Altform,’ while the races of the complex species (‘ Art’) he terms ‘Jungformen.’ This is a novel terminology but it draws attention to a matter of no little importance, especially in view of the enormous multipli- cation of subspecies which is now taking place.— W. 8S. Menegaux on Ostrich Farming.! — In this valuable paper one can find conveniently arranged, information on practically any phase of the subject : of Ostrich rearing or the Ostrich plume business. The several geographic races of the bird are first described; then the structure of the plume and its development, and the variation in the feathers on different parts of the body are discussed. Chapter three deals with a history of the use of 1L’Elevage de L’Autruche, Récolte et Commerce des Plumes par A. Menegaux. Bibliothéque d’Agriculture Coloniale, pp. 1-156. Paris. 1913. vovgis a Recent Literature. 601 Ostrich plumes, and the commercial terminology and points used in valuing plumes. Chapter four considers the methods of procuring the plumes from the birds and other chapters relate to the commerce in Ostrich plumes, the domestication and care of the birds, and the extension of Ostrich farm- ing. When we learn that in 1911 over 800,000 pounds of Ostrich plumes were exported from Cape Colony, valued at about ten million dollars, and that Ostrich raising is now going on in Transvaal, Australia, Algeria, Tunis, Soudan, Madagascar, Egypt and the United States, we begin to realize the magnitude of this business, and more than ever the absolute lack of necessity for tolerating in any way, shape or form the traffic in wild bird plumage. M. Menegaux has furnished us with a valuable work of reference which can be read with profit by all interested in the feather trade, either commercially or in its relation to bird protection—W. S. Dubois’ List of the Birds of Belgium.! — Dr. Dubois prepared in 1885 a list of Belgian birds of which this is a ‘new edition.’ Eightnames in the old list are cancelled and 25 species added during the twenty-seven years that have intervened making a total of 353. In comparing the avifauna of Belgium with that of any of the United States it may be of interest to state that Dr. Dubois finds that 70 species are resident, 57 summer residents, 39 winter visitants, 49 regular transients and 123 irregular or accidental. To these he adds as a separate category, 15 climatic varieties — surely a severe reflection upon the ‘ subspecies.’ Dr. Dubois is very conservative in matters of nomenclature adhering to the twelfth edition of Linnzus, and rejecting tautonomy and trinomials, his 15 climatic varieties being designated by the old-fashioned ‘‘ var.”-— W.S. McAtee on the Relation of Birds to Grain Aphides.2 — Mr. McAtee presents an elaborate report of a week’s study of birds in connection with an outbreak of Grain Aphides near Winston Salem, N. C. Of the species present which fed upon the Aphides the following were the most important and in the order named, Field Sparrow, Goldfinch, Chipping Sparrow, Savannah Sparrow, Song Sparrow, Vesper Sparrow, and Snowbird. By estimating the number of birds present on the area of 100 acres which was under observation and the average number of Aphides found in the stomachs examined, Mr. McAtee concludes that these birds devoured about a million aphides a day, while migrants passing through at the time consumed as many more. It is interesting to see that all the species cited above are Fringillide, birds not usually credited with this sort of diet.— W. 8. Beal on Our Meadowlarks in Relation to Agriculture.’ — The dis- tribution and economic status of Sturnella magna and S. neglecta are here 1 Nouvelle Revue des Oiseaux Observes en Belgique, par Le Dr. Alph. Dubois. Mem. Soc. Zool. France. Tom. XXV, 1912, pp. 162-209. 2 Relation of Birds to Grain Aphides. By W. L. McAtee. Year book U. 8. Dept. of Agriculture for 1912. pp. 397-404, 3 figs. 3 Our Meadowlarks in Relation to Agriculture. By L. Beal. Yearbook U. 8. Dept. of Agriculture, 1912. pp. 279-284. 602 Recent Literature. hase summarized on the basis of data and stomach material in possession of the Biological Survey. Five-sixths of the animal food of these birds. proves to consist of beetles, caterpillars and grasshoppers which far more than counterbalances the occasional and usually local consumption of grain, peas, etc.— W. S. Economic Ornithology in recent Entomological Publications.— The output of publications of all branches of the Department of Agricul- ture has been abnormally small during the present calendar year. Hence we find that only two of those of the Bureau of Entomology contain note- worthy mention of the bird enemies of insect pests. The fruit tree leaf- roller (Archips argyrospila) has caused considerable loss to fruit growers. in Colorado, New Mexico, and New York. Mr. John B. Gill, the author of the bulletin on this pest states! that several species of birds have been observed feeding on the larvae. These birds are the Bluebird, Western Robin, Catbird, Redwinged Blackbird, Orchard Oriole, Kingbird, Phoebe and the English Sparrow. In a Farmers’ Bulletin? on the common white grubs, larve of May beetles, and well known serious pests, Mr. John J. Davis gives birds first place among the natural enemies. The Biological Survey has found adults or larvee of May beetles in the stomachs of more than 60 species of birds, a fact mentioned by Mr. Davis. Some of this author’s original testimony is as follows: “Probably the most important of these enemies are the birds, especially crows and crow blackbirds. Fields of timothy sod have been literally overturned by crows in their search for grubs, and in some fields the grubs. were almost exterminated by them. Crows have often been observed following the plow in infested fields, eagerly picking up every grub that was unearthed. Mr. Henry Holzinger, of Lancaster, Wis., said that Crow Blackbirds followed the plow in great numbers where he was turning over a sod field in the spring of 1912. In one instance he watched a single black- bird eat many grubs, apparently its full capacity, and then gather as many as it could hold in its beak and fly away. In this case the bird destroyed in all 20 grubs in about 1 or 2 minutes. This habit of eating a large number of grubs and then flying away with its beak full was reported as a common occurrence with the blackbird. Mr. Fred Nelson, of Tabor, 8. Dak., stated that his attention was directed to the unusual abundance of grubs in his field in the fall of 1911 by the blackbirds which came in flocks and followed him as he plowed. He soon learned that they were gathering grubs. After picking up several grubs each bird would fly back to the trees a short distance away and soon return. Thus there was a continuous flight from the trees to the ground and from the ground to the trees. Besides crows and blackbirds practically all of our common birds feed on white grubs or their adult forms, the May beetles.’? — W. L. M. 1 Bulletin 116, Part V, U. S. Bureau of Entomology, March 12, 1913, p. 102. *No. 543, U. S. Department of Agriculture, July 18, 1913. NOT Recent Literature. 603 Collinge’s ‘The Food of Some British Wild Birds.’!— With the subtitle ‘‘ A study in economic ornithology ”’ and the limiting word ‘ some’ in the main caption, it would appear that this little book deserved to escape censure because it does not absolutely settle the economic status of British birds. But it has nevertheless been rather pointedly criticised? evidently by someone with a bias in favor of uniform protection of all birds. A few words of truth uttered by Professor Collinge about certain injurious species, apparently are all this critic was able to see in the book and his prejudice is such that these could not be endured. This censorious reviewer states “it cannot be said that his (Collinge’s) book greatly advances knowledge on this debated subject.” This statement, which serves chiefly to manifest the ignorance of this reviewer, is not only untrue but slanderous. Professor Collinge’s book reports on the original examination of more than 3,000°stomachs of British birds, and is therefore by far the largest single contribution to its subject thus far made. The facts that the author includes digests of the researches of other works and gives a comprehensive bibliography are also held up against him by the afore-mentioned censor. The work has simply been done in modern and excellent style, and these inclusions make it immensely more valuable to all really interested in its subject matter. Professor Collinge’s book includes besides 4 general introductory and 3 concluding chapters, detailed reports on the food of 29 species of birds, besides chapters on “‘ Birds as destroyers and distributers of weed seeds ” and “ Birds in relation to forestry.” The treatment by species includes an abstract of previously published evidence, tabulation of contents of stomachs examined, field observations by the writer, notes on the food of nestlings (when studied), examination of faeces (when made) and conclusions. The conclusion is preponderately favorable to 18 species and more or less unfavorable to 11. Professor Col- linge elaborates upon and reiterates his previously expressed opinion as to the lack of beneficial influence in the case of seed-eating birds. He states that birds on the whole are praiseworthy in their relations to forests. All in all this is the best handbook of the food of British Birds in existence and should be in the hands of everyone who desires reliable information on economic ornithology in this particular field — W. L. M. Bigglestone on Nesting Behavior of the Yellow Warbler.*— This paper is based upon a continuous study of a nest of young Yellow Warblers from the time of the hatching of the eggs, and irregular earlier observations, the observer occupying a blind situated close to the nest. With the co- operation of eleven assistants it was possible to record the actions of parents 1 London 1913, 109 pp. 2 Bird Notes and News, Vol. V, No. 6, June, 1913, pp. 93-94. 3A study of the Nesting Behavior of the Yellow Warbler (Dendroica estiva estiva.) By Harry C- Bigglestone. Wilson Bulletin, Vol. XXV, No. 2, June, 1913, pp. 49-67 [oce: 604 Recent Literature. and young on each day, from the beginning of feeding about 4.30 a. M. to its cessation at about 8 P. M. without interruption, aggregating 144 hours and 53 minutes. Such cooperation renders studies of this sort much less irk- some. During this time the parents fed the young 2373 times and a table shows roughly the different sorts of food that were provided. There was no feeding by regurgitation. The egg shells were devoured by the parents as were the excreta during the earlier part of the nestling period. Later they were carried away. The female did all the brooding and both birds had a stereotyped method of approaching the nest. The incubation period was eleven days. This paper will take its place with a number of similar studies that have appeared in recent years and which we trust may increase in number until all of our common species have been similarly investigated. A com- parative study of such records will eventually yield most valuable generali- zations.— W.S8. Stone on Venezuelan Birds.! — This paper treats of the birds secured by the Francis E. Bond Expedition of 1911, in the Paria Peninsula and the Orinoco delta, all the collections there secured having been presented by Mr. Bond to the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. After a summary of the movements of the expedition and some comments on the faunistic relationship of certain of the species found at Cariaquito on the Paria Peninsula, the paper gives an annotated list of the one hundred and seventy-three species collected. As stated by the author ‘it is not sur- prising that no new forms were obtained. ... in a region so long familiar to bird collectors as the Orinoco delta,” although the collection, which com- prises five hundred and four skins, accompanied by full data, is of consid- erable value, “‘ in view of the lack of definite localities in the case of early collections made in the Orinoco region.’’ The two regions examined are quite different in character, forty-eight species having been taken at Caria- quito which were not secured in the delta country, although the author does not consider the collection ‘“ sufficiently comprehensive to warrant any gen- eral deductions on distribution.”’ Field notes on the coloration of the tarsi, irides and other soft parts, made by Mr. Thomas S. Gillin who prepared the specimens, and notes on distribution and abundance supplied by Mr. Stewardson Brown, who was also a member of the expedition, add value to the paper.— J. A. G. R. Abstract of the Proceedings of the Linnxwan Society of New York.’ — The Abstracts which cover the first 56 pages are full of bird records of 1On a Collection of Birds obtained by the Francis E. Bond Expedition in the Orinoco Delta and Paria Peninsula, Venezuela. By Witmer Stone. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1913, pp. 189-212. Issued July 14, 1913. * Abstract of the Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New York for the years ending March 10, 1908; March 9, 1909; March 8, 1910; and March 14, 1911. Nos. 20-23, February 8, 1913, pp. 1-122, pll. I-XIV. venga | Recent Literature. 605 local interest, while two of the three papers published in full treat of birds. These are both by P. B. Philipp.— ‘ Bird’s-nesting in the Magdalen Is- lands,’ and ‘ The Bird Colonies of Pamlico Sound.’ Both are well illus- trated by photographic reproductions and are accompanied by annotated lists respectively of 55 and 12 species with detailed accounts of the habits, abundance and distribution of the birds, and interesting incidents of the trips. The society seems to be active and prosperous and the present creditable publication is the most pretentious of its series of sixteen issues.— W. S. The Ornithological Journals. Bird-Lore.! Vol. XV. No.4. July-August, 1913. The “Old Man.” graph of a male bird ‘ in display.’ The Finding of a Treasure. By Reginald Phillipps.— Interesting ac- count of the Hobby, Falco subbuteo. The Avicultural Magazine. Vol. IV. No.10. August, 1913. A Day in a Hampshire Garden. By Philip Gosse.— Familiar English birds discussed. Numerous articles on cage birds in all three numbers. Bird Notes.2, Vol. IV. No.6. June, 1913. Some Interesting Birds. By W. T. Page— Excellent photographs of the Great Spotted Woodpecker. British Owls. By F. Dawson Smith Photographic illustrations. Bird Notes from Trieste to Bombay. By H. Whistler— Photograph of Hemprich’s Gull in flight. Bird Notes. Vol. IV. No.7. July, 1913. Three Pytelie. By W. T. Page.—Colored plate of P. melba and P. afra. Some Interesting Birds. By W. T. Page.—Photographs of Philemon argenticeps and Calliste fastuosa. The Emu. Vol. XIII. Partl. July, 1913. On the Osteology of the Red Wattle Bird (Anthochera carunculata). By R. W. Shufeldt.— Four plates. 1Edited for the Avicultural Society by Hubert D. Astley. Published by West, Newman & Co., 54 Hatton Garden, E. C. London. 2 Journal of the Foreign Bird Club. Edited by Wesley T. Page. 8 Organ of the Royal Australasian Ornithologists’ Union. Edited by A. ay Campbell and Charles Barrett, Melbourne, Australia. London Agents, Witherby & Co., 326 High Holborn. 610 Recent Literature. lean The Eggs of Gymnorhina spp. By A. F. Bassett Hull — Colored plate. Field Ornithology in South Australia. By 8. A. White — An annotated list of 75 species with several views of the country. Capt. White submits, under protest, to the nomenclature of the new R. A. O. U. Check List and in a letter emphasizes his opposition to it. Bird-Life of the Kow Plains (Victoria). By L. G. Chandler.— 101 species listed with notes and some excellent photographs of nests. Field Notes on Some Ralline. By Miss J. A. Fletcher. The Austral Avian Record.! Vol.I. No.8. March 20, 1913. New Subspecies of Birds from the Monte Bello Islands, N. W. Australia. By P. D. Montague.— Eremiornis carteri assimilis and Anthus australis montebellv. Additional Species Described by Gould from Norfolk, Lord Howe, and Philip Islands. By Witmer Stone and Gregory M. Mathews. The Genus-name Meliphaga. By Gregory M. Mathews.— The type was first properly designated by Gray, 1840, as M. chrysotis. The name therefore takes the place of Péilotis of most authors while Meliphaga auct. nec. Lewin becomes Zanthomiza Swainson. Additions and Corrections to My Reference List. By Gregory M. Mathews.— 21 new races proposed. : New Geneva. By Gregory M. Mathews.— 10 new genera proposed. The Austral Avian Record. Vol. II. No.1. August 2, 1913. The Coloration of the Palate and Pharynx of Australian Birds. By J. Burton Cleland. Additions and Corrections to My Reference List. By Gregory M. Mathews.— 10 new forms. Mattingleya inornata Ramsay. By Gregory M. Mathews. New Genera and Species. By Gregory M. Mathews.— 3 genera, one species. On Some Interesting [New Zealand] Birds in the Vienna Museum. By Tom Iredale.— Gallirallus hectori ruscheki subsp. nov. and Hemipuffinus gen. nov., type Puffinus carneiceps Gould. Ardea? [In Dutch] Vol. II. No.2. June, 1913. Abnormal Coloration. By A. E. H. Swaen.— With list of albinos. Ornithological Investigations in Steil in Omstreken. By P. C. Riotte. — Annotated list of 55 species. Ornithological Observations in Netherlands. By E. D. Van Oort. Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie Vol. V. No. 50. June, 1913. On the Classification of Birds. By A. Dubois.— Dr. Dubois’ System is by no means a modern one. He divides the Aves into three subclasses, 1 Edited by Gregory M. Mathews. Published by Witherby & Co., 326 High Holborn, London, W. C. 2Edited for the Netherlands Ornithological Society by L. F. De Beaufort, A. A. Van Pelt Lechner and E. D. Van Oort. Published by E. J. Brill, Leiden. 3 Edited by A. Menegaux, 55 Rue de Buffon, Paris. 3 Shane o | Recent Literature. 611 Ratite, Ptilopsedes, and Gymnopedes, the last two based on the condition of the young at hatching. In the arrangement of orders the Parrots are put at the head of the system separated from the Scansores, ete., by the whole Passerine series. The Cormorants are allowed to stand with the other Steganopodes in the ‘Ptilopedes’ although the young are anything but downy, and on the other hand the Caprimulgide with downy young hardly agree with the ‘ Gymnopedes.’ Need of a New Catalogue of French Birds According to a Modern Classification. By Dr. Besaucéle. For the Formation of a ‘Committee on Migration’ in France. By J. Delamain. On Aquila nevia. By Gabriel Etoc. Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. Vol. V. No. 51. July, 1913. Study of a Collection of Birds Obtained by M. Albert Pichon in Western Yunnan. By A. Menegaux and R. Didier. Regarding the Buzzard. By R. Didier— Food Habits. Abnormal Eggs. By A. Legros. On Procellaria glacialis. By N. Seguin-Jard. Notes on the Spring Migration of 1913. By J. Delamain. Ornithological Notes in Paris. By R. Babin — Columba palumbus in the public gardens. The Truth about the Birds of Prey. By F. Daguin. Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. Vol. V. No. 52-53. August- September, 1913. The Ostrich in French West Africa. By G. Bouet. Migration during 1912 and early 1913. By M. P. Petitclere— In several parts of France. Egret Hunting in South America. By E. R. Wagner. Ornithological Observations at Setif, Algeria 1895-1900. By A. L. Charriere. Several local lists. Journal fiir Ornithologie. Vol. 61. Part 3. July, 1913. On Nesting Data and Egg-Measurements of the Owls of the Western Palearctic Region. By Forstmeister Wendlandt. A Contribution to our knowledge of the Ornis of French Guinea. By Adalbert Klaptocz.— Annotated list of 130 species collected at Mamou and Dabola. September, 1911—January, 1912. A Contribution to our Knowledge of the Bird Life of the Eastern Erz Mountains. By Richard Heyder. On the Distribution of the Birds of Lower Amazonia. By E. Snethlage. Oological Notes from German East Africa. By Ludwig Schuster. Journal fiir Ornithologie. Special Number I. 1913 [July]. 1 Bdited for the German Ornithological Society by Dr. A. Reichenow. L. A. Kittler, Leipzig, Agent. 612 Recent Literature. loos Fourth Annual Report on Bird Observations at the Imperial Biological Station at Heligoland. By Hugo Weigold.— An elaborate and interesting contribution to our knowledge of bird migration. Four maps show the movements of certain Gulls along the coasts of Europe. Ornithologische Monatsberichte.! Vol. 21, No.6. June, 1913. Ornithological Notes in Holland 1911-1912. By Baron R. Snouchaert van Schauburg. On Bird-Speech. By Richard Biedermann Imhoof. On a New Raven from Baluchistan. By A. Laubmann. Corvus splendens zugmayeri subsp. nov. Some Remarks on Anser anser. By W. Grafsmann. Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol.21. No.7-8. July-August, 1913. Remarks on the Bird Life of the European Forests at Different Latitudes. By Fritz Braun. Jaegers on the Rhine. By Dr. le Roi. Bee-eating Birds. By J. Gengler. On the Biology of Some Strand Birds. By W. Hagen. Northern Rarities at Lubeck. By W. Hagen. Some Observations on Carpodacus erythrinus (Pall.). By R. Zimmer- mann. On the Swimming of Dippers. By R. Fenk. Two Days Among the Birds of Jericho. By Ernst Schmitz. The Wintering of Parus atricapillus borealis in Finnland. By H. Grote and H. B. Loudon. New Forms from Spain and Portugal. By H. Weigold. Sazicola enanthe nivea, Alauda arvensis sierre and Alauda arvensis taitt. Ornithologische Monatsschrift.2, Vol. 38. No.5. May, 1918. Ornithology in Croatia, 1910. By E. Réssler. Totanus hypoleucus, T. ochropus and Rallus aquaticus as German Winter Birds. By O. Brauns. Ornithologische Monatsschrift. Vol. 38. No. 6. June, 1913. Fifth Yearly Report of the Experimental and Model Station for Bird Protection. By Hans Freiherr von Berlepsch. Ornithologische Monatsschrift. Vol.38. No.7. July, 1913. On the Bird Rocks of the Faroes. By Carl Kichler. Revista Italiana de Orritologia [In Italian]. Vol. II. No. 3. The Various Forms of Shrikes in Italy. By T. Salvadori. Systematic Position of Laniellus leucogrammicus. By T. Salvadori. 1 Edited by Dr. A. Reichenow. R. Friedliinder and Son, Berlin N. W. 6, Karlsh. 11. Agents. ? Organ of the German Society for the Protection of Birds. Edited by Dr. C. R. Hennicke and Dr. O. Taschenberg. Agent Max Kretschmann, Creutz’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung in Magdeburg. 3 Edited by Ettore Arrégoni Degli Oddi. Published by Stabelimento, Poli- grafico Emiliano, Piazza Calderini 6, Bologna, Italy. Or ini Recent Literature. 613 Somateria mollissima in Italy. By E. Balducci. On Caccabis labatet. By G. Martorelli. An Apparently New Form of Genneus. By A. Ghigi— Genneus fockel- manni Di. sp. Ornithological Articles in Other Journals.! Mitchell, Dr. P.C. Onthe Anatomy of Baleniceps rex. (Abst. Proc. Zool. Soc. London, No. 123. June3, 1913.) — Many characters in common with Scopus, most of which occur also in the Storks. Baleniceps seems best placed in a group by itself equivalent to the Storks and Herons. Patten, C. J. The Diurnal Migrations of Certain Birds Observed at the Tuskar Rock [Ireland]. (The Zoologist, June 16, 1913.) Stubbs, F. J. The Velocities of Migratory Birds. (The Zoologist, July 15, 1913.) — Considers that birds probably do not fly in ‘ the teeth of the wind,’ but take advantage of air currents for long flights. Ingram, C. Stray Notes on the Birds of Trinidad and Tobago, British West Indies. (The Zoologist, July 15, 1913.) Mudge, G. P. Some Phenomena of Species Hybridization among Pheasants. (The Zoologist, July 15, 1913.) — Comparison of plumage of Euplocamus nycthemerus X E. swinhoii with parents. Selous, E. A Diary of Ornithological Observation Made in Iceland During June and July, 1912. (The Zoologist, August 15, 1913.) Clarke, W. Eagle. Two Birds New to the Scottish Fauna. (The Scot- tish Naturalist, July, 1913.) — Motacilla flava beema, Sterna anglica. Anderson, P. The Birds of the Island of Tiree. (The Scottish Natura- list, July, 1913.) DuBois, A. Review of the Ritite Birds. (Bull. Soc. Zool. de France XXXVII, p. 300; XXXVIII, p. 104, 1913.) — A List with synonyms and generic keys. DuBois, A. Birds and Insects from the Economic Point of View and The Protection of Birds. (Bull. Soc. Zool. de France, XX XVIII, 1913.) Stanwood, C.J. The Hermit Thrush at Home. (Nature and Culture May, 1913.) — A careful study of anest and young. The incubation period is determined as 12 days. Swenk, M. H. and Zimmer, J.T. Some Notes on the Summer Birds of Southwestern Nebraska. (Proc. Nebraska Ornith. Union, V, pt. 4, May 1, 1912.) — Annotated list of 53 species. 1 Some of these journals are received in exchange, others are examined in the library of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. The Editor is under obligation to Mr. J. A. G. Rehn for a list of ornithological articles contained in the accessions to the library from week to week. 614 Recent Literature. lon Holland, R.P. The Gun for Spring Shooting. Varied Experiences and Some Success in Hunting Ducks and Geese with a Camera. (Out Door World and Recreation, July, 1913.) Editorial. Shooting Up An Egret Rookery.— Illustrated account of the latest Florida outrage. (Out Door World and Recreation, 1913.) Bailey, B. H. The Occurrence of Melanism in the Broad-winged Hawk; A Remarkable Flight of Broad-winged Hawks; and Notes on the Food of the Black-crowned Night Heron in Captivity. (Proc. Iowa Acad. Sci., XIX, 1912.) Pellett, F. C. Food Habits of Red-tailed Hawk, Cooper Hawk and Sparrow Hawk. (Proc. Iowa Acad. Sci., XIX 1912.) Gardner, Leon. A Partial Account of the Birds in the Vicinity of Laguna Beach [Cal.]. (First Ann. Rept. Laguna Marine Lab. 1912.) Brother Alphonsus. Brief notes on Indiana birds by this author run through the numbers of the Midland Naturalist and in the July issue is an article on the autumnal migration of 1912. Davidson, A. El Pajaro Lino or the California Woodpecker. (Bull. So. Cal. Acad. Sci., Jan. 1913.) Rothschild, Hon. Walter and Hartert, E. OnSome Australian Forms of Tyto. (Nov. Zool., XX, 1913.) — This paper is a study of Gregory M. Mathews’ types, augmented by the material in the Tring and British Mu- seums. After most careful consideration the authors reject seven of the nine new forms proposed by Mr. Mathews as pure synonyms based in their opinion upon sexual or individual differences. Zitkov, B. M. Birds of the Peninsula of Yamal. (Ann. Mus. Zool. V Akad. Imp. St. Petersbg., XVII, 1913.) [In Russian.] Bianchi, V. L. Tenth Supplement to the List of Birds of St. Peters- berg. (Ann. Mus. Zool. Akad. Imp. St. Petersbg., XVII, 1913.) [In Russian. | Tubia, J. F. Aves de Cataluna. (Mem. de la Real Sociedad Esp. Hist. Nat., VII, 1913.) — A list of 277 species with brief descriptions, keys and 81 text figures, essentially a manual for popular use. Salvadori, T. Note on Pucrasia ruficollis David & Oust., and on Tchitrea melanura Rchnw. (Bol. Mus. Univ. Torin., X XVII, 1912.) Phillips, J. C. Two New African Birds. (Proc.. Biol. Soc. Wash., XXVI, June 30, 1913.) — Caprimulgus eleanore Fazogli, Sudan; Passer domesticus chephreni, Cairo, Egypt. Todd, W. E. Clyde. Preliminary Diagnoses of Apparently New Birds from Tropical Americana. (Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XXVI, Aug. 8, 1913.) — 34 new races proposed from Venezuela; Santa Marta, Colombia; Bolivia, and Isle of Pines. Hellmayr, C. E. Aves for 1912 (Archiv. fur Naturgesch. B. Heft. 2, July, 1913.) — This excellent review of the year’s literature appears with remarkable promptness. Chasseriaud, R. The Flight of Birds. (La Nature XLI.) Schmidt, H. W. The Birds of Erlangen and Vicinity. (Sitzungsb. Physch-med. Soziet Erlangen, 44, 1913.) beach ice | Recent Literature. 615 Boss, K. Studies of the Development of the Brain in Fringilla canaria and Chelydra serpentina. (Gegenbaur’s Morphol. Jahrb., XLV. 1913.) _ Fries, Dr. Studies of Hybrids, Columba palumbus and Columba livia. (Berajah 1913.) Campenhausen, L. Freiherr von. ‘The Birds of the Southwest Coast of the Island of Oesel. (Mittl. Sekt. f. Naturkunde Gsterreich. Touristen-Klub. Wien. 1912, Vol. XXIV.) Publications Received.— Bailey, Harold H. The Birds of Virginia. J. P. Bell Co., Lynchburg, Va. 8vo. 1913. pp. 362. §$3. Beal, F. E. L. Our Meadowlarks in Relation to Agriculture. (Year- book U.S. Dept. of Agriculture 1912. pp. 279-284.) Bigglestone, Harry C. A study of the Nesting Behavior of the Yel- low Warbler. | (Reprint [repaged] from the Wilson Bulletin, June, 1913.) Carnegie Museum. Sixteenth Annual Report, 1913. Craig, Wallace. Peter, My Painted Bunting. (The Avicultural Magazine, IV, No. 8, pp. 245-248.) Craig, Wallace. The Stimulation and the Inhibition of Ovulation in Birds and Mammals. (Journal of Animal Behavior, May—June, 1913, pp. 215-221.) Doolin, John B. Field, Forest and Stream in Oklahoma. Report of the State Game and Fish Warden for 1912. Roy. 8vo. 1913. pp. 159. Dubois, Alph. Sur la Classification des Oiseaux. (Rev. Franc. d’Or- nith. May—June, 1913.) Oiseaux et Insectes au Point de Vue Economique. (Bull. Soc. Zool. de France, XXXVIII, 1913, pp. 165-171.) Pour la Protection des Oiseaux. (do. pp. 127-133.) Coup d’Giil sur les Oiseaux Ratites. (do. XXXVII, 1913, pp. 303-310, XXXVIII, 1913, pp. 104— 115). Novelle Revue des Oiseaux Observés en Belgique. (Mem. Soc. Zool. de France XXV, 1912, pp. 162-209.) Faull, J. H. The Natural History of the Toronto Region, Ontario, Canada. Toronto. Published by the Canadian Institute, 1913. Svo. pp. 419. $2. Faxon, Walter. Brewster’s Warbler (Helminthophila leucobronchialis) a Hybrid between the Golden-winged Warbler (Helminthophila chrysop- tera) and the Blue-winged Warbler (Helminthophila pinus) (Mem. Mus. Comp. Zool. Vol. XL, No. 6, pp. 311-316. August, 1913.) Grinnell, Joseph. Leucosticte tephrocotis dawsoni— A New Race of Rosy Finch from the Sierra Nevada. (The Condor, XV, 1918, pp. 76-79.) The Willow Ptarmigan. (Nat. Asso. Audubon Soc. Educational Leaflet 60.) Hahn, Walter L. The Future of the North American Fauna. (Popular Science Monthly, August, 1913. pp. 169-177.) Laubmann, A. Wissenschaftliche Ergebnisse der Reise von Prof. Dr. G. Merzbacher im zentralen und éstlichen Thian-Schan, 1907-8. I. Végel. (Abhandl. K. Bayer. Akad. Wissen. Math.-phys. Klasse. X XVI. Band 3. Abhandl. January, 1913. pp. 1-105. [oct: 616 Recent Literature. McAtee, W. L. Relation of Birds to Grain Aphides. (Yearbook U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 1912. pp. 397-404.) McLean, George P. The Plumage and the Tariff — Extermination of Useful Birds for their Plumage a Grave Economic Blunder. Speech in the U.S. Senate. (Reprint from the Congressional Record, 1913.) Mathews, Gregory M. The Birds of Australia. Vol. III. Pt. 3. London, Witherby & Co. August 18, 1913. Mearns, Edgar A. Descriptions of three New African Weaver-birds of the Genera Estrilda and Granatina. (Smithson. Mise. Collns. Vol. 61, No. 9. July 31, 1913.) Descriptions of four New African Thrushes of the Genera Planesticus and Geocichla. (do. No. 10. August 11, 1913.) Menegaux, A. L’Elevage de L’Autruche. Récolte et Commerce des Plumes. Bibl. d’Agriculture Coloniale, Paris. A. Challomel Ed. 1913. 8vo. pp. 1-156. Riley, J. H. The Bahama Barn Ow]. (Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XXVI, pp. 153-154. June 30, 1913.) Shufeldt, R. W. Review of the Fossil Fauna of the Desert Region of Oregon, with a Description of additional Material collected there. (Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., XXXII, pp. 123-178. July 9, 1913.) Further Studies of Fossil Birds with Descriptions of New and Extinct Species. (do., pp. 285-306. August 4, 1913). The American Grouse and Their Identifi- cation. PartI. (Outer’s Book, Sept. 1913. pp. 239-244.) Novel Appli- cation of Photography to Scientific Pictorial Ornithology. (The Photo- graphic Times, August, 1913. pp. 9-12.) Extinct Birds. (The Guide to Nature, June, 1913. pp. 38-41.) Interesting Nesting Site for Rough- Winged Swallows. (do., July, 1913. pp. 61-62.) On the Osteology of the Red Wattle-Bird (Anthochera carunculata.) (The Emu, July, 1913. pp. 1-14.) An Introduction to the Study of the Eggs of the North Ameri- can Limicole. (The Condor, July-August, 1913. pp. 138-151.) Stanwood, Cordelia J. The Hermit Thrush at Home. (Nature and Culture, May, 1913. pp. 24-39.) Stone, Witmer. On a Collection of Birds Obtained by the Francis E. Bond Expedition in the Orinoco Delta and Paria Peninsula, Venezuela. (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1913. pp. 189-212. June 14, 1913.) Stresemann, Erwin. Ornithologische Meszellen aus dem Indo- Australischen Gebiet. (Novit. Zool., XX, June, 1913. pp. 289-324.) Die Végel von Bali. Aus den Zoologischen Ergebnissen Der II. Frei- burger Molukken-Expedition. (do., pp. 325-387.) Townsend, Charles Wendell. Sand Dunes and Salt Marshes. Boston, Dana Estes & Co. 1913. S8vo. pp. 311. Thurston, Henry. The Gray Kingbird at Home. (Bird-Lore. 1913. pp. 165-168.) U. S. Department of Agriculture. Proposed Regulations for the Protection of Migratory Birds. (Circular 92 Biol. Survey.) Explanation of the Proposed Regulations for the Protection of Migratory Birds. (Cir- Vol. | 1913 Recent Literature. 617 cular 93, Biol. Survey.) Directory of Officials Concerned with the Pro- tection of Birds and Game, 1913. (Circular 94, Biol. Survey.) Abstract, Proc. Linn. Soc. N. Y., Nos. 20-23, 1907-1911. Abstract, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, No. 123, July 3, 1913. Ardea, Tijdschrift der Ned. Orn-Vereen., II, No. 2, June, 1913. Austral Avian Record, II, No. 1, August 2, 1913. Avicultural Magazine, (3) IV, Nos. 8-10, June-August, 1913. Bird-Lore, XV, No. 4, July-August, 1913. British Birds, VII, Nos. 1-4, June-September, 1913. Bulletin British Ornith. Club, Nos. CLXXXVIII-CLXXXIX, May 14-June 11, 1913. Bulletin, Charleston Museum, IX, No. 5, May, 1913. Condor, The, XV, Nos. 3-4, May—June, July-August, 1913 Current Items of Interest. (Audubon Soc. Dist. of Columbia) No. 17, April 12, 1913. Emu, The, XIII, Pt. 1, July, 1913. Forest and Stream, LX XX, Nos. 24-26, LX X XJ, Nos. 1-10. Ibis, The, (10) I, No. 3, July, 1913. New Jersey and Pennsylvania Audubon Bulletin, No. 2, May 1, 1913. Oodlogist, The, XXX, Nos. 6-8. June-August, 1913. Ornithologische Monatsschrift, 38, Nos. 5-7, May-July, 1913. Outdoor World and Recreation, XLIX, Nos. 1-3, July-September, 1913. Philippine Journal of Science, VIII, No. 2-3, April-June, 1913. Proceedings Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, LXV, Pt. 2, April-August, 1913. Proceedings Nebraska Ornith Union, V, Pt. 4, May 1, 1912. Records of the Australian Museum, IX, No. 3, May 31, 1913, X, No. 5, May 17, 1913. Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie V, Nos. 50-53, June-September, 1913. Revista Italiana d’Ornitologia II, No. 3, January-March, 1913. Science N. 8. XX XVIII, Nos. 966-975. Scottish Naturalist, The, Nos. 18-20, June-August, 1915. Wilson Bulletin, The, XXV, No. 2, June, 1913. Zoologist, The, (4) XVII, Nos. 198-200, June-August, 1913. 618 Correspondence. [oct. CORRESPONDENCE. Naturalists and ‘ Concealing Coloration.’ Epiror or ‘THE AUK.’ Dear Sir: —In a letter just received from Mr. John T. Coolidge 3rd. now in British East Africa, he writes: ‘‘What you say about an object of uniform color against the sky seen from below has been impressed upon me lately. J find that in hiding to ambush game for moving pictures, it is essential to have an opaque background, otherwise you are sure to be detected, silhouetted against the sky. I am going to pin white strips of paper on my shoulders and helmet, when an opaque background is not obtainable. I am doubtful about getting a Chapman’s Zebra, but shall not fail to bring you a Grant’s Zebra. Individuals vary tremendously but many Grant’s Zebra have jet black stripes on a clean white ground. Rarely they have a faint supplementary stripe between the others and sometimes the stripes are brown on a yellow-cream ground, but I will look for a contrasty one. I have moving pictures of Zebra coming to water which show the extreme fear they have of approaching the bushy and reedy water holes, even by day. In the rains, they can drink out of pans in the open, but all permanent water is surrounded by bush or reeds, or usually both. * * *” This should remind the reader of the obviousness of what I have re- peatedly tried to show to naturalists, that the laws of illumination and vision are the same the world over, and that the naturalists who have opposed the progress of this great biological discovery merely need to study these laws. This well known variation of zebras’ colors from black and white to brown and yellow is absolutely parallel to the variations of form and other characters, equally well known in almost all species. All the cases are more or less obviously traceable to corresponding variation in the animals’ cir- cumstances. In the Zebra’s case, for instance, pure black and white are a little the best costume where the sky, and particularly stocky (and therefore par- ticularly opaque) reeds tend to be the animal’s sole background. On the other hand, in a region where more translucent vegetation and less open sky are typical, so that the lightest note behind the zebra is apt to be mere’ lighted foliage oftener than sky, a brown and yellow zebra would often match a little closer than a black and white one. Yours very truly, AppoTtt H. THAYER. Monadnock, N. H. Sept. 11, 1913. Vol. XXX : * * i913 | Correspondence. 619 Migration and Periodic Accuracy. Epiror oF ‘THE AUK.’ Dear Str: — In Dr. John C. Phillips’ highly interesting remarks on these topics (Auk, XXX, p. 202) he says “It would indeed be interesting if we could subject castrated birds to experimental conditions in order to test the strength of their migratory impulses, but this could hardly be accom- plished.” : It would be equally interesting if we could take species migrating north- ward for reproductive purposes, and subject them to a reversal of seasonal sequences, by introducing them into the southern hemisphere, and learn then what changes and variations of migratory impulses would follow. Sometime ago the writer had occasion to make inquiries concerning the habits of introduced Cervide in New Zealand; the following letter (quoted only in relevant parts) from a well informed New Zealand Government Official came as a reply to these inquiries; ....‘‘In reply to your question regarding the introduction of deer into New Zealand: — The first red deer presented comprised 12, which were the gift of the late Prince Consort to the Colony. These deer were bred in Windsor Forest. Six of them were shipped to Wellington and six to Canterbury in the year 1862, but three only were landed alive, one stag and two hinds. These were sent to Wellington and kept by the Govern- ment in a stable, and after the interest and curiosity of the inhabitants were satisfied, the three deer were put into a dray, and carted over the Tararua Mountains into the Wairarapa district where they were liberated, and from that trio there are now quite 12,000 deer in the vicinity. In addition to producing larger antlers than their progenitors in Scotland, they also increased very considerably in general bulk. Rutting occurs generally from about the 20th of March to the 14th of April. This is de- pendent very largely upon the weather. When the weather is cold, the rutting takes place early, but should it be very mild and warm it does not oceur until about the end of March or first week in April. Calving occurs generally in October and November. The stags shed their antlers in November. The rutting, calving and shedding of antlers, as you will see, are exactly opposite to the time in which these processes occur in England. If you take the English dates and defer them for six months you get the same results as regards the red deer in New Zealand.”’.... It is highly probable that these facts concerning the definite reversal of time of rutting, etc., have already been published, yet if so, such publica- tion has up to date escaped the writer’s notice. The facts just quoted constitute a most striking exposition of the seasonal influence on biologic functions and nutritional processes of great magnitude and importance to the species in question. It is possible that parallel alterations in migration, including “periodic accuracy,” ovulation, nesting, and incubation would 620 Correspondence. aoe be found to result could one successfully transplant and keep track of birds of migratory species from the northern to the southern hemispheres, or vice versa. The writer’s only excuse for calling attention in this ornitholo- gical publication to data bearing directly on mammals only, is that the data also bear indirectly on cognate processes in birds, and should be avail- able for future investigators of migration, etc, Very truly, W. H. Bereroxp. Denver, Colo. Vol. | 1913 Notes and News. 621 NOTES AND NEWS. . Paiuip Lutuey Scuater, D. Sce., F. R.8., one of the original Honorary Fellows of the American Ornithologists’ Union, died on June 27, 1913, at the age of eighty-three years. Dr. Sclater was known throughout the scientific world as secretary of the Zoological Society of London, a post which he filled from 1859 to 1902; and as a founder of the British Ornithologists’ Union, and editor of its journal ‘The Ibis’ from 1866 to 1912 with the exception of a period of 12 years. He was also chairman of the British Ornithologists’ Club since its organization. His services to ornithology throughout his long and active life can scarcely be overestimated, especially in connection with neotropical bird life of which he made a specialty, and upon which he published a long series of papers culminating with the volumes of the British Museum Catalogue of Birds, dealing with the Tanagride, Icteride, Tyrannide, Dendrocolaptide, Formicariade and other characteristic neotropical families. Dr. Sclater’s loss will be felt by ornithologists the world over, especially by the many who were fortunate enough either through personal contact or through correspondence to count him as a friend. At the request of the president of the American Ornithologists’ Union, Dr. Daniel Giraud Elliot will deliver a memorial address on Dr. Sclater at the annual meeting of the Union in November, which will be published in full in the January number of ‘The Auk.’ Tue American Museum’s zodlogical explorations in South America, which, during the past two years, have produced such interesting results in the northern parts of that continent, now promise to be even more effectively prosecuted in southern South America, under the leadership of Colonel Theodore Roosevelt, who in December plans to enter Southern Brazil. Mr. George K. Cherrie and Mr. Leo E. Miller, both tried members of former Museum expeditions, will accompany Colonel Roosevelt as field assistants. In Ecuador, Mr. Richardson has had a successful season and a shipment of 1400 birds and mammals has just been received from him. These specimens were collected in part on the coast from the northern extension of the arid coastal zone of Peru, and give definite information of where this arid strip merges into the humid coastal region of northeastern Eeua- dor and western Colombia. Mr. Richardson also collected in the luxuriant forests of the Subtropical Zone at an altitude of 6000 feet, in the Temperate Zone about Quito and the base of Pinchincha, and in the Paramo or Alpine Zone of Pinchincha and Chimborazo, working on the latter mountain up to an altitude of [oce: 622 Notes and News. 16,000 feet. Here Mr. Richardson secured not only specimens but acces- sories for a Habitat Group designed to represent the bird-life of the upper life-zone of this extinct voleano. From Peru, the Museum’s available study material has received an exceptionally important addition in the collections made by R. H. Beck for Mr. F. F. Brewster and Dr. L. C. Sanford. A large shipment lately received from Mr. Beck is particularly rich in little-known marine forms collected well off the coast of Peru, and in a beautifully prepared series of water-fowl from Lake Junin, situated at an altitude of 13,000 feet in the Peruvian Andes, which includes the Andean Flamingo and many other species not heretofore represented in the Museum. Tue thirty-first stated meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union will be held at the American Museum of Natural History, New York City, November 11-13, 1913, with a business meeting of the Fellows on the evening of the 10th. The annual subscription dinner will be held at the Hotel Endicott, close to the museum, which will also be the headquarters for visiting members. These annual gatherings bring together upwards of one hundred bird students from various parts of the country. The attractions offered by the sessions of the meeting, and by the institution at which they are held, and above all the stimulus of personal contact with other ornithologists, tend to bring back those who have once been fortunate enough to be present at one of these gatherings. There are however a great many members and associates of the Union who have never attended a meeting and upon these especially we would urge the importance of at once making plans to be present in New York on November 11. One of the greatest privileges of membership is the opportunity of attending these annual meetings and a large attendance creates a wider and deeper interest in ornithology and strengthens the organization of the A. O. U. which has done so much for bird study in America. We learn from ‘The Ibis’ of the safe return of Mr. A. F. R. Wollaston’s New Guinea Expedition. The party consisted of Mr. Wollaston, Mr. C. B. Kloss, five Dyak collectors, seventy-four Dyak carriers and an escort of 130 men provided by the Dutch Government. ,They succeeded in reaching the snow line on Mt. Carstensz about the end of February, and sailed for home April 3. The collections include 1300 skins of birds and some of the novelties have already been described by Mr. Ogilvie-Grant. The party found animal Jife very scarce above 6,000 ft. Some Pipit-like birds occurred about 9000 ft. and a Dove and a Thrush between 13000 and 14000 ft. Just one hundred years ago there occurred an event the effect of which, on the development of American ornithology, it is impossible to estimate. On August 23, 1813, there died in Philadelphia, Alexander Wilson, aged vel x= *] Notes and News. 623 forty-seven years and forty-eight days. At the time of his death he was engaged in preparing for publication the eighth volume of his ‘American Ornithology.’ This confining work during the heat of midsummer seems to have been too much for a constitution never robust, and he was unable to withstand an attack of sickness which might not under other cireum- stances have proved serious. Wilson’s premature death removed him from the scientific world, when he was known to but very few outside of his own city. He did not live to hear the great praise that his work received in the scientific centers of England and France, and apparently had reaped no financial profits from its publication. One cannot but speculate upon what the effect would have been upon later ornithologists had Wilson been spared to round out the period of life normally allotted to man. We know that he had a work on American Mammals in mind and also a popular manual or handbook on American birds. What influence would the existence of such works have had upon the similar publications of Audubon and Nuttall? Indeed the presence in America of an ornithologist of the reputation that Wilson must surely have attained, would certainly have had a tremendous influence upon the whole career of Audubon, who as it was had the field practically to himself. In the March and June numbers of ‘Bird Notes and News’ are some interesting articles on the prevention of bird mortality at light houses. The idea of saving the birds which, attracted by the light, are supposed to dash themselves against the masonry or glass of the lighthouses, originated with the distinguished Dutch naturalist, Prof. Jac. P. Thijsse. He ad- vanced the theory that the majority of the migrants fascinated by the glare, or so bewildered by it that they loose their sense of direction, fly aimlessly round and round seeking a resting place, until they become exhausted, fall, and perish. For three years past he has had installed at the Terschelling Lighthouse on the Frisian Islands, ladder like perches of wood or iron covered with cloth, attached to the roof and platform. On nights when conditions are favorable for attracting migrants to the light, the perches become crowded with resting birds “to the number of ten thousand”’ and when dawn ap- proaches the whole company resume their flight. The mortality has been so reduced that at present it does not exceed a hundred birds during the whole migration period. Similar experiments are now in progress at St. Catharine’s Lighthouse on the English coast, being conducted by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds with the hearty support of the Lighthouse Board. It has already been demonstrated both here and at Terschelling that the racks or perches must be placed actually in the glare of the light, as the birds will not alight in the dark area above or below. It is encouraging to find what promises to be such a simple solution of this problem. 624 Notes and News. [aus Messrs. WirHersy & Co., 326 High Holborn, London, announce the publication, by subscription, of a work entitled The Gannet: a Bird with a History by J. H. Gurney, F. Z. 8., illustrated with colored plates, maps and drawings; 600 octavo pages. Price to subscribers before October 30, 25 shillings. Duutz & Co., 6 Landwehrstrasse, Miinich, announce a reprint of the ornithological articles contributed by R. P. Lesson to the ‘‘Echo du Monde Savant.”’ This is one of the rarest of publications and the importance of Lesson’s contributions make reference to it imperative. The reprint will be under the editorship of Dr. A. Menegaux. INDEX TO VOLUME XXX. [New generic, specific, and subspecific names are printed in heayy-face type.] Asrornis albigularis formosana, 304. sakaiorum, 302. Acanthis hornemanni exilipes, 152. linaria linaria, 345, 567. linaria rostrata, 152. Acanthiza pygmea, 303. Acanthopneuste borealis, 152. kennicotti, 152. trochiloides harterti, 302. Acanthositta chloris granti, 607. Accentor fagani, 607. Accipiter bicolor schistochlamys, 370. cooperi, 6, 244, 495, 567. velox, 244, 272, 420, 536,. 567. Acrocephalus streperus intermedius, 464. taiti, 459. tangorum, 302. Actitis hypoleucos, 597. macularia, 6, 257, 337, 372, 420, 426, 498, 567. Actochelidon, 125. Actodromas, 597. Z£chmophorus occidentalis, 37, 280, 563. Agialitis, 287. meloda, 115, 152, 226, 260, 566. mongolus, 444. placida, 444. sanctehelene, 444. semipalmata, 6, 426, 566. Agithalus caudatus taiti, 466. Zéstrelata hasitata, 507-509. AXthiopsar cristatellus, formosanus, 302. 625 Afribex, 444. Africa, 289, 597. Afroxyechus, 444. Agelaius phceniceus arctolegus, 246. pheeniceus floridanus, 498. pheeniceus fortis, 152, 569. pheeniceus phoeniceus, 258, 260, 344, 421. pheeniceus richmondi, 379. subniger, 453. Agriocharis ocellata, 432. Aimophila ruficeps ruficeps, 129. Aix, 490. sponsa, 9, 22, 306, 421, 564. Ajaia ajaja, 424, 503. Alabama, 276. Alauda arvensis sierrs, 612. arvensis taiti, 612. Albatross, 509. Alea torda, 546. Alcedo, 119. ispida, 600. ispida pelagica, 600. Alcide, 506, 507. Aleyone, 119. Alle alle, 429, 436, 505, 506. Allen, Arthur A., Stilt Sandpipers (Micropalama himantopus) at Ithaca, N. Y., 480; Cory’s Least Bittern at Ithaca, N. Y., 559-561, Allen, Francis H., more notes on the morning awakening, 229-235; the concealing coloration ques- tion, 311-317. Allen, Glover M., an Essex County ornithologist, 19-29; see also Phillips, J. C. Aluco pratincola, 152, 245, 433. 626 Amaurornis phoeenicura, 600. Amblycercus holosericeus, 378. American Museum of Natural His- tory, expedition to South America from the, 160, 621; expedition to Colombia, 319, 474. American Ornithologists’ Union, thirtieth stated meeting of the, 96-105; report of the ‘Auk’ In- dex Committee, 319; thirty-first stated meeting of (announce- ment), 622. Amizilis cerviniventris chalconota, 584. eyanocephala, 374. tzacatl tzacatl, 374, 427, 584. Ammodramus bairdi, 280, 281. savannarum australis, 77. savannarum bimaculatus, 280, 570. savannarum floridanus, 246. Ammomanes deserti katharine, 142. Ampelis cedrorum, 348. Amphispiza bicolor, 605. nevadensis, 605. Amytornis merrotsyi, 302. Anas boschas, 304. fulvigula fulvigula, 241. platyrhynchos, 22,424, 503,564. platyrhynchos — greenlandica, (ile rubripes, 118, 547, 564. rubripes tristis, 5, 118. Anhinga anhinga, 489. Ani, 426. Anous stolidus, 125. stolidus gilberti, 124. Anser albifrons gambeli, 22, 565. erythropus, 607. indicus, 139. Anteleotringa, 596. Anthipes, 307. Anthochera carunculata, 610. Anthracothorax prevosti viridi- cordatus, 449. 151, Auk Index. lau Anthus australis montebelli, 461, 610. richardi albidus, 307. rubescens, 28, 351, 573. spraguei, 573. wollastoni, 608. Antigone, 303. Antrostomus, 287. carolinensis, 245, 497. rufus otiosus, 452. vociferus vociferus, 26, 536. Aphelocoma cyanea, 246. Aplonis panayensis gusti, 600. panayensis leptorrhynchus, 600. Aquila, 465. antiqua, 598. chrysaétos, 39, 436, 567. ferox, 598. lydekkeri, 598. nevia, 611. Aramus vociferus, 243, 493. Archibuteo ferrugineus, 438, 567. lagopus sancti-johannis 6, 567. Archilochus colubris, 130, 245, 279, 341, 497, 532, 536, 543, 568, 584. Ardea, 305, 461. herodias, 39. herodias adoxa, 287. herodias cognata, 288. herodias fannini, 288. herodias herodias, 115, 281, 287, 336, 424, 549, 565. herodias hyperonea, 288. herodias lessonii, 288. herodias oligista, 288. herodias sanctilucee, 288, 452. herodias treganzai, 287. herodias wardi, 242, 287, 491. Ardetta eurythma, 465. minuta, 142. Arenaria interpres morinella, 567. Argentina, birds of, 121. Aristonetta, 151. Arizona, birds of, 399-401. Arkansas, birds of, 579. — ve Vol. ria 1913 Arremonops chloronotus, 380. Artamus fuscus, 466. leucorhynchus humei, 599. Asio abessinicus graueri, 467. flammeus, 568. wilsonianus, 542, 568. Astragalinus tristis tristis, 346, 421, 570. Astur atricapillus atricapillus, 227, 567. atricapillus striatulus, 438. Atalolestris, 444. Atlaptes castaneifrons tame, 450. Attila citreopygus salvini, 375. rufipectus confinis, 450. Auk, Razor-billed, 2, 546. Aulacorhamphus, ceruleigularis cog- natus, 121. prasinus, 374. Aurepthianura, 303. ‘ Austral Avian Record,’ review of, 141, 303, 461, 610. Australia, birds of , 124, 443, 447, 596. Austria, birds of, 291. ‘ Avicultura Magazine,’ review of, 140, 301, 460, 609. Avocet, 23, 566. Aythya marila, 436. Bzxo.opuus bicolor, 247, 353, 502. Bagg, Egbert, a strange sparrow roost, 275. Bailey, Harold H., Starlings and ' Turkey Vultures migrating, 274; birds at sea, 281; review of his ‘The Birds of Virginia,’ 594. Balzniceps rex, 613. Baldpate, 548, 564. Bangs, Outram, review of his ‘Some Birds from the Highlands of Si- beria,’ 451-452; review of his re- cent papers on new species and subspecies of birds, 452; see also Thayer, John E. Barbour, Robert, an abnormal Rose- breasted Grosbeak, 435. Index. 627 Barbour, Thomas, a different as- pect of the case of Roosevelt vs. Thayer, 81-91. Barrett, Harold L., Catbird and Brown Thrasher in winter in Massachusetts, 278; Kentucky Warbler in Massachusetts, 587. Barrows, Walter B., concealing action of the Bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus) 187-190. Bartram, William, bird migration records of, 325-358. Bartramia longicauda, 24, 337, 425, 566. Basileuterus culicivorus culicivo- rus, 378. melanogenys eximius, 122. melanogenys ignotus, 122. Basillina xantusi, 584. Bavarian Ornithological Society, review of ‘ Proceedings’ of, 463. Baynard, Osear E. breeding birds of Alachua Co., Florida, 240- 247. Baza subcristata megala, 600. subcristata pallida, 600. Beal, F. E. L., review of his ‘Food of our More Important Fly- catchers,’ 127; ‘Our Meadow- larks in Relation to Agriculture,’ 601. Beal, F. E. L. and W. L. McAtee, review of their ‘Food of Some Well-known Birds of Forest, Farm and Garden,’ 127. Bent, A. C., progress of his work on the ‘Life Histories of North American Birds,’ 161-164; no- tice of his ‘A New Subspecies of Crossbill from Newfoundland,’ 288. Bergtold, W. H., a study of the House Finch, 40-73; White Pelican in Colorado, 430; Road- runner in Colorado, 434; birds of the headwaters of the Gila 628 Index. (ae river, New Mexico, further rec- ords, 438; migration and periodic accuracy, 619. Bickerton, W., review of his ‘Home- Life of Terns,’ 125. Bigglestone, Harry C., review of his ‘A Study of the Nesting Behavior of the Yellow Warbler,’ 603. Bird-banding, 248-261. ‘ Bird-Lore,’ reviewed, 138, 299, 456, 605. ‘Bird Notes,’ reviewed, 460, 609. Bird Protection at Lighthouses, 623. Bishop, Louis B., the A. O. U. Check-List, third edition, 149- 15oe Bittern, 115, 187-190, 242, 268, 491, 565. Cory’s Least, 242, 570. Least, 23, 236, 242, 565. Blackbird, Brewer’s, 566. Red-winged, 236, 255, 258, 260, 344, 358, 421. Rusty, 18, 554. Yellow-headed, 113, 569. Bluebird, 29, 247, 255, 259, 355, 502, 519, 521, 530, 533, 573. Boanerges internigrans, 451. Bobolink, 198, 348, 358, 498, 524, 531, 534, 544, 569. Bob-white, 24, 238, 338, 494, 567. Florida, 243. Bogardus, Charlotte, Hudsonian Curlew on Long Island in winter, 270. Bombyecilla cedrorum, 27, 571. garrula, 571. garrula pallidiceps, 447. Bonasa umbellus togata, 6. Botaurus lentiginosus, 39, 115, 187- 190, 242, 268, 491, 565. Bowles, J. Hooper, two new records for Washington state, 116. Boyle, Howarth S., see Thurston, Henry. Brabourne, Lord, and Chubb, Charles, review of their ‘The Birds of South America,’ 286. Bradypterus elgonensis, 304. Brant, 336. Branta bernicla, 39. bernicla glaucogastra, 336. canadensis canadensis, 5, 237, 339, 565. canadensis hutchinsi, 39, 565. canadensis minima, 39, 237. Brazil, birds of, 121, 289. ‘British Birds,’ review of 140, 300- 301, 459, 608. British Columbia, birds of, 447. British Ornithologists’ Club, re- view of ‘ Bulletin,’ 139-140, 302, 458-459, 607-608. Brooks, W. Sprague, the King Eider (Somateria spectabilis) in Massachusetts, 107; an addition to the A. O. U. Check-List, 110. Brown, C. Emerson, Fulmar in Massachusetts, 105. Brown, Herbert, obituary notice, 472. Brown, Nathan Clifford, the Sharp- shinned Hawk again in Maine in winter, 272. Bruchigavia nove-hollandis for- steri, 124. Bryant, H. C., review of his papers on economic ornithology, 132- 136; review of his publications on the food of the Meadowlark, 294; review of his papers on Economic Ornithology in G@alifornia, 453. Bubo virginianus heterocnemis, 7. pallescens, 568. subarcticus, 227. virginianus, 244, 420, 504, 532. Bubulecus coromandus, 294. Bufflehead, 565. Bull-birds, 3. Bullfineh, 453. Bunting, Indigo, 199, 207, 513-519, 534-535, 571. Vol. aaa | 1913 Bunting, Lark, 571. Lazuli, 571. Snow, 18, 275, 346, 570. Buphaga africana, 129. Buteo albicaudatus, 120. Buteo borealis borealis, 6, 244, 495. borealis calurus, 567. borealis harlani, 152. borealis krideri, 277, 567. lineatus alleni, 244, 495. lineatus lineatus, 25, 564. platypteus, 244, 426, 532, 567. swainsoni, 167-176, 227, 381- 394, 426, 567. Butler, A. L., review of his ‘Finches and Weaver Birds of the Sudan,’ 137. Butorides albidulus, 453. virescens, 122. virescens barbadensis, 122. virescens christophorensis, 122. virescens cubanus, 122. virescens curacensis, 122. virescens dominicanus, 122. virescens eremonomus, 122. virescens grenadensis, 122. virescens hypernotius, 122. virescens luceanus, 122. virescens margaritophilus, 122. virescens mesatus, 122. virescens tobagensis, 122. virescens virescens, 152, 242, 336, 370, 420, 493, 565. Caccasis labatei, 613. Cacomantis lineatus, 302. merulinus, 307. Calamospiza melanocorys, 571. Caleaiius lapponicus lapponicus, 27, 209, 520: ornatus, 239, 438, 570. pictus, 228, 239. Calidris arenaria, 436. California, birds of, 288, 291. Calliope calliope camtschatkensis, 152. Calliste fastuosa, 609. Index. 629 Callocalia francica assimilis, 307. francica reichenowi, 307. inopina pellos, 451. linchi oberholseri, 307. Calvifrons, 305. Calypte anna, 129, 155, 584. cost, 584. Cameron, E. §8., notes on Swain- son’s Hawk (Buteo swainsoni) in Montana, 167-176, 381-394. Campephilus principalis, 245, 504. Campophaga martini, 302. Camptostoma pusillum tris, 450. Canutus, 287. canutus rogersi, 597. canutus rufus, 597. Canvasback, 548, 565. Capito maculicoronatus pirrensis, 288. Caprimulgus, 287. eleanore, 614. ludovicianus, 608. Carbo carbo steadi, 607. sulcirostris, 607. Carcineutes, 120. Cardinal, 27, 78, 348, 421, 499. Florida, 246. Cardinalis cardinalis cardinalis, 27, 78, 348, 421, 499. cardinalis flammiger, 380. cardinalis floridanus, 246. Carduelis caniceps parapanisi, 304. Carpodacus erythrinus, 612. mexicanus frontalis, 40. purpureus purpureus, 345. Caryothraustes canadensis simu- lans, 122. poliogaster poliogaster, 380. Cassidix oryzivora mexicana, 378. ‘Cassinia’, notice of, 298. Casuarius australis, 303, 466. Catarractes, 444. Catbird, 207, 247, 278, 351, 358, 429, 499, 504, 545, 573, 590. Catharacta, 287, 444. tenuiros- 630 Catharacta lonnbergi clarkei, 444. lonnbergi intercedens, 444. maccormicki wilsoni, 444. Catharista foetans, 287. urubu, 112, 244, 420, 426, 494. Cathartes aura septentrionalis, 227, 244, 339, 494, 553, 567. Catharus fuscater mirabilis, 122. Catoptrophorus semipalmatus in- ornatus, 116, 551, 566. semipalmatus semipalmatus, 152: Centrocercus urophasianus, 38. Centropus bengalensis sarasinorum, 307. sinensis, 600. sinensis anonymus, 600. sinensis parroti, 600. Centurus carolinus, 78, 245, 497. dubius, 374. Ceophloeus leucoramphus, 374. pileatus abieticola, 340. Cepphus grylle, 545. Cerchneis, 287. Cercococeyx olivinus, 466. Cercomela melanura erlangeri, 462. scotocereca enigma, 462. Cereopsis noveehollandie, 460. Certhia familiaris americana, 353, Daz oMoe familiaris montana, 117. familiaris zelotes, 117. Ceryle, 120. aleyon aleyon 7, 245, 279, 340, 3738, 427, 504, 543, 568. aleyon caurina, 116. americana septentrionalis, 373. septentrionalis isthmicus, 427. torquata, 152, 373, 427. torquata stictipennis, 152. Ceycopsis, 119. Ceyx, 119. Cheemepelia, 287. buckleyi, 449. minuta minuta, 449. m. eleeodes, 449. passerina aflavida, 449. Index. [oun Oct. Chemepelia p. albivitta, 449. p. antillarum, 449. p. bahamensis, 449. p. exigua, 449. p. grisola, 449. p. insularis, 449. p. Jamaicensis, 449. p. nana, 449. p. neglecta, 449. p. pallescens, 449. p. parvula, 449. p. passerina, 449. p- quitensis, 449. p. soccorroénsis, 449. p. terrestris, 244, 504. p. trochila, 449. rufipennis eluta, 449. r. rufipennis, 373, 449. Cheetura pelagica, 27, 245, 258, 341, 497, 568. Chalcoparia singalensis, 123. Chamethlypis poliocephala palpe- bralis, 378. Chamzza brevicauda boliviana, 121. Chapman, F. M., the scientific value . of bird photographs, 147-149; notice of his ‘Color Key to North American Birds,’ 442. Charadrius, 287. dominicus dominicus, 552, 566, 581. falklandicus, 444. fulvus, 294. geoffroyi, 444. melanops, 444. tricollaris, 444. veredus, 444. wilsonia, 444. Charitonetta, 151. albeola, 39, 565. Chat, Yellow-breasted, 28, 80, 351, 358, 437, 557, 572. Chaulelasmus streperus, 17, 548, 564. Chelidonaria urbica, 151. Chelidoptera tenebrosa pallida, 450. Vol. S| 1913 Chen hyperboreus hyperboreus, 22, 226, 549, 565, 575. hyperboreus nivalis, 336, 575, 579. Chickadee, 9, 531, 534. Black-capped, 353. Carolina, 247, 502. Hudsonian, 9, 437. Long-tailed, 573. Chicken, Prairie, 238, 563. Childs, John Lewis, Robins de- stroyed by a storm, 590. China, birds of, 451. Chlamydodera maculata, 141. Chloris, 451. Chloroceryle, 120. Chloronerpes chrysochlorus auro- sus, 121. yucatanensis yucatanensis, 374. Chlorophonia, 264. callophrys, 264-266. Chlorostilbon puruensis, 448. Chondestes grammacus grammacus, 240, 570. Chordeiles acutipennis texensis, 427. virginianus chapmani, 245. virginianus sennetti, 568. virginianus virginianus, 26, 130, 420, 427, 497, 532, 539. Choucaleyon, 120. Chrysomitris forreri, 308. cucullata, 301. Chrysothlypis chrysomelas ocularis, 122; Chubbia, 596. Chuck-will’s-widow, 245, 497. Cinnyris brevirostris, 142. clementix, 600. clementize keiensis, 600. ornata, 123. Circus approximans, 304. approximans drummondi, 604. hudsonius, 6, 244, 272, 426, 504, 542, 567. Cirrepidesmus, 444. Cisticola aberrans minor, 467. Index. 631 Cisticola elgonensis, 304. kmunkei, 304. monticola, 467. prinoides, wambugensis, 289. Cistothorus stellaris, 558, 573. Clangula, 302. clangula americana, 5, 565. islandica, 575. Claravis pretiosa pretiosa, 373. Clark, Hubert Lyman, Notes on the Panama Thrush-Warbler, 11-15. anatomical notes on some genera of passerine birds, 262-267; an- atomical notes on Todus, Oxyrun- cus and Spindalis, 402-406. Cleaves, Howard H., what the American Bird-banding Associa- tion has accomplished during 1912, 248-261. Coale, H. K., Hummingbird’s eye- lashes, 583. Cobb, Anna E., Little Blue Heron (Florida caerulea) in Vermont, (Pile Coccothraustes coccothraustes ja- ponicus, 18. Coccyzus americanus americanus, 25, 245, 340, 420, 426, 496, 568. _ erythrophthalmus, 496, 568. Coereba bahamensis, 155. luteola obscura, 450. Colaptes auratus auratus, 245, 497. auratus luteus, 7, 257, 279, 341, 536, 568. cafer collaris, 568. Colinus virginianus floridanus, 243. virginianus virginianus, 24, 238, 338, 494, 567. Collett, Robert, obituary of, 318. Collinge, W. E., review of his papers on economic ornithology, 453- 454, 603. Colombia, birds of, 121. Colorado, birds of, 112, 480. Columba albigularis, 301. 632 Columba albinucha, 467. livia, 615. nigrirostris nigrirostris, 372. palumbus, 611, 615. squamosa, 271. Columbina, 287. Colymbus, 287, 458. auritus, 506, 563. holbeelli, 267, 429, 436, 506, 563. nigricollis ealifornicus, 37, 563. parvus, 598. Compsothlypis americana ameri- cana, 247, 500. americana usnez, 279. Concealing coloration, 146, 311- Siler cialennoiles ‘Condor,’ review of, 138, 299, 456, 605. Connecticut, birds of, 152, 577. Conurus aztec, 373. Cooke, Wells W., the relation of bird migration to the weather, 205-221; review of his ‘ Distribu- tion and Migration of N. A. Herons,’ 450. Coot, 243, 503, 562. Coprotheres, 444. Coracina, 305. papuensis meekiana, 306. Corey, Alice, Bicknell’s Thrush in Froneonia Notch, N. H., 589. Cormorant, 22. Double-crested, 22, 564. Florida, 241, 503. Corvus brachyrhynchos _ brachy- rhynchos, 7, 234, 348, 554, 565. brachyrhynchos pascuus, 246. corax principalis, 3438, 487. corax sibiricus, 305. corax sinuatus, 569. corax ussurianus, 305. cornix, 151. corone, 143. frugilegus, 151. macrorhynchus mandschuricus, 464. Index. [oct. Corvus ossifragus, 246, 498, 543. sibiricus, 305. sinensis, 305. splendens zugmayeri, 612. Cory, C. B., review of his ‘Descrip- tions of new Neotropical Birds,’ 449-450. Corythornis, 119. Coscoroba, 467. Cossypha somereni, 139. Coturnicops noveboracensis, 550, 580. Coturnix australis, 303. coturnix, 198, 307. coturnix corsicana, 305. ypsilophorus, 303. Cowbird, 276, 344, 554, 569. Craig, Wallace, method of recording bird music and a correction, 591; notice of his publications on bird behavior, 290; review of his ‘The Stimulation and Inhibition of Ovulation in Birds and Mam- mals,’ 599. Crane, Little Brown, 591. Sandhill, 243, 498, 565, 591. Whooping, 430, 565, 591. Craspedoprion brevirostris, 376. Creciscus coturniculus, 151. jamaicensis, 243, 269. Creeper, Brown, 219, 221, 358, 532, 573, 587, 595. Criniger affinis harterti, 307. gularis balicus, 600. Crossbill, 7, 279, 570. Red, 345, 437. White-winged, 7, 555. Crotophaga ani, 426. sulcirostris, 373. Crow, 7, 234, 343, 514-529, 534, 554, 569. Fish, 246, 498, 543. Florida, 246. Cryptoglaux acadica acadica, 339, 548, 554. funerea funerea, 18. funerea richardsoni, 18, 25, 227. Vol. ax | 1913 Cryptolopha umbrovirens, 607. yemenensis, 607. Cuba, birds of, 268, 271, 452. Cuckoo, Black-billed, 496, 524, 533, 568. Yellow-billed, 25, 245, 340, 420, 426, 496, 568. Cuckoos, 606. Curlew, 591. Eskimo, 4, 10, 24, 269, 581. Hudsonian, 3, 4, 24, 270, 426, 542. Long-billed, 24. Curruca igata, 607. Cyanecula, 303. Cyanerpes cyanea carneipes, 378. cyaneus ramsdeni, 452. Cyanistes cyanus yenisseensis, 464. Cyanocephalus cyanocephalus, 116, 280. Cyanocitta cristata cristata, 343, 420, 569. cristata florincola, 246, 498. Cyanoramphus auriceps macleani, 607. Cyanospiza ciris, 140. Cyanthus latirostris, 584. Cygnus cygnus, 305. davidi, 464. Cyornis, 307. Cypselus pacificus cooki, 459. DaFiza acuta, 9, 17, 564, Damsell, Benjamin F., notice and records of, 19-29. Darling, S. T., and Bates, L. B., notice of their publication on transmission of anthrax by Buz- zards, 295. Deane, Ruthven, the concealing coloration question, 146; the Passenger Pigeon at the Cincin- nati Zoological Gardens - still living, 433. Delaware, birds of, 273. Delaware Valley Ornithological Index. 633 Club, twenty-third annual meet- ing, 323; notice of ‘Proceedings’ for 1912, 298. Dendrobiastes, 307. hyperythra alefurus, 307. Dendrocincla anabatina anabatina, 374. tyrannura hellmayri, 450. Dendrocitta formose sinica, 305. sinensis, 305. Dendrocopos, 142. Dendrocopus, 142. Dendrocyena arborea, 139. Dendrocygna viduata, 110. Dendroica xstiva estiva, 8, 129, 235, 350, 378, 428, 572. exrulescens czerulescens, 572. castanea, 428, 572. cerulea, 121, 240. coronata, 8, 28, 155, 234, 350, 378, 572. dominica albilora, 378. dominica dominica, 501. fusca, 28, 378. magnolia, 8, 114, 234, 277, 378, 572. palmarum palmarum, 5 pensylvanica, 152, 428, striata, 8, 121, 501, 572. tigrina, 155, 278, 378, 437. vigorsi, 247, 421, 501, 557. virens, 8, 234, 279, 572. Dendrophassa, 123. Diatryma ajax, 598. Diczeum formosum, 139. hanieli, 306. hirundinaceum, 141. Dichromanassa rufescens, 242. Dickcissel, 78, 240, 348, 427, 571. Digena, 307. Diglossa sittoides intermedia, 450. Diomedella, 124. Diomedia exulans rothschildi, 124. Ditelmatias, 596. Dives dives, 379. 557, 72. 572. 634 Dolichonyx oryzivorus, 343, 498, 544, 569. Donacobius brachypterus, 305. Doolin, John B., review of his ‘Field, Forest and Stream in Oklahoma,’ 598. Dove, Ground, 244, 504. Western Mourning, 567. Mourning, 10, 24, 244, 339, 494, 542. Dovekie, 2, 429, 436, 505, 506. Dowitcher, Long-billed, 551, 566, 596. Drymophila caudata klagesi, 121. Dryobates, 142. Dryobates borealis, 245, 496. pubescens, 155. pubescens homorus, 280, 281. pubescens medianus, 7, 151, 420, 568. pubescens nelsoni, 151. pubescens pubescens, 245, 340, 496. sealaris symplectus, 151. scalaris cactophilus, 151. villosus auduboni, 151, 496. villosus villosus, 25, 568. villosus leucomelas, 151. Dubois, Alphonse, review of his ‘Birds of Belgium,’ 501. Duck, Bahama, 110. Black, 5, 106, 547, 564. Eider, 22, 281. Florida, 421. Golden-eye, 5. Harlequin, 106, 115, 268, 548. Lesser Seaup, 424, 565. Mallard, 22, 128, 424. Oldsquaw, 436. Pintail, 17. Redhead, 22. Ring-necked, 22, Ruddy, 565. Seaup, 17, 436, 565. Shoveller, 17, 22, 137. 245, 225, 565. Indecx. [oet. Duck, Tufted, 17. Wood, 9, 22, 241, 490, 564, 571. Dumetella, 13. carolinensis, 152, 247, 278, 351, 376, 429, 504, 545, 573, 590. Dumeticola, 451. Dysithamnus mentalis emilex, 290. mentalis suffusus, 122. EAG te, Bald, 25, 244, 339, 504, 567. Golden, 436, 567. Economic Ornithology in California, 132-134. Economic Ornithology in Recent Entomological Publications, 128— 132, 293, 602. Ectopistes migratorius, 24, 338, 483, 552. Ecuador, birds of, 121. Edoliisoma utakwensis, 608. Egatheus, 92-95. Egret, 23, 242, 491. Reddish, 242. Snowy, 242, 424, 503. Egrets, killing of, 609. Eegretta candidissima candidissima, 242, 424, 508. thula, 287. Eider, 3, 22, 281. King, 17, 22, 107-110, 548. Eifrig, G.,; notes on some of the rarer birds of the prairie part of the Chicago area, 236-240. Elenia martinica subpagana, 376. Elanoides forficatus, 112, 494. Electron platyrhynchus — suboles, 121. Elemiornis carteri assimilis, 610. Elseya, 444. Emberiza citrinella erythrogenys, 464. citrinella somovi, 308. hortulana, 142. leucocephalos, 464. palustris tschusii, 140. yessoénsis continentalis, 459. Vol. | 1913 Embody, Geo. C., review of his ‘Bird Enemies of Amphipods,’ 136. Empidochanes zuliensis, 450. Empidonax difficilis difficilis, 130. flaviventris, 7, 274, 427. minimus, 376, 569. trailli alnorum, 27, 112, 569. trailli trailli, 274, 427. virescens, 498. ‘Emu,’ review of, 141, 302, 460, 609. Eopsaltria coomooboolaroo, 303. Eos bornea, rothschildi, 307. semilarvata, 302. Epthianura aurifrons, 303. lovensis, 303. tricolor, 303. Eriocnemis flocens, 121. Eremiornis carteri assimilis, 461. Ereunetes mauri, 551. pusillus, 425, 566. Erionetta, 151. Erismatura, 287. jamaicensis, 39, 565. ‘ Erythromyias, 307. Erythrosterna, 307. Erythrura prasina, 140. Estrilda rhodopyga hypochra, 597. rhodopyga polia, 597. Eucometis, 11. Eudromias, 447. australis, 447. Eudynamis orientalis harterti, 306. Eugallinago, 596. Eugenes fulgens, 584. Euphagus carolinus, 18, 554. eyanocephalus, 569. Euphonia, 266. gouldi, 379. hirundinacea, 379. minuta, 266-267. sclateri, 448. Eupodella, 444. Eupsychortyx cristatus continentis, 449. Index. 635 Eurocephalus anguitimens béhmi, 462. anguitimens deckeni, 462. anguitimens erlangeri, 462. anguitimens fischeri, 462. Eurystomus orientalis, 294. orientalis connectens, 600. orientalis gigas, 600. Evermann, Barton Warren, eigh- teen species of birds new to the Pribilof Islands, including four new to North America, 15-18. Fauco, 287. eesalon lymani, 452. albigularis, 371. biarmicus, 461. laniarus, 305. columbarius columbarius, 6, 567. melanotus, 302. mexicanus, 567. peregrinus anatum, 553, 567. sparverius paulus, 244. sparverius, 317, 339, 406-418, 426, 495, 542, 553, 567. subbuteo, 609. Falcon, Prairie, 567. Faull, J. H., review of his ‘The Natural Hsitory of the Toronto Region,’ 596. Faxon, Walter, review of his ‘ Brew- ster’s Warbler (Helminthophila leucobronchialis) a hybrid be- tween the Golden-winged War- bler (H. chrysoptera and the Blue- winged Warbler (H. pinus),’ 595. Field Museum, habitat groups in the, 160. Finch, Hepburn’s Rosy, 116. House, 40-73. Purple, 345, 517, 524, 534. Flammea, 141. Fleming, J. H., Ontario bird notes, 225-228. Flicker, 245, 497. 636 Flicker, Northern, 7, 257, 279, 341, 536, 568. Red-shafted, 568. Flight of birds, 509-511, 359-366. Florida, birds of, 110, 240-247. Florida cxrulea, 111, 242, 420, 424, 430, 492. Flycatcher, Acadian, 274, 498. Alder) 27; 12. 513-5225 533, 569. Crested, 246, 342, 427, 497, 532. Least, 533, 569. Olive-sided, 7, 527, 533, 554, 569. Traull’s 274. 427. Yellow-bellied, 7, 274, 427. Fogg, Edward H., Evening Gros- beak (Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina) at Manchester, N. H., 435. Fondia omissa, 302. Forbes, Alexander, concerning the flight of Gulls, 359-366. Forbush, Edward Howe, review of his ‘ History of the Game Birds, Wild Fowl and Shore Birds of Massachusetts,’ 118; notice of his ‘Fourth Annual Report of the State Ornithologist,’ 293. Fordyce, George L., a Baltimore Oriole in winter, 274. Formicarius moniliger intermedius, 375. Francolinus granti, 463. kirki, 463. pondicerianus mecranensis, 462. orientalis arabistanicus, 462. sephena jubensis, 462. Fregata aquila, 424. Fringilla canaria, 615. k¥ teydea polatzeki, 139. Fulica americana, 243, 503, 565. Fuligula cristata, 306. Fulmar, 105. glacialis glacialis, 105. —— Index. Furnarius [ace Oct. aguatus venezuelensis, 450. GADWALL, 17, 548, 564. Galbula melanogenia, 373. ruficauda brevirostris, Gallinago brasiliensis, 596. delicata, 23, 116, 226, 337, 425, 565. hardwickii, 596. imperialis, 596. macrodactyla, 596. megala, 596. nobilis, 596. stricklandi, 596. Gallinula galeata, 23, 77, 243, 425. Gallinule, Florida, 23, 77, 243, 425. Purple, 243, 425, 503. Gallirallus hectori ruscheki, 610. Gallus gallus, 294. Game Legislation, 321. Gannet, 3, 225, 505, 506, 509. Gavia immer, 4, 563. stellata, 4, 506, 509, 545, 577. Gelochelidon nilotica addenda, 124. nilotica aranea, 125. nilotica grénvoldi, 124. Gennzeus fockelmanni, 613. Geocichla piaggiz keniensis, 597. Geococeyx californicus, 434. Georgia, birds of, 106, 477-505. Geothlypis trichas brachidactyla, 378. trichas ignota, 247, 501. trichas occidentalis, 572. trichas trichas, 130, 234, 350. Geotrygon goldmani, 121. linearis trinitatis, 302. Glaucidium gnoma californicum, 222-224. gnoma gnoma, 222-224. gnoma pinicola, 222-224. phalenoides ridgwayi, 373. phalenoides swarthi, 224. phalenoides vigilante, 224. Glaucis hirsuta fusea, 449. 450. Vol. XXX 1913 Gnatecatcher, Blue-gray, 81, 247, 354, 421. Godwit, Hudsonian, 24, 271, 430, 436, 566. Marbled, 24, 226, 551, 566. Goethalsia bella, 122. Golden-eye, 565. Barrow’s, 575. Goldfinch, 346, 421, 519, 524, 530, 534, 570. Goose, Cackling, 237. Canada, 5, 200, 237, 335, 565, 578. Greater Snow, 336, 575, 579. Hutchins’s, 565. Lesser Snow, 549. Snow, 22. 226, 565, 575. White-fronted, 22, 565. Gordon, H. E., feeding wild ducks on Sodus Bay, N. Y., 579. Goshawk, 155, 227, 567. Western, 438. Gouldia conversi, 584. Grackle, Boat-tailed, 246. Bronzed, 27, 219, 570. Great-tailed, 427. Florida, 246, 499. Purple, 345, 358. Gracula, 307. Grallaria guatemalensis aripoensis, 302. Grallaricula flavirostris brevis, 122. Granatina ianthinogastra roosevelti, 597. -Graucalus, 305. Grebe, Eared, 563. Holbeell’s, 267, 429, 486, 506, 563. Horned, 506, 563. Pied-billed, 241, 420, 503, 563. Western, 280, 563. Greenfinch, 454. Grinnell, George Bird, Brazilian Tree-duck (Dendrocygna viduata) in New Jersey, 110. Grinnell, Joseph, two new races of the Pigmy Owl from the Pacific Index. 637 coast, 222-224; notice of his‘ Out- look for Conserving the Band- tailed Pigeon,’ 291. Griscom, Ludlow, the Orange- crowned Warbler at Englewood, INSU Sos Gronberger, S. M., Zsop as a bird observer, 438. Grosbeak, Blue, 380. Evening, 228,°275, 435, 437, 554, 570. Rose-breasted, 129, 199, 207, 211-214, 435, 532, 571, 582. Western Blue, 280. Grouse, Canada Ruffed, 6. Prairie Sharp-tailed, 567. Ruffed, 582. Grus americana, 430, 565. mexicana, 243, 493, 565. Guara alba, 241, 268, 490. Guillemot, Black, 2, 545. Guinea-fowl, 126. Guiraca cerulea cerulea, 380. cerulea lazula, 280. Gull, Bonaparte’s, 506, 507. Franklin’s, 563. Glaucous, 3. Great Black-backed, 3, 5. Herring) 55.5) 207, 200, aos, 506; 507. 563. Laughing, 423, 546. Ring-billed, 236, 563. Ross’s, 16. Sabine’s, 105, 574. Guttera cristata makondorum, 142. Gygis alba monte, 124. alba royana, 124. Gygisterna, 124. Gymnasio lawrencei exul, 453. Gymnostinops montezuma, 378. Gymnorhina, 610. Hasta, 14. Heematopus 302. ostralegus, 306. quoyi, 444. niger meade-waldoi 638 Hahn, Walter L., review of his ‘The Future of the North Ameri- can Fauna,’ 598. Haleyon smyrnensis, 457. pileatus, 457. Halizetus leucocephalus 39, 304. leucocephalus alascanus, 152. leucocephalus, 25, 244, 339, 504, 567. Hall, F. H., double bird tragedy, 438. Harelda hyemalis, 140, 436, 577. Harlow, Richard C., Bittern breed- ing in New Jersey, 268; nesting of the Black Rail (Creciscus jamaicensis) in New Jersey, 269; the Marsh Hawk nesting in New Jersey, 272. Harper, Francis, see Overton, Frank, also Wright, Albert H. Harporhynchus, 14. Hathaway, Harry 8., Notes on the occurrence and nesting of certain birds in Rhode Island, 545-558. Hawfinch, Japanese, 18. Hawk, Broad-winged, 244, 426, 532, 567, 614. Cooper’s, 6, 155, 244, 495, 567. Duck, 281, 558, 567. Fish, 495. Florida Red-shouldered, 244, 495. Krider’s, 227, 567. Little Sparrow, 244. Marsh, 6, 244, 272, 426, 504, 542, 567. Pigeon, 6, 567. Red-shouldered, 25, 567, 682. Red-tailed, 6, 244, 495. Rough-legged, 6, 567. Sharp-shinned, 155, 244, 272, 420, 438, 536, 567. Sparrow, 406-418, 339, 426, 495, 542, 558, 567. Swainson’s, 167-176, 227, 381- 394, 426, 567. Index. (aon Oct. Hawk, Western Red-tailed, 567. Helenzgialus, 444. Helinaia swainsoni, 378, 500. Hellmayr, C. E., notice of his ‘Birds from the Mouth of the Amazon,’ 289; review of his ‘Remarks on a little known neo- tropical finch (Zonotrichia strigi- ceps Gould)’, 121. Hellmayr, C. E. and J. Graf von Seilern, review of their ‘Birds of the Cumbre de Valencia,’ 121. Helmintheros vermivorus, 421, 378. Helodromas, 287. solitarius solitarius, 152, 372, 425, 566. Hemiprocne longipennis harterti, 600. Hemipteryx egregia, 467. major, 467. Hemipuffinus, 610. Hemithraupis ornatus, 122. Henderson, Junius, review of his ‘The Practical Value of Birds,’ 454. Henicorhina prostheleuca prosthe- leuca, 377. Henshaw, H. W., notice of his ‘Fifty Common Birds of Farm and Orchard,’ 292; notice of his ‘Report of Chief of the Biological Survey for 1912,’ 292. Herodias egretta, 23, 242, 491. alba maoriana, 606. Heron, Black-crowned Night, 237, 243, 336, 424, 503, 565. Great Blue, 115, 281, 336, 424, 565. Green, 111, 242, 336, 420, 493, 565. Little Blue, 111, 242, 420, 424, 430, 492. Louisiana, 242, 424. Ward’s, 242, 491. Yellow-crowned Night, 243, 336, 424, 493. 237, Vol. a | 1913 Herpetotheres cachinans, 371. Herpsilochmus rufimarginatus, ex- iguus, 122. Hersey, F. Seymour, Sabine’s Gull in Massachusetts, 105. Hesperiphona vespertina montana, 116. vespertina vespertina, 228, 275, 435, 437, 554, 570. Hess, Isaac E., nesting of the Barn Ow] in Ulinois, 433. Heterhyphantes golandi, 302. Heteromirafra, 608. Heteronyx, 688. Heteropygia, 287. Heteroxenicus cruralis formaster, 451. Himantopus mexicanus, 425. Hirundo erythrogastra, 276, 349, 421, 428, 571, 590. rustica, 151. Histrionicus histrionicus, 39, 106, 115, 548. Holt, Ernest G., notes on the Loggerhead Shrike at Barachias, Ala., 276; some land-birds at sea, 590. Homoscolopax, 596. Hornaday, W. T., review of his ‘Our Vanishing Wild Life,’ 442- 443. Horsbrugh, Boyd, notice of his ‘Game-Birds and Water Fowl of South Africa,’ 126, 289. Houbara undulata, 462. Howe, R. Heber, Jr., a few notes on Newfoundland birds, 114; Hol- beell’s Grebe in Concord, Mass., 267. Hull, Edwin D., the Swallow- tailed Kite in DeWitt Co., Illi- nois, 112; the Snow Bunting (Plectrophenax nivalis nivalis) in Chicago and vicinity during the fall and winter of 1912, 275; the Red-throated Loon on Southern Lake Michigan, 577. Index. 639 Hummingbird, Rieffer’s, 427. Ruby-throated, 245, 279, 341, 358, 497, 532, 536, 548, 568, Hummingbirds, eyelashes of, 583. Hydranassa tricolor ruficollis, 242, 370, 424. Hydrochelidon leucopareia landii, 124. leucopareia leggei, 124. leucopareia swinhoei, 124. leucoptera, 125. nigra surinamensis, 152, 225, 424, 547, 564. Hydroprogne, 125. tschegravaimperator, 125. tschegrava oliveri, 458. Hylocichla alicize alicie, 121, 240, 573. alicie bicknelli, 589. fuscescens fuscescens, 115. fuscescens fuliginosa, 115. fuscescens salicicola, 152, 573. guttata pallasi, 9, 29, 279, 558, 573. mustelina, 354, 376, 421, 502, Slo. ustulata swainsoni, 9, 573. Hylospingus inornatus, 122. Hyphantornis, 137. teeniopterus, 137. Hypothymias azurea oberholseri, 599. azurea symmixta, 599. Hypsibates leucocephalus timoren- sis, 444. Hypsipetes, 451. dela- IAnTHIA goodfellowi, 139. Ibis, 92-95. Ibis, Glossy, 242, 268. White, 241, 268, 490. Wood, 226, 242, 282, 491. Ibis wethiopica, 93. ‘This,’ review of the, 1389, 300, 457. Icteria virens virens, 28, 80, 351, 378, 437, 557, 572. Icterus bullocki, 569. 640 Icterus galbula, 27, 155, 274, 344, 427, 569. gularis yucatanensis, 379. hypomelas, 128. mesomelas mesomelas, 379. prosthemelas, 379. spurius, 27, 78, 246, 344, 427, 379, 498, 569. Ictinia plumbea, 371. Illinois, birds of, 112, 236-240, 275, 433. Index Zoologicus, No. II, notice of, 475. Indiana, birds of, 577. Indicator exilis erlangeri, 462. Indigobird, 347, 358. Inezia caudata intermedia, 450. Tonornis martinicus, 243, 425, 503. Iowa, 77-81, 406-418. Tridoproene albilineata, 377. bicolor, 8, 130, 232-234, 571. Isle of Pines, birds of, 452. Ispidina, 119. Ithagenes wilsoni, 451. Ixobrychus exilis, 23, 242, 565. neoxenus, 242. Jacana spinosa, 371. Jaeger, Parasitic, 3, 546. Pomerine, 444, 546. Jay, Blue, 348, 420, 569. Canada, 27. Florida, 246. Florida Blue, 246, 498. Labrador, 7. Pinion, 116, 280. Jenks, Charles W., Holbcell’s Grebe (Colymbus holbelli) at Bedford, Mass., 429. Jewel, L. L., some North American birds in Panama, 422-429. Jewett, Stanley G., a correction, ale ‘ Journal fiir Ornithologie,’ revue of, 142, 304, 462, 611. Junco, 346. Index. [eee Junco, Slate-colored, 7, 571. Junco hyemalis carolinensis, 595. hyemalis hyemalis, 7, 346, 447, HLGMolienol Owns soa oreganus shufeldti, 447. siemssenl, 458. KennarD, F. H., the Black Duck controversy again, 106; Arkansas Kingbird in Massachusetts, 112. Killdeer, 24, 219, 248, 337, 358, 426, 566. Kingbird, 127, 207, 231, 245, 342, 358, 427, 497, $20, 521, 527, 528, 534, 543, 568, 590. Arkansas, 112, 2738, 568. Gray, 427. Kingfisher, Belted, 7, 245, 279, 340, 358, 427, 504, 524, 530, 533, 543, 568. Isthmian, 427. Northwestern Belted, 116. Ringed, 427. Kinglet, Golden-crowned, 9, 354, tleyy lay, Gul, eek, Rel. lays. Ruby-crowned, 9, 28, 219, 221, 279, 545, 578. Kite, Swallow-tailed, 112, 494. Kittiwake, 3, 505, 506, 508, 509. Knudsen, Valdemar, death of, 159. Kuser, John Dryden, wintering of the Blue-headed Vireo (Lanivireo solitarius solitarius) at Aiken, South Carolina, 277. LABRADOR, birds of, 1--10. Lacedo, 120. Lagopus leucurus altipetens, 447. | leucurus peninsularis, 447. Lalage nigra, 123. Lamb, Charles R., Eskimo Curlew (Numenius borealis) in Massa- chusetts, 581. Lamprocorax metallicus, 307. Lamprotornis corrusca, 304. melanogaster, 304. Vol. | 1913 Laniarius helenz, 607. quadricolor, 302. Laniellus leucogrammicus, 612. Lanio aurantius, 379. Lanius borealis, 350, 572. ludovicianus excubitorides, 572. ludovicianus ludovicianus, 246, 276, 421, 499. ludovicianus migrans, 544, 556. Lanivireo solitarius solitarius, 129, Dhiks Lano, Albert, Greater Snow Goose in Arkansas, 579. Lark, ‘Desert Horned, 569. Horned, 3438. Hoyt’s Horned, 228. Prairie Horned, 569. Larus affinis, 459. argentatus, 5, 237, 257, 333, 466, 506, 563. atricilla, 423, 546. delawarensis, 236, 563. fuscus antelius, 459. fuscus britannicus, 459. franklini, 563. hemprichi, 302. marinus, 5. philadelphia, 507. Laticauda, 583. rubriginosa, 450. Laubmann, A., review of his ‘Birds of eastern Thian-Schan,’ 599. Legatus albicollis variegatus, 376. Leistes superciliaris petilus, 452. Leucanous, 124. Leucopsar, 140. rothsehildi, 140. Leucosticte tephrocotis littoralis, 116. Licmetis pastinator, 139. Ligurinus, 451. Limnocinclus, 597. Limnopardalis maculatus inoptatus, 452. Limosa fedoa, 24, 226, 551, 566. hemastica, 24, 271, 430, 436, 566. Index. 641 Limpkin, 243, 493. Lincoln, F. C., the Alder Fly- catcher in Colorado, 112; the Slate-colored Fox Sparrow breed- ing in Colorado, 113. Linnean Society of New York, ‘Abstract of Proceedings,’ noticed, 604; annual dinner of the, 165. Linnet, California, 454. Liothrix lutea, 460. Lobipes lobatus, 23, 111, 565. Locustella fluviatilis obscura, 305. Longspur, Chestnut-collared, 239, 438, 570. Lapland, 27, 570. McCown’s, 570. Smith’s, 228, 239. Loon, 2, 4, 563. Red-throated, 2, 4, 506, 509, 545, 577. Lophodytes cucullatus, 503, 564. Loxia curvirostra corsicana, 305. curvirostra minor, 7, 279, 345, 570. curvirostra percua, 289. leucoptera, 7, 555. Luscinia megarhynchos megarhyn- chos, 463. Lusciniola pryeri sinensis, 302. Lyrurus tetrix britannicus, 301. MAcHAERIRHYNCHUS flaviventer no- vus, 306. Machetes pugnax, 18, 552, 576. Macrodura, 596. Macropygia ruficeps nana, 600. Macrorhamphus griseus scolopa- ceus, 551, 566, 576. Magdalen Islands, birds of the, 177- 187, 271, 480. Magpie, 569. Maine, birds of, 270, 272, 574-577, 587-589. Mallard, 22, 424, 564. Manacus candei, 375. Man-o’-war-bird, 424. Maorigerygone, 607. 642 Index. lane Mareca americana, 548, 564. penelope, 548, 574. Margarornis bellulus, 122. perlata peruviana, 450. Marila, 287. Marila affinis, 39, 424, 565. americana, 22, 39, 564. collaris, 22, 39, 225, 561. ferina, 17. fuligula, 17. marila, 17, 39, 565. valisineria, 39, 548, 565. Mallard, 503, 560. Martin, Gray-breasted, 428. Purple, 219, 221, 228, 246, 349. 499, 556, 471. Marx, Edward J. F., random notes from Easton, Pa., 279. Massachusetts, birds of, 19-29, 105, 107, 112, 118, 267, 278, 429, 430, 435, 580, 581, 585, 587. Mathews, Gregory M., on the gen- eric names Ibis Lacepéde and Egatheus Billberg, 92-95; re- view of his ‘Birds of Australia,’ 124, 4438-445, 596-597. Mathewsia, 303. Mattingleya inornata, 610. MeAtee, W. L., an item for bibliog- raphers, 117; destruction of Sap- suckers, 154-157; two ornitho- logical fables from Louisiana, 282; notice of his ‘Index to U. 8S. De- partment of Agriculture Publica- tions on the Food of Birds,’ 290; review of his ‘Relation of Birds to Grain Aphides,’ 601. Me Lain, 8. B., Woodcock at Wheel- ing, W. Va., 580; Rose-breasted Grosbeak breeding in West Vir- ginia, 585. Meadowlark, 27, 344, 569. Southern, 246, 498. Western, 132, 294, 453. Mearns, E. A., notice of his ‘New African Grass-Warbler of the Genus Cisticola,’ 289; review of his descriptions of new African Thrushes and Weaver Birds, 597. Megaceryle, 120. Megalopterus minutus americanus, 124. minutus atlanticus, 124. Megalestris, 287. Megalurus flindersi, 302. Megascops asio asio, 340. Meiglyptes grammithorax microp- terus, 123. Melanerpes erythrocephalus, 26, 245, 341, 420, 497, 568. formicivorus bairdi, 155. Melanitta, 151. Melanosterna, 125. anzthetus, 124. recognita, 125. Meleagride, Extinct, 29-36. Meleagris altus, 29. antiqua, 29. eeler, 29. gallopavo osceola, 243. gallopavo silvestris, 30, 494. superba, 29. Meliphaga, 461, 610. chrysotis, 610. Mellopitta lugubris rostrata, 608. Melopelia asiatica trudeaui, 372. aslatica australis, 372. Melospiza georgiana, 346, 544, 571, 605. lincolni lincolni, 8, 281, 380, 571, 605. Melodia juddi, 281. Melodia melodia, 230, 346, 571. melodia beata, 452. Menegaux, A., review of his ‘The Raising of the Ostrich,’ 600. Merganser, 115, 287, 564. Hooded, 5038, 564. Red-breasted, 3, 5, 17, 564. Mergus, 287. americanus, 39, 115, 564. serrator, 5, 17, 39, 564. Vol. | 1913 Meriden Bird Club, notice of its ‘Annual Report, 1912,’ 455. Merops persicus, 308. Merrill, D. E., the Great-tailed Grackle in New Mexico, 584. Mesocarbo, 607. Messager Ornithologique, 464. Metallura, 583. Mexico, 367-380. Meyer, I. Ralph, observations on a pair of Brown Creepers, 587-589. Michigan, birds of, 111, 273, 581. Micropalama himantopus, 23, 430, 551, 566. Microrhopias grisea fumosa, 450. Microscelis, 451. Migration, 191-204, 205, 221, 457, 619. Miller, W, DeW., review of his ‘Revision of the Classification of the Kingfishers,’ 119; Metallura vs. Laticauda, 583. Mimus gilvus gracilis, 376. polyglottos polyglottos, 28, 247, 352, 501. Miro traversi, 607. Missouri, 268, 278, 437. Mitrephanes eminulus, 122. Mitrospingus, 11, 14. Mixornis pileata, 123. Mniotilta varia, 121, 234, 378, 428, 572. Mockingbird, 28, 247, 352, 501. Molothrus ater artemisiz, 151. ater ater, 276, 344, 554, 569. ater obscurus, 151. Momotus conexus reconditus, 121. momota cametensis, 141. osgoodi, 449. swainsoni, 294. Monasa pallescens minor, 468. Montana, birds of, 116, 167-176, 381-394. Moore, Robert Thomas, the Fox Sparrow as a songster, 177-187. Morris, Harry, notice of his ‘Car- Index. 643 rion feeders as disseminators of Anthrax or Charbon,’ 297. Morris, Robert O., early records of Rail in Massachusetts, 580. Motacilla alba, 151. flava beema, 613. Munia punctulata blasii, 307. Murre, 2. Briinnich’s, 21. Muscicapula, 307. Muscivora tyrannus, 375. Myadestes coloratus, 122. townsendi, 280. Mycteria americana, 226, 242, 282, 438, 491. Myers, Harriet Williams, notice of her ‘The Birds Convention,’ 291. Myiarchus crinitus, 246, 342, 427, 497, 532. lawrenceii, lawrenceii, 376. magister nelsoni, 376. Myiobius xanthopygus sulphurei- pygius, 376. Myioceyx, 119. Myiochanes brachytarsus, 376. virens, 246, 342, 427, 376, 498, 569. richardsoni 427. Myiodynastes chrysocephalus ven- ezuelensis, 121. luteiventris, 375. Myiomoira macrocephala_ marri- neri, 607. Myiozetetes texensis texensis, 376. Myrmotherula selateri, 141. richardsoni, 280, NaANNorRcHILUS- leucogaster bra- chyurus, 377. Nannus hiemalis hiemalis, 353, 421, boy, 5/2: Nealbatrus, 124. Nebraska, birds of, 430, 452. Nelson, E. W., review of his ‘De- scription of New Genera, Species and Subspecies of Birds from 644 Index. lace Panama, Colombia and Ecua- dor,’ 121; notice of his ‘Two New Species of Birds from Mount Pirri, Eastern Panama,’ 288. Neopsittacus iris wetterensis, 306. Neospilura, 596. Nesierax pottsi, 607. Nesomiro, 607. Nesopisobia, 596. Nettion carolinense, 22, 564. Nettium torquatum, 140. New Guinea, expedition to, 622. New Hampshire, birds of, 435, 589. New Jersey, birds of, 110, 268, 269, 272, 585. New Mexico, birds of, 488, 584. New York, birds of, 270, 430, 542- 545, 559, 570, 579. Newfoundland, birds of, 114, 288. Nichols, John Treadwell, notes on offshore birds, 505-511. Nighthawk, 26, 207, 420, 427, 497. 532, 536. Florida, 245. Texas, 427. Sennett’s, 568. Nomenclature at the Ninth Inter- national Zoological Congress, 475. North Carolina, birds of, 418-421. Norton, A. H., birds new or rare to Maine, 574-577, Nothocercus julius venezuelensis, 449. Numenius, 444. americanus, 24. borealis, 10, 24, 269, 444, 581. hudsonicus, 24, 270, 426, 444, 542, tenuirostris, 444. variegatus, 294. Nuthatch, Brown-headed, 247, 502. Florida White-breasted, 247, 502. Red-breasted, 9, 279, 354, 524, 531, 534, 573. White-breasted, 354, 513, 515, DLoOoloooNOlos Nuttallornis borealis, 7, 554, 569. Nyctanassa violacea, 243, 370, 493. Nyctea nyctea, 25, 228, 568. Nycticorax nycticorax nevius, 237, 243, 336, 424, 508, 565. Nyctidromus albicollis yucatanen- + BIS) Over Nyroca, 287. Oberholser, H. C., review of his ‘ Re- vision of the Subspecies of the Green Heron (Butorides virescens [Linn.]),’ 123; review of his ‘De- scriptions of One Hundred and Four New Species and Subspecies of Birds from the Barussan Is- lands and Sumatra,’ 123; re- view of his ‘A Revision of the Forms of the Great Blue Heron,’ 287. OcEANITES oceanicus, 506. Oceanodroma leucorhoa, 21. Ochromela, 307. Octhodromus, 287, 444. Odurella, 596. (inanthe leucopyga gra, 467. yemenensis, 607. Ohio, birds of, 274. Old-squaw, 486, 577. Oldys, Henry, a remarkable Her- mit Thrush song, 538-541. Olor, 151, 598, buccinator, 39. columbianus, 39, 225, 549, 565. paloregonus, 37. Onychoprion, 125. Ontario, birds of, 114, 225-228, 596. ‘Odlogist,’ review of the, 139, 300, 457, 606. Oporornis agilis, 28, 121, 240. formosus, 421, 429, 587. philadelphia, 28, 429, 572. Oreocincla dauma socia, 451. whiteheadi, 607. Oreosterops javanica elongata, 600, pinaiz, 140. Oriole, Baltimore, 569. Vol. el 1913 Oriole, Bullock’s, 569. Orchard, 129, 498, 569. Oriolus oriolus, 198. Oregon, 36-39, 117. Ornithological articles in other journals, 143, 306, 465, 613. ‘ Ornithologisches Jahrbuch,’ review of, 305, 464. ‘Ornithologische Monatsberichite,’ review of, 141, 304-305, 462, 612. “Ornithologische Monatsschrift,’ review of, 142, 305, 463, 612. Ortalis vetula intermedia, 371. Osgood, W. H., notice of his expe- dition to Peru, 159. Osmotreron, 123. Osprey, 6, 244, 281, 420, 568. Ostrich, 600, 611. Otocoris alpestris alpestris, 343. alpestris hoyti, 152, 228. alpestris leucolema, 569. alpestris praticola, 569. Otomela lucionensis, 294. Otus asio asio, 340, 568. floridanus, 245, 504. maxwellie, 280. Ovenbird, 196, 207, 211-214, 351, 358, 428, 513-526, 535, 572. Overton, Frank, and Harper, Francis, bird photography by the direct color process, 74-76. Owl, Acadian, 339. Arctic Horned, 227. Barred, 532, 536. Burrowing, 568. Florida Barred, 245, 495. Florida Screech, 245, 504. Great Gray, 25, 227. Great Horned, 155, 244, 420, 504, 532. Labrador Horned, 7. Long-eared, 542, 568. Richardson’s, 18, 25, 227. Rocky-Mountain Screech, 280. Saw-whet, 543, 554. Screech, 340, 568. Index. 645 Owl, Short-eared, 568. Snowy, 25, 228, 568. Western Horned, 568. Tengmalm’s, 18. Oxpecker, African, 129. Oxyechus, 287. vociferus, 24, 2438, 337, 372, 426, 566. Oxyruncus cristatus, 404. cristatus frater, 404. Oxyura, 287. PACHYCEPHALA grisola, secedens, 600. Pachysylvia decurtata, 377. Pagoa, 444. Pagolla, 444. Palzophasianus meleagroides, 598. Palxornis torquata, 457. Palmer, T. S., the Harlequin Duck in Wyoming, 106; addi- tional notes on the Harlequin Duck in Wyoming, 267; intro- duction of Ruffed Grouse on Washington Isl., Wisconsin, 582; review of his ‘National Reserva- tions for the Protection of Wild Life,’ 128. Panama, 121, 288, 422-429. Pandion haliaétus carolinensis, 6, 244, 420, 495, 568. Paradisza duivenbodei, 462. Paradisea raggiana sororia, 462. Parascolopax, 596. Pardigalla intermedia, 608. Parepthianura, 303. Parisoma buryi, 607. Paroxyechus, 444. Parus ater ptilosus, 139. atricapillus borealis, 612. cinereus, 464. cinereus bokharensis, 464. cinereus dzungaricus, 464. cinereus ferghaniensis, 464. cinereus turcestanicus, 464. Passer, 137. 646 Index. hes Passer domesticus, 153, 247. domesticus chephreni, 614. montanus volgensis, 464. yatu, 142. Passerculus sandwichensis alaudi- nus, 280, 570. sandwichensis savanna, 7, 570. Passerella, 14. iliaca, 177-187. iliaca iliaca, 8, 544. iliaca insularis, 18. iliaca schistacea, 113. Passerherbulus caudacutus, 129. henslowi henslowi, 487, 555. henslowi occidentalis, 570. lecontei, 570. maritimus maritimus, 152, 556. nelsoni nelsoni, 239, 555. nelsoni subvirgatus, 555. Passerina amoena, 571. cyanea, 347, 380, 571. Pedicecetes phasianellus campes- tris, 567. Pelecanoides urinatrix coppingeri, 124. Pelecanus ecalifornicus, 424. erythrorhynchos, 106, 225, 430, 564. occidentalis, 22, 424. Pelican, Brown, 22, 424. California Brown, 424. White, 106, 225, 430, 564. Pelidna alpina sakhalina, 17, 566. Pelionetta, 151. Peltohyas, 447. Pember, F. T., Black Vulture in Vermont, 112. Penelope perspicax, 452. Pennsylvania, birds of, 105, 279, 325-358. Penthestes, 464. atricapillus atricapillus, 9, 353. atricapillu sseptentrionalis, 573. carolinensis carolinensis, 247, 502. cinetus, 152. Penthestes cinctus obtectus, 152. hudsonicus columbianus, 447. hudsonicus hudsonicus, 9, 437. rufescens rufescens, 230. Perdix perdix, 465. Pericrocotus stanfordi, 606. Perisoreus canadensis canadensis, Paik canadensis nigricapillus, 7. infaustus opicus, 452. Pernettyva, 444. Peters, James L., list of birds col- lected in the territory of Quin- tana Roo, Mexico, in the winter and spring of 1912, 367-380. Petrel, Black-capped, 507, 508. ' Wilson’s, 3, 506. Leach’s, 21. Petrochelidon, 152. lunifrons lunifrons, 130, 571. Peucza eestivalis sestivalis, 246,499. Pewee, Western Wood, 280, 427. Wood, 232, 246, 273, 342, 427, 495, 513-519, 533, 535, 537, 569. Pheeopus, 444. Phethornis adolphei fraterculus, 121. anthropilus fuscicapillus, 450. Phalacrocorax auritus auritus, 22, 564. auritus floridanus, 241, 503. carbo, 22. macropus 37, 598. pelagicus robustus, 151. pelagicus resplendens, 151. Phalarope, Northern, 23, 111, 565. Wilson’s, 237, 551, 566. Phasianus strauchi chonensis, 302. Pheugopedius maculipectus macu- lipectus, 377. Philemon argenticeps, 609. Phillips, John C., bird migration from the standpoint of its periodic accuracy, 191-204; a crested Canada Goose, 578. Vol. sae 1913 Phillips, Dr. J. C., and Glover M. Allen, notice of their Sudan ex- pedition, 160. Philohela minor, 23, 115, 243, 336, 504, 580. Phlcotomus pileatus abieticola, 26, 420. pileatus pileatus, 245, 496. Phlogothraupis sanguinolenta san- guinolenta, 379. Pheebastria, 125. Phoebe, 219, 261, 342, 358, 521, 522, 533, 569. Pheebetria fusca campbelli, 124. Pheebetria palpebrata huttoni, 124. Pheenicophais curvirostris deningeri, 600. Phcenicothraupisrubica nelsoni, 379. salvini salvini, 379. Phyllergates, 307. cucullatus batjanensis, 139. Phylloscopus indicus albigula, 142. borealis examinandus, 600. trivirgatus parvirostris, 307. Piaya cayana thermophila, 373. cayana venezuelensis, 449. Pica leucoptera, 464. pica hudsonia, 569. Picoides americanus americanus, 22: arcticus, 26, 554. Picolaptes warszewiezi sequatoria- lis, 142. Picumnis vargee, 141. venezuelensis, 450. Picus canus biedermanni, 142. goru, 142. Pigeon, Band-tailed, 591. Passenger, 24, 338, 433, 552. Pinarochroa rudolphi, 304. Pinarolestes megarhynchus super- fluus, 306. Pinicola enucleator pacata, 452. Pintail, 9, 17, 564. Pionus senilis, 373. Pipilo erythrophthalmus alleni, 246, 499. Index. 647 Pipilo e. erythrophthalmus, 276, 347, 571. maculatus arcticus, 571. Pipit; 28, 351, 57s. Sprague’s, 573. Pipromorpha assimilis assimilis, 376. Piranga erythromelas 12, 27, 348, 428, 511. rubra rubra, 121, 246, 348, 379, 499. Pisobia, 287. acuminata, 597. aurita, 597. bairdi, 551, 566. fuscicollis, 542, 566. minuta, 597. minutilla, 5, 425, 560. maculata, 238, 425, 551, 566. Pisorhina angeline, 141. Pitangus sulphuratus derbianus, SH), Pitta mackloti oblita, 306. Planesticus grayi grayi, 376. helleri, 597. migratorius migratorius, 9, 230, 258, 394-398, 355, 504, 573. olivaceus polius, 597. Platypsaris aglaiz sumichrasti, 375. Plectrophenax nivalis nivalis, 18, 275, 346, 570. nivalis townsendi, 18. Plegadide, 95. Plegadis, 92-95. autumnalis, 242, 268. Ploceus manyar, 307. Plover, Black-bellied, 566, 591. Golden, 24, 238, 271, 552, 566, 581, 591. , Killdeer, 24, 219, 248, 337, 358, 426. Piping, 3, 4, 115, 226, 260, 552, 566. Semipalmated, 3, 6, 426, 566. Upland, 24, 337, 425, 566. Pluvialis, 287. Pneepyga mutica, 451. Pochard, European, 17. 648 Podica petersi, 461. Podiceps, 287, 458. Peecile atricapillus borealis, 463. Peecilonetta bahamensis, 110. Podilymbus magnus, 598. podiceps, 241, 420, 503, 563. podiceps antillarum, 452. Polioptila ceerulea czrulea, 81, 129, 247, 354, 421. californica, 129. superciliaris superciliaris, 377. Poliospiza elgonensis, 302. menachensis, 607. Polysticta stelleri, 39. Pocecetes gramineus confinis, 280, 570. Porzana atra, 459. carolina, 281, 425, 550, 565. murrayi, 459. Predo audax, 122. Pratincola caprata, 307. caprata albonotata, 307. Premnoplex brunnescens rostratus, WA. Pribilof Islands, birds of, 15-18. Prinia inornata burmanica, 608. formosa, 608. inornata exter, 451. Procellaria glacialis, 611. Procelsterna cerulea nebouxi, 124. cerulea imitatrix, 124, Progne chalybea, 377, 428. subis subis, 228, 246, 349, 499, 556, 571. Prohaematopus, 444. Proictinia gilmorei, 598. Propasser, 451. Protective coloration, 81-91. Protonotaria citrea, 240, 428, 500. Psaltriparus santarite, 399. plumbeus, 399. melanotus lloydi, 399-401. Psephotus cucullatus, 301, 460. chrysopterygius blaauwi, 460. dissimilis, 301, 460. Pseudacanthis yemenensis 607. Index. [oet. Pseudocolaptes boissonneautii, stri- aticeps, 121. Pseudogerygone jacksoni, 141. Pseudotantalus, 93-95. Pseudotriceus pelselni berlepschi, 288. Psilorhinus mexicanus cyanogenys, 377. vociferus, 377. Psittinus cyanurus, 123. Pteroglossus torquatus zonus, 374. Ptilotis, 461, 610. ornata wesleydalei, 459. ornata underbooli, 459. Publications Received, 148, 308, 468, 615. Pucrasia joretiana, 140, 300. ruficollis, 614. Puffin, 2. Puffinaria garnotii lessoni, 124. Puffinus borealis, 547. brevicaudus, 307. carneipes, 610. garnoti magellani, 124. gravis, 507. lherminieri, 506, 509. Pycnonotus leucotis, 142. Pyrocephalus rubinus blatteus, 376, 452. Pyromelana, 137. Pyrrhula arizanica, 139. europea, 453. Pytelia melba, 609. afra, 609. erythro- Quai, California Valley, 453. Valley, 133. Quelea, 137. eethiopica, 137. Querquedula cyanoptera, 564. discors, 22, 143, 424, 564. Quiscalus major macrourus, 427. major major, 246. quiscula seneus, 27, 570. quiscula agleeus, 246, 499. Vol. tenn | 1913 Quiscalus quiscula quiscula, 345. Rai, Black, 243, 269. King, 23, 77, 226, 236, 243, 436, 549, 580. Sora, 281, 425. Virginia, 550, 565. Yellow, 550, 580. Rallicula klossi, 608. Rallus aquaticus, 612. elegans, 23, 77, 226, 243, 436, 549, 580. elegans ramsdeni, 448. virginianus, 550, 565. Ramphastosg carinatus, 433. Ramsden, Chas. T., Glossy Ibis (Plegadis autumnalis) in eastern Cuba; a new record, 268; on the occurrence of Columba squamosa (Bonnaterre) in Cuba, 271. Raven, 343. Northern, 343, 437, 569. Recurvirostra americana, 23, 566. Redhead, 22, 564. Redpoll, 238, 345, 570. Redstart, 8, 207, 279, 351, 358, 421, 429, 501, 515, 516, 518, 572. Red-wing, Florida, 246, 498. Thick-billed, 569. Reed, Chester A., review of his ‘Birds of Eastern North America,’ 120; obituary of, 319. Reedbird, 591. Regerinus uncinatus, 371. Reguloides maculipennis 451. pulcher vegetus, 453. Regulus calendula calendula, 9, 28, 129, 155, 279, 573. satrapa satrapa, 9, 354, 545, 573. Remiza pendulina bostanjogli, 464. pendulina menzbieri, 464. “Revista Italiana di Ornitologia,’ review of, 465. “Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie,’ review of, 142, 303-304, 461-2. debilis, Index. 649 Ridgway, Robert, review of his ‘Color Standards and Color No- menclature,’ 439-440. Ridgwayia pinicola, 301. Riley, J. H., review of his ‘Birds of the Mount Robson Region,’ 447- 448; review of his ‘King Rail of Cuba,’ ‘New Hummingbird from Brazil’ and ‘A New Name for Tanagra sclateri Berl,’ 448; re- view of his ‘The Bahama Barn Owl,’ 597. Riparia riparia, 130, 349, 428, 591. riparia fuscocollaris, 305. Rissa tridactyla tridactyla, 505, 508, 509. Rhamphastos carinatus, 374. Rhipidura flabellifera kempi, 607. Rhode Island, birds of, 545-558. Rhodinocichla rosea eximia, 11-15. Rhodostethia rosea, 16. Rhynchocyelus cinereiceps, 376. Rhynchophanes mecowni, 570. Rhynchostruthus percivali, yeme- nensis, 608. Road-runner, 434. Robin, 9, 211-214, 230, 258, 394- 398, 355, 504, 518, 514, 519, 522- 526, 538, 535-537, 573, 590. Rogibyx, 444. Roper, Kenyon, Towhee in winter near Steubenville, Ohio, 276. Ross, Lucretius H., birds observed at Bennington, Vt., 436. Rossignol, G. R., Jr., another Bridled Tern for South Carolina, 105; White Pelican at Savannah, Georgia, 106. Rough-leg, Ferruginous, 488, 567. Royal Australasian Ornithologists’ Union, review of its ‘ Official Check List of the Birds of Aus- tralia,’ 445-447. Ruff, 18, 552, 576. Rupornis magnirostris conspecta, 370. magnirostris occidua, 452. 650 Sacre, John H., thirtieth stated meeting of the American Orni- thologists’ Union, 96-105. Saltator, 262. atriceps, 262-264. atriceps raptor, 380. grandis grandis, 379. magnoides magnoides, 379. Sanderling, 3, 436. Sandpiper, Baird’s 551, 566. Buff-breasted, 426, 552. Least, 5, 238, 425, 566. Pectoral, 238, 425, 551, 566. Red-backed, 17, 238, 566. Semipalmated, 3, 238, 425, 566. Solitary, 238, 425, 566. Spotted, 3, 6, 257, 337, 358, 420, 426, 493, 5038, 566. Stilt, 23, 430, 551, 566. Western, 551. White-rumped, 452, 566. Sapsucker, Yellow bellied, 26, 115, 155, 219, 221, 340, 518, 524, 534, 568. Saunders, Aretas A., additional notes to the ‘Birds of Gallatin County, Montana,’ 116; the Old Squaw in Connecticut in summer, 577. Saunders, W. E., Harris’s Sparrow ineastern Ontario, 114; Hudson- ian Godwit on the Magdalen Islands, 271; Hudsonian God- wit, a correction, 430. Sauromarptis, 120. Sauropatis sanctus forsteri, 607. Saxicola leucomelzena, 460. cenanthe nivea, 612. Sayornis pheebe, 130, 261, 342, 376, 569. saya, 306. Scapaneus guatemalensis guate- malensis, 374. Scharff, Robert F., review of his ‘Distribution and Origin of Life in America,’ 283-286. Index. [oce: Sclater, Philip Lutley, obituary of, 621. Scolopax lapponiea, 444. saturata, 596. solitaria, 596. Scoter, 3. Scotiaptex nebulosa nebulosa, 25, 227. Scytalopus magellanicus grandis, 449, Seilern, J. Graf von, see Hellmayr, C. E. Seiurus aurocapillus, 351, 428, 572. motacilla, 80, 429, 585. noveboracensis nogabilis, 152, B18) O12: noveboracensis noveboracensis, 13, 428, 532, 557. Selasphorus alleni, 584. rufus, 155, 584. platycercus, 584. Sericornis flindersi, 302. Serinus canarius germanicus, 463. Setophaga ruticilla, 8, 121, 129, 279, 351, 378, 429, 421, 501, 572. Sharples, Robert P., Caspian Tern in Chester Co., Pennsylvania, 105. Shearwater, Audubon’s, 506, 507, 509. Cory’s, 547. Greater, 507. Shelley, G. E., review of his ‘Birds of Africa,’ 126. Sherman, Althea R., Carolinian avifauna in northeastern Iowa, 77-81; the nest life of the Spar- row Hawk, 406-418. Shoveller, 17, 22, 137, 548, 564. Shrike Loggerhead, 246, 276, 421, — 499. Migrant, 544, 556. Northern, 350, 572. White-rumped, 572. Shufeldt, Perey W., unusual plum- ages of the Ocellated Turkey (Agriocharis ocellata), 432. Vol. ae | 1913 Shufeldt, R. W., contributions to avian paleontology, 29-39; an unusual malady and _ probable cause of death in a Toucan (Ramphastos carinatus), 483; re- view of his recent papers on fossil birds, 597. Sialia sialis sialis, 29, 247, 259, 355, 502, 573. Siberia, birds of, 451. Siphia, 307. Siskin, Pine, 238, 532, 570. Sitta canadensis, 9, 279, 354, 573. carolinensis atkinsi, 247, 502. carolinensis carolinensis, 155, 354, 573. europea hispaniensis, 459. pusilla, 247, 502. pygmzxa pygmea, 129. Sittasomus griseus virescens, 121. sylvioides sylvioides, 375. Smithson, A. F., some birds of southwestern Missouri, 437. Smithsonian Report for 1911, notice of, 289. Snipe, Wilson’s, 23, 116, 226, 337, 425, 566, 591. Snyder, W. E., a recent capture of the Eskimo Curlew, 269; the Wood Pewee a foster parent, 273; the Evening Grosbeak in Wis- consin, 275. Solitaire, Townsend’s, 280. Somateria dresseri, 22, 281. spectabilis, 17, 22, 107-110, 548. Song, 472-474, 538-541, 591. Sora, 281, 425, 550, 566. South African Ornithologists’ Un- ion, notice of ‘ Journal,’ 461. South Carolina, birds of, 105, 114, 271, 273, 276, 277, 278, 429. South Dakota, birds of, 280, 281, 561-573. Sparrow, 556. Acadian Sharp-tailed, Index. 651 Sparrow, Baird’s, 280, 281. Chipping, 230, 346, 513-526, 583;/585, 570: Clay-colored, 570. Dakota Song, 281. English, 41, 53, 247, 275. Field, 219, 221, 258, 279, 544. Florida Grasshopper, 437. Fox, 8, 177-187, 211-214, 219 221, 544, 570. Gambel’s, 18. Grasshopper, 77. Harris’s, 114, 570. Henslow’s, 437, 555, 570. House, 454, 524, 529, 533. Kadiak Fox, 18. Lark, 240, 570. LeConte’s, 570. Lincoln’s, 8, 207, 281, 570. Nelson’s, 239, 555. Nuttall’s, 584. Pine-woods, 246, 499. Savannah, 7, 518-523, 533, 570. Seaside, 556. Slate-colored Fox, 113. Song, 219, 230, 346, 513-526, 5oa, Deo, O70: Swamp, 346, 544, 570. Tree, 544. Vesper, 516-525, 533. Western Chipping, 280. Western Field, 570. Western Grasshopper, 570. Western Henslow’s, 570. Western Savannah, 280. Western Tree, 280, 570. Western Vesper, 280, 570. White-crowned, 199, 544, 570. White-throated, 7, 116, 346, 516-525, 533, 556, 570. Spatula clypeata, 17, 22, 548, 564. Speotyto cunicularia hypogea, 568. Sphyrapicus varius varius, 26, 115, 340, 568. Spindalis pretrei, 405. 280, 652 Spinus notatus, 152. Spinus pinus, 532, 570. Spiza americana, 78, 240, 348, 380, 427, 571. Spizella monticola monticola, 544. monticola ochracea, 280, 570. pallida, 570. passerina arizone, 280. passerina passerina, 230, 346, 570. pusilla arenacea, 571. pusilla pusilla, 152, 258, 279, 544, Spoonbill, Roseate, 424, 503. Sporathraupis cyanocephala bii- singi, 464. Sporophila morelleti, 380. Squatarola squatarola, 566. Starling, 274, 275, 454, 543, 554. Steganopus tricolor, 287, 551, 566. Stegmatops indistincta nupta, 307. argentaurus patasiwa, 307. Stelgidopteryx serripennis, 377. Stellula calliope, 584. Stercorarius longicaudus, 444. parasiticus, 444, 546. pomarinus, 444, 546. Sterna anglica, 613. anzetheta, 105. caspia, 105. dougallii, 125, 574. dougallii bangsi, 124. dougallii arideensis, 124. forsteri, 564. fuseata, 125, 547. hirundowowelbecoranooo, 420, 436, 458, 546, 564. vittata bollonsi, 458. Sternula, 125. nereis davisie, 458. nereis exsul, 124. Stigmatops monticola, 140. deningeri, 140. Stilt, Black-necked, 425. Stipiturus malachurus, 303. Stizorhina vulpina intermedia, 608. Index. haee Oct. Stone, Witmer, the concealing colo- ration question, 146; the A. O. U. Check-List, 153-154; a peculiar Hudsonian Curlew, 270; the concealing coloration question, 317; bird migration records of William Bartram, 325-358; re- view of his‘ Birds obtained by the Francis E. Bond Expedition in the Orinoco Delta and Paria Peninsula, Venezuela,’ 603. Stoparola, 305. panayensis obiensis, 139. Stover, A. J., night song of Nuttall’s Sparrow, 584. Stresemann, Erwin, reviews of his “Ornithological Miscellany of the Indo-Australasian Region,’ and ‘Birds of Bali,’ 599. Strigops habroptilus innominatus, 607. habroptilus parsonsi, 607. Strix funerea, 607. varia alleni, 245, 495. varia varia, 532, 536. virgata virgata, 373. Strong, R. M., review of his ‘Some Ideas on Teaching a Bird Course,’ 127. Stubbs, Arthur P., Little Blue Heron (Florida cerulea) at Lynn, Mass., 430. Sturnella magna argutula, 246, 498. ‘magna magna, 27, 344, 601. neglecta, 569, 601. Sturnus vulgaris, 151, 158, 548, 554. Subspilura, 596. Sula bassana, 225, 465, 505, 506,. 509. eyanops, 287. dactylatra, 287. Surniculus lugubris brachyurus, 600. Suthora unicolor canaster, 451. zappeyl, 451. Suya crinigera cooki, 608. yunnanensis, 608. Vol. S| 1913 Swales, B. H., Northern Phalarope (Lobipes lobatus) in Michigan,111; Golden Plover in Michigan, 581. Swallow, Bank, 349, 428, 571. Barn, 129, 276, 349, 358, 421, 428, 5238-529, 533, 571, 590. lie, 524, 529) 534. 571: Rough-winged, 571. Tree, 8, 232-234, 519, 529, 534, iil Swan, Whistling, 226, 549, 565, 591. Swann, H. Kirke, review of his ‘A Dictionary of English and Folk-Names of British Birds,’ 441-442. Swarth, H.S., the status of Lloyd’s Bush-Tit as a bird of Arizona, 399-401. Swenk, Myron, W., the Whooping Crane (Grus americana) in Ne- braska, 430. Swift, Chimney, 27, 194, 245, 253, 258, 341, 358, 497, 524, 530, 534, 568. Sylvia undata corsa, 305. Sylviparus modestus occultus, 451. Synallaxis candei venezuelensis, 450. erythrothorax, 375. fuscifrons, 305. gularis pichinche, 143. Tanager Scarlet, 27, 207, 211-214, 348, 358, 428, 513, 515, 517, 524, doo, Olle Summer, 246, 348, 499. Tanagra abbas, 379. cana diaconus, 379. sclater, 448. xanthogastra quitensis, 122. Tangara fucosus, 122. guttata bogotensis, 121. Tangavius involucratus, 379. Tantalus ibis, 93. Tchitrea melanura, 614. Teal, Blue-winged, 22, 424, 564. Cinnamon, 564. Index. 653 Teal, Green-winged, 22, 564. Tegetmeier, William B., obituary notice of, 319. Telmatodytes palustris iliacus, 573. palustris palustris, 129. Tern, Arctic, 3, 125. Bridled, 105. Black, 225, 424, 547, 564. Caspian, 105. Common, 3, 5, 21, 125, 254, 257, 333, 423, 4386, 546, 564. Forster’s, 564. Lesser, 125. Roseate, 125, 574. Sooty, 547. Tesia grallator, 451. Thalassarche melanophris belcheri, 124. melanophris impavida, 124. melanophris richmondi, 124. Thalasseus, 125. bengalensis arabicus, 124. bergii bakeri, 124. bergii edwardsi, 124. Thalassogeron chrysostoma culmi- nata, 124. chrysostoma harterti, 124. Thamnistes anabatinus coronatus, 122. Thamnophilus doliatus catus, 452. doliatus dearborni, 450. doliatus yucatanensis, 375. Thaumastura cora montana, 449. Thayer, Abbott H., naturalists and ‘Concealing Coloration,’ 471, 618; review of his ‘Concealing Colora- tion, an Answer to Theodore Roosevelt,’ 126. Thayer, John E., a winter record of the Brown Thrasher in Lancaster, Mass., 435. Thayer, John E., and Bangs, Outram, review of their ‘Some Chinese Vertebrates. Aves,’ 451, and ‘A New Race of the Great Blue Heron,’ 452. 654 Thrasher, Brown, 211-214, 247, 278, 351, 358, 485, 501, 578. Thraupis episcopus nesophilus, 448. Threnetes frazeri venezuelensis, 449. Threskiornis «thiopica, 93. Thriponax javensis, 600. javensis confusus, 600. Thrush, Gray-cheeked, 207, Dios Hermit, 9, 29, 129, 279, 438, 516-519, 522, 527, 533-541, 558. Olive-backed, 9, 513-519, 527, 533-537, 573. Willow, 573. Wood, 354, 358, 421, 502, 515, 516, 518, 523, 528, 533, 535— 537, 573. Thrush-Warbler, Panama, 11-15. Thryomanes bewicki bewicki, 129, 437. Thryothorus ludovicianus ludovi- cianus, 80, 352, 435, 501, 557. ludovicianus miamensis, 247. Thurston, Henry and Boyle, Ho- warth S., some seasonal notes on Long Island birds, 542-545. Tiaris bicolor, 152. Titlark, Sprague’s, 569. Titmouse, Tufted, 81, 247, 353, 502. Tityra semifasciata personata, 375. Todd, W. E. Clyde, notice of his expedition to James Bay, 161; review of his ‘Revision of the Genus Chzemepelia,’ 448-449. Todirostrum cinereum finitimum, 240, 376. Todus multicolor, 402. Torrey, Bradford, review of his ‘Field-Days in California,’ 288; obituary of, 157-159. Totanus damacensis, 596. flavipes, 372, 425, 566. fuscus, 305. hypoleucus, 612. melanoleucus, 566. Index. [oct: Totanus ochropus, 462, 612. tenuirostris, 596. Towhee, 211-218, 276, 347, 358, 571. Arctic, 567, 571. White-eyed, 246, 499. Townsend, Charles W., some more Labrador notes, 1-10; review of his ‘Sand Dunes and Salt Marsh- es,’ 593. Toxostoma rufum, 247, 278, 351, WBS XO, Be Tree-duck, Brazilian, 110. Treron curvirostra, 123. Tribura, 451. Tringa, 287. maculata, 597. Troglodytes aédeon, aédon, 353. aédon parkmani, 258, 573. festinus, 122. musculus hypaédon, 377. irrequies, 377. Trogon melanocephalus cephalus, 374. Tropic-bird, 508. Trotter, Spencer, Arkansas King- bird (Tyrannus verticalis) in Dela- ware, 273; review of his ‘Faunal Divisions in Relation to Vegeta- tion,’ 450-451. Tryngites subruficollis, 426, 552. Tschusi zu Schmidhoffen, notice of his ‘Bibliography of Austrian Or- nithological Literature for 1911,’ 291. Turacus ruspoli, 300. Turdus deningeri, 140. menachensis, 607. musicus hebridensis, 465. swynnertoni, 459. Turkey, Ocellated, 432. Florida, 248. Wild, 494. Turkey-buzzard, 295-298. Turtur decipiens elegans, 462. capicola hilgerti, 462. risorius, 290. melano- a eS Wor ae Index. 655 1913 Turtur turtur, 198. Turnstone, Ruddy, 3, 567. Tyler, Winsor M., a successful pair of Robins, 394-398; two rare birds for Massachusetts, 435. Tympanuchus americanus ameri- canus, 238, 567. Tyrannus dominicensis, 427. melancholicus satrapa, 375. tyrannus, 231, 245, 342, 427, 497, 543, 568, 590. verticalis, 112, 273, 568. Tyto, 141, 614. alba detorta, 302. perlatus lucayanus, 597. U. 8. Biological Survey, review of the ‘Proposed Regulations for the Protection of Migratory Birds,’ 591-593. Upupa waibeli, 304. Uria lomvia lomvia, 21. Urinator arcticus, 304. Urochroma costaricensis, 449. VANELLUS lateralis, 444. Veery, 115, 129, 207, 513-518, 5ae, 536-537. Venezuela, 121, 603. ‘Verhandlungen der Ornitholog- ischen Gessellschaft in Bayern,’ review of, 142. Vermivora celata, celata, 152, 556, 572, 585. celata lutescens, 116. chrysoptera, 240, 436, 544, 595. leucobronchialis, 436, 595. peregrina, 8, 121, 572. pinus, 435, 595. rubricapilla gutturalis, 155. rubricapilla rubricapilla, 234. Vermont, birds of, 111, 112, 436. Vetola, 444. Vini hendersoni, 459. stepheni, 459, 600. Virginia, birds of, 113, 274, 594. Vireo griseus griseus, 28, 246, 350, 377, 499. huttoni huttoni, 130. ochraceus, 377. Vireo, Blue-headed, 207, 277, 513, 515, 517, 534. Red-eyed, 207, 246, 358, 499, 515-519, 534, 535, 572. Solitary, 207, 277. Warbling, 207, 350, 572. White-eyed, 28, 246, 350, 499. Yellow-throated, 129. Vireolanius eximius mutabilis, 122% Vireosylva gilva gilva, 350, 572. flavoviridis, 377. olivacea, 246, 350, 499, 572. Visher, S. S8., a few South Dakota records of some western birds, 280; additions to a list of the birds of Harding County, north- western South Dakota, II, 281; an annotated list of the birds of Sanborn County, south east- central South Dakota, 561-573. Volatinia jacarini splendens, 380. Vultur monachus, 305. Vulture Black, 112, 244, 420, 426, 494. Turkey, 227, 244, 274, 339, 494, 553, 567. Watwace, J. H., notice of his ‘ Ala- bama Bird Day Book,’ 455. Warbler, Bay-breasted, 428, 572. Black and White, 207, 234, 428, 516-519, 572. Blackburnian, 28, 516-518. Black-poll, 8, 501, 572. Black-throated Green, 8, 207, - (a Black-throated Blue, 515-516, 557, 572. Blue-winged, 435, 595. Brewster’s, 436, 595. Canada, 196, 429, 516-518. 656 Index. lave Warbler, Cape May, 278, 437. Cerulean, 240. Chestnut-sided, 207, 428, 514—- 51S br2 Connecticut, 28, 240. Golden-winged, 240, 544. Hooded, 501, 595. Kentucky, 421, 429, 587. Lutescent, 116. Magnolia, 8, 114, 207, 211, 234, iit, SUG. yey Mourning, 28, 429, 511-518, ae Myrtle, 8, 28, 234, 350, 534, 572. Nashville, 207, 234. Northern Parula, 279. Orange-crowned, 556, 572. Palm, 572. Parula, 247, 500, 515-516, 518. Pine, 247, 421, 501, 557. Prairie, 247, 421. Prothonotary, 240, 428, 500. Swainson’s, 500. Tennessee, 7, 207, 572. Wilson’s 207. 21 572. Worm-eating, 421. Yellow, 8, 196, 207, 2385, 350, 358, 428, 572, 603. Yellow-throated, 501. Warren, B. H., Yellow-headed Blackbird in Virginia, 113. Washington, birds of, 116. Washington Biologists’ Field Club, 475. Water-Thrush, 207, 428, 532, 557.- Grinnell’s, 572. Louisiana, 80, 429, 585. Water-Turkey, 489. Waxwing, Bohemian, 571. Cedar, 27, 348, 524, 534, 571. Wayne, Arthur T., the Golden Plover (Charadrius. dominicus dominicus) again on the coast of South Carolina, 271; two fly- catchers of the genus Empidonax new to the fauna of South Caro- lina, 273; the Magnolia Warbler (Dendroica magnolia): an addi- tion to the fauna of the coast region of South Carolina, 277; the Cape May Warbler (Den- droica tigrina) taken in the spring on the coast of South Carolina, 278; the Dovekie (Alle alle): an addition to the fauna of South Carolina, 429. West Virginia, birds of , 276, 580, 585. “Western Wild Life Call,’ noticed, 292, 455. Weston, Francis M., Jr., swimming of young Herons, 111; Magnolia Warbler in the. coast region of South Carolina, 114; Barn Swal- low in South Carolina in winter, 276; additional notes from the mountains of western North Carolina, 418-421. Whip-poor-will, 26, 536. Whistler, 3. ' Widgeon, European, 525, 574. Wild-fowl refuges, 161. Willet, 116. Western, 551, 566. Williams, H. C., White Ibis (Guara alba) in Missouri, 268; Brown Thrasher wintering near St. Louis, Mo., 278. Williamson, EH. B., actions of nest- ing Red-shouldered Hawks, 582. Wilson, Alexander, anniversary of death of, 622. ‘Wilson Bulletin’, review of, 138, 456, 606. Wilson Ornithological Club, 320. Wilsonia canadensis, 429. eitrina, 578, 501. pusilla pusilla, 130, 569, 572. Wisconsin, birds of, 269, 275, 582. Wood, Norman A., first Michigan specimen of the Three-toed Wood- pecker, 273. ~ wall” ce ie Shwe

a + apo ARs mill. a , try EP oA LTT Pere enyy 0 =% fee y MERARAAa pane be AeA ada ry Ret TINNY ce raiment renncr rae ins UT; ne a. gpm R abe Band aa@ esas peebeeeeaeeees JAWS ee : p PY al to al 2 Amy, pny A. ] iala aba | ‘en Am Aantians - | A Be Be |) Proraypii, | Moye enn intit tee dt -rre wy ronal inc SUSUU Pelee Oy, bs tbh. by Ot Ves ww ak bh ' 6 eae vy yh | wee x =! pay Roar ?| t weal Tht ay arent Van .* " i | " Se wo! woes = oS ee’ bea be » ‘ : ss On oe . a a i ri y Lees . ¥ w TN 1 yyy U Sh ad NNT RET) TS eres 1 Ad TTN ¥ ( i] aut wR $ . ax* ag? we a & “iad wv pty: ah Mpewiaevuve by ; Ww p Laan eed ‘ ™ . . Sa Sys yasrinee pet C vis? outed" wee tly guntytvy 1% we Sais fire FT esata al | vit¥rn 698 wee edenuey haat, Dnt ~m. ‘| Wine | des Be Es , ; : wy { ‘ my eee tecr ener ss sinh myyeeate Nucumemce eens ae at 4 Sw! Seu me aoe nny wd weTeSON Ne 1 TT Pet Wi, Ned ha ao we’ NAG Yure~. E paras ie 8 ay peeve. erste pr® cr why, "AKA > v | fe Fao ag * % A SA ao $8 parengy ttt eS ald Seb delet iad LAP ie ANY his aba OL) w or ya # Nate