\ eo eee al
Fh ite te a

nara y
NP tages
Yoon ne
4 hes
My me
3 We
yep t
hed op

. A. b SNe
S18 FBO anh,
a as re

© thar s sh 44 y
at Fae ne dale,

be

em

ete eat re ay : :
vibe? 3 beret r ‘. NALS

BF Ria . : J Y Ay Reece leniet yt ciahbinaey
mies en gun,

+;
2

Me eye! ee Oy
ore Pertatet:
ian dh Gatien

2
+<

=,
=
ee:

a5 ar
Tar.

a=

wal tig diac,
enor eee

pSeE:
eae

syste ;

PRR Ss,
¥

=

eee ae:
SiSzo: ;

*

be
=;

$x

Pe

oe

Sethe

7
bed)

ahGat
hte the

Wo lbey
on if a gs:
et
reg

eee

+s he +
t eh: Lait 47 rib ah
bacbnap wate yet ies

a,

=
Tae,
age

ee

Seats
- Serer

Be

PS

are ee se, See

=.

a >
7,
x,
Ss,
x

=
<,
ss

3

=
Be
Shs

?
pits

Se
=

a

wv:

3s

periseterstse?

Tr

=:

eeirereqizics

>.
tri

e

setistivi:

ratit:

COs
hee

ey
ty 94 Bean be

. -s
stsie?

es

ads |
bid this wr igs

“Pasties
¥

a

J
£

ee
ath
ois

*

LAS ES

We ee

te
=

: ret. f
Tees

oe

is ) ae

‘ss
&

cy

Eicietvees:

7,
af

ee

My
orate,

Be

2.

sttre
a7

peevers

Fee,
2%:
$57.
neat)
<2
xy

Ex
©
rae

=aels
<

tee.
*.
M2

See
ease
rent

.¢

we
eEs5,

ney

ees

?,
%

BS

:: Ss
th
eet

sy

pers alge
ee gceteraet

i 2 -- 111i Ae aaa PETE EEE Winer HT TAL, TT hd
ide Beee erat I pa. Agha s “gina . niped

53 IGS. vv PTTL TTT ELMS
; aes x rv Pail Lah ;
| To ete ath great eT _ “Mgeyy, nity» :
‘ ree BT ~ Sees Ns oe oe ;
s an crvnaten bey “nuh ‘
| NL Wyre es 4 Ad
CesyNene en = AAT A AAG

Ge ONe 2 Bett)
wr Booed | |
ie ad x 3

ke fv |
vs a te 2 , fs rs hn wats. Ah h fy bey
~~ Ory pe eMNCER RENEE hy Se (Men
TTT | | ¥ vitae eree ‘ "I dreerg¥ m, Ty
Wie pr AU eS refit wvoye or. vagy v..
Ming f TM n Vpghwenety lo Te J * tvtve Ny
LTE LLL pekahbakt tooo raw tut ew heel ngey appease Tasthcahy vet
: “Vuus oun vy
y, Wev'vennee eel TUE a
; =~ Steed
uh Z Ce ON NN
SPADA DA OTA ney Ue RL CORE Pl]
BICC TTA eet PT fj
vweeenseaute sy ll TALL |
eee + fed ae BAS Po a re Doble e wari hey ie ae a} | | Wh
| ee 2 : 4.x “
SA 32 7” my phe ant ot : mettre 1 ani 1 NAG ine To ~ }

euT q]
y .* ~ a ba »
vert wey Mementhi LL ant LAP bp 3 Medd ; bids Aa AS h
2 is, ae bb “eee A é ae & 2 vow Cr
A 1a] | | hd Wes 1
oh : 4

Jif =i ash mle g fae aha

we. "= NUNS Ser on “ | BPs
nf ‘ vee ; “ i 1S 28 ws wen < Ne
Re oeeee BeCeeLL AM eeene Feeae | | N Wav? 4
: Be Pe ats: neUca ee <sN42 wee ‘ mT re LL vis SNe i '

Ys 2S ats SS

|,
\ WA 3
tw. on aie wat

evi vast!
site tt Leet gst

S@ Se ees <

“ey eagyae Gaene tat hd
we ~ ei AR. wy Aa je
SS a Leh R ’ Dette erenewer ONT

* AMAL wet ynndtrwencacer

A Ye

ea toe OE

ey See
rs ffs Ot

TE ELLTTELLLAT g | WN wo
pare. ne” a he het se ae W | Vertes an ld

| y | Vv wiv? led sonal he ~ \e wyvrv "hAds 11
wan, - Snap f= ig ws &Sy, Ll wee ~— 3 + eyul ues wiv. Wry
ee Te a: 4 ek ae I L DR ADADAG SA vg
= Yes he OS we oad é
‘ey, leanne vougyl! Ww, iy tag ef Shah td bolt HA
La cian ‘ee, MPPAL T EL ELL =
ve cee man mare Peat sh bbabaltol } meee bh LL om, At vou u ‘“w fl bs A AT lh
‘ <i | > he Tr aan W BP wryntteny ant ey Wen, Vy —. br es c
Yn, = oe Be aoe vu ae ret | ty aca G 4 are bb | YW tv ‘yy, £$4 we —
& eeu Chel ? “ pote ¥ a? og OO ae we oe : eee
AA] wetitrene gut UP wet we HUT aes ; lili Wn vey Tene UY! a
pete | 1 | Ree qtUy' Y es we, fo oe wi wes ews Ve ave®
Aur 1h essed wyveet! © amt ‘w ed we Mn

Vase we Ce ee act inet tyivy > wth uyaee tay Ly ¥, ) Opes yar hy»
Pty aad re ANON OEU ces none beh ter ww ? PF gone UF iL

han
m4 i i

' in
é >

as PN

Dat

c
8

G Ces.
Oxp SERIEs, CONTINUATION OF THE New SERIES,
Vou. XXXIX ( BULLETIN or THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB Vion. XXeeT,

‘The Auk

H Quarterly Journal of Ornithology

EDITOR
WITMER STONE

VOLUME XXXI % 7
PUBLISHED BY A$ vce 6 A

The American Ornithologists’ Union. he aa

CAMBRIDGE, MASS.
1914

Entered as second-class mail matter in the Post Office at Boston, Mass.

-

iy

CONTENTS OF VOLUME XXXII.

NUMBER I.

In Memoriam: Puttip LUTLEY SCLATER. By DG Elitot, D> Ses,
F. R.S. E., etc. (Plate I) : : : s
PRELIMINARY DESCRIPTION or A New PETRED. By Robert Cushman
Murphy. (Plate IL) : , 3 k ;

A PLEA FOR THE CONSERVATION OF THE Ewer. By Charles Wendell
Townsend, M. D. :

ON THE Hapirs AND BEHAVIOR OF THE HErrinc Gutn, LARUS
ARGENTATUS Pont. By R. M. Strong. (Plates III-— a)

Notes on Nest Lire of THE BROWN CREEPER IN MASSACHUSETTS.
By Winsor M. Tyler :

THE FALLACY OF THE TENDENCY TOW “ARDS ULTRAMINUTE. Dis-
TINCTIONS. By J.D. Fieerns .

NOTES ON THE ORNITHOLOGY OF CLAY AND PALo Auro ‘Countins,
Iowa. By A.D. Tinker. (Plates XI—XII.)

AppitTions To ‘‘NoTEes ON SOME SUMMER AND Fatt Birps OF THE
Crookep Lake ReEGiIon, Cass AND Crow WING CouUNTIES,
Minn.” By Albert W. Honywill, Sis

Some Brnary Generic Namgs. By Gregory M. M athews, F.R.S.E.

THIRTY-FIRST STATED MEETING OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’
Union. By John H. Sage

GENERAL NOTES.

Brown Pelican Regular off North Carolina, 100; Recovery of a Banded
Pintail Duck, 100; American Egret (Herodias egretta) at Martha’s
Vineyard, Mass., 100; The Willet in Central New York, 100; Kill-
deer Plover at Cambridge, Mass., 101; Turkey Vulture (Cathartes
aura septentrionalis) at Martha’s Vineyard, Mass., 101; Doryfera
vs. Hemistephania, 101; Phoebe (Sayornis phebe) in Colorado,
102; The Fox Sparrow in Central Park, New York City, in
August, 102; An Abnormal Rose-breasted Grosbeak, 102; Two
Prothonotary Warblers in Massachusetts; 103; Tennessee War-
bler (Vermivora peregrina) in Massachusetts in Autumn, 103,
Mourning Warbler (Oporornis philadelphia) in Florida, 103;
Hooded Warbler at Boston, Mass., 104; Hooded Warbler at
Nahant, Mass., 104; Some Rare Birds at Hamilton, Kansas, 104;

A Quaint Reminiscence of Audubon, 105; Correction, 106.

RECENT LITERATURE.

Gurney’s ‘The Gannett,’ 107; Sage and Bishop on the Birds of Con-
necticut, 108; Tyler on Some Birds of the Fresno District, Cali-
fornia, 109; Grinnell and Swarth on the Birds and Mammals of
the San Jacinto Area of Southern California, 110; Gifford’s ‘ Birds
of the Galapagos Islands,’ 112; Brooks’ List of the Birds of
West Virginia, 112; Bailey’s ‘Life Zones and Crop Zones of New
Mexico,’113; Todd on New Neotropical Birds, 113; Karkham’s
‘North and South,’ 114; Wood on Michigan Birds, 115; Howell
on New Birds from Alabama, 115; Mearns on New African Birds,

.

il

Contents of Volume XXXI.

115; Shufeldt on Fossil Feathers and Fossil Birds, 116; Gain
on Penguins of the Antarctic Regions, 116; Mathews’ ‘A list of
the Birds of Australia, 116; Witherby on the Moult of the Rook,
118; Trevor-Battye’s ‘Camping in Crete,’ 118; Hartert’s ‘Die
Vogel der paliarktischen Fauna,’ 119; Economic Value of Wild
Birds in South Africa, 120; Bird Enemies of Diabroticas, 120;
Shelford’s ‘Animal Communities in Temperate America,’ 120;
The Oriole, 123; The Ornithological Journals, 124; Ornithologi-
cal Articles in Other Journals, 132; Publications Received, 134.

CORRESPONDENCE.

Albatross Specimens, 136; Teaching a Bird Course, 137.

NOTES AND NEWS.

Obituary: Alfred Russell Wallace, 138; Ora W. Knight, 141; Fred B.

Spaulding, 142; Dr. F. A. Jentink, 143; Dr. J. W. B. Gunning,
143; Bird Protective Legislation for 1913, 143; The Cat Prob-
lem, 145; A Banded Swallow, 146; The ‘One-Letter’ Question,
146; The Chicago Ornithological Society, 148; The A. O. U.
Committee on Classification and Nomenclature, 148; The 1914
Spring Meeting of the A. O. U., 148.

NUMBER II.

PaGE

AMONG THE Birps OF THE EASTERN Supan. By John C. Phillips.
(Plate XIII.) . : : 2 ; : : 5 ‘ . 149

THe Frerrucinous RovuGcu-LEeG, Archibuteo ferrugineus In Mon-
TANA. By E.S. Cameron. (Plates XIV-XVIII.) . | li59

Birps AS DESTROYERS OF GRASSHOPPERS IN CALIFORNIA. By
Harold C. Bryant ; , : : ; : ; os

On THE HaBits AND BEHAVIOR OF THE HERRING GULL, Larus argen-

tatus Pont. (Concluded). By R. M. Strong. (Plates XIX—
XX.) Bes ee : ; : ; : : : : e alits

An EcouoaicaL Stupy OF THE BREEDING BIRDS OF AN AREA NEAR
Cuotnau, Mont. By Aretas A. Saunders : ; : . 200

Doers A GREBE SPREAD ITs WiNGs JusT Berore Divine? By Verdi
Burtch. (Plates XXJ-XXII.) : 5 : : : rela

Birps or AUTAUGA AND MonTGoMERY CouNTIES, ALABAMA. By
Lewis S. Golsan and Ernest G. Holt. (Plate XXIII.) 212

ACADIAN CHICKADEES (Penthestes hudsonicus littorialis) In Boston
AND VICINITY IN THE Fat oF 1918. By Horace W. Wright 236

GENERAL NOTES.

The Western Grebe in Ohio, 248; American Merganser (Mergus ameri-

canus) at Boston, Mass., in Midwinter, 243; Two Unrecorded
Specimens of the European Widgeon from Massachusetts, 243;
Notes on the Habits of an Old-squaw (Harelda hyemalis) and two
Lesser Scaup Ducks (Aythya affinis), 244; American Egret (Hero-
dias egretta) in Rhode Island, 245; Notes on an Unusual Flight of
Stilt Sandpipers (Micropalama himantopus), 246; Franklin’s

Contents of Volume XXXI.

Grouse in Colorado, 246; Sharp-shinned Hawk in Meine in Win-
ter, 247; Extreme Emaciation in a Specimen of the Snowy Owl
(Nyctea ‘nyctea), 247; Another Species Added to the Avifauna of
South Carolina, 248; The Arkansas Kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis)
in Rhode Island, 248; Capture of Myiarchus crinitus (Linn.) in
Eastern Cuba, 248; An Unusual Observation on the Crow (Corvus
brachyrhynchos) at Lubec, Maine, 248; Starlings (Sturnus vulgaris)
at Providence, R. I., 249; Starlings (Stwrnus vulgaris) in Cam-
bridge, Mass., 249; The Rusty Blackbird (Huphagus carolinus in
Connecticut m Winter, 250; The Bobolink (Dolichonyz oryzivorus)
as a Conveyor of Mollusca, 250; Cowbird Notes, 250; Evening
Grosbeak (Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina) at Boston, Mass.,
251; The White-winged Crossbill (Loxia leucoptera) in the District
of Columbia, 251; Unusual Nesting Site of the English Sparrow,
252; Swainson’s Warbler (Helinaia swainsoni) at Guantanamo,
Cuba, 253; Magnolia Warbler in Colorado, 253; Canadian War-
bler in Colorado, 253; The Short-billed Marsh Wren (Cistothorus
stellaris) on Long Island in Winter, 253; The Red-bellied Nut-
hatch (Sitta canadensis) Feeding among Weeds, 253; The Acadian
Chickadee (Penthestes hudsonicus littoralis) at Watch Hill, R. L.,
254; The Identity of Hypodes cinerea Cassin, 255; Some Mar-
shalltown, Iowa, Notes, 255; Two Species New to Colorado, 256;
Unusual Occurrences at Madison, Wis., 256; Effect of Cold on
Moult, 257.

RECENT LITERATURE.

Millais’ ‘British Diving Ducks,’ 259; Reichenow’s ‘Die Végel,’ 261;
Oologia Neerlandica,’ 262; Phillips on African Birds, 263; Bunker
on the Birds of Kansas, 263; Swarth on Geese of the Branta cana-
densis Group, 264; Job on the Quest of the Canvasback, 264;
Mearns on Additional New Birds from Africa, 265; Grinnell’s
‘Second List of Birds of the Berkeley Campus,’ 265; Baker’s
‘Indian Pigeons and Doves,’ 265; Menegaux’s Reprint of the Orni-
thology of the Echo du Monde Savant, 266; Mathews’ ‘The Birds
of Australia,’ 267; The South Australian Ornithologist, 267; Mul-
len’s ‘Guide to Selborne,’ 268; Sarasin on the Birds of New Cale-
donia, 268; Hellmayr on the Avifauna of Timor, 268; Elms’ ‘A
Pocket-Book of British Birds’ and other ‘ Handbooks,’ 269; Miss
Keezel’s ‘Bird Study Note Book,’ 269; Shufeldt on Extinct
Ostrich Birds of the United States, 269; Valuable Economic
Reports, 270; Bird Enemies of the Philippine Locust, 270; Report
on Introduced Pheasants in Massachusetts, 271; The Ornitho-
logical Journals, 273; Ornithological Articles in Other Journals,
281; Publications Received, 284.

CORRESPONDENCE.

The Gannets of Bonaventure, 287; Researches of Gerhard Heilmann
on the Origin of Birds, 287.

NOTES AND NEWS.

Stopping the Traffic in Bird Plumage, 289; Heredity and Sex, 290;
Meeting of the Wilson Ornithological Club, 290; Meeting of the
Delaware Valley Ornithological Club, 291; Dinner of the Lin-
nor ok of New York, 291; The Spring Meeting of the

iv Contents of Volume XXXI.

NUMBER III.

Tur Movuuts AND PLUMAGES OF THE ScOTERS — GENUS OIDEMIA.
By Jonathan Dwight, Jr.,. M.D. (Plates XXIV-XXX.)
A List or Birps FROM THE VICINITY OF GOLDEN, CoLtorapo. By
R. B. Rockwell and Alex. Wetmore. (Plates XXXI-X XXIII.)
Earzty REecorpDs oF THE Witp TurKEY. By Albert Hazen Wright
OsTEOLOGY OF THE PASSENGER PIGEON (Hctopistes migratorius). By
. Dr. R. W. Shufeldt. (Plate XXXIV.) .. : : é ;
NorTeEs ON THE LOUISIANA CLAPPER Ratu (Rallus crepitans saturatus)
IN TExas. By George Finlay Simmons i 5 : :
A New Sussrecies oF DEnDRAGAPUS (Dendragapus obscurus flem-
ingt) FROM SOUTHERN YUKON TerRRiToRY. By P. A. Taverner
AN UNDESCRIBED GALAPAGOS RACE OF OCEANODROMA CASTRO. By
John Treadwell Nichols ‘ : « ; ; : :
THIRTY-SECOND STATED MEETING OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLO-
aists’ Unton. By John H. Sage . : : ¢ . e

GENERAL NOTES.

Pacp
293

306
304

308
363
385
308
390

A Misinterpretation, 394; Concealing Postures of Grebes, 395;

Herring Gulls at Sea, 397; Glaucous Gull (Larus hyperboreus) on
Fresh Pond, Cambridge, Mass., 397; European Widgeon (Mareca
penelope) at Boston, Mass., 397; An Egret on Long Island, 398;
The Woodcock Carrying its Young, 398; A Feeding Habit of the
Ruddy Turnstone, 399; Willow Ptarmigan in Montana, 399;
Choucaleyon versus Sauromarptis, 399; The Bobolink breeding

in Southeastern Pennsylvania, 400; Evening Grosbeak in Penn-

sylvania, 400; Nuttall’s Sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys nuttallt)
wintering in King Co., Wash., 400; The Bahama Swallow in
Cuba, 401; The Coahuila Cliff Swallow (Petrochelidon fulva pal-
lida) in Texas, 401; The Tufted Tit — A New Record for Canada,
402; Blue-Gray Gnateatcher (Polioptila cerulea) at West Haven,
Conn., 402; Three New Birds for Champaign County, Illinois,
402; New Bird Records for Arizona, 403; Birds transporting
Food Supplies, 404. ,

RECENT LITERATURE.

Ridgway’s ‘The Birds of North and Middle America,’ Part VI, 406;

Chapman on New Birds from Colombia, Venezuela and Ecuador,
407; Mearns on New African Birds, 408; Thayer and Bangs on
Birds of the Arctic Coast of East Siberia, 408; Stresemann on the
Birds of Ceram, 409; Mathews’ ‘The Birds of Australia,’ 410;
‘Die Schwalbe,’ the Austrian Bird Migration Report, 410; Grin-
nell on the Mammals and Birds of the Lower Colorado Valley,
411; Bangs and Phillips on Birds from Yunnan, 412; Bangs on
New Birds, 413; Oberholser’s Monograph of the Nighthawks, 413;
Allen’s ‘The Red-winged Blackbird,’ 414; Beebe’s Preliminary
Pheasant Studies and Other Papers, 515; Chandler on the Feath-
ers of Circus hudsonius, 415; Bett’s ‘Birds of Boulder County,
Colorado,’ 416; Walpole-Bond’s ‘ Field Studies of Some Rarer Brit-
ish Birds,’ 416; Stresemann on Early Accounts of Birds of Para-
dise, 417; Wright and Allen’s ‘Field Note-book of Birds,’ 417;
Bryant on the Economic Status of the Western Meadowlark, 417;
Field Studies of Nestling Birds, 420; Economic Ornithology in Re-

Contents of Volume XXXI.

cent Entomological Publications, 421; Hewitt on ‘The Protection
of Birds in and around Ottawa,’ 422; Menegaux on Birds as Ene-
mies of Mice, 423; A Note on ‘The Effect of Extent of Distribu-
tion on Speciation,’ 423; Henshaw’s ‘ Birds of Town and Country,’
423; The Ornithological Journals, 424; Ornithological Publica-
tions in Other Journals, 430; Publications Received, 432.

NOTES AND NEWS.

Obituary: A. C. L. G. Giinther, 435; G. E. H. Barrett-Hamilton, 435;

Publication of Reports of Expeditions, 436; Progress of Bird
Protection, 437; Roosevelt Brazilian Expedition, 438; Book
Notices, 438.

NUMBER IV.

Paces

OBSERVATIONS ON BIRDS OF THE SOUTH ATLANTIC. By Robert Cush-

man Murphy. (Plates XXXV—-XXXIX.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE STOMACH IN THE EUPHONIAS. By

Alex. Wetmore

AnatomIcaL Notes ON TROCHALOPTERON AND SICALIS. “By Hubert

Lyman Clark

Earty Recorps or tHE Witp Turkey. II. By Albert Hazen Wright
Some WINTER Birps ofr OKLAHOMA. By Wells W. Cooke
NoTES ON THE Birps or LEON County, FLor1ipA — THIRD SuppLe-

MENT. By R. W. Williams

THE CALIFORNIA FoRMS OF THE GENUS Psaltriparus. By H arry Ss

Swarth. (Plate XL.)

A Review or THE GENUS PHO@BETRIA. By John Treadwell Nichols

and Robert Cushman Murphy. (Plate XLI.)

GENERAL NOTES.

Harlequin Duck in Glacier National Park, Montana, 535; American

Egret (Herodias egretta) at Naushon Island, Mass., 535; Yellow-
crowned Night Heron in Colorado, 535; Red Phalarope (Phala-
ropus fulicarius) off Boston Harbor in Summer, 536; Another
Massachusetts Record for the Turkey Vulture (Cathartes aura
septentrionalis) 536; Richardson’s Owl (Cryptoglaua funerea rich-
ardsont) in N. EK. Ilbnois, 536; Unusual Behavior of a Ruby-
throated Hummingbird (Archilochus colubris), 536; Breeding of
the Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius phoniceus pheeniceus) in
Nova Scotia, 537; Brewer’s Blackbird (Huphagus cyanocephalus)
breeding in Southern Minnesota, 538; Florida Meadowlark (Stur-
nella magna argutula) in Nor thern Illinois, 540; Evening Grosbeak
at Jamaica Plain, Mass., 540; Chestnut- collared Longspur in Col-
orado, 541; The Snow Bunting Again in the Chicago Area, 541;
Nevada Savannah Sparrow in New Mexico, 542; A Second North
Carolina Record for Lincoln’s Sparrow (M. elospiza lincolnt lin-
colnt), 542; Bell’s Vireo in Wisconsin, 543; San Lucas Verdin
(Auriparus flaviceps lamprocephalus) in California, 543; Notes
from Springfield, Mass., 543; West Virginia Notes, 544: Some
Winter Bird Notes from the Yellowstone National Park, 546;
Some Breeding Birds of Garrett Co., Maryland, 548; Serious
Loss of Bird-Life During Spring Migration, 548.

439
458
461
463
473
494
499

526

vi Contents of Volume XX XI.

RECENT LITERATURE.

Eaton’s ‘ Birds of New York,’ 550; Swarth’s ‘ List of Arizona Birds,’ 551;
Aiken and Warren on the Birds of El Paso County, Colorado, 552;
Mathews’ ‘Birds of Australia,’ 552; The New Nature Library,
553; Bannerman on Birds of the Canaries, 553; Recent Publica-
tions on Economic Ornithology, 553; Further Observations by
Collinge on the Dispersal of Weed Seeds by Birds, 554; Herman
on Useful and Harmful Birds, 554; Food of the Common Partridge
(Perdix perdix) of Europe, 555; the Ornithological Journals, 556;
See pica! Articles in other Journals, 563; Publications Re-
ceived, 564.

NOTES AND NEWS.

The extinction of the Passenger Pigeon, 566; The Traffic in Rhea
plumage, 567. :

PAGE
IGxaoabe, 7 5 ; : ; , P : F F j . 669
ERRATA . ; ; : : ; : : : : ; FY aie}
Dates or Issuz : : 5 ; : ; : ; , Pe 51938)

CoNTENTS : ‘ 3 : : F : : i
OFFICERS AND MEMBERS A 2 . F ; ; : : 1x

Contents of Volume XXXI. Vii

ILLUSTRATIONS.
PLATES.
Plate I. Philip Lutley Sclater.

ie Il. Astrelata chionophara Murphy.

a III. Strawberry and Gravel Islands, Wisconsin (two views).
oe IV. Blind on Strawberry Island and Juvenal Gull (two views).
as V. Herring Gulls fighting and parent feeding young (two

views).
VI. Herring Gull with young at nest.

$s VII. Characteristic Gull Nest and Gull on nest (two views).

2 VIII. Newly-hatched Herring Gulls (two views).

ie IX. Gull scene at Gravel Island.

ss X. Parent Gull and young and Gull erying (two views).

“ XI-XII. Views of Clay and Palo Alto Counties, Iowa.

if XIII. Caprimulgqus eleanore Phillips.

“ XIV-XVII. Nest of the Ferruginous Rough-leg (five views).

. XVIII. Ferruginous Rough-leg (two views).

“ XIX-XX. Herring Gulls (three views).

“ XXI-XXII. Holbcell’s Grebe on the surface and diving (four views).

Ke XXIII. Views of Bear and Catoma Swamps, Alabama.

+ XXIV. Heads of ducks of the genus Oidemia.

“« XXV-XXVII. Primaries of ducks of the genus Oidemia.

“ XXVITI-XXX. Skins of Oidemia. -

. XXXI. Views of Lookout and Genesee Mountains, Colorado
(two views).

« XXXII. Nest of Red-shafted Flicker and young Long-crested Jay
(two views).

“ XXXIII. Nests of Gray-headed Junco and Spurred Towhee (two
views).

“« XXXIV. Osteology of the Passenger Pigeon.

“« —XXXV. Mollymoke, Diomedia melanophrys (two views).

“ XXXVI-XXXIX. Various species of Tubinares (numerous views).

i XL. Map showing distribution of Psaltriparus in California.

“a XLI. Sooty Albatross and young and skins of Sooty Albatrosses
(two views).

Trext-Cuts.
Paae.
Map of Gull Colonies, Green Bay, Wisconsin ‘ : ; : 23
Map of Clay and Palo Alto Cos., Iowa . : p , , ‘ 71
Reproduction of Audubon’s Permit : : ; 5 ELOG
Bills of Oceanodroma castro bangsi and O. c. Pe eeiaieira : . 389

a, ane
ety! :
We AY

cre

he
i,

OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES OF THE AMERICAN
ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION. 1914.

Expiration of Term,

CHAPMAN VHRANK: Mi President.is..<incieite erate <1s,e 10 014:61 101 April, 1914.
Biren A Re eos pone: 20 ‘ : ii

Haeeen ee We Wice=IeneStaenrss eters tes sinters 1914.
PUMESE SMOELIN, (Ess ASCLT CMU), arsiaie byt = x's clsarer's'p 8 aloe 0B s0, 0,0 00's “ 1914,
DwiGHT, JONATHAN, JR., Treasurer...........0eceeeee “ . 1914,

ADDITIONAL MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

OHV AINE SUERUUTUEDVIESINGS a: clots’ visi sieia)'s aero ehsvave! siete lace ete epetaieie(ss April, 1914.
rare RR VY SUMEEAINE 65 oh ccs ice veoh nig 2's, dane’ '6 pails tale a pce oe fe 1014,
EME aA sltee cae VAC e ts ares x cass) si’ 28 waves ees aged Shelwee Cece lniei wie’ i Oi:
SD CECUS DS VV RILEREIDD EL 252s. of aya lateiote cypie eisvagbee! ohes eins @'e/ece «| 2914;
Rime MOND) CHARTS Wp uie,ci's ons: a,0i¢ <a ss' o dveranaie » Gis as eres “« 1914,
EL OEMTTS yy P HOMAG) Ory 3. state aie cara csibietete dane eee jualé “1914
SMa MEVNY BUMS 09 6 a/ sss siete Gcod Mma Rie React os “1914,
PROETRORE VD AIS 22 ais atl ole ssa) BGS Brn) amrasc adv ain ave pore ele wie ew oe
BATCHMEDER, CMARLNS I os. .0 50s, x 80'2)n 4 a0" 8 555 0 8)
PORCAWANEEESS WV EETAMY 3s oisra ches sie Seas ass wep aime evaiessiniors
Ber eeerten 0 Ne 2 Merete
MUIR AWN CC. SEV ART 52-5, ch oS, dans le a are lets oysi oye wera ellel avd aions
PUPROMMS UME SAWN c0lcc cy Aiea Gc cet Bidvelte Us cayee: Bee ta Buel 9 Maga it
ERM RP RPA Ve EC COMRISIULS halo aga Fic nails die ter eh ole hal diste late Ge ela

Epitroriau Starr or ‘Tur Auk.’

STONE, WITMER, Editor........c.ccceees see fe wrevexevereve, sis April, 1914.

CoMMITTEES.

Committee on Publications.

CHAPMAN, FRANK M. Stone, WITMER.
Saaz, JouNn H., Secretary. DwiaGut, JONATHAN, JR.

Committee of Arrangements for the Meeting of 1914.

CHAPMAN, FRANK M., Chairman. Fisumr, A. K.
SaceE, JoHN H., Secretary. RicumMonp, C. W.
McAtTEsr, W. L.

x Fellows.

FELLOWS, MEMBERS, AND ASSOCIATES OF THE
AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION.
MARCH, 1914.1

FELLOWS.

Date of

Election.
ALLEN, Dr. J. A., Amer. Mus. Nat. Histi, New York City........ Founder
AnTaONY: A. W.-, Lronside, Ores. yo. 1 siajelorein oiele apoio eee (1885) 18952
Banes, OuTRAM, Museum Comp. Zoélogy, Cambridge, Mass.. . (1884)1901
Barrows, Prof. W. B., Box 1047, East Lansing, Mich............... 1883
BaTCHELDER, CHARLES F., 7 Kirkland St., Cambridge, Mass... . Founder
Beat, F. E. L., Biological Survey, Washington, D.C.......... (1887)1901
Berse, C. Wiiu1am, New York Zo6l. Park, New York City. .. . (1897)1912
Bann ARTHUR ©: aunton, Massi. acess -riccse a cere (1889)1909
BICKNELL, EUGENE P., Box 1698, New York City............... Founder
BisHop, Dr. Louis B., 356 Orange St., New Haven, Conn...... (1885)1901
*BREwSTER, WILLIAM, 145 Brattle St., Cambridge, Mass......... Founder
Brown, NaTHaNn CuirrorD, 218 Middle St., Portland, Me....... Founder

CHADBOURNE, Dr. ArtTHUR P., 193 Beacon St., Boston, Mass.. . (1883)1889
Cuapman, Dr. Frank M., Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City

(1885) 1888
Cooke, Prof. Wreuts W., 1450 Fairmount St., Washington, D.C...... 1884
*Cory, CHar.eEs B., Field Museum Nat. Hist., Chicago, Ill....... Founder
Deane, RUTHVEN, 112 W. Adams St., Chicago, Ill................. 1883
DutcHer, WIiLurAM, 939 Park Ave., Plainfield, N. J........ (1883) 1886

Dwiaut, Dr. JoNaTHAN, Jr., 1384 W. 71st St., New York City. . (1883) 1886
Ewuiot, Dr. Dante, G., Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City. . Founder
Fisoer, Dr. ALBert K., Biological Survey, Washington, D. C....Founder

FisHer, Prof. WattrerR Kenrick, Box 373, Palo Alto, Cal...... (1899)1905
Forsusu, Epwarp H., 9 Church St., Westboro, Mass......... (1887)1912
Furertes, Louis A., Cornell Heights, Ithaca, N. Y............ (1891)1912
Git, Prof. TaEoporE N., Smithsonian Inst., Washington, D.C.....1883
GRINNELL, Dr. GeorcE Birp, 238 E. 15th St., New York City...... 1883
GRINNELL, JosePH, Mus. Vert. Zoél., Univ. Cal., Berkeley, Cal. (1894)1901
Hensuaw, Henry W., The Ontario, Washington, D. C............. 1883
JonrEs, Lynps, Spear Laboratory, Oberlin, Ohio.............. (1888) 1905

1Members of the Union, and subscribers to ‘The Auk’ are requested to
promptly notify Dr. Jonarnan Dwiaeut, Jr., Treasurer, 134 W. 7ist St., New
York City, of any change of address.

2 Dates in parentheses indicate dates of joining the Union.

* Life Fellow.

Honorary Fellows. xi

Loomis, Leverett M., Cal. Acad. Sci., San Francisco, Cal... . . (1883)1892
Lucas, Dr. Frepreric A., Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., N. Y. City... (1888)1892
MAILuiArD, Josep, 300 Front St., San Francisco, Cal......... (1895)1914
McAteer, Waupo Lex, Biological Survey, Washington, D. C.. .(1903)1914
McGreeor, Ricuarp C., Bureau of Science, Manila, P.I..... (1889) 1907
Mearns, Dr. Epa@ar A., U.S. A., Smithsonian Institution, Washing-

Merriam, Dr. C. Hart, 1919 16th St., N. W., Washington, D. C.Founder
Minter, WALDRON DeEWirT, 309 E. 7th St., Plainfield, N. J..(1896)1914
NeurRuinG, H., Palm Cottage Experiment Gardens, Gotha, Fla...... 1883
Ne tson, E. W., Biological Survey, Washington, D.C............... 1883
OBERHOLSER, Harry C., Biological Survey, Washington, D. C. (1888)1902
Oscoop, Witrrep H., Field Museum Nat. Hist., Chicago, IIl..(1893)1905
Patm_Er, Dr. T.S., 1913 Biltmore St., N. W., Washington, D. C.. (1888)1901
PALMER, WILLIAM, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. (1888)1898
Ricumonp, Dr. CHaries W., Smithsonian Institution, Washington,

TDI GHA AS Spa Nery RS ncee's SENS Tear Oona Oy ADE ran RM ATH SU (1888) 1897
Hipewsre, Erol. Rosman, Olney. Ty can aaek «ie ccdieelsee o ners Founder
Roserts, Dr. THomas S., 1603 4th Ave., 8., Minneapolis, Minn....... 1883
PAT MOLIN) SE EO OLLIANIGs CONT a cac aids aie aiele alee lox vende aiage hee 1883
Saunpers, WItu1AM E., 240 Central Ave., London, Ontario......... 1883

SHuUFELDT, Dr. Ropert W., 3356 18th St., N.W., Washington, D.C. Founder
Stone, Dr. Witmer, Acad. Nat. Sciences, Philadelphia, Pa... . (1885)1892
Wipmann, Otro, 5105 Morgan St., St. Louis, Mo.................. 1884

RETIRED FELLOWS.

BHEDING) ly MAN StOCKLON,, Calica enmisoe acicicide ceeieie sales (1883)1911
Git, Prof. THroporeE, Smithsonian Inst., Washington, D. C.. .(1883)1913
LAWRENCE, NEwsBoup T., Lawrence, N. Y..............-..- (1883)1913

StesneceER, Dr. LEonHARD, U.S. Nat. Mus., Washington, D. C.(1883)1911

HONORARY FELLOWS.

Brruepscu, Graf Hans von, Schloss Berlepsch, Post Gertenbach, Wit-
Pastiia esq its'e1 Vial © cif 002509, (Ade Pn SRP Aca PR Rees yea (1883)1890
Dresser, Henry Hees, Atheneum Club, Pall Mall, London, 8. W..1883
Dusots, Dr. ALPHONSE, Museum Natural History, Brussels. . . (1884)1911
Finscu, Prof. Dr. Orro, Leonhardplatz 5, Braunschweig, Germany. . . 1883
GopMAN, FREDERICK DuCanzs, 45 Pont St., London, S. W........ 1883
Hartert, Ernst, Zoélogical Museum, Tring, Herts, England. . . (1891)1902

Harvis-Brown, Joun A., Dunipace, Larbert, Stirlingshire, Scotland
: (1883) 1902

*Life Fellow.

“xii Corresponding Fellows.

-Hetimayr, Dr. Cart E., Wittelsbacherstrasse, 2III, Munich,
CLT tee cte eiviels bis o ndin’ a teatate ga tana’ iehg a kavelents ta taeteneleate (1903)1911

InerinG, Dr. HERMANN Von, Museu Paulista, SAo0 Paulo, Brazil. (1902)1911

-Pycrart, WILLIAM PLANe, British Museum (Nat. Hist.) Cromwell

Road, London: Si Wiel fh) ta. go taie nie ae leeeenee teamed (1902)1911
\ReIcHENow, Dr. Anton, K6nigl. Mus. fiir Naturkunde, Invaliden-

gtrasse, (45, ) DOUG 7.45) fis sid ket nats wh hee) ord op neve eee (1884) 1891
Roruscuitp, Hon. LionEL WALTER, Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts,

gs exis sc lated oe oeeas s HC es ee (1898)1913
Satvapor1, Count Tommaso, Royal Zodl. Museum, Turin......... 1883
Scuatow, Prof. Herman, Hohenzollerndamm 50, Berlin-Grunewald,

Cr anite Oy eR, de SETA SUA Toate 5 Middl otc Diss © 6 (1884)1911

CORRESPONDING FELLOWS.

Auraro, ANASTASIO, San José, Costa Rica... .......00.ceeesecnusns 1888
ALPHERAKY, Sercius N., Imperial Acad. Sci., St. Petersburg, Russia.1913
ARRIGONI DEGLI Opp1, Count Errors, University of Padua, Padua,

DGG 6.3.0 2 ci2is. Siehacchs da tarba luhieb lela atta ale hae ey eee ae 1900
BonuOTE, JOHN Lrewis, Gade Spring Lodge, Hemel Hempstead, Herts,

Bing tand... els sale. 5 bdisve skye yeh eet ee er at 1911
Bureau, Dr. Louis, Ecole de Médicine, Nantes, France........... 1884
Butter, Lieut.-Col. E.A., Winsford Hall, Stokesby, Great Yarmouth,

rn Lars israyaiss ais b solieetavesetesenere aeueks otarcrate Glatelare chatter eeeee ae ere 1884
Birrixorer, Dr. JoHANNES, Zodlogical Garden, Rotterdam, Holland .1886
Buturuin, Serarus A., Wesenberg, Esthonia, Russia.............. 1907

CAMPBELL, ARCHIBALD JAMES, Custom House, Melbourne, Australia. 1902
CarrikER, M. A., Jr., Cincinnati Coffee Co., Santa Marta, Colombia

(1907)1912
CHAMBERLAIN, Montaaug, Cambridge, Mass............ (Founder) 1901
Cuuss, CHARLES, British Museum (Nat. Hist.) Cromwell Road, Lon-
LOTS IS oy WW ocak Ste hares ior lovee ea ke heya eee ctie RST eee ee 1911
‘CLARKE, WILLIAM EaGte, Royal Scottish Museum, Edinburgh...... 1889
DaucueisH, Joun J., Brankston Grange, Bogside Station, Alloa,
SCO tA. sia: sieialia ss e.5 a ais Evie toy orale ake Re 1883
. Doug, Sanrorp B., Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands.................. 1888
Ecut, Apotpa BacHOoreN von, Nussdorf, near Vienna............. 1883
Evans, ARTHUR HUMBLE, 9 Harvey Road, Cambridge, England..... 1899
FEILpEN, Col. Henry Wemys, Burwash, Sussex, England........... 1884
FERRARI-PEREZ, Prof. FERNANDO, Tacubaya, D. F., Mexico........ 1885
FREKE, Percy Evans, Southpoint, Limes Road, Folkstone, Kent,
Binpland ye. 3. cic ss nv oss Sede s See e nee eee 1883
FUrRBRINGER, Prof. Max, Director Anatom. Institute, University of
Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany .:.:3 22000) eee 1891

Gapvow, Dr. Hans, University Museum of Zoology, Cambridge,
PANGVAIG 65 15.5 «seis cies spelevesoele ak ae ee ee eee 1884

Members. xiii

GirTANneER, Dr. A., St. Galle, Switzerland.................2.005. 1884
Gopwin-AvsTEN, Lieut.-Col. Henry Haversuam, Nore, Hascombe,
Godalming Surrey, PaGaL 5. cic we eee odin cing date lero cle’ 1884

Goetn1, Prof. Dr. Emu A., Zieglerstrasse 36, Bern, Switzerland..... 1903
GRANDIDIER, ALFRED, 6 Rond-Point des Champs Elysées, Paris..... 1883

GurRNEY, Jonn Henry, Keswick Hall, Norwich, England.......... 1883
Hartina, James Epmunp, Edgewood, Weybridge, Surrey, England. .1883
Hennicxks, Dr. Caru R., Gera, Reuss, Germany...............+-- 1907
HMENGON,JELARBY Vi, WOKOMAMIA (5 ifie da tec eels We S cisyeralele ola cia\aliernts 1888
Huewan, Orro, Budapest, Hungary i. 5 5.6. seis ceca hatin wees 1908
Hupson, Witu1am Henry, Tower House, St. Luke’s Road, West-
pourne Perio MOndone Wess Pe eine iid roles 8 We tle 1895
KRUKENBERG, Dr. E. F. W., Wiirzburg, Germany................. 1884

Krier, Dr. THEOBALD J., University Museum, Athens, Greece... .1884
Leagg, Col. Witt1am V., Cullenswood House, St. Mary’s, Tasmania. . 1891
Le Sovér, Dup.ey, Zodélogical Gardens, Melbourne, Australia...... 1911
MacFaruaneE, Roperick, Winnipeg, Manitoba..................- 1886
Maparisz, Dr. JuLius von, National Museum, Budapest, Hungary . 1884
Matuews, Grecory M., Langley Mount, Watford, Herts, England. .1911
Menzsier, Prof. Dr. Micuasu, Imperial Society of Naturalists,

PUL OSCONT coef c Siaetcishtee tale or late a Watorod hotut a'cis) lords] wiel Maur aNAe tte 1884
Mutxats, JoHN GUILLE, Compton’s Brow, Horsham, Sussex, England .1911
AMEND, AVES t A IRAE) 8). hrc vats ALi tat cot sieve eaurs) peteieie &, ob; ahavaretraceiniapere 1886
NicHotson, Francis, The Knoll, Windermere, Westmoreland, Eng-

FSgeRGR es are Oia rel BLM tel 8 CY Pha RRMA ae rede hiro dm oe ee 1884

Norra, ALFRED J., Australian Museum, Sydney, New South Wales. .1902
Oartvie-GRANT, WILLIAM Robert, British Museum (Nat. Hist.),

Cromyell Road? London, So Wie io al daisies sete ales Seis ates 1899
PaiMnin, Dr J. T.; Helsingtors, Binkanad 5000? v5 cho rece Sets ees 1883
Ramstry, E. P., Sydney, New South Wales................00.0-8: 1884
Hesoan, PRepmnre. Napasale. 26 i332 sdadin ae cules wes hore Sinha se oe 1888
SciaterR, WitL1AM LUTLEY, 10 Sloane Court, Chelsea, London, 8. W..1906
SusHxin Dr. Peter, University, Kharkov, Russia...............- 1903
THEEL, Dr. Hsaumar, University of Upsala, Upsala, Sweden........ 1884
Tscuusi zU SCHMIDHOFFEN, VicToR, RITTER VON, Villa Tannenhof,

bet HMallemn Salapurg, Austria: 2.0 oo oso. ok ee ear eae 1884
Van Oort Epwarp Dante, Museum Nat. Hist., Leyden, Holland. .1913
Waternouse, F. H., 3 Hanover Square, London, W..............- 1889
Wince, Dr. Heruvr, University Zodlogical Museum, Copenhagen. . .1903
WORCESTER, Prot, Dman’ C., Manila. Pil. oon bec t s leita soe onan 1903

ZELEDON, Don José C., San José, Costa Rica..............02ee eee 1884

XIV Members.

MEMBERS.
Auten, ArtHor A., 707 East State St., Ithaca, N. Y........... (1909)1914
ALLEN, Francis H., 4 Park St., Boston, Mass................ (1888) 1901
Auten, Dr. Gover M., 234 Berkeley St., Boston, Mass....... (1896)1904
ANDERSON, Dr. RupotrH M., 901 Virginia St., Sioux City, Ia... (1907)1914
Arrwater, H. P., 2120 Genesee St., Houston, Texas.......... (1891)1901

Battey, VERNON, 1834 Kalorama Ave., Washington, D.C... .(1887)1901
Battey, Mrs. VERNON, 1834 Kalorama Ave., Washington, D.C. (1885)1901

BATES WILLIAM L., Ardmore, Pa ii. 2): 5.22% 00s «ities aoe mena (1885) 1901
Barsoour, Prof. Erwin H., Univ. of Nebraska, Lincoln, Neb. . . (1892)1903
Bartscu, Pav, Smithsonian Inst., Washington, D.C........ (1896) 1902
Brereton, Dr. W. H., 1159 Race St., Denver, Colo........... (1889)1914
Bonn, FRANK, 3127 Newark St., Cleveland Park, Washington, D. C.
(1887)1901
Bow es, JoHN Hooper, Tacoma, Wash..................-6- (1891)1910
Brals.In, Dr. WILLIAM C.,556 Washington Ave., Brooklyn, N. Y.(1894)1902
Brooxs, ALLAN, Okanagan Landing, B. C................--- (1902)1909
Bryan, WILLIAM ALANSON, College of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaiian
MSA MS is cass chore ese eee Oe ela hee Ge eT ne (1898) 1901
BURNS, ‘Frank, L.,\ Berwyn) Pav's-<x,.i0'sok,ccintaeatoniaies seen (1891)1901
Butter, Amos W., 52 Downey Ave., Irvington, Indianapolis, Ind.(1885)1901
CAMERON, ES, Vlarsh, sMontanaice. sone cee eee ieicnioe ioe (1903)1910
@eAMBERS |W). LEE Magle: Rock (Cally asa ae eee (1907)1913

CuarK, Austin Hosart, 1726 18th St., N. W., Washington, D. C.(1899)1901
Cuark, Prof. Hupert Lyman, Museum of Comparative Zoélogy, Cam-

brid ese Mass i bis hit t Heccae aie caren striae ores ciel Lor oem (1886) 1902
Daaeertt, Frank S., 2833 Menlo Ave., Los Angeles, Cal....... (1889)1901
Dawson, WILLIAM LEon, Santa Barbara, Cal................ (1895)1905
Deane, WALTER, 29 Brewster St., Cambridge, Mass.......... (1897)1901
PranBern, Nemp, Linden, Md inicio. eee} ona dsee en cee (1902) 1907
Eaton, Eton Howarp, Hobart College, Geneva, N. Y....... (1895) 1907
EVERMANN, Prof. Barton W., Bureau of Fisheries, Washington,

BAC ic nn pe tgs co jacal ranted whee a aS mee Oe (1883) 1901

FInuey, WiuuiaM L., 651 East Madison St., Portland, Ore... . . (1904)1907
FLEMING, JAMES H., 267 Rusholme Road, Toronto, onees . .(1893)1901

GauLt, BENJAMIN son Glen Mllyn oT 2 ne ee eee (1885) 1903
GotpMaNn, Epwarp Atronso, Biological Survey, Washington, D. C.
(1897)1902
HorrMann, Ratpx, 11 W. Concord Ave., Kansas City, Mo. . . (1893)1901
Ho.uister, Nep, U.S. Nat. Museum, Washington, D. C...... (1894)1910

Howe Lt, Artuur H., 2919S. Dakota Ave., Washington, D. C. . (1889)1902
Jacoss, J. WARREN, 404 S. Washington St., Waynesburg, Pa. . (1889)1904
JEFFRIES, WILLIAM AvuGustTus, 11 Pemberton Square, Boston, Mass.
(1883) 1901
Jos, Rev. Hersert K., 291 Main St., West Haven, Conn..... (1896)1901

Members. . XV

Jorpan, Prof. Davi Srarr, Stanford University, Cal........ (1885)1901
Kennarp, F. H., Dudley Road, Newton Centre, Mass........ (1892)1912
Know tron, F. H., U.S. Nat. Mus., Washington, D.C....... (1883) 1902
Mackay, GeoraGE H., 304 Bay State Road, Boston, Mass... .(1890)1901
Maruurarb, Joun W., 300 Front St., San Francisco, Cal...... (1895) 1901
Miter, Mrs. Ouive THorne, 5928 Hays Ave., Los Angeles, Cal . (1887) 1901
Morris, GEORGE SPENCER, Olney, Philadelphia, Pa.......... (1887) 1903
Morris, Rosert O., 82 Temple St., Springfield, Mass........ (1888) 1904
Mourpocn, Joun, 16 High Rockway, Allston, Mass............ (1883)1901
Norton, Artaur H., Mus. Nat. Hist., 22 Elm St., Portland, Maine
(1890) 1902
Pearson, T. GILBERT, 1974 Broadway, New York City...... (1891) 1902
PENNocK, CHaruzs J., Kennett Square, Pa..............+--. (1888) 1901
IPAInTIES JOHN G:, Wenham, Mansi. occis sis ciilelels « ¢ e<( loins (1904)1912
PREBLE, Epwarp A., 3027 Newark St., Washington, D.C..... (1892)1901
RATHBUN, SAMUEL F., 217 14th Ave., N., Seattle, Wash...... (1893) 1902

Raoaps, SAMUEL N., 81 Haddon Ave., Haddonfield, N.J...... (1885)1901
Ritey, Josepa H., U.S. National Museum, Washington, D.C... (1897)1905
Rives, Dr. Wiii1aM C., 1702 Rhode Island Ave., Washington, D. C.

(1885)1901
Rosrnson, Col. Wirt, U.S. A., West Point, N. Y........... (1897)1901
Seton, Ernest Toompson, Cos Cob, Conn............-.+++- (1883)1901
*SHerMAN, Miss ALTHEA R., McGregor, Iowa............--: (1907)1912
SrerHens, Frank, R. F. D. No. 2, San Diego, Cal........... (1883) 1901
Strona, Dr. Revsen M., Dept. Zodl., Univ. of Chicago, Chicago, Ill.
(1889) 1903
Swa.es, BrapsHaw Hatu, Grosse Isle, Mich...............-- (1902)1909
Swarts, Harry S., Mus. Vert. Zool., University of California, Berke-
Nye Mele: VA at etal Lahaina haya alehanep tone aio ey aletotors alae alsa (1900) 1909
TAVERNER, Percy A., Victoria Memorial Museum, Ottawa, Canada
(1902) 1909
Taayer, JoHN Extot, Lancaster, Mass.............020e0005 (1898)1905
Topp, W. E. Cuiyps, Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, Pa....... (1890) 1901
TowNsEND, CHARLES H., Aquarium, Battery Park, New York City
(1883)1901
TowNnsEND, Dr. CaarRLES WENDELL, 76 Marlborough St., Boston,
1 oA eae AG Es 2g eS Re Ae eA > REE ene (1901)1905

Trotter, Dr. Spencer, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Pa. . (1888)1901
Warren, Epwarp Royat, 20 West Caramillo St., Colorado Springs,

(O70) (Nala SEA CUS SEI ICT A nO Leet Orato Circe EO ORe (1902)1910
WAvne) Anracn TL. Mt. Pleasant, 8. Cisais acca levine scanese : (1905)1909
Wetmore, ALEx., Biological Survey, Washington, D.C....... (1908)1912

Wotcort, Dr. Rosert H., Univ. of Nebraska, Lincoln, Neb. . (1901)1903
Woop, Norman A., Museum Univ. of Mich., Ann Arbor, Mich. . (1904)1912
Wricuat, Mrs. Mazset Oscoop, Fairfield, Conn............. (1895)1901

* Life Member.

XV1 Associates.

ASSOCIATES.
Assott, CuInton GILBERT, 153 W. 73rd St., New York City aa. 1898
Apams, BENJAMIN, 476 5th Ave., New York City..............---. 1911
Apams, Watuace, Los Molinos, Cal........... Ave Os NAVE is): 1901
Apams, Dr. Z. B., 42 Cottage Farm Rd., Brookline, Mass............ 1908
Arxen, CuarLes Epwarp Howarp, 12 Pikes Peak Ave., Colorado
Springs) (Colo, Poet ssh. es eis clam ¢ ayes) ail ened eneeeteaee 1898

Arxen, Hon. Joun, Superior Court, Court House, Boston, Mass... . 1905
Axetry, Cart E., American Museum Nat. Hist., New York City. ..1913

ALEXANDER, Miss ANNIE M., 92 Sea View Ave., Piedmont, Cal..... 1911
Auten, Mary P., 206 Moon St., Hackettstown, N.J............... 1913
Aums) JOHN S:, North: Maston, Mass. 222). \0. 2. - cs oye ements 1913
ANDERSON, Mrs. J. C., Great Barrington, Mass...................- 1903
ANpREws, Roy C., Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City........ 1906
ANGELL, WALTER A., 33 Westminster St., Providence, R. I......... 1901
Antuony, H. E., Amer. Mus. Nat Hist., New York City........... 1911
ANTHONY, Mrs. P. Reep, 113 Commonwealth Ave., Boston, Mass.. ..1913
ARCHBOLD, JosEPH A., 107 Hodge Ave., Buffalo, N. Y............. 1903
ARMSTRONG, Epwarp E., 207 N. Michigan 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, Enwakp, Box 56; Enfield, Conn: 00. 00 os. eee comes 1908
BABCOCK DEAN. Hstes Park, Colon... ues oes ee eee 1911
Basson, Mrs. Carouine W., 182 Granite St., Pigeon Cove, Mass.. .1912
Baaa, Easerrt, 406 Genesee St., Utica, N. Y.............00eeeees 1883
Barmy, Dr, Bo He, 1417 Ist Aver Cedarikapids: lassen rere 1913
parmpy, Prof. GiA:,"Geneseo; (Ne Yoo) ean sect cere ee recneete 1910
BarLey, Haron H., 320 50th St., Newport News, Va.............. 1903
BaILey, SAMUEL WaLpo, Box 212, Newburyport, Mass............ 1909
Baker, Franx C., Chicago Acad. Sciences, Chicago, Ill............ 1907
BakeER, JoHN H., 7 Holyoke Place, Cambridge, Mass............... 1911
BaLpwIin, Rocsr N., 600-911 Locust St., St. Louis, Mo............. 1904
Bates, Dr. BLENN R., 149 W. Main St., Circleville, Ohio........... 1907
Baur, Mrs) Bennet’ F., Oakville; Conn..<... occa eee eee 1905
Bani, Davy 8:,622 W.113:St., New York @ity.5.)-. 20s en eee 1913
Batu, Miss Heten Aveusta, 43 Laurel St., Worcester, Mass....... 1893
Bau, Jas. P., 5001 Frankford Ave., Philadelphia, Pa.............. 1911
Banxs, Miss Marrua, Westport, Conn...............-+0eececeee 1911
Barsoor, Rev. Ropert, Y. M. C. A., Montclair, N. J............. 1902

Barsoor, Dr. THomas, Mus. of Comp. Zodlogy, Cambridge, Mass.. .1903

Associates. XVil

BARNARD, Judge Jos, 1306 Rhode Island Ave., Washington, D. C.....1886

BaRNEs, CLAUDE T., Box 1199, Salt Lake City, Utah............. 1908
BARNES), EOns dist VLA GOON IGACON) LIEL SS ovarereiaclsie si sralcrseielaie woevavers 1889
Barrett, Caas. H. M., Biological Survey, Washington, D. C........ 1912
BARRETT, HAROLD LAWRENCE, 704 Centre St., Jamaica Plain, Mass.. .1909
Barry, Miss ANNA K., 5 Bowdoin Ave., Dorchester, Mass........... 1907
Barttett, Miss Mary F., 227 Commonwealth Ave., Boston, Mass.. .1912
BARTLETT, Won. M., 410 Hotel Princeton, Allston, Mass............. 1913
BARTRAM, EDWIN B., 131 Beech Tree Lane, Wayne, Pa.............. 1913
Batten, GEORGE, JR., 381 Fourth Ave., New York City....:........ 1914
BATTEN: Gros 93) Union str. Vlontelain (Nissen. cs... acl. Jace oa ak 1911
BayNarp, Oscar E., Box 328, Clearwater, Fla..................00. 1910
BAVNES HRNES@ bles IMericl ermirN 4 evs sicis elevate ot ctaaiel ocere alee aha siousleyetons 1912
BECK, ROLLO HOWARD (oat doses Lv. Ds 21. Calera 5 yok, mclsereas borer 1894
Beers, Henry W., 91 Denver Ave., Bridgeport, Conn............ 1895
Bex, Prof. W.5., Agricultural College, N.Dii. ts .aicnec ses ner dar 1912
BENNEEP Rey. Grom Lowa Cityallianyas | i254 75 pees tees cf abejateie ail seleles 1913
BENNETTS, WiLuIAM J., 1941 Ist St. N. W., Washington, D. C.....1901
BrERIER, DE LAGNEL, 171 Monte Vista Place, Ridgewood, N. J....... 1885
Berry, Mrs. 8. JENNIE, 633 Waterloo St., London, Ontario........ 1909
Betts, NorRMAN DE WITT, Forest Products Lab., Madison, Wis...... 1908
BIcKNELL, Mrs. F. T., 419 N. Broadway, Los Angeles, Cal.......... 1913
Brippte, Miss Emity Witiiams, 2201 Sansom St., Philadelphia, Pa..1898
BicELow, ALBERT F., 84 State St., Boston, Mass.................. 1910
Bicutow, Henry Bryanv; Concord), Massi. jacaci << cs socc es sic: 1897
BigELow, Homsr Lang, Old Orchard Road, Chestnut Hill, Mass... .1902
BicELow, LyMan F., 80 Winter St., Norwood, Mass................ 1914
BIaGLEesTon#£, Harry C., 3918 Fourth Ave., Sioux City, Ia........... 1913
BrIrRDSEYE, CLARENCE, Biological Survey, Washington, D. C......... 1908
BLACKWELDER, E\x1ot, Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis.......... 1895
Buatn, Dr. AtEx. W., Jr., 1105 Jefferson Ave., E., Detroit, Mich...1901
Briain, Merritu W.,1026 N. Coronado St., Los Angeles, Cal........ 1910
Buak8, Sipney F., 154 Walnut St., Stoughton, Mass.............. 1910
Buatcauey, W.S., 1530 Park Ave., Indianapolis, Ind............. 1895
BioomFIELD, Mrs. C. C., 723 Main St., W., Jackson, Mich......... 1901
BoarpMaN, Miss E. D., 416 Marlborough St., Boston, Mass......... 1906
BopingE, Donaupson, 4 Mill Place, Crawfordsville, Ind............. 1913
Boaarpvus, Miss CHaruorre, Elm St., Coxsackie, N. Y............ 1909
Bocert, WiuuraAM S., 1000 Garden St., Bellingham, Wash........... 1904
Bottss, Mrs. Frank, 6 Berkeley St., Cambridge, Mass............. 1912
Bout, BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, 1421 Prospect Ave., Kansas City, Mo...1909
BOND LARRY To.) acetal AMINE, oc 8 alee ss cde die wisi severe sels wee 1908
Bonrits, F. G., 1003 Corona St., Denver, Colo.................0.. 1912
Boor, SHnBMAN Mi. Glen Gove, Ty. iii le iieeie w eee oeciele ee ees 1911
Bornpun, Sponcun, Fall River, Mass... <0 ccc so ciie eu cnte nettle wale sis 1912

Boruanp, WM. G., 14 Wall St., New York City................... 1911

XViii Associates.

Borneman, Henry §., 1613 Dyre St., Frankford, Philadelphia, Pa... .1912

Bosson, CAMPBELL, 722 Tremont Bldg., Boston, Mass............. 1906
Boup1not, Mrs. H. R., 302 Rusholme St., Davenport, Iowa......... 1909
BouRNE. Enos. Ls Hamburehy Nees fone cle eleetetole et nen ee 1914
Bownisu, Bs S.,-Demarest, N. J... 5.0) hci cee o/ore winless aleteaeer en ie 1891
BownpisH, Mrs: B. S., Demarest, N. J... 2.3.6. eens lowe sm enees 1902
Bowpitcu, Haron, 636 Beacon St., Boston, Mass................- 1900
BownpitTcu, JAMES H., 903 Tremont Bldg., Boston, Mass............ 1913
Boyp, Mrs. Harriet, 17 Marsh St., Dedham, Mass................ 1912

Boynton, Cuas. T., 1005 South Sheridan Rd., Highland Park, Ill... .1912
Bracken, Mrs. Henry Martyn, 1010 Fourth St., 8. E., Minneapolis,

1 60h) en a a ener WEEMS Scho ae nc oy 1897
Braprorp, Mosss B. L., Concord Public Library, Concord, Mass... . .1889
BRADLEE, THOMAS STEVENSON, Somerset Club, Boston, Mass....... 1902
BRANDRETH, CouRTmNAY, Ossining, N. Y..........-1...sesc0n+ sca 1905
BRANDRETH, FRANKLIN, Ossining, N; Y...: ..\.'s J. os.ce soem eels 1889
BRANTLEY, WILLIAM ForEAcrRE, Blackshear, Ga................--- 1912
Brewster, Epwarp Everett, 316 East C St., Iron Mountain, Mich.1893
Brewster, Mrs. WILLIAM, 145 Brattle St., Cambridge, Mass........ 1912
Brings, Epmunp, 52 Wyman St., West Medford, Mass............ 1910
Bringe, Mrs. Epmunp, 52 Wyman St., West Medford, Mass......... 1902
BRicHt, Miss Anns” Ll Pottsville; Pazceccs se acsearle ier 1903
Bammny, H. H.,' Raleigh, NuiG.. . . ck. Pe etme tees *, 1904
BristTou, JoHN I. D., 1 Madison Ave., New York City.............. 1907
Britten, G.S., 302 University Bldg., Syracuse, N. Y............... 1913
Brock, Dr. HENry Hersert, 687 Congress St., Portland, Me...... 1894
Brockway, ARTHUR W., Hadlyme;'Connt:).2.5ecee eet cine 1912
Brooks, Rev. Earue Amos, 419 N. River Ave., Weston, W. Va......1892
Brooks, GoruHaMm, 373 Beacon St., Boston, Mass................-- 1912
Brooks, Miss Martua W., Petersham, Mass...................--- 1913
Brooks, WIiInTHROP S., Milton, Miass..).205.).002...5 o. eee 1907
Brown, Miss AnnIE H., 31 Maple St., Stoneham, Mass............ 1909
Brown, Artuour 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, H.A.,.40 Talbot St., Lowell; Masa. 02. 55.3... 400 one 1912
Brown, Mrs. Henry T., Winchester, Mass.................2--000- 1912

Brown, Husert H., Beamsville, Ontario: .’..,225. 24.1.5. eees eee 1889
Brown, Mrs. J., Jr., 71 Bay State Road, Boston, Mass............. 1913
Brown, Puiuip G., 85 Vaughan St., Portland, Me................5 1911
BROWN, STEWARDSON, 20 E. Penn St., Germantown, Philadelphia, Pa..1895
Brown, Wo. James, 250 Oliver Ave., Westmount, Quebec.......... 1908
Browninea, Wn. Hat, 16 Cooper Square, New York City......... 1911
Bruen, FRANK, 65 Prospect St., Bristol, Conn...................- 1908
Bryant, Haroip Cur, Univ. of California, Berkeley, Cal......... 1913

Buster, Geo. M., 185 Franklin St., Lynn, Mass.................- 1911

Associates. xix

Bursank, Cuas. O., 48 Glenwood Ave., Newton Centre, Mass....... 1912
Burcxes, Mrs. J. W., 36 Curve St., Waltham, Mass................ 1912
Burcess, Jonn Kinaspury, Chestnut St., Dedham, Mass......... 1898
Burke, WM. BaRpWELL, 130 Spring St., Rochester, N. Y.......... 1901
BurueicH, Tuos. D., 825 N. Wigley Ave., Pittsburg, Pa............. 1913
Burnett, Witu1AM L., State Agric. College, Fort Collins, Colo....... 1895
BurnuaM, JOHN Birp, 111 Broadway, New York City............. 1912
Burt, H. P., 355 Union St., New Bedford, Mass...............++- 1908
BuRTCH., VHEDI,) DPA Morty iis eX sqicteis foie n aca sigs sioiinv@.e-os8 oe simle ere 1903
Buxsaum, Mrs. Cuara E., 4822 Grand Boulevard, Chicago, Ill....... 1895
@xnor. Louis, Brookline; | Wass. 2) 2 5 lake cities sda, tls0's setaresisi ois fs 1904
Capvuc, EuGcene E., 563 Massachusetts Ave., Boston, Mass........ 1910
CALLENDER, JAMES PHILLIPS, 32 Broadway, New York City........ 1903
Ca.vERrt, J. FLETCHER, 380 Dufferin Ave., London, Ont............. 1912
CaMPBELL, Ciara D., 1253 Beacon St., Brookline, Mass............ 1913
CarPENTER, Rev. CHARLES Knapp, 311 Park St., Elgin, Ill......... 1894
CarPENTER, GEorGE I., 129 Dean St., Brooklyn, N. Y.............. 1907
Carnricer, H. W., 5185 Trask St., Fruitvale Station, Oakland, Cal... .1913
@anran. JOHN, D.,. Lansdowne, Pas. ioisids sicfaiacsra es, s/s, essen oeiehals ye 1907
Cass, Cuirrorp M., 7 Holcomb St., Hartford, Conn.............. 1892
Casu, Harry A., 54 Spring St., Pawtucket, R. I................44- 1898
Casxkry, Rosert C., 58 Mills St., Morristown, N. J................ 1908
eect FAMERS JP. OCbaway Nib chore ke aia a doles «ile «ob acdheiets 1905
CHAMBERLAIN, CHauncy W., 36 Lincoln St., Boston, Mass........ 1885
Cuapin, Prof. ANarE Ciara, 25 Freeman Cottage, Wellesley, Mass... 1896
CuaPin, James, 330 W. 95th St., New York City................. 1906
CHarman, Mrs. F. M., Englewood, N. J......00:02scecccecescencs 1908
Cuapman, Roy, 2316 Pierce Ave., St. Anthony Park, St. Paul, Minn.. .1911
WHASH SIDNEY. Nantucket, Mass: ccs ciehe cielo cacisss) 2 fis ousrereie wlajeceyare core 1904
CHEEsMAN, M. R., 55 W. 4th St., S., Salt Lake City, Utah.......... 1911
Caipm AN, Grace B:, Sandwich, Mass: .< 2.0 6< ig. ccc ecw ws ees ee 1912
Curisti£, Epwarp H., 5069 Kensington Ave., St. Louis, Mo....... 1910
Curisty, Bayarp H., 403 Frederick Ave., Sewickley, Pa........... 1901
Cuark, Mrs. ANNE M. L., Box 153, Lancaster, Mass............... 1912
Crank, B. Priston, Box 2862, Boston, Mass:......0..620.08050008 1907
WORKS (CUAREIN GEO EL. vHUDECswIICANS ance iy laa tel oe: Leeks oer ons 1913
CuarKk, Epwarp B., Hamilton Hotel, Washington, D. C........... 1900
Cranky Eo VWiATTON WH alTpont,: lait. a fim chun sid a aovekadia cannds state 1913
CuarK, Josran H., 238 Broadway, Paterson, N. J..............-.- 1895
CLARKE, CHARLES E., 11 Chetwynd Road, Tufts College, Mass... ..1907
CuarkeE, Miss Harriet E., 9 Chestnut St., Worcester, Mass....... 1896
CuarxkE, Rowena A., Kirkwood Branch, St. Louis, Mo............. 1906
SP ats St VME NON te OTAEY SING) Moe (3 2cc\'sja) tle jaye, xiv & 6,'s alas Sh eyaieenya,é 1909
Spay, CHAS: IRVIN, boxiooo, Mureks, Gals oi ccs srcc\is Ge w viele o's bs <8 50 1911
CLEAVES, Howarp H., Public Museum, New Brighton, N. Y........ 1907

CLEVELAND, Dr. CLEMENT, 925 Park Ave., New York City......... 1903

xx Associates.

CLEevELAND, Miss Lit1an, Woods Edge Road, West Medford, Mass..1906

Coan, Henry K., Highland: Park) Mee aes etre etn a ents 1883
Coss, Miss ANNA E., 322 Broadway, Providence, R.I.............. 1913
Coss, Miss ANNIE W., 301 Massachusetts Ave., Arlington, Mass..... 1909
Coss, STANLEY, 340 Adams St., Milton, Mass.................00-- 1909:
Copan, JouN S., Quail St., West Roxbury, Mass................ 1908.

Corrin, Miss Lucy V. Baxter, 3232 Groveland Ave., Chicago, Ill. 1905.

Cocerns, HERBERT L., 2929 Piedmont Ave., Berkeley, Cal........... 1913
Cotsurn, ALBERT E., 806 S. Broadway, Los Angeles, Cal........... 1891
Coz, Dr. Leon J., College of Agric., Univ. of Wis., Madison, Wis. . . 1908.
Convin, Wauree S., ‘Osawatomie,Kaniih..too.- ee tenance 1896
Commons, Mrs. F. W., 2437 Park Ave., Minneapolis, Minn......... 1902
Coney, Mrs. Gro. H., 859 Prospect Ave., Hartford, Conn........... 1906
Cook, Miss Lin1AN GILLETTE, 165 W. 82d St., New York City...... 1899:
Cop, FRANCIS Ri Jr, Dimock) Rasen eee eee oe 1892
CopELAND, Dr. Ernest, 141 Wisconsin St., Milwaukee, Wis......... 1897
CopE.LANpD, Manton, 88 Federal St., Brunswick, Me............... 1900:
Corey, Miss Autce F., 1111 Park Ave., Plainfield, N. J............ 1910:
Counter; Sranuny, Lafayette, Inds: iocees cate cne ce eee ene 1912
Crart, Miss Laura FB. Glen .Cowe, Nii sen. coe oe acinar nee 1912
Grate, WaLmAcn; Orono, Mes 2. yas nae Lee eee erEe 1912
CraiaMiLe, Miss Estuer A., 24 8. Grant St., Hinsdale, Ill.......... 1910:
Cram, R. J., 26 Hancock Ave., W., Detroit, Mich.............. ~, 18938.
CRANDALL, ©; W.; 10 Lhird St. Woodsidew NewYA-.e fee eeineceene 1891
CRAND,, Miss Ciara Li, (Dalton) Masses acacia cree 1904
Crane, Mrs. ZENAs, Dalton; IMlassicer nee cet iec eee eieee 1904-
CreHOoRE, FREDERIC M., Box 1252, Boston, Mass................-- 1913
Cressy, Mrs. N.S., 25 Quaker Lane, West Hartford, Conn......... 1912"
CRITTENDEN, Vioua E., 43 Lovett St., Beverly, Mass.............. 1913.
Crocker, Mrs. Davin, Barnstable; iass. ee... en ek eee eee eee 1912:
Crocker, Mrs. Emmons, 48 Mechanics St., Fitchburg, Mass......... 1912
Crossy, MaunsEtu S§., Grasmere, Rhinebeck, N. Y...............- 1904
Coiver, Detos E., Addingham, Parise. seheeeaeee ecto 1913:
Coummines, Miss Emma G., 16 Kennard Road, Brookline, Mass..... 1903:
Corrie, Routa P., Dept. of Agriculture, Washington, D.C......... 1895:
Currier, B. H.,.79 Milk St., Boston, Mass) 4-0 eo se eee 1913
CurrIER, EDMONDE SAMUEL, 416 E. Chicago St., St. Johns, Ore..... 1894
CusuMan, Miss Aticg, 919 Pine St., Philadelphia, Pa............. 1910:
Cutter, Mrs. Annie F., 117 Washington Ave., Chelsea, Mass...... 1908.
Dana, Miss Apa, 488 Centre St., Newton, Mass.............-+.0+- 1912’
Dang, Mrs. Ernest B., Chestnut Hill, Mass...............0.ee00; 1912
DanIELson, Miss Epna H., R. F. D. 3, Goodhue, Minn............ 1910:
Dart, Dr. Leste O., Curtis Court, Minneapolis, Minn............ 1898
Davenport, Mrs. Exizaseta B., Lindenhurst, Brattleboro, Vt..... 1898
Davipson, Mrs. F.S., 1302 W.,S. Grand Ave., Springfield, Ill........ 1912

Davis, Caarues H., 515 Michigan Ave., Saginaw, Mich........... 1906

Associates. xxi

Day, Cuzster Sessions, 15 Chilton Road, West Roxbury, Mass... .1897

Day, Franx Mus, Mt. Airy, Philadel pita ai oo obs) elm sine aio ein to 1901
Dean, R. H., 300 St. Vincent Ave., St. Louis, IV ORSe Is. Bicketctae resiemies 1913
Deane, Dante, Wurman, Box 425, Fairhaven, INT SB a. ¥2h. cietean ciee sr ain 1913
Deane, GEORGE CLEMENT, 80 Sparks St., Cambridge, Mass........ 1899
DeLoacg, R. J. H., University of Ga., Athens, Graeett sip ters anaiaeie eee 1910
Dennis, Davin W., Richmond, NL eres hte cnevahabaiclats tate ieian cdatepceeters 1907
Densmore, Miss MaBeEt, 629 4th St., Red Wiese, Naar SS Foe d cites 1910
Dersy, RicHarp, 969 Park Ave., New York MOTE Gps arts raters ea neers 1898
Dericxson, Mrs. Gro. P., 1760 Hennepin Ave., Minneapolis, Minn..1910
DeVine, J. L., 5319 Woodlawn Ave., Chicago, ss... os as )ha eed vos 1903
Dewey, Dr. Cuarues A., 78 Plymouth Ave., Rochester, N. Y...... 1900
Dics, Lez RayMonp, Prescott, Wash.....----+++++++sseeecreeee: 1909
Dickerson, Miss Mary C., Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City. . .1908
Dickey, Donatp R., Box 701, Pasadena, Ca 22 sah sities meee raters 1907
Dickey, Samus. S., Waynesburg, Pa......-...--- eee eee eee eee: 1905
Duis, Freperick M., 2927 W. 28th Ave., Denver, Colo}... 02s 1892
Dimock, Geo. E., Jr., 907 N. Broad St., iBizabeths Newari scien 1911
Dionne, C. E., Laval University, Quebec, Ques cs.) .5 5 sis als ayo arateiniee 1893
Drxon, Freperick J., 111 Elm Ave., Hackensack, N. J.........-- 1891
Dopson, Joserx H., 534 Sheridan Road, Evanston, Ill............. 1909
Do.pear, Miss KATHERINE, Clarke University, Worcester, Mass... . . 1912
Dorn, Prof. L., Concordia College, Fort Wayne, 18 a0 aimee ae Bites b 1912

Dovucuerty, Gen. Witu1aM E., 1409 E. 14th St., Fruitvale, Cal... ..1890
Downnour, Miss ExizaBETH, 203 Talbott Ave., Indianapolis, Ind... . .1913

Draper, J. Sumner, Readville, Mass.......-..-++++eerere ee eeees 1908
Drowne, Dr. Freperick Peasopy, Warren, R.I.......-..+-.+++-- 1899
Drummonp, Miss Mary, Spring Lane, Lake Forest, Hees ie se eines 1904
Du Bon, James L., Windsor Locks, Conn........---++++esseeeees 1909
Dup.ey, Saran H., Lyman School, Berlin, IMistcigmet apa gen eee Make ne 1912
Duamore, ARTHUR RADCLYFFE, Newfoundland, N. J............-:- 1899
Dutt, Mrs. A. P. L., 211 N. Front St., Harmisburg, Pai sc56. e's: 1900
Dunpar, W. Linrrep, U. M. C. Co., Bridgeport, Wants dy sct won 1906
Dunn, Miss Harriet A., Box 45, Athol Minas 20.5522. 8 oan ee sis)- 6's 1909
Durrexz, Owen, Box 125, Fall River, IN IEC ues aac Oe ODEs Onno 1887
Duryea, Miss Annig B., 62 Washington St., Newark, N. J......... 1911
Dwicut, Dr. Epwin W., 119 Pearl St., Boston, INAS) seats ee leceyeetrs 1911
Dycug, Prof. L. L., Pratt, Kansas..........+--- esses e eee eeecees 1886
Dyer, Epwarp T., Southampton, N. Y......-.-+-+--+sseese reese 1911
Dyke, ArTHur Curtis, 205 Summer St., Bridgewater, Mass....... 1902
Fare, Miss Eveanor P., Palma Sola, Fla.......-.-++++++++e+e00> 1910
Farty, Cuas. H., 185 Fairmount Ave., Hyde Park, Mass........---- 1912
Eastman, Francis B., Plattsburg Barracks, INLD pied ad perc ort 1909
Eastman, Harry D., 24 State St., Framingham, Mass.........--- 1891
Eaton, Miss Mary S., 8 Monument St., Concord, Mass....5.....: 190S
Eaton, Scorr Harrison, North Bend, Ohi ke Pas Caio Seen e cide 1912

Xxii Associates.

Epson, Joun M., Marietta Road, Bellingham, Wash.............. 1886
EDWARDS, PhomBe P., Brookline, Mass... $2.2 .ciswtewamecmaee ei iee 1912
Epwarps, Vinau N., Box 36, Woods Hole, Mass.................. 1912
Exincer, Dr. Ciype E., 100 Rosedale Ave., West Chester, Pa...... 1904
Eicum, Auaust, 1133 0 St., Lincoln, Neb). 2 3:26 cee seamrmte hr 1902
Errric, Rev. C. W. Gustave, Concordia Teachers College, Oak
Parke TN. ioe adie ece eta 0 WN. 0! nian eiaitne's aie eee 1913
Emprck, Dr: JA. F., New Haven, Mo. 0. .)2%.\2 22 cee ten entre: 1906
EKBLAW, WALTER ELMER, care of G. Ekblaw, Rantoul, Ill........... 1911
EvprivGe, ArtTuour 8., South Lincoln, Mass...............-.+e-0-: 1912
Exuiot, Mrs. J. W., 124 Beacon St., Boston, Mass................. 1912
Enazort, Dr. 5. Harn, 63: William St., Lyons; Nz Yin eee eee ee 1912
Kinns, Goren P., Norwalk, Conn... 2.) :t22..5.oaeleeemen ance 1904
EMMET, CHRISTOPHER TEMPLE, Stony Brook, N. Y................ 1909
Eumnr, Ropert T.;New Rochelle, N.Y. 2.52.4. ..aeeree ieee 1904
Emmons, RuPert A., 17 TSt., N. E., Washington, D. C............. 1913
Emory, Mrs. Mary Drie, 156 Foundry St., Morgantown, W. Va. . .1899
ENDERS, JoHN O., 17 Highland St., Hartford, Conn................ 1904
Evans, Miss NevapA, 3637 10th Ave., S., Minneapolis, Minn....... 1910
Evans, Wiuu1AM B., 205 E. Central Ave., Moorestown, N.J........ 1897
FARLEY, JOHN A., 105 Summer St., Malden, Mass................. 1904
Farr, Marcus 8., Princeton University, Princeton, N. J.......... ..1900
FarwELL, Mrs. JoHn V., Ardleigh, Lake Forest, Ill................ 1896
Fay, S. Prescorr, 3 Brimmer St., Boston, Mass...) 2. 2.5... 5000 1907
Feucer, ALvA Howarp, North Side High School, Denver, Colo..... 1898
Fei, Miss Emma TrEGO, 1534 N. Broad St., West Philadelphia, Pa.. .1903
HEETON; Wi: Re; one: Tree} /Mont.. :. oo ae eee eer eee taEe 1910
Frerauson, Mrs. Mary VAN E., 57 Arlington Ave., Providence, R. I..1912
Ferry, Miss Mary B., 19 Morgan Ave., Norwalk, Conn............ 1912
Frevp, Epwarp B., 30 Gillette St., Hartford, Conn................ 1898
Pie ep Drs GHol Wi Sharon Vass seer ORY HE ROS, et tae 1910
FisHER, Miss EvizABETH WILSON, 2222 Spruce St., Philadelphia, Pa.. 1896
FisHer, G. Ciypr, American Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City...... 1908
FisHER, WALTER T., 45 Fairfax St., Cambridge, Mass............... 1907
FLANAGAN, JOHN H., 89 Power St., Providence, R. I............. 1898
PunrcHeR,, Mrs: Mary H., Proctorsville: Vitis secme ace aes 1898
Fioyp, WILLIAM, 84 William St., New York City................. 1913
Form Jonn/ Ps 104 Franklin Stk, Suftolk, Valae-o-ee eee aes 1913
Foore, Miss F. Huserra, 90 Locust Hill Ave., Yonkers, N. Y...... 1897
FORBES, ATH xXANDER, Milton, Miasss. 4. sa acento eee eee 1912
Forpyce, Gro. L., 40 Lincoln Ave., Youngstown, Ohio............ 1901
Fow ter, FrepERIcK Haun, 221 Kingsley Ave., Palo Alto, Cal...... 1892
Fow er, Henry W., Acad. Nat. Sciences, Philadelphia, Pa......... 1898
Fox, Dr. Wiuu1aM H., 1826 Jefferson Place, Washington, D. C....... 1883
Francis, Gro. A., 1453 Sea View Ave., Bridgeport, Conn........... 1911

FRANcIS, NATHANIEL A., 35 Davis Ave., Brookline, Mass........... 1913

Associates. XXili

PAs DONATD, Johnstown, Ne Yoee2 seis Mc ee Sok nee cece Phe awe 1902
Prearamn. Je AMG OON (OWA a Gees lee ace ole ese ce ee cen oe 1909
FREEMAN, Miss Harriet E., 37 Union Park, Boston, Mass......... 1903
Paencn, CHAntims iH. Canton, Mass 20.) Soigieise sac des asst. . .1904
BENCH Virs HAS Elen Cantonmlviasssenis. sa tecie ones <b cee ones 1908
FULLER, CLARENCE T., 71 Broadway, New York City.............. 1907
Fuuier, Mrs. Evita M., Needham, Mass.................00ceceee: 1909
Mapuinn, ie Onin NeCdiAIN wr das: 25) te bilatii ae le atin eee ele oak 1904
FUNKHOUSER, W. D., 415 No. Tioga St., Ithaca, N. Y.............. 1913
GABRIELSON, Ira N., 206 N. Ist Ave., Marshalltown, Iowa......... 1912
Gano, Miss Laura, 744 National Road, W., Richmond, Ind........ 1903
GARDINER, CHARLES Barnes, 5 Minard Place, Norwalk, Ohio...... 1903
CARRICK JAMMSYE Ors WESTON Sie Srila. cistacm et clae ace ets a cles ate 1906
Gave, JOHN; Dox 254, Lorrington,/Oonn).) 241). cies occa seen ee 1901
GeorGE, Mrs. W. W., 1312 Market St., Parkersburg, W. Va........ 1912
GERTKEN, SEVERIN, St. Johns University, Collegeville, Minn........ 1912
GTANTNE nOHASUSA a) DOland Ni ee ails) ecte oc deci ieiete wala olnt Sa eee 1911
Giakon, Joun T., Sodthborough, Mase.) .622..00 04.6. enc uello ace 1912
Gipson, Lanaepon, 5 Union St., Schenectady, N. Y................ 1904
Grman, M. PRENCH, Sacaton, ATIZONGie <2 Jes pied slams sé wlloe ceed 1907
GuappDING, Mrs. JoHN R., 30 Stimson Ave., Providence, R.I........ 1912
GimASON, ALFRED 1); (Gleasondales Miassinn. ceo. eels<s cetfon ve ee 1912
GopsHaL., W. V., 1625 East Fayette St., Syracuse, N. Y............ 1912
Gorean, Luwis §.¢ Autaugaville, Alay. 9: .5305.3 oc gd ss ea cae eek: 1912
Goopats, Dr. JosEPH LINCOLN, 258 Beacon St., Boston: Mass 25...) 1885
GoopricH, JuLiet T., 1210 Astor St., Chicago, ll Bh Naat ate ecto 1904
Gorpon, Harry E., 313 Laburnum ee Rochester, No Ys 55s... 1911
Gourp Dr Armen Vis Malden yWisassiaacoe cee nee niece ete oe 1912
GouLp, JoserH E., 5 Clifton St., Norfolk, Va..................00. 1889
SEARTAWE, NV MLS Vice AICCOs SLU tS tadaie arandnt ie a amet etela hie ow aleve a ae 1909
GRANGER, Miss Heuen, Griswoldville, Mass.....-................ 1904.
GRANGER, WALTER, Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City........ 1891
Grant, WM. W., 706 E. Seneca St., Ithaca, N. Y.................. 1910
Graves, Mrs. Cuaruzs B., 66 Franklin St., New London, Conn.....1905
Gray, Miss EvizABetu F., 870 High St., Dedham, Mass............. 1913
Gray, Miss Isa E., 5 Chestnut St., Boston, Mass.................- 1912
GREEN, Miss Mary Amory, Croton-on-Hudson, N. Y.............. 1911
GREENOUGH, Henry Voss, 23 Monmouth Court, Brookline, Mass.. .1909
Grecory, STEPHEN §., Jr., 1349 Astor St., Chicago, Ill............. 1906
Griscom, LupLow, 21 Washington Sq., N., New York City....... 1908
GRONBERGER, S. M., Smithsonian Inst., Washington, D. C......... 1909
Gross, ALFRED O., 17 McKeen St., Brunswick, Me................- 1907
GROSVENER, GinBERT H., National Geog. Soc., Washington, D. C...1913
Guitp, Henry R., 102 Beacon St., Boston, Mass.................. 1912
GUTSELL, JAMES S., 301 College Ave., Ithaca, N. Y.............2e0: 1911
HADENY, ALDEN EH, Monrovia, Indiatia......5....0.00.ccee sees 1906

XXiV Associates.

Hatt, Franx H., Agricultural Experiment Station, Geneva, N. Y...1910

Hasz, H. Portme, Leominster, Mass... 2c 2)scc cometise ieletiate snee 1904
Hauuett, Geo. H., Jr., Haverford College, Haverford, Pa............ 1911
Haxenron, Dr: B. Ai; Highland Park, TU. oss. oreprtee ert ee 1909
HANKINSON, THos. Leroy, Charleston, Ul... .2))psaweeesinsee 1897
Harpon, Mrs. Henry W., 315 West 71st St., New York City...... 1905
Hanoy, Joun’ H.; Jr.,. Littleton, Mase) cco. ap eee ere iia 1905
Harper, Francis, 555 First Ave., College Point, N. Y............. 1907

Harper, Mrs. Geo. V., 102 Pennsylvania Ave., Wilmington, Del... .1910
Harrinaton, EvizABETH R., 11 Ave., and 47th St., New York City. .1913

Hanns, Harry, Kansas: City,, Mo.)).0 25. 22s eae eee eee 1911
Harris, Ror C.,. 725 N: 10th St., Richmond, ima eye ease 1911
Hart, CuArtes G., Box 47, East Berlin, Conn................--.. 1908
Harvey, Miss Ruts Sawyer, 1203 Woodland Ave., Cincinnati, Ohio . 1902
Hasxeti, Miss HELEN P., 1207 Henry St., Alton, Ill.............. 1905
HaskE.Lu, Wm. S8., Woolworth Building, New York City............. 1913
Hatraaway, Harry S., Box 1466, Providence, R. I...............- 1897
HAvemnuynr, H.'O., Jr, Mahwah, Niad-c coe een ace are crinccer 1893
Hazarp, Hon. R..G., Peaee Dale, Re tn...) sec. eae nie 1885
Her, Caantus E., Needham, Masai). o.0 22.5022 2 se trsmein seems 1908
Huram, Anraur’ H., (Miller Place, No ¥i20 desis senior itenmercieens 1888
Hemenway, Mrs. Harriet L., Readville, Mass.................0.. 1912
HENDERSON, Judge Junius, Boulder, Colo.................-.... 1903
HEnpRICKSON, W. F., 276 Hillside Ave., Jamaica, N. Y............ 1885
Henn, ARTHUR WILBUR, Indiana University, Bloomington, Ind...... 1909
Herrick, Francis H., Adelbert College, Cleveland, Ohio............ 1913
Herrick, Harowp, 25 Liberty St., New York City............... 1905
Hirrick, Newson I.,'Cedarhurst, Nowe. eee re 1913
Hersey, F. Stymour, 6 Maple Ave., Taunton, Mass............... 1911
Hensry, iL: J.,, Wray, ‘Colos.: .: 22a eee eee eee ae aoe 1909
Huss Isaac .. Philo, TM. 3. ose cs wiererctseneieeieleiete eens 1909
HicBer, Harry G., 13 Austin St., Hyde Park, Mass.............. 1900
FTeGins, Henry CHAs., Uxbridme: Vinss. ere ateiei lector steieireraees 1912
Hit, JAMES Haynes, Box 485, New London, Conn................. 1897
Hitz, Mrs. Toomas R., 4629 Baltimore Ave., Philadelphia, Pa....... 1903
Hinckiey, Gro. Lyman, Public Library, Boston, Mass............ 1912
HiIncKuLEY, Henry H., Melrose Highlands, Mass................-.- 1912
Hing, Prof. James Stewart, Ohio State Univ., Columbus, Ohio... .1899
Bim ‘Mrs. Jann L., Auburn, Ind). oo: 02.5 piece aoe eee 1890
Hircucock, Frank H., Metropolitan Club, New York City........ 1891
Hx, Grorce E., 630 Columbus Ave., New York City............. 1904
Hopae, Prof. CLirron Fremont, State University, Eugene, Oregon. .1899
Howden, Mrs. Epwin B., 323 Riverside Drive, New York City...... 1903
Hoven, Mrs. EMevineE R., 13 E. 79th St., New York City........ 1902
HOGHAND WEVAROLD) MUAY, Galesbure. TI Sys ie eerste eee eee te 1910

Ho.uanp, Dr. Witii1aM J., Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, Pa....... 1899

/

Associates. XXV

HouuisTteR, WARREN D., 620 McPhea Bldg., Denver, Colo....... 1901
Houtman, Raur# H., 33 Chestnut St., Stoneham, Mass.............. 1907
Rieu Baber Ge eARaCiIras: cA lois. arid 2 ta iat a/Sta.sis.9-0 ahs, ole aro ee oar 1911
Hott, Mrs. Nancy W. C., 13 Chauncey St., Cambridge, Mass...... 1908
Honyrwiti, ALBERT W., Jr., 522 Holmes St., Wilkinsburg, Pa....... 1907
MGRSTALT. BRUCE: PEinebO sy INS ca «esis lavarelthaleiaiarein sine id dopa ecw 8.9 .8)8 1905
Hortcuxiss, Miss Jutra R., 502 W. 113 St., New York City......... 1912
Howey CARLTON Oe dVilorrisville sate 4.5 2c 3 opti csenis teh y<1ai cichees ta canine 1901
Howe, Recinatp Heser, Jr., Thoreau Museum, Concord, Mass....1895
HM OWNETACAY IDRAZ ber 5 @ovamenn Galt 0 vaevces ts cto eed 1a sivas eleree § sicke 1909
Ho wEbin BENge phe dite Ever Heel sl ES OOMGODS INI s) scievsie acters le <P eie se 1907
Howss, Paut Griswoip, Maplewood Biol. Laborat., Stamford, Conn. .1913
How.anp, R. H., 164 Wildwood Ave., Upper Montclair, N. J........ 1912
Hoyt, Miss ANNIES., 160 Lexington Ave., New York City............ 1909
Hoyt, Wituiam H., Box 425, Stamford, Conn....................- 1907
Hopparp, Dr. Lucros, 1s. Houghton, Miecbo: 5:2). 64. 320.0055 ete 1907
Husparp, Mrs. Sara A., 177 Woodruff Ave., Brooklyn, N. Y....... 1891
Hupson, Mrs. K. W., 22 Chestnut Hill, Wellesley Hill, Mass........ 1911
Hunn. Ep win D. 6024 Hllis-Aver, Chicago: WN taco: os.c.cetia- -le 1913
Hunn, Joon T. SHARPLEsS, 1218 Prospect Ave., Plainfield, N. J.....1895
Hunt, CHreswE.u J., 740 8. Cuyler Ave., Oak Park, Ill........... 1902
Hurcainson, Dr: Wo. Box42, Portsmouth, Va./2.....5..2..0...- 1910
Inaauis, CHarues E., East Templeton, Mass................... 1885
INGERSOLL, ALBERT M., Box 843, San Diego, Cal................. 1885
REVENGE: JOHN Glen OOve, Ne) Voice detente da Wee ehane) Ab omi os3ia) ele ienais cain sala 1894
isn Oo 1B. 2c Wat pts NEW VOLK Olbyine G6 ais 5). co </lk) celaie <i<ieiel+s 1891
vans HD AvID | Souunamip bom Ni Ver laere tie ecb ieieiine cicioccle are «isteore 1912
JACKSON, Hartuey H. T., Biological Survey, Washington, D. C.....1910
Jackson, THomas H., 304 N. Franklin St., West Chester, Pa....... 1888
James, Mrs. I. M., 105 W. Court St., Doylestown, Pa............. 1909
ANTES. 2 NORMAN Eval bImMMORE alVUC yok eee iaine totems cit eresorel. gishebe crescus atone 1913
JARVES, Miss Frora Amy, Box 151, Kingston Hill, R.1.......:...... 1913
Jenkins, Miss Ina G., 30 Dearborne St., Roxbury, Mass............ 1912
EONIKS CHARM eS CCLOTG VIASSee<)5 = 5, cetsrya hieiesticve sr auctetessiiera e iauerens 1912
JENNEY, CHARLES F., 100 Gordon Ave., Hyde Park, Mass.......... 1905
JENNINGS, RicHarD D., 129 Harrison St., Hast Orange, N. J.......... 1913
HINT EG WWESEWOOR, DEASR eh. cicd.cdc' ioc dicey oibln’s «Bias So eats 1912
Jessup, J. M., Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C......... 1910
JEWEL, LinpsEy L., Rosemont Villa, Saranacwbalce wIN ieee uy..ceecee = cue 1910
JEWETT, STANLEY G., 582 Bidwell Ave., Portland, Oregon......... 1906
JEWwETT, McCormick, 395 Yale Station, New Haven, Conn........ 1909
BS, AURWIN WINE ACINgSley,. LOW cis. «asians aja cde se gc ¢ slnlele' a ele's's'e 1910
Jounson, Cuas. E., 714 16 Ave.,S. E., Minneapolis, Minn.......... 1912

JOHNSON, FRANK Epaar, 16 Amackassin Terrace, Yonkers, N. Y.....1888
Jounson, Mrs. Grack Pertis, City Library Asso., Springfield, Mass. . 1908
JGHNSON, JAMES Howanp, Bradford, N. Hs... 0.0.05. ce0s esses 1894

XXV1 Associates.

Jounson, J. M., 77 Herkimer St., Brooklyn, N. ¥....2222555-2---2-
JOHNSON, WALTER Apams, 120 W. 32d St., New York City..........
JOBNEGN, WritranS., Lyons, N.Y oe 6c cisieis cite ots seh
Jones, F. W., 563 Massachusetts Ave., Boston, Mass...............
JONES, Dr. LomBarp C., Falmouth, Mass.........5..s2sc0eeeeee es
JORDAN: Av EL.WB Wowelllx Wash s'.5 cra 2 aie cee eet eee eee
Jump, Mrs. Epwin R., 350 Waltham St., West Newton, Mass.......
PUSTICH EEN Y, | WEVON, Pais delicious cals Gesu ace ee eee eee
KatmsBacuH, Epwin R., Biological Survey, Washington, D. C.......
Knapp, Mrs. H. A., 301 Quincy Ave., Scranton, Pa.................
Keays, JAMES Epwarb, 328 St. George St., London, Ontario.........
Keim, Tuomas DANnrI£t, Fellowship Farm, Stelton, N. J............
1iGaierporere wey uicise Als, IShibsyere (Oninve ING WE bs acootogrocenpourbeodoe
Kennan, 4: F., Virginia,’ Minn... : 02.0). ee eae eee
KENDRICK: | Winn Ey Denver, Coloy eee eee ees
KENISTON, ALLAN, Box 148, Edgartown, Mass...................-.
TkGonsp, IDAep no De, aif MWelste teutey Jaataemovels Wits oS oAeccondoaesscacane
Kant, Epwin:C., 90) West St.,.New Work City... sone eee ees
Kermope, FRANctis, Provincial Museum, Victoria, B. C
Keyes, Prof. Cuas. R., Mt. Vernon, Ia
*Kippnr, INaraanton T.,. Milton, Mass. >.28 7 «em users ee nee
Kran, Witrrep L., 755 Eastern Parkway, Brooklyn, N. Y
KODBURN | RANKS Mise ontm i airtel oe leae ts terete tne rea eee
Kincore, WILu1aM, Jr., 4304 Colfax Ave., S., Minneapolis, Minn.....
KInMan, A... H,,. Ridgeway, .Ontario.). 1.20 sate ete eine
Kine, LE Roy, 20 E. 84th St., New York City...................
KirxuaM, Mrs. James W., 275 Maple St., Springfield, Mass..........
*KIRKHAM, STANTON D., 152 Howell St., Canandaigua, N. Y
KiRKWwoop, PRANK C!) Baldwins Mda.. eso eee
KorrREDGE, JOSEPH, Jr. Priest River slidahoms sneer ae
K.LosEMAN, Miss Jesste E., 4 Spruce St., Dedham, Mass..........
KNAEBEL, Ernest, 3707 Morrison St., Chevy Chase, D. C
Knapp, Mrs. Henry A., 301 Quincy Ave., Scranton, Pa...........
KNo.Luorr, FERDINAND WILLIAM, 30 E. 42nd St., New York City....
Kou er, Lovuts SLIDELL, 98 Watsessing Ave., Bloomfield, N. J.....
Kremer, Rotanp Epwarp, 1720 Vilas St., Madison, Wis..........
KretTzMAN, Prof. P. E., 1230 St. Anthony Ave., St. Paul, Minn
- Kose, Anruony RB... Bernardsville, Nv dese, eee
Kuser, Mrs. Antuony R., Bernardsville, N. J
Kuser, Joun Drypen, Bernardsville, N. J
Kurcain, Dr. Vicror; ‘Green: Lake; Wise eoaeeenee meee ake
La Dow, STan.ey V., 610 W. 116th St., New York City
Lacey, Howarp Groreg, Kerrville, Texas................000000:
Lams, Cuas. R., 159 Brattle St., Cambridge, Mass

ere wee eee ewes

ele «© «6s 0d © p & s 0) 6) 6 6d @ 6 016166 (0 le

eis) \s\e1e) 6) 0!

ee

eye) ‘6m ie (oe le O16 PUP © 2) 6. ole iniene

Sheela =) 0) (a, © (ewe) slo

Wie fees le /a0 0 (e060 «6 =

* Life Associate.

Associates. XXV1i

LANCASHIRE, Mrs. JAMES Henry, Manchester, Mass.............. 1909
Lang, Lawton W., 121 Franklin St., Lynn, Mass................. 1909
Lanc, Hersert, Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City........... 1907
Lantz, Prof. Davin 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, Puruip, 31 E. Mt. Airy Ave., Mt. Airy, Philadelphia, Pa.. .1902

Taw). muGnnm, Hollywood, Cale. occ. jccdk sven se she cae clels es 1907
LAWRENCE, JOHN B., 126 E. 30th St., New York City.............. 1907
LEE, CHARLOTTE E., 40 E. 31st St., New York City................. 1913
[iva T rept SW obep ty gpl omega aco 110 Ol Gaur Pal B I Se cei ee Ren eR BO 1910
Leman, J. Howarp, 48 Beacon St., Boston, Mass................- ‘1912
LemsEN, Nicuouas F., 34 Nassau St., New York City............. 1912
LENGERKE, JUSTUS VON, 200 5th Ave., New York City............. 1907
Tmyey, Wi. CHARLESWORTH, Alton Bay, N: Hi.......).2.2...2-0h080- 1908
Lewis, Dr. Freperic 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
Lewis, L. Atva, 608 Panama Bldg., Portland, Ore................. 1913
lirGons stokley, hecos Mexagss wr da wean a ero eis ey a oa ei ey ots 1912
LINncoLNn, FREDERICK CHARLES, Colorado Museum Natural History,
Denver “Color ey eR ee ee Sr, 2a a Cee ah ROI sites 1910
aines, Gro. H., 208 Piermont: Ave, Nyack, N--Y:.........:..¢.+.¢ 1913
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
Litre, LuTHEr 2d, 1625 W. Adam St., Los Angeles, Cal. ........... 1913
LONGSTREET, RuBERT J., Stetson University, DeLand, Fla........... 1913
Ronn, icev, Wrenram FR Dover; Masaiy. 245. 20 none skh cba asiccaee 1901
HRORING, J. AUDEN: Owero. Nie None 55 ceric it salem ae slate we bie Salevetsw 1889
Lorine, Marion B., 914 High St., Dedham, Mass.................. 1913
Low, ErHE.Bert T., 30 Broad St., New York City................ 1907
Lucg, Mrs. Frances P., 140 Washington St., Boston, Mass......... 1912
ee EDWARD OE,” Ghat Oana HIN sc) AA cee ciccd clave atalate bo stale Sie chee ai us 1904
‘UND, Or HB: oft beacon) ou. boston, Miassss... 0... 4000808 ao 1913
LuTHER, CLARENCE H., 8 Mcllroy Bldg., Fayetteville, Ark.......... 1910
MacDovaatt, GreorceE R., 112 Wall St., New York City........... 1890
Mackie, Dr. Wo. C., 54 Coolidge St., Brookline, Mass.............. 1908
Mactay, Mark W., Jr., 8830 Park Ave., New York City............ 1905
Mappock, Miss EMELINg&, The Drexel, Philadelphia, Pa ............ 1897
Mapison, Haroup L., Park Museum, Providence. R. I............. 1912
Paar. . He Windsor: tacks, (Comms: s cio. Ce bela Slee e be can slsie 1902
Maituanp, Rosert L., 141 Broadway, New York City............. 1889
Mann, firms PS iWailliamstown; Mass... f..c..6cc... 00 ceces eee 1912
NUABIHS ed AMEsG)6 Port @hester. Ni. Wacko) ale Word vine Gelato sik eats 1913

MarsBig, Ricuarp M., 7 Keiffer St., Brookline, Mass.............. 1907

XXVill Associates.

Marcu, Prof. Joun Lewis, Union College, Schenectady, N. Y....... 1903
Marrs, Mrs. Kinesmitu, 9 Commonwealth Ave., Boston, Mass...... 1903
MarsHatu, Evua, M. O., New Salem, Mass.................+..2-- 1912
Martin, Miss Maria Ross, Box 365, New Brunswick, N. J......... 1902
Marx, Epwarp J. F., 8 Chestnut Terrace, Easton, Pa............. 1907
Mason, Vinton W., 12 Davenport St., Cambridge, Mass............ 1913
Marrern, Epwin S., 1042 Walnut St., Allentown, Pa.............. 1912
Marrern, WatTER, 1042 Walnut St., Allentown, Pa................ 1912
May, Miss Aprtina, 226 Ocean St., Lynn, Mass.................. 1912
Maynarp, C. J., 447 Crafts St., West Newton, Mass................ 1912
McCuntock, Norman, 504 Amberson Ave., Pittsburgh, Pa......... 1900
McConnEeLEyEARRY-B.)i\Cadiz, O:nsnc accent ee Eee ree 1904
McCook, Puiuie James, 15 William St., New York City........... 1895
McHarron, Dr. Henry, 335 Golley St., Macon, Ga............... 1898
McI.LHEenny, Epwarp Avery, Avery Island, La................... 1894
McIntire, Mrs. Hersert Bruce, 4 Garden St., Cambridge, Mass.. .1908
McIntyre, Mrs. J. W., 151 Franklin St., Newton, Mass............ 1913
McLain, Rospert Barrp, Market and 12th Sts., Wheeling, W. Va... .1893
Melman, HonaGro. bs) unspuny. | Connen senna eee eres 1913
McMauon, WAtrT F., 21 Maywood St., Roxbury, Mass............. 1913
MeMarnan? Mrs) Guisnrr (GorhamwN- Hessen se meeeeeeeen 1902
Map, Mrs. 5. M.,. 301 Wi: 91)St.. New York City) aoe eee . -1904
Means, Cuas. J., 29 Marlborough St., Boston, Mass............... 1912
Me uvs, J. T., 36 Cottage St., Wellesley, Mass................ eG?
MeEncEL, G. Henry, 739 Madison Ave., Reading, Pa................ 1913
Mprriam, Caanins, Weston, Masa. i>. s 00. 22 baie oan eee erie 1908
Merriam, Henry F., 30 Clinton Ave., Maplewood, N. J............ 1905
MpRRinn, ALBERT RY, elamilton, Mass). eee eee eee 1912
Merrity, D. E., State College, New Mexico..................... 1913
Murr, Harry, Bangor, Maine. :). 3... 2coeeelbee eee eee 1883
Mirrsnon, 'W. B:, Saginaw, Mich). ) 3.79. 4elk coe se eee 1905
Mussmnanr,G. H., Linden; Towa .!/. 0/5. see bond aoe te 1911
Metca.r, Rost. W., 160 High St., Springfield, Mass............... 1912
Mercatr, WiiLArp L., 16 Gramercy Park, New York City......... 1908
Mercatr, Z. P., A& M. College, West Raleigh, N.C................ 1913
Meyer, Lieut. G. Raupx, Ft. McKinley, Portland Harbor, Me...... 1913
Manny Mass Elan OISHs benox »WVlassiw sly yale erie eee eee ee 1913
’ Minter, Cuas. W., Jaffna College, Vaddukoddai Station, Jaffna,

Ceylon... Se ee a a 1909
Miter, Leo, Amer. Museum Nat: Hist., New York City.......... 1912
Muts, Harry C., Box 218, Unionville, Conn..................-6-- 1897
Monns, Dr, "Hpreert R:, Tampa, Pla: ot eee eee 1911
Mit1s, Prof. Wiuu1aM C., Ohio State Univ., Columbus, O.......... 1900
Miner, Leo D., 1836 Vernon St., N. W. Washington, D. C........... 1913
Miscuke, Gro. M., 1122 49th St., Brooklyn, N. Y..............--- 1913

MitcHELL, CATHERINE ApAmMs, Riverside, Ill................-++++- 1911

Associates. XxX1X

MircuHett, H. H., 2337 Smith St., Regina, Sask., Canada............ 1913
MirTcHE.1, Dr. Watron I., 603 Beacon Bldg., Wichita, Kan......... 1893
Morr, AtEx. L., 77 Hampshire St., Lowell, Mass.................4. 1912
Moopy, Miss Jut1a, Summit Rd., Wellesley, Mass................. 1913
Moorn) CaAst Si apan ier oy Cale nays 2 altars s eiircen aituaieveley tide ars 1913
Moorn, Hunay DP), eaddonfield, Nj divi. ts seo ais 5 s/selete ieee eleie we 1911
Moorg, Miss Exiz. Putnam, 221 Worcester St., New Haven, Conn.. .1905
Moore, Rosert THomas, 46 Mansion Ave., Haddonfield, N. J...... 1898
Moors, WiLu1AM G., 257 W. Main St., Haddonfield, N. J.......... 1910
Morcom, G. FREAN, 734 Belden Ave., Chicago, Ill.................. 1886
Deloap ey cubes? Wicg Vv CENOLS CORI on a basc/.\eLaretetele cba) jefiniarer oosiaiSpese be 'sjsiaa 1911
Moraan, Atsurt, Box 1323, Hartford,,Conn,.. 2....). 5.2)... <i oes 1903
MonGant ALBERT S., (Winfield: WWrpW Sina etcee Seyars oe wialebepelel delokeys 1913
Mortey, G. GrISwoLpD, 2325 13th St., Boulder, Colo.............. 1911
TGERIS: OUD NEY | Vi SSTIStON alsa clos ittatayey ct ele aS waytfei shoilatehet esta 1911
Morse. mz AvAe 210 Hilm) Sh.) Worcester: Masse. iiss 2.13 6)5). -ahetspacto nie 1913
MORSE WEUARRY GInNANVeluron Olander mire claire <aierpeiateve cists = 1912
MosueEr, FRANKLIN H., 17 Highland Ave., Melrose, Mass.......... 1905
Munro, J. A., Okanagan Landing, British Columbia, Canada....... 1913
Morpae_y, Dr. Eueene E., 444 Tellfair St., Augusta, Ga............ 1903
Murpuy, Rosert C., Museum, Brooklyn Inst., Eastern Parkway,
SOON TA nN V5 Nels case oy Re ee eho Las ee, iG bal thal njourbons 1905
MuseravE, JoHN K., 3516 Shady Ave., Allegheny, Pa.............. 1909
MussELMAN, THoMas Epaar, Gem City Business College, Quincy, Il1.1910
Myers, Mrs. Harriet W., 311 Ave. 66, Los Angeles, Cal........... 1906
Myers, Miss Lucy F., Brookside, Poughkeepsie, N. Y............. 1898
Nase, Henman W., Box 264; Pueblo, Colo). hus ws nie See bao aces ee lee 1892
NELSON, JAMES ALLEN, Somerset, Bethesda, Md................... 1898
NEWELL, Mrs. H. S., 2431 E. 5th St., Duluth, Minn............... 1912
NewHaLs: DART Si. Merahord, Bas. <5 2 sid aekiz. de wei sinc’ esate yovelcrw che te 1908
NeEwmMa\N, Rev. STEPHEN M., Howard University, Washington, D.C.. .1898
NicHo.s, JoHn M., 46 Spruce St., Portland, Me.................. 1890
NicHo.s, JoHN TREADWELL, Am, Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City. .1901
Nicuouson, Donatp J., West Church St., Orlando, Fla............. 1912
Nis, Mrs. Lucius, 5 Union St., Greenfield, Mass.................. 1913
Nosie, G. Kinesuey, 13 Howland St., Cambridge, Mass........... 1913
Notte, Rev. Fe.rx, St. Benedict’s College, Atchison, Kan.......... 1903
Norris, J. PARKER, Jr., 2122 Pine St., Philadelphia, Pa............ 1904
Nornais, Roy C., 725 N. 10th St., Richmond, Ind.................. 1904
Novy, Frank ORIEL, 721 Forest Ave., Ann Arbor, Mich............ 1909
NowELL, JoHN RowLanp, Box 979, Schenectady, N. Y...........-- 1897
Oaepen, Dr. Henry Vinina, 141 Wisconsin St., Milwaukee, Wis... ..1897
aie ©. 1457 law Ste, Presa, Calin.) Jin hacienieidss essialeoeleiesin seuss 1913:
Wrovs, Lenny, cuyeroprimngs Midis. sie iis sch aod ch /dislaiale tiejmates « 1896
*Ouiver, Dr. Henry Kreme, 2 Newbury St., Boston, Mass........ 1900

* Life Associate.

xxx Associates.

Orpway, EvizABETH I., 20 Myrtle St., Winchester, Mass............ 1913
Ossorn, ArTHurR A., 58 Washington St., Peabody, Mass............ 1912
OsBuRN, PinareE S., 189 E. Colorado St., Pasadena, Cal.......... 1910
Overton, Dr. Frank, Patchogue, N. Y........-.-ccsseecesewsess 1909
*OweEn, Miss Junierre AMELIA, 306 N. 9th St., St. Joseph, Mo...... 1897
Paing, Augustus G., Jr., 18 West 49th St., New York City......... 1886
Pa.apin, ArTHuR, N. Y. State Museum, Albany, N. Y............. 1911
Patm_er, S. C., Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Pa............... 1912
Parker, Mrs. BENJAMIN W., 4 Hopestill St., Dorchester Centre, Mass.1909
Parker, Hon. Herpert, South Lancaster, Mass...............+..- 1904
Parsons, JOHN E., 130 E. 36th St., New York City.................. 1912
Parsons, R. L., 158 Raymond Ave., South Orange, N. J........... 1911
Parsons, WiLuiaM, Box 422, Manila, P. I..............eeeeeeees 1909
Paut, Lucius H., 202 Edinburgh St., Rochester, N. Y.............. 1908
PRABODY, Rev: P.B., Blue: Rapids, Kans... scone eine a 1903
PEAVEY, Rospert W., 791 Coney Island Ave., Brooklyn, N. Y....... 1903
Peck, Morton E., 292 N. Summer St., Salem, Ore................ 1909
Penarp, Tuos. E., 16 Norfolk Rd., Arlington, Mass............... 1912
PENFIELD, Miss Anni S., 155 Charles St., Boston, Mass........... 1912
PENNINGTON, FRED ALBERT, 5529 Kenwood Ave., Chicago, Ill...... 1910
Peprer, Dr. Wm., 1811 Spruce St., Philadelphia, Pa............... 1911
Perkins; Dr. Guo. -H.,; Burlington; Vti.05s 02042 0-e54 seek oe eee _.1912
Perry, Dr. Henry JOSEPH, 636 Beacon St., Boston, Mass............ 1909
Prtrers, ALsEert §., Lake Wilson, Minn...) 22.6.6 50. Nad ieee « 1908
Prrers, JamES Len, Harvard, Mass.:.:....0.:.. 02.2 ceececcesoes 1904
PuHEtps, FranNK M., 212 E. 4th St., Elyria, Ohio.................. 1912
Puptps, Mrs. J. W., Box 36; Northfield, Mass....5.....:..3...0..- 1899
IPATLHOWER,|CHAS.A-. Chatham Ne a werent ee eee 1913
Puiuiep, Parirp B., 220 Broadway, New York City............... 1907
Paruuips, ALEXANDER H., 54 Hodge Road, Princeton, N. J......... 1891
PHILLIPS, CHas. LINCOLN, 4 West Weir St., Taunton, Mass........... 1912
PriusBurY, FranK O., Box 592, Walpole, Mass..................--- 1909
PrncnHot, GirrorpD, 1617 Rhode Island Ave., Washington, D. C...... 1910
Pitcarrn, WILLIAM G., 3330 Perrysville Ave., Allegheny, Pa......... 1906
Puatt, Mrs. Dan F., “‘ Ambercroft,’”’ Englewood, N. J.............. 1913
Por, Miss MarGaretta, 1222 N. Charles St., Baltimore, Md....... 1899
Pomeroy, Harry Kirxuanp, Box 575, Kalamazoo, Mich.......... 1894
- Ponp, Miss Eten J., 160 Lexington, Ave., New York City......... 1909
Poor, ALFRED D., 401 W. 7th St., Wilmington, Del............... 1901
Porg, ALEXANDER, 1013 Beacon St., Brookline, Mass............. 1908
Porn Hr Colmesneil: Texas 26.22 eee ee ee eee 1913
Porter, Rev. E. C., 51 Fowler St., Boston, Mass.................-. 1912
Porter, Louis’ H.;\(Stamford, ‘Conn :. 25). A) «eee ee 1893
Post, Wm. 8., 347 5th Ave, New York City.) 602). 520seGueeroee 1911

* Life Associate.

Associates XXxi

POTTER SULTAN) Kei @ ama ene Nideg mis aiceh Noes esis i biokttocia:daresnle eal 1912
PraEGER, WituiaM E., 421 Douglas Ave., Kalamazoo, Mich....... 1892
Price, JouN Henry, Crown W Ranch, Knowlton, Mont........... 1906
PRICE PETGON Ee lee bOXt4-4 DIINO Wien Vide ays, seis eclels << ev 1913
Primm, Roy Les, 113 W. Dayton St., Madison, Wis................ 1912
Proctor, Mrs. Henry H., 282 Commonwealth Ave., Boston, Mass.. .1912
PRecton,, 180s. Hy Popsheldy Mass: 2 iid adi a is Rb idaics vos aA QLD
Porpy, James. 5. i. FD: 4; Plymouth, Mich. 3. 955 6505 5. se sess. 1893
PUrNAM, Prot, i. Wg Cambridge, Mass. 26). 6.1.) 6 Heles,s oe eieediec’s wane 1912
RamspeEn, Cuas. G., Box 146, Guantanamo, Cuba................. 1912
RaATHBORNE, R. C., 18 Congress St., Newark, N. J.................. 1911
FUAWSON A CHASS ule OxtOrdrVasslaeaits cere fan teiie, Sf fotcvetecleleiea kote caicteks 1912
Rawson, Catvin Luraer, R. F. D. 2, Putnam, Conn.............. 1885
Raymonp,. Mrs. C. E., 213d. St., Himesdale, Ill... .. 065 cee eee 1910
Rea, Pau M., Charleston Museum, Charleston, 8. C.............. 1912
Reaau, Dr. ArTHuR LINCOLN, 39 Maple St., West Roxbury, Mass.. .1896
ReEcToR, WiLson BLaAIne, Belington, W. Va...............0.000006 1913
REDFIELD, Miss Evisa WHITNEY, 29 Everett St., Cambridge, Mass..1897
RENCHER, SAMUME ME © hester miller sper ae teyscinorsamioite aaa 1912
Reep, Hueu Danret, 108 Brandon Place, Ithaca, N. Y............ 1900
Reun, JAMEs A. G., 6033 B Catherine St., Philadelphia, Pa........ 1901
RensHaw, Mary H., Box 1640, New Orleans, La.................. 1913
REYNOLDS, AO. Ey. We ikts HD) 25 Went. Washes. -v- «csicie el «se ele 1912
Ruoaps, CHARLES J., care of Girard Trust Co., Philadelphia, Pa... ..1895
Rice, JAmMes Henry, Jr., Summerville, 8. C............0..0.0000: 1910
IRECE AWARD Js. fvOachd ales: ind saevercey terre tee antares Ba heh cosae Wr cicecites 1913
Ricwarps, Miss Harriet E., 36 Longwood Ave., Brookline, Mass.. .1900
RiIcHARDSON, WYMAN, 224 Beacon St., Boston, Mass............... 1912
Ripeovt, A. Liuu1an, 15 Farragut Rd., Swampscott, Mass.......... 1912
Ringway, JOHNGL. Chevy Chasey Mid. )3 oc Sele je jab keets oa Sie leesaes 1890
RickETson, WALTON, 10 Anthony St., New Bedford, Mass.......... 1913
RIKER, CLARENCE B., 43 Scotland Rd., South Orange, N. J./....... 1885
FUNG: (CARR, aa Samin aw Mae. sc) ls ee Sr ice Side 1912
Rripuey, Cuas., 173 Harvard St., Dorchester, Mass................- 1912
Ripexey, Mrs. J. W., 67 Greenleaf St., Malden, Mass................ 1912
Rossins, Miss Aumepa B., Y. M. Library Association, Ware, Mass. .1910
ROBERTS, JAMES O., 821 Genesee St., Utica, N. Y................--- 1912
RosBertTs, JOHN T., Jn., 350 Main St., Buffalo, N. Y............... 1906
Roserts, WILLIAM Ety, 5501 Spruce St., Philadelphia, Pa........ 1902
Rosertson, Howarp, 157 8. Wilton Drive, Los Angeles, Cal........ 1911
Rosinson, AnTHoNy W., 409 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa....... 1903
Rockwoop, Mrs. Go. I., 340 May St., Worcester, Mass........... 1912
*Rocers, CHARLES H., Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City..... 1904

Rotrs, ALFRED G., High School, Pottstown, Pa..................- 1909

* Life Associate.

XXXli Associates.

RoosEvELT, FRANKLIN Deuano, Hyde Park, N. Y............... 1896
Ropger, Kenyon, 509 N. 4th St., Steubenville, Ohio.............. 1911
Ross, Groucn Hi. '23 West'St.,, Rutland, V0... )2\).5(.- alee sales 1904
‘Ross, Dr. Lucretius, 507 Main St., Bennington, Vt................ 1912
RossiGNoL, GILBERT R., Jr., 2116 Bull St., Savannah, Ga.......... 1909
Rowiny, JoHn, 42 Plaza Drive, Berkeley, Cal......... 550202 -100% 1889
SACKHTD, ‘CLARENCE, Bye, .N;. Yin: sis ciscicjeer's ete cr eeteereee oe ener 1910
Sacre, Henry M., Menands Road, Albany, N. Y.................. 1885
SANBORN, Coun C., 709 E. Lincoln Ave., Highland Park, Ill........ 1911
SANFORD, HARRISON, Litchfield; Connie.) .)\i5: bi] eb sete ern 1905
SAUNDERS: ARmrAs) AC. West Haven, Conn... see perenne 1907
Savacn, James, 1097 Ellicott. Sq., Buffaloy N. Yu. <.c. as. ett. ees 1895
Savacn, Watter Gums, Delight, Ark: .)...). <:1)..c:lclem sists ¥ eetosmeieiets 1898
ScHantz, OrpHEUs M., 5215 W. 24th St., Cicero, Ill................ 1907
ScuEenck;, FrEprIc, 52 Brattle St., Cambridge, Mass................ 1912
Scumipt, Waupo, U.8.S.S. ‘‘ Albatross,” Sausalito, Cal........... 1910
Scuorcer, A. W., Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, Wis........ 1913
ScHwepDER, ArTHuR, 184 Upper Mountain Ave., Montclair, N. J....1911
Scorr, Wiut1aAM G., Box 1954, Winnipeg, Man., Canada........... 1913
SEWALL, JoTHAM B., 1501 Beacon St., Brookline, Mass............ 1912
SHANNON, WM. Purpy, 1170 Broadway, New York City.......... 1908
SHARPLES; “ROBERT PP) West) Chester Passes eee eee onenee 1907
Saw, Cuas. F., 676 Bedford St., North Abington, Mass............ 1912
Suaw, Dr. J. Houproox, 438 Court St., Plymouth, Mass............ 1912
SHaw, Wiuu1am T., 600 Linden Ave., Pullman, Wash.............. 1908
SHHARER, Amon it-,, Mont), Belvieus dlexsseeee ere eee eeeeeee 1905
SHELDON, CHARLES, 8 W. 9th St., New York City................. 1911
SHELTON, ALFRED, 2312 Gough St., San Francisco, Cal............. 1911
Surras, GEorGE, 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. 53d St., New York City............ 1912
SHROSBREE, GEORGE, Public Museum, Milwaukee, Wis............ 1899
Sruuman, Harper, 4 Gramercy Park, New York City............. 1902
Stmmons, Guo. F., 622 First National Bank, Houston, Texas...... 1910
Siape, Mrs. Danret D., Chestnut Hill, Mass...............-+c-0- 1912
Surpa) Austin Aun, Box 63; Wanslow, -Ark.qs2 ase 1911
Smita, Byron L., 2140 Prairie Ave., Chicago, Ill................. 1906
Sued, Miss Hramu M., Rome; Ohio. 22.) 2:45 « haseee eee 1910
Situ, Rev. Francis Curtis, Boonville, N. Y.............0.- .. 1903
SMira, Prof. Frank, Univ. of Tl., Urbana, Hl)... o¢eeneae eee 1909
SmiruH, Horace G., State Capitol, Denver, Colo.................-- 1888
Situ, Dr. Hucx M., 1209 M St. N. W., Washington, D. C......... 1886
Smita, Jesse L., 141 South 2nd St., Highland Park, Ill............. 1907
Smita, Louis Irvin, Jr., 3908 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa........ 1901

Smita, Myrton T., 308 Pearl St., Hartford, Conn...............-. 1909

Associates, XXXili

Smith, Witeur F., South Norwalk, Conn...................000%8- 1909
Smytu, Prof. Exuison A., Jr., Polytechnic Inst., Blacksburg, Va... .1892
Snyper, WILL Epwiy, R. F. D. 6, Beaver Dam, Wis............... 1895
SouTHER, ARTHUR L., 38 Pleasant St., Stoneham, Mass............. 1913
Spears, Miss Eruet D., 115 East 69th St., New York City........... 1913
SPEENBURGH, D. C., 200 W. 95th St., New York City............... 1913
SpELMAN, Henry M., 48 Brewster St., Cambridge, Mass........... 1911
ora Miss M. T., 381 Chisinonweslih Ave., Boston, Mass.......1913
STANSELL, S. S., Nail. Alberta Canada. gur aca seek eree ee 1913
Stanton, Prof. J. Y., 410 Main St., Lewiston, Me............... 1883
Stanwoop, Miss CorDELIA JOHNSON, Ellsworth, Me............... 1909
STEARNS, Gro. Cusuman, 494 Washington St., Dedham, Mass...... 1913
prune Jon i. Plemingtom, IN. Sores sos. Meck ite slated snakes 1906
Srepuens, T. C., Morningside College, Sioux City, Iowa........... 1909
STEVENS, FRANK E., 25 Hudson St., Somerville, Mass.............. 1912
SIVENS) rh hb Ox 5460. incon NED acmeaerics cen ce eae 1908
Stites, Epcar C., 345 Main St., West Haven, Conn.............. 1907
Sr. Joun, Epwarp Porter, 75 Farmington Ave., Hartford, Conn...1911
SLOCKBRIDGE, CHAs, Ao’ Port’ Wayne Inds, o2se 8. iin ec os ae 1911
STODDARD, HERBERT Eee Field Museum Nat. Hist., Chicago, Ill..... 1912
SrONH, CHARENCH Ho SraniChPOrg, iN. (ke. cle deans octets tlesle octuale ois 1903
Stone, H. F., ukarnetbe: INE SAVES ein Ss a rae RTD rere AUTON ye Ose A EROS 1913
SrONE, Wit LD) Rayettevile: ARK. o2'.. sit. e cei sete Fallot crc 1911
Stover, ALLAN J., Kings Rd., R. F. D. 3, Corvallis, Ore........... 1912
StRATER, Francis A., 50 Sumner Rd., Brookline, Mass............ 1912
STRATTON-PorTER, Mrs. GENE, Box 855, Rome City, Ind........... 1906
STRUT 0. LERTCHHE. Beverly, Noe. cs. tes cease cee be eles ye bes 1908
STRODE. Wiese MD WISTON he. se te mie meee ters Marne eee trea 5 1911
Stuart, Geo. H., 3rd, care of Girard Trust Co., Philadelphia, Pa... ..1913
SHURGISH OI \GARRENE Groton WiasSeene noe ae eRrhem oe ex aiteni een 1910
STURTEVANT, Epwarp, St. George’s School, Newport, R. I......... 1896
Styrer, Mrs. Karwarine R., Concordville, Pa.................--: 1903
SuaepeEn, Artuur W., 52 Highland St., Hartford, Conn.....:....... 1913
Summers, JOHN N., 17 E. Highland Ave., Melrose Highlands, Mass.. .1912
Sumner, Mrs. Grawam, Englewood, N. J............cee cece ceeees 1910
Surrace, Prof. Harvey ApAM, State Zoélogist, Harrisburg, Pa...... 1897
Swarn, JoHn Merton, Box 633, Farmington, Me.................. 1899
Swenk, Myron H., 3028 Starr Street, Lincoln, Neb................ 1904
Swezny, Groren, 855 S. 15th St., Newark, N. J.............25... 1901
Taytor, ALEXANDER R., 1633 Main St., Columbia, 8. C........... 1907
Payton, DB: e., 1619 Green St.; Columbia, S.C... oes eae ee 1911
TAYDOR, lionrnn ©., Kelouna, British Columbia....:..-/.........-- 1913
TerRiLu, Lewis Mcl., Stanley Ave., St. Lambert, Quebec.......... 1907
feeTaCwAnins DARWIN, Golden; ‘Coll: . 2... roc Peeler se tee 1906

Test, Dr. FREDERICK CLEVELAND, 4620 Greenwood Ave., Chicago,

XXXIV Associates.

Tusr, Louis Acassiz, Rolla, Mos.) <.:0/s:<e sis leone ele 4 see eee ee 1908
Tuomas, Miss Emity Hinps, 2000 Spruce St., Philadelphia, Pa...... 1901
Tuompson, Cuas. S., 1721 Mission St., South Pasadena, Cal......... 1909
THORNE, SAMUEL, 19 Cedar St., New York City.................. 1908
TuHurston, Henry, Box 181, Floral Park, N. Y.................. 1912
Tmeny, Garo.’ D:, Darien; Conn... .....4-/ee sheep = eee eee 1910
TINKER, ALMERIN D., 631 S. 12th St., Ann Arbor, Mich........... 1907
Tomuinson, FRANKLIN L., Box 572, Shelton, Conn................. 1912
Toppan, GreorGeE L., care of Col. C. Pfaff, Framingham, Mass....... 1886
TourTEeLLoTTe, A. J., 114 East Main St., Westboro, Mass.......... 1913
Tower, Mrs. Kats Denice, 9 Newbury St., Boston, Mass........... 1908
TownsEND, Witmot, 334 80th St., Brooklyn, N. Y................ 1894
Treaanza, A. O., 610 Utah Savings & Trust Bldg., Salt Lake City,
Wea ssi eb sce e's 0d eal bso Wie eine ons eae lennon ener ee tear 1906
Trippp, THoomas M., Howardsville, Colo... 22.0 .02.c0 cans cec swans 1909
Trotter, Witi1am Henry, 36 N. Front St., Philadelphia, Pa....... 1899
TRUMBULL, J. H., Plainville, Connie. 2.8 oe eee eee 1907
Tuppury, WARREN C., 600 Security Bldg., Los Angeles, Cal........ 1903
Torts, Le Roy Metviute, Thrushwood, Farmington, Me.......... 1903
Turts, Miss Mary I., 1 Atlantic St., Lynn, Mass................. 1910
Tourriz, Dr. Aubert H., 1069 Boylston St., Boston, Mass.......... 1908
Tortie, Henry Emerson, 253 Yale Station, New Haven, Conn.....1909
Tweepy, Epaar, 37 Fairview Ave., Danbury, Conn............... 1902
Tyrer, JoHn G., 1114 Belmont Ave., Fresno, Cal................. 1912
Tyter, Dr. Winsor M., 522 Mass. Ave., Lexington, Mass........... 1912

Uxricu, ALBERT GEoRGE, 3307 Washington Ave., St. Louis, Mo.....1909
UnpEeRwoop, Witi1am Lyman, Mass. Inst. Technology, Boston,

CY: rene MT A eS ey 1900
VALENTINE, Miss ANNA J., Bellefonte, Pa..........0.ccccecccccces 1905
Van BEvREN, Miss Louis, 21 W. 14th St., New York City........ 1909
Van CortLanpT, Miss ANNE S8., Croton-on-Hudson, N. Y.......... 1885
Van Name, WILLARD Grass, N. Y. State Museum, Albany, N. Y....1900
Van Sant, Miss ExizaBetu, 2960 Dewey Ave., Omaha, Neb........ 1896
VANTASSELL, I’. L.; 116 High St., Passaic, N. J...2..5.0..5..0c003. 1907
VeTTER, Dr. CHARLES, 2 West 88th St., New York City......... 1898
VieTor, Dr. Epwarp W., 166 St. James Place, Brooklyn, N. Y...... 1911
Visunr, Steruun S., Vermilion, iS: Dy Sees eee eee 1904

’ Vorsy, Prof. J. Wm., 489 Main St., Burlington, Vt................ 1912
VroomaN, Isaac H., Jr., 282 Hamilton St., Albany, N. Y........... 1908
WADLEIGH, WM. G., 219 State St., Boston, Mass..................- 1913
WapswortH, CLARENCE S., 37 Washington St., Middletown, Conn.. .1906
WatcoTt, FrepEeric Cotiins, 14 Wall St., New York City........... 1913
Waite, Miss EvizaBetu W., 29 Shepard St., Cambridge, Mass... ..1912
Warts, Mrs. J. Gruman, 19 Pearl St., Medford, Mass............... 1912
Warns iipwarp H., Hyde ParkGNe Yon oceanic eine 1896

WAtkur,) Anmxanpmr, ‘Mulino, ‘Oregs: tance. meena ete eae a 1913

Associates. XXXV

Watker, Curtis H., University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill............ 1910

Waker, Ernest P., Fisheries Service, Wrangell, Alaska........... 1911
Warner, Guo. BR.) Roi. Did; Murray, Utabi....6 60. see tedeeecs 1909
Waker, Dr. R. L., 355 Main Ave., Carmegie, Pa..........0.0000; 1888
Wauuace, Cuas. R., 27 Park Ave., Delaware, Ohio................ 1913
Wauuace, JaMEs S., 533 Front St., E., Toronto, Ontario........... 1907
Wa ter, Dr. Hersert E., 53 Arlington Ave., Providence, R. I.....1901
Watters, Frank, South Sandisfield, Mass..................2.000. 1902
Warp, Frank Haw ey, 18 Grove Place, Rochester, N. Y........... 1908
Warp, Henry L., 882 Hackett Ave., Milwaukee, Wis.............. 1906
Warp, Mrs. Martua E., 25 Arlington St., Lynn, Mass............. 1909
Wanner, HipwaAnp P., Concord, Mass..i..o2diec te clesioc od occ bu eas 1910
WarNER, Goopwin, Concord Junction, Mass...................-. 1908
WARNER Wilts bly Re eke D2 Cantelds Ohion 4.4. 025.0) see 1913
Watson, Mrs. AtEx M., 2818 Winslow St., Walnut Hills, Cincinnati,
CUTTS CP REM ay Pd AAI a OU al 1910
WenenE: ca. F alinades Park: Ni Seccts cides anctaite s's.taa s bela crete 1907
Werr, J. ALDEN, 471 Park Ave., New York City.................. 1899
WELLMAN, Gorpon B., 54 Beltran St., Malden, Mass.............. 1908
WENTWoRTH, Irvine H., 245 Belden Ave., San Antonio, Texas...... 1900
WESTON, Francis M., Jr., 149 Queen St., Charleston, S.C........... 1913
Wetmore, Mrs. Epmunp, 125 E. 57th St., New York City.......... 1902
Weyaanpt, CornE tus, Wissahickon Ave., Mt. Airy, Philadelphia, Pa.1907
Wranron, Winirax P.; Groton; Mass....22;d2ncbess ones ibe 1907
WHEELER, EpmMunpD Jacos, 177 Pequot Ave., New London, Conn... .1898
WHEELER, HARVEY, Elm St., Concord, Mass...................0.. 1912
Waee tock, Mrs. Irene G., 1040 Hinman Ave., Evanston, Ill....... 1902
Wauitcoms, Myron L., 40 Westland Terrace, Haverhill, Mass...... 1912
Waite, Francis Brac, St. Paul’s School, Concord, N. H.......... 1891
Waiter, Georce R., Dead Letter Office, Ottawa, Ontario........... 1903
Waiter, Dr. Jamzs C., 259 Marlborough St., Boston, Mass......... 1913
Waite, W. A., 158 Columbia Heights, Brooklyn, N. Y............. 1902
NVRUTE VV Mou CO HSTIOR: 5 Cre pin cule eeacie ce cee eenls a bho aslcawes « 1911
Wuitney, Prof. Davip D., Wesleyan Univ., Middletown, Conn....... 1912
WickrrsHaM, Cornetius W., Cedarhurst, N. Y................... 1902
Witsor, Appison P., 60 Gibson St., Canandaigua, N. Y............ 1895
Witcox, T. Ferprnanp, 162 W. 54th St., New York City......... 1895
Wis, Marx L. C., 311 N. 5th St., Camden, N. J..............0.- 1893
Witarp, Bertet G., 30 Huntington Ave., Boston, Mass......... 1906
WtULARD, FRANK C., Tombstone, Arizona. .......:...0eccecvecce 1909
WItiaArD, Miss Heten, 25 Regent Circle, Brookline, Mass.......... 1913
Witucox, Prof. M. A., 80 Mountain Ave., Malden, Mass............ 1913
WILLET, GEorGE, 2123 Court St., Los Angeles, Cal................ 1912
Wiuuiams, Harry C., 1281 Goodfellow Ave., St. Louis, Mo.......... 1908

Wiuuiams, Rosert 8., New York Botanical Gardens, Bronx Park,
Peon iterhics kb ere h le choc Wrautle wis aici e We aye. at es we dee clare wisieie 1888

XXXV1 Associates

Wiiiams, Rozert iW. Jr., Tallahassee, Fla..).......3505 0c cee ues 1900
WEELTAMSON, (By By:slutitons. Td 20.5 2. sis. cles bc che ce clone lerereretanenene 1900
Wittiston, Mrs. SAMUEL, 577 Belmont St., Belmont, Mass......... 1911
WINDLE, FRANCIS, 253 Dean St., West Chester, Pa................ 1909
Wine, DeWirt C., 5401 Madison Ave., Chicago, Ill................ 1913
WInsLow, ArtTuur M., 3 Lyford St., Worcester, Mass.............. 1912
WITHERBEE, Mrs. F. B., 106 Berkeley St., West Newton, Mass...... 1906
Woop, Mrs. Gso., 1313 Spruce St., Philadelphia, Pa............... 1910
Woop, J. Cuame, 179! 17th St:, Detroit, Mich: .!s% 0: 72 2-eecen seee 1902
Woop, Netson R., Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C.....1895
Wooprurr, FRANK M., 225 Wisconsin St., Chicago, Ill............. 1904
Wooprvrr, Lewis B., 24 Broad St., New York City............... 1886
Worcester, Mrs. ALFRED, Bacon St., Waltham, Mass............. 1908
Wricut, AuBERT H., 707 E. State St., Ithaca, N. Y................ 1906
Wriaut, Miss Harriet H., 1637 Gratiot Ave., Saginaw, W.S., Mich.1907
Wriaut, Horace WinsLow, 107 Pinckney St., Boston, Mass....... 1902
Wrigat, Sawunn, Conshohocken, Pa...i..0)dJs0 04s 0 secpee ne 1895
Wyman, Luruer E., 1333 Burlington Ave., Los Angeles, Cal........ 1907
Youna, Miss Harriet Fisie, Maple & Monroe Sts., Hinsdale, Il... .1911
Youne, Joun A., 371 Dundas St., London, Ontario..............+%- 1907
Young, Joun P., 1510 5th Ave., Youngstown, Ohio............... 1911
YounG, WALLACE Park, 73 Soramen Ave., Toronto, Canada....... 1913

ZAPPEY, WALTER R., 137 Westminster Ave., Arlington Heights, Mass..1905
ZimmER, J. T., 421 Holdridge St., Lincoln, Neb.............-.2+00: 1908

Deceased Members. XXXVIi

DECEASED MEMBERS.

FELLOWS.

Date of Death
MU ENFECEIET, (CC EUASREAMNS © 5.5 alc tun oiictare's otarate sya viele o a(e ie wisiele slale’s: 6 March 8, 1908
BATRD; SPENCHR BH ULEMR TONG cis cie/e)s1e.6'e/sieis aisle esis eiaieicielsle\e'c Aug. 19, 1887
EPR ERR Le ARTIS SEAEEE,.(2iohclass\cia'ateia's*elalsie’ sini ieiajale wialalste Sale os Feb. 4, 1897
RECOM REEL EOE soy iafafers/chatersisiajaictahe}aters! ajabeledslatetaldtateteraw nese Dec. 25, 1899
Goss NATHANINL STICKNEY. 6: <.0\5.6.04 6 2 sie 8 dw 0 vale ocle cles March 10, 1891
EIOHDHE td OSMPH) DASSHDT yin ct creie) sit) «io a\oilste sielsie' clelelel< ereievc Feb. 28, 1888
SHERAIES) SOHN. AMORY 4 ouiniv sos iib sbi bve aiaieln ofa eidie'eis!e.a%s March 26, 1892
TT AR TE, OMAGH sive cee sree uisiars atmid'e abe e'aiee see e Jan. 31, 1903
Pinner, Janns, CGUSHINGS\ .46% gives ss ucelne winwele ss sr s'es Oct. 27, 1902
RURDIN, MELENR YS AUGUSTUS: > saiche os) crcl o's) leat) ae: er eleve: eae) ac March 29, 1911
SONENCRI DD Cy OOH GN ES RATED <0 a5 win\e/st aie: siete sieiwlare </aie| etale oie March 18, 1900
AUR IAC EIS. OG EDO) sishorn s.a)'ecceiel staal wiereiclal ataratepatalotalansls\e'e/cie Dec. 28, 1903
WV ATION) OHING MUAYNAIRD 5, 0) Jo) /o)/0/e\ olnila)'et or'afaile (ele Miletol'e'eveteele eis Jan. 28, 1887

Honorary FELLOWS.

BLANFORD, WILLIAM THOMAS. 2.400 cee seis cecad case ste cect June 23, 1905
BecAGhy J.)V.. BARBOZA, DU) 4 5 64/s sis wae eetielatele cielslere «a5 als July —, 1908
BURMETSTHR] TLUGRNEANIN s.)2i<hcre) <<! Veleislalalstieleleiaic) defewieretetele else May 1, 1892
MOE MIGLS PROA Mi para lc seh 4,24 e)ayaicinn Siaysts man's AiareePORteim stele e oreebes Feb. 20, 1906
Ara DRE PAMEN RICH. Vis55 5 6,s,cps!s 6s-< avalos a ort osx se ae eee eae owes Jan. 1, 1897
MGR RENTOET PEC MUNGEN PATE TWIG 5105 nt atalars (aarp ee Sia ares oi8 oie) a c/a wie" s Dec. 14, 1909
MEVCNIDEA CH) SUADN is 2.0 aera seicie tie e's ween eater eine aleve ctate erscs March 14, 1896
COUENIG YPN ELTON IRM oss: <i sa 'areigl thaheicte! ein statittete Wester eiold ore April 20, 1890
PPAR TGA G MIATA 5 <0 ccien ise lols tine aoe rewrone ec vieeete ole iets Nov. 20, 1900
PUY, (AOMAS, EMON RW ic. elds ts oon Werte eid a ese ose e ots June 29, 1890
RGA, CUORDESUANID sorely dhe cho shabatioy al ota ach ayeraenewiatatare oes svele Sept. 15, 1895
ICAWREN CH \GHORGE (NIE WBOLD)s o\s)./e'e1. oieie'< («cle ole ie eile) ofa) sia%s cre Jan. 17, 1895
Winans AM OLN MBERINARD © s).cisielesye caters. a aunco wie tereye era e fstaces Feb. 5, 1911
MirNm=DWARDS,. (ALPHONSE)... -) ae craeisiielsl« os sreiisl e's ieee April 21, 1900
RUAN NY. MASEAHIRIDTD yet cic elicistcrctaralchetelsliaiia:krelalalarcte'are stavels.e «oe sa ete June 7, 1907
PAR VV ELLEAW KOUDCHMIN 4 cisis' dacs ivncve'esais eae ode cas July 3, 1890
AEM Z EIN PAT GULSI VON stcy tcp ct ot avela!ctatever ots loistersiceretsievelereveistiereyae Sept. 2, 1891
PER EMUM MMODEMED bs fe ous suid ald iaid Felon oo’ Davee qasie eee ese ess June 1, 1898
SIAR PEL ONGAIREY. Gel ciss 1k 6 eck cree SU staGie eae ew Nella here Oct. 20, 1907
ee ADM ATEN PRU Yk vi ad c's hele ce ee cee ee ae ee a June 27, 1913
Seema teeR CI HONE RENNER RUAN a, 3260 G, op! Sisic: Gn! Sin'c. w sitet Sees are slate ew eet erels Jan. 17, 1884
SERS OULAS URTV Vid Lie hc uid, kite ve clone. ve wie Ais i alvel ele’ lola wleers Nov. 26, 1895
MHeRPE, FUCHARD GOWDLERs 6 6.60c60scce'en'sscaecteaen es Dec. 25, 1909
PIMA ZAIN OW. Kel ee! AD SATGAS crane cic) ojetaileiicie: e\cichel ers ec aici eue\sisi'ele. seater Jan. 17, 1890

NPA TIAO EAGER ODE UO SSE ies G-< 7 ore et nels wlerere arelorerstorere o wiater Nov. 7, 1913

XXXVIii Deceased Members.

CoRRESPONDING FELLOWS.

PERO MO! SASS ciety wes ota isle: wie sie w ninieicl\e:e ole mista isin minieisisieherets Jan. 1, 1900
PERCE ON OHI oohe. cio 5.5) 5:4101 4 bi 01s 'c @\a:e) elpra’e elsialeccjure es eiefaiaians Aug. 16, 1900
ISAEDAREUS: EIDUARD c.a)e » cisinlsieias 0's o6/eo's we m vlaistceeplaieteieints Oct. 30, 1893
BUAKISTON, LHOMAS WRIGHT. .... 2005s 0s 0je¢ ees ee em sini che Oct. 15, 1891
VEASEUS, PEVLUDOLPE 5 5 o.6.4 o> some «lnk oe 6 e/e ot ovina e aie Sept. 21, 1907
BUASIUS, WILHELM. .....5...00e cece cece ccceccecrceeeeee May 31, 1912
BoapaNnow, Mopest NIKOLAEVICH........-2seeeeeeeeees March 4, 1888
SRA. | WORLD INES LED |c 615, 0-5) 0/050: 6.0 014 ,5/0) eyoueles =iein\e heen Reape May 21, 1905
BOELER, WALTOR TA WEY 54 3. 001 0:0\)ei) eof ae crises inate tens July 19, 1906
CWOLENTT AROBERT: 524.56 sioiaes erorsiemionsinieca see eTopeoeitelierts Jan. 27, 1913
Coormn, JAmMms GRAHAM), << .4:..60/s0% 0 0 «/y0'e 010 alalelotetele ntetatels July 19, 1902
CORDEAUK, SOHN orj.c00) 6.0.55 015 sie inigtiacoieistehala ote nigh etal eee Aug. 1, 1899
DAVID, “ARMAND: 3. 5.-'5)- 00 s\< «01s alors eiaj./e cee oie oe ete epee Nov. 10, 1900
GAS ANWR oo e's syicte..0'p ip ie toute atone ie legeuene [ote aceon ae Jan. 7, 1910
AITO V LCTOR Gs 251) uielaare.01 5:5 ga ataitel a) 40 estetolave oie etaace tte ieme March 19, 1906
JEUNE hii qs rigasmongoauedrsoopodundcbonoAcesoDn ss Aug. 15, 1887
FEARGITS. SIDWARD «0.0/5, clin «als © > siesec ous istomoiels wine tate erelensts March 19, 1895
Hive, (Gusray EDLBR VON... 2-/<cios ols sissies «eer oene Jan. 9, 1911
FROUWUBY ROMS. 5 6 yo scd ale oie veienn a ost maa fete latehe eae ene Feb. 21, 1902
HoMEYER, EUGEN FERDINAND VON.........-2eeeeeeseeees May 31, 1889
IGNUDSON, © VALDEMAR 0 5 0 50:04 2's are oun saraycn ate einen etree Jan. 8, 1898
LAVARD, EDGAR LROPOLD.. .):...6 fo. ac « ca asetodieias tae amie Jan. 1, 1900
PRVERKUBN, PAUL ¢ .).¢6.5.5;¢)s ies ies biel eae amie teeta eres Dec. 5, 1905
LytTrLeton, THOMAS LORD LILFORD............002-+-000- June 17, 1896
MarscHaLnL, AUGUST P'RIBDRICH. |. < <x «'\s)< clears sie /alelaereierel isl Oct. 11, 1887
MatuGnnn, ANDERS: JOHAN... <<. «> 's\sidaieinieislerieieeslenteee: April 12, 1897
MIppDENDORFF, ALEXANDER THEODORE VON..........+.005: Jan. 28, 1894
Moszsisovics, Fetrx G. HERMANN AUGUST............+0-- Aug. 27, 1897
OATES} SE UGEND) WIEGIAM: «ce eceiese eee ater eeciae Nov. 16, 1911
OUSTATET, TIMILM .. 5. 5.< os o's's 0 sis:els sin tals a etapa ene ate generates Oct. 23, 1905
PHTrpPr) RUDOLPH! AMANDUS\..< 5 ce eateries eee Aug. —, 1904
PREJEVALSKI, NicoLAS MICHAELOVICH..........++eeeee-> Oct. 20, 1887
PRENTISS, DANIEL WEBSTER. . 55.0 oe1e cleiele wlelnicis oe siels ousted Nov. 19, 1899
Prymn, Harry Jams STOVIN. 22:42)... caatepeemen eee Feb. 17, 1888
. Rapps, 'Gusray FERDINAND»... 60055020 seem eg cee aeee eae —— 1903
SCHRENCK:| IUROPOLD! ‘VON «).c1s2c1 cis clecoeiacileieilehigere ie Jan. 20, 1894
S&LEYS-LONGSCHAMPS, EDMOND DE..........0--eeeeeeees Dec. 11, 1900
SHEVERTZOW, NICOLAT ALEKSYMWVICH. ..o< oe ceicnisiele ol: Feb. 8, 1885
SHELLEY.) GEORGE! FIRNEST..|....0 oc ose ener ee eee rerne Nov. 29, 1910
STEVENSON: ELENRY ... 4.5: vic)5.01616 ce cele re she cealeretoeieietelererrcoterane Aug. 18, 1888
PURIST HAM EW. TS... 5. 2 ia:a'e:s olisje. «.0iene re, qt eee ee ae ieee March 8, 1906
WHARTON, JHIENREY Teno soos sie cic sv orcierel ossicles enero Sept. —, 1895

WOODHOUSE, SAMUEL W..:..s.05< cee loc eee cone ee alone: Oct. 23, 1904

Deceased Members. XXXI1X

MEMBERS,
IBROWNREMERBERT os 25200, soni os sibs meas Seely yal May 12, 1913
IB RUINEITS DERN orale orp ye. ays, 5, ie) 0) oats ooo )ejafalctee maja leg 6 8)a'ehs June 20, 1904
RATED 7 WEAN 2 cate ys nicicie a oi x.t we ere oo > oip pee 96/18 © eyelmysiele a) « Dec. 9, 1910
TUID SV UMMREMR DPWIGHT ic secession ve <5 06S rials oie0 Nels Oct. 22, 1905
IXireret. (OMAN iminEk SB a6 hobo pepeb OBE DAOC ORES Dom pOre Nov. 11, 1913
HampH, Witiram LMGRANGE. .. 2.6.6 ec ccc se cee cece aes July 8, 1907
MORRUY MED RADRORDR ose aieteiacclsie cio siarer ciealoueleleneca s olelonaunicy e:2 Oct. 7, 1912
WHETMAN: CC HAREM CPDIMG «oro. 2 = oie nip peieisic eis waiacens wlere's Dec. 6, 1910
ASSOCIATES.
POAC Ee TAR ENCE TE 5 os c3 aa) clasts cia: in ooh oc Sum, wv Bieidhel oes May 20, 1893
ELEN OMAREMS SEA VINE > 6 25 25 5-5 5 ue e's = wlnicra Gale suodelovee sais Oct. 15, 1893
PONAAIRIRS pMIUEU ANOS 220 acta ysl iade boss o's wei ein 'e/orwis a) Siemnielat ers Malte ane Feb. 6, 1907
PACENE EU ATEMON AVEESO . 00.2% ots sie aise ewes cig nie minty wet azerehs May 19, 1885
URE WEDGE ARE COBEADAIN Soo 5/5: ac. «icin sioleieis oriole esate sists March 11, 1894
AEE MY) EPA TRIOS fE 3 a oi 5) «| aveh ooh hn nyo) 2) ec ee Scares] SrafeelciMiniavele we e+e, 1905
PEE V2 RNR 5p ostae go ona ta la (ala yeris tel wi obatote wie ialahdiermek diols’ heraracehe Nov. 6, 1902
BORE MIR OERGE @ @ ocs See vide a vcs ae a wm hem emus aatalntos aim © June 25, 1898
IBRCKHAM, CHARLES, WICKLIFFE. «3... de oles elas one sie cieree wie June 8, 1888
SEU Bres EUR IREROG hae occa oo aie oun ba, 4 '4ssx aka ie ninieln raehotenmtenVobavel@ face April —, 1897
BIRT WRU ERAN CIS) OSEPH'))eals «cst clere el cisievel tetera ola telerereket June 29, 1901
BOARDMAN, GEORGE AUGUSTUS............0ce cee ceceeees Jan. 11, 1901
BERR RE LE ORS Fe EER MINT Rvs sy oc ancr iste) acts osc 4) cps¥e> anti dishansnetouslnnataieo eiet opla Jan. 10, 1894
SEPA HNN) FO SPIIRUED YEN go cco isc auc, © bu sve) ou Ni ns0/'adaxausvesaciesepelereser storenouete Jan. 5, 1900
BRR, WILLIAM. LAWREINGD «. «5 «6.0: 0:c.e,0:0, 00.041 onteimerciere cine 6 Dec. 7, 1889
BRNNINGHH, GHORGE PRANK oo 66 n 0228 Ho o0 ae awo eee wed «a Dec. 3, 1905
PEPIN IVAN ERASIU IES sso soca 0\cha\ cel exalanara- ira verareparels diay aietarer ots tei b Mar. 21, 1907
LRA We MSTIES WW rejesra oo 0110: Mile ors wiimos w ayer sete etoletel serieiare tev scum Sept. 3, 1897
LERUAN ORENT CIP BORD 5 ..5.2.c505. oynysierseieiel ni yee ete yells oodiale ei Jan. 16, 1901
ee NG, HaLAN OTS CHANEURE, 5. 5-5 0/'5 xJala ais sin sb e's wide aca eteboiste sles Jan. 9, 1900
ME reRU CT NW ETS Shy oreye feck gs Nope) ini sve! mvatarcrere cieiar asaraaneiera eare-s Sept. 6, 1909
SeRPATEREE. TMGN ABD Be a a & ooo eva cise fom cle sia bolle srerehuine vie et March 16, 1904
EEIMOR te mMMME RSON 2 si ose) och ei “scl sv crske) 4s) Orabia est otenewwenstiapehete Oct. 23, 1913
MEMS EM RTSERINS 18. ten ectecre (ce sive eaerciin ere Soles mine Ow c\esemeues June 10, 1895
EP ARBHEY VESREINIDON |. oc els.0 sere sx ole wow sje ares oeete sts Nov. 20, 1901
PAMPER TOBNRT ARGYLL: » <2 sss oc bewseness oss vn as April —, 1897
NPR U NE EN Med DT 3 Foy) 37a ah nbaf sarc) «<i ai sisi oyotsenc a's, clate mvessralovenelsiaiele le Feb. 18, 1904
(CER TRESS C30 AN Ee aa Nov. 15, 1907
DERE EMD ee ere ek won niiicyls « xsivbies Sunle » » sible PE OHAe Dee — 1900
Seater, ISABED, PADDOCK. ...0 60-000 cc ces coecccaeen: Sept. 15, 1907

CHADBOURNE, Mrs. ARTHUR PATTERSON..........0-000+08: Oct. 4, 1908

xl Deceased Associates.

CUARTMS RED UAIRUAR © .i5/6'c 50:5 t+ 2,5 lees oie «-cievery reenenetere nee May 6,
Cram, JOHN INATHANTIL( (is. cc's Gisiw di ei ticievn sjesela eo syelaumslepene Jan. 13,
GOR WemViccie am we tinvats = craveieicle.s Grete ee eee e eee e eens April 26,
COUR URN, WELLEAM “Weis <4's'e's's (sc cs ole 's lee 0's 0 /elolnielelolacaheetele Oct. 17,
Caramrr VATIONSO IME 6). < i025 also 6 $s ea cles lle ete ete eter Aug. 22,
Conant, Mrs. THOS. Ou ics dilsasstsa ssc ose cases Heese Dec. 28,
CORNING, (HRASTUS, (SEs .)s\eicis vies <i0'n so oo aie atone cele olde eh meine April 9,
MPA) AVN. GEE 1 0.1, $206.5, 'o fa '6 'sGorlsoratineule "a ile Rita to a a a olla cee April 21,
TD Arc, SOHN “AMLLEIN:. 5:4 6 0% aceienvo.ee sos oo oro b ore earn trea Feb. 21,
DATS Mrs) SSUSAIN Lg. 6s eerie oaie.c.e ooo cere kine ereieteteie Rea Feb. 13,
Davis’ WATTER WRii o5 isis 'a's/hc 3 dee sisele ses Cette eee April 8,
DAVIS WVITS SPV VATITE ROR cul a5 aleve erele eioieie ts Re ReR a ner Nene Feb. —,
ID UXTOR NMI LON;.: 2.4 to'av5 4-ein. vies) oesaieralers aholerde ete Ste Reto July 27,
Deven, Junran MOoNTGOMMRY. <2... 055 > «sete Nov. 23,
HULIOTS SAMUEL LO WNL « «sss sis. oy!0is + oe ale ene ee Feb. 11,
EEA ANTICS: (HAN ICIUIN 3.0.9: 5.8 aie ts: o/s > /euore foie siete sa okra area April 24,
RAR Wann, “Vira: HinnmN Sek, sécc.csister cal ceceite ce eee Aug. 6,
PRR. JOIN JH AR WHOLE... careleisia sree eile Cle 6 alererere ator eae Feb. 11,
BISHER (Wie AHUBBELD): 2) bc.clsc. ced seetee cece aE Oct. 6,
Rowimn, Josaua LOUNSBURY:. «sc 2.a1ssccus tee ieee amen July 11,
Boutin CaaRins, ANTHONY <2... s4 alc oieuies Use coin eee Mar. 16,
Gusnpr, ABRAHAM EIRBERT: .. 2.0525. 0ee8 sss oe nee April 30,
Goss, SRNTAMOIN (RANKLENS ...).\j.jccc/aeoaslahegoe eee July 6,
Eiri: ERRINIRY 4.0. 5/0\c sc cae on 6) ear oas 4 oes ROR Te Nov. 6,
Elarou,: Jusem: MAURICM:. ssc )40.05 one eee ee eee May 1,
BR, WEA EL 6 otc se csiasd ave estan ee nearer eee Oct: —;
HoapLEy, FRmpERIcCK HopGus:.....%...cameeeeees aes Feb. 26,
Bouums, LaRun KeinGin: ..), .0.sseceeseeeeeeeee een May 10,
EIGOPHS; JOSTAR . ...0s50 cue se esed sec eeeeee tee Jan. 16,
Lowa \ HGORENCE) Ay o.o.-00)0 4 wis 2.5 'acas dpe ee eae July 1,
Flown Mise LOUISE: ...:0.<.0. «0s «6.00089 a eee Sept. 13,
Howianpy JOHN SNOWDON... ..+.'ss2s ae 2ee bee eee Sept. 19,
INGMRSOLE,) JOSEPH CARLETON: «... <0 sicisos eee aeoe Oct. 2,
JHNKS; JOHN WHIPPLE POTTER... .......0<.5 00h + enetnun Sept. 27,
JMSUORUN,: MORTIMER. .... 5. ns's.cclae dee eee cee pee March —,
Powe, Pron LOWES 36,6 j6.0:01:0\000.8.4 20 eee eee ee March 22,
ABGRTEACIORR AWWINE SA. 20 fase have po 's,hd 018) beaveh ORR ee Tee Feb. 15,
KurGHy, WaLBUR: CLINTON. ..,:.......0 cic ocensecdem eon July 8,
BGT OEIN COs 25. su aus sac a mrdua via aie ba hed en July 9,
Wenox (OWN COWING, 65... 5s cc clea bekic ene ee eee June 1,
FROGH, VAWIGUBIT 5 ooo sic blo s/eicals eald pute o wae See Feb. 15,
TS UAERONG TOD WIGS 6 0)6:56 6:0 ies a cleus totaal nee en heen Dec. 4,
TREMOETMN PORE... «| /sra.cie + ssseieioasnie-e same ols ee eee Aug. 5,
HAWRENGH, ROBERT HOR... 2%... p<. oc ence ede Oe April 27,
Een) LeeLinpALeXANDER. . 0... 000016) ss0 oes seen May 20,

BANDEN, (CHARLIS.. 55s. . sas. 0 oc's dele Weed eee Feb. 3,

1911
1903
1885
1899
1902
1907

1900
1913
1907
1913
1901
1909
1889
1895
1912
1910
1909
1899
1906
1895
1893
1913
1898
1913
1895
1906
1904
1913
1912
1885
1898
1894
1905
1894
1908
1903
1904
1904
1907
1902
1888
1897
1908
1888

Deceased Associates. xli

PLOW DEVAN DEEW AMEE. © i/o. dle cie 5 o)cls sa Jele og: eieleldcihee nies June 14, 1906
ARIE MEMO. Cine Aiahara, Svial a ao, 4.4, siaiece. bie au. Ba?ojeva,si8.cale! oe Aug. 15, 1900
MEAD TTSANT UATE XCAN DR G6 cscf-) miedo ies) at's eit) aes alee sha ecaiciens Oct. 25, 1907
VGA BT os COMPAR TM SY ee Mane ci uno e stor, Gematol lal arca tite tat Sept. 25, 1900
ARCH: POISE WELD 5. 2 a2 0 ecolsieis Sleicrs © d's aie lesa ace daceiele wyeatiede.& March 19, 1899
MARISUW OE ARD, IuORATING 6 oc25 5.0 .cicherets cde/ele cre eo) arohe one iaaae Dec. 11, 1895
IVES EIN GRELE NR Wig V Vin soins cic crete eee aches ME he tls oe mia Feb. 26, 1914
NTG Biwi Neel Ann tn One sewer tevene leh ua tadevae ee ckauar sears reteie oe Nov. 1, 1909
ING SGaspwi gs A PALI Baggs GU cb COE EnIT BI CTOEG SCE eC ore Nov. 1, 1899
BPMN) AG GORGE: SMUD) 3). 2 iaca-a(5, <6 are. s iuibasa ais deine Cosas June 19, 1901
IN DaStouey Jalopy? DIA pine eo tn 6 COGIC ooo Dio d Sarco Noy. 138, 1890
MORRELL OUARHNGH I ELONR Vics.) ciheracieterr ties eels eicuse sieves July 15, 1902
INICHOES) HOWARD GARDNER'S o 5 ccs © «otitis ec sie neues e.cc June 23, 1896
TBE SNe ho dey gS nucleon ia ayia obey eid ola o, 6 seat Sars wi 'eashw eselcare Wes) dls March 12, 1903
INOR THR OPA OHNE lie at ceiciereisins rare satus tice teen roe ei sicis See June 26, 1891
ADDO CKASLEAT Folin Vie wisi vrsisyisiers eisiaisis, oe ovecuene lo tonene ie layer steels Sept. 15, 1907
pA Ree AU SITIN IM ee teiceec ar. Kelarenanceclincde ster eked of ovemeamioiare icin ecens Sept. 22, 1893
PAUUMIDR HREDERICK @GARKOY |. vests a acc Sle ae ema cece March 8, 1906
Pama ON Mac EBA COME VOT} cov BG) oc Suncare vere erase dee ehan ohat sete Shae May 14, 1906.
RAGSDALH GHORGH, ELONRY . <2 5/.)cjsig, 0008s son's bs viens 6% March 25, 1895
EA MORGW MEY tes Geico See sk al a obo arate toate Woe March 20, 1903:
ASW IE MEAN CIS WWILLPAIM 29500 fas) Seavcieievetens, trots cool cuelayetesaede dolar June 12, 1911
JEST oY Cisn oS Nee) Ca eae AL ey oe a nehaeas gpa ie etl Lah Ue RON ee Dee. 15, 1912:
RACHARDSON MININIISS ics). 2 io)2/2 ctoyleiige cereus yohetoraiciare) eel ane overee s June 24, 1893
LOSING,’ Mrs. EDWARD: «5)..08 55)... aloe atcbartonaye creat aha July 2, 1906
SANE eA UE A LVO)W) c Abo 75 31 5.0 Seats) ha to hreatarescicupnehiye es Mtb de set dk April 20, 1906
SMEOUS MOMRCY SHERBORN: (2). \2./5 secc sais a nepotism eles olaiens April 7, 1900
MRP UENTE aE AINEEIEY VEL yap ccs ev Aare C1 ekcheaina Coe ne Cae IS we Gas Feb. —, 1895
SEAN HOMAS IDWABDS: « 4c snos sae eo fos aoe o dubai Dec. 23, 1902
RS MUATInY RUSTING ATE: CANINES BERRIEN. stare: dctw, ete wrer rate ota: che ie ate trowel April 24, 1884
SAAT MEL Se iat eiete scone GEMS hae ave hae Test PEA Eee Mar. 12, 1912
SMMC TT CAO NCH ATBWRT' <2 25.5 oe 4 lieve clades lous eve ehels Wileitewi dle cs May 6, 1896
Siveasty Tu bns}y 18s oft Os aie Oe ean oer apaan Sloss Ea ame Pt ewe SL Jan. 1, 1912
SNOW. E RANCIS, FLUNTINGION . .. «5 <6 iis fin done ot akidleee es Sept. 20, 1908
POUTHWICK, JAMHS IMORTIMOR 3... o6c 6b sec wie we se papas ees June 3, 1904
SPAUD UNG RCH D Ss bo aye oy tebe tate e. sis tor ctuee cate -e eucher nekal cy aayems Oct. 22, 1913
SAUNA RY EARNS ee del ors rain ir ar aia aaa alle! oieaerevarviah Seals March —, 1895
re Mia yee IM 1S DPT IPS Ue fs AE age SR Pa a March 28, 1907
ae IN TRO IRIBCOML:. oko 5 6 alos c'a dard 6 wee bibenee a April 10, 1910
BEET O MIPS ON VAN D Mentor et os eect 2 ere oc ay ere ates aia te tovorals.w oltsc’ Aug. 7, 1907
omni ears: MEATY ING) 2 ioc ciate x 6 cn ote bia lal. vee cde & March 16, 1897
AREER, POGHNN) CARLETON 2... 25... . 5 cc 0b ee elcne ee Sept. 6, 1896
OB EVANO RIVERS OVW ETATEARE OLS So cy. ce voles cars clese. 4 cls eid 0/6 aperoiecere Nov. 29, 1912
RUNNY ERY EP MIOR REY RMOTAGE oo ics, 50s coco 6 <0 5)0/6 3b 6 016m 0,0 wae Be June 8, 1884
WATERS, BIWARDY STANLY... 00.000ceecvecesewecence Dec. 26, 1902

PV SRI Ty Teer soos GEAR TEBIC Wier or cs Laban chy Acie le cassis cd wabiotenniatala way ate Feb. 24, 1914

xiii Deceased Members.

Va L AnD, SAMUI) WV UBS. |.1.°% 0. 6)<..0 = «(bie sievorale a eherenarenmenene May 24, 1887
IWATE SONS EDNELY), i\5, cvs lois, 2 clei lel elo oreo da evo le arene teceianerees Nov. 22, 1911
WIstTER, WILLIAM RoTCH......... MAO eters dian Helos 6 Aug. 21, 1911
UD) WTEGEALAINE oho .00) «o/s ered e) i a abe) aS atls statuh elle aNabaela tease ema Aug. 9, 1885
Wooprurr, EDWARD SEYMOUR ;).\..2../:4)-.4. 004505 see Jan. 15, 1909
Worramn, Cranes Ky... 3.665 50425 45 sw clen denote ates May 27, 1909
MOUNG CURTIS CUAW J. js csc) < J cis a eudidis o1a.a.ck0 shel ae oe eee July 30, 1902

e.. | CONTINUATION OF THE ee
eries, eries,
Vol XXXIX SBULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB ly. xxxI

The Auk

H Quarterly Journal of Ornithology

Vol. XXXI JANUARY, 1914 No. 1

AZINE ES

FLA
=

PUBLISHED BY

The American Ornithologists’ Union

CAMBRIDGE, MASS.

. Entered as second-class mail matter in the Post Office at Boston, Mass.

CONTENTS

PAGE
In Memoriam: Puitie Lurtey Scuater. By D. G. sel 2 He fe Eee S. AS etc.
(Plate I) ; 3 ; ‘ : 4 5 a
PRELIMINARY DerscripTION oF A New PETREL. Bee Hover Cushman Murphy,

(Plate II)- . : 2 - 4 3 A ; : 12

A a ive THE CONSERVATION OF THE E1pER. By Charles Wenger Townsend, A
On THE Hasits anD BeuAvior OF THE HERRING ein LARUS ARGENTATUS Baek

By R. M. Strong. (Plates III—X.) A . . 3 : F ‘ 3 22
Notes on Nest Lire or THE BROWN CREEPERIN Malsacasaees By Winsor

M. Tyler 5 ; 7 : 4 : 5 ® 5 : 5 : 50
THE Fauuacy OF THE TENDENCY TOWARDS ULTRAMINUTE Deere By

J. D. Figgins 3 5 : ‘ 3 3 4 ; 3 : 2 : 62

Noves ON THE ORNITHOLOGY OF CLAY AND Pato Auto CountTigs, Iowa. By
A. D. Tinker. (Plates XI-XII.) . a x 2 ‘ : , ‘ 70

AppiTions To ‘‘Nores ON SOME SUMMER AND Fauu Birps OF THE CROOKED LAKE
Reaion, Cass anD Crow WING Comes Mow, ie By Albers W. Hony-

will, Jr. . 3 ; : 5 : 82
Some Binary GENERIC NAMES. By Gece M. eran FOR. S. E. = 86
Tuirty-First STATED MEETING OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION. By

John H. Sage ; MK 2 5 < ; ; ‘ F 5 z . 92

GENERAL Nortrres.—Brown Pelican Regular off North Carolina, 100; Recovery of a
Banded Pintail Duck, 100; American Egret ( Herodias egretta) at Martha’s Vineyard,
Mass., 100; The Willet in Central New York, 100; Killdeer Plover at Cambridge,
Mass., 101; Turkey Vulture (Cathartes aura septentrionalis) at Martha’s Vineyard,
Mass., 101; Doryfera vs. Hemistephania, 101 ; Phoebe (Sayornis phoebe) in Colorado,
102; The Fox Sparrow in Central Park, New York City, in August, 102; An Abnor-
mal Rose-breasted Grosbeak, 102; Two Prothonotary Warblers in Massachusetts,
103; Tennessee Warbler (Vermivora peregrina) in Massachusetts in Autumn, 103;
Mourning Warbler (Oporornis philadelphia) in Florida, 103; Hooded Warbler at
Boston, Mass., 104; Hooded Warbler at Nahant, Mass., 104; Some Rare Birds at
Hamilton, Kansas, 104; A Quaint Reminiscence of Audubon, 105; Correction, 106.

Recent LiterRATuRE.— Gurney’s ‘The Gannett,’ 107; Sage and Bishop on the Birds
of Connecticut, 108; Tyler on Some Birds of the Fresno District, California, 109;
Grinnell and Swarth on the Birds and Mammals of the San Jacinto Area of Southern
California, 110; Gifford’s ‘Birds of the Galapagos Islands,’ 112; Brooks’ List of the
Birds of West Virginia, 112; Bailey’s ‘Life Zones and Crop Zones of New Mexico,’
113; Todd on New Neotropical Birds, 113; Kirkham’s ‘North and South,’ 114;
Wood on Michigan Birds, 115; Howell on New Birds from Alabama, 115; Mearns
on New African Birds; 115; Shufeldt on Fossil Feathers and Fossil Birds, 116;
Gain on Penguins of the Antarctic Regions, 116; Mathews’ ‘A list of the Birds of
Australia,116; Witherby on the Moult of the Rook, 118; Trevor-Battye’s ‘Camping
in Crete,’ 118; Hartert’s ‘Die Végel der palaarktischen Fauna,’ 119; Economic
Value of Wild Birds in South Africa, 120; Bird Enemies of Diabroticas, 120; Shel-
ford’s ‘Animal Communities in Temperate America,’ 120; The Oriole, 123; The
Ornithological Journals, 124; Ornithological Articles in Other Journals, 132; Pub-
lications Received, 134.

CorRESPONDENCE.— Albatross Specimens, 136; Teaching a Bird Course, 137.

Notes anp News.— Obituary: Alfred Russel Wallace, 138; Ora W. Knight, 141;
Fred B. Spaulding, 142; Dr. F. A. Jentink, 143; Dr. J. W. B. Gunning, 143; Bird
Protective Legislation for 1913, 143; The Cat Problem, 145; A Banded Swallow,
146; The ‘One-Letter’ Question, 146; The Chicago Ornithological Society, 148; The
A. O. U. Committee on Classificaton and Nomenclature, 148; The 1914 Spring
Meeting of-the A. O. U., 148.

‘THE AUK,’ published quarterly as the Organ of the AMERICAN ORNITHOLO-
cists’ UNIon, is edited, begmning with the Volume for 1912, by Dr. 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 York, N.Y. Foreign Subscrib-
ers may obtain ‘THe AvuK’ through levgeol ele 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 Dr. WITMER STONE,
AcapremMy oF NaTurRAL ScrmNcEs, 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 BppEat.

PLATE I.

THE AUK, VOL. XXXI.

THE AUK:

A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF

ORNITHOLOGY.

WOOL? KX. JANUARY, 1914. Wo; 1

IN MEMORIAM: PHILIP LUTLEY SCLATER.!
Born 4th Nov., 1829— Died, 27th June, 1913.
BY-D., G, ELLIOT, D, SC., F: B.S. E., &C.

Plate I.

A PRrINcE in the realm of Zoological Science has fallen, and I am
called here today to bid you look upon his face, and hearken to the
records of his deeds. Death, whom the Poet has called “The
Beautiful Angel,” has in recent years frequently visited within
our ranks, and many and wide are the gaps he has made, until the
brilliant cohort that embraced all of our noblest and best, is now
shattered and dispersed, leaving of its talented members, but a
sorrowing remnant, survivors of a glorious host.

Of all those who did brilliant work during the past sixty years,
and whose familiar places know them now no more, it would seem
almost invidious to select by name any particular member of that
celebrated company, which made the middle and latter part of the
last century glorious in our annals, a few survivors of whom even
extending its renown into the opening of this one, which we have
been privileged to witness.

But high as is the rank in our science which we willingly accord
to many of that distinguished band, and which was one of the
glories of the Victorian Era, yet there was one who occupied a

1 Address delivered 11th November, 1913, at the thirty-first stated meeting of
the American Ornithologists’ Union.

1

2 Exutot, In Memoriam: Philip Lutley Sclater. pas

commanding position, whose name was known wherever in the
world the study of ornithology held a place, and whose labors were
persistent and never ceasing over a period longer than that allotted
to the majority of mankind, and Philip Lutley Sclater has long
been recognized as one of the great leaders and exponents of our
science.

He was born on the 4th of November, 1829, at Tangier Park, in
Hampshire, the country residence of his father, William Lutley
Sclater, Esq., and his boyhood was passed at “ Haddington House,”
another of his father’s estates, and there, in the celebrated locality
sacred to the memory of Gilbert White of Selborne, he fostered
his taste, and love for the study of birds. I say fostered intention-
ally, for I believe an ornithologist or naturalist, like the poet, must
be born and not made, and if he has not the “ Divine Afflatus,” his
labors will be but fitful, lacking the soul, and his spasmodic efforts
will come to naught. But our friend was born to the ‘Purple,’
his lineage was true, and in the pursuit of his loved birds, he gave
action and expression to the spirit that was in him.

At ten years of age he was sent to a famous school at Twyford
near Winchester and when thirteen years old he went to Winchester
College and three years later became a scholar of Corpus Christi
College, Oxford, but being under age he did not become a resident
at the University until 1846. At that time Strickland was a reader
in geology at the University and he was Sclater’s instructor in
scientific ornithology, and here he began his collection of bird skins,
at first confining himself to those species found in the British Isles.

In 1849 he received the degree of Bachelor of Arts, and he con-
tinued for two more years at the University devoting himself to the
study of natural history and modern languages, and became
familiar with French, German and Italian. In 1851, he began the
study of law, and became a student of Lincoln’s Inn, and in 1855
he was admitted a Fellow of Corpus Christi College, and was also
called to the bar, and followed the Western Circuit for several
years.

In 1856 he made his first visit to America, going west as far as
Lake Superior and the upper waters of the St. Croix, which river
he descended in a canoe to the Mississippi, and later published an
account of his journey in the third volume of “ Illustrated Travels.”

wane Exuiot, In Memoriam: Philip Lutley Sclater. 3

In Philadelphia he met at the Academy of Natural Sciences,
Baird, Cassin, Leidy, and other well known scientists, and passed
considerable time studying the splendid collection of birds possessed
by that Institution.

Returning to England he remained for several years in London
practicing law and studying natural history, and was a constant
attendant at the meetings of the Zoological Society.

Nearly twice the number of years allotted to a generation of man-
kind has passed away, since Sclater and I first met. It was in
London, where I had come from Paris, after a considerable stay
upon the continent studying in the various museums, and preparing
the Monograph of the Pittas. On going to the house to which I
was directed, quite an unpretentious one as I remember it, I as-
cended two flights of stairs after entering, and knocked at the door
of a room which was opened by Sclater himself, and on giving my
name was greeted with a cordial “Come in, come in, there are a
few of us here talking about birds, come and join us.” I found
there a small company of young men, the names of most of whom
have since become known wherever ornithology holds its sway, and
there were laid the foundations of many friendships which death
has alone terminated. I brought an account of Mitchell’s death
in Paris, Sclater’s predecessor in the office of Secretary of the Zoo-
logical Society, rumors of which had reached London, but no de-
tails. Mitchell had resigned, and Sclater had been nominated for
the office by Owen and Yarrell, and elected in the previous April.
He had only just entered upon his duties, and he found the publi-
cations of the Society much behind in their regular issue, the state
of the Gardens not what it should be, and many reforms needed,
which during the next three years were established, and put into
effect, and the “ Proceedings” and “Transactions” brought up to
date. At that time Sclater was tall and slender, with an attractive
smile and cordial manner. He remained the most active power
and influential officer of the Society for fifty years, and under his
leadership it was raised to the first rank in dignity and usefulness,
among the kindred institutions of the world, as well as in the
importance and beauty of its publications.

Although when Sclater commenced to make his collection of bird
skins at Oxford, he intended not to restrict himself to any one

lao

4 Euu1oT, In Memoriam: Philip Lutley Sclater. Sanit

country, but to include the birds of the world, he soon found this
would be too great an undertaking, and he decided to confine his
investigations to the avifaunas of Central and South America, and
it was in those regions the greater part of his work was accom-
plished. But of course, as secretary of a society which carried on
its works practically over the entire world, he was led to investigate
from time to time families and species far removed from his chosen
field of labor, and he published important papers and memoirs
on mammals and birds of Asia and Africa and other eastern lands.

In 1858 he published his scheme for the six great geographical
divisions of the earth. These were the Nearctic — including Green-
land, and all North America and the northern half of Mexico; Neo-
tropical — southern half of Mexico, West Indies Islands, Central
America, and South America, with the Falkland and Galapagos
Islands; Palaearctic — all Africa north of the Atlas Mountains,
Europe, Asia Minor, Persia, Asia north of the Himalayas, northern
China, Japan and Aleutian Islands; Ethiopian — Africa, south
of the Atlas range, Madagascar, Bourbon, Socotra and Arabia to
the Persian Gulf; Indian — India, Ceylon, Burma, Malacca, Asia
south of the Himalayas, south China, Philippines, Borneo, Java,
Sumatra and adjacent islands; Australian — Papua, Australia,
Tasmania and the islands of the Pacific Ocean.

This arrangement was at once accepted as one admirably con-
ceived, and for generalizing a geographical distribution on a broad
scale it will remain as evidence of Sclater’s skill and foresight in
establishing the natural boundaries of birds upon the earth.

I read not long ago in one of our metropolitan dailies, in a short
notice of Sclater’s career, after mentioning this arrangement pro-
posed by him, it stated that “it was said, he paved the way for
Darwin.” This, of course, was merely a layman’s short-sighted
view, and no one would be more quick to decline the honor than
Sclater himself, for no one paved the way for the great investigator,
he hewed his own road, and no man was ever able to walk abreast
with him upon it, save one alone, Wallace.

The meetings of the Society, which were held twice a month
except in summer, during the period Sclater was Secretary, were
most interesting, and in the sixties and seventies of the last century,
when I resided abroad, I was usually present, indeed at one time

—_—_

bigs Y07'5 a Exusot, In Memoriam: Philip Lutley Sclater. 5

I was a member of the Publication Committee. The number of
eminent naturalists present on those evenings was marvellous,
and no such body of celebrated men, all members of one Zoological
Society had ever before been assembled together, and we may
believe it will be a long time before one equal to it will be again
seen, for it was the height of zoological activity in the world, when
indeed there were giants in the land. Listen to the roll of those
meetings so you may know who were the leaders at that time in
Europe in the various branches of natural science, and as I call
their names, no response comes to my ear, save the sound of the
funeral bell tolling for those who have passed away.

I begin with the ornithologists, some of whom, however were
equally great in other branches of science. Philip Lutley Sclater,
and Osbert Salvin, devoted friends, co-laborers in a large number of
most important papers, synopses and volumes treating of the birds
of the Neotropical Region. Alfred Newton, steadfast friend and
charming companion, who published comparatively little during
his career but was probably better versed in ornithological lore
than any man of his time, and who will be remembered by the
Ootheca Wolleyana, and the Dictionary of Birds. John Gould,
famous for the great series of splendidly illustrated volumes.
Richard Bowdler Sharpe, at that time the Librarian of the Society,
but afterward head of the Department of Birds in the British Mu-
seum, and whose enduring monument will be that great Catalogue
of Birds founded upon the unrivalled collection in that institution.
George E. Shelley, author of the Birds of Egypt, Monograph of the
Sun Birds, beautiful representatives in their metallic plumage, of
our fairy Hummers, and the great work on the Birds of Africa.
Lord Lilford known for his beautiful illustrations of British Birds.
Henry Seebohm, explorer of the desolate Tundras of far away
Siberia, author of “ British Birds,” “The Charardriide’”’ and other
works. John Henry Gurney, during his life time the great autho-
rity on raptorial birds. Henry E. Dresser, author of the great work
on the Birds of the western Palaearctic Region, and other works.
Henry B. Tristram, Canon of Durham, and whose name brings to
our minds the feathered inhabitants of the sacred land of Palestine,
deserted and stricken Moab, and the thirst lands lying along and
upon the placid waters of the Sea of Death. Edgar Leopold Leyard,

(pene

6 Exutot, In Memoriam: Philip Lutley Sclater. Tecat

talented brother of the illustrious discover of Nineveh, who brought
with him the breath of the South African veldt, and the knowledge
of the feathered creatures that wing their way over its wide expanses,
as his work on the birds of that region proved. Robert Swinhoe,
modest of mien, handsome of face, versed in the birds of China and
far distant Formosa. Arthur Penrhyn, better known as Viscount
Walden, and later as the Marquis of Tweeddale, and whose volumi-
nous papers on the birds of the Philippine Islands and those of other
eastern lands are well known. Howard Saunders, master of the
long winged skimmers of the seas, of continental coasts, and the
shores of the far flung islands of the main. Frederic Ducane
Godman, chief editor and co-author with Osbert Salvin of the colos-
sal work on the natural history of Central America, the “ Bio-
logia Centrali Americana.” Then there rises before me the majestic
figure with the lion-like head covered with silvered hair and leng-
thened beard of Edward Blyth, whose mind was stored with the
knowledge of the birds and quadrupeds of India and other eastern
lands, and his colleague and coworker in the same fields Dr. T. C.
Jerdon Alston, already bearing in his delicate form the seeds of the
complaint that cut all too soon his promising career. At times
there would be present celebrated ornithologists from the Continent
and during the French and German war Jules P. Verreaux left his
native city, Paris, on the advent of the German army, and came
to London and occupied Sclater’s private room in the library
building, which had been courteously placed at his disposal. Be-
sides these there were others not strictly ornithologists, but very
eminent in their various chosen fields of work. Sir Richard Owen,
with his elaborate contributions on the great Dinornis, the extinct
giant birds of New Zealand. Sir William Henry Flower, great
comparate anatomist, and later joint author with Lydekker of
“Animals Living and Extinct.” Thomas Hualey and William
. Kitchen Parker, world widely known, and St. George Mivart, cele-
brated with the two others just named for their intimate knowledge
of animal anatomy. Then we recognize Garrod, Forbes and Murie,
successive prosectors of the Garden, and whose many and elaborate
papers shed a flood of light upon the affinities, and their proper
places in classifications of the animals submitted to their scalpels.

The artists were represented: there came Joseph Wolf with his

| Exuiot, In Memoriam: Philip Lutley Sclater. é

gentle ways and pleasant face, the greatest animal draughtsman
and painter of any age, and Keulemans, happy in his skill for de-
lineating birds. I do not remember ever to have seen at those
meetings either John Edward or George Robert Gray, but the
former’s physical disability which constrained him to move about
in a rolling chair was sufficient to explain his absence, but I know
of no reason why George Robert should not have been present,
nor did I ever see there, either Darwin or Wallace. It may have
been that as they lived out of London, it was not convenient for
them to come into town at night, but both those eminent men were
frequently in the library during the day and I have often been with
them on those occasions, Darwin seeking information on some par-
ticular subject he was then investigating, demanding facts not theo-
ries, for which he did not seem to have any particular use.

Those were interesting meetings, and at times the discussions
were very lively, and those whose mental artillery was not of the
requisite weight had best keep away from the arena.

That was a glorious company of eminent men, broad-minded and
far-seeing, whose field of labor was as wide as the world, untram-
melled by the artificial, oft changing boundaries of States, Princi-
palities or Powers.

And where now are all those brilliant souls! They have passed
over the threshold of that shining portal, through which all the
living have seen at times many of those they loved and cherished,
vanish from tear dimmed eyes, for, of all those whose names I have
mentioned, but two remain with us today, Dresser and Godman
long passed the number of years allotted to men upon the earth.
The survivors of those meetings stand like lone columns, erect,
lifting their heads aloft on a wide deserted plain, surrounded on
every side by ruins, and when in thought I sweep aside the inter-
vening years and stand again in that once crowded room, and look
on row upon row of vacant chairs, which now no man can fill, the
heart yearns with a fervent longing for

“A touch of a vanished hand
And the sound of a voice that is still.”

On the establishment of the Ibis in 1859, the members of the
British Ornithologists’ Union, of which Sclater was a founder,

8 Exuiot, In Memoriam: Philip Lutley Sclater. [es

selected him as its first editor, and he continued in the office for
six years, when he was succeeded for a similar period by Alfred
Newton, followed by Osbert Salvin, who was the editor for the next
six volumes, composing the third series. Then Sclater again
became one of the staff, and he remained either sole editor or asso-
ciate editor up to the beginning of the last year of his life.

It would seem that his constant work as Secretary of the Zoologi-
cal Society, in connection with the publication of his numerous
papers and volumes that were constantly appearing, would have
been quite sufficient for him, without assuming the responsibility
and labor attached to the publication of an important journal,
but his capacity for work seemed unlimited, and he associated him-
self with Sharpe in establishing the British Ornithologists’ Club,
and usually presided at the meetings, and delivered an address at
the beginning of the season. I have been his guest a number of
times at the annual dinner, and of course sat at his side, and he was
always a dignified presiding officer, of courteous demeanor. He
appeared to delight in work, and once he told me that there never
was a time when his pockets were not full of proofs requiring read-
ing and correcting, and wherever he went, all his spare moments
were occupied in this to most of us, wearisome and distasteful labor.

He became a member of the British Association for the Advance-
ment of Science in 1847, and was Secretary of Section D. for a
number of years, and ultimately its President in 1875, and delivered
an address, taking for his subject, “The present state of our knowl-
edge of geographical zoology,” and in the succeeding year was
elected one of the two general Secretaries, and served for five years,
when he became ex-officio a member of the council.

In 1874 he served as private secretary to his brother the Right
Hon. George Sclater-Booth, M. P., afterwards Lord Basing, who was
president of the local government board, and served for two years,
and was offered a permanent position in the civil service, which he
declined as he would not give up his natural history work.

The library of the Zoological Society is greatly indebted to
Sclater’s knowledge of works bearing on that science, and to his
activity in procuring the needed additions to make it complete.
Every newly published work of merit was obtained as soon as
possible after it was issued from the press, and there is no place

we ‘| Euuiot, In Memoriam: Philip Lutley Sclater. 9

in the world where a naturalist depending upon books to aid him
in his investigations can more easily and satisfactorily accomplish
the completion of his labor.

In 1884 Sclater came to America for the second time, the reason
being the meeting of the British Association that year in Montreal,
and he was present at one of the early meetings of the American
Ornithologists’ Union. I saw much of him during his stay in New
York at that time. He did no scientific work on this trip, but
met many of his old friends and made the acquaintance of a number
of those whom heretofore he had known only by reputation.

‘Selater’s position as Secretary of the Zoological Society gave
him great opportunities for seeing and acquiring specimens of
birds and mammals, and other zoological material.

His office at 11 Hanover Square, was the general meeting place
of all naturalists in London, whether residents or visitors, and he
was in constant correspondence with all those who were interested
in natural science in every part of the world. Consequently
material poured in upon him from all quarters, and his opportunities
for discovering new forms were equalled by few and surpassed by
none. It is not surprising therefore that those he supplied with
names amounted to considerably over a thousand, and his papers
on many scientific subjects to something like fifteen hundred.

Although ornithology was his chief study, he did a large amount
of work in mammology, and he made important contributions to
the families of the Deer, and Rhinoceros, and on various genera of
American and African Monkeys. His published works of which he
was the sole author or in co-operation with others, amounted to
nearly thirty, of which, in mammalogy the most important was
“The Book of Antelopes,’”’ by Sclater and Thomas, in four volumes
containing descriptions of all the known species, and life histories
so far as known, and 100 colored plates of many forms; and in
birds, perhaps, “The Exotic Ornithology” by Sclater and Salvin,
issued in large and small folio, with one hundred colored plates of
birds of the Neotropical Regions.

Sclater was an indefatigable worker, never seeming to grow weary,
and no one with any less powers for continuing steadily at his
task for long periods could have possibly accomplished as much as
he did, even in the course of an equal number of years.

10 Exuiot, In Memoriam: Philip Lutley Sclater. eke

He contributed Volumes XIII, XIV and XV of the “Catalogue of
Birds,” published by the British Museum, and he was co-author
with W. H. Hudson in a work on “Argentine Ornithology,” a valu-
able contribution to our knowledge of the birds of that southern
land. Indeed in almost any field of ornithology which has been in-
vestigated during the past half century, Sclater’s ceaseless activities
are manifested and he has impressed his vigorous personality upon
the scientific literature of his time. He was above all a systematic
naturalist, most conservative in his methods and beliefs, and never
was reconciled to the introduction of trinominals, adhering tena-
ciously, as did many of his contemporaries to the Linnean system
of binominals. He loved the old ways, and looked askance and
with suspicion upon ‘innovations.’

Naturally one who was so well known far and wide, and who had
done so much valuable scientific work, should receive many honors,
and have his name enrolled among the members of many Societies.
I have neither the time or space to enumerate them, suffice to state,
that he was an Honorary Member of nineteen, Corresponding
Member of thirteen, Member of ten, and Fellow of three of the
scientific societies of the world, altogether a varied membership in
forty-five, and I may probably have missed some.

During the greater part of his career he had continued to add
to his collection of birds, and in 1886, when it had amounted to
nearly nine thousand specimens of over three thousand species, he
transferred it to the British Museum, whose collection augmented
at about the same time, by those of Gould, Salvin and Godman,
Hume, and others, became unrivaled in the world. After Sclater
had ceased to be Secretary of the Zoological Society, he published
comparatively little, and once I said to him that I thought he must
feel lonesome now freed as he was from his many official duties,
he quickly replied, “not at all, why should I be, I ride to hounds
several times a week, and I have ‘ The Ibis’ which keeps me pretty
busy, and really I do not seem to have any spare time at all.”

When I went to Africa in 1896, on arriving in London, the first
person I consulted regarding my expedition was my old friend,
then Secretary of the Society. I told him I proposed to go through
Mashonaland into the countries beyond along the line of the Zam-
besi, by way of Beira. He pointed out the imminence of the war

re Euiot, In Memoriam: Philip Lutley Sclater. tl
with the Matabili the greatest fighting tribe in Africa, and which
soon after broke out and devastated all that region and he asked me
what I would do to protect myself and train, against a hostile na-
tion in arms. I saw the point and replied, “Very well I will go
through Masailand,” a territory then little known or traversed, by
way of Zanzibar and Mombasa, but he strongly opposed this idea,
for it so happened he was then in constant correspondence with
that particular part of Africa, as his third son, Guy Lutley Sclater
was an officer in the Royal Engineers and was then engaged in the
construction of the railroad from Mombasa, which eventually
reached the shores of the Victoria Nyanza. He told me there was
great unrest among the tribes, that the rhinder-pest had nearly de-
stroyed the natives’ cattle, and had made serious inroads among
the bovine Antelopes; that fever was prevalent and severe along
the line of the road, which proved unhappily too true, for his son
died of an attack of it, before I returned to England; and he sug-
gested I should go through Somali-land, into the countries beyond,
north of the equator, and this I subsequently did.

I only saw Sclater a few times after he left the service of the
Society. He was then living at Odiham Priory, about forty miles
from London, and on each occasion, he came up to town to see me.
Although it had been some years since we last met, in the first inter-
view, I saw but little change in him. He was still active, both
physically and mentally, took as much interest in natural science
as ever, and he told me in the course of conversation, that he still
rode to hounds once or twice a week. A few years after, I was
again in London, working daily in the British Museum on the Pri-
mates, and he came again to see me, this time however, accom-
panied by his eldest son William Lutley Sclater, and I thought I saw
achange. He was not so erect, nor so physically active, and when
he entered my room, he seemed weary, and it was evidently a relief
for him to be seated. But his mind was as clear and active as ever,
and during his visit he asked many questions about my work, in
which he took great interest, for he had written a good deal on the
Primates himself in the years gone by; but when he rose and took
my hand to say good-bye, I felt it was a final parting, as I was
soon to leave England, and as he passed towards the door, I said
in a low tone to his son who had lingered behind, “take care of your

[Jan.

12 Murpuy, A New Petrel.
father, he is not nearly so strong as he was,” and my old friend
passed out of my sight on earth forever. A few more years were to
pass swiftly by, and the summons came to cease all earthly labor.
The energetic toiler was still arrayed in the panoply of work, which
he had carried so well over such a long series of years, his faith had
not abated, nor his courage failed, and he still grasped in his aged
hands, his familiar weapons the pen and the book, which he had
wielded so long and so effectively. But the time had come when
he was to “ cease from his labors, and his works were to follow him.”

The day was drawing to its close in the beautiful month of June,
and peace like a blessing from another world, seemed to hover over
the land, and Nature rejoiced in her smiling fields, and the opened
buds and blossoms; the sun was: slowly sinking to its rest
behind the western hills, flooding the fleecy clouds floating in the
blue vault above with crimson and with gold; from the east, the
shadow of the coming night was creeping slowly, slowly onward,
casting a pall over the valleys; the evening breeze with its soft
breath was playing among the leaves, and calling forth the perfume
of the flowers, and the nightingales, in their own fair land, chief
minstrels of the feathered choir, had sounded in one great burst
of melody, the opening chords of the vesper hymn,— when there
came to our friend, waiting, ever waiting, the murmur of softly
moving wings heralding the presence of the “Beautiful Angel,”
who gently led him out of his earthly mansion, just across the
threshold, to the bright land beyond.

PRELIMINARY DESCRIPTION OF A NEW PETREL.
BY ROBERT CUSHMAN MURPHY.
Plate ITI.

On the return voyage of the recent expedition to the island of
South Georgia conducted by the American Museum of Natural
History and the Museum of The Brooklyn Institute of Arts and

“AHAUOIN VAOVHdAONOIHO ViALVIGCULSW

syserdy 100 1 gem
aw

"I dLVIg
UDO UOIN loli Nh

os are Mourpuy, A New Petrel. 13
Sciences, a stop of one day was made at Trinidad Islet in the south
tropical Atlantic. Among the birds collected by the writer on
that occasion is a single specimen of an strelata which is new to
science.

The new species belongs to that division of the genus character-
ized by an exposed white area on the under side of the outer pri-
mary, and in its measurements it approximates its three congeners,
4. arminjoniana Gigl. and Salvad., 4. wilsoni Sharpe, and .
trinitatis Gigl. and Salvad., which likewise are known only from
the vicinity of the same remarkable islet. In plumage, however,
it resembles no other /strelata, its white mantle, flecked with spots
like ermine-tails, making it at once the most distinctive and most
beautiful of its kind. Further notes on the affinities of the species
will be presented in a forthcoming paper. I propose to name it

Astrelata chionophara! sp. nov.

Type in American Museum of Natural History, R. C. M. No. 1982,
adult 9, Trinidad Islet, lat. 20° 30’ S., long. 29° 22’ W., April 8, 1913.—
Pileum, sides of head, wings, rump, upper tail-coverts, and tail blackish-
brown, the concealed portions of all the feathers white; a few interspersed
white filoplumes on occiput; mental apex, lores, cheeks, fore part of cervix
and sides of neck mottled blackish-brown and white; hinder cervix and
interscapulum white, the feathers with dark shafts, faint anteriorly, which
expand to form conspicuous rhomboidal speckles on the middle and lower
back; scapulars white with dark shaft streaks, the exposed portion of
outermost dark; under surface except chin white, the under tail-coverts
broadly tipped with blackish-brown; under wing-coverts white, a few dark
shafts and mottlings toward margin of wing; axillaries white with dark
shafts, two of them on either side broadly edged on one web with blackish-
brown; sides marked slightly with dark feather shafts; feathers of lower
flanks tipped with blackish-brown chiefly on their outer vanes. Bill (in
life) bright flesh color flecked with black, the unguis chiefly black; iris
brown; feet and legs (in life) pale flesh color with a few black freckles on
webs. Length (skin) 376 mm., wing 285, tail, central rectrices 115, lateral
rectrices 81, culmen 30, tarsus 33, middle toe with claw 51.

1 From Xvcévecos = snowy, and ®apos = a mantle.

14 TOWNSEND, Conservation of the Eider. ea

A PLEA FOR THE CONSERVATION OF THE EIDER.!
BY CHARLES WENDELL TOWNSEND, M. D.

Tue treatment of that magnificent duck the Eider (Somateria
dresseri) along our Atlantic coast is rapidly leading to its extermi-
nation. This duck which is locally known as “Sea Duck,” “ Laying
Duck,” “Shoreyer,” “Eskimo Duck,” “Moynak,” and “ Metic,”
is everywhere diminishing in numbers. In Maine they were at one
time reduced to a few pairs, but, by enforcement of laws and by
reservations watched over by wardens, they are beginning to
increase. I believe there are only two or three cases of their
breeding at the present time on the Nova Scotia coast. On the
Newfoundland coast their numbers are pitifully few where once
they abounded. The coast of Labrador formerly swarmed with
these birds, and the islands were thickly covered with their nests.
All the ornithologists from the time of Audubon to the present day
who have visited this coast have bewailed the fact that the Eider
was signaled out for destruction.

In 1906 Dr. G. M. Allen and I saw only about seventy of these
birds on the long stretch of the eastern coast of Labrador between
Battle Harbor and Hamilton Inlet. This is a region that is
visited by a large number of Newfoundland fishermen in summer,
and its coast is dotted with the fishing hamlets of the residents or
liveyeres as they are called. ‘The men know every nook and cranny
of the coast, shoot the birds in great numbers in both fall and spring
migrations, take their eggs and down whenever they find them and
even shoot the setting females. In visiting their fishing traps in
the height of the breeding season they often take their guns along
with them so that few birds escape. North of Hamilton Inlet the
Northern Eider (Somateria mollissima borealis) is persecuted by the
Esquimaux of the Moravian villages as well as by the fishermen.

‘t The same condition of affairs exist on the southern coast where
Eiders are persecuted not only by the white fishermen but also by
the Montagnais Indians, who, after disposing of their furs, the

1Read at the meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union, November 11,
1913.

. s

ine | TowNnsEnD, Conservation of the Eider. 15
result of their winter’s work, cruise along the coast in sail-boat and
canoe and feast on the Eider eggs and flesh.

In 1909 Mr. A. C. Bent and I found the ground about the In-
dians’ encampments covered with Eider egg shells, and we saw Eider
flesh being dried and smoked by the fires. Two men, who were
ranging over the islands with pails had collected a hundred eggs
in less than an hour’s time. William Brewster described the
method used by these Indians in 1881,— “They skirt the shores
in canoes, keeping as close to land as the depth of water will permit.
Meanwhile their dogs scent about among the trees quartering the
ground like trained setters, and when a nest is discovered announce
the fact by loud barking. The nests are usually within a few rods
of the water, and the scent of the dogs is so keen that they rarely
pass one. If the sitting bird can be caught or shot the opportunity
is seldom neglected, for the half starved Indian neither knows nor
respects considerations of mercy, or, perhaps we should call it
policy,— which restrain more enlightened sportsmen on such
occasions. Proceeding thus two men in a canoe will frequently
ransack twenty miles of coast-line in a single day and find, proba-
bly, nearly every eider nest. The result of this systematic perse-
cution cannot be doubtful or long delayed.”

Mr. Abbott Frazer, who was in Southern Labrador in 1884 said of
this bird, “They are persecuted with relentless energy by both man
and beast from the time they arrive up to the time they leave, and
the countless hoards that once inhabited this coast are fast disap-
pearing, and it will not be long before the Eider of Southern Labra-
dor, like the Eider of Grand Manan will be but a memory of the
past.”

It is natural that the fishermen and Indians should act thus,
for Eider eggs are delicious eating and the flesh of the birds, at least
of the female and young, is equally palatable. Both are generous
in the amount of nourishment furnished. But these people are
killing the goose that lays the golden egg, and the time is not far
distant, where such methods prevail, before the Eider will be no
more.

There is no reason why the Eider, which furnishes the valuable
Eider-down of commerce, should not be made a source of consider-
able income, without any reduction of its natural abundance.

16 TOWNSEND, Conservation of the Eider. aut
The principle of conservation can as well be applied to the Eider as
to a forest. The conservation of the Common Eider of Europe
(Somateria mollissima), a species that differs but very slightly from
the American bird, has been practiced for many years in Iceland and
Norway. ‘The birds are rigidly protected during the nesting season
and offered every encouragement. They are not allowed to be
shot, and even the discharge of a gun in their vicinity is forbidden
by law. Suitable nesting sites are furnished close to the houses
and the birds become semi-domesticated, losing all fear of man.
The people are allowed to take the eggs and down during the first
of the season, but the birds are permitted to hatch out and rear
a few young in order to keep up the stock. The last down is taken
after the birds have left.

The following quotations from various authors show what can be
done in the conservation of the Eider and what a profitable and
pleasant business it may be made: “— A person,” says Horrebow,'
“as I myself have witnessed, may walk among these birds while
they are sitting, and not scare them; he may even take the eggs
and yet they will renew their laying as often as three times.”
According to the relation of Sir George Mackenzie,? “On the
8th of June at Vidée, the Eider Ducks, at all other times of the
year perfectly wild, had now assembled in great numbers to
nestle. The boat, by which they approached the shore, passed
through multitudes of these beautiful fowls, which scarcely
gave themselves the trouble to go out of the way. Between
the landing place and the Governor’s house, the ground was
strewn with them, and it required some caution to avoid treading
on the nests. The Drakes were walking about uttering a sound
very like the cooing of Doves, and were even more familiar than the
common Domestic Ducks. All round the house, on the garden
wall, on the roof, even in the inside of the house, and in the chapel,.
were numbers of ducks sitting on their nests. Such as had not
been long on the nest generally left it on being approached; but
those that had more than one or two eggs sat perfectly quiet, suffer-
ing us to touch them and sometimes making a gentle use of their
bills to remove our hands.”

1 Quoted by Nuttall.
2 Travels in Iceland, p. 126. (Quoted by Nuttall.)

| TOWNSEND, Conservation of the Eider. 17

Baird, Brewer and Ridgway quote from C. W. Shepard, as fol-
lows: “The islands of Vigr and Oldey are their headquarters in the
northwest of Iceland. In these they live in undisturbed tranquil-
lity. They have become almost domesticated, and are found in
vast multitudes, as their young remain and breed in the place of
their birth. As the island (Vigr) was approached, we could see
flocks upon flocks of the sacred birds, and could hear them cooing
at a great distance. We landed on a rocky, wave-worn shore. It
was the most wonderful ornithological sight conceivable. The
Ducks and their nests were everywhere. Great, brown Ducks
sat upon their nests in masses, and at every step started from under
our feet. It was with difficulty that we avoided treading on some
of the nests. On the coast of the opposite shore was a wall built of
large stones, just above the high-water level, about three feet
in height, and of considerable thickness. At the bottom, on
both sides of it, alternate stones had been left out, so as to form a
series of square compartments for the Ducks to nest in. Almost
every compartment was occupied, and as we walked along the shore,
a long line of Ducks flew out, one after the other. The surface of
the water also was perfectly white with drakes, who welcomed their
brown wives with loud and clamorous cooing. The house itself
was a marvel. The earthen walls that surrounded it and the
window embrasures were occupied by Ducks. On the ground the
house was fringed with Ducks. On the turf slopes of its roof we
could see Ducks, and a Duck sat on the door-seraper. The grassy
banks had been cut into square patches, about eighteen inches
having been removed, and each hollow had been filled with Ducks.
A windmill was infested, and so were all the outhouses, mounds,
rocks, and-crevices. ‘The Ducks were everywhere. Many were so
tame that we could stroke them on their nests, and the good lady
told us that there was scarcely a Duck on the island that would not
allow her to take its eggs without flight or fear. Our hostess told us
that when she first became possessor of the island the produce of
down from the Ducks was not more than fifteen pounds in a year,
but that under her careful nuture of twenty years, it had risen to
nearly a hundred pounds annually. Most of the eggs were taken
and pickled for winter consumption, one or two only being left in
each nest to hatch.”

18 TOWNSEND, Conservation of the Eider. [Fae

Burton writing in 1875! says that not even a, salute was per-
mitted to be fired at Reykjavik for fear of frightening the Eider
which was there a “barn door bird” and as “tame as horse-pond
geese.” He says “the turf is shaven and hollowed to make the
nests — and the places are marked by pegs.”

Slater® says of the Common Eider that it is “resident in large
numbers; especially abundant round the coast, strictly preserved
by law, and in consequence very tame. In Akureyri, for instance,
the old ducks with their ducklings feed along the edge of the fjord
quite close to the houses and road, and take no more notice of the
passers-by than domestic ducks would do — which is very pretty.
In winter they pack in immense flocks. The Eider down is, of
course, the property of the owner of the land, and every induce-
ment and protection is given to the birds, as the down is a valuable
article of trade.” Bernhard Hantzsch* says: “In consequence of
the special protection, which man everywhere exercises over them,
their numbers seem slowly to increase.”

Nelson Annandale‘ says: “The one offence against the Icelandic
bird laws which a native cannot commit with impunity -is the
slaughter of the eider-duck.— What is more important than many
laws, namely public opinion, protects the species, and there seems
to be a sentimental interest in it.— Probably it is due to the great
tameness of the bird, which appears actually to seek the vicinity
of a human dwelling for its nesting place and to frequent those
parts of the coast which are more frequented by man.— The
Icelandic eider-farms are frequently situated on little islands off
the coast. Small circular or oblong erections of rough stones are
made among the hummocks, to protect the brooding ducks from
wind and driving rain.— All the seafowl in these farms become
exceedingly tame, as no gun is allowed to be fired and every thing
liable to disturb the ducks is carefully banished. Those who
know how to handle them can even stroke the backs of the ducks
as they sit on their eggs.— On such farms there is a separate
building or large room entirely devoted to cleaning the down.

1 Ultima Thule or a summer in Iceland.

2Manual of the Birds of Iceland, 1901.

3 Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Vogelwelt Islands, 1905.
‘The Faroes and Iceland, 1906.

vel xx a ] TOWNSEND, Conservation of the Eider. 19
The apparatus consists of a series of oblong wooden frames, which
may be either fixed in a horizontal position or held in the hand.
Their number and size varies greatly, but in all cases the principle
is the same, depending on the tenacity with which the down clings
to anything on which it is thrown, partly because of its lightness
and partly because of the structure of the individual feathers which
compose it. Along the frames are stretched rather loosely, a num-
ber of strings which may be either of twine or of thongs of leather.
The down is cast onto these near one end, and a spatula of wood or
bone drawn briskly backwards and forwards over the other end.
The down still clings to the strings, but all impurities, such as pieces
of seaweed or grass, small stones, or coarse feathers, fall through to
the ground.”

Newton! says: “Generally the eggs and down are taken at
intervals of a few days by the owners of the ‘ Eider-fold,’ and the
birds are thus kept depositing both during the whole season; but
some experience is needed to insure the greatest profit from each
commodity. Every Duck is allowed to hatch an egg or two to
keep up the stock, and the down of the last nest is gathered after
the birds have left the spot. The story of the Drake’s furnishing
down, after the Duck’s supply is exhausted, is a fiction. He never
goes near the nest.” Annandale (loc. cit.) says: “It was formally
the custom to take away all the down supplied by the female; but
this practice was said to lead to great mortality among the ducks
through exhaustion and nowadays each nest is generally rifled only
once before the eggs are hatched, and then again after the young
have left it.”

The same conservation of the Eider exists in Norway. Stejneger?
says: “All along the coast of Norway, where the bird is protected
by law throughout the year, the common eider (Somateria mollis-
sima), is now exceedingly common and very tame. The inhabitants
take great care of the breeding birds, which often enter their houses
to find suitable nesting-places, and cases are authenticated in which
the poor fisherman vacated his bed in order not to disturb the
female eider, which had selected it as a quiet corner wherein to
raise her young. In another place the cooking of a family had to

1 Dictionary of Birds, 1893-1896.
2 Riverside Natural History.

[eS

20 TOWNSEND, Conservation of the Hider. Teak

be done in a temporary kitchen as a fanciful bird had taken up
her abode on the fireplace.”

When St. Cuthbert, that holy man, went to live a lonely life on
Farne Island he tamed the Eiders and they are called St. Cuthbert’s
ducks even to this day.

Eider-down is not only extremely light and elastic but is also
one of the poorest conductors of heat. It is therefore an ideal sub-
stance for preserving warmth and is the best material for coverlets,
puffs, cushions ete. Its money value is considerable and there is
always a demand for it in the markets of the world.’ The retail
price in Boston at the present time of well cleaned Iceland or Nor-
wegian eider-down is $14 a pound. It is probable that each nest
furnishes — as a very conservative estimate — from an ounce to
an ounce and a third of down, therefore twelve to sixteen nests or
breeding females are needed for each pound. Burton states that
the annual supply of down in Iceland rose from 2,000 pounds in
1806 to 7,000 pounds in 1870. One can easily understand the great
value of this product even if the producer receives only one half of
the retail price. He could count on at least fifty cents a season for
each breeding female in his Eider-fold.

Imagine the pleasure as well as profit that could be obtained
along the coast of Labrador, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia and
Maine if these birds were treated in the manner above described and
flocked and nested about the habitations of man. Then, each
dweller in suitable localities by the sea, could have his own flock
of these beautiful birds, for the female is as beautiful in her modest
‘dress of shaded and pencilled brown as is the male in his striking
raiment of jet black and cream- and snow-white, delicate sea-green
cand dark navy-blue. The cooing notes, so long few or absent in
‘many places, would again resound over the waters, and best of all,
_ ito the practical minded, the birds would pay well for their protec-
‘tion by gifts of eggs and of valuable eider-down.

How can the present senseless habit of destruction be stopped
and this desirable state of affairs brought about? As a preliminary
step in Labrador and Newfoundland I would suggest that a few
islands scattered along the coast should be made bird reservations,

1 The down obtained from dead Eiders, however, soon loses its elasticity and is
of little value.

Mele xt} TowNnsEND, Conservation of the Hider. 21
and carefully guarded by one or two families who live on or near
the islands. These people should be allowed to take the first set
of eggs and down, as well as the down left behind after the duck
has hatched out the second set and has left for the season, but
should not be allowed the use of fire arms, and their Eskimo dogs
must be confined during the nesting season. In other words these
people must not frighten the birds and must treat them kindly.
The object of the experiment should be spread broadcast along the
coast with the request for fair play, so as to restrain others from
poaching and frightening the ducks on the reservation.

The rapidity with which the birds will respond to this treatment
and the intelligence they will display in the recognition of the safety
spots will surprise the people. This is the case wherever bird reser-
vations are established. At Ipswich, Massachusetts, the shores
of a small, protected pond are thronged with shore birds of many
species which display almost no fear of man, while on the neighbor-
ing beaches, where they are shot, they are very wary. In the city
of Boston the Charles River Basin and J amaica Pond are the
resort of numerous ducks that pay but little attention to the peo-
ple, while in the sea and ponds nearby, where shooting is allowed,
the ducks show their usual wildness.

It is useless to pass laws if they are not observed or if the senti-
ment of the community is against them. This reform, which will
be of such great value to our northern sea-coast, can only be accom-
plished by education, and these bird reservations with their Eider-
farms will be one of the best means to that end. It is for this pur-
pose that I have written this and have quoted the convincing ex-
periences of the natives of Iceland and Norway; and I hope that
through the Moravians and Dr. Grenfell and the Catholic and other
missionaries of Labrador, and the factors of the Hudson’s Bay
Company’s Posts, and the independent fur-traders, and through
the press of Newfoundland and Nova Scotia, and especially through
the Governor General of Newfoundland and the Lieutenant Gov-
ernor of Quebec, to all of whom I intend to send this little tract,
the people will understand the great need and value of the con-
servation of the Eider.

De Strona, Habits of the Herring Gull. oe

ON THE HABITS AND BEHAVIOR OF THE HERRING
GULL, LARUS ARGENTATUS PONT.

BY R. M. STRONG.

Plates ITI-X.

I. Introduction. VII. Reactions to stimul.
II. Methods. 1. Auditory.
III. Social or community 2. Visual.
relationships. 3. Chemical.
IV. Feeding habits. 4. Other reactions.
V. Breeding habits. VIII. Special activities.
1. Mating. 1. Flight.
2. Nest construction. 2. Bathingand drink-
3. Brooding. ing.
4. Care of offspring. 3. Perching.
5. General behavior IX. Comparison of diurnal
of juvenals. and nocturnal activi-
6. Development of ties.
bird after hatch- X. Variability and Modi-
ing and lifecycle. fiability in behavior.
VI. Voice. XI. Migration. ;
1. Introductory. XII. Summary.

2. The “alarm ecry”’.
3. The “challenge’’.
4. Other cries.

I. INTRODUCTION.

It is the purpose of this paper to describe the results of work
which was begun with the idea of studying bird habits intensively.
I learned through Mr. Henry L. Ward, curator of the Milwaukee
Public Museum, that colonies of Herring Gulls were to be found
breeding on islands off both coasts of the peninsula which forms
Door County, Wisconsin, i. e. in Green Bay and in Lake Michigan
(See Fig. 1.)

These birds seemed to be especially favorable for my purpose
because: (1) they nest in rather compact colonies on the ground
and in more or less open places so that many individuals can be
seen and studied to advantage, and (2) their considerable size and
largely white plumage make them among the best bird subjects for
the indispensable photographic records. Furthermore, I had
already had some experience with these birds, especially during

2 i
-.
Je
>

THE AUK, VOL. XXXII. FaPAGIvE wlililis

1. THe STRAWBERRY ISLANDS FROM THE EAST. ISLAND ON LEFT OCCUPIED BY
Great BiuE HERONS, OTHER TWO ISLANDS BY HERRING GULLS.
2. GRaveEt ISLAND.

oe | Strone, Habits of the Herring Gull. 23
July, 1907, when I visited a breeding colony at Gull Island in Lake
Superior, near Marquette, Michigan.

On June 20, 1911, I made a preliminary exploring trip in Green
Bay starting from my headquarters at Ephraim, Wisconsin. With
the aid of a motor boat, the Strawberry Islands, the Sister Islands,

yf,
ra
Hat Island. a

Fig. 1. Map showing locations of Gull colonies in region of GreenBay,
Wisconsin.
and Hat Island were all visited during the day, and colonies of
Herring Gulls were found breeding on all of these islands except at
the largest of the Strawberry Islands (See Plate III, Fig. 1) which
supported a colony of Great Blue Herons.

As it did not seem practicable to attempt to live on any of the

24 Strone, Habits of the Herring Gull. ES

islands, I thought it best to stay at Ephraim and depend upon small
boats for transportation whenever a visit was made to the gull
colonies. Unfortunately, boats were not always available and the
weather was not favorable on many days. Work was carried on at
the Sister Islands on June 26, July 12, and July 15; at Middle
Strawberry Island on June 30 and July 29; and at Gravel Island
July 18 and 19. Another period was spent at Middle Strawberry
Island beginning at 7:20 p. m., July 7 and ending the next day at
7:05 4. mM. So much time was taken by preliminary studies that
my experimental work at the breeding places was barely begun
when the season ended.

Other experiments were begun with some juvenal gulls which
were taken from their nesting places to Ephraim and were kept in a
pen (See Plate IV, Fig. 2). These birds were removed to Chicago
in August where experiments with them are still in progress. Ref-
erences will be made in this paper to observations made on these
captive gulls. The work in Chicago has been made possible through
the kindness of Professors Angell and Carr of the Department of
Psychology, in giving me outdoor cage accommodations.

The only species of gull discussed in this paper except where
otherwise stated, is the Herring Gull.

II. Meruops.

Like other observers, I found a tent or blind indispensable for the
study of the birds at their breeding places. On approaching a
breeding colony of gulls a wild panic begins which does not cease so
long as the intruder appears to be in the immediate vicinity.

I had a tent made similar to that described by Sawyer,' with
some modifications. It was about four feet high and six feet long

‘at the bottom. The cover was made from dark green cambric
lining cloth, costing seven cents a yard. The entire cover could be
folded into a package small enough to go into a coat pocket.

After the first trip, extra openings were made to facilitate taking

1 Sawyer, E. J. A Special Bird-Blind. Bird Lore, Vol. XI, no. 2, March-April,
1909, pp. 71-73. One page of text figures.

THE AUK, VOL. XXXII. REATEMIV.

1. BLIND ERECTED ON MIDDLE STRAWBERRY ISLAND.
2. JUVENAL GULL SWALLOWING FISH ABOUT TEN INCHES LONG.

1 ae
Le ame
itr.

et

v<

ee ie Re rion.

ti

4
As
H
i

ping

tee

=o

a | Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. 25
photographs in various positions. When not in use these apertures
were closed by cloth doors which were provided with hooks and
eyes such as are used by dressmakers, but of extra large size.
An opening about five inches square in the top served quite suc-
cessfully for ventilation.

Such a tent can be set up on rocky places where stakes cannot be
used; and there are no guy lines to obstruct the camera field. It is
possible to see more or less of what is going on outside of the tent
through the cloth itself, although holes of small size give a clearer
view. When dark clothing is worn, one’s movements inside are
not noticed.

The lower margin of each side and end of the tent was held down
by a pole which ran through a hem in the cloth, and the ends of the
poles were anchored with weights when a wind was blowing. Thus
in Plate IV, Fig. 1, pieces of wood appear at the corners, for this
purpose. A brisk breeze was blowing when the picture was taken
as may be seen in the bellying of the side of the tent.

This tent with considerable additional anchorage in the form of
rocks went through an unusually violent storm without injury or
displacement. Only a small portion of the heavy fall of rain came
through the cloth. It was found wise to carry permanent tent
poles carefully fitted to the corner blocks, in a bundle as a part of
my outfit. Drift boards were used as a floor.

The chief objection to this form of tent is that it is not high
enough to permit the observer to stand upright. During a long
day, I could not avoid becoming much cramped even when I tried
shifts from a sitting to a reclining position and so on. I have since
used a tent of similar form but larger and over six feet tall. The
poles are all of bamboo and the corner fittings are of brass. The
number of openings has been reduced but they have been placed
in carefully selected positions. The sides and ends are all sewed
together except at one corner where the entrance is placed. ‘Tapes
are provided for closing the entrance. This tent is much neater
and far more comfortable, and it can be set up with the adjustments
of equipment in less than fifteen minutes.

I found it necessary, as has been the experience of others, to have
a companion leave the tent after having been inside with me. He
would also leave the island with our boat, and he would not return

26 Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. on
until a time agreed upon for the trip home. During this period I
could not emerge myself without spoiling all chances for the day.
After the departure of my companion, the apparently normal life
of the colony was largely resumed in a few minutes. This precau-
tion was not observed at Gravel Island, and the gulls there did not
come very near the tent during the several hours my companion
and I spent in the tent. Apprehension was shown in other ways,
also. Ward’s experience at Gravel Island when he had no one to
leave the tent was similar and his account! follows. “The next
time that I visited the colony, three days later, I was alone. I
beached my boat, set up my tent and entered. Six minutes later
the first of the young reached the island, followed two minutes later
by the settling of the first adults, some on the island at its most
distant point, but most in the water. It was an hour and thirty-
five minutes before any came close to the tent, and not until half
past four the next morning, or thirteen hours after setting up my
tent, did the first one alight on it. The gulls on this occasion were
quite uneasy and were frequently thrown into a panic by their own
actions. The sudden alighting of a bird, or a fight between two,
would frighten one, who, not waiting to see what was the trouble,
would take wing, followed by one after another as the panic-formed
wave swept over the island, leaving it almost bare of gulls. Fortu-
nately they quickly recovered and returned, but their alertness
and the frequent ‘wak-wak, wak, wak’ of their note of suspicion
showed that something bothered them. Apparently the departure
of two people and the boat the first visit had deceived them into
thinking that all had left the island, while on the second trip,
although I had disappeared, yet no one had left the island, and for
thirteen hours they remembered this and were suspicious. After
the first gull lit on the tent they abandoned their suspicions and
were as familiar with it as on the previous day.”

A small folding camp chair was found a great convenience, but
boxes are often available on a beach and these serve very well as a
seat.

Two cameras were used, one a 5 X 7 Graphlex with a Tessar

1 Ward, H. L. Notes of the Herring Gull and the Caspian Tern. Bull. Wis-
consin Nat. Hist. Soc., Vol. IV, No. 4, October, 1906, pp. 113-134, 2 plates.

von | Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. 2G
lens, and the other a folding tripod camera size 3} X 4+ inches with
both a lens shutter and a focal-plane curtain shutter. The smaller
camera was more often used, and frequently with only one of the
two combinations of the convertible lens which it carried. I have
found a convertible lens exceedingly useful in bird photography as a
long-focus lens is frequently needed. It has been my experience
that it is not practicable to use large diaphragm openings in bird
photography because of the flatness of the field which they involve
when the camera is as near as is necessary for photographing
birds. I rarely use an opening larger than U.S. 8 or F. 11.

A Ill. Socrat or Community RELATIONSHIPS.

An interesting analysis of a Herring Gull community has been
made by Herrick.1 He speaks of “family-units” and “family
domains” which he says are guarded “with relentless vigilance.”
These precincts may be small and close together in a crowded
breeding place.

There is also much evidence of co6peration. Thus Herrick men-
tions the fact that Herring Gulls will “attack a common enemy,
such as bird, beast or man, with a certain degree of concerted ac-
tion.”

Herring Gulls are frequently to be seen together in flocks away
from a breeding place. Mackay,” however, did not regard them as
truly gregarious. Thus he says “they apparently only come to-
gether when there is some particular reason for doing so, as for
instance something to eat, or to roost on some sand shoal or rest,
and not apparently because they like to be together.” Lucas *
disagreed with this conclusion as follows: “I should have said that
gulls scattered in search of food at high water, but came together
sociably at other times.” My own observations agree with those
of Lucas. These birds are usually to be seen in the company of

1 Herrick, F. H. 1909. Organization of the Gull Community. Proc. Seventh
International Zool. Cong., Boston, 1907, 3 pp.

2 Mackay, G. H. Habits.of the American Herring Gull (Larus argentatus
smithsonianus), Auk, Vol. IX, 1892, no. 3, pp. 221—228.

3 Lucas, F. A. Habits of the Herring Gull. Auk, Vol. 1X, no. 4, pp. 388-9.

28 Strone, Habits of the Herring Gull. Re
other individuals, often in vast flocks. It may be questioned
whether the gregarious habit implies fondness of the members of a
company for each other.

Both juvenal and adult Herring Gulls seem to prefer the com-
pany of other individuals of their age. My captive gulls and those
I have seen wild are usually to be found in close groups, especially
when at rest. However, they are often cruel to each other and
like other animals will fight fiercely for food.

A large amount of fighting occurs at a breeding place where no
struggle for food is involved. Some of the encounters are un-.
doubtedly the results of intrusions upon a nesting precinct as is
Herrick’s opinion, and I saw adults resenting attacks upon the
young by other adults. Many of the fights, however, seem to
indicate simple belligerency. A gull will approach another with
head somewhat lowered and bill pointed straight forward or slightly
upward. They will then grasp each other by the mandibles and
attempt to drag each other about. Blows may be given with the
wings and even with the feet. In Plate V, Fig. 1, such an en-
counter appears. The gull on the right is shown just at the mo-
ment when its wings have struck its opponent. The heads of the
combatants appear in an oblique position as a consequence of the
locking of mandibles. Frequently other gulls will join in the fracas
and quite a lively but usually short and harmless tussle follows.
I saw one fight broken up by another bird interfering much as a
rooster may interfere in an encounter between two other cocks.
Often a challenge to fight is not accepted, and the bird approached
simply retreats.

Various writers have mentioned the killing of young gulls by
adults. According to Ward! this may be a very common occur-
rence. He saw “some dozens”’ of half grown gulls which appeared
to have been killed by adults, and he described the performance in
considerable detail. The following is taken from his account which
agrees with my own observations. “The main point of attack was
the back of the head. To this region a number of severe blows
were given with the point of the bill, after which it was grasped

1 Ward, H. L. Why Do Herring Gulls Kill Their Young. Science, n. s., Vol.
XXIV, 1906, No. 619, pp. 593-4.

PLATE V.

THE AUK, VOL. XXXII.

HERRING GULLS FIGHTING.
PARENT FEEDING NEWLY HATCHED YOUNG.

I

2.

}
ey

Me eas caverta rath

S| Srronea, Habits of the Herring Gull. 29
between the mandibles of the adult and the bird was pulled about
until the skin and flesh were cut through to the skull.”

This maltreatment of the young has also been described by
Dutcher and Baily! and it has been discussed by Herrick. I
found that similar treatment was administered to a juvenal gull

when it was placed in a cage with two juvenals two to three weeks

older. One gull, the youngest of the three in the cage, was par-
ticularly persistent and savage in its attacks so that I had to
remove the newcomer until its head had healed and it was better
able to defend itself.

On erecting my tent at one of the Sister Islands, July 12, 1911,
I took a downy juvenal not more than a week old, inside with me.
This I released at 12:50 p. M., and it made its way out at once. Its
appearance outside caused great excitement. The little gull
started west in the direction of the place where I had captured it.
On its way it went near a couple of gulls which appeared to belong
to a nest I had under observation. These birds started the “ chal-
lenge ery,” and others joined in the same performance. The small
gull approached the two adults just mentioned and was pecked on
the head after a minute or so. It was next given a number of sharp
blows which apparently did no serious damage. The little bird
turned at bay and when pecked most severely ran screaming with
mouth open, towards its persecutors. This was followed by alter-
nate running and fighting, a procedure which was successful in
preventing further serious attacks. The bird eventually found
shelter under some drift wood about fifty feet away from my
tent.

Herrick explains these attacks upon the young as follows:
“This is due to the ferocity of the guarding and fighting instincts
in the old birds, and to a lack of attunement in the instincts of the
young, in consequence of which a chick will occasionally stray from
its own preserve and trespass on the domain of a neighbor.” Un-
doubtedly this covers many and perhaps most cases, but it seems
doubtful whether the deaths among the juvenals at Gravel Island

1 Dutcher, W. and Baily, W. L. A Contribution to the Life History of the
Herring Gull (Larus argentatus) in the United States. Auk, Vol. XX, 1903,
No. 4, pp. 417-31. Plates XXI-XXII.

30 Strona, Habits of the Herring Gull. pon
can be explained as easily. There both Ward! and I found a
promiscuous herding of juvenals without regard to precincts at
least when the birds were of good size. Furthermore, it does not
account for attacks upon juvenals by other juvenals.

During the winter of 1912-3, a wild Herring Gull with a broken
wing was left in a basket at my door. It was evidently in the
second year and of the same age as the gulls which I brought from
Green Bay in 1911. After a few days, noticing that the injured
gull carried the wing free from the ground, I placed it with the
other two gulls. They at once approached in belligerent attitudes.
The newcomer faced them with its head up in dignified defiance,
and it was not attacked. Of course I do not know what encounters
may have occurred during my absence, but ever since its introduc-
tion this bird has been master at feeding time, even with a wry
wing. It is not larger, and it recently appeared much smaller as
a consequence of poor condition.

A somewhat similar performance occurred when a young crow
which had developed enough to fly well, was placed in the gull
enclosure. The gulls advanced with threatening actions and even
pecked the crow on the head. The latter bird maintained an air
of unconcern giving little attention to the gulls who ceased trou-
bling it after afew moments. The crow became at least their equal
in bluffing, and I have recently seen it drive all three of the gulls
away from the food dish without a battle. The extent to which
the gulls submit to the crow, however, seems to vary inversely with
their hunger.

Other birds may nest in apparent safety upon an island even
fairly densely populated with gulls. Spotted Sandpipers, Bronzed
Grackles, Song Sparrows, and other land birds were more or less
common nesters on the Strawberry Islands. I found Red-breasted
Mergansers nesting on all of the wooded islands occupied by gulls.
So far as I could see, no attention was paid to these birds by the
gulls. On the other hand, a large bird like the Great Blue Heron
seemed to be viewed with disfavor, and I did not find both occupy-
ing the same island. On one occasion, I saw a Great Blue Heron
pursued and much harassed by gulls.

1 Ward, G.L. Notes of the Herring Gull and the Caspian Tern. op. cit.

| StroneG, Habits of the Herring Gull. 31

I have always found Herring Gulls nesting on islands not in-
habited by man, but exceptions occur in the literature. A very
large colony of gulls studied by Dutcher and Baily was found
nesting on Great Duck Island which has a light house.

Though the Herring Gull seems to prefer remote places for nest-
ing, it is a matter of common observation that at other times if
unmolested, it does not hesitate to frequent large cities where bodies
of water with food occur.

IV. FrepinGc Hasits.

The Herring Gull is generally recognized to be almost omnivorous
in its feeding habits. It is especially known and prized as a scaven-
ger. I have found that fishermen appreciate its habit of ridding
the water of dead fish. It has been my observation that fish,
especially when fresh, are preferred by gulls; but when hungry they
take almost anything in the animal food line and many forms of
plant matter. Dutcher! mentions insects including large numbers
of ants as eaten by Herring Gulls. E/jifrig? noted the occurrence
of shells, seeds, berries, and a crab in the stomachs of three adult
Herring Gulls taken May 29, June 10, and June 15. According
to Knight,’ sea-urchins and star-fishes are eaten. Various molluses
and a crustacean are mentioned by Norton,* and Audubon ° states
that eggs are sucked. There is even a record of the capture by a
gull of a bat ® which had been flying about over a river where gulls
occurred. Various molluscs are mentioned by Mackay as gull
food.

My captive gulls when very hungry will eat bread, but they prefer
animal food. Their main article of food is liver with occasional
feedings of fish scraps. When live fish are caught, the Herring

1 Dutcher, W. Report of the Committee on Bird Protection. Auk, Vol. XXI,
1904, No. 1, pp. 164-5.

2 Hifrig, C. W. S. Notes on Northern Birds. Auk, Vol. XXIII, 1906, No. 3,
pp. 313-8.

3 Knight,O. W. The Birds of Maine. 1908, p. 49.

4Norton, A. H. The Food of Several Maine Water-Birds. Auk, 1909, Vol.
XXIV, No. 4, p. 438.

6 Audubon, J. J. Ornithological Biography. Edinburgh, 1835, Vol. III, p.
591.

6 Rodger, A. M. Herring Gull (Larus argentatus) capturing a Bat. Ann.
Scott. Nat. Hist. Soc., 1903, p. 51.

32 Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. (eae

Gull may immerse its head and a large portion of its body, but I
have never seen complete immersion. The bird may fly down to the
water for food, but it does not dive vertically as terns do. Other
writers have made similar observations. The following is taken
from Townsend’s account of the Herring Gull. “ When after small
fish or objects below the surface, Herring Gulls throw themselves
with some splashing and wings partly spread, head foremost into
the water and on rare occasions with such force as to submerge
themselves. In these plunges they shoot down obliquely with
backs up....I have seen them while riding the water on a rocky
shore, occasionally fly up into the air a few feet to get an impetus,
and then plunge into the water so that only the tips of the wings
and tail were visible, coming up with molluses and rock-weed in
their bills.”’

Pieces of food not too large are swallowed entire, and the mass
may be relatively great (See Plate IV, Fig. 2). Mackay ' described
the great swallowing capacity of the Herring Gull as follows:
“T have known both the adults and young birds to swallow a dead
pollock head-first, the estimated measure of which was ten inches
long by two inches in diameter at the thickest part.” One bird
known as “Gull Dick,” and to be mentioned again in this paper
would swallow six or eight pieces of pork the size of a hen’s egg
when hungry, according to Mackay. My captive gulls have
swallowed fish of the size mentioned above on a number of oc-
easions. Under ordinary conditions in cool weather, one of my
birds will eat four to six ounces of beef liver at a meal when fed
once a day, and it will be thoroughly hungry the next day.

According to Townsend,” Herring Gulls “eject the harder parti-
cles of their food, and balls of crabs, clams and fish bones entirely
cleaned of flesh are scattered about their resting places on the beach.
These balls are sometimes two inches in diameter; they are loosely
compacted and soon fall to pieces. They often contain bits of
feathers or down.”

An interesting habit of the Herring Gull is described by Town-

1 Mackay, G. H. op. cit., pp. 222-3.
2Townsend, C. W. The Birds of Essex County, Mass. Memoirs Nuttall
Ornithological Club, 1905, No. 3, p. 91.

ie

a | Strona, Habits of the Herring Gull. 33
send ! as follows: “They may often be seen flying nearly straight
up or in circles, with a clam or a crab, which they drop from a
height, follow closely the descent, and alight to regale themselves
on the exposed contents. If they fail to break the shell the first
time, they try again. This habit, which is also a common one with
Crows explains the fact that molluses shells, crabs, and sea urchins
are scattered along our coast, sometimes half a mile from the sea.”
Anthony ? states that this is a habit of various gull species, and he
says “the clam was as often dropped on a soft sand beach as other-
wise, and after repeated efforts the gull seemed unable to under-
stand why the shell was not broken. Possibly a few yards distant
a rock beach would have furnished all that was necessary to make
the effort successful.’ Audubon? also described this method of
breaking mollusc shells.

The feeding of the young by the parents will be discussed in the
section devoted to the care of the young.

V. Breepine Hapsits.

1. Mating.— My field studies with gulls in both 1907 and 1911
were carried on after mating had apparently ceased. Most of the
observations described by others do not include mating. At Great
Duck Island off the coast of Maine, the breeding gulls are stated
by a resident * to arrive each year in March. They are said not
to be mated when they arrive. After mating is completed, nest
building begins. This is about the middle of May or later. A
short but interesting account of the mating behavior is given by
Audubon.°

A peculiar performance has been observed by Ward ® which he
compares to the dance of the albatross described by Fisher, but
its relation to mating is uncertain. Copulation also has been

described by Ward.

1 Townsend, C. W. op. cit., p. 96.

2 Anthony, A. W. Random Notes on Pacific Gulls. Auk, 1906, Vol. XXIII,
No. 2, pp. 129-7.

3 Audubon, J. J. Ornithological Biography. Edinburgh, 1835, Vol. III, p. 592.

4Dutcher and Baily, op. cit., p. 431.

5 Audubon, J.J. Ornithological Biography. Edinburgh, 1835, Vol. ITI, p. 590.

6 Ward, H. L. Notes of the Herring Gull and the Caspian Tern. Bull. Wise.
Nat. Hist. Soc.

34 Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. a

2. Nest Construction.— I have seen no nest building operations
by gulls, and I had no evidence of any nest building being attempted
during my visits to the colonies. However, I found nests in early
July which seemed to have been constructed very recently. Her-
rick! speaks of “brand new nests” made in late July never to be
occupied. The nests, as has been stated by others, are usually
fairly bulky and of varying materials. Apparently grass, fine
weed-stems, and feathers are preferred as these occurred in the
majority of nests. Sometimes, however, nests were made largely
of strips of bark or of coarse weed stems. Other beach debris
may be used, especially the finer or softer materials. Bits of bark
and other coarse materials appear in the nest which is shown in
Plate VI. .

The nests are mostly saucer shaped (see Plate VII, Fig. 1).
They have been described in detail by Ward? who also gives meas-
urements. Dutcher and Baily also give measurements in their
article.

Although Ward’s studies were made as late as the first week in
July, he * observed that “Incipient nest building was going on con-
tinuously.”” However, he saw no nest making that seemed likely
to be carried to completion. Herrick * made similar observations.

A description of actual nest building is given by Ward in the
case of the so-called incipient nest building which he observed.

As has already been stated in the introduction to this paper, a
great variety of locations may be chosen for the nest. In general,
it seems that uninhabited islands are preferred, where the nest may
be anywhere on the beach or back some rods from the open beach
in bushes, among tall herbaceous plants, or in grass, or upon rock
ledges. Often the shelter of a drift log is chosen (See Plate VII,
Fig. 2). Nests may be placed in trees under certain circumstances,
a point that will be discussed elsewhere in this paper.

Much of the grass used in the nests is growing when pulled up by
the birds, according to Dutcher and Baily. They have also de-
scribed one nest as composed entirely of fresh green material.

1 Herrick, F. H. The Home Life of Wild Birds, p. 163.

2Ward,H.L. Notes of the Herring Gull and the Caspian Tern. p. 116.
3 op. cit., p. 131.

4 Herrick, H. F. Home Life of Wild Birds.

THE AUK, VOL. XXXII.

PLATE VI.

HERRING GULL WITH NEWLY HATCHED YOUNG AT NEST ABOUT SIX FEET FROM BLIND.

NOTE THE COARSE NEST MATERIALS.

A xr
ewe

q
is A J

oe an 4 Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. 35
They observed much repairing of the nest with green grass or weeds
during incubation.

There is a description ! of a nest placed 60 feet above the ground
and composed of “long, firm, flexible grasses, evidently gathered
when green from the salt marshes, and carefully woven into a
circular fabric.”’ It is stated that this nest could be handled with-
out coming to pieces.

Herrick ? also speaks of the habit of pulling grass “all summer
long,” which is sometimes carried to the nest, and he gives an inter-
esting description of a mid-July revival of the nesting instinct.

3. Brooding.— According to data given by Dutcher and Baily,*
which was reported to them by a resident of the island where their
work was done, the period of incubation is a little less than four
weeks, usually. The following is taken from their account: “The
first egg was found May 15, and the first completed set of three eggs
on May 22. The last set of eggs hatched August 3-5. Fifteen
nests were marked and watched in order to determine the time occu-
pied in incubation, which proved to be as follows: 1 in 24 days; 2 in
25 days; 5 in-26 days; 4 in 27 days; 3 in 28 days.”

As the males cannot be distinguished from females by their
plumage, ordinarily, it is difficult to get data concerning the relative
parts taken by the two parents in brooding. Dutcher and Baily
obtained evidence that both parents take part in brooding the eggs.
They state‘ that: “On one occasion, while photographing gulls on
nests, it was noted that the first bird that occupied the nest, after
the camera was focussed, had a number of dark feathers on its
breast; after it had left the nest a bird with a pure white breast
occupied it. That this was a mated pair there is no reason for doubt,
for they were together, and both exhibited the greatest solicitude for
the nest and its contents.” They also observed that the stage of
incubation could be determined by the increasing anxiety of the
parents as the end of the period drew near. On the same page the
following occurs: “During the last few hours before the pipping or

1 Baird, Brewer, and Ridgway, Vol. II. The Water Birds of North America.
p. 239.

2 Herrick, F. H. Home Life of Wild Birds, p. 163.

top cit., p. 431.

4 op. cit., p. 426.

36 Strona, Habits of the Herring Gull. wae

cracking of the egg the parent birds were so fearless that they would
leave the nest only on a near approach, and while the camera was
being focussed would remain within a few yards, perched either on
the ground or on a low tree or stump.”’ This change in behavior
towards the end of the incubation period is of course not peculiar
to gulls.

Some observations were made by Dutcher and Baily! on the turn-
ing of the eggs by the brooding bird. They found that the eggs are
sometimes turned slightly with the bill when the bird goes on the
nest, though in one case where each egg had been marked with an
arrow, only one was found turned after the bird went on the nest.
I also obtained some evidence of the eggs being turned by the bird.
In some cases, as the parent nestled down over the eggs it appeared
probable that at least a slight turning of eggs would occur. There
was usually more or less shifting of the feet, body and plumage, as
the bird adjusted itself to the eggs and nest. This performance
has been described in detail by Dutcher and Baily.?

On very warm days, especially at midday, I found that the nest is
left frequently for a few moments. At such times the bird goes to
the water’s edge and takes at least a partial bath. There is much
splashing of water with the bill and sometimes with the whole head.
There is some drinking of water also at this time.

Another phase of the brooding activities is the repelling of in-
truders from the vicinity of the nest. According to Herrick,’ one
of the parents is on guard most of the time after the eggs hatch,
for several weeks. He says also that the guarding bird stands on a
perch which is maintained by habit. Dutcher and Baily also
mention this guarding habit, and I have also noticed it. According
to Hornaday,’ a pair of Herring Gulls bred successfully in Bronx
Park Zodlogical Gardens. He states that the male “bluffed or
fought everything coming within ten feet of the nest.” During a
battle, the sitting female would point her bill toward the sky and
scream.

So far as I could determine, there is more or less brooding of the

lop. cit., p. 427.

2 op. cit., p. 427.

2? Herrick, F. H. Proc. Seventh Internat. Zool. Cong.
4Hornaday, W.T. The American Natural History, p. 297.

THE AUK, VOL. XXXI PLATE VII.

1. CHARACTERISTIC GULL NEST ON ROCK LEDGE AT GuLt ISLAND
} NEAR MARQUETTE, MICH., IN LAKE SUPERIOR.
2. HERRING GULL ON NEST.

pate
%,, oy ete Ke

é
"i To
pe aed
pip Bg 4
pipe
aki @
r
SY as
YS ”
od, F"
4
i’ eye 'é
A ‘
‘ ’
)
.
‘
4
ad
'
{
. '
ete j
b ." ; .

re | Strona, Habits of the Herring Gull. 37
young for several hours after hatching or until they are able to run
about. Often on a hot day, one of the parents would simply stand
over the newly hatched nestlings shading them from the sun.
Plate X, Fig. 1. The other parent was usually near by and it
would change places with its mate at intervals.

I doubt whether there is much covering of the young for more
than a day or two after hatching, in pleasant weather. No observa-
tions were made in bad weather of the treatment of very young
birds.

The eggs (see Plate VII, Fig. 1) have been fully described by many
writers, especially in general works on birds. Detailed descriptions
are given by Dutcher and Baily of some of the very numerous and
great variations. Good descriptions occur in Ward’s paper.

4. Care of young.— Concerning the care of the young by their
parents, much remains to be learned. The brooding and shading
of the newly hatched young has just been described. I obtained
considerable evidence that both birds participate in feeding the
young. According to Herrick,! the young gull receives its first
food in about one hour after hatching, at the nest.

The larger juvenals tease vigorously for food when hungry and
the whole feeding performance for a young gull more than a few
days old has been well described by Ward *: “The young comes in
front of an adult and with a bowing and courtesying movement
put up its bill to that of the old one, continuing the bowing for
several minutes, resting between times. Sometimes it took hold
of the adult’s bill with its own, at other times merely touched bills.
When the adult opened its mouth the young put its bill within.
Failing to get indications of food, it went to another adult, and
repeated the operation, passing in succession to several, until at
length it seemed to get some favorable signs, for it remained by this
one, alternately begging and resting. After some time it was ap-
parent to me that the adult was striving to regurgitate. It would
open its mouth, stretch its neck nearly horizontally, then bring its.
head down to the ground. After a moment it will close its bill,
turn its head to one side and look at the ground over which it had

1 Internat. Zool. Congress Report. op. cit.
20D. Cit., (p. Lou.

38 Strone, Habits of the Herring Gull. Fees
been straining, as though expecting to find something there. Other
gulls were from time to time attracted to the scene, but were
promptly chased away by this bird, who ran rapidly at them with
open beak and outspread wings. Perhaps half an hour after these
efforts began I saw a portion of a fish appear in its mouth, and a
moment later it was deposited on the ground, when the young
promptly seized it. The fish appeared to be a herring about 7 or 8
inches long and so mascerated that it readily fell apart. The adult
assisted in breaking it up, and I saw it pick out the vertebral
column, which it dropped with the other pieces.”

“The young fed mostly from the ground, but occasionally
snatched a piece from the bill of the adult.... After some minutes
I noticed that regurgitation was apparently to be repeated, and in
about a quarter of an hour the remains of another fish were depos-
ited on the ground and disposed of in the same manner.”

The newly hatched young, according to my observations are more
passive, and I obtained some evidence that the parent may initiate
the feeding performance. Similar conditions occur in the feeding
of young pigeons. On June 30, 1911, while taking observations
on one of the Strawberry Islands, a pair of gulls whose nest was
about five feet from the base of my tent fed two young not many
hours old and still too weak to walk well, at irregular intervals
within eight to ten feet from my point of observation. The little
gulls had been coaxed away from their nest for a few feet by their
parents, a distance which they covered with difficulty.

The following notes concerning the observations just mentioned
have been taken from my note book. The bird shading its young
was relieved at 12:40 Pp. M., and went down to the water for a drink.
The other parent at once proceeded to feed the young gulls while
the first bird stood a few feet away at the edge of the water. The
adult bird did not insert its bill in the mouth of its offspring but the
latter took food from the ground just below the bill of the parent.
Occasionally the young reached up towards the bill of the parent
which was held low, often almost at the ground (see Plate V,
Fig. 2). A quantity of food in a fine and soft condition was dis-
gorged in more or less of a heap. After the young had eaten, the
parent swallowed what was left. These very young birds ate
slowly, apparently without much appetite. The whole perform-
ance passed off quietly and with no rapid movements.

ver == al Strone, Habits of the Herring Gull. 39

At 1:45 p. M., I saw the same young birds being fed again. A
little later, I noticed another feeding of some gulls a few days older.
Small fishes appeared in the food disgorged by the parent.

In spite of the fact that the gulls seemed to settle down to normal
activities during my tent work, I saw surprisingly few cases, rela-
tively, of feeding the young. These were usually a little too far
away to permit close observation, and it was seldom possible to
determine by observation from my tent what the nature of the
food was.

The stomachs of six young Herring Gulls “of different sizes”
as reported by Norton,! “contained almost no fish but all contained
ants in varying quantities, only one being full.’’

Where many young gulls occur in a relatively small area, it is
difficult to determine whether the adult birds always feed only
their own young. The small amount of evidence I obtained sug-
gested that the parents, usually, feed their own offspring. But it is
of course possible that birds usually feeding their own offspring,
may occasionally give food to other juvenals.

At Gravel Island there was apparently considerable promiscuous
feeding according to the observations of both Ward and myself.

I observed adult gulls alighting near close flocks of young birds
on a number of occasions, at Gravel Island. Each time the juve-
nals surrounded the adult like a pack of wolves, and it was often
completely hidden from my view by the struggling young gulls.
In Plate IX such a scene appears. Such a performance was
usually accompanied by considerable noise made by the hungry
birds. Other adult birds sometimes added to the clamor by scream-
ing. The general excitement is shown in the illustration just
mentioned.

The period during which the young are fed is evidently a long one.
I saw young birds which must have been at least six weeks old,
and probably considerably older than this, still being fed by adult
birds. It is of course possible that young birds may be obtaining
some of their food themselves before all food giving by their parents
or by other adults ceases.

On a few occasions, I saw adults apparently resenting the ap-

1 Dutcher, W. Report of Committee on Bird Protection. Auk, 1904, Vol. X XI,
No. 1, p. 164.

40 Strone, Habits of the Herring Gull. Sad
proach of other adults to their young, but data of this sort are very
meagre. These observations and those quoted in this paper from
Herrick and Hornaday, however, make it probable that the young
are guarded for at least a considerable time after hatching by their
parents.

I have been unable to obtain data concerning the relationships
of the parents to the young when the latter are learning to take care
of and feed themselves. Adults and young roam about together
in flocks for weeks or months after the young are able to fly.

5. General Behavior of the juvenal gulls— The behavior of the
young just after hatching has been described by Ward.

According to Dutcher and Baily ? “The instinct to hide seems to
be developed within an hour or two after hatching, or so soon as
the young bird is strong enough to walk.’ My own experience is
that the instinct to hide is not always developed thus early. On
July 6, 1907, at Gull Island near Marquette, Michigan, in Lake
Superior, I found a nest containing one single nestling which stood
up pertly in its nest and did not give the usual indications of fear
(see Plate VIII, Fig.1). The plumage of this bird was dry, and it
was able to stand. On the same day, another nest was observed
with two young and an egg in which the occupant was breaking
its way out (see Plate VIII, Fig. 2). In this case the two nestlings
showed very great fear and left their nest which was located on a
small ledge of rock, squealing pitifully. They showed other signs
of distress and began to pant. Mrs. Strong held an umbrella over
the birds to protect them from the intense sunlight that prevailed.
Nevertheless, before I had gone through the process of mounting a
camera on a tripod and making one exposure, one of these birds
died. Presumably the combination of fear and heat was respon-
sible. The dying bird appears in the picture.

I agree with Dutcher and Baily that young gulls show the hiding
-instinct as soon as they are able to run about freely. During the
pandemonium that prevails among the adults when one approaches
the nesting place of a colony of gulls, the larger young not yet able
to fly may be observed with the aid of strong glasses running about

lop cit., p. 120.
2op cit., p. 422.

THe AUK, VOlme XXXII. PLATE VIII.

1. NBEWLY-HATCHED YOUNG SHOWING NO FEAR.

2 NEWLY-HATCHED YOUNG IN A PANIC OF FEAR

oan | Strone, Habits of the Herring Gull. a:
to places for hiding. On reaching shore all young birds able to
leave their nests will be found hiding except those that have taken
to the water. Those able to fly are pretty sure to join the adults in
flying overhead, or they often alight on the water at some distance.
This hiding instinct has been described in some detail by Dutcher
and Baily.

At Gull Island in Lake Superior, I frequently saw half grown
gulls running headlong over the rocky surface of the island after
being removed from their hiding places. They would often fall ten
or more feet over ledges to rocks below without any apparent injury
or significant delay in their rush for the water.

According to my observations the young gull, when attempt-
ing to hide, especially if still in the down plumage, will remain
perfectly quiet until it is handled or removed from its hiding place.
After being disturbed in this way, however, the hiding instinct seems
to be replaced by an impulse to flee and the bird, if not checked,
will run in headlong fashion until it reaches water or gains a posi-
tion where it is really out of sight, a number of rods away. Usu-
ally when such a bird reaches the water it will swim some dis-
tance from shore. I have observed the same behavior in the young
of the Wilson’s and Roseate Terns, Sterna hirundo, and S. dougalli.
The Laughing Gull, Larus atricilla, apparently shows the same
behavior, but I have not studied the habits of this species enough
to make a complete comparison. Probably this hiding behavior is
common to most species of the whole order, under similar circum-
stances.

In the case of the gulls hatched in tree nests, the behavior must of
course be different. It is hardly conceivable that the young in
tree nests as high as fifty feet above the ground, as some have been
stated to be, can leave their nests before the flight feathers are well
developed. Concerning this point we find Dutcher and Baily '
saying: “The young in tree nests also seem to have sense enough
not to walk off the edge of the nest, for in 1902 Mr. Baily found
young at least ten days old in a tree nest.”

As viewed from my tent, the young gulls appeared to spend
most of their time standing idly about waiting for food. The

lop. cit., p. 422.

42 Strone, Habits of the Herring Gull. ae

recently hatched birds were observed enjoying the shade of one of
their parents when the sun was intense as has already been stated
in this paper. They also used drift wood or anything else offering
shade. The more developed juvenals, especially on warm days,
did a large amount of bathing at the water’s edge. Still older
young would swim further out from shore in bathing. When the
definitive feathers are developing and begin to burst from their
sheaths, much time is spent in dressing the plumage with the beak.
Whether the opening of the feathers is facilitated by the feather
manipulation could not be determined.

6. Development of bird after hatching— A detailed account of
the hatching and early development of the young after hatching
has been given by Dutcher and Baily.

Growth is rapid but the young are in the down plumage for a
number of days after hatching. It is not in the province of this
paper to give a detailed description of the plumage, and the reader
is referred to the account given by Dutcher and Baily? (p. 422
with Plate XXII). The sequence of plumages has been described
by Dwight.* The dark plumage of the juvenal gull is replaced
after the first winter by a lighter and less mottled plumage with
quite a bit of individual variation in the rate of change, judging
from my captive gulls. At two years, my gulls had lost most of
their juvenal coloration. Strange to say the wild gull obtained in
the winter of what must have been its second year, was somewhat
behind the others when they were two years old. None of my gulls
had acquired at two years as advanced a plumage as that described
by Dwight for Herring Gulls of that age. Sharpe * describes
progressive changes extending through the first five autumns, and
he says that the “quills” have more dark coloring at the fifth
autumn than appears in older birds. The following quotation
from Townsend’s account of the Herring Gull agrees well with my
observations. “It is superficially evident from the large number
of dark and mottled birds at all seasons, that it takes several years

lop. cit., pp. 421-2.

2 op. cit., p. 422.

3 Dwight, J. The Sequence of Plumages of the Laridae (Gulls and Terns).
Auk, 1901, Vol. XVIII, No. 1, pp. 49-63.

4 Sharpe, R. B. Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum. Vol. XXV, 1896,
p. 264.

Meer mag Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. 43

to attain the beautiful adult plumage. What appears to be a dark
tip to the tail, so prominent in young birds of a certain age, is often
retained after increasing whiteness has set the stamp of years, but
it is entirely absent in the snowy white tail of the fully matured
bird. Birds with pure white tails with the exception of a slight
central sprinkling of dusky brown and with a few faint gray streaks
in the upper breast, are not uncommon.”

My gulls acquired a yellow iris in the second winter, but they still
in their third fall have the bill colored as in the first year. Accord-
ing to Astley,! the bill does not become yellow until the fourth year,
although a nearly complete adult plumage appears at the third
autumnal molt. Sharpe’s account indicates that the adult colora-
tion of the beak is not acquired until after the fourth autumn.

Very meagre data are available as to when breeding begins. A
case is described by Dutcher? of a gull which apparently began
breeding when two years old, and I quote the evidence given for
this conclusion as follows. “In response to the question whether
the dark colored birds ever mated with the white birds, Mrs.
Stanley said that they did when they were two years old. Her
reason for this belief was as follows: On one occasion a young gull
had lost one of its legs just above the knee. The wound healed
but the bird was a cripple and had to hop and stand on the perfect
leg. They fed the bird, and it became very tame. In the fall it
left with the other gulls and returned with them the next spring,
exhibiting its old familiarity. That season when the bird was only
one year old it did not mate. It remained on and about the island
all the season, departing with the others on their southward migra-
tion. The following season it returned again and was still partially
dark colored. It secured a white mate and raised a brood of young.”’

It is my judgment that Herring gulls rarely breed this early. I
saw a few with a very small amount of the immature coloration in
their plumage, which were certainly at least two yeags old. I
obtained no evidence that these birds were breeding except the
fact of their occurrence with breeding birds at a breeding place.

1 Astley, H. D. My birds in Freedom and Captivity, p. 160. E. P. Dutton
and Co., London, New York, J. M. Dent and Co.

2 Dutcher, W. Results of Special Protection to Gulls and Terns Obtained
through the Thayer Fund. Auk, Vol. XVIII, 1901, No. 1, p. 98.

44 Strona, Habits of the Herring Gull. aus
All of the birds that I actually saw with eggs or young were adult,
as far as I could see.

I have seen relatively few immature gulls during the spring and
summer after their first winter, but this is probably due to their
scattered distribution. Many individuals linger some distance
south of the breeding range of the species. Thus Townsend
speaks of immature gulls being abundant at all seasons off the coast
of Essex County, Massachusetts, though Herring Gulls do not now
breed south of Maine on the New England coast. Immature
gulls are also seen over the south portion of Lake Michigan during
the breeding season though the nearest breeding place is many
miles to the north.

Concerning the longevity of the Herring Gull, I have found two
records which indicate that the period of life may be considerable
though giving no idea how long it may be. Thus Morris ! mentions
a Herring Gull which was being fed daily and was very tame.
This bird is stated to have escaped thirty years before “from a
garden where he had been a prisoner.’’ Another bird known as
“Gull Dick” is well known to ornithologists through the reports
made by Mackay to ‘The Auk.’ He says that this bird ? had “ the
habit of frequenting, and returning year after year to the waters
adjacent to Brenton’s Reef, Narragansett Bay, and was known in
consequence to the crew of the lightship anchored in that locality
....In 1891 the bird arrived October 12 which makes the twen-
tieth winter it is known to have passed in this locality. This bird
was identified each year partly by its tameness, and “also by
certain marks on its wings, also by its ery.” It was reported by
Mackay during the following four years after which it failed to
appear.

V1." VoIcr.

1. Introductory— During the summer of 1911, especially, I
gave a large amount of attention to the sounds made by the gulls
with the hope of making interpretations concerning their signifi-
cance. Attempts to describe the various vocal performances were

1 Morris, F.O. A History of British Birds. Vol. VI, p. 159.
2 op. cit., pp. 226-8.

Ne | Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. 45
made whenever possible, with difficulties which will be appreciated
by all observers who have tried to make descriptions of animal
sounds.

Though I tried to notice anything that might have any bearing
on the significance of the sounds made by the gulls, I had the
following points especially in view: (1) the circumstances under
which each sound was made, (2) any possible evidence of associated
emotions, (3) the attention given by other individuals and espe-
cially by the young to these sounds. As all of the cries occupy
only a few seconds at the most, it is necessary when in the field to
be ready to give instant attention the instant the sound is heard.
Here again we see the advantage of the presence of a considerable
number of individuals at such close range as they can be at a breed-
ing place. Some notes are not made frequently by a single indi-
vidual, and the chances of hearing them are multiplied many times
when the observer is in the midst of a fairly large breeding colony.
On the other hand, of course, a large number of gulls in a limited
area make a bedlam of noise which is often confusing. With care-
ful concentration on single sounds or performances it is possible to
reduce the confusion of sound to a working basis.

2. The alarm cry.— In my experience, whenever wild gulls are
disturbed at their breeding places, at least by man, they become
very noisy. Though other sounds are made, the characteristic
and usual cry is what has been called by Herrick,! Ward and others
the “alarm ery.” This consists of sharp and short notes in doub-
lets or triplets which are produced with great variations in quality
and in pitch. I was unable to determine whether these variations
are produced by different individuals. They are striking and
always to be noted when a colony of breeding gulls is disturbed.

After trying various syllables to represent these sounds, I finally
decided that the following is ‘as satisfactory as anything I could
devise, kek’-kek-kek, with an accent on the first syllable, the e
being sounded as in deck. Often only two instead of three of these
sounds are made in a group. ‘These triplets or doublets are uttered
in rapid succession as the bird flies about in the general panic.

Mackay? described the alarm cry with the syllables “cack,

1 Herrick, F. H. The Home Life of Wild Birds.
2 op. cit., p. 226.

46 Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. ES
eack, cack,” and Herrick! used the following: “waw-wak-wak!
wak-wak! wak-wak!”’ Ward used the same symbols in his paper.
Another rendering was made by Knight? as follows: “ha-ha-ha”’
or another alarm cry as follows: “qu-e-e-e-a-h que-e-e-e-a-h.”’
He noted that these cries vary in the “intensity of their demon-
stration” depending on the contents of the nest (whether fresh
eggs, incubated eggs or young are present) the amount of previous
disturbance they have been subjected to, ete.

The alarm cry may be high and shrill or rather low with “chest
tone”’ quality. Intermediate variations also occur. As the dis-
turbance in a gull colony subsides, these notes are uttered less
and less frequently, and the lower notes predominate more as the
excitement decreases. The cries also become less loud and incisive,
until as Herrick * has expressed it: “Finally ceasing like a clock
running down, the mandibles continue to work with no sound for a
moment or so.”

I have often heard these sounds made when the birds were appar-
ently simply solicitous or slightly anxious concerning their eggs or
young. Thus hours after the gulls had settled down to apparently
normal activities about my tent, single birds would occasionally
fly overhead making the alarm ery. At such times the ery 1s
characteristically low and not at all shrill.

3. The “challenge.’”’— This was for me the most interesting vocal
performance, though it is less often mentioned by other writers.
Herrick describes-a “scream of defiance” and has a photo showing
a bird making this noise. Ward is the only writer to my knowledge
who has described this performance in any detail, and his interesting
account follows. “Frequently, the general clamor would be
dominated by a peculiar cry which I put into words as ‘yeh, yeh,
yeh,’ rapidly repeated and increasing in vehemence to the utmost
capabilities of the gull, when it quickly ceased. Usually, a few
seconds after one began another joined, until often there were a
half dozen birds screeching at once, and occasionally, this number
would be increased to a score or more.....The bird stretches its

1 Op. Cit:, p. 55.
2 Knight, O. W., op. cit., p. 48.
3 op. cit., p. 55.
4 op. cit., p. 130.

(cANO GONATIVHO,, GHL ONIMVW GV SLINGV UTHLO GH], “SIVNHANL AHL Ad NodaIH st
a00d HLIM LIOGV NY ‘ADVWOTd IVNAANL NI GUY SGUIM WUVG AH], “GNVIS]T TGAVUD LY ANGOG TIN

“XI SALW Td ‘IXXX “TOA ‘ANY FHL

ae | Strona, Habits of the Herring Gull. 47
neck downward, opens its bill widely and begins the call, then with
a jerky sort of start it stiffly raises its outstretched neck, usually
to an angle of about forty-five degrees. Generally, almost invari-
ably, the head, neck, body and tail are all held in practically the
same line and in a remarkably stiff manner. The whole perform-
ance is so machine like in its rigidity and precision of motion that
the gulls appear like a lot of automatons.”’ I have adopted Ward’s
term “the challenge” for this cry.

I made a number of records of the performance, and I add a few
details to Ward’s description. Just before the head is raised a single
note which may be of appreciable duration is often made. This
I tried to represent in my notes by the syllable “keee.”’ It is fol-
lowed by a series of high and shrill notes as described by Ward.
I finally settled on the following representation in my notes:
“ keee, kee’ ek, kee’ ek, kee’ ek, kee’ ek, kee’ ek, etc.”” The e in kee
is sounded as in see and this syllable is accented. The first note is
longer. Although this noise seemed to take more time, I found on
using a watch that it occupies only a few seconds. The perform-
ance, may, however, be repeated more than once during the course
of a few minutes, when other gulls are “challenging.”

In my experience the “challenge” call is usually made by a
bird on or about the ground, but I have often heard swimming or
flying birds make this noise. All of these situations are shown in
Plate IX where a number of birds are seen in the performance.
The three birds on land at the left and in front, give the best idea
of the usual position.

Good pictures of gulls indulging in the “challenge” appear in
both Herrick’s and Ward’s accounts of the habits of these birds.

Concerning the significance of the “challenge” performance,
little more than opinions can be offered. It may sometimes be
made when other individuals are frantically indulging in the
“alarm cry.” I have noted individuals going through this per-
formance while flying about in the general panic which took place
when I was landing at an island where gulls were breeding. This
behavior often seems to indicate a belligerent attitude and it then
well deserves the term “defiance cry” or “challenge.” My ob-
servations lead me to agree with Ward in saying “ Anything that
startles the gull without producing a panic, or the proximity of

Jan.

48 Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. [ae

fighting birds, or even at times the approach of other gulls seems to
be sufficient cause for its production.”

My captive gulls have indulged in a performance which I have
observed on a few occasions. This has appeared to be a developing
challenge. The first efforts were made in their first autumn. The
same positions were taken, and the sounds made were as similar
as the first crowing efforts of a young rooster are to the crow of a
mature cock. The last attempt was observed in the early summer
of 1913. As my birds have attempted the challenge only on rare
occasions, I have not been able to study its characteristics satis-
factorily. Each time the performance was begun without warning,
and it was over in a few seconds. On each occasion a contest over
food was in progress, although the bird making the noise was not
always engaged in the struggle. Contests over food are exceedingly
frequent, however, and the only sounds made, with these rare
exceptions, consist of a shrill squealing chatter.

Adult birds in late summer after the breeding season is over
make a cry which is at least similar if not identical with the “chal-
lenge,” but I have not observed it at close range.

4. Other cries— Though the “alarm” and “challenge” cries
make up a large portion of the general clamor at a breeding place,
especially when the birds are disturbed or excited, other sounds are
also made. Of these a cry remarkably like the mewing of a cat is
one of the most frequent. The birds I saw “mewing”’ held the
neck arched and the head pointed downward. This performance
often occurred when adults approached young birds apparently
their offspring. It also seemed at times to be made in calling the
young. The adult gull at the extreme right in Plate X, Fig. 2 is
seen “mewing.” This bird was engaged in coaxing its newly
hatched young to a place not so near the tent, and they were too
weak to do more than stumble along over the pebbly beach. The
whole procedure was rather deliberate and more or less interrupted.
Now and then the adult would make the mewing sound, and on
one of these occasions I obtained the photograph just mentioned.
Ward ! observed another set of conditions under which the mewing
cry may occur as follows: “The first day that I was in the tent,

1 op. cit., p. 129.

ak

THE AUK, VOL. XXXI. PEATE eX.

1. PARENT GULL SHADING NEWLY-HATCHED YOUNG.
2. GULL AT RIGHT MAKING THE “MEW” CRY, VERY YOUNG OFFSPRING WALKING:
JUST BEHIND. OTHER GULLS SEEN IN CHARACTERISTIC LOAFING POSITIONS.

———

Pia | Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. 49

at 3 P. M. a rain squall came up. Dark clouds obscured the sun,
occasional flashings of lightning were seen and peals of thunder
sounded from time to time. The wind came in cold sharp gusts.
The shrill cries of the gulls were quickly subdued and a plaintive
mewing was ‘the all-prevailing sound.”

On a few occasions, I heard a shrill and prolonged cry which was
distinguishable from the mew and yet apparently related to it in
its characteristics. This I have represented in my notes by the
syllable “kerr” with the e sounded as in her. It suggested to me a
noise often made by a contented hen in the chicken yard. I was

‘unable to get any clue to its significance.

A high-pitched kee sound is often made when the bird is flying.
I have heard this given by gulls away from their breeding place.
It is of appreciable duration, and it descends slightly in pitch.

Another performance which I noted only a few times involved a
rapid series of weak notes not unlike the peeps of a newly hatched
gull but with more of a whispering quality. This I represented as
follows: “peep-peep-peep-peep-peep, etc.”” The beak was opened
only slightly and shut with each note. It is possible that this is the
“run down” alarm cry which Herrick mentions, but its occurrence
was not connected with any apparent alarm nor was it closely
preceded by alarm cries. The bird stood about in the position
shown in Plate X, Fig. 1 and was very near my tent. The noise
would not have been heard if the gull had been many feet away.
Perhaps a fair guess would be to suggest that we had here an inci-
pient alarm cry which did not involve a stimulus strong enough to
produce the full response.

Young Herring Gulls give a cry for food which varies with age.
The newly hatched birds utter only weak peeps. As they grow
older, these develop into more insistent squealing notes which
may be made with a bowing motion for each. When attacked or
in distress, juvenal gulls often make a sharp and still more incisive
squeal in which the notes are uttered more rapidly and more loudly.
I have already mentioned the attempts at a challenge cry which are
made by juvenals.

(To be concluded.)

50 Tyter, Brown Creeper in Massachusetts. fe

NOTES ON NEST LIFE OF THE BROWN CREEPER IN
MASSACHUSETTS!

BY WINSOR M. TYLER.

In the midst of an extensive wood in the Town of Lexington,
Mass., over an area of ten or fifteen acres the land lies in long, more
or less parallel, ridges with hollows between, like great solidified
sea-waves,— the eskers of the geologists. From crest to crest is a
distance of fifty yards or more. The ridges are covered with well
grown white pine and an occasional hemlock. ‘The damper hollows
are filled with a luxuriant growth of cinnamon fern, shaded by white
and black oak, and red maple. Nearby, to the south, and within
two hundred yards toward the west are two swamps, one marshy,
the other wooded. For the past five or six years, this region has
been infested with brown-tail and gypsy moths, and the life of the
trees, especially of those growing on the drier ridges, has been
threatened. Indeed, at a point where two ridges join, the moth
invasion became so serious that, in despair of saving the trees,
many of them were cut down over the space of six or seven acres.
Many more trees, killed either by the moths or by a forest fire which
ran through the locality year before last, remain standing in the
clearing, their bark entirely torn off by the wind or gradually falling
away in flakes.

In this clearing, I heard a Brown Creeper (Certhia familiaris
americana) singing on May 5, 1913. Ten days later, early in the
morning, I found two Creepers in the clearing. One soon dis-
appeared; the other flew back and forth between the burned trees
and a growth of sprout oaks a hundred yards to the north. On
each return to the clearing, she carried in her bill some dry grass
which she took to her nest behind a piece of loose bark, standing off
from the trunk of one of the burned oak trees.

The following notes record the history of this pair of Brown |

Creepers and the partial history of a second pair which bred eight
miles away in Concord, Mass. The record has been made up from

1 Read at a meeting of the Nuttall Ornithological Club, November 3, 1913.

| Tyter, Brown Creeper in Massachusetts. 5t
my notes which I wrote largely with the birds before me. I have
used quotation marks to indicate direct transcription from these
field records.

The nest tree is a dead black oak, the trunk of which three feet
above the ground measures 33 inches in circumference. Little of
the bark has fallen except from the upper half of the tree where it is
nearly bare. Eight feet from the base, a slab of bark as broad as
the span of one’s hand stands off from the trunk; it is continuous
above with the unseparated bark of the tree; its free lower border
is six inches from the trunk; on each side is a bare area. The
cavity behind the bark is nearly filled by the nest,—a mass of
sticks, bits of bark and dead wood, caterpillar webbing, dry grass,
cocoons and the down of cinnamon ferns,— materials all to be
found in the immediate neighborhood. ‘The nest measures seven
inches in height. Its base, made chiefly of sticks, projects slightly
below the flake of bark. The nest is attached to the inner side of
the bark and not to the trunk; when the flake is raised, the entire
nest swings out with it. The nest is lined with fern down; the
hollow is oval with the long axis parallel to the surface of the trunk;
it is built up at the two sides, giving a hammock effect.

“May 17. At the Creeper ground, 7-S a.m. By standing
on a stump, I can look into the nest. It is empty, although practi-
cally completed. When the bird comes to the nest, she enters
facing the trunk and comes out with her back to it. This is re-
peated at the next trip. She gives the long, vibrating, sibilant
“Zit” call and the short “ts” almost continually. Today she
collects material from near the nest —from within twenty-five
yards. She is always in sight except when she is behind a tree or
branch. She adds to the nest what appears to be a bit of bark.
She is away for two minutes,— the next time for one minute —
again for one minute. When ascending a smooth, barkless trunk
she spreads her feet far apart (as a squirrel would). She finds
nesting material here,— fine filaments which she peels off. She
generally alights below the nest and creeps up to it; sometimes she
alights above and hitches downward, moving backward and side-
ways. She goes now to the ground for dry grass. She hops about
for a distance of ten feet, gathering blades eight inches long. She
creeps easily over rocks, even over an almost upright face. The

52 Tyrer, Brown Creeper in Massachusetts. aun

darker male brings dry grass to the nest and goes behind the bark,
but he does not add the material to the nest; he waits about. The
female returns, adds to the nest the grass she has brought, then
takes the grass from the male. Now she is collecting shreds from
the inner bark of a dead oak tree, sometimes in her search crawling
under projecting strips of bark. She often tries to break off tiny
twigs by grasping them in her bill and shaking them,— once she
hovers in the air in the attempt.”

“May 19, 8:30 a.m. Neither bird seen about the nest. The
cup is deep and I see no eggs. I do not dare to feel in the nest for
fear of dislodging it.”

“May 20,3 p.m. One egg inthe nest. In the semi-darkness
behind the bark the shell appears white and unmarked. The
birds are not within hearing.”

“May 21,4 p.m. The nest contains two eggs. White with
pinkish tint. I see no markings.”

“May 22, Noon. A cloudy day. I can see into the nest per-
fectly well today; previously the dazzling light has made the cavity
seem dark. There are four eggs in the nest. They are spotted
with fine brown specks about the larger end.”

“May 24, 3:30 p. mM. Six eggs. Female on the nest. When
I look in, she flies off, but returns in five minutes. The notes of
the female when disturbed are the “ts” and the customary long
“ Ziut,’’— the same notes she used when building her nest and when
undisturbed. I believe now that I did not see the full number of
eggs until the 22nd, that the first egg was layed on the 19th and
that one has been layed each day since.”

“May 28, 7 a. mM. A damp cloudy morning, temperature
46°, Wind east. The female is on the nest facing the main en-
trance. She does not leave when I peek in two feet away. The
male Creeper is collecting food; he goes about with a tuft of in-
sects in his bill,— he sings even while carrying a good sized tuft.
7:40. He comes to the vicinity of the nest and calls; the female
joins him,— side by side, heads up, on a tree trunk near the nest
he feeds her. She flutters her wings like a young bird asking for
food. She returns soon to the nest and the male retires. At 7:45,
he returns and, calling “ Z7iit,”’ flies to the nest. His mate reaches
out and takes food from his bill,— her head appears at main en-

2a | TytEeR, Brown Creeper in Massachusetts. 53
trance. She must be on the side of the nest. Again at 8:15, the
male carries food to the nest and goes out of sight beneath the bark.

“Sometimes the Creepers climb high in a tree to where the
branches are so small that, in ascending, the birds almost grasp
them in their claws. They do not (or I have not yet seen them)
perch crosswise on the little twigs. When crawling out a hori-
zontal limb, they often wind about it so that the back faces the
ground. Often, too, a bird sits perfectly motionless for a minute
or two, even with food in its bill.”

When the two birds were side by side, it was apparent that
the male was slightly the darker, but this difference in color was
not sufficiently marked to serve as an identification when only one
bird was in sight.

“May 30. This morning Mr. Walter Faxon found the nest and
the slab of bark on the ground at the foot of the nest tree. All the
eggs were broken. The birds were nowhere to be seen. The
heavy wind of last night was, without doubt, responsible for the
catastrophe.”

In the afternoon of May 18, 1913, Mr. Faxon discovered the nest
of a pair of Brown Creepers in Concord, Mass.

“This nest is twelve feet from the ground behind the loosened
bark of a dead white oak tree, the trunk of which, three feet up,
measures 54 inches. The flake of bark which shelters the nest is
attached at the top and on one side and hangs closely to the trunk.
A handful of material (sticks, etc., the base of the nest) protrudes
from the free lower edge. A foot above this is a tiny hole — no
bigger than a mouse’s hole — through which the bird crawls down
to the nest. Mr. Faxon and I spent an hour (May 19) about
the nest. Once a bird came out and, after feeding for a minute
or two from the surrounding tree trunks, moved off. Fifteen
minutes later, we heard her notes as she approached. She flew
to the nest tree, alighted below the nest, crawled up to the hole,
turned head downward with her back to the trunk and disappeared.
The nest tree stands on high land in an open grove of white pine
and oak near the shore of a small pond. Presumably the female
bird is incubating.”

From the report of Mr. and Mrs. C. A. Robbins of Onset, Mass.,
both Creepers were feeding young on May 21.

54 TyterR, Brown Creeper in Massachusetts. less

“May 26. The Concord nest, 4 p. m. After an interval
when both birds are absent, one bird visits the nest three times and
the other once; all four visits are made within five or ten minutes.
The bird which comes oftener is paler'than the other. This pale
one in every instance enters and leaves the nest cavity by a tiny
opening just above the protruding material, six inches below the
entrance used during incubation (May 19). As this bird comes
out head first, it must turn around inside. The darker bird in its
one visit uses the upper hole in entering and leaving. It brings
from the nest a bit of white excrement which appears almost globu-
lar in shape and flies away with it. The birds collect food for the
young from the bark of the trees nearby — small insects. Once
Mr. Faxon made out a spider in a parent’s bill.”

As in the case of the Lexington Creepers, the difference in color
was diagnostic only when the birds were together.

On the second of June, from 11 A. m. till noon, Mr. Faxon and
I watched the Concord Creepers feeding their young. The parents
brought food to the nest every few minutes and during the entire
period were almost always within sight or hearing. We soon con-
vinced ourselves that each bird used a different hole, both on enter-
ing and leaving the nest and from the fact that the incubating bird
had always entered by the upper hole we suspected that the female
was still using this entrance while the male came and went below.
On one occasion, we saw the “upper hole bird” creep down to the
next and stand over the young with half-spread wings for a minute
or two. This maternal brooding by the supposed female strength-
ened our opinion and when on June 3rd I heard the male sing
repeatedly while the female who had entered by the upper crevice
and who afterwards left by it, was in the nest, we felt no doubt
of the respective sexes of the two birds. At our visit on June 2,
it appeared to us that the male bird was as diligent as the female in
feeding the young birds and in carrying away their excrement.

In order to determine this point with mathematical accuracy,
I stationed myself at 7:15 the next morning (June 3) eighteen
feet from the nest and, for the succeeding hour and a half, recorded
at each visit of the parents which entrance was used and whether
or not excrement was taken away on leaving. The following table
indicates the result.

a | TyuER, Brown Creeper in Massachusetts. 539)
wD Lie) wD)
x ER wt 2
bX oa) 0 i
et Patil eis nbebm en's
ey = a BH
~ ~ io 4)
Q Upper entrance, leaves with excrement 3 0 2 5
leaves without “ 8 5 6 19
o' Lower entrance, with excrement 1 1 1 3
without “ 0 1 7 8
o' Lower entrance, ) with excrement 0 0 1 1
without entering} without “ 5 0 4 9
Totals 17 7 21 45

@ 24 visits — removes excrement 5 times.
oc 21 visits — removes excrement 4 times.

During the first half hour, the male sang frequently. Evidently
this interfered with his feeding the young. During the second
period both parents were absent for ten minutes. Once in the hour
and a half, the male, entering below, left by the upper hole. He
was disturbed by the coming of the female, I think, although she
went away without entering.

As the Creepers hunted about for food, and as they flew to the
nest, they uttered continually both from a perch and while in the
air, their single high sibilant call, “ts,” a note which suggests the
slightest chip-note of Regulus satrapa, Often too they give the
long, tremulous “ Zzizt,”’ but only, I believe, when perched. When
bringing food to the nest tree, the female alighted above the nest
(6-10 feet) and descended to it by successive flights in loops; the
male generally alighted below the nest and crept upward. When-
ever the parents entered the nest, the young birds reared and I
could see them plainly through the lower hole which had been en-
larged by the frequent passage of the male bird. When they opened
their mouths, the pale yellow lining shone out clearly in the dim
light. The female parent in feeding stood head downward above
the nest in the cavity behind the bark. Although more conveni-
ent, it would seem, to leave by the lower crevice (her head was
almost opposite this entrance) she invariably turned and climbed
out the hole by which she had entered. The male parent often —
took the same position, but in ten of his twenty-one visits to the
nest he did not go behind the bark,— he merely reached in through
the lower entrance.

{|

56 Tyrer, Brown Creeper in Massachusetts. ae

Having delivered the food to the young birds, the parents waited
motionless for a moment. If a nestling was ready to void excre-
ment, he began at once to hitch and shuffle about in the nest, then,
straightening his legs and raising his tail, he slowly expelled a
feecal sac upward toward his parent. The black needle-like bill

of the adult bird closed immediately upon the sac and steadied it, —

perhaps aided in its delivery — until it was entirely expelled. The
voiding of excrement was a leisurely process; all the movements
were slow; there was none of the snapping up and snatching one
sees in a nest of Robins.

In watching a pair of Brown Creepers about their nest, whether
they are building, incubating their eggs, or feeding their young, one
is soon impressed by an air of happiness and calm which pervades
the active little birds. From the behavior of many birds, one
comes to associate the finding of a nest with anxiety expressed in
various ways,— with the nervous panic of the Warblers, the Robin’s
hysterical apprehension, the noisy complaint of the Crow and even
with the polite uneasiness of the gentle Field Sparrow. The Brown
Creeper, however, although doubtless observant, does not seem to
look upon man as a danger; he continues his work uninfluenced,
I believe, by close scrutiny. Happy and calm, even under observa-
tion, the Creepers appear preoccupied in their work and the com-
radeship of a pair is very pretty to see. The male shares with the
female her interest in the progress of the nest; even although he
knows nothing of nest building he collects material and offers it
to his mate. Ever ready to assist, he feeds the female while she
builds and while she is sitting and, after the young are hatched,
he is no less industrious than she in caring for their needs.

The young birds left the Concord nest early on June 4 (pos-
sibly June 3). At 8 a. M., two were clinging, thirty feet from
the ground, to the trunk of a living white pine tree which stood not
far from the nest. One or two more were on another pine trunk.
The little birds were extremely difficult to find by reason of their
small size, their distance from the ground, their inconspicuous color
and especially because each took a station in the dark shadow im-
mediately below a horizontal limb. Here they remained motion-
less for many minutes. Later, two young birds, one following the
other, moved upward by feeble hitches and perched or squatted

| Trier, Brown Creeper in Massachusetts. Sy
close to the trunk in the right angle formed by the limb. In hitch-
ing over the bark, they moved almost straight upward and whenever
I saw them as a silhouette against the sky, and could thus determine
the point, they did not use their tails for support. The shortness
of the young Creeper’s tails gave to their bodies a rounded, unbird-
like outline and, with their short, stubby bills of wide gape and their
squatting position on the upright bark they suggested tree-toads in
nosmall degree. Like most young birds after they leave the nest,
the fledgling Creepers were more noisy than they had been the day
before. They announced their whereabouts to their parents with
a note not previously heard,— a high sibilant call, “tssssz,” or
sometimes clearly divided into two syllables thus:— “ts-tss7.’’
The voice was very slightly tremulous and, although the pitch
and delivery of the notes were decidedly Creeper-like, they suggested
to Mr. Faxon and me a flock of Cedarbirds.

The female parent, impelled probably by habit, visited the nest
tree three times and looked in the upper entrance hole. Once she
entered the nest cavity, but returned without feeding. Finally
she came to the two young birds clinging side by side on the pine
trunk. She took a position below and behind them and fed one.
-The young bird extended his neck way back to take the food.
The male bird was still associated with the family and I have
no doubt that he too was feeding the young birds. He did not
sing during an hour or more. We did not visit the Concord Creep-
ers again.

The effect upon the pair of Lexington Creepers whose nest was
blown down on May 30 was to excite the nest-building instinct
of the female and to stimulate the male to a renewed period of song.
In the afternoon of the same day, Mr. Faxon and I found the pair
in the clearing closely associated,— the male singing continually,
the female busily exploring dead tree trunks and creeping under
loose bark, in search of a new nest site.

“May 31, 7-8 a. mM. The male Creeper sings frequently; his
voice rings through the wood: he sings louder and more frequently,
it seems, than previously. The female carries nesting material
behind a piece of bark on a dead white oak tree, 75 yards to the
north of the former nest site. |The new site is fifteen feet from the

58 TyteR, Brown Creeper in Massachusetts. ras

ground. The bark lies closer to the trunk than on the other tree,—
the cavity behind it is therefore smaller. Already pieces of wood
and, I think, a feather protrude from a crevice below where the nest
is to be. Once the male comes to the tree, but he does not bring
nesting material.”

“June 1, 8:30-10 a. m. The birds have abandoned the nest
on which the female was working yesterday in favor of a new site
25 yards to the south of the original nest. The new site (No. 3)
is in the same hollow as the first nest; the tree (a black oak) is
smaller, but as was the case in both the other trees, it is dead and
much of the bark still clings to it. The nest is already well under
way. Our attention was attracted to it by the material projecting
beneath a loose cuff-shaped bit of bark which nearly encircles the
tree. At two points, one above the nest and the other below it,
the cuff is attached to larger areas of unseparated bark. The
birds enter the cavity from above. The entrance is six inches above
the nest and eight feet from the ground. The male sings freely
this morning and much of the time remains in the vicinity of the
nest, often accompanying the female on her excursions for nesting
material. When we first came upon the pair, the female was mak-
ing long flights from the nest. She brought in bits of bark and some
fuzzy material (fern down or caterpillar webbing). We saw her col-
lect also bits of bark from nearby trees. Twice at least the male
brought material and delivered it (bark or dead wood) to the female
who was in the nest cavity. The female made half a dozen long
flights, returning every two minutes. Then she flew eight times
in the next ten minutes to a very small dead white pine a few yards
away and returned each time with one or more fine twigs. Often
after returning with a twig six inches long, she had some difficulty
in forcing it through the entrance hole. She was wise enough, how-
ever, to turn her head so that the twig might slip in end first. Once,
when she brought in a beakful of fern down, the material kept catch-
ing on the rough bark and tripping her up, but by bending her neck
backward she was able to hold the stuff clear of the bark. In her
trips to the little dead pine, the Creeper always alighted on the
slender trunk, but in order to reach the terminal twigs she had to
hop out on the smaller branches. Sometimes, when these were
very small, she perched crosswise upon them; often she crawled

o,f

| TyieR, Brown Creeper in Massachusetts. 59
around them,— her back to the earth. When perched, her tail
hung straight downward, like a Phoebe’s or a Brown Thrasher’s
when he sings. She broke off the twigs by tugging at them while
perched or while fluttering in the air. Twice one of the pair took
a bit of material from that which protruded from the base of the
nest and carried it inside the nest cavity. Soon after her trips to
the pine the bird disappeared for nineteen minutes. On her return,
she brought a cocoon.

The use of both the fern down and the webbing is, I believe,
to bind the twigs together and to hold the nest to the bark, against
which it rests. In the first nest site, if it had not been for this
adhesion, the nest would have fallen to the ground of its own weight,
for its base was unsupported.”

At 9 a. M., June 2, we found one of the birds at nest No. 3.
Half an hour later, both birds were at the second nest (the nest
which on June 1 we thought had been deserted). The female flew
to the nest with a bit of bark (25 X + inches) then pulled from the
protruding base of the nest a piece of fuzz and took it into the
cavity. Five minutes later she (or her mate) crept again to the
base and pulled off a bit of bark which she carried within. This
economical habit of using material twice (first for the foundation
and later for building the nest proper) is apparently a common
practice. We saw it again and again.

On June 5, 8-8:30 a.m. I saw or heard nothing of the birds.

June 9, 7.30-8.50 a. M. The female entered nest No. 3 at 7.35.
The male remained in the vicinity and sang frequently, at 7.45,
8.15, and 8.48. He called the female from the nest and fed her,
and each time she returned at once to the nest where “she is evi-
dently incubating.”

On the following morning (June 10) there were two eggs in the
nest No. 3. The female bird came to the nest and it seemed evi-
dent that she was laying a second set of eggs. Such was not the
case, however. During the next three days the two birds busied
themselves in continuing to build nest No. 2 and were never or
rarely seen about the nest which contained the eggs. No more eggs
were layed in this nest and our conclusion was that it had been made
merely to receive the two eggs, probably the remnant of the first set.

From June 13, the Creepers were followed by Mr. George Nelson

[ae

60 TyteR, Brown Creeper in Massachusetts. Jan.

of East Lexington who kindly permits me to add that the birds
built two more nests and that in one of these the female laid eggs
which were destroyed by a thunder storm early in July.

Summary of details of nests.

Circumference of

Faced Height Tree trunk 3 ft. up.
Nest No. 1 ENE Site Black Oak 33 inches
Nest No. 2 SSE 15 White Oak 29 inches
Nest No. 3 NE by N 8 Black Oak 22 inches
Concord nest SSE 12 White Oak 54 inches

The history of these two pairs of Creepers suggests a reason for
their breeding so far south of their normal range and also a cause
of the failure of one pair to raise their young.

Breeding Brown Creepers are rare in eastern Massachusetts;
they have been reported here in summer not more than a dozen
times in the last thirty-five years. For the most part, the nests
were built in white cedar or red maple trees standing in denise wet
swamps.! One nest was found in a dead white pine? and another
in a pitch pine’, both surrounded by woodland. It is to be noted
that these former Massachusetts nests were placed in situations not
very dissimilar from those on the birds’ regular breeding ground in
northern New England.

The sites, surrounded by trees, were well protected from the
wind and the nests themselves were sheltered by strong or tenacious
bark. Very different conditions prevailed in the Concord nest site
and in all the five in Lexington. The six nest trees stood either
in a clearing or in an open wood, and were exposed to the wind to
a greater or less extent. The nests were built in trees, long dead,
with brittle or frail bark,— black or white oak,— trees with which
the Creeper can have had little experience in the Canadian Zone.
That the Concord nest withstood the strain of the wind and of the

1 Kennard, F. H., & McKechnie, F. B., Auk, XXII, 183-193.
Chadbourne, A. P., Auk, XXII, 179-183.

2 Kennard, F. H., & McKechnie, F. B., op. cit.

8 Townsend, C. W., Birds of Essex County, 1905, p. 307.

‘4 Brewster, W., Bull., N. O. C. IV, 199-209.

Sie | TyueR, Brown Creeper in Massachusetts. 61
birds’ continual passage in and out was due in large measure, not
to the strength of the bark, but to the fortuitous circumstance that
the loosened strip was adherent along the whole of one side to the
firm bark of the trunk. This nest tree was, moreover, larger and in
a more sheltered situation than any of the others.

For many years past, there have been few dead trees in eastern
Massachusetts except in such remote localities as the almost
inaccessible swamps where Messrs. Kennard and McKechnie found
their Brown Creepers breeding. Of late years, however, this
region about Boston, Mass., has been the very center of the gypsy
and brown-tail moth invasion with the result that in many pieces
of woodland the trees, after being stripped year after year by the
larvee, have been decimated. ‘The trees which die first, and in the
greatest number, are the oaks,— the favorite of the gypsy moth.

This wholesale killing of the oaks has opened up the woodland
in two ways,— primarily through the loss of the foliage of the trees
which have been killed and secondarily (as in the case of the clearing
in Lexington) through the extensive cutting off of living trees by
the owners of infested regions to save their threatened property.
The result is that there are at the present time in eastern Massa-
chusetts hundreds of acres of devastated woodland abounding in
sites of suitable size for Brown Creepers’ nests. Many of the sites
are unfavorable for nesting, however, in that they are exposed to
the full force of the wind and sheltered insufficiently by fragile oak
bark.

That the two pairs of Brown Creepers noted in the present paper
were the only ones which passed the summer in this vicinity is
highly improbable: the increase in the number of breeding sites,
unfavorable though many of them are, has no doubt induced many
other Creepers to tarry in their northward spring migration and to
attempt to breed here. That few have been discovered is not sur-
prising for, as has been emphasized above, the Creepers, in the
main, stay very near their nesting ground and often for long periods
keep nearly silent.

It is probable, indeed, that the Brown Creeper is, for the time
being, a regular summer resident, if no more than a rare one, in
eastern Massachusetts and that the species will be found breeding
here as long as the moths continue to kill the trees.

62 TyieR, Brown Creeper in Massachusetts. pea

Mr. Walter Faxon has pointed out another change in our avi-
fauna due to the same cause,— the killing of the trees by moths.
Mr. William Brewster! writing in 1906 gives for this locality but
a single summer record of the Hairy Woodpecker (Dryobates villosus
villosus). At the present time, however, this bird is a not uncom-
mon summer resident in Lexington, Mass., a town included in the
Cambridge Region. Indeed during the past summer (1913) a
pair bred near the clearing where the Brown Creepers built their
five nests.

|

THE FALLACY OF THE TENDENCY TOWARDS ULTRA-—
MINUTE DISTINCTIONS.

BY J. D. FIGGINS.

ALTHOUGH conservative ornithologists deplore and have repeat-
edly protested against the seeming unfortunate tendency towards
the creation of endless subspecies upon differences too slight for
identification by physical comparison, an examination of recent
literature would indicate that but little had been accomplished.

In certain genera many identifications are quite impossible
unless the student be willing to accept purely geographical evidence
of an extremely doubtful character. Indeed there are now numer-
ous forms unrecognizable by even their sponsors, except through a
knowledge of the locality from which such specimens were taken;
and were the subject of less importance one’s regret would be limited
by his sense of humor.

While a geographical interval, together with physical differences,
or variations sufficiently pronounced to be apparent to the average
student would seem reasonable ground for separation, conservative
ornithologists doubt the wisdom of some of the late ultraminute
distinctions. A continuance of this “Futuristic” school of orni-
thology will obviously lead to geography as a text-book of more

1 Birds of the Cambridge Region, 1906, p. 210.

Vol. |

1914 Fieains, Ultraminute Distinctions. 63

importance than the present-day literature on birds; and it will be
necessary to study the subject through the use of charts resembling
contour maps or weather report bulletins.

That slight physical differences, even with a geographical in-
terval, are insufficient grounds for separation seems conclusively
proven through the examination of a series of Gambel’s Quail
(Lophortyx gambeli) from western Colorado.

With a view of accounting for the presence of these birds in
Colorado and possibly arriving at some conclusion regarding the
causes of the changes hereafter described, a short history and de-
scription of the region is perhaps not amiss.

Accepting the various authorities as correct in believing the
California Quail (Lophortyx c. californica) had been introduced in
the neighborhood of Grand Junction, a search was made for speci-
mens, and while the literature agrees that the experiment had
proven highly successful, no evidence of the presence of these birds
was found. Quail were abundant, however; but specimens taken
at Olathe, Montrose Co. were obviously more nearly referable to
gambeli, though the differences in measurements and coloration
seemed to point to the possibility of a subspecies. Additional
specimens were then taken at Cedaredge, Delta Co., and Grand
Junction, Mesa Co., and in view of the seeming total absence of
californica, it is reasonable to suppose gambeli and not californica
was introduced there.

While this may ‘be regarded as sufficient evidence to correct the
error in identification, of more importance is the significance of the
changes that have taken place during the period of introduction,
and which seems to have an,important and direct bearing on the
question of separations based on minute distinctions.

Having failed to establish the Bobwhite in western Colorado, the
gentlemen interested in the introduction then secured nearly one
thousand quail from California, which they liberated ‘at or near
Montrose, Montrose Co.’!

1 Contrary to the literature and general belief, investigation proves conclusively
the original lot of birds were liberated at Montrose and not Grand Junction.
Evidence of this is found in the official records of Montrose Co. with the date,
1885, and the names of the gentlemen financing the undertaking. Unfortunately
the record does not give the exact locality from which the birds were taken, and
extensive correspondence has not revealed additional information.

64 Ficains, Ultraminute Distinctions. a

These birds, unlike the Bobwhite, immediately sought the bench
lands: where they were undisturbed by irrigation and repeated
harvesting of alfalfa,— elements that had proven disastrous to the
latter. Finding excellent cover there and rearing two broods a
season, their increase was phenomenal; and through natural
processes and stocking additional sections, the birds were soon
abundant throughout the entire region. Broadly speaking, the
Gambel’s Quail may now be considered as occupying all suitable
localities within the drainage areas of the Uncomphgre and Gunni-
son rivers and the lower valley of the Grand river within the state-

This region is of a sedimentary nature, deeply eroded by glacial
action and ancient water courses, and is characterized by broad
valleys laterally terminating in morainal benches or high mesas.
While orchards and agricultural activities are much in evidence,
the broken country is undisturbed, and there the quail find excel-
lent cover in the thick growth of “chico” and sage.

Since the precipitation is but 8.31 inches the region may be
considered as arid: with temperatures ranging from —16° to
+104° at Grand Junction to probably —35° nearer the main range
of mountains. The altitude varies from 5,500 ft. at the Utah-Colo-
rado boundary to 6,000 ft. at Somerset, Gunnison Co.

A doubtful record of Gambel’s Quail is credited to Colorado (see
Cooke’s ‘Birds of Colorado’) but the distance given by Sclater,
(see Sclater’s ‘A History of the Birds of Colorado’) as he
agrees, would evidently assign the locality to New Mexico. That
this record is referable to the introduced birds is extremely unlikely;
and equally so is the possibility of their presence in the western
part of the state due to migrations from the south; for although
they are known to occur at considerable altitude, a mountain range
of large extent separates the two regions,— averaging more than
10,000 ft.!

With a view of affording comparison of specimens from the two
localities, both California and Colorado birds are described below.

1 Three months continuous systematic collecting along the southern boundary
of Colorado from the Utah line to the Rio Grande river failed to reveal the slight-
est trace of Gambel’s Quail except a single specimen taken by H. H. Sheldon at
Elco, La Platta Co., in June of this year, and five specimens at Cortez, Montezuma
Co. The former capture is probably due to the introduction of these quail at.
Huntington, New Mexico, and the latter to recent introductions at Cortez.

Vol. |
1914

Description OF Lophortyx gambeli
FROM CALIFORNIA.

Adult Male.

Occiput; light rufus posteriorly,
dark chestnut anteriorly.

Band of white across forehead and
extending to nape.

Throat; dull brownish black.

Crest; sooty brown.

Forehead; varying from brownish
black streaked with gray to equal
markings of gray and black.

Band of white around black of
throat, extending to eye.

Chest; creamy gray, quills dusky
gray.

Back of neck; gray, quillsdusky gray.

Back, rump, scapulars and tertials;
brownish gray, quills distinct
reddish brown.

Inner edge of tertials; buff to creamy
white.

Tail; dark blue-gray, tinged on
edge and tip with brownish.

Upper tail coverts; same as rump,
but mottled with grayish white.

Primaries, secondaries and spurious
primaries; grayish brown, outer
web lighter, quills brown.

Sides; rich chestnut streaked with
white.

Flanks; buff, broadly streaked with
chestnut and gray.

Upper belly; creamy white to deep
buff.

Belly; brownish black, lateral and
posterior feathers mottled with
buff and chestnut.

Lower belly; buff to ochre with
brown markings.

Under tail coverts; light to deep
buff with bar of grayish brown
along quills.

Feet; flesh brown.

Bill; dark brown to brownish
black.

Fiaains, Ultraminute Distinctions. 65

Description or Lophortyx gambeli
FROM COLORADO.

Adult Male.

Occiput; uniform brown.

Band of white across forehead and
extending to nape.

Throat; glossy black.

Crest; sooty black.

Forehead; equally streaked with
gray white and black.

Band of white around black of
throat and extending to eye.

Chest; pure blue-gray, quills dusky
gray.

Back of neck; pure blue-gray, quills
dusky gray and terminating in a
tip of dark brown.

Back, rump, scapulars and tertials;
gray, tinged with olive.

Inner edge of tertials;
creamy white.

Tail; dark blue-gray, quills brown-
ish black.

Primaries and spurious primaries;
brownish gray, lighter on outer
edge, quills dark brownish gray.

Sides; dark purplish brown,
streaked with white.

Flanks; buffy cream,
streaked with brown.

Upper belly; very pale buff.

Belly; uniform slaty black.

Lower belly; very pale buff.

Under tail coverts; creamy buff
with bar of brownish gray along
quills.

Feet; flesh brown.

Bill; brown to vandyke brown.

Iris; brown.

white to

broadly

66 Fieeins, Uliraminute Distinctions.

Adult Female.

Occiput; reddish brown.

Crest; dusky black.

Forehead; whitish, streaked with
gray.

Throat; light buff, streaked with
brown and gray.

Chest; buffy gray, median line and
tips of feathers brown.

Inner edge of tertials; buff to creamy
white.

Back, rump, scapulars and tertials;
grayish brown, quills brown.

Tail; dark gray, strongly tinged
and edged with brown.

Sides; light chestnut,
with white.

Flanks; dark buff to cream, streaked
with brown.

Belly and breast; dark buff to
creamy white, strongly streaked
and tipped with brown.

Under tail coverts; same as belly,
but broadly streaked with brown.

Feet; brown.

Bill; brown.

streaked

Auk
Jan.

Adult Female.

Occiput; brownish gray.

Crest; dark slate.

Forehead; gray,
black.

Throat; buffy gray streaked with
dark gray.

Upper chest; gray, quills indistinct.

Back of neck; gray, median line
and tips of feathers dusky gray.

Back, rump, scapulars and tertials;
gray, tinged with white to creamy.

Inner edge of tertials; white to
creamy white.

Tail; dark blue-gray, quills brown-
ish black.

Sides; chestnut brown streaked
with white.

Belly and breast; light creamy
buff to grayish buff, sparsely
tipped and streaked with dark
gray and brown.

Under tail coverts; same as belly,
but streaked with dark gray.

Bill; grayish brown.

Feet; light flesh brown.

streaked with

From the above descriptions many differences will be noted;
but those of major importance, are, the difference in the colors of
the occiput, wings, rump, tail and the black of the throat and belly.
Another item of equal importance is the uniform persistence in the
characters in Colorado specimens and the variation in birds from
California.!. Much of the latter difference is no doubt due to se&a-
son; but there is a marked similarity when localities are considered.

Upon a closer analysis of the colors it is readily seen that the
California specimens are invariably modified by reds and browns,

1 Through the kindness of Mr. Joseph Grinnell I have been enabled to examine
a series of more than fifty specimens of Gambel’s Quail from California which throws
much light upon the subject. These birds were taken at various points in the
southern section of the state and the variations in some instances are far more
pronounced than many of the recent separations. Indeed were one inclined to
accept the modern methods of creating subspecies there would be little difficulty
in making two, and perhaps three or four distinctions.

=?

a | Ficarns, Ultraminute Distinctions. 67
while this peculiarity is absent in Colorado birds. Briefly, then,
the result of introduction has been a tendency towards eliminating
the reds and browns, the development of olive to replace those
colors and in increasing the purity of the blacks and grays.

Since the comparatively short period of introduction has resulted
in such marked changes in coloration, it is but natural to expect
possible differences in measurements. That they are so pronounced
however, is a matter of surprise. In offering these it is understood
that the tables of lengths are of little value when taken from dried
skins; but they are included. While the length measurements of
Colorado specimens are incomplete, those given are from birds in
the flesh and will be of value when opportunity permits like measure-
ments of California specimens.

Measurements of Lophortyx gambeli from California.’

Tar- Mid. :
Sex. Locality. Date. Length. Wing. Tail. sus. toe. Nail.

o'Mecea Riverside Co. Cal. April 4 8.85 4.37 4.30 1.10 1.35 .28
o'Colo. River e “ 19 10.22 4.30 4.50 1.25 1.50 .37

o'New River, us NTS OAS 5425 OST 232
o'Pinyon Flat, os June 21 9.00 4.20 4.05 1.12 1.87 .383
o'Carrizo Creek rf Aug. 23 9.95 4.45 4.37 1.12 1.36 .37
Se es o ‘ “ 26 10.05 4.388 4.37 1.10 1.45 .30
o'New River, Cal. Desert Nov. 26 10.00 4.70 4.75 1.25 1.52 .33
oe . 4 CO G62) 42 eee 45) -49
‘sh a i re gt “ 95 9.45 4.45 4.387 1.14 1.45 38
oo a % “ es “ 9.55 4.50 4.48 1.30 1.51 .37
ome . ? rs SS 9108) 4750) 4252) ted 1250) 37
o'Below Needles, Colo. River Feb. 21 8.00 4.37 4.12 1.15 1.45 .37
ood °s a ue _ (Se Sr 450 Aalbmlesp ae52 39
Sass. oe Us Hs ue “8.45 4.60 4.18 1.15 1.45 .28
o' Mecca Riverside Co. Cal. Mch. 30 9.38 4.55 4.45 1.12 1.28 .37
o'Riverside Mt. Colo. River “ 19 9.75 4.50 4.25 1.16 1.43 .32
of oe a ey He “910 «(9.80 4.55 4.37 1.138 1.38 .38
rou “ “6 “cc 6c ‘“c “ce 9.50 4.51 4.25 et 1.44 46
rou ‘c “ “ce ‘cc “cc 16 9.25 4.62 4.45 eS 1.45 09
re (a3 “c “ “ “ bc 9.15 4.50 4.25 1.12 1 ete 30
oBlythe, Colo. River Cal. “« 92 9.05 4.38 4.25 1.17 1.38 .38
o'Pecachos ‘“ a = April 10 9.75 4.55 4.51 1.15 1.33 .29
o'Mecea, Riverside Co. “ 5 9.62 4.49 4.27 1.13 1.37 .37

1 All measurements in inches.

Length. Wing. Tail.

9.25 4.39 4.25
8.50 4.38 4.20
9.00 4.53 4.12
9.50 4.62 4.63
9.45 4.25 4.25
9.02 4.30 4.87
9.25 4.55 4.25
8.30 4.52 4.13
8.20 4.51 4.01
449
9.00 4.38 4.23
9.37 4.50 4.20
10.00 4.38 4.25
10.30 4.64 4.52
9.80 4.34 4.20
8.25 4.27 4.20
8.75 4.37 4.00

68 Ficerns, Ultraminute Distinctions.
‘Sex. Locality. Date.
o'Salt Creek, Imp. Valley April 26
Coyote Well, Imperial Co. Mch. 27
Below Needles, Colo. River Feb. 22
o'Pilot Knob, San Diego, Co. Mch. 10
o'New River, Salton Lake April 15
o'Near Imperial May 11
rot “ec “ “ce “ce
2 Below Needles, Colo. River Feb. 21
2 ce ce “ iz3 “c “ce
Q ce “ce “ce iz “ce 6c
? Pilot Knob, San Diego, Co. Mch. 10
2 Riverside Mt. Colo. River eG
2 Mecca, Riverside Co. ee 0)
ce) “cc “ce ce ce 18
2 “ 6c iz ce 19
9 Riverside Mt. Colo. River ie te |
¢ Blythe, Colo. River i #23
San Jacinto Mt. June 12

QEast of Pecakos, Colo. River April 19

2 New River, Colo. Desert Nov. 25
9 “és cc “ec “ce iss 95
9 “ “ce iz “ ce 296
9° ce a9 e “ec “cc Bret

Average Male

Minimum.

Maximum.

Average Female.
Minimum.
Maximum.

8.30 4.28 4.05
9.78 4.39 4.20
9.95 4.30 4.38
8.95 4.45 4.15
9.20 4.60 4.25
9.55 4.58 4.38

9.3634.45 4.31
8.00 4.20 3.87
10.22 4.70 4.75

8.98 4.50 4.21
8.20 4.27 4.00

Tar-
sus.

1.13
1.20
1.10
1.09
1.13
1.14
1.15
1.13
1.15
1.13
1.15
1.13
112
1.15
1.14
1.15
1.07
1.12,
1.12
1.12
1.13
1.14
1.15

1.15
1.09
1.30

1.13
1.07

10.00 4.60 4.52 1.15

Measurements of Lophortyx gambeli from Colorado.

o'Cedaredge, Delta Co. Janene 4.42 3.90
rou cc ce “ a9 “cc 4.62 4.00
roe a4 (as “ek a9 “ee 4.50 3.75
J “ “ec “ec “cc “e 4.50 3.65
fot ce igs ce ce “ 4.55 4.08
o'Olathe, Montrose Co. Dec. 20 10.83 4.65 3.72
cee beg a a ae WED teas a0
Gadis sf a oe 11:29 4.50 3.64
Guns “ s of co A770" 4259 3254:
of ne ef t Be alile(a) “le7yey Bias
o'Grand Junction Feb. 26 11.00 4.55 4.20
eh es “ AS 2564256) 13295

1.15
1.20
1.15
1.13
1.15
etl
1.10
1.08
1.05
1.08
1.25
Lg

Mid.
toe.

1:26.
1.43 .
1.45 .
1.38 .
1.36 .
1.36 .
1.32 .
1.28 .
1.45. .
1.38 .
1.32 .
1.38 .
1.38 .
1.45.
1.40 .
1.38 .
1.33 .
1,287:
1.39 «
1.38 .
1.37 .
1.45.
1.45 .

1.40 .
1.26 .
1.50 .

1.38 .
1.28 .
1.45 .

1.48 .
1.50 .
1.40 .
Isto)
137 os
45"
1.40 .
1.35.
1.40 .
oil.
aoe
1.42 .

a | Fieems, Ultraminute Distinctions. 69
Tar- Mid.
Sex. Locality. Date. Length. Wing. Tail. sus. toe. Nail,
2 Olathe Delta Co. Sept. 24 4.55 3.70 1.06 1.37 .33
Oe gs: + if Dec. 20 10.29 4.23 3.09 1.05 1.30 .33
Og se i ee NOb2 Ape o:28 107 1.45) 35
ono iy - ‘“* 10.50 4.66 3.57 1.06 1.32 .35
9 Cedaredge, Jan. 31 Boi? St0 1.00 1.35) 35
Q “ as 4.37 3.65 1.05 1.27 .34
Q e i - 4.48 3.65 1.10 1.34 36
9 ss s i 4.55 3.80 1.12 1.30 35
@Grand Junction Feb. 26 11.50 4.50 4.10 1.14 1.36 32
0 ie re os “ 10:85-4.61 4403) 115° 1438: .38
On ats « “ SS EOOFALIOS S925) eZee 9N 32
Average Male. 11.26 4.354 3.8034 1.20 1.40 .364
Minimum. 10.83 4.40 3.54 1.05 1.31 .31
Maximum. 11.70. 4.70 4.20 1.25 1.50 .38
Average Female. 10.78 4.50 3.694 1.08 1.85 .342
Minimum. 10.29 4.23 3.09 1.00 1.27 .32
Maximum. 11.50 4.70 4.10 1.15 1.45 38
Comparative average of California and Colorado Specimens.
Males from California 4.45 4.31 1.15 1.40 .354
x “ Colorado 4.352 3.803 1.20 1.40 .363
Females from California 450) 4.21 MIBI 188 33%
S “Colorado 4.49 3.694 1.08 1.35 .344
Comparative differences in Males 095 .503 .05 .00 .01
o fe “ Females Ol 5 05.03, .014
Note. Since the length measurements of California specimens are

without value through being taken from dried skins, comparison is omitted.

In considering the causes of the changes that have taken place
in Gambel’s Quail since its introduction into Colorado, perhaps
the most important are food, climate and environment. The wide
range of the species in California imposes like conditions and hence
the differences in the birds there, as noted above. The question,
therefore arises, what constitutes a subspecies? A great number
of the recent subdivisions are based on far less evidence and reason
than is apparent in this example of introduced birds. If the ex-
tremists are justified in their activities are not the Colorado birds
entitled to subdivision? If not, why not?

Is it not time to return to sanity?

fee

70 TINKER, Ornithology of Clay and Palo Alto Counties, Ta. Jan.

NOTES ON THE ORNITHOLOGY OF CLAY AND PALO
ALTO COUNTIES, IOWA.

BY A. D. TINKER.!
Plates XI-XII.

TueE following paper is based upon material secured by the
University of Michigan-Walker Expedition to northwestern Iowa
in the summer of 1907. The field notes are those of Alexander G.
Ruthven, who has also supplied the general summary of the habitat

| ¥.
: @ Sibley |Spirit ay 4
| OSCEOWA |

; | DICKY NSO

/® Sheldon |
8.1 Gon) xt éPrimdobr
jo BRIE N}|
Orange City '

Hawarden

| |
Le Mars rs EROK BE | PocAHONTA
OUT H ./Cherokee | | BUENA VISTA j Pox ontas”
ce Storm Laks

Fig. 1. Map showing area covered by survey.

distribution and has assisted in the preparation of the paper. The
field work was done by Drs. Ruthven and Max M. Peet, and cov-

-ered the period between July 1 and September 1. Three papers ”

have appeared on the results of this work.

1 Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan.

2 Ruthven, Alexander G., The Faunal Affinities of the Prairie Region of Central
North America. Amer. Nat., XLII, pp. 388-393. Contributions to the Her-
petology of Iowa. Proc. Iowa Acad. Sci., 1910, pp. 198-209. Ruthven, Alexander
G., and Wood, Norman A., Notes on a Collection of Mammals from North-
western Iowa, zbid., 1912, pp. 203-205. :

nP

ie | TInKER, Ornithology of Clay and Palo Alo Counties., Ia.. 71
The investigations were confined to the townships of Sioux,
Riverton, Lake, Freeman and Logan in Clay County and Highland
and Lost Island in Palo Alto County. These townships are in the
adjacent parts of the two counties (Fig. 1). 334 skins, 12 nests
and 8 sets of eggs, representing 86 species were secured, to which
have been added by purchase seven specimens, representing five
species. Most of the stomachs were preserved for future study.

HABITATS.

A description of the region has been given by Ruthven,! and it
will be sufficient to quote the following general account of the
habitats. “Owing to the relief there is more diversity in the
biotic environments of the region investigated than is usual in the
prairie-plains region. The ridges and knobs, varying in height,
are separated by small areas of flat or gently rolling prairie, and
everywhere are lakes, ponds and sloughs of various sizes. The
immediate area studied was on the water-shed between the Mis-
souri and Mississippi river systems, the lakes examined being the
source of streams tributary to the different systems.”

Ruthven has classified the different habitats as follows:

UPLAND.

Upland Prairie. Uncultivated areas, covered by the original
vegetation of grasses and herbs, are still to be found on some of the
ridges. These areas are, however, becoming fewer in number
yearly, as more land is placed under cultivation. (Plate XI,
Pig. 1.)

Grain Fields. The greater part of the higher land has, within the
past thirty years, been placed under cultivation, and this has been
mostly at the expense of the upland prairie areas.

Groves. In many places groves of soft maple, cottonwood, wil-

1 Ruthven, Alexander G., Contributions to the Herpetology of Iowa, p. 200.

2 TINKER, Ornithology of Clay and Palo Alto Counties, Ia. Pas

low, and box-elder have been planted on the uplands. These are
so open, however, as to have no appreciable effect on the terrestrial
vertebrate fauna, with the exception of the birds, the local distribu-
tion of which they are profoundly modifying.

LOWLAND.

Lowland Prairie (Meadows). The low, generally poorly drained,
areas have in many instances been reserved for hay-land or pasture.
In some places the original vegetation has been supplanted by tame
grasses; in other places it remains undisturbed. The original
vegetation consists of a dense growth of tall grasses and herbaceous
forms. (Plate XI, Fig. 2.)

Swamps (Sloughs). The swamps are mostly devoid of trees and
filled with a rank growth of grasses and sedges. The vegetation
grows principally in clumps and on hummocks composed of roots
and decaying vegetation. They are mostly uninfluenced by man,
except as they are drained.

Shores of Lakes and Streams (Marginal Forests). This habitat
supports the only natural timber in the region, and, where undis-
turbed, there is always a comparatively dense growth along the
shores of the streams and larger lakes. The timber zones are,
however, much narrower, and the trees more scrubby, than in the
southern parts of the state. In most places at the present time
this timber has been largely removed. (Plate XII, Fig. 1.)

AQUATIC.

The aquatic life is found in the lakes, ponds, sloughs and streams.
The conditions in these habitats are very similar, as the lakes are
for the most part shallow and the streams slow-flowing. (Plate
XII, Fig. 2.)

THE AUK, VOL. XXXI. PLATE XI.

1. Upnanp Prarrie, Cray County, Iowa.
2. Low Meapow, Ciay County, Iowa.

ee ae

Vol, S221) Tinker, Ornithology of Clay and Palo Alto Counties, Ia. 73

LOCAL DISTRIBUTION OF BIRDS.

As was to be expected the birds may be divided rather sharply
into five groups — woodland, prairie, meadow, aquatic (including
waders), and marsh forms. There is some overlapping because
some of the prairie forms will nest in the groves, some of the marsh
forms feed on the prairie, and some of the woodland forms nest on
fence posts, telegraph poles, etc., on the prairie and may feed there,
but the five groups are nevertheless rather well defined. The more
common species and the major habitats which they frequent are
as follows:

Woodlands (Starred species only observed as migrants): Mourn-
ing Dove, Flicker, Kingbird, Phoebe, Robin, Bluebird, Bob-white,
Long-eared Owl, Screech Owl, Black-billed Cuckoo, Yellow-
billed Cuckoo (marginal forests only), Downy Woodpecker, Red-
headed Woodpecker, Least Flycatcher, Alder Flycatcher, Blue
Jay (marginal forests only), Orchard Oriole, Baltimore Oriole,
Bronzed Grackle, Goldfinch, Rose-breasted Grosbeak, Warbling
Vireo, Black and white Warbler*, Yellow Warbler, Wilson’s War-
bler,* Catbird, Brown Thrasher, Parkman’s Wren, Long-tailed
Chickadee, Bay-breasted Warbler*, Song Sparrow, Cowbird.

Prairies: Prairie Chicken, Upland Plover, Flicker, Nighthawk,
Arkansas Kingbird, Prairie Horned Lark, Dickcissel, Western
Grasshopper Sparrow, Migrant Shrike, Bluebird, Short-eared Owl,
Kingbird, Tree Swallow.

Meadows: Bobolink, Dickcissel, Marsh Hawk, Short-eared Owl,
American Bittern, Meadowlark.

Swamps: Black Tern, American Bittern, Least Bittern, King
Rail, Virginia Rail, Sora Rail, Yellow-headed Blackbird, Red-
winged Blackbird, Swamp Sparrow, Maryland Yellow-throat,
Prairie Marsh Wren, Short-billed Marsh Wren.

Aquatic Habitats and Beaches (Starred species only observed as
migrants): Semipalmated Plover*, Stilt Sandpiper*, Pectoral Sand-
piper*, Least Sandpiper*, Solitary Sandpiper*, Spotted Sandpiper,
Yellowlegs*, Greater Yellowlegs*, Killdeer, Pied-billed Grebe,
Blue-winged Teal, Shoveller, Great Blue Heron, Green Heron,
Florida Gallinule, Coot, Kingfisher.

74 TINKER, Ornithology of Clay and Palo Alto Counties, Ia. ES

It will be noted that no division into grove and natural woodland
forms is attempted in the above grouping, and an inspection of the
data given in the list of species will show that this is because no
differences in the faunas of the two habitats are apparent. The
groves (which have in every instance been planted) are profoundly
influencing the local distribution of the woodland forms. Formerly
the only trees in the region were about the lakes and streams, but
the narrow zones of original woodland are rapidly being cleared,
which would probably eliminate a number of species if it were not
for the fact that the groves and the trees that have been planted
along the roads serve as refuges. As it is, there is apparently a
congestion of the woodland species. In one grove about one
hundred yards square, grouped about farm buildings, and composed
of low box elders and willows and well cleared of underbrush, six-
teen species of birds were found nesting and a number of these were
represented by several pairs. It is evident that the low trees, lack
of underbrush, and the location of this grove must have constituted
unfavorable conditions for nesting birds, and to these was added
the presence of scores of English Sparrows which also nested in the
trees. A more careful study would probably show further that
many of the woodland species are forced to the prairie for food:
that some of them are also forced to breed on the prairie is appar-
ently shown by the nesting of the Flicker, Tree Swallow, Kingbird
and Bluebird on the fence posts.

List oF SpEctrEs.!

1. Podilymbus podiceps. Prep-pittep Grese.— Only a few birds
of this species were seen. An adult male was taken, July 29, in the rushes
of the east end of Elbow Lake, and on July 16 a nest with six eggs was found
in the same habitat.

2. Hydrochelidon nigra surinamensis. Buiack Tern.— The Black
Tern was found in numbers. It nested in the wet marshes that form the
outlet to Lost Island Lake, and roamed over all of the grassland habitats.
Immature birds just able to fly were taken on and after July 3.

1 As the field work covered a restricted area (Fig. 1) exact localities have often
been omitted in the annotations in the following list, the habitat data being
deemed sufficient. The dates of observations are also omitted, except in the case
of migrants and immature birds, nests and eggs. .

THE AUK, VOL. XXXI. PLATE XII.

, hae a
Nie

1. SHORE or TRUMBULL LAKE, Cuay County, Iowa.
2. East END oF EvBow Lake, Pato Auto County, Iowa.

| TINKER, Ornithology of Clay and Palo Alto Counties, Ia. 15

3. Querquedula discors. Buur-wincep Trau.— This was the most
common duck observed. Nests and eggs (11 in one nest) as well as young
birds in all stages of development were found in the outlets of Elbow and
Lost Island Lakes. Most of the young were well feathered and able to fly
on July 16.

4. Spatula clypeata. Snoverter.— A single specimen, an adult
female, secured in the outlet of Lost Island Lake, August 21, was the only
one of this species observed.

5. Botaurus lentiginosus. Birrern.— Very common about the
marshes of the region. The nests were found most frequently in the low
meadows bordering the marshes.

6. Ixobrychus exilis. Least Birrern.— The Least Bittern was quite
common at the east end of Elbow Lake, where a number of pairs nested
among the rushes growing in water from three to four feet deep. An adult
male and female with nest and six eggs (slightly incubated) were taken here
on July 16, and on July 30 six nestlings and another nest with five eggs
nearly ready to hatch were found in the same habitat.

7. Ardea herodias herodias. Great BLur Hreron.— A relatively
common species about the lakes and marshes of the region. On August
15, an adult female was taken at Virgin Lake, and on August 22 an adult
male was secured at Elbow Lake.

8. Butorides virescens virescens. Green Heron.— Occasionally
noted about the marshes but not as common as the preceding species.

_ An immature male with down-tipped feathers on the head was taken at

Elk Lake on August 19, and on August 9 an adult female was secured at
Trumbull Lake. The species was also observed in the outlet of Elbow

_ Lake.

9. Nycticorax nycticorax nevius. BnLack-cRowNED Nicut HErRon.
— On August 21 an immature male was taken by Ruthven in a clump of
willows along a road and about a half mile from the outlet of Elbow Lake.
This was the only individual of the species that was certainly identified.
The bird had become exhausted, and was evidently forced to alight outside
of its regular habitat.

10. Rallus elegans. Kina Ratu.— There is an adult male of this
species, taken near Ruthven, October 4, 1909, by Nels Hansen, in the mu-
seum collection.

11. Rallus virginianus. Vrirernra Rarw.— Undoubtedly this species
is rather common about the marshes of the region studied, although it was
only noted occasionally. Three specimens were taken: one, an immature
male well feathered, was secured in a slough on the south side of Elbow
Lake on August 3.

12. Porzana carolina. Sora. The only Sora seen was an adult
male taken at the outlet of Lost Island Lake, August 8.

13. Gallinula galeata. FiLorma GaLLiInuLe.— Very common about
the marshes of the region explored. Several nests with eggs and numbers
of immature birds were noted in the rushes and sedges. On August 2,

76 TINEER, Ornithology of Clay and Palo Alto Counties, Ta. les

an adult male and female with a nest and seven eggs were found at the east
end of Elbow Lake, and well feathered birds were secured at the outlet.
of Elbow Lake, August 19 and 21, in a pond near Elbow Lake, on August
21, and at the outlet of Lost Island Lake, on August 30.

14. Fulica americana. Coot.— A common breeding species about
all of the lakes and marshes in the region. Immature birds were taken
at the east end of Elbow Lake on July 16 and 29, and at the outlet of
Lost Island Lake on August 6, 12 and 14. Some of the young taken on
July 16 and August 14 were still in the down.

15. Micropalama himantopus. Stitt Sanppiper— Two adult
males of this sandpiper were taken on a pond near Virgin Lake, August 15,
and on August 27 an adult female was secured at a pond in Clay County.
These were the only birds seen.

16. Pisobia maculata. PrcroraL SANppIpER.— The only Pectoral
Sandpipers seen were in small flocks from which the following specimens.
were taken; an adult male and female in a swampy meadow near the outlet
of Lost Island Lake, August 8, an adult female near Virgin Lake, August 15,
and an adult male near a pond in Clay County, August 11.

17. Pisobia minutilla. Least SanpprpER.— Rather common about
the ponds after August 11. Only adult males were secured, five at a
pond in Clay County, August 11, 19 and 21, and one near Virgin Lake,
August 15.

18. Totanus melanoleucus. GrraTER YELLOW-LEGS.— An adult
female of this species was taken near a pond in Clay County, August 15.
This was the only bird seen.

19. Totanus flavipes. YrLLow-Lecs.— The only Yellow-legs ob-
served were in several small flocks from which an adult male was
taken in a marsh, August 12, an adult female at a small pond near Virgin
Lake, on August 15, and an adult male at a pond in Clay County, August
22.

20. Helodromas solitarius solitarius. Soiirary Sanppiper— A
common species during the fall migrations. Only adults were seen, and the
first bird was observed on July 31. After this date and throughout August
they were found about the prairie ponds, on the mud flats in the sloughs,
and on the lakes.

21. Bartramia longicauda. Upnianp PLover.— Not uncommon on
the higher grassland areas. Immature birds (males) were found in a pas-
ture south of Elbow Lake and on grass-covered hills in eastern Clay County
on August 3 and 19. These birds were well feathered.

22. Actitis macularia. Srorrep Sanpprper— Common in the
breeding season about the lakes with sandy shores. On August 22 they
were observed about the ponds on the prairie.

23. Oxyechus vociferus. KitupEER.— Very common throughout
the region studied; preferring the vicinity of water but often found at some
distance from it. Immature specimens were secured in a slough south of
Elbow Lake, August 2, in a pasture in eastern Clay County, August 8,

yee at) TINKER, Ornithology of Clay and Palo Alto Counties, Ia. ad

and at a pond in Clay County, August 12 and 29. These birds are well
feathered but have down-tipped tail feathers.

24. ASgialitis semipalmata. Sremreatmatep PLoveR.— The only
record of this species secured was an adult male taken at a pond in Clay
County, September 1.

25. Colinus virginianus virginianus. Bos-wuHitr.— This bird
is not uncommon throughout the region examined. It was most frequently
observed about the wooded areas.

26. Tympanuchus americanus americanus. Pratriz CoickKEN.—
Formerly this species was very common in Clay and Palo Alto Counties,
according to the observations of Ruthven, but in recent years it has been
nearly exterminated. It was not found in the summer of 1907, but on
November 11, 1911, Nels Hansen took an adult female, near Ruthven,
that is now in the museum.

27. Zenaidura macroura carolinensis. Mournina Dovre.— Very
common throughout the region. The nests are placed in the wooded areas
and in the willows along the roads. Two nestlings were taken in a willow
tree on July 2 (hatched July 1). Another was taken in a grove, July 12,
and a nest with two eggs was found, August 15, in the woods at Virgin
Lake.

28. Circus hudsonius. Marsa Hawx.— Common throughout the
region, frequenting and nesting in the low meadows. An immature male
was taken near the outlet of Elbow Lake, August 28.

29. Halizetus leucocephalus leucocephalus. Bap Eacre.— The
species was not found in the summer of 1907, but an immature female
taken in Palo Alto County, October, 1907, by Nels Hansen, is in the mu-
seum.

30. Asio wilsonianus. LonG-ErARED Owni.— An adult female was
found in a grove near Lost Island Lake, July 22.

31. Asio fammeus. SnHorT-EARED Owx.— An adult female Short-
eared Owl was taken on upland prairie in eastern Clay County, August 5.

32. Otus asio asio. ScreecH Ow..— This species was not found in
1907. An adult male, taken February 1, 1909, and an adult female, se-
cured on February 2, 1909, in Palo Alto County, by Nels Hansen, are in the
museum.

33. Nyctea nyctea. Snowy Ow1.— Occasionally seen in the winter
(Ruthven).

34. Coccyzus americanus americanus. YELLOW-BILLED Cuckoo.
— Not uncommon in the wooded areas. One specimen, an adult female,
was taken in a grove of willows near Elbow Lake, July 17, another at Elk
Lake, August 21, and a third in a grove on high ground, August 28.

35. Coccyzus erythrophthalmus. Buack-sBitteEp CucKoo.— Oc-
casionally noted in the groves and timber zones along the streams and
lakes. An adult male and female were found in a grove near Lost Island
Lake, July 22, and others were seen in a grove on high ground at different
times during July and August.

78 TINKER, Ornithology of Clay and Palo Alto Counties, Ia. ES

36. Ceryle alcyon aleyon. Britrep KiInerisHeR.— Common about
the lakes.

37. Dryobates pubescens medianus. Downy Wooprrecker.—
Several were seen in the woods about the lakes. An adult male was taken
at Lost Island Lake, July 26.

388. Melanerpes erythrocephalus. Rrp-HEaADED WoopPrEcKER.—
An adult male taken in a grove in Palo Alto County, July 17, and an adult
female found in the woods at Lost Island Lake, July 18, were the only birds
of this species seen.

39. Colaptes auratus luteus. NorrHern FLickrErR.— Very common
both on the prairie and in the groves and timber zones along the lakes and
streams. Nests were found in the groves and in hollow fence posts on the
prairie.

40. Chordeiles virginianus virginianus. NicuHrHawK.— Common
throughout the region, frequenting the higher grassland areas and grain
fields. No nests or immature birds were found.

41. Chetura pelagica. Cuimney Swirr.— Noted occasionally in
the evening, flying about near the town of Ruthven.

42. Archilochus colubris. Rusy-trHroatep HumMMINGBIRD.— Only
observed a few times. An adult female was taken at Lost Island Lake,
August 27.

43. Tyrannus tyrannus. Kincpirp.— A common breeding species,
nesting in the groves and timber zones along the lakes and on fence posts
on the prairie. On July 2 a nest fifteen feet from the ground in a grove
contained no eggs. On July 23 a nest with nestlings was found in the top
of a fence post five feet high in a meadow, and on July 24 a nest with three
nestlings was found four feet from the ground in willows in a grove.

44. Tyrannus verticalis. ArKANsAS KinGBIRD.— Noted in most of
the prairie districts throughout the region. Adults and immature birds of
both sexes were secured, the latter on August 7, 15, 20, and 26. A nest was
found twenty-five feet from the ground in a poplar tree along a road,
August 7, and contained three young birds well feathered but just able
to fly.

45. Myiochanes virens. Woop PrEwrr.— Occasionally observed in
the groves and timber belts along the streams and lakes. A well feathered
immature bird and a nest were observed in a grove, August 3.

46. Empidonax trailli alnorum. ALpER FiycatcHErR.— A very
common species about the streams and lakes, and found in lesser numbers
in upland groves. Adults were observed throughout July and August, and
an immature female (well feathered) was taken on August 13.

47. Empidonax minimus. Least FrycatcHer.— Common breeder
in all of the groves and in the woods about the lakes and streams; also
frequents the willows along the roads. An immature female (well feath-
ered) was taken in a grove near Lost Island Lake, August 7.

48. Otocoris alpestris praticola. Prairie Hornep LarxK.— Com-
mon on the higher grassland and in the cultivated fields throughout the
region. No immature birds were taken.

emma TinkER, Ornithology of Clay and Palo Alto Counties, Ia. 79

49. Cyanocitta cristata cristata. Buur Jay— One specimen, an
adult female, was taken at Lost Island Lake, July 26. No others were
noted.

50. Corvus brachyrhynchos brachyrhynchos. Crow.— Observed
in small flocks in July and August, on the prairie, in groves, and in the wood-
land along the lakes and streams. The nests were only noted along the
Ocheyedan River at Spencer and at Gilletts Grove on the Little Sioux River.

51. Dolichonyx oryzivorus. Boxsotinx.— The Bobolink was only
found in small numbers. The breeding pairs were only noted in low
meadows, but on August 26 a small flock in winter plumage was seen on
upland prairie.

52. Molothrus ater ater. Cowsirp.— The Cowbird was found
everywhere, but the only immature birds were taken in the groves and in
the woods along the streams, July 18 (well feathered) August 22 (nestlings).

53. Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus. Yr.LLOW-HEADED Buack-
BIRD.— One of the most abundant species in the region. A large series of
specimens, representing every plumage, of this beautiful blackbird were
secured. The nests were found only in colonies, and were placed in the
rushes and sedges in the sloughs. A large colony at the east end of Elbow
Lake consisted of hundreds of breeding pairs. Nestlings were found in
this colony of July 16, but most of the young birds were well feathered and
leaving the nests at this time.

54. Agelaius pheeniceus pheeniceus. Rep-wincED BLACKBIRD.—
Like the preceding species the Red-winged Blackbird is very common, but
the birds do not seem to range so far from the marshes, where they nest,
and the nests are more widely distributed. Nestlings were found on July
3 and 5, but the young birds were leaving the nest at this time. In two
nests the young birds were three and five in number.

55. Sturnella neglecta. WrsteRN MrapowLarK.— A common
species in all of the prairie areas, meadows and cultivated fields. Well
feathered immature birds were taken on July 19 and August 1 and 27.

56. Icterus spurius. OrcHArD OrtoLte.— The Orchard Oriole was
only found in the willows that have been planted along the roads, but it
undoubtedly occurs in the other wooded habitats. Four individuals were
seen, one an immature male (well feathered) taken on August 3.

57. Icterus galbula. BautimorE OrroLte.— Only observed in two
upland groves and in low woods at Trumbull Lake. Two immature birds
in downy plumage were taken on August 1, and another well feathered was
noted on August 9.

58. Quiscalus quiscula eneus. Bronzep GracKkLe.— Noted in all
of the wooded habitats, but most frequently in the upland groves. Imma-
ture birds were taken in a grove in Clay County, July 6 (well feathered),
7 (one in the down and one well feathered), and 11 (fully feathered).

59. Astragalinus tristis tristis. Goiprincu.— A common species,
nesting in the groves but feeding to a considerable extent in the open
habitats. A nest with four eggs was found on August 13.

SO TINKER, Ornithology of Clay and Palo Alto Counties, Ia. [ue

60: Plectrophenax nivalis nivalis. Snow Buntinc.— Two adult
males and one adult female taken on February 24, 1909, near Ruthven, by
Nels Hansen, are in the museum collection.

61. Ammodramus savannarum bimaculatus. WersTERN GRass-
HOPPER SPARROW.— Only found on the upland prairie areas but very com-
mon in that habitat. Of the series secured, but one, a fully feathered male
taken on August 19, is immature.

62. Passerherbulus henslowi occidentalis. Wrstern Henstow’s
Sparrow.— The only individual of the species noted was taken by Ruthven
in a grassy swale on rather high ground in Clay County, August 29.

63. Melospiza melodia melodia. Sona Sparrow.— Apparently
far from common. The only specimens seen were two adult males in a
marsh near Lost Island Lake, July 22, an adult male at the same place,
August 7, another on the shore of Trumbull Lake, August 13, and a fully
feathered immature female at Elk Lake, August 19.

64. Melospiza georgiana. Swamp Sparrow.— Common through-
out July and August about the sloughs, but not observed elsewhere. The
only immature bird in the collection is a female taken on August 26.

65. Passer domesticus. ENncGiisH SPARRow.— Common everywhere,
nesting both in buildings and in trees in the groves.

66. Zamelodia ludoviciana. Rosr-BREASTED GROSBEAK.— Only
found in two upland groves and in the woods about Lost Island Lake.
Three of the four birds seen were in the last named habitat, and one, found
July 26, is a nestling.

67. Spiza americana. Dickxcissmu.— Found in the grassland habi-
tats, both on the hills and in the meadows; locally rather common. All
of the specimens secured are adult.

68. Petrochelidon lunifrons lunifrons. Cuiirr SwaLtow.— Com-
mon throughout the region, nesting under the eaves of barns and out-
buildings.

69. Hirundo erythrogastra. Barn SwaLttow.— A common species,
nesting on the rafters in barns. A nest with four partly feathered nestlings
was found on July 11.

70. Iridoprocne bicolor. Trem Swattow.— Noted only about the
grassland areas. A nest was found in a hole in the top of a fence post,
July 3, and a well feathered immature male was taken on July 18.

71. Riparia riparia. Bank Swattow.— A colony was found nesting
in a gravel bank near Lost Island Lake. In the latter part of August the
birds were seen in numbers with other swallows about the swamps.

72. Lanius ludovicianus migrans. Micrant SHrike.— Frequently
observed about the fields and pastures. Immature birds were taken on
July 19 and 22.

73. Vireosylva gilva gilva. Warpsuine Vireo.— An adult female of
this species was found in the woods about Lost Island Lake, July 25, and a
nestling was taken in the same locality on July 26. These were the only
birds seen.

foe | TInEER, Ornithology of Clay and Palo Alto Counties, Ia. 81

74. Mniotilta varia. Buack anp WHITE WaARBLER.— The only bird
of this species noted, an adult male, was taken in a grove in Clay County,
August 30.

75. Dendroica estiva estiva. YrELtLow WarBLer.— Not uncom-
mon, particularly about the groves and in the willows along the roads. An
immature male in the collection was taken on July 24 and a nestling on
July 18.

76. Dendroica castanea. Bay-BREASTED WARBLER.— A single bird
of this species, an adult male, was taken by Ruthven in a grove in Clay
County, July 4.

77. Geothlypis trichas trichas. MaryLtanp YELLOW-THROAT.—
Common about all of the marshes. An immature bird in the down was
taken on July 23 and another, well feathered, on August 1. One bird was
seen in an orchard about a mile from a marsh.

78. Wilsonia pusilla pusilla. Wuitson’s WAarBLER.— The only birds
of this species observed were an immature male and two immature females
(all fully feathered) in a grove in Clay County, August 28 and 30.

79. Dumetellacarolinensis. Catstrp.— The Catbird was seen a few
times in the woods about the lakes.

80. Toxostoma rufum. Brown THRAsHER.— Only a few Thrashers
were observed, and these were in the woods about the lakes. Two imma-
ture birds just ready to leave the nest were found at Elbow Lake, July 8.

81. Troglodytes aédon parkmani. WesterN Hovusre WrEN.—
Common in the groves and in the woods along the lakes and streams.
Three birds in the fine series obtained are immature; they are a partly -
feathered male taken on July 17 and a nearly fully feathered male and
female taken on July 24, all in groves.

82. Cistothorus stellaris. Snort-sirtep Marsh Wren.— This
wren was occasionally observed about the marshes but was found in num-
bers only in a small slough south of Elbow Lake. Only adults were noted.

83. Telmatodytes palustris iliacus. Pratrm Marsh Wren.— A
very common species about all of the marshes in the region. Many nests
were observed where the rushes and sedges were growing in the water. A
nest with five unincubated eggs was found on July 30, and well feathered
immature birds were taken on August 3.

84. Penthestes atricapillus septentrionalis. Lona-rarLep CHICK-
aprr.— An adult female secured by Ruthven in willows along a road,
July 14, was the only one of this species observed.

85. Planesticus migratorius migratorius. Rozsinx— The Robin
was observed in some numbers about the wooded habitats.

86. Sialia sialis sialis. Buursrrp— The Bluebird was found both
in the wooded and grassland habitats, but was most common in the latter,
where it nests in fence posts. Three well feathered nestlings were taken in
a pasture on August 6.

(pan

82 Honrwi1u, Birds of Cass and Crow Wing Counties, Minn. |Jan.

ADDITIONS TO “NOTES ON SOME SUMMER AND FALL
BIRDS OF THE CROOKED LAKE REGION, CASS
AND CROW WING COUNTIES, MINN.”

BY ALBERT W. HONYWILL, JR.

UNDER the above title I gave a list which appeared in ‘The Auk’
for April, 1911, pp. 229 to 237. As the result of two more sum-
mers spent in the region mentioned I desire to add the following
notes and list of eleven additional species.

The time covered was from July 29 to September 15, 1911, and
from July 20 to September 6, 1912. During this time I made two
trips of two days each, on August 18 and 19, 1911, and again on the
24th and 25th of the same month, to a part of the region which
I had visited on only one previous occasion. I made three further
trips to this region on July 29 and August 22 and 24, 1912. The
observations made on these trips and likewise in the region pre-
viously described led me to add the following notes. Two years
time has brought about several noticeable changes and no doubt
the bird life of this region will undergo still further change as the
country is opened up to farming. The advance in civilization is
already making itself felt upon the bird life of this particular region
and it is believed for this reason that these notes will prove of
interest a few years hence.

The region above mentioned is located about two miles north-
east from the head of Crooked Lake and contains two small shallow
lakes and numerous sloughs. The first lake encountered on a walk
from Crooked is known as Stake Lake and is the larger of the two
mentioned. The name is derived from the fact that the course
of an old lumber road, used during the winter season several years
previous, was marked across the lake by several stakes, two of
which still remain. This lake is perhaps a half mile in extent and
is surrounded by a number of acres of meadow land which extend
back from the water from a dozen to two or three hundred feet.
During some years this is largely marsh land but the last two
years were unusually dry. A walk around the lake revealed a
Loon’s nest only a few inches above the water and on a side of

eg | Honywitu, Birds of Cass and Crow Wing Counties, Minn. 83

the lake where the water was quite shallow. Pieces of egg shell
remained in the nest. It was interesting to note that there was
nothing in the vicinity of the nest which offered any conceal-
ment such as bushes or grass. A pair of old birds and two
young occupied the lake and were undoubtedly the owners of the
nest. There are practically no rocks along the shore so that it
was probably for this reason that the Mallards would come out
into the grass or even go up into the brush to sun themselves.
I flushed a number from the edge of the brush which arose with
quacks of alarm as I walked along. One bird was evidently
moulting and was hardly able to make its escape. During 1912
the water was much lower both at Stake Lake and Ox Meadow.
The lower water exposed rocks near the center of Stake Lake which
were used by the Mallards in sunning themselves during the middle
of the day.

The second lake, if it can be designated by such a name, is called
Ox Meadow Lake. It is situated in the midst of a wild meadow
and marsh land called by the natives Ox Meadow from the fact
that several hundred head of oxen were formerly quartered there
during the summer. These oxen were used in the winter for haul-
ing logs but during the summer were allowed to run wild and feed
on the luxuriant grass around Ox Meadow and Stake Lake.

Ox Meadow was teeming with bird life. As I walked out into
sight of the meadow on my first trip I flushed a magnificent flock
of Prairie Chickens. They arose from all sides, thirty-five in
number, and after a short flight sailed off on stiffened wings until
one by one they dropped into the tangled mass of hazel brush,
briars and wild sun flowers a short distance from the meadow. At
the waters edge stood a Bittern while ducks and grebes swam off
at my approach but did not take flight.

On one occasion I spent over an hour lying in the tall grass near
the waters edge watching the scene spread out before me. Pied-
billed Grebes were numerous and would bob up and disappear
among the lilies in a most interesting way. Further out I observed
several families of Wood Ducks leisurely swimming along in single
file. There were probably sixty to seventy birds in all while Mal-
lards were even more numerous although they kept well towards
the center of the lake. Occasionally a small band of Yellow-legs

on

84 Honywit11, Birds of Cass and Crow Wing Counties, Minn. Tank

would dart across the water, their white under parts flashing as
they wheeled and turned. Nearer at hand two young Hooded
Mergansers were feeding while overhead an occasional Swallow
circled to and fro. Asa finishing touch to this scene of wild beauty,
teeming with bird life and activity, two deer appeared on the oppo-
site shore. They stood with heads erect for several moments, in-
tently listening, and then apparently satisfied that all was safe
they commenced to slowly feed along the shore until something
startled them and they dashed from sight.

Among the apparent changes which have taken place during the
past two years should be mentioned a decrease in the number of
Loons observed. This may possibly be due to the water level in
the various lakes, particularly the smaller lakes and ponds, which
in some cases are nearly dry. This undoubtedly has had some
effect on the breeding of this bird but perhaps only locally. The
Black Tern seems to be increasing largely in numbers each year
while just the reverse is true in the case of the Great Blue Heron.
This bird, formerly quite common, has decreased in numbers to
such an extent that it was observed but once during the season of
1912. The Mallard is quite common for a region containing no
wild rice. On August 22 a flock of over 250 birds was observed
at Stake Lake. The Ruffed Grouse appears to be holding its own
in numbers if indeed it is not increasing slightly while the Prairie
Chicken is spreading its range rapidly with the increase of culti-
vated ground. The hawks are difficult of identification and there
are undoubtedly others than those included in my first list which
frequent this region. The Baltimore Oriole, which was with some
uncertainty included in the previous list, has since been observed
on several occasions in the vicinity of the camp. Among the
Warblers there are undoubtedly several species which should be
included in the list but their identification is uncertain. The fall
migrants slip by quietly and in garbs confusingly similar which
makes the work of adding to a local list doubly hard to a person
denied the pleasure of witnessing the spring migration in the same
region.

In the following list are included those species not mentioned
in the previous list.

1. XXX 4
~ 1914 | Honyrwitu, Birds of Cass and Crow Wing Counties, Minn. 85

87. Larus argentatus. Hrrrine Guiu.— Two Herring Gulls were
seen on Crooked Lake September 12, 1911. They were feeding upon dead
fish and we were able to approach quite close to them in a launch before
fear overcame their desire for food and caused them to fly a short distance
away. At our departure they immediately returned to the fish and re-
sumed feeding.

88. Larus franklini. FRANKLIN’s GuiL.— This bird was seen on
September 9 and 11, 1911, flying over Crooked Lake. On the latter date
it flew within about 25 feet of my boat which gave me an excellent oppor-
tunity to observe it.

89. Tympanuchus americanus americanus. Pratrin CHickEN.—
A flock of about 35 birds was seen near Ox Meadow on August 18 and 19.
A smaller flock, probably some of the same birds, was flushed from the
lumber road between Ox Meadow and Stake Lakes on August 24, 1911.
Again in 1912 the birds were found plentifully at the same place. The
Prairie Chicken appears to be increasing in this vicinity quite rapidly.
Several birds were flushed from the open brush land a half mile north of the
camp and also from the road leading from the head of Crooked Lake to
Stake Lake. Two years ago about 40 acres of land were cleared and planted
about a half mile southwest of the camp. In 1912 about a half acre was
planted to buckwheat for the express purpose of coaxing in the Prairie
Chickens. About 30 acres were also planted to wheat and oats. This
abundant feed appeared to bring about the desired result as a small covey
of Chickens was several times observed either in the fields or in the brush
adjoining. As no shooting is allowed in this vicinity we hope to see a
notable increase in the flock next year.

90. Pedicecetes phasianellus phasianellus. SHarp-TAILED GROUSE.
— On August 19, 1911, an adult bird was flushed from the brush on an
arm of higher ground between Ox Meadow and a swale to the northeast.

91. Totanus flavipes. Lesser YELLOW-LEGS.— Seen in small num-
bers on both Ox Meadow and Stake Lakes on August 18, 19, 24 and 25,
1911. Early in the morning of the 24th, as we sat by the fire in the front
of the tent, a flock of three Yellow-legs and five Killdeer circled and alighted
at the water’s edge. Although we were not 20 feet away and made no
attempt to be quiet or motionless, they appeared to be almost fearless and
fed undisturbed. A few Yellow-legs were also observed in 1912 at the same
place.

92. Myiarchus crinitus. Crrestep FrycatcHer.— It was not un-
common to hear the characteristic call of this flycatcher from the depth of
a small grove near the camp. The loud and long drawn ‘ wheep ”’ call
note was often heard in August although at this time the Crested Fly-
catcher is generally supposed to remain quiet.

93. Iridoprocne bicolor. Tree Swattow.— On August 24 and 25,
1911, single Tree Swallows or flocks of four or five were seen over both
Stake and Ox Meadow lakes. A few Cliff Swallows were seen at the same
time and also on August 19 but at no time was either species common.

86 Honywi11, Birds of Cass and Crow Wing Counties, Minn. (ae

‘Tree Swallows were seen flying over Crooked Lake on September 5, 1911.
In 1912 Tree Swallows were again observed upon several occasions, but
never more than a few individuals were seen at one time.

94. Riparia riparia. Bank Swattow.— Although I knew that these
birds occurred in this region because of the numerous nesting holes I had
seen in several sand banks, it was not until the summer of 1912 that I
actually saw the bird. Two pair nested in a small bank at the camp which
had been formed by digging out sand for building purposes. The actual
nesting bank was not over four feet high or eight feet long and it was in-
teresting to note that the birds had started 22 different holes before they had
succeeded in completing two that were satisfactory for nesting purposes.
Some of these holes were only a few inches deep, others nearly a foot. In
each case the birds had been discouraged because a large stone or a root
obstructed further progress.

95. Compsothlypis americana usnez. NortTHERN PARULA WAR-
BLER.— I was shown the skin of an adult male that was found dead about
the last of June, 1911.

96. Dendroica coronata. Myrriun Warsier.— Observed on August
18 and 26, 1911. In both cases only one bird was seen and that at a short
distance from the camp.

97. Certhia familiaris americana. Brown Crerper.— This bird
was inadvertently omitted from the original list. It was seen on. August
28, 1908, and again on August 3 and 9, 1911.

|
) |

SOME BINARY GENERIC NAMES.
BY GREGORY M. MATHEWS, F. R. 8. E.

In the Nov. Zool., Vol. XVII, 1910, pp. 492-503, I wrote: “On
some necessary alterations in the nomenclature of birds,” and there
drew attention to the illegality of the “ Brissonian genera” accord-
ing to my interpretation of the International Code.

The second part, published six months later (Vol. XVIII, pp. 1-22,
1911), commented on the 20th Opinion rendered by the Inter-
national Commission of Zoological Nomenclature which, dealing
with the Gronovian genera, ruled that these were admissible though
Gronow was not a binomialist. This ruling was based on the
interpretation of the word “binary”: the Commission concluded

pea Martuews, Some Binary Generic Names. 87
that this was a word with a meaning not previously utilised to my
knowledge, the actual wording being: “It is clear that Gronow’s
nomenclature is binary — that is, he names two units or things,
genera and species.” I clearly showed that this was quite a novel
acceptance of the word “binary” and concluded “I therefore sub-
mit that the meaning given to the word ‘binary’ must be governed
by the context, and that in view of Article 26 it can have none other
than that used by me, i. e., absolutely equivalent to binomial.”

Without any consideration of my arguments, however, Opinion
No. 37 decided that the Brissonian genera were available wnder the
Code. I made my last protest in this matter in the Nov. Zool.,
Vol. XVIII, pp. 452-5, 1912. At the Monaco Congress in March,
1913, the Opinions as a whole were approved by the Congress and
consequently now rank equally with the Coded Laws. I therefore
now utilise the Brissonian Genera in accordance with my oft-ex-
pressed desire for the attainment of uniformity, notwithstanding
my personal disapproval of the action of the International Com-
mission in concluding that the word binary was intended to admit
the genera of non-binomial writers.

It seems impossible to think that the Commission could not have
seen that the consequence would be the further admission of gen-
eric names commonly neglected. As far as I was able to judge the
whole basis of our present nomenclatural system was binomiality
and to undermine this system was a grievous fault.

In my nomenclatorial researches I examined as many books as
possible and I noted some which though not binomial were cer-
tainly binary. These I ignored but it is no longer possible to do
so. In this paper I will show the insecurity of some of our most
common generic names through the admission of “binary” authors.

‘I would here note an interesting confirmation of my meaning of the

word binary as opposed to that of the International Commission.
In the Essais de Zoologie Générale, published as long ago as 1841,
Is. Geoffroy Saint Hilaire discussing the Linnean system of no-
menclature, wrote p. 112 “La nomenclature binaire, appliquée a la
désignation de tous les animaux et de toutes les plantes, est, de
tous les progrés accomplis par Linné, celui dont l’importance a été
le mieux comprise, et celui aussi dont l’invention lui a été le plus
exclusivement attribuée. Ces deux expressions, Nomenclature bi-

Auk

88 Martuews, Some Binary Generic Names. Vaal

naire et Nomenclature linnéenne, sont méme devenues aujourd’hui
des synonymes si parfaits qu’on les prend indifféremment l’une pour
Vautre.”

Anyone conversant with the literature surrounding the produc-
tion of the present International Code must concede that my pro-
tests were well-founded. C. Davies Sherborn, when compiling
his Index Animalium, the indispensable aid to the systematist,
gave a Bibliography of all the books examined, carefully noting all
those he rejected as non-binomial. Included in this List must be
many that will call for acceptance as being binary and I herewith
put on record one such that will interest American Ornithologists.

In 1791 a book was published at Philadelphia dealing with
Travels in Carolina of W. Bartram. Numerous notes on the bird-
life occur and a long list of birds occurring in Carolina and Florida
is given. All the names have been rejected on account of the non-
binomiality of the author. I do not intend to go into any detail
regarding this work as Americans must be much more familiar
with it than I am and I should probably make many mistakes.
New generic names occur which would come under the category
of binary though the author was not binomial. All I have noted in
this edition, however, seem to come under the class “ nomina nuda.”

In 1793 however a German translation was published in Berlin:
this was edited by E. A. W. Zimmermann, who made explanatory
notes. There is little doubt that the editor was a binomialist, but
that does not much concern us.

The fact remains that in many cases the Bartramian names are
accompanied by Zimmermann’s identification and some quaint
complications occur.

On p. 151 a footnote by Z. identifies a bird as Linaria ciris.

On pp. 276-301 notes and the Bartramian list of birds occur.

Regulus atrofuscus minor appears in the text as a Bartramian
name, followed however on p. 277 by “den Blauvogel (Motacilla
sialis. Rubecula americana.)”’

On p. 284 appears:

“ Merula marilandica. 'The summer red bird. Die Marylin-
dische Amsel. (Seligm. Cat. III. T. 12.)” and

Lucar (dies Wort ist mir unbekannt, vielleicht ein Druckfehler)
lividus. The cat bird or chicken bird. (Muscicapa carolinensis
Linn. Der Fliegensinger aus Karolina.)”’

Vol. a |

1914 Martuews, Some Binary Generic Names. 89

On p. 286 is written:

“Tanaria cirts. 'The painted finch or nonpareil. Der gemahlte
Fink (Emberiza ciris L. Seligm. Cat 7).

Tinaria cyanea L. The blue linnet. Der blaue Hanfling.
(Seligm. Cat. II. Tab. 90.)”

“Calandra pratensis. The May bird. (Kaum darf ich diesen
Vogel fiir die Calandra halten, da die Lerchen schon oben vorge-
kommen sind; doch ist freilich die Calandra ein Nordamerikan-
ischer Vogel).”

We have on p. 287:

“ Motacilla sialis Linn. Thebluebird. Der Blauvogel. (Seligm.
Cat. Rubecula americana caerulea. II. T. 94.)

Motacilla domestica (regulus rufus.) The house wren. Der
Zaunkonig. (Motacilla regulus Linn.)

Motacilla palustris (regulus minor). The marsh wren. Der
Sumpfzaunkénig.

Motacilla Caroliniana (regulus magnus). The great wren of
Carolina. Der grosse Zaunkénig. (Der Leib dunkelbraun, Brust
und Kehle falb. Regulus major, subtus ex rufescente flavus Gmel.
Linn. Der grossere Zaunkénig von Louisiana. Buffon.)

Regulus griseus. The little bluish wren. Der kleine bliuliche
Zaunkénig.

Regulus cristatus. The golden crown wren. Der Zaunkénig mit
goldener Kappe. (T'roglodytes Linn.)

Regulus cristatus alter. The golden crown wren. Der Zaunkénig
mit rother Haube. (The ruby crowned wren Edwards. Seligm.
Cat. III. T. 90. Motacilla calendula Linn.)

Regulus peregrinus, gutture flavo. The olive-coloured yellow-
throated wren. Der Zaunkénig mit gelber Kehle. (Vielleicht
der Figuier de la Caroline Buffon).

Ruticilla americana. The redstart. Der Amerikanische Roth-
schwanz. (Mot. phinicurus?)

Luscinia seu philomela americana. The yellow-hooded titmouse.
Die Amerikanische Nachtigall. Catesby.”

No more new generic names occur until p. 291:

Morinella americana. The turnstone or dotrel. Der Morinell
oder Strandreiher (Tringa morinella Linn. Seligm. Catesby
ive a: 36.)

90 Matuews, Some Binary Generic Names. _ pes

On p. 293 we have

“Petrella pintada. The pintado bird. Der weiss und schwarz
gefleckte Petrel (oder Sturmvogel). (Seligm. Cat. IV. T. 77.
Procellaria capensis Linn. Pintado des Dampier.)”

A consideration of the preceding extracts suggests the discus-
sion of the generic names, Linaria, Regulus, Rubecula, Merula,
Lucar, Calandra, Ruticilla, Luscinia seu Philomela, Morinella and
Petrella.

Before proceeding further reference to Sherborn’s Index Anima-
lium given prior introductions of some of these names, as,

Linaria, G. Edwards in M. Catesby, Carol. I 1771, 45.

Rubicula vel Rubecula. id ib 47.

Merula Moehring Geslach Vogel (Nozem & Vosm ed.) 1758,
8 & 27.

Luscinia id ib 2 Canis

The other names are given, when at all, as of a later introduction,
ase

Regulus Bartram in Barton 1799 & Lucar Barton 1799.

The quotations ex Moehring (Nozem. & Vosm. ed.) are now ruled
out so that probably the names there noted may still appear earlier
than the present instance. There can however be little doubt that
these binary generic names will replace more familiar binomially
introduced ones, commonly in use.

Thus Linaria in the present case is earlier and equivalent to Pas-
serina Vieillot 1816 as now used in the A. O. U. Check-List 3rd Ed.
p. 285, 1910. The introduction of the same generic name given by
Sherborn as above refers to the same. Of course the acceptance of
binary generic names necessitates the re-examination of the editions
of Catesby’s Carolina, in addition to the Edwards one above noted,
and the Seligmann edition quoted by Zimmermann in the extracts
here given. What the result will be I cannot foretell.

Regulus would seem to preserve the traditional use whenever its
introduction may date from.

Rubecula would replace Sialia Swainson 1827 of the A. O. U.
Check-List, 3rd Edition, p. 366, 1910, whether it dates from
Zimmermann or from Edwards 1771.

Merula must be dealt with as it is based on Selig. Cat. III. T. 12.
and is thereby recognisable.

1. XX XT : é
ue 1914 ] MatuHews, Some Binary Generic Names. 91

LTucar must again come into use in place of Dumetella S. D. W.
1837, as that name is used in the A. O. U. Check-List, 3rd. Ed., p.
1910.

Calandra at this place I consider a nomen nudum.

Ruticilla might be also thus construed but I believe it comes into
consideration from another binary source at somewhere near this
date.

Iuscinia might be again classed as a nomen nudum but the
reference to “Die Amerikanische Nachtigall Catesby”’ suggested
its introduction in some of the editions of Catesby’s work.

Morinella of course falls as a synonym of Arenaria Brisson 1760.

Petrella, however, appears to displace Daption, Stephens 1826 as
used in the A. O. U. Check-List, 3rd Ed., p. 51, 1910.

This last name is the only one that directly concerns my own
studies in ornithology, namely that of Australia, and in order to
make sure of this matter I forwarded the book here noted to Dr.
C. W. Richmond, Secretary of the Ornithological Committee on
Nomenclature, desiring his opinion upon my conclusions. He has
written me, that, after conferring with Dr. L. Stejneger, one of the
members of the International Commission on Nomenclature, the
only conclusion possible was that these generic names were duly
proposed and regularly introduced by a writer who was binary
though not binomial. He also desired me to note that this edition
of Bartram’s Travels also appeared as Vol. X of the Magazin von
merkwiirdigen neuen Reisebeschreibungen.

I would here state that the above notes are merely fragmentary
in order to draw attention to the work mentioned and that further
detailed investigation of this work by one familiar with American
Ornithology might reveal some name I have overlooked.

My own researches lead me to suggest that the apparently ill-
advised admission of “binary” generic names will lead to such an
upsetting of names that the only means of escape will be the recog-
_ nition of a List of Nomina Conservanda: such a result has been
recently scoffed at by good workers, but these were undoubtedly
unaware of the many binary writers to be taken into consideration,
the present instance being only one out of many.

The rejection of “binary” writers, as opposed to binomial ones,
would have obviated discussion and made more stable our present
nomenclature.

92 Sace, Thirty-first Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. ao

Jan.

THIRTY-FIRST STATED MEETING OF THE AMERICAN
ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION.

Tue Thirty-first Stated Meeting of the American Ornithologists’
Union convened in New York City, Monday evening, November
10th, 1913. The business meeting was held at the Explorers’
Club, 345 Amsterdam Avenue, and the public sessions, commenc-
ing Tuesday, November 11th, and lasting three days, were held
at the American Museum of Natural History.

Business Session. The meeting was called to order by the
President, Dr. Frank M. Chapman. Twenty-seven Fellows were
present. The Secretary’s report gave the membership of the
Union at the opening of the present Stated Meeting as 992, con-
stituted as follows: Fellows, 49; Retired Fellows, 2; Honorary
Fellows, 15; Corresponding Fellows, 57; Members, 77; Associates,
792.

During the year the Union lost seventy-eight members, fourteen
by death, twenty-nine by resignation, and thirty-five for non-
payment of dues. The deceased members include two Honorary
Fellows, one Corresponding Fellow, one Member, and ten Associ-
ates, as follows:

Dr. Philip Lutley Sclater, one of the original Honorary Fellows,
who died June 27th, 1913, at the age of 83 years;' Prof. Alfred
Russel Wallace, an original Honorary Fellow, who died in London,
November 7th, 1913,? in his 91st year; Prof. Robert Collett, a
Corresponding Fellow, who died at Christiana, Norway, January
27th, 1913, in his 71st year; * Herbert Brown, a Member, who died
in Tuscon, Arizona, May 12th, 1913, aged 65 years;* and the
following Associates: Miss Louise Howe, who died September 13th,
1912; Mrs. Wm. H. Upham, who died November 29th, 1912;
Chester A. Reed, who died at Worcester, Mass., December 16th,
1912, aged 36 years®; Mrs. Susan L. Davis, who died February

1For an obituary notice, see Auk, XXX, p, 621; also Memorial Address in
the present number.

2 For an obituary notice see “ Notes and News’ of this number.

3 For an obituary notice, see Auk, XXX, p. 318.

4For an obituary notice, see Auk, XXX, p. 472.

5 For an obituary notice, see Auk, XXX, p. 319.

Pot =* <a Sace, Thirty-first Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. 93

13th, 1913; Florence A. Howe, who died July 1st, 1913; William H.
Hill, who died October, 1913; Fred B. Spalding, who died at Lan-
easter, N. H., October 22d, 1913; Jefferson Butler, who died in
Detroit, Michigan, October 23d, 1913, aged 45 years; Henry Hales,
who died November 6th, 1913; and Miss Lucy H. Baird, who died
June 19th, 1913.

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,
Thomas S. Roberts, Witmer Stone and Wilfred H. Osgood, mem-
bers of the Council.

Waldo Lee McAtee, Washington, D. C., Joseph Mailliard, San
Francisco, Cal., and Waldron De Witt Miller, of New York City,
were elected Fellows; Hon. Lionel Walter Rothschild, of Tring,
England, was elected an Honorary Fellow; Sergius N. Alphéraky,
St. Petersburg, Russia, and Edward Daniel Van Oort, of Leyden,
Holland, were elected Corresponding Fellows; Dr. Arthur A. Allen,
Ithaca, N. Y., Dr. Rudolph M. Anderson, New York City, Dr. W.
H. Bergtold, Denver, Colo., W. Lee Chambers, Eagle Rock, Cal.,
and George Willet, Los Angeles, Cal., were elected to the class
of Members, and the following one hundred and forty-two persons
were elected Associates:

Carl E. Akeley, New York City.

Miss Mary Pierson Allen, Hackettstown, N. J.

John S. Ames, North Easton, Mass.

Mrs. S. Reed Anthony, Boston, Mass.

Dr. B. H. Bailey, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

David Ball, New York City.

Edwin B. Bartram, Wayne, Pa.

George Batten, Jr., Montclair, N. J.

William M. Bartlett, Allston, Mass.

Rev. George Bennett, Iowa City, Lowa.

Mrs. F. T. Bicknell, Los Angeles, Calif.

Dr. Lyman Fisher Bigelow, Norwood, Mass.

Harry C. Bigglestone, Sioux City, Lowa.

Miss Cora Blackledge, Beaver, Pa.

Wesley W. Blair, Newtonville, Mass.

1¥For an obituary notice see “Notes and News’ of this number.

94 Saag, Thirty-first Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. ee

Prof. Donaldson Bodine, Crawfordsville, Ind.
Thomas L. Bourne, Hamburg, N. Y.

James Higginson Bowditch, Boston, Mass.
G.S. Britten, Syracuse, N. Y.

Miss Martha W. Brooks, Petersham, Mass.
Mrs. Jonathan Brown, Jr., Boston, Mass.
Harold Child Bryant, Berkeley, Calif.
Thomas D. Burleigh, Pittsburg, Pa.

Miss Clara D. Campbell, Brookline, Mass.
H. W. Carriger, Oakland, Calif.

Clarence H. Clark, Lubec, Me.

H. Walton Clark, Fairport, Iowa.

Ethan Allen Cleasby, Portage, Wise.

Miss Anna E. Cobb, Providence, R. I.
Herbert L. Coggins, San Francisco, Calif.
S. Bayard Colgate, Orange, N. J.

Frederic M. Crehore, Boston, Mass.

Miss Viola E. Crittenden, Beverly, Mass.
Delos E. Culver, Addingham, Pa.
Benjamin H. Currier, Boston, Mass.

J. H. Davenport, Houston, Texas.

R. H. Dean, St. Louis, Mo.

Daniel Whitman Deane, Fairhaven, Mass.
Miss Elizabeth Downhour, Indianapolis, Ind.
Rupert A. Emmons, Washington, D. C.
Richard Erkskine, Wenonah, N. J.

William Floyd, New York City.

John S. Folk, Suffolk, Va.

Nathaniel A. Francis, Brookline, Mass.

W. D. Funkhouser, Ithaca, N. Y.

Mrs. W. W. George, Parkersburg, W. Va.
Miss Elizabeth F. Gray, Dedham, Mass.
Miss Caroline 8. Greene, Cambridge, Mass.
Gilbert Hovey Grosvenor, Washington, D. C.
Mrs. W. K. Harrington, New York City.
William 8. Haskell, New York City.

Prof. Francis H. Herrick, Cleveland, Ohio.
Newbold Lawrence Herrick, Cedarhurst, N. Y.
Mrs. J. Emory Hoar, Brookline, Mass.

Paul Griswold Howes, Stamford, Conn.
Laurence M. Huey, San Diego, Calif.

Edwin D. Hull, Chicago, Ill.

Norman James, Baltimore, Md.

Miss Flora Amy Jarves, Kingston Hill, R. I.
Richard D. Jennings, East Orange, N. J.

J. M. Johnson, Brooklyn, N. Y.

eae | Saag, Thirty-first Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. 95

Henry Justice, Devon, Pa.

Ralph T. Kellogg, Silver City, New Mexico.
Duane E. Kent, Rutland, Vt.

Wilfred L. Kihn, Brooklyn, N. Y.

Prof. P. E. Kretzman, St. Paul, Minn.

Stanley Vaughan La Dow, New York City.
Charlotte E. Lee, New York City.

L. Alva Lewis, Portland, Oregon.

George Herbert Lings, South Nyack, N. Y.
Luther Little, 2d, Los Angeles, Calif.

Rubert J. Longstreet, De Land, Fla.

Miss Marion B. Loring, Dedham, Mass.

F. B. Lund, M. D., Boston, Mass.

Herschel James McCallum, Pittsburg, Pa.
Miss Harriette Frances McIntyre, Newton, Mass.
Hon. George Payne McLean, Simsbury, Conn.
Walt F. McMahon, Roxbury, Mass.

James C. Maples, Port Chester, N. Y.

Vinton W. Mason, Cambridge, Mass.

Luke B. Martin, Clearwater, Florida.

George Henry Mengel, Reading, Pa.

Dayton Eugene Merrill, State College, New Mexico.
Zeno Payne Metcalf, West Raleigh, N.C.
George Ralph Meyer, Fort McKinley, Me.
Miss Heloise Meyer, Lenox, Mass.

Leo Dwight Miner, Washington, D. C.

Horace H. Mitchell, Saskatchewan, Canada.
George M. Mischke, Brooklyn, N. Y.

Miss Julia Eleanor Moody, Wellesley, Mass.
Chas. 8. Moore, San Diego, Calif.

Albert Sidney Morgan, Winfield, W. Va.

Miss Eliza A. Morse, Worcester, Mass.
Frederick S. Moseley, Boston, Mass.

James Alexander Munro, Okanagan Landing, B. C.
Mrs. Lucius Nims, Greenfield, Mass.

Gladwin Kingsley Noble, Yonkers, N. Y.
Geoffrey Maurice O’Connell, Ithaca, N. Y.
Horace C. Ohl, Los Banos, Calif.

Miss Elizabeth Irving Ordway, Winchester, Mass.
Azel A. Packard, Springfield, Mass.

Chas. A. Philhower, Chatham, N. J.

Mrs. Dan Fellows Platt, Engelwood, N. J.

E. F. Pope., Colmesniel, Texas.

Mrs. S. W. Powell, West Becket, Mass.

Ligon Price, Dumnore, W. Va.

Wilson Blaine Rector, Belington, W. Va.

96 Sacu, Thirty-first Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. cor

Miss Mary Henrietta Renshaw, New Orleans, La.
Ward Jennings Rice, Roachdale, Ind.
Mrs. C. G. Richards, Lancaster, Pa.

- Walton Ricketson, New Bedford, Mass.
James O. Roberts, Utica, N. Y.
William Allen Robinson, Vineyard Haven, Mass.
Harold Goddard Rugg, Hanover, N. H.
Arlie William Schorger, Madison, Wisc.
William G. Scott, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Louis Agassiz Shaw, Beverly Farms, Mass.
Arthur L. Souther, Stoneham, Mass.
Miss Ethel Downing Spears, New York, N. Y.
Delmar Charles Speenburgh, New York City.
Miss Mary T. Spooner, Boston, Mass.
E. Alfred Steck, Philadelphia, Pa.
George H. Stuart, Philadelphia, Pa.
Arthur W. Sugden, Hartford, Conn.
S. 8. S. Stansell, Manly, Alberta.
George Cushman Stearns, Dedham, Mass.
Herman Foster Stone, Lawrence, N. Y.
Lionel Edward Taylor, Bankhead Ranche, Kelowna, B. C.
Albert Joseph Tourtellotte, Westboro, Mass.
William Henry Triscot, Sonora, Sutton Co., Texas.
William Y. Wadleigh, Boston, Mass.
Frederic Collin Walcott, New York City.
Alexander Walker, Mulino, Oregon.
Chas. R. Wallace, Delaware, Ohio.
Willis G. Warner, Canfield, Ohio.
Francis M. Weston, Jr., Charleston, S. C.
D. V. Wharrum, Anstinburg, Ohio.
Dr. James C. White, Boston, Mass.
Miss Helen Willard, Brookline, Mass.
Miss Mary Alice Willcox, Ph. D., Malden, Mass.
DeWitt C. Wing, Chicago, III.
Wallace Park Young, Toronto, Canada.

Dr. A. K. Fisher, E. W. Nelson and Dr. Chas. W. Richmond were
re-appointed ‘Committee on Bird Protection.’

Pusuic Sessions. First Day. The meeting was called to order
by the President, Dr. Chapman. An address of welcome was
made by Prof. Henry Fairchild Osborn on behalf of the President,
Trustees and Scientific Staff of the American Museum of Natural
History.

The papers read during the morning session were as follows:

ie | Saace, Thirty-first Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. 97

‘A Study of the Feeding of Nestlings,’ by Prof. Lynds Jones.
Remarks followed by Dr. Merriam and Mr. Batchelder.

‘The Work of a Village Bird Club,’ by Ernest Harold Baynes.
Illustrated by lantern slides. Remarks followed by Messrs.
Bowdish, Saunders, Bond, Fuertes, Seton, Lord and Smith, Miss
Moore, and Drs. Bishop, Fisher and Merriam.

‘Experiments in Feeding Hummingbirds during Seven Summers,’
by Miss Althea R. Sherman.

‘A Plea for the Conservation of the Eider,’ by Dr. Chas. W.
Townsend. Remarks followed by Messrs. Arnold, Cleaves, and
Bent.

It was voted to send copies of Dr. Townsend’s paper to the Gov-
ernor General of Newfoundland, and the Lieutenant Governor
of the Province of Quebec, with the recommendation that proper
measures be taken for the protection of the Eider on the Labrador
Coast, thus preventing its extinction.

‘In Memoriam — Philip Lutley Sclater,’ by Dr. Daniel Giraud
Elliot.

The following papers, all illustrated by lantern slides, were pre-
sented at the afternoon session.

“The Problem of Gliding Gulls,’ by William Palmer. Remarks
followed by Messrs. Bond, Saunders, Forbush, and the author.

‘Some Observations on the Nesting of the Pied-billed Grebe,’
by Dr. Arthur A. Allen. Remarks followed by Messrs. Seton and
Job.

‘Birds of the Bogota Region of Colombia,’ by Dr. Frank M.
Chapman.

In the evening an informal reception was held in the ornithologi-
cal laboratories of the American Museum of Natural History, ten-
dered to members of the A. O. U., by the Board of Trustees and
Officers of the Museum.

Second Day. The meeting was called to order by President
Chapman.

The papers of the morning session were:

‘Some Migration Phenomena,’ by Prof. Lynds Jones. Remarks
followed by Messrs. Forbush, Saunders and Baily, and Dr. Arthur
A. Allen.

‘Bird Groups at the Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago,

98 Sacre, Thirty-first Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. as

Ill., by Wilfred H. Osgood. Illustrated by lantern slides. Re-
marks followed by Dr. Palmer, Mr. Bent and the Chair.

‘Persuading the Robins to Nest near Our Homes,’ by Mrs. E. O.
Marshall.

‘Alexander Wilson, 1766-1813, and some Wilsoniana,’ by Dr.
Witmer Stone. Remarks followed by Messrs. Deane and Forbush.

“The Present Status of Wild Swans in Montana,’ by E. S. Cam-
eron. In the absence of the author it was read in part by A. C.
Bent.

‘A Forgotten Plumage Character of the American Scoter,’ by
Dr. Jonathan Dwight, Jr. Remarks followed by Messrs. Fuertes
and Palmer, Miss Moore, and Dr. Stone.

‘Bird Banding Activities; Season 1913,’ by Howard H. Cleaves.
Illustrated by lantern slides. Remarks followed by Messrs. Job
and Fuertes, Dr. Palmer, and the author.

The following papers, all illustrated by lantern slides, were
presented at the afternoon session:

‘Wild Fowl Studies in Northern Manitoba,’ by Herbert K. Job.

‘The Musical Method versus the Syllabic Method of Recording
Bird Songs,’ by Robert Thomas Moore. Remarks followed by
Messrs. Saunders, Coale, Murphy, Cleaves, and the Chair.

‘Crossing the Andes of Peru,’ by Wilfred H. Osgood.

In the evening the members of the Union, and their friends, met
at dinner at the Hotel Endicott.

Third Day. The meeting was called to order by President
Chapman. ‘The papers of the session were:

‘Some Ornithological Aspects of the Federal Migratory Bird
Law,’ by Dr. T.S. Palmer. Discussion followed by Wm. S. Haskell,
Counsel of the American Game Protective Association, regarding
the constitutionality of the bill.

‘Bird Studies on James Bay,’ by W. E. Clyde Todd.

‘The Present Condition of the Aviary, of the New York Zodlogi-
eal Society,’ by C. William Beebe.

‘Birds of the South Atlantic,’ by Robert Cushman Murphy.
Illustrated by lantern slides.

The following papers, in the absence of their authors, were read
by title:

‘Notes on the Nesting Habits of the Northern Violet-green

Pigie | Saag, Thirty-first Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. 99

Swallow (Tachycineta thalassina lepida), at Seattle, Washington,’
by S. F. Rathbun.

‘Notes on Nighthawks,’ by Harry C. Oberholser.

Resolutions were adopted thanking the President and Trustees
of the American Museum of Natural History for a place of meeting,
and for other courtesies tendered to the Union; to the Linnean
Society of New York for generous hospitalities extended to the
Union during the Thirty-first Stated Meeting; to the Executive
Committee of the New York Zodlogical Society for their polite
invitation to visit the Zodlogical Park and the Aquarium of the
Society; and to Robert W. Priest, of the Gaumont Co., Limited,
of London, for his courtesy in allowing, a special exhibition at the
Thursday afternoon session, of the motion pictures of antarctic life
taken by Herbert G. Ponting, F. R.G. S., the official photographer
of the late British Antarctic Expedition under Capt. Scott.

On Friday, November 14th, upon invitation of the New York
Zoological Society, many members of the Union visited the Aqua-
rium and the New York Zoélogical Park. They were received by
Director Townsend and Curator Beebe and entertained at luncheon
at the Park.

The registered attendance of members was unusually large, and
the number of new members elected has been exceeded but once
since the foundation of the Union.

The next meeting of the Union will be held in Washington, D. C.,
the date to be determined later.!

JoHN H. Saag,
Secretary.

1 See ‘Notes and News’ of this number for date.

100 General Notes. aes

Jan.

GENERAL NOTES.

Brown Pelican Regular off North Carolina.— The Brown Pelican
(Pelecanus occidentalis) has heretofore been considered casual as far north
as North Carolina.

Mr. Russell J. Coles, a leading American field ichthyologist, to whom we
are indebted for our knowledge of the occurrence of several southern fishes
at Cape Lookout, tells me that he regularly sees one or more small flocks
of this bird at that Cape about the first of August. As there is little chance
of error in the identification of so striking a species, I accept the record
without question.

I quote from a letter from Mr. Coles, in which he says of the Brown
Pelican:

‘“‘ During no summer have I observed more than a dozen until on Aug. 6,
1913, I saw 5 flocks of them, the largest containing 13 and the smallest 3,
making a total of 41. No flock was in sight of another flock, yet they all
followed in approximately the same track, first appearing coming in from
the Northeast,.... they would light on the water near the point of Cape
Lookout and after a short rest continue their flight without stopping to fish.
None of the flocks followed the shoreline to the southwest, but all flew
directly south.” — Jonn TREADWELL NicHois, American Museum of
Natural History, New York City.

Recovery of a Banded Pintail Duck.— Mr. Jefferson C. Wenck of
New Orleans informs me that one of the guides at the Delta Duck Club
killed a female Pintail at Cubit’s Gap, near the mouth of the Mississippi
River, in December 1912, that had a band on the right leg, marked 186A.
It will be of interest to know where this bird was tagged.— A. K. FisHmr,
U.S. Biological Survey, Washington, D. C.

American Egret (Herodias egretta) at Martha’s Vineyard, Mass.—
On July 22, 1913, I was attracted by the sight of an American Egret in the
Black-Crowned Night Heronry at Squibnocket Pond, Martha’s Vineyard.
‘This wanderer from the south seemed to live in perfect harmony with his
cousins. The bird remained in the colony during my entire week’s stay.
At times he would circle with the immature herons a few rods above my
head; again he would sail leisurely out to the edge of the pond and stand
motionless as if awaiting an opportunity to seize some finny loiterer. But
not once did I notice any quarrelling or wrangling between the egret and his
less ornate relatives G. Kinestey Nose, Cambridge, Mass.

The Willet in Central New York.— On August 20, 1913, I observed
two large shore birds on the beach at the east end of Oneida Lake in the
town of Verona, N. Y. Fromadistance I took them to be Greater Yellow-

wae | General Notes. 101
legs, but on the 25th, two birds, undoubtedly these same two came much
nearer and were identified as Willets (Catoptrophorus semipalmatus semi-
palmatus.) They were very tame, permitting approach within less than
one hundred feet, when their marked plumage was very much in evidence.
My two sons and myself watched them for probably an hour with our
naked eyes and also with the field glasses, drew a diagram of their markings
and wrote a description from life. We tried to take photographs but in
this we failed and pressing for a nearer view, finally caused the birds to
move away. We saw them again the next day but that was the last of
them. Twenty-five years’ observation on this beach has never shown me

one before and I believe them to be very rare here.— Easrrt Baca, Utica,
VY

Killdeer Plover at Cambridge, Mass.— On November 15, 1913,
during the Harvard-Yale freshman football game, two Killdeer Plover
(Oxyechus vociferus) alighted on the field while the game was in progress.
It was during the third period of the game that the plover, calling shrilly,
flew over the crowd. Several of the students whistled in reply. The birds
circled around for a moment, and then alighted in the very middle of the
field, — not forty yards away from the struggling players. Hardly had the
birds folded their wings, when the Harvard stand burst out cheering for
their team; this was too much for the plover and calling once or twice, they
flew up and away.

This incident is most singular, not only because of the unnatural behavior
on the part of the plover, but because Killdeer are extremely rare migrants
in the Cambridge region — G. Kinastey Nosue, Cambridge, Mass.

Turkey Vulture (Cathartes aura septentrionalis) at Martha’s Vine-
yard, Mass.— On July 25, 1913, I watched an immature Turkey Vulture
on the west bank of Squibnocket Pond. The bird was evidently very
much interested in something below him on the shore. After hovering
and circling for a short time, he alighted on the ground behind some bay-
berry bushes. Upon showing my head above the shrubbery, the vulture
swept majestically away; and, followed by a pestering Kingbird, soon
disappeared into the blue sky.— G. Kinastey Nosuez, Cambridge, Mass.

Doryfera vs. Hemistephania.— In his Birds of North and Middle
America, Part V, page 342, Ridgway, following the British Museum
Catalogue (Salvin, 1892, p. 38) and the Hand-List (1900), uses Hemi-
stephania Reichenbach, 1854, as the generic name of the Lance-billed
Hummingbirds, rejecting Doryfera Gould, 1847, because of the prior
Doryphora Uliger, 1809. Inasmuch as the second element of these names,
though of the same signification, is from a different language and the rules
of American Ornithologists’ Union Code do not allow the rejection or
emendation of a hybrid name, there seems to be no reason why Doryfera
should not be employed. Doryfera was used by Hartert in the Tierreich

102 General Notes. foe

(1900, p. 10) and in Journal fiir Ornithologie (1900, p. 358) he defends its
use— W. DeW. Miter, American Museum of Natural History, New
York City.

Pheebe (Sayornis phebe) in Colorado.— Whilst looking through some of
my Colorado birds preparatory to sending them to the British Museum
(Nat. Hist.) London — I was pleased to find a male example of the above
bird taken in Pueblo Co., Colorado on April 5, 1896. So far as I am aware
this is the second occurrence of this species in the State.— Wi1LLouGHBY P.
Lowe, Throwleigh, Okehampton, England.

The Fox Sparrow in Central Park, New York City, in August.—
On the afternoon of August 9, with the temperature at 85°, I was in Cen-
tral Park looking for early migrating warblers. As I was going along a
path bordered by rhododendron shrubbery, I noticed a fair-sized bird
hopping along the edge of the path a few yards in front of me, scratching in
the dead leaves for food. A long look through binoculars proved it to be a
Fox Sparrow (Passerella iliaca iliaca) with somewhat worn plumage, al-
though the coloring was very rich. The bird appeared thoroughly misera-
ble and was obviously suffering from the heat. So listless was it, that
rather than move away, it permitted a very near approach, finally taking
wing with a feeble “ cheep.”’ This effort seemed to exhaust what little
energy it had left, as I found it sulking at the base of a bush, and it actually
permitted me to part the upper branches of the bush and peer down at it
with my face not more than five feet away. Istared at it some time before
it finally moved off once more, and I followed it about for some ten minutes
longer, in no case being far enough away to use binoculars. I cannot say
whether it was a ‘ left over’ from the last season or a migrant. The Fox
Sparrow does not arrive in Central Park much before October 15 as a rule.
The bird was not seen again, though I was in that part of the Park almost
every day until the end of August.— LupLow Griscom, New York City.

An Abnormal Rose-breasted Grosbeak.— I have a female Zame-
lodia ludoviciana which I took on June 7, 1894, at Sand Lake, Parry Sound
District, Ontario, and which closely resembles one described by Mr. Robert
Barbour (Auk, 1913, page 435). In my bird the under parts are grayish
white, the streaks are few, narrow and confined to the sides; the breast has
a rather faint patch of deep chrome yellow which follows in general outline
that of the adult male; the back is much lighter than is usual in the normal
female, the feathers being edged with gray instead of brown which brings
' into contrast the dark centers of both the scapular and back feathers, the
rump and upper tail coverts are olive gray; the axillars and under wing
coverts are normal in color but a few of the latter have rose colored
streaks which though very fine are more pronounced than usual. The
bird was sexed and I think correctly by the late Mr. Geo. E. Atkinson —
J. H. Fueminea, Toronto, Ontario.

‘ceri omml General Notes. 103

Two Prothonotary Warblers in Massachusetts.— I wish to report
the presence of a Prothonotary Warbler (Protonotaria citrea) in Ipswich,
Mass., on Sept. 13, 1913. The bird — a male, I judged, from the brilliancy
of its plumage — was associated with a flock of Chickadees near the border
of a low-lying, rather moist wood and attracted my attention by a loud,
sharp call-note not unlike that of the Water-Thrush.

This is the first record of the Prothonotary Warbler for Essex County,
Mass., and I find in the literature the mention of but twelve birds seen or
taken in the State.

In this connection I take pleasure in adding the record of a Prothonotary
Warbler seen in Arlington, Mass., by Miss Mary E. Hadley on May 21
and 22,1912. This bird appeared with a heavy flight of migrant warblers.

It sang repeatedly a song suggesting a Water-Thrush and often, alighting
on fence-posts, peered about them as if in search of a nesting site— WIN-
sor M. Tyter, Lexington, Mass.

Tennessee Warbler (Vermivora peregrina) in Massachusetts in
Autumn.— As the Tennessee Warbler ( Vermivora peregrina) occurs so
rarely during the fall in Massachusetts I wish to record the following in-
stances of its occurrence at Harvard, Mass., that have come under my
observation this fall and last.

September 9, 1912 a young female shot.

September 17, 1912 an adult female shot.

September 14, 1913 a young female shot.
All these birds are now in my collection.

In addition to these three definite records may be added that of a bird
seen in company with the one shot on September 17, 1912; two seen Sep-
tember 9, 1913, and two seen with the bird secured on September 14, 1913.
— Jamss L. Petrers, Harvard, Mass.

Mourning Warbler (Oporornis philadelphia) in Florida.— While
visiting the Cerion plantations in the spring of 1913, on the Florida Keys,
I had occasion to note the birds seen on and about the various islands
between Miami and the Tortugas, and I have sent to Dr. Alfred G. Mayer,
Director of the Marine Biological Laboratory.of the Carnegie Institution,
a short sketch enumerating the birds observed on the various keys, which
will be published in the forthcoming Year Book of the Carnegie Institution.
I have also handed a copy of this manuscript to the Biological Survey,
believing the notes therein would be of interest on account of the informa-
tion bearing upon bird migration.

Prof. W. W. Cooke informs me that in this list I have made a new record
for Florida, namely, the Mourning Warbler. This, a Redstart, a Black-
poll Warbler, a Florida Yellow-throat, a Water-Thrush, and a Black-
throated Blue Warbler, were seen on May 8 drinking from the scanty
drippings caused by a slight leak in the water tank at the lighthouse on
Sands Key, off Miami.— Pau Barrscu, U.S. National Museum, Washing-
ton, D. C.

104 General Notes. Auk

Jan.

Hooded Warbler at Boston, Mass.— On October 2, in walking around
the Boston Public Garden looking for migratory birds, as is my custom,
I met a friend who told me she had just seen a “ strange little warbler with
a black bib and cap which were connected by a band on the side of the
head,’’ but she had lost sight of him. We searched for him but could not
find him.

The next day I met her again and we found the bird in the same location
as the day before and were sure that it was a Hooded Warbler (Wilsonia
mitrata.) While we were standing there Mr. E. H. Forbush passed through
the garden. I gave him my field glasses that he might see the bird and he
confirmed our identification.

The little stranger did not seem to be a bird of the tree tops as at no time
did I see him more than two thirds up in the trees but his favorite place was
in the lower branches flitting in and out with an occasional drop to the
flower beds below. He was in full plumage and easy to find as the graceful
opening and closing of his tail distinguished him at once.

The maple trees where he made his stay are on the edge of a path where
people are passing to and fro all day long, yet he paid no attention to them
and kept on with his hunt for food. My friend heard him one morning
give his clear bright song, and I heard his call note many times. We studied
him every day and notified many bird students so that they might enjoy
the unusual opportunity with us.

He remained in the garden eleven days. After he had been there about
three days a storm set in of rain and dense fog, which lasted a week. He
was seen on the twelfth of October, but the morning of the thirteenth was
fair and I was unable to find him so that it would appear that he was held
there by the inclement weather and took advantage of the first clear night
to start on his long flight southward.— Ipa G. JeNnKiIns, Boston, Mass.

Hooded Warbler at Nahant, Mass.— On the afternoon of August 30,
1913, in company with Messrs. Albert Richards and Lawton W. Lane, while
walking leisurely through one of the estates at East Point, Nahant, our
attention was attracted to a warbler new to usall. It proved to be a male
Hooded Warbler (Wilsonia mitrata) in full plumage.

The bird was very active but not shy and allowed us to watch it at close
range as it flitted from one shrub to another in pursuit of insects. The
black markings of the head contrasted with the yellow gave the bird a
striking appearance and when on the wing the tail was spread displaying
the white outer tail feathers. At no time did we observe the bird more
_ than six or seven feet from the ground. Although I had been unable to
find the species recorded from Essex County, Dr. Charles W. Townsend
tells me that he has one record.— GrorcE M. Bustier, Lynn, Mass.

Some Rare Birds at Hamilton, Kansas.— I have in my collection of
birds several specimens which I think worthy of record in view of their
rarity in Kansas.

Vol ota General Notes. 105

On October 3, 1909, I secured a specimen of Sabine’s Gull (Xema sabinit),
it was wading in the mud along the edge of a small pond and I first took it
to be a plover, but on approaching nearer I found it was an unknown bird
tome. AsI had no gun with me I had to return over a mile to get it, on
returning I found the bird swimming in the shallow water. It was an im-
mature male in fine plumage. There is a previous record of its capture
in the state, made I believe by Goss.

A fine specimen of Ruddy Turnstone (Arenaria morinella) was taken
October 1, 1911, on the bank of a large artificial lake near here, it is an adult
male. There is one previous record, a single specimen taken by Mr. F. E.
Forbes on the Kansas River, August 16, 1898 (Snow). In Prof. Snow’s
last Catalog of Kansas Birds he states that he has omitted from it fourteen
species that were inserted in his first and second editions on the authority of
Dr. Brewer and Prof. Baird, but no specimens having been secured to date
he preferred to drop them. Among them were the Black-bellied Plover
(Squatarola squatarola) and the Red-breasted Merganser (Mergus serrator).
I have four specimens of the former, two males and one female, adults, and
an immature male. The first three were taken on the same lake as the
turnstone, September 8, 1912, there were six in the flock, all adults; the
other was taken a few days later, October 13, at the same place, and was
alone. A Red-breasted Merganser was shot out of quite a flock of ducks,
March 1, 1912. It is a male in full plumage.

In company with the Black-bellied Plovers I secured a specimen of
Eastern Willet (Catoptrophorus semipalmatus semipalmatus) for which I do
not think there is a published record for the state. The difference is
quite apparent when the two birds are placed side by side. Our common
Kansas bird being the western form.

On December 21, 1910, I was fortunate to secure a specimen of Evening
Grosbeak (Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina), a male, and I should judge
in full plumage. It was shot out of a flock of about a dozen as they were
flying overhead, I was unable to secure other specimens. This also is I
think a first record for the state.

I also have specimens of Knot (Tringa canutus), Stilt Sandpiper (Micro-
palama himantopus) and Red-legged Black Duck (Anas rubripes) also
Red Backed Sandpiper (Pelidna alpina pacifica), all of which are of such
rarity as to be classed as accidental visitants.

Identifications of all the above have been verified by the University of
Kansas.— G. C. Rinker, Hamilton, Kansas.

A Quaint Reminiscence of Audubon.— After John James Audubon
had completed his double elephant folio “‘ Birds of America ” and published
also his ‘‘ Synopsis of the Birds of North America,” and had in 1839 re-
turned from his last voyage to England, he lived for a while in New York
City, previous to his moving in 1842 to the then suburbs, or what is now
known as Audubon Park.

During this time he seems to have turned his attention more particularly

106 General Notes. aad

to quadrupeds, having in preparation his great work on this subject, and a
document in my possession throws a quaint light on his researches at this
time, as well as the thoughtfulness of the mayor in protecting the “ in-
habitants’ from stray shots. The following is a reproduction of the
document.— F. H. Kmnnarp, Newton ee hea

ae

iol eg Sy VEG

A Correction.-- In the article by Thurston and Boyle on Long Island
birds in ‘The Auk,’ XXX, line three, page 545, ‘Ruby-crowned Kinglet’
should read Golden-crowned Kinglet.— Henry TxHurston, American
Museum of Natural History, New York City.

PN ot sa Recent Literature. 107

RECENT LITERATURE.

Gurney’s ‘The Gannet.’ 1— It is refreshing to be able to turn from the
multitude of faunal papers and diagnoses of new subspecies which make up
such a large proportion of the ornithological literature of the day, to a work
dealing exclusively with a single species, but treating it exhaustively from
practically every point of view. Such a work is Mr. Gurney’s portly
volume on the Gannet. With an interest aroused nearly fifty years ago the
author has lost no opportunity to add to his stock of information concerning
this interesting bird until he has been able to compile a work which for
years to come will be our chief work of reference for this species. He has
delved into the works of old voyagers and explorers and into ancient
historic volumes for the hidden lore that they contain; visited most of the
existing colonies of Gannets, conducted correspondence with hosts of
persons acquainted with the bird in life as well as those conversant with
its history in the past and studied all the scientific literature dealing with it.

The Chapter headings from which one may gain some idea of the scope
of the work are: I. Names of the Gannet; II. Distribution; III-IX.
Descriptions of the present colonies; X. Abandoned Breeding Colonies;
XI. Numbers; XII. Nidification; XIII. Nestling; XIV. Habits; XV.
Food; XVI. Flight; XVII. Mortality; XVIII. Age; XIX. Gannets as
Food; XX. Plumage; XXI. Osteology; XXII. Anatomy. There are
also; a historical preface, introduction, bibliography and five appendices
dealing with allied species, tropical Boobies, parasites, historic and pre-
historic remains and fossils. Mr. Gurney has well called the Gannet ‘a
bird with a history ’ and the historic portions of his monograph are most
interesting reading, particularly the quotations from Martin Martin,
Gent., who in 1698 published an account of a voyage that he had made to
“St. Kilda the remotest of all the Hebrides” and whose account of the
Gannet is considered by Mr. Gurney to be one of the best that has been
published. Martin moreover has much of interest to say on other species
besides Gannets. He tells us that he and his crew were made most
welcome on their arrival and were liberally supplied with eggs mainly those
of the Guillemot. During their three weeks’ stay they consumed 16,000 or
18 eggs per diem for each man. Our author remarks that ‘‘ One wonders
not so much at the islanders collecting 16,000 eggs, which would be an easy
task, as at the capacity which Martin and his crew possessed to eat so
many.”

1 The Gannet | A Bird With a History | By | J. H. Gurney, F. Z. S. | Author of
‘“‘A Catalogue of the Birds of Prey (Accipitres and | Striges), with the number
of Specimens in Norwich Museum.” | Illustrated with numerous Photographs,
Maps and Drawings, and one Colored Plate by Joseph Wolf | Witherby & Co.|
326 High Holborn, London |1913. S8vo. pp. i-li + 1-567. Price 25s. net.

108 Recent Literature. as

The history of the Gannet however dates far back of Martin’s time, not
only is there an admirable story of the Bass Rock Gannets in the ‘ Historia
Majoris Britanniz’ 1521, but mention is made of the birds in an inventory
of the resources of Lundy Island in 1274 during the reign of Edward I, and
the name Gannet occurs in an Anglo Saxon poem by Beowulf A. D. 597.

The name Gannet seems to come from the same source as gans, gander
and goose; while ‘ Soland’ or ‘ Solon Goose’ is from the Icelandic ‘ sula-n ’
zi. e., ‘the Gannet.’

Gannets now breed on a limited number of rocky, more or less inacces-
sible islets in the northern seas, which they have occupied from time im-
memorial. Lundy Island off the English coast is at present abandoned
on account of the persecution of the birds. The inhabited islets are Gras-
holm, Wales; Bull Rock and The Skelligs, Ireland; Bass Rock, Ailsa
Craig, St. Kilda Islands, Sulisgeir and The Stack of Stack and Skerry,
Scotland; Mygganaes, Ferées; Sulusker, Eldey and Grimsey, Iceland;
and Bird Rocks and Bonaventure, Canada. The total number of birds
now living is estimated by Mr. Gurney as 101,000 (exclusive of course of
the allied species of South Africa and Australia).

The accounts of the habits of the bird contain a vast amount of informa-
tion from the personal observation of the author and from various other
sources, while the ehapters on osteology and anatomy contain extracts
from probably all the published papers touching on the subject. Mr.
Gurney is to be congratulated upon the successful completion of a most
valuable addition to ornithological literature, while the publishers have
contributed their share in producing a beautiful example of book making.
— admirable typography and half-tones and an attractive binding — W. 8.

Sage and Bishop on the Birds of Connecticut.'— Thirty-six years.
have passed since the appearance of the last list of Connecticut birds,—
that prepared by Dr. C. Hart Merriam in 1877. Both the lapse of time
and the enormous strides that have been taken in the study of American
ornithology, have made it highly desirable that we should have a more:
modern work on the birds of the state, which would bring the knowledge of
the subject up to date. It would have been difficult to pick two men
better qualified for this task than the authors of the work before us and the
results of their labors are quite up to our expectations.

The main part of the work consists of an annotated list of 329 species
with an appendix including seven introduced species and ten of doubtful
status. The data under each are based upon the collections and notes of
the authors and upon information furnished them or recorded by others.

1 The Birds of Connecticut | By John Hall Sage, M. S. | Secretary of the Ameri-
can Ornithologists’ Union | and | Louis Bennett Bishop, M. D.| Fellow of the
American Ornithologists’ Union | assisted by | Walter Parks Bliss, M. A. | vignette. |
Hartford. | Printed for the State Geological and Natural History Survey, | 1913.
[Bulletin No. 20.] 8vo. pp. 1-370.

ioe | Recent Literature. 109
Mr. Bliss has tabulated and arranged much of these data and combined
them into a harmonious whole.

Under summer resident species, are given a general statement of the
character of occurrence and abundance; the earliest and latest record for
several localities; character and location of the nest; number of eggs and
average date; other nesting dates and notes on abnormal plumages,
unusual occurrences, etc. Under transients are given the earliest and latest
dates for both spring and fall migration, while all records are given for
species which are rare or irregular. For the sake of brevity the most
frequent authorities quoted for records are indicated by their initials or
their last name alone, and a list of full names and initials is given at the end.
This plan appeals to us as the best we have seen for bringing into conven-
ient shape a vast amount of records. This part of the work is intended
primarily for the ornithologist or student who desires to obtain facts or
figures on the occurrence of any given species in Connecticut and very
fittingly it is followed by a good bibliography. For the farmer, or stu-
dent of live wild birds there is provided an admirable treatise on Econo-
mic Ornithology prepared entirely by Dr. Bishop and based upon his own
observations and the best reports of government and state economic orni-
thologists. The idea of separating these two subjects as distinct parts of
the report is novel and there is much to be said in its favor. The nomen-
clature and classification follow the A. O. U. Check-List.

The report is by no means only a list of the birds of Connecticut. Orni-
thologists interested in almost any special line of research will find in it
matter of importance, well worth seeking for — historical accounts of the
Wild Pigeon, and the early abundance of the Red-headed Woodpecker,
valuable data on the parasitism of the Cowbird, as well as cases of Cuckoos’
eggs in nests of other species and Barred Owl’s eggs in nests of the Red-
shouldered Hawk! The autumnal flights of Flickers and the former
excessive shooting of these birds by gunners are described while albinos and
abnormal plumages or eggs are noted under many species.

The report is in all respects a thoroughly up to date and well prepared
state list and a contribution to ornithological literature of which the authors
may well feel proud.— W. S.

Tyler on Some Birds of the Fresno District California.'— In this,
the ninth publication of the Cooper Ornithological Club in the series
known as ‘ Pacific Coast Avifauna’, Mr. Tyler presents an account of the
present day conditions of bird life in the vicinity of Fresno in the San Joa-
quin Valley.

So rapidly has this region been settled and conditions changed that a
paper such as the one before us is most welcome, especially to those far re-

1Some birds of the Fresno District, California, By John G. Tyler. Cooper
Ornithological Club, Pacific Coast Avifauna Number 9, Hollywood, California,
Published by the Club, October 1, 1913. Roy. 8vo. pp. 1-114.

110 Recent Literature. oe

moved from California who are not acquainted with the changing condi-
tions; while so diversified is the wild life in different parts of this great state
that local ornithological reports such as this are perhaps equally welcome
to the resident bird students.

Mr. Tyler does not attempt a summary of previously published papers
dealing with the birds of the Fresno region, but presents simply the results
of his personal experience of more than ten years, with quotations from
friends upon whose observations he can place reliance. One hundred and
sixty-one species are included, while fifty others previously reported as
occurring were omitted because the records could not be satisfactorily
proven. The paper is far from the all too frequent dry, annotated list.
Besides a statement on the relative abundance and the general character
of occurrence of each species, there are extended observations on their
habits, food and nests which make entertaining reading and form a valuable
contribution to the life histories of California birds.

It is sad to read of the rapid decrease in the water birds that formerly
thronged the valley and unfortunately the immediate cause is one that
neither the Audubon Societies nor legislation can check. ‘‘ The large
grain and stock ranches ”’ says the author, ‘‘ are being subdivided, reclama-
tion work is steadily reducing the swamp-covered areas, vineyards and
orchards are springing up everywhere with a consequent great increase in
population. Even the tule ponds that remain are often unsuitable for a
nesting place on account of the custom of using them as foraging grounds
for bands of hogs.’”’ A careful perusal of Mr. Tyler’s interesting pages
however shows that there is still an abundance of bird-life to interest the
ornithologist in the vicinity of Fresno and with the energetic campaign now
being waged on behalf of the wild life of California let us hope that some of
the species now most seriously threatened may still be preserved.— W. S.

Grinnell and Swarth on the Birds and Mammals of the San
Jacinto Area of Southern California.1— This important report is based
mainly upon field work conducted by the Museum of Vertebrate Zodlogy of
the University of California in the year 1908, which resulted in the acces-
sion of 1099 mammals, 1533 birds and 437 reptiles. The authors describe
in detail the various localities where collections were made, and discuss the
life zones and faunas; annotated lists of 169 birds and 63 mammals are
then presented while the paper ends with considerations of, (1) the “ Boreal
Fauna of San Jacinto Peak compared with that of Other Mountains of
Southern California;” and (2) the “Sonoran Biota of the San Diegan
District Compared with that of the Adjacent Desert.”

1 An Account of the Birds and Mammals of the San Jacinto Area of Southern
California, with Remarks upon the Behavior of Geographic Races on the Margins
of their Habitats. By J. Grinnell and H. S. Swarth. University of California,
Publications in Zoology, Vol. 10, No. 10, pp. 197-406, pls. 6-10, 3 text figs. Oct.

31, 1913.

Maga | Recent Literature. Dg |

In considering questions of distribution the authors do not limit them-
selves to a consideration of life zones but recognize “‘ three entirely different
orders of ecological delimitation,” which they indicate by the terms ‘ zonal,’
‘faunal’ and ‘ associational.’ In their discussion of the zones they fail to
detect in the animal life any trace of either the Hudsonian or Arctic Alpine
which had been credited to the San Jacintos by H. M. Hall in his report
on the flora of the mountains, and rather question the desirability of
including these zones on the very meagre data that he was able to furnish.
The authors state that they would use the word ‘ fauna’ for “ a subdivi-
sion of a life zone, based upon conditions of atmospheric humidity.” As
has been the experience of others however they find that practically it is
better to use the term in a different sense, giving it in a manner a higher
rank than the ‘zone.’ For instance they recognize a Colorado Desert and
a San Diegan fauna each covering both the Upper and Lower Sonoran
Zones. The late Dr. Arthur Erwin Brown advocated precisely the same
plan in discussing the distribution of reptiles in Texas, and claimed that the
Upper and Lower Sonoran zones of the eastern humid area had far more in
common than either had with the corresponding zone in the arid region,
and he therefore made his primary divisions east and west instead of zonal.
Dr. J. A. Allen adopted a similar plan in his paper on ‘ Distribution of
North American Birds’ (Auk, X, pp. 97-150).

In their use of ‘ Associations’ the authors are recognizing the work of
the ecologic botanists, and they are essentially bringing out the correlation
of the distribution of certain animals to certain plant ‘ formations ’ — an
important point and one which underlay a recent paper by Dr. Spencer
Trotter.t

In their closing chapters the interesting fact is emphasized in connection
with boreal islands or mountain tops that ‘‘ the smaller the disconnected
area of a given zone, the fewer the types which are present thereon,” while
the disturbing part that this principle is likely to play in attempts to
establish centers of distribution and lines of dispersal upon the number of
existing species is pointed out. The difference in the faunas on the two
slopes of the San Jacinto mountains — semihumid on the west and ex-
tremely arid on the east, is pointed out as well as the variability in the
extent to which characteristic forms of one fauna invade the other, the line
of delimitation being by no means uniform for all species. This discussion
opens up very interesting lines of investigation as to the reason for the
different behavior of different species on the margins of their habitats and
the whole paper is an excellent illustration of what may be accomplished
in the study of distribution in limited areas with diversified physical condi-
tions, such as prevail so frequently in the west but are hard to find in the
eastern states.

The annotated list of birds is a valuable one and contains much impor-

1 cf. Auk, 1913, p. 450.

112 Recent Literature. [3 at,

tant original information on the habits, abundance, and relationship of the
species treated. While gross comparisons are hardly permissible it is
nevertheless interesting to note that of the 146 species and subspecies of
land birds 85 are identical with those listed in Mr. Tyler’s Birds of Fresno
noticed above.— W. S.

Gifford’s ‘ Birds of the Galapagos Islands.’ 1— At the time of the
earthquake and conflagration at San Francisco the Academy of Sciences
had an expedition in the Galapagos which during an absence of 17 months
secured the finest series of collections yet obtained on these interesting
islands, and these have formed the nucleus of the new museum which the
Academy has had to build up. Reports on several of the collections have
already been published and in the contribution before us Mr. Edward W.
Gifford, assistant curator of ornithology at the Academy, and ornithologist
of the expedition, presents the first installment of an account of the orni-
thological material that was obtained, of which the skins alone number
8,691.

Forty-five species are treated in the present installment all of which, except
the Dove, are water birds. The fullness of the accounts of the resident spe-
cies leaves little to be desired and the completed report promises to be the
most important contribution to the ornithology of the Galapagos that has
yet appeared. Seven half-tones illustrate some of the more interesting spe-
cies and their nests, including photographs of the flightless Cormorant
(Nannopterum harrisii).

The nomenclature and sequence follow Sharpe’s ‘ Hand List,’-but even
with this fact clearly stated it is unfortunate that the authorities for the
names were not added, as is customary in all works of such importance as
the present. We trust that Mr. Gifford may be able to push his report
to an early completion and maintain the high standard that he has estab-
lished.— W. S.

Brooks’ List of the Birds of West Virginia.-— Mr. Viquesney’s re-
port as forest, game and fish warden of West Virginia is another of the
admirable, educational reports that are being issued today by game wardens
in various states.

In addition to general information on the protection of insectivorous and
game birds, there is included a carefully prepared list of all the birds of
the state by Rev. Earl A. Brooks. This is divided into two parts, one

1 Expedition of the California Academy of Sciences to the Galapagos Islands
1905-1906. VIII. The Birds of the Galapagos Islands, with Observations on
the Birds of Cocos and Clipperton Islands (Columbiformes to Pelecaniformes).
By Edward Winslow Gifford. Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci. Fourth Series, Vol. II, Pt. I.
pp. 1-132, pl. 1-7. August 11, 1913.

2 Second Biennial Report of the Forest, Game and Fish Warden [of West Vir-
ginia] 1911-1912. J.A.Viquesney. Belington [W. Va.] [1913]. Svo. pp. 1-106
with 19 half-tone plates. List of birds, pp. 87-106.

vou ie "| Recent Literature. 113

treating of the game species, fifty-two in number, and the other the non-
game birds,— one hundred and ninety-four. The latter list contains brief
annotations and both vernacular and current technical names are used for all
species; the former, prepared originally as an address before the State Fish
and Game Protective Association, lacks technical names and is not so uni-
form in character, the shore birds being listed without annotations while the
gallinaceous species are treated at considerable length.

The list forms a reliable summary of the wild bird life of West Virginia,
but we trust Mr. Brooks will continue his researches and furnish us with a
more comprehensive report, giving the distribution of the species in detail
and the actual records of the rarer forms, with a discussion of their eco-
nomic value. Such a report would be well worthy of publication by the
state government and would be a welcome addition to ornithological lit-
erature.— W. S.

Bailey’s ‘Life Zones and Crop Zones of New Mexico.’ !— This
report is based upon the field work of the Biological Survey, for a number of
years past, conducted mainly by Mr. Bailey himself. The excellent map,
which is on a reasonably large scale, presents the life zones of the state in
considerable detail while the text discusses the physical characteristics of
each and presents lists, not only of the mammals, breeding birds, reptiles
and plants, but of the various varieties of vegetables and fruits which thrive
there. There is also a comparison of the several mountain ranges of New
Mexico and a bibliography. The report will prove of great value to all
students of geographical distribution, and ornithologists will look forward
with much interest to the report on the birds and mammals which, it is
announced in the introduction, will be published later. We are pleased to
notice in this and other recent publications of the Biological Survey a return
to the possessive form in the case of birds named after persons, thus con-
forming to the ‘ A. O. U. Check-List’ as well as to popular usage.— W. S.

Todd on New Neotropical Birds.*— Thirty-three new species and
subspecies are briefly described by Mr. Todd in the present paper. Most
of these are from the Santa Marta region, Colombia; the provence del
Sara, Bolivia; and the Rio Caura, Venezuela, and they give us some idea
of the wealth of neotropical material that is being acquired by the Carnegie
Museum. Some of these descriptions are, we regret to say, open to the same
criticism that has already been made in these pages in other connections,

1 North American Fauna. No.35. Life Zones and Crop Zones of New Mexico.
By Vernon Bailey. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Biological Survey.
Henry W. Henshaw, Chief. S8vo. pp. 1-100, 16 half-tone plates, 6 text cuts,
and acolored map. Actual date of publication, September 5, 1913.

2 Preliminary Diagnoses of Apparently New Birds from Tropical America. By
W. E. Clyde Todd. Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, Vol. XXVI, pp. 169-174,
August 8, 1913.

114 Recent Literature. ret

i. e., they are full enough to answer the actual requirements of publication
under our code but are often not full enough to enable anyone to recognize
the species without consulting the type specimen. Such diagnoses are fre-
quently more of a hindrance than a help to the advancement of science, and
it seems a pity that our American ornithologists, who have set such a high
standard in most of their work, cannot take time to adequately describe
all of the new forms which they are in such haste to name, or that the
institutions which they represent cannot provide immediate means for the
publication of adequate descriptions, for we realize that the author is not
always to blame. A new genus Microstilbon is proposed for Microstilbon
inspiratus, a Bolivian hummingbird allied to Chetocercus.— W. 8S.

Kirkham’s ‘ North and South.’ !— Mr. Kirkham already well known
as a writer on nature, author of ‘East and West,’ ‘In the Open,’ etce.,
compares, in the present volume, the aspect of nature in the Lake Coun-
try of New York and in the Coastal Plain of South Carolina, attempting,
as he puts it, ‘‘to reflect the spirit of the North and of the South, as do
the birch and the cypress .... to make you hear in an inner ear the ringing
call of the Carolina wren and to become suddenly conscious of the perfume
of jasmine; or to hear the eerie song of the upland plover descending from
the sky, and again to be dimly aware of water lilies and the lapping of little
waves on a summer day.”’ That he has succeeded admirably in his under-
taking his readers will, we think, unanimously agree.

Mr. Kirkham evidently possesses an accurate knowledge of the birds,
flowers, trees and insects and an ability to treat of them as he finds them;
to bring before us not only the characteristics of the species of which he
writes but also the more subtle spirit of their environment. This con-
stitutes his interest in nature, and he has little sympathy for the man who
never gets beyond the bare facts. He says ‘‘ you have perhaps kept a
record of birds and flowers, and have devoted much time and energy to the
matter, but this is the most elementary work. You will graduate someday
from bookkeeping unless you aim to remain a bookkeeper all your days.
.... Ornithology, like everything else, will be just as commonplace as the
mind that pursues it.”” He apparently forgets that some people are unable
to get beyond the ‘bookkeeper’ stage, and even in attaining that, they
may derive as much pleasure and benefit from the study of nature as the
more gifted writers who, like our author, are privileged to soar to greater
heights. The two spots of which this volume treats are a summer camp on
the shore of Canandaigua Lake, N. Y., and a winter home near Milford,
S. C. Besides frequent casual mention of birds there are two chapters
that deal entirely with them. ‘Birds about the Camp’ treating of the
northern locality and ‘Winter Bird Life’ with the southern.

1 North and South. Notes on the Natural History of a Summer Camp and a
Winter Home. By Stanton Davis Kirkham. G. W.Putnam’s Sons. New York
and London. The Knickerbocker Press, 1913. S8vo. pp. 1-286. $1.75 net.

ee | Recent Literature. iTS

These of course are of especial interest to the ornithologist although the
whole volume will be interesting reading to all who love the great outdoors.
The book is attractively printed and is illustrated by a number of half-tones
of characteristic scenery from photographs by the author.— W. 8.

Wood on Michigan Birds.'— Continuing his investigations on the
Charity Islands already noticed in these pages,? Mr. Wood was able during
July, 1911, to add eight species to his former list and to secure breeding data
on 37 species. Notes on 66 species are included in the present paper which
are accompanied by 19 half-tones illustrating the physical features of the
islands. In another short paper? Mr. Wood presents notes on sixteen spe-
cies of rare or unusual occurrence in Michigan.— W. S.

Howell on New Birds from Alabama.‘— Even the eastern United
States seems still able to produce novelties for those who care to make
careful comparisons of material from different areas and are content to
establish new forms on slight differences. Mr. Howell finds that the Crows
of the southern states exclusive of Florida and possibly Georgia, are smaller
than either the northern or the Florida race. This form which ranges
north to the District of Colombia and southern Illinois he names Corvus
brachyrhynchos paulus..

A number of Towhees from Alabama differ from the northern form in
having the white markings less extensive, while they are distinctly larger
than Florida birds. This form is separated as Pipilo erythrophthalmus
canaster although Mr. Howell is unable as yet to fix the limits of its distribu-
tion.— W. S.

Mearns on New African Birds.*— In two papers Dr. Mearns adds
eleven more forms to the already long list of novelties discovered by him
on his two trips to Africa. In the first there are described Cisticola robusta
abaya, Lake Abaya, Abyssinia; C.r. tana, Tana River, British East Africa;
C. subruficapilla bodessa, Bodessa, Abyssinia; and C. s. fricki, White Lake
Abaya, Abyssinia, all obtained on the Childs Frick Expedition, and C.

1The Breeding Birds of the Charity Islands with Additional Notes on the
Migrants. By N. A. Wood, Fourteenth Report of the Michigan Academy of
Science, 1912. pp. 178-188.

2 Auk, 1912, p. 118.

3 Notes on Michigan Birds. By N. A. Wood, Fourteenth Report of the
Michigan Academy of Science, 1912, pp. 159-162.

4 Descriptions of two New Birds from Alabama. By Arthur H. Howell, Proc.
Biol. Soc. Wash., Vol. X XVI, pp. 199-202, October 23, 1913.

5 Descriptions of Six New African Birds. By Edgar A. Mearns, Smithsonian
Miscellaneous Collections, Vol. 61, No. 11, pp. 1-5, August 30, 1913.

Descriptions of Five New African Weaver-Birds of the Genera Othyphantes,
Hypargos, Aidemosyne, and Lagonosticta. By Edgar A. Mearns. Smithsonian
Miscellaneous Collections, Vol. 61, No. 14, pp. 1-5. September 20, 1913.

116 Recent Literature. ian

natalensis nilotica, Lado Enclave, and Pyromelana flammiceps changam-
wensis, Changamwe, coast of British East Africa, secured by the Smith-
sonian African Expedition under Col. Theodore Roosevelt. The second
paper deals wholly with Weaver Birds, four were obtained on the Childs
Frick Expedition, the last one on the Smithsonian Expedition. The new
forms with type localities are as follows: Othyphantes fricki, Sidamo,
southern Abyssinia; Hypargos niveoguttatus macrospilotus, Meru Forest,
British East Africa; Aidemosyne cantans meridionalis, Indunumara Mts.,
B. E. A., Lagonosticta rubricata fricki, Gardulla, Abyssinia; and Aidemo-
syne inornata, El Dueim, White Nile, Sudan.— W. 8.

Shufeldt on Fossil Feathers and Fossil Birds.'— In this paper Dr.
Shufeldt discusses the various specimens of fossil feather impressions that
have been described, illustrating most of them, and also presents some
photographs of other specimens found in the Florissant formation in Colo-
rado by Prof. T. D. A. Cockerell and others.

Two new species are based on bird remains in the Peabody Museum,
Yale University. Hebe schucherti from the Green River Eocene of
Wyoming, is a possible ally of the South American Pteroptochide, although
the author is not prepared to say positively what its affinities may be
other than that it is passerine. Yalavis tenuipes is another passerine
species about the size of a warbler, locality unknown.— W. S.

Gain, on Penguins of the Antarctic Regions.*— This interesting
account with numerous excellent illustrations is reprinted from La Nature.
Dr. Gain was naturalist of the Charcot Expedition of 1909, which wintered
at Petermann’s Island and had ample opportunity for studying these
interesting birds. His report upon them forms a convenient work of
reference on the habits of a group with which the recent antarctic expedi-
tions have made us more familiar than ever before, birds whose remarkable
structure and peculiar actions arouse our keenest interest.— W.S.

Mathews’ ‘A List of the Birds of Australia.’ 3— Some months ago,
much to our regret, we felt it necessary to comment adversely upon the

1 Fossil Feathers and some heretofore undescribed Fossil Birds. Journal of
Geology, X XI, No. 7, Oct.-Nov. 1913, pp. 628-652.

2 The Penguins of the Antarctic Regions. By L. Gain. Smithsonian Report
for 1912, pp. 475-482, plates 1-9. 1913.

3 A List of the Birds | of Australia | By | Gregory M. Mathews, F. R. S. E. |
Fellow of the Linnean and Zoological Societies of London | Member of the British
Ornithologists’ Union | Corresponding Fellow of the American Ornithologists’
Union | Member of the Royal Australasian Ornithologists’ Union | Author of |
“‘The Birds of Australia’ | Containing the Names and Synonyms Connected |
with each Genus, Species and Subspecies of | Birds found in Australia, at present
known to | the author. | [vignette]. Witherby & Co., 326 High Holborn, Lon-
don, W. C.| 1913. roy 8vo. pp. i-xxiv + 1-332 + index and map of Australia

howing type localities. [Edition limited to 270 copies.]

Vvoligia | Recent Literature. 117

Check-list of Australian birds prepared by a Committee of the Royal
Australasian Ornithologists’ Union, inasmuch as the list did not at all reflect
the present status of Australian ornithology, while it rejected the principles
of zoological nomenclature now in almost universal use. In the course of
our remarks we expressed regret that the Committee could not have seen
its way clear to avail itself of Mr. Gregory M. Mathews’ laborious researches
into the nomenclature of Australian birds.

While we have had no occasion to alter our views on this matter, we are
gratified to find that Mr. Mathews has gone steadily along with his re-
searches and has now embodied them in a ‘ List of the Birds of Australia’
which represents the finished result of the investigations of which his
‘Reference List,’ good as it was, constituted only a preliminary outline.
While still rigidly upholding the International Code of Nomenclature
Mr. Mathews has gone farther and has relinquished such of his personal
views as were at variance with the published ‘ opinions’ of the Interna-
tional Commission, and accepted the generic names of Brisson. It is
broadminded action of this kind, that gives us such high hope of attaining
a uniform zoological nomenclature in the not very distant future.

Mr. Mathews’ ‘ List’ follows the plan of the last edition of the A. O. U.
Check-List and the recent Hand-List of British Birds by Messrs. Hartert,.
Jourdain, Ticehurst and Witherby; giving binomial headings for the groups
of subspecies, generic types and the method of their fixation, and the type
locality for each species as well as its range. It is moreover an improve-
ment upon these lists in that it gives a full synonymy for both genera and
species and fixes types for the generic synonyms. The work thus becomes
far more than a list of Australian birds, being an important contribution to
the study of ornithological nomenclature.

As an authoritative Australian list it stands preéminent. The literature
has been exhaustively studied, every point of nomenclature has been made
to conform with the rulings and opinions of the only authoritative body
that we have — the International Commission and personal opinion has
been made subservient to majority rule. It is to be earnestly hoped that
Australian ornithologists will be broadminded enough to realize that in
order to have any permanency in nomenclature we must follow some au-
thoritative rules, and that they will accept as their guide the splendid work
that Mr. Mathews has produced. Much remains to be done on Australian
birds but here is a solid foundation upon which to build. No human work
is infallible, there will be additions to this list as well as eliminations and
alterations — without them there could be no progress, and there are also:
legitimate differences of opinion as to just how much differentiation a form:
should exhibit to warrant recognition. These, however, are inevitable in
any list and we cannot but feel that this work of Mr. Mathews is going to
be the one followed by the progressive ornithologists of Australia, many of
whom are evidently not in sympathy with the list prepared by their com-
mittee.

In his preface Mr. Mathews presents a historic review of systematic

118 Recent Literature. aes
ornithology in Australia, and discusses the whole nomenclature problem as
well as the zoogeography of the region.

The volume as a whole contains an enormous amount of information
and ornithologists both in Australia and elsewhere should feel grateful to
Mr. Mathews for his painstaking researches and for presenting the results
in such an available form.— W. S.

Witherby on the Moult of the Rook.!— The well known Rook of
England and Europe and an eastern subspecies ranging to Japan differ
from the Crows in having the face and upper throat bare of feathers in the
adult, though they are normally feathered in juvenal birds. The method
by which the feathers are lost has been a frequent subject for speculation
and most writers seem to have preferred to speculate rather than to experi-
ment, as frequently happens in similar cases. Mr. H. F. Witherby, how-
ever, by securing a good series of birds of all ages in the flesh, and
studying them intelligent!y, has cleared up the whole matter. He finds
that at the post-juvenal moult a new set of feathers is acquired and the
bird has a fully feathered face which it retains until January or later.
The feathers are then moulted simultaneously with the wearing of the
body plumage as the breeding season approaches. As the feathers drop
out the papillae become active, but instead of producing feathers there
arise only short ‘pins’ a millimeter or so in length, rarely terminating
with short degenerate feather structures. The down feathers which are
scattered here and there over the throat and face do not moult, and with
the pins they suffer gradual abrasion until the next autumnal moult. At
this and each succeeding post-nuptial moult the throat develops a covering
of gray down which with a few degenerate feathers that appear with it
soon wears away until the area is bare. The papille of the face do not
seem ever to become active again.after the post-juvenal moult. |

Mr. Witherby has done an excellent piece of work in demonstrating ex-
actly how and when this peculiar loss of feathers occurs. Why the feather
papillze should regularly become inactive he leaves to some one more con-
versant with feather development, and generously offers them his material.

While conducting this investigation on the moult of the head Mr.
Witherby natural y took note of the sequence of plumage elsewhere,
~which he describes in detail and which is essentially the same as in our
_American Crow.— W.S.

Trevor-Battye’s ‘Camping in Crete.’?— This handsome volume
‘forms a book of old world travel more than usually interesting to the

1 The Sequence of Plumages of the Rook. With Special Reference to the Moult
of the ‘‘Face.’”” By H. F. Witherby. British Birds, Vol. VII, No. 5, October 1,
1913, pp. 126-139.

2 Camping in Crete | with Notes upon the Animal | and Plant Life of the Island |
By | Aubyn Trevor-Battye |M.A., F.L.S., F. Z.S., F. R. G.S., etc. | Including
‘a Description of certain Caves and their Ancient Deposits | By Dorothea M. A.
Bate, M. B. O. U. | with thirty-two Plates and a Map. | Witherby & Co. | 326
igh Holborn, London |19138. S8vo. pp. i-xxi+1-308. Price 10s 6d.

Peis | Recent Literature. 119

ornitho’ogist inasmuch as the author’s interests “lay away in the moun-
tains and the plains”’ and he “ only spent short intervals in the cities,
leaving again as soon as he could possibly do so.’ His object he states
“ig a very simple one; it is to picture the scenery and natural features of
the island, and to lead the reader to go to Crete.”’ The pages are naturally
full of allusions to birds, and flowers and the general aspects of nature.
The beautiful song of the Blue Rock Thrush is described, the habits of the
Kestrels and the trapping of Partridges in the caves of the mountains.

Among the appendices are chapters on the plants, mammals, and birds
of the island. The last includes only such as were observed or obtained
between March and the end of June but contains mention of species re-
corded by other observers and not seen by the author, while the annotations
are often full.

The naturalist has much the same experience with the Cretans as with
rural natives of other countries. ‘‘ On the whole,” says our author, “‘ they
regard one, perhaps, as rather soft-headed — as harmless, but just a little
touched in the head: else why should a man be eternally digging and pick-
ing and smelling plants, or taking endless troub’e to follow some tiny bird
over the heated rocks and peer at it through glasses; and then, if he shoots
it, not even to eat it, but only take with patient trouble its feathers and its
skin! It is ridiculous.” We are glad to learn, though, that ‘‘ the Cretans,
unlike the people of France or Italy, do not slaughter the small birds.”

The half-tone illustrations and the map are excellent and the book is as
attractive in appearance as it is interesting to read.— W. S.

Hartert’s ‘Die Vogel der palaarktischen Fauna.’ !— In the present
installment of this important work the consideration of the Strigide is
completed and the Falconide treated in full, with a few pages on the
Aquilide (= Buteonide). We note the following new forms, Bubo bubo
swinhoeit, Kinkiang, China; Athene noctua lilith, Der-ez-Zor, and Falco
tinnunculus dacotie, Eastern Canaries (Lanzarote).

Tyto Biliberg is used for the Barn Owls and Strix for the Barred Owls
and the nomenclature follows the International Code in all respects.
Two cases are left undecided, i.e., Aegolius vs. Cryptoglaux and Athene vs.
Carine which depend upon the ‘ one letter rule,’ the question being whether
Aegolia and Athena of earlier date render invalid the two above names.
The trinomial system as in previous parts of the work is carried to the
extreme, in the reduction of many widely separated forms to subspecies.
The Merlin for instance becomes a subspecies of our Pigeon Hawk or to be
more exact they are both grouped as subspecies under the'binomial term
Falco columbarius. So also our Barn Owl becomes T'yto alba pratincola,
all the Barn Owls of the world being considered as subspecies of 7’. alba.

1 Die Vogel der paléarktischen Fauna. Systematische Ubersicht der in Europa,
Nord-Asien und der Mittelmeerregion vorkommenden Vogel. Von Dr. Ernst
Hartert. Heft VIII (Bd II., 2). Berlin, August 1913.

120 Recent Literature. [jan

We trust that this invaluable work of reference on palzarctic birds will
be pushed to an early completion.— W. 8.

Economic Value of Wild Birds in South Africa.— Dr. H. E. Warren,
Director of the Natal Museum has recently published! an instructive
summary of the relation of South African birds to agriculture. Dr.
Warren comments on the abundance of birds in certain European countries
and attributes their numbers in large part to the prevalence of hedges which
furnish shelter and nesting sites. A noticeable scarcity of birds in South
Africa is thought to be due to excessive clearing, the lack of hedges, and to
the destructive activities of native and white boys.

The following groups of birds are said to be beneficial: owls, kestrels, the
Tetraonide, coucals, woodpeckers, barbets, hoopoes, Caprimulgide,
rollers, and cuckoos. Special mention is made of locust birds, including
the white stork, the white-bellied stork, pratincoles, wattled starling and
the hadadah ibis. Other groups coming in for commendation are the
plovers, lapwing, cranes, the secretary-bird, ground hornbill, kites and
certain other birds-of-prey. The birds mentioned as injurious include
bulbuls, mouse-birds, and the pied starling— W. L. M.

Bird Enemies of Diabroticas.— Two of the recent contributions from
the U. 8. Bureau of Entomology, published in the new series of Bulletins
of the Department of Agriculture contain notes on the bird enemies of
destructive beetles. The southern corn rootworm ( Diabrotica duodecim-
punctata), the adult of which is usually known as the spotted cucumber
beetle, is a serious pest. High percentages of the stand of corn in some
localities are damaged and this in addition to losses among cucurbit and
other crops contribute to a total damage amounting to many thousands of
dollars. The ubiquitous beetle responsible for this mischief is eaten by
many birds. A list of 24 species furnished by the Biological Survey is
published? by Professor F. M. Webster, the author of the two bulletins
here mentioned.

A closely related beetle, the western corn rootworm ( Diabrotica longi-
cornis), causes the same sort of damage as its congener, and to a correspond-
ing extent in its more limited range. The Biological Survey was able to
furnish * the names of only two bird enemies of this pest, namely the night-
hawk and the wood pewee.— W. L. M.

Shelford’s ‘Animal Communities in Temperate America.’ —
With the chief exceptions of investigations in Michigan under Adams and

1 Agr. Journ. of South Africa. VI, No. 3. Sept. 1913, pp. 461-465.

2? Bull. No. 5, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture, Sept. 1913, p. 9.

3 Bull. No. 8, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture, Sept. 1913, p. 6.

4 Shelford, V. E. Animal Communities in'Temperate America as illustrated in
the Chicago region. Bull. No. 5, Geog. Soc. of Chicago, October, 1913, 362 pp.

Nea | Recent Literature. [21

Ruthven, and Shelford’s personal researches in ecology, ecological studies
in this country have heretofore related almost entirely to plants. Shel-
ford’s status as a pioneer animal ecologist is therefore clear. The impor-
tance of the subject and his mastery of it are demonstrated by the book
herewith reviewed.

The contents of ‘ Animal Communities in Temperate America’ may be
conveniently grouped in 3 categories, a general discussion of the animal
organism and its environmental relations (3 chapters), the nature of various
environments and an account of their inhabitants (11 chapters), and a
general summary and theoretical discussion (one chapter.) Ecology as
generally understood is the relation of organisms to environment. As
environment includes all living things with which a species comes in con-
tact as well as its inorganic surroundings, it is easy to see that ecology is a
very comprehensive science. In fact the impression one gathers from the
introductory chapters of Shelford’s book is that ecology is only less broad
than biology as a whole.

The science of ecology has one obstacle to struggle against, that is, the
impression that ecological papers often seem to be but an elaboration of
the obvious. The present reviewer must admit that this criticism is not
unfounded; in fact the impression forced upon him by a pretentious ecolo-
gical publication of some years since took the following form, somewhat
Hibernice, that it was a statement of things everyone knew in language no
one could understand. Ecologic terminology is not carried to an extreme
in Shelford’s book. The statement of facts constituting part of the funda-
mantal knowledge of most biologists is necessarily included. A little
inspection, however, shows that the ecologist endeavors to get at the phy-
slological basis for the relations of animals to their environments. The
obvious, well it is obvious, but the why of the obvious, ah! there is where
the expert in ecology is needed. Everyone knows that black-fly larve live
on the upper surfaces of stones in swift currents. Why they prefer this
habitat is not so well known. Besides the evident advantage of having a
plentiful supply of food constantly brought along by the stream, the eco-
logist has found that they cannot complete their life history in the absence
of current. The pupa of the fly is 'oosely enclosed in a cocoon. It has
been found that without current the insect cannot make this cocoon, but
makes a shapeless tangle instead. Certain animals prefer sand that is less
shifting and is slightly darkened by humus. Some fishes can live in water
with only 1 cc. of oxygen per liter while others require from 6-14 cc. We
might enumerate other instances of scientific answers to various whys, but
suffice it to say that ecology is a field that has long needed cultivation. It
has already produced valuable results but much remains to be done.

The notes on birds in this book consist largely of lists of the species
inhabiting various formations. There can be little complaint about most
of these, but the statement on page 274 that ‘‘ The Baltimore and Orchard
Orioles build elaborate nests on the shrubs,’”’ should be corrected. On
page 166 the scarcity of information on quantity of life on the land is

122 Recent Literature i? ae

mentioned. However the following papers bearing on this point could

with advantage have been abstracted or cited in the bibliography.

Burns, F. L. A warbler census. Osprey, Vol. 2, No. 4, Dec. 1897, pp.

48-50.

A sectional bird census. The Wilson Bulletin. N.S. Vol.

8, No. 4, Dec. 1901, pp. 84-103.

Forbes, S.A. An ornithological cross-section of Illinois in Autumn. Bul.
Ill. State Lab. Nat. Hist., Vol. 7, 1907, pp. 305-335.

my The mid-summer bird life of Illinois: a statistical study.

Am. Nat., Vol. 42, Aug. 1908, pp. 505-519.

Hales, H. The birds on a farm. Oologist [Willard’s]. Vol. 5, 1880, pp.
73-75.

McAtee, W. L. Census of four square feet. Science, N. S., Vol. 26,
Oct. 4, 1907, pp. 447-449.

Some remarks on the economic significance of birds call for further
comment here. On pages 8 and 10 Shelford notes the incongruities of
protection based on sentimental grounds. We have no quarrel with these
statements, since upon the basis of sentiment alone, the protection of all
groups may be urged with equal propriety.

The protection of birds for economic reasons is an entirely different
matter, and to the reviewer, seems to rest upon an adequate foundation.
Shelford says ‘‘ Other things being equal there are but two more reasons
for special measures for the preservation of birds, than for the preservation
of reptiles, amphibians, or insects. First, birds are subject to destruction
by reckless gunners. Second, they are less dependent upon natural condi-
tions ....and are better able to survive after land has been put under
cultivation than some other groups.” (p. 11.)

Two additional reasons for the protection of birds, one would say without
reservation, should be enough to warrant preferential protection for them.
The second reason given by Shelford touches the heart of the matter.
Birds are abundant and very adaptable. They have to a large degree that
independence of environment to which man owes in part the dominance he
now enjoys. Birds have a greater potentiality for good than any other
group of metazoa. The abundant small mammals are excluded for the
same reason as vegetarian insects, their economic tendencies are too largely
adverse to the best interests of man. Contrasted with other groups of
predators upon the enemies of man, birds are greater destroyers and more
mobile than any other group, they are more abundant than the mammals,
and less subject to great fluctuations in numbers than the parasitic and
predaceous insects.

There are few who would deny that as a group birds are more useful and
less injurious, insects less useful and more injurious. As reasons for mun-
dane activities usually go, those for special protection for birds are cogent.

Shelford stands pat in referring to “ that detestable avian rat, the Eng-
lish sparrow.” This again is a matter of sentiment, the bird is detestable
to those who detest it. The following facts should not be forgotten. The

“ce

eee | Recent Literature. 123
English Sparrow alone of all our birds will live in the parkless sections of
large cities; to many people there it is the only bird and they would not
give it up. As to economic value, it may be said that the English Sparrow
is known to feed on a larger variety of insect pests than is any native bird
and that it is one of the most effective enemies of the destructive alfalfa
weevil.

The part of the theoretical discussion in Shelford’s book that is probably
of most interest to readers of ‘The Auk’ is that relating to geographical dis-
tribution. Remarks on page 161 indicate that the variously proposed
laws of temperature control in the opinion of ecologists, do not fit the case.
These opinions are summed up by Shelford on p. 299: ‘ Nothing is, I
believe, more incorrect than the idea that the same single factor governs
the regional distribution of most animal species. Since the environment is
a complex of many factors, every animal, while in its normal environmental
complex, lives surrounded by and responds to a complex of factors in its
normal activities.” The question properly asked, “‘ Can a single factor
control distribution?” probably must be answered in the negative.

As to the general style of the book it may be said that it is not adapted
to recreative reading. The book is frankly a manual or text-book, hence
the style is direct, concise and inornate. The title more properly would
read ‘‘ Animal Communities in the Chicago Region.’”?’ Temperate America
not only includes part of the continent to the south but is of too broad
implication even for the present treatment of the subject as applied to
North America. The illustrations are abundant and good; the bibliog-
raphy and indexes are excellent. The publication was subsidized and
locally distributed by The Geographic Society of Chicago. It is handled,
however, as one of the regular series of University of Chicago publications
and may now be obtained only from the University Press — W. L. M.

The Oriole.'— This handsomely printed and well illustrated journal
appears under the editorship of Mr. John Dryden Kuser who is also presi-
dent of the Somerset Hills Bird Club, of which it is the official organ. The
objects of the club are the protection and study of birds, and this, their
first publication, will go far to attract attention to their work and to
stimulate the members to further endeavor. There are articles by mem-
bers, on the Chickadee, Passenger Pigeon, Cardinal and Mallard, illustrated
by colored plates loaned by the National Association of Audubon Societies,
and other contributions of a more general nature including one by W. De W.
Miller, ‘Hints on Bird Study’; and one by C. Wm. Beebe, ‘ Feathered
Martyrs.’ Dr. Wm. H. Wiegmann also contributes three records of the
Purple Sandpiper near New York City, and a note on the occurrence of the
Bartramian Sandpiper, both rare species in this vicinity.

We congratulate the editor of the Oriole upon its creditable appearance
and trust it may have a useful and successful career— W. S.

1The Oriole. Official Organ of the Somerset Hills Bird Club, Bernardsville,
N. J. Vol. 1, No. 1, August, 1913.

124 Recent Literature. ia

The Ornithological Journals.

Bird-Lore.! Vol. XV. No. 5. September—October, 1913.

With Asio in the Greenwood. By Florence Merriam Bailey.— A most
interesting account of the Long-eared Ow] in North Dakota.

The Sharp-tailed Grouse in Manitoba. By J. Woodcock.— With
photograph from life.

Notes on a pair of Holbeell’s Grebe. By M.S. Crosby.

An Opportunity Interrupted. By Arthur A. Allen— A study of the
nesting of the Blue-headed Vireo. A Cowbird’s egg laid before the nest
was quite completed was ‘ floored over ’ but two more were laid later!

The Migration of North American Sparrows.— Harris’ and the Golden-
crowned Sparrows. Migration Tables by W. W. Cooke, plumage notes
by F. M. Chapman. Color plate by Fuertes.

Educational Leaflet— The Cat-bird. By Witmer Stone.— With color
plate by Horsfall.

Bird-Lore. Vol. XV. No. 6. November—December, 1913.

Impressions of the Voices of Tropical Birds. By Louis Agassiz Fuertes.
— The first installment of what promises to be an interesting and valuable
discussion of the songs and singing habits of South American birds. Illus-
trated by original sketches.

The Tropic-Birds of Bermuda. By Karl Plath. Illustrated by photo-
graphic reproductions.

The ‘Old Maid’ Gull. By W. O. Doolittle.

The Present Status of the Heath Hen. By George W. Field.

My Bird Neighbors. By Mrs. L. H. Toussaint.— In Florida.

How to Make a Thrashery. By Mable Osgood Wright.

The Migration of N. A. Sparrows. The Rosy Finches. Migration by
W. W. Cooke, plumage notes by F. M. Chapman, color plate by Fuertes.

The Annual Report of the Audubon Societies forms a contribution
of about 100 pages, well worthy of perusal.

The Tufted Titmouse. By Florence Merriam Bailey. Educational
Leaflet, with plate by Fuertes.

The Condor.? Vol. XV. No.5. September—October, 1913.

A Revision of the California Forms of Pipilo maculatus Swainson, with
Description of a New Subspecies. By H. 8. Swarth.— In this paper a
material increase in the races of Pipilo maculatus is proposed; P. m. falcifer
McGregor, is recognized for the coast form regarded as inseparable from
P. m. oregonus in the A. O. U. Check-List; P. m. megalonyz is restricted to
~ the San Diegan region and the birds of the great interior valleys is separated

1 Organ of the Audubon Societies. Edited by F. M. Chapman. Published by

D. Appleton & Co., Harrisburg, Pa.
2 Edited for the Cooper Ornithological Club, by Joseph Grinnell. Published at

The Condor office, Hollywood, California.

Wie | Recent Literature. 125

as P. m. falcinellus subsp. nov. Grinnell’s P. m. curtatus regarded as
identical with P. m. arcticus is recognized as distinct, occurring in the
Warner Mountain region in summer and along the lower Colorado in win-
ter. In addition it is pointed out that P. m. clemente occurs only as San
Clemente and Santa Catalina Islands, the Santa Cruz bird being megalonyz.
This paper seems to be a very careful piece of work and the additional .
information relative to P. m. curtatus should call for a reconsideration of
this form on the part of the A. O. U. Committee.

Unusual Nesting Site of the Mallard. By O. J. Murie.— In a tree seven
feet from the ground.

Call Notes and Mannerisms of the Wren Tit. By J. Grinnell— A
valuable contribution to the history of this unique bird. Mr. Grinnell’s
reference to the value of song in judging relationship of birds is in line with
an editorial in the July ‘ Auk,’ while his efforts to represent the various vocal
efforts of the bird by the syllabic method are additional evidence of the
utter failure of this method in the vast majority of cases. His careful
analysis would doubtless be understood by one who had already heard the
bird, but to one who has not it conveys no meaning whatever as an aid in
trying to reproduce the notes. There seems to be no method by which
the quality of a song may be conveyed in words to one who has not heard it.

The Wilson Bulletin.! Vol. XXV. No.3. September, 1913.

Home Life of the Glossy Ibis (Plegadis autumnalis Linn.). By Oscar
E. Baynard.— An account of the nesting of the species at Orange Lake,
Alachua Co., Florida; with half-tone illustrations.

The Olive-backed Thrush ( Hylocichla ustulata swainsoni) at his Summer
Home. By Cordelia J. Stanwood.— One of the very best studies of nestling
birds that has yet appeared, with tables of increase in weight, and length,
observations on food, etc., illustrated by half-tones from photographs.

A Vacation in Quebec. By G. Eifrig.

The Winter Birds of Algonquin Park, Ontario. By A. Cleghorn.

The Warbler.2. Vol. VII. 1913 (first issue since October, 1910).

A Theoretical Analysis of the Colors of Familiar Warblers. By John
Treadwell Nichols.— A detailed discussion of the plumages of 25 familiar
species, without however arriving at any very satisfactory result. It
seems doubtful if any such result can be attained by the study of any
limited group of birds.

A Nesting Season in Nova Scotia. By Harold F. Tufts.

An Apparently Heretofore Unfigured Plumage of Conuropsis carolinensis.
By Henry Thurston.— A green-headed bird with an ‘ orange-crimson ’
frontlet and cheeks, but no yellow. It is supposed to be the normal juvenal
plumage.

1 Edited for the Wilson Ornithological Club by Lynds Jones, Oberlin, Ohio.
Edited and published by John Lewis Childs, Floral Park, N. Y.

126 Recent Literature. oe

A Collecting Trip to Diomede Island. By John Koren.

Notes on the Nesting of Bobwhite at Flowerfield, L. I. By John Lewis.
Childs.— With half-tone plate of nest.

Wilson’s Plover. By Henry Thurston.— At Tampa Bay, Fla.

The Depredations of Cats on Muskeget Island. By G. K. Noble —
Cats left by inhabitants of hunters’ shacks destroy many nesting terns.

Long Island Bird Notes. By John Lewis Childs and Henry Thurston.

Notes Extending Dates of Arrival and Departure of Certain Species on
Long Island. By Henry Thurston.— Notes on 23 species.

Long Island Notes. By J. T. Nichols and R. C. Murphy.— Notes on
51 species.

Two hand colored plates of a set of eggs of the Knot and the head of the
immature Carolina Paroquet illustrate the number.

The Odlogist.! Vol. XXX. No.10. October 15, 1913.

Birds seen on a Long Journey. By A. C. Read.— A nominal list of
species seen en route from Isle of Pines to Montreal Canada and return.

The Odlogist. Vol. XXX. No.11. November 15, 1913.

Wintering of the Catbird at Pittsburg, Pa. By Thomas D. Burleigh.

The Northern Pileated Woodpecker. By S. 8. Dickey.— Nesting in
Huntingdon Co., Penna.

Unusual Winter Birds. By Thomas D. Burleigh.

The Ibis.2, X Series. Vol. I. No. 4. October, 1913.

Notes on Birds around Mpumu, Uganda. By L. M. Seth-Smith—
Annotated list of 174 species with colored plate of eggs and half-tone of
Platystira cyanea on its nest.

Corrections to ‘the ‘ Catalogue of the Collection of Birds’ ee in the
British Museum.’ By Rev. F. C. R. Jourdain.— This contribution covers.
only the palzarctic species.

Notes and Observations on the Painted Snipe (Rostratula capensis) in
Ceylon. By J. O. Beven.— An interesting account of this bird which is.
one of comparatively few species in which the female is larger and more
brightly colored than the male.

Notes on the Vultures found in the neighborhood of Simla and adjacent
ranges of the Himalayas. By P. T. L. Dodsworth.— A valuable contribu-
tion to the life history and distribution of seven species of these birds.
which on account of their large size and repulsive nature have been but
little studied. It is pointed out that a lack of satisfactory specimens
renders it impossible to settle finally the question of the identity of Gyps
fulvus and G. fulvescens.

A few Remarks on the European Certhiide. By Collingwood Ingram.
— Six subspecies are recognized of which Certhia familiaris pyrenaica from
the upper forests of the Pyrenees is described as new.

1 Edited and published by R. M. Barnes, Lacon, Ill.
2 Edited for the British Ornithologists’ Union, by W. L. Sclater. Published by
R. H. Porter, 7 Princess St., Cavendish Sq., W., London.

Pon. | Recent Literature. 127

On a Collection of Birds from Southern Abyssinia presented to the
British Museum by Mr. W. N. McMillan. Part I. Passeres. By W. R.
Ogilvie-Grant.— This report is based upon a collection of upwards of 3000
skins collected by P. C. Zaphiro employed by Mr. McMillan to supplement
the collection obtained on his expedition to the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan in
1903-1904. The annotated list includes 229 species, of which Salpornis
salvadorii abyssinica, Limonu on the Urguessa River, is described as new.
Several other novelties from other collections are also described in this
paper incidentally: Mirafra pecilosterna jacksoni, Kikuyu; Bradyornis
infuscatus seimundi, Deelfontein Cape Colony; and B. 7. ansorgii Catam-
bella and Huxe. The last two occur in a monograph of the genus
Bradyornis which is appended. The author’s practice of citing two or
more types is quite unnecessary and is the source of possible complications
in the future. Sooner or later some one else must select one of them as
the type.

Obituary. Philip Lutley Sclater. By A. H. Evans.— With Bibliog-
raphy of 582 titles.

Brief Obituaries of Thomas Ayres and Dr. J. W. B. Gunning.

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club... Vol. XXXII. Sep-
tember, 1913.— This volume of 336 pages comprises the club’s annual rec-
ord of bird migration for the spring of 1912 and autumn of 1911. It follows
the same general plan as the previous reports and contains a vast amount
of data. It is possible, from the records received, to group the migrants into
several classes according to the points at which they reach England, the
Ring-Ouzel, Grasshopper Warbler, Pied Flycatcher and Land-Rail arriving
solely on the western half of the south coast, while the Nightingale, Tree-
Pipit, Red-backed Shrike, Wryneck and Turtle Dove come in on the south-
east coast, etc. The most striking feature of the winter of 1911-12 was the
unusual visitation of Little Auks.

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. No. CXC. October
24, 1913.— This number is devoted to a Guide to Selborne and a Synopsis
of the Life of Gilbert White, by W. H. Mullens — prepared for the visit
of the Club to Selborne which was given up on account of the death of Dr.
Sclater.

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. No. CXCI. Octo-
ber 24, 1913.

Obituary of Philip Lutley Sclater.

W. R. Ogilvie Grant exhibited specimens of the rare Spitsbergen Ptarmi-
gan, Lagopus hyperboreus.

Carduelis carduelis bermudiana was described as new by J. N. Kennedy,
but the propriety of naming birds introduced by man and which had
changed color slightly as has been the case with the European Goldfinch
in Bermuda, was questioned by members.

1 Edited by W. R. Ogilvie Grant. Published by Witherby & Co., 326 High
Holborn, London.

128 Recent Literature. ee

Hon Walter Rothschild discussed the relationship of various forms of
Cassowary.

D. A. Bannerman described as new Sazicola dacotie muriele, Allegranza
Island, Acanthis cannabina harterti Lanzarote Island, Canary Islands.
H. H. Harington presented a revised key to the species of Turdinulus
describing as new T’. brevicaudus venningi and T. epilépidotus bakeri, from
the Southern Shan States, Burma.

EK. Stresemann called attention to variation in House Sparrows, the
English birds being slightly smaller than the Continental race.

British Birds. Vol. VII. No.5. October 1, 1913. é

The Sequence of Plumages of the Rook. By H. F. Witherby (see p. 118).

British Birds. Vol. VII. No. 6. November 1, 1913.

The Red-throated Diver in its Breeding haunts. By Miss E. L. Turner.
— A valuable contribution to the life history of this Loon with numerous
half-tones from photographs.

Dr. L. Bureau’s Work on the Partridge. By N. F. Ticehurst.— A review
of ‘L’age des Perdix. II. La Perdix rouge,’ an exhaustive study of
moult.

Recovery of Marked Birds.

The Avicultural Magazine.2 Vol. IV. No. 11. September, 1913.

The Seed Snipe. By Hubert D. Astley.— Plate of Thinocorus rumi-
civorus and account of some live birds brought from Chili.

Nesting of the White Wagtail, Motacilla alba. By W. E. Teschemaker.

Nesting of Purple Sunbirds in Captivity. By E. J. Brook.

Some of My Sunbirds. By Alfred Ezra. -

The Avicultural Magazine. Vol. IV. No. 12. October, 1913.

Colored plate of Petrocincla cinchloryncha.

Hunting Duck Eggs in the Marshes of Manitoba. By H. K. Job.

Longevity in Captivity. By A. G. Butler— One Red-billed Weaver
has lived in the author’s aviary of over 18 years.

A Prairie Chicken raised from captive laid Eggs. By John C. Phillips.

Bird Notes.? Vol. IV. (n.s.) No.8. August, 1913.

Some Interesting Birds. By W. T. Page, illustrations by H. Willford.
— Admirable photographs of the Lesser Black-backed Gull, continued in ,
Nos. 9 and 10 with illustrations of Terns and Cormorants.

An Island on the River Jhelum, Punjab. By H. Whistler— Describes
the nesting birds.

Bird Notes. Vol. IV (n.s.) No. 9. September, 1913.

Memories of a Trip in Argentina. By Mary C. Hawke.

Accounts of various birds in captivity in both numbers.

1 Edited by H. F. Witherby. Published by Witherby & Co., 326 High Hol-
born, London.

* Edited for the Avicultural Society by Hubert D. Astley. Published by West,
Newman & Co., 54 Hatton Garden, E. C., London.

3 Journal of the Foreign Bird Club. Edited by Wesley T. Page. ‘Treasurer,
Sydney Williams Holland Lodge, Edmonton, London, N., England.

Pion | Recent Literature. 129

The Austral Avian Record.! Vol. II. Nos. 2 and 3. October 23,
1913.

Notes on Billberg’s Synopsis Faunz Scandinavie. By G. M. Mathews
and Tom Iredale.

Dates of Publication of Plates of the ‘‘ Ornithology ....of the ‘ Co-
quille.’”’ By G‘ M. Mathews.

New Generic Names, with Some Notes on Others. By G. M. Mathews.
— Twenty-seven new names proposed.

Additions and Corrections to my Reference List. By Gregory M.
Mathews.— Five new names proposed and a long list of synonyms and
changes.

The Emu.? Vol. XIII. Part 2. October 1, 1913.

A Commonwealth Collection. By A. J. Campbell— Account of the
egg collection of Mr. H. L. White, with three excellent color plates.

Description of a New Sericornis. By C. F. Cole— 5S. insularis sp. nov.
Forsyth Island, Bass Strait.

Birds of Moora (W. A.) and District. By C. L. E. Orton and P. T.
Sandland.— Annotated list of 125 species.

The Black-eared Cuckoo (Mesocalius palliolatus, Lath.). By P. A.
Gilbert and H. Keane.— Its eggs are chocolate colored, closely resembling
those of the Little Field Wren (Chthonicola sagittata) its most frequent host.

Some Swamp Birds. By A. C. Stone.

Bird-Life on White Island (N. 2). By W. R. B. Oliver.

Visit to Torilla Plains. By E. D. Barnard.

The Birds of Peel Island. By N. V. I. Agnew.— Annotated list of 76
species.

American View of the R. A. O. U. “ Check-list.”-— This is an answer to
the review in the July ‘Auk’, which naturally was not endorsed by the
editors of ‘The Emu.’ We still maintain however that to have stability,
nomenclature, in any branch, and in any country, must follow international
rules and custom; and that in order to carry on the splendid work that they
have accomplished in the past, and to make known to the world the orni-
thology of their most interesting continent, progressive Australian orni-
thologists cannot be hampered by any such list as that proposed by the
R. A.O. U. Committee. The editors of ‘The Emu’ make one statement to
which exception must be taken, i. e., ‘‘the reviewer has not had the same
experience and knowledge as Australians of the practical application of
trinomial methods.” After serving for twelve years on the A. O. U.
Committee on Classification and Nomenclature and having to pass upon
the host of trinomial forms that have been proposed in America in that

i Edited by Gregory M. Mathews. Published by Witherby & Co., 326 High
Holborn, London.

2Organ of the Royal Australasian Ornithologists’ Union. Edited by A. J.
Campbell and Charles Barrett, Melbourne, Australia. London agents, Witherby
& Co., 326 High Holborn.

130 Recent Literature. ee
time, one would seem to have had ample opportunity to judge of the
desirability of the ‘trinomial method.’ But even though he is not entirely
in sympathy with the extremists in matters of subdivision the writer
strongly upholds the trinomial method as a most desirable and indispensa-
ble feature of nomenclature.

The Journal of the South African Ornithologists’ Union.! Vol.
IX. No.1. July, 1918.

Egg Collecting in the Bushveld. By Austin Roberts.— An interesting
account of the physical features of the ‘bushveld’ and of the nesting
habits of upwards of 125 of its characteristic birds.

Additions to the List of Birds of the District of Matatiele E. Griqualand.
By C. G. Davies—— Twenty-five species.

The White Stork in South Africa. By Alwin Haagner.

Note on a Three-toed Ostrich Chick. By John Hewitt.

Field Notes on Birds Observed and Collected in the Boror District of
Portuguese East Africa. By F. V. Kirby.— Thirty-nine species.

The Nidification of the Crowned Francolin in Captivity. By A. K.
Haagner.

Journal fiir Ornithologie. Vol. 61. No. 4. October, 1913. (In
German.)

Between Migration and Breeding-time in the Meander. A Contribu-
tion to the Ornithology of Asia Minor. By Hugo Weigold.

On a Collection of Birds from Mysol. By Erwin Stresemann.— An
annotated list of 72 species. Loriculus awrantiifrons batavorum is described
as new from Dutch New Guinea. ;

On the 1911 Migration of Nutcrackers in Schlesia. By Paul Kollibay.

An Assembling place for Cranes. By. E. Hesse.

Remarks on some Persian Birds. By N. Sarudny and M. Harms.

Journal fiir Ornithologie. Special Number 2. 1913.

Report of Bird Migration at Rossiten, 1911, Part 2, and 1912, Part 1.
By Dr. J. Thienemann.

Ornithologisches Monatsberichte.*? Vol.21. No.9. September, 1913.
(In German.)

Bird life on the Rovuma. By L. Schuster.

Breeding Habits of the Tern. By J. Thienemann.— Based upon ob-
servations at Rossitten.

On Parus bokharensis Licht and its nearest allies. By N. Sarudny and
M. Harms. P. b. panderi described as new.

Description of two New Birds collected by Drs. Bluntschli and Mr.
Peyer on the island of Marajo at the Mouth of the Amazon. By H. Graf

1 Editors, Dr. J. W. B. Gunning, B. C. R. Langford and A. K. Haagner,
Pretoria, Transvaal. London Agents, Witherby & Co., 326 High Holborn.

2 Hdited for the German Ornithological Society by Dr. A. Reichenow.
L. A. Kittler, Agent, Leipzig.

3’ Edited by Dr. A. Reichenow. R. Friedlander and Son, agents, Berlin, N. W.
6, Karlsh. 11.

i

ie | Recent Literature. 131

von Berlepsch.— Amazona ochrocephala xantholema and Zenaida jessiee
marajensis.

On the North African Buzzard. By D. Kleinschmidt.

Ornithologisches Jahrbuch. Vol. XXIV. Nos.3-4. May—August,
1913. (In German.)

On the Capture of a Jay-Cuckoo (Clamator glandarius) and a favorable
Locality for the Observation of Bird Migration. By O. Reiser.

Journal Notes in Jerusalem. By P. E. Schmitz.

Journal Notes on the Oder delta Country and Lower Pomerania. By
R. J. Fromholz.

On the Ornithology of the Island of Corsica. By A. Laubmann.— A
fully annotated list-of 40 species.

Ornithologische Monatsschrift.! Vol. 38. No. 8. August, 1913.

(In German.)

A Sketch of the Bird-life of Plauen and Vicinity. By F. Dersch.

Woodpecker and Squirrel, with colored plate.

Ornithologische Monatschrift. Vol. 38. No.9. September, 1913.

Ornithological Sketches from Memmert, 1912. By O. Leege.

Numerous notes on bird study and bird protection in these and also in
No. 10.

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie2 Vol. V. No. 54. October 7,
1913. (In French.)

The National Park. By L. Lavanden.— Its protection to birds.

The Truth about the Birds of Prey. By F. Daguin.

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. Vol. V. No. 55. November 7,
1913.

On Eagles observed in France. By E. Anfrie.

On the two new Birds of Paradise (P. duivenbodei and P. raggiana
sororia). By A. Menegaux— The latter proves = P. intermedia deVis,
upon the relationship of the former several views are advanced.

Duration of Incubation in the Pigeons. By X. Raspail.

Ornithological Observations in the Vicinity of Setif, Algeria, 1895-1900
(concluded). By A. L. Charriere.

Ardea.? Vol. II. No.3. September, 1913. (In Dutch.)

Ornithological Investigations in Steil in Omstreken (1908-1912). By
P. C. Riotte (concluded).

The ‘ Strophe’ of the Meadow-Pipit. By H. Stadler and C. Schmitt.

Results of Bird-banding by the Museum of Leyden. By E. D. Van Oort.

1 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
Verlagsbuchlandlung in Magdenburg.

2 Edited by A. Menegaux, 55 Rue de Buffon, Paris.

3 Edited for the Netherlands Ornithological Society by L. F. DeBeaufort, A.
A. Van Pelt Lechner and E. D. Van Oort. Published by E. J. Brill, Leyden.

132 Recent Literature. aunt

Ornithological Articles in Other Journals.!

Calvert, E. W. Guelph Winter Birds, 1912-13. (Ontario Natural
Science Bulletin, No. 8. 1913.)

Calvert, E.W. Migration Report of the Wellington Field Naturalists’
Club. Guelph Ont., 1912. (Ontario Natural Science Bulletin, No. 8,
1913.)

Weston, F. M., Jr. and others. Notes on South Carolina Birds. (Bul-
letin of the Charleston Museum, Oct.—Nov., 1913.)

Chamberlin, E. B. Notes on the Breeding Habits of the Ruby-
throated Hummingbird. (Bulletin of the Charleston Museum, Nov., 1913.)

Anderson, Peter. The Birds of the Island of Tiree. (Scottish Natura-
list, Sept., Oct. and Nov., 1913.)

Patten, C. J. Asiatic Sky-Lark on Migration Obtained at the Tuskar
Rock Light Station. (Zodlogist, Sept. 15, 1913.)

Selous, Edmund. A Diary of Ornithological Observation made in
Iceland during June and July, 1912— continued. (Zodlogist, November
15, 1913.)

Ingram, Collingwood. On the Marsh- and Willow-Tits of France.
(Zodlogist, November 15, 1913.)

Farley, F. L. Is Bartram’s Sandpiper Disappearing from the Prairies?
(Ottawa Naturalist, Aug.—Sept., 1913.)

Speechly, H. M. Tyrannus verticalis for the fourth successive year at
Pilot Mound, Man. (Ottawa Naturalist, Aug—Sept., 1913.) t

Stanwood, Cordelia J. The Home Life of the Red-breasted Nut-
hatch. (Nature and Culture, October, 1913.) — Another of the author’s
admirable and painstaking studies of nesting birds.

Stanwood, Cordelia J. A Tame Downy Woodpecker. (Nature and
Culture, April, 1913.)

Heald, F. D., and Studhalter. Preliminary Note on Birds as Carriers
of the Chestnut Blight Fungus. (Science, Aug. 22, 1913.) — The results
of this investigation are by no means convincing. At any rate if spores
during a wet period can be rubbed of the branches of the trees in such
quantities, the millions that must be scattered by other agencies renders
the part played by birds in their dissemination scarcely worth considering.

Guelph, G. P. Game Birds in New York State. (Forest and Stream,
October 11, 1913.) — Contains records of shore birds in Lake Ontario.

Ingersoll, Ernest. Comfort in Old Books. (Forest and Stream,
October 18, 1913.) — Refers to various ‘ bird books.’

Phillips, J. C. Reciprocal Crosses between Reeves’s Pheasant and the
Common Ring-neck Pheasant Producing Unlike Hybrids. (Amer. Nat.,

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
obligations to Mr. J. A. G. Rehn for a list of ornithological articles contained in
the accessions to the library from week to week.

ar ama Recent Literature. 133

November, 1913.) — The birds could readily be separated and appeared
like two distinct species, those from the male Reeve’s and female Ring-
neck being uniformly lighter than those from the other combination.

Macginley, P. J. Notes from the Skelligs. (The Irish Naturalist,
November, 1913.)

Alphonsus, Brother. Winter Birds of 1912-13, and Comparative
Migration of Our Birds in Spring. (Midland Naturalist.)

Nesterov, P. V., and Nikandrov, J. N. On the Migration and Nidifi-
cation of Birds in the vicinity of Pskov. (Ann. Mus. Zool. Acad. Imp. St.
Petersburg, XVIII, pp. 102-124.) — Text in Russian, but with tables
giving dates for 15 years, and technical names of the species.

Menzbier, M. Contributions to Russian Ornithology.— The Question
of the Relationship of Aquila fulvescens Gray. (Bull. Soc. Imp. Nat.
Moscow, 1911, No. 4, pp. 287-302 (1913.) — In German.

Suschkin, P. P. The Avifauna of the Minussensk Territory, the West-
ern part of the Sajan Mountain and Urjanchan Land. (Bull. Soc. Imp.
Nat. Moscow, 1912, pp. 198-400 (1913).) — An extended discussion of the
ranges of the species and tables of occurrence for various allied regions.

Schuster, W. The Breeding of Aegialites minor and Actitis hypoleucos
in Hesse (Bericht Oberh. Gesell. Nat.- und Heilkunde zu Gressen. 1912.
V, pp. 136-138, 1913.)

Rothschild, W., and Hartert, E. List of the Collections of Birds
made by Albert S. Meek in the Lower Ranges of the Snow Mountains, on
the Erlanden River, and on Mount Goliath during the years 1910 and 1911.
(Novitates Zoologica, October, 1913.) — This paper presents the ornitho-
logical results of Mr. Meek’s travels in New Guinea which he has already
described in his book ‘A Naturalist in Cannibal Land.’ 229 species are
listed of which the following are here described as new: Astur melanochlamys
schistacinus, Mt. Goliath; A. cirrhocephalus papuanus, Snow Mts.; Pe-
cilodryas albonotata griseiventris, Mt. Goliath; P. leucops nigro-orbitalis,
Snow Mts.; Macherirhynchus nigripectus saturatis, Mt. Goliath; Sericornis
arfakiana oorti, Bihagi; S. meeki, Mt. Goliath; Pitohui meeki, Mt. Goliath;
Philemon noveguinee brevipennis, Snow Mts. also Ailuredus buccoides oorti
from Waigiu.

Hesse, Erich. Review of a Collection of Birds from the Altai. A
Contribution to the Ornithology of Interior Asia. (Mitteil. Zool. Mus.
Berlin. VI, pp. 353-454, June, 1913.)

Briinig, C. The Migration of Nutcrackers (Nucifraga cariocatactes.)
(97. Jahr. Natforsch. Gesell. Emden., 1912 (1913.))

Hammling, J. Ornithological Observations and Notes from the Pro-
vince of Posen. (Zeitschr. Naturwis. Abteil., XX, Vol. I. No.6. 1913.)

Seth-Smith, D. Note on breeding of hybrids between Peacock and
domestic fowl], and between Peacock and Guinea. (Abst. Proc. Zool. Soc.
London, No. 125, Nov. 11, 1913.)

134 Recent Literature. Bs

Publications Received.— Bailey, Vernon. Life Zones and Crop
Zones of New Mexico. Biol. Survey U. 8. Dept. of Agriculture, North
American Fauna, No. 35. September 5. 1913.

Brooks, Earle A. Birds of West Virginia. (Second Biennial Rept. of
Forest, Game and Fish Warden, J. A. Viquesney, for 1911-12. 1913.)

Finley, W. L. Game and Fish Protection and Propagation in Oregon,
1911-1912 (1913.)

Gain, L. The Penguins of the Antarctic Regions. (Smithsonian
Report for 1912. 1913.)

Gifford, E. W. The Birds of the Galapagos Islands, with Observations.
on the Birds of Cocos and Clipperton Islands (Columbiformes to Pelecani-
formes.) (Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci., 4th series, Vol. I, Pt. 1. August 11,
1913.)

Grinnell, J., and Swarth, H.S. An Account of the Birds and Mammals
of the San Jacinto Area of Southern California with Remarks upon the
Behavior of Geographic Races on the Margins of their Habitats. (Univ.
of Cal. Publ. in Zool., Vol. 10, No. 10. October 31, 1913.)

Grinnell, J. Call-Notes and Mannerisms of the Wren Tit. (The
Condor, XV. September, 1913.)

Gurney, J.H. TheGannet. A Bird witha History. Witherby & Co.,
326 High Holborn, London. 1913. Price 25s.

Howell, A.H. Descriptions of Two New Birds from Alabama. (Proce.
Biol. Soc. Wash., XX VI. October 23, 1913.)

Kirkham, Stanton Davis. North and South. Notes on the Natural
History of a Summer Camp and a Winter Home. G. W. Putnam’s Sons,
New York. 1913. $1.75 net.

Mathews, G. M. A List of the Birds of Australia. Witherby & Co.,
326 High Holborn, London. 1913.

Mearns, E. A. (1) Descriptions of Five New African Weaver Birds
of the Genera Othyphantes, Hypargos, Aidemosyne, and Lagonosticta.
(Smithson. Mise. Coll. Vol. 61, No. 14. September 20,1913.) (2) Desecrip-
tions of Six New African Birds. (Jbid., Vol. 61, No. 11. August 30, 1913.)

Palmer, T.S., Bancroft, W. F., and Earnshaw, F. L. Game Laws for
1913. (Bulletin of the U. S. Dept. of Agriculture No. 22. October 15,
1913.)

Pearl, Raymond. (1) The Biology of Poultry Keeping. (Ann. Rept.
Mavin Agric. Exper. Sta. for 1913, pp. 101-120, July, 1913.) (2) The
Measurement of the Intensity of Inbreeding. (Bull. 215, Univ. of Me.
Agr. Exp. Sta. August, 1913.)

Rathbun, Richard. A Descriptive Account of the Building Recently
Erected for the Departments of Natural History of the United States
National Museum. (Bull. 80, U.S. Nat. Mus., 1913.)

Sage, John H. and Bishop, Louis B., assisted by Bliss, W. P. The Birds
of Connecticut. (Bull. No. 20, State Geol. and Nat. Hist. Survey. No-
vember, 1913.)

Shufeldt, R. W. (1) The American Grouse and their Identification.

ane ’ Recent Literature. 135

(Outer’s Book, October, November and December, 1913.) (2) Notes on
Buzzards and Ravens. (The Guide to Nature. September, 1913.) (38)
The National Zoological Garden. (Pop. Sci. Monthly. November, 1913.)
(4) On the Patella in the Phalacrocoracide. (Proc. Zool. Soc. London,
September, 1913.) (5) On the Comparative Osteology of Cereopsis novee-
hollandie. (The Emu, April, 1913.) (6) Fossil Feathers and Some
Heretofore Undescribed Fossil Birds. (Jour. of Geology, Vol. X XI, No. 7.
October-November, 1913.)

Stanwood, Cordelia J. (1) ATame Downy Woodpecker. (Nature and
Culture, Vol. V, No. 11. April, 1913.) (2) The Home Life of the Red-
breasted Nuthatch. (ibid., Vol. VI, No.1. October, 1913.)

Taylor, W. P. Synopsis of the Recent Campaign for the Conservation
of Wild Life in California. (The Condor, XV, May, 1913.)

Trevor-Battye, Aubyn. Camping in Crete. With Notes on the Ani-
mal and Plant Life of the Island. Witherby & Co., 326 High Holborn,
London. 1913. Price 10s. 6d. net.

Todd, W. E. Clyde. Preliminary Diagnoses of Apparently New Birds
from Tropical America. (Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., Vol. XXVI. August 8,
1913.)

Tyler, John G. Some Birds of the Fresno District, California. Pacific
Coast Avifauna, Number 9. Cooper Ornithological Club, Hollywood,
Cal. October 1, 1913. $1.50.

United States National Museum. Report for the Year ending June 30,
1912. 1918.

Wilson, Woodrow. Regulations for the Protection of Migratory Birds
by the President of the United States of America, A Proclamation. Octo-
ber 1, 1913.

Witherby, H. F. The Sequence of Plumages of the Rook. (British
Birds, Vol. VII, No. 5, October 1, 19138.)

Wood, N. A. Notes on Michigan Birds. (Fourteenth Report of the
Mich. Acad. Sci. 1912.)

Abstract, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, Nos. 124, 125, October 28, November
11, 1913.

Ardea, II, No. 3, September, 1913.

Austral Avian Record, II, Nos. 2-3, October 23, 1913.

Avicultural Magazine, (3) IV, Nos. 11 and 12, V, No. 1, September—
November, 1913.

Bird-Lore, XV, Nos. 5 and 6, September—December, 1913.

British Birds, VII, Nos. 5 and 6, October-November, 1913.

Bulletin British Ornith. Club, Nos. CXC and CXCI, October 24, 1913.
Index to Vol. XXXI, August 1913. Vol. XXXII, Report on Immigrations
of Summer Residents, Spring, 1912, September, 1913.

Bulletin, Charleston Museum, IX, Nos. 6, 7, October-November, 1913.

Condor, The, XV, No. 5, September—October, 1913.

Current Items of Interest (Aud. Soc. Dist. of Columbia), No. 19, Octo-
ber 16, 1913.

136 Correspondence. jan

Emu, The, XIII, Pt. 2, October, 1913.

Forest and Stream, LX XXI, Nos. 11-25.

Ibis, The, (10) I, No. 4, October, 1913.

Odlogist, The, XXX, Nos. 9,10 and 11. September—November, 1913.

Oregon, Sportsman, The, I, No. 2, October, 1913.

Ontario Natural Science Bulletin, The, No. 8, November, 1913.

Oriole, The, I, No. 1, August, 1913.

Ornithologische Monatsschrift, 38, Nos. 8, 9 and 10, August—October,
1913.

Ornithologisches Jahrbuch, XXIV, No. 3-4, May—August, 1913,
(Sept. 10, 1913.)

Ottawa Naturalist, The, X XVII, Nos. 5-6, 7, 8, August-November,
1913.

Proceedings and Transactions of the Nova Scotia Institute of Science,
XII, Pt. 4, Session 1909-1910, August 30, 1913.

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie, V, Nos. 54, and 55, October-November,
1913.

Science, N.S., XX XVIII, Nos. 976-990.

Scottish Naturalist, The, 1913, Nos. 21, 22 and 23, September—-Novem-
ber, 1913.

Warbler, The, VII, 1913.

Wilson Bulletin, The, XXV, No. 3, September, 1913.

Zoodlogist, The, (4) XVII, Nos. 201, 202 and 203, September—-November,
1913.

CORRESPONDENCE.
Albatross Specimens.

Eprtor or ‘ THe Avk:’

During the past few years, I have been studying the comparative ana-
tomy of the Tubinares with considerations of bird anatomy in general.
I am in great need of specimens of Diomedea nigripes, the Black-footed
Albatross, and I could use five or six specimens to advantage. This bird
is stated to be common on the North Pacific Ocean. I would also be glad
to have specimens of any other albatrosses. Any suggestions as to how I
' may obtain the desired material will be very gratefully received. I shall
be glad to pay a reasonable price for the material.

Specimens collected should be placed in either formalin or alcohol but
I prefer formalin which is also cheaper and easier to carry on a collecting
trip. The formalin may be made up as a 10% solution, i. e., 9 parts of
water with 1 part of formalin or formol as it is often called. A solution of

euiay Correspondence. 137

even only half this strength will do fairly well for a few days. One incision
only which may be about three inches long, should be made in the ventral
abdominal wall just to one side of the median line. The bird should then
be placed in the formalin solution which should if possible be several times
the bulk of the bird. If large containers are not available, a smaller amount
of the solution may be used but it should be changed twice during the
following week. Specimens should be kept in the formalin solution for a
week or more, after which they may be wrapped for shipment with cotton
which has been soaked in the same solution. Oiled paper or something
equally impervious should cover this, and the package may then be packed
in a box for shipment. Shipments should be addressed care of the Labora-
tory Supply Department, Room 10 Botany Building, University of Chicago.

Very truly yours,
R. M. Strona.
Hull ZoGlogical Laboratories, The University of Chicago.
November 3, 1913.

‘Teaching A Bird Course.’

Epiror or ‘THe Avk:’

In the Review of my paper on ‘ Teaching a Bird Course’ which appeared
in the January, 1913 ‘Auk,’ the reader is led to believe that the course in
Ornithology which I give at the University of Chicago is designed only for
those who wish to learn to identify birds. This interpretation of my paper
is probably due to the fact that most of my discussion dealt with pedagogical
problems of field work and identification of specimens. As a matter of
fact, the lectures which occur twice a week, cover a field almost equal in
credit value to the balance of the course. Taxonomy occupies a very small
place in the lectures. They are devoted primarily to bird morphology and
physiology, including also such topics as migration and behavior.

Very truly yours,
R. M. Strona.
The University of Chicago,
November 3, 1913.

138 Notes and News. foe

Jan.

NOTES AND NEWS.

ALFRED RussEL Wauuace, D. C. L., O. M., F. R. S., an Honorary
Fellow of the American Ornithologists’ Union, died on November 7, 1913,
in the ninety-first year of his age, and after sixty-four consecutive years of
scientific activity.

Wallace, while standing in the highest rank among ornithologists,
entomologists and botanists is best known in the broader field of philosophy
and evolutionary thought, where his name is closely linked with those of
Lyell and Darwin; and especially will he ever be remembered for his joint
publication with Darwin of their independent discovery of the theory of
Natural Selection. Wallace was typical of a group of scientific men of
the last century, which may well be known by the name ‘naturalists,’
among which he ranked at the very top and of which he was the last
survivor.

In the present days of specialization it seems impossible for men of this
type to develop and it is doubtful if the world will ever again see men of
such broad learning as those who contributed to the fame of what Wallace
himself has termed ‘the Wonderful Century.’

He was born in the village of Usk in Monmouthshire, England, on
January 8, 1823, the son of Thomas Vere Wallace and Mary Anne Grennell.
He attended grammar school until about thirteen years of age and appar-
ently received much educational benefit from association with his father
who was a man of literary tastes then engaged in tutoring.

The family being in poor circumstances Wallace was taken from school
and for seven years pursued the study and practice of land surveying with
his brother. His attention had already, through some of his early reading,
been directed to plants, and he now in his spare time amused himself by
collecting specimens of the wild flowers of the vicinity of the towns where
he lived and to name them as well as he could from certain inadequate
books on botany of which he had come into possession. He says in his
autobiography of these early collections, ‘‘I experienced the joy which every
discovery of a new form of life gives to the lover of nature, about equal to
the rhapsodies which I afterwards felt at every capture of a new butterfly
on the Amazon, or at the constant stream of new species of birds, beetles
and butterflies in Borneo, the Moluccas and the Aru Islands.”

Surveying not proving profitable, he gave it up when he became of age
and obtained a position as a teacher in a school in Leicester. Here he
met Henry W. Bates, a man of kindred tastes, who had a collection of
British beetles which amazed Wallace, as he had no idea that such a
variety of these insects occurred in England. He at once became an
ardent entomologist and advanced in his knowledge of this branch of
natural science as rapidly as he had in botany.

Influenced by the perusal of Edward’s ‘ Voyage up the Amazon’ Wallace

i

ee | Notes and News. 139
and Bates decided upon an expedition to Brazil for the collecting of scien-
tific specimens. They arranged with Samuel Stevens to act as agent, in
receiving and disposing of their collections and Wallace set about practicing
the shooting and skinning of birds, the study of ornithology having appar-
ently failed to attract him prior to this time. They sailed on April 20,
1848, and after a voyage of twenty-nine days landed at Para.

Wallace remained in Brazil until 1852, making excursions partly in
conjunction with Bates, partly on his own account. He ascended the Rio
Negro to the second cataract at Juaurité on the river Uaupes, farther than
any other explorer succeeded in penetrating until 1881. He made extremely
valuable collections especially of insects and birds, but being shipwrecked
on the voyage home, he lost all of his private collections, and apart from his
experience, profited only by the proceeds of the material sold for him by
Stevens.

He had however made quite a reputation as a collector and explorer and
had contributed a paper to the Zoological Society on the Umbrella-bird
of the Amazon, so that he gained the entré to scientific circles in London.
During the next two years he spent most of his time at the British Museum
familiarizing himself with the literature and collections bearing upon the
natural history of the East Indies, whither he planned to direct his next
explorations. He secured a copy of Bonaparte’s ‘Conspectus Avium’
in which he marked all the East Indian birds adding on the margins descrip-
tions of additional species, as he had done with his first book on botany at
the outset of his natural history studies. He was thus, he says, “‘able to
identify nearly every species” that he found, and he adds, ‘“‘no one who is
not a naturalist and collector can imagine the value of this book to me.”
He sailed for the East Indies in 1854.

Almost at once he began sending back not only collections of birds and
insects but contributions to various scientific journals treating of a variety
of subjects, but especially of comparisons of the faunas of different islands,
and upon various topics bearing upon the origin and relation of species.
In 1858 from the island of Ternate, he wrote his famous letter to Darwin,
outlining the theory of Natural Selection and from then on this subject

_ was ever uppermost in his mind. While his knowledge of the bird life

of the East Indies at this time was greater than that of any other naturalist,
he described but few species, passing rapidly from the systematic view of
nature to the broader philosophical attitude which grew out of it and which
characterized his future life with ever increasing force. He says himself:
“T had in fact been bitten by the passion for species and their description
and if neither Darwin nor myself had hit upon Natural Selection I might
have spent the best years of my life in this comparatively profitless work.
But the new idea swept all this away. I have for the most part left others
to describe my discoveries and have devoted myself to the great generaliza-
tions which the laborious work of species-describers has rendered possible.”

For eight years he continued his explorations extending them to the Aru
Islands and the coast of New Guinea in the pursuit of Birds of Paradise.

140 Notes and News. [AS

Jan.

In 1862 he returned to England, his mind filled with ideas and data for
the great works that he was later to produce. First appeared ‘The Malay
Archipelago’ his ‘journal of researches’ as it has been termed, dealing
with zodlogy, botany, anthropology and physical geography as only the
master hand can deal. Passing over the various publications on Natural
Selection and kindred subjects which have been covered by abler reviewers
in various sketches of the life and works of the great naturalist, we must call
attention to two works which deal more directly with ornithology, viz. the
‘Geographical Distribution of Animals’, 1876, and ‘Island Life’, 1881, which
are really the pioneer treatises on zoogeography. Here his earlier announce-
ment of the imaginary line between Bali and Lombok separating the Indian
and Australian zodlogical regions — since known as ‘Wallace’s Line’ —
is fully elaborated, while the zodlogical regions named by Sclater are
adopted and amplified.

His ornithological communications to ‘The Ibis’ and other journals
from 1850 to 1875 are particularly noteworthy, covering various aspects
of the science. In one paper dealing with the arrangement of the families
of birds published in 1856 he arrived at the same conclusions as to the proper
limitation of the Passeres from a study of external characters alone as were
later reached by avian anatomists. This was a matter of much gratifica-
tion to Wallace and, in commenting upon the work of the anatomists, he,
called attention to his earlier publication and emphasized the premises
upon which his conclusions were based. Indeed he seems to have heen
rather impatient of minute anatomical investigations, preferring to base
his generalizations upon the study of external characters, and the grosser
relations of animals and plants to their environment. ;

Wallace married, in 1866, the daughter of Mr. Wiliam Mitten and
spent the remainder of his life in England except for a visit to Canada and
the United States in 1886 and trips to Switzerland, Scotland, ete.

His literary activity continued almost to the time of his death and his
last volume ‘The World of Life’ published in 1911, to quote from Prof.
Osborne “gives as clear a portrayal of his final opinions as that which his
first essay of 1858 portrays of his early opinions.”

In considering Wallace as an ornithologist one is impressed with the great
possibilities which the science contains, and the varying degrees to which
they are developed by different workers in the field, each according to his
ability. There is the painstaking observer to whom generalization is
impossible and who often fails to distinguish between that which is worthy
of record and that which is worthless; the specialist who devotes all his
resources to one limited field, species-description, anatomy, detailed-dis-
tribution or what not, and is often blind to anything beyond; and finally
the broad minded philosopher to whom ornithology is but one of many
fields from which to glean the facts that are stored away in his mind to form
the basis for those generalizations which are to revolutionize scientific
thought. We cannot limit ornithology to any one of these, each contributes
to the measure of his ability, and the fact that Alfred Russel Wallace drew

Monga | Notes and News. 141

his inspiration from other fields as well, renders his loss to ornithology
none the less— W. S.

Dr. Ora Wits Knicut, a member of the American Ornithologists’
Union, died on November 11, 1913, from double pneumonia.

He was born in Bangor, Maine, July 15, 1874, son of George Willis and
Nellie Ada (Blood) Knight. He attended the public schools of Bangor
and in California, and graduated with honors at the University of Maine
(then Maine State College), receiving the degree of B.S. in 1895. He con-
tinued to pursue post-graduate studies in chemistry at the University and
received the degree of M.Sc. in 1897. While in college he was Sergeant
and Second Lieutenant of Co. A., Coburn Cadets and on graduation, was
recommended to the Adjutant General for excellence in military scholar-
ship.

He was assistant in Natural History at the University during his post-
graduate work and then became assistant chemist at the Maine Agri-
cultural Experment Station. In 1903 he was appointed state assayer
and at the same time entered into private business in the same field. He
was chemist for the Lackawanna Foundaries and several other concerns
and as a consulting chemist and microscopist had but few equals. He
did much analytical work for prominent physicians, and came into promi-
nence before the public as an expert in important court cases. He was
sure of his ground in such cases and was ever zealous for right and justice.
In recognition of his attainments Dr. Knight received the degree of Doctor
of Science from his university in 1909, and was honored with the highest
emblem of the Phi Kappa Phi Society of which he was a member.

Dr. Knight was married, very happily, August 11, 1899, to Miss Minnie
Gertrude McDonald of Bangor, who has ever been an able assistant in his
undertakings. In 1911 he removed from Bangor to Portland where he
built a residence.

From early boyhood Dr. Knight was interested in birds and ornithology
was always his pet hobby. He was elected a member of the Maine Orni-
thological Society in 1895, and was an active participant in the meetings,
holding various offices and contributing many valuable papers to the
‘Journal’ of the society. He was also an expert and painstaking photog-
rapher and his illustrated lectures on bird life were always enjoyable.
In 1897 the University of Maine published as Bulletin No. 38, his ‘A List
of the Birds of Maine’ and in 1908 he published his portly volume ‘The
Birds of Maine.’ These books constitute our authoritative works on the
birds of the state.

Dr. Knight was elected an Associate Member of the American Ornitholo-
gists’ Union in 1893 and a member in 1907 and was a frequent contributor
to ‘The Auk.’

His scientific activities were not however confined to ornithology. He
possessed a thorough knowledge of botany and had formed a nearly com-
plete herbarium of the plants of Maine, which he has bequeathed to the

142 Notes and News. ae

Jan.

Smithsonian Institution. He was a member and officer of the Josselyn
Botanical Club and also a member of the American Chemical Society.
He had formed a scientific library which he left to the Bangor Public
Library.

In the death of Dr. Knight science has lost a most promising student and
a large circle of associates, a valued friend. He had a very high sense of
honor and was a noble example of true manhood. He was a deep student
of human nature and weighed very carefully those with whom he came in
contact. He did not make close friends as readily as some, but once he
counted anyone a friend, he was his staunch supporter, and the word friend
had a deep meaning to him.

The writer for many years has enjoyed his close friendship and has had
the pleasure of many days association with him, wading the Orono Bog in
the haunts of the Yellow Palm Warbler, or passing pleasant evenings in his
home or in his chemical laboratory. To him Dr. Knight’s death comes as
an irreparable loss.— J. M. S. ;

FRED. BENJAMIN SPAULDING, an Associate of the American Ornithologists’
Union, died on October 22, 1913, after a short and painful illness. He was
born in the town of Lancaster, New Hampshire, on the 7th of June, 1867,
and was the son of William C. and Harriet 8. Spaulding.

His boyhood days were spent on a typical New England farm nestled
close to the foot hills of the White Mountains. He attended the public
school and proved a good student and on the expiration of his study there
he entered the Lancaster Academy. On leaving the Academy Mr. Spauld-
ing was employed by Frank Smith & Co., for several years and then entered
the Eastman Business College. Here he learned practical business methods
and upon leaving returned to Lancaster, where, in 1899, he joined with Mr.
C. Moore in establishing a flour and grain business, of which he later
acquired entire control.

Mr. Spaulding’s fellow townsmen acknowledged his business qualities
and he served terms as their Selectman, and was sent to the Legislature,
in 1910, where he made an enviable record.

He married on June 7, 1892, Miss Hattie N. L. Connor and this union
proved a very happy one, blessed with two children.

Students of bird life and lovers of the out door world have experienced
a great loss in the death of Mr. Spaulding. He was a man loved by many
and a model for field workers to follow, making a careful, studious, and
conservative observer of nature. I recall with pleasure a few weeks spent
- with him at the delightful home which he and his wife made the living
example of the word hospitality. During the bright days spent with him
we were constantly in the field and each day he unfolded the home life of
some avian resident that heretofore I had known only as a migrant.
It is a pity more observers are not of his type. His idea was not only to
compile a local list but to know each bird’s household as his own.

Among the interesting results shown by his careful study are several

—

a

orem Notes and News. 143
records for his state including the breeding of the Hudsonian Chickadee.
Each year many an ornithologist journeyed to his hospitable home and
time will never erase the grateful memory of those visits.

Besides his association with the A. O. U. he was a member of the Cooper
Ornithological Club and the Maine Ornithological Society.— H. T.

Dr. FrEDERICUS ANNA JENTINK, director of the Leyden Museum and
well known as a writer on mammals, especially on those of the Malay
and Papuan Islands, died on November 4, 1913, in his sixty-ninth year.
He was well known to ornithologists as editor of ‘Notes from the Leyden
Museum.’

Dr. J. W. B. GuNNING, president of the South African Ornithologists’
Union and director of the Transvaal Museum and Zoological Gardens,
died in Pretoria, June 23, 1913. Dr. Gunning was born at Helversum,
Holland, September 3, 1860, and came to South Africa in 1884, practicing
medicine in the Cape Colony until 1892 when he was appointed director
of the newly formed museum at Pretoria. It was largely through his efforts
that the Zoological Garden was established and he was also active in
founding the 8. A. Ornithologists’ Union.

Dr. T. S. Patmer furnishes the following summary of Bird Protective
Legislation for 1913, in continuance of his report in ‘The Auk’ for April,
19138, p. 321.

Now that the legislative record is closed a hasty review reveals the fact
that about 200 new game laws were enacted during the year. While the
number of statutes is less than that in 1911, the importance of the legisla-
tion is probably greater than that of any previous year. Of chief interest
are the three Federal laws regulating protection of migratory birds, pro-
hibiting importation of plumage, and the Senate Resolution authorizing
treaties for the protection of birds with foreign Governments.

The migratory bird law was approved on March 4 and the regulations
for carrying it into effect were duly prepared by a Committee consisting
of T. S. Palmer, A. K. Fisher, and W. W. Cooke. These regulations were
published on June 23, were later revised and adopted by the Department,
and took effect when approved by the President on October 1. A begin-
ning has been made in the herculean task of carrying the regulations into
effect. The country has been divided into 13 districts and the organiza-
tion of the field force in about half of these districts is now under way.
On account of the small appropriation for enforcement, the main reliance
is upon cooperation with State officials. Each district is in charge of an
experienced Inspector appointed by the Department and from three to
seven wardens are appointed by the Department on recommendation of
the respective game commissioners for cooperative work from each of the
States. This arrangement will provide a skeleton force of about 200 or
250 men distributed among the various States. A Chief Warden, six
Inspectors and about 75 Wardens are already in the field. The work
naturally differs in the various districts. In the one comprising the Middle

144 Notes and News. ae

States very gratifying results have been obtained in law enforcement partic-
ularly in New Jersey and in Maryland at the head of Chesapeake Bay;
in the Northwest district special attention has been given to educational
work and to stopping the hunting on the Mississippi River. Preparations
are now being made to secure certain amendments in the laws of the States
whose legislatures convene in January so as to make the local laws conform
with the regulations and thus avoid as far as possible any conflict in the
close seasons under the State and Federal statutes.

The plumage provision in the Tariff Bill which owes its origin to a sug-
gestion by Mr. Henry Oldys was actively championed by the National
Association of Audubon Societies under the guidance of Secretary T.
Gilbert Pearson and by the New York Zoological Society under the direc-
tion of Dr. W. T. Hornaday. The provision in the form proposed by Doc-
tor Hornaday passed the House without change on May 8, but in the
Senate was amended by the Finance Committee so that its effectiveness
was largely destroyed. By action of the Democratic caucus on September
2, the proposed amendment was abandoned and the House provision was
restored. The bill passed a few days later and was approved on October 3.
The Treasury Department immediately enforced the plumage provision
in the case of plumage worn by travelers as well as in the case of feathers
imported for sale, and notwithstanding vigorous protests, all persons
arriving at ports of entry with prohibited plumage either in trunks or on
their hats, were compelled to relinquish such trimmings or to return them
to the port of shipment.

A Senate Resolution authorizing the President to negotiate treaties with
foreign Governments for the protection of birds was passed on July 7, 1913.
It is to be hoped that a convention may be arranged with Canada at an
early date for the better protection of migratory birds.

From an ornithological standpoint the most important State laws were
those in Pennsylvania prohibiting the sale of aigrettes and certain other
imported plumage after July 1, 1914; the comprehensive Florida statute
providing for a game commission, a license system, and the repeal of all
local laws; the special law in Florida removing Robins from the game list;
and the establishment of 15 game preserves in the United States and four
in Manitoba. Provision for enforcing the game laws was assured through
the adoption of the resident hunting license system in Delaware, Florida,
Ohio, and Pennsylvania. In Illinois, Montana, Oklahoma, and South
Dakota, the warden work was reorganzied and single commissioners were
replaced by a Board. In Ohio an Agricultural Commission replaced
several former State departments and the game warden service was placed
under its charge. In Connecticut the Fish and Game Commission was
increased from three to eight members, and in New Hampshire the Board
of Fish and Game Commissioners was replaced by a single game commis-
sioner.

Colorado was the only State which extended the open season for water- ~
fowl in the spring but this action was largely offset by the Federal Regula-

ener Notes and News. 145

tions. Three States, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Vermont, withdrew
protection from the European Starling and authorized destruction of the
bird under certain conditions. In California several important changes
were made, such as strengthening the plumage law, and protecting the
Band-tailed Pigeons, rails, and smaller shorebirds but some of the bills
failed to receive the approval of the Governor or were subject to referendum.
In Vermont the restriction on the number of permits to collect birds for
scientific purposes in force at any one time was removed. ‘The interest
in bird reserves was well illustrated in Wisconsin whose legislature memor-
ialized Congress to set aside certain islands in the Great Lakes for the pur-
pose of establishing bird reservations to be ultimately placed in charge of
the States when they were ready to assume the expenses of maintenance.
On the whole, the legislative record is highly satisfactory and shows sub-
stantial progress.

In view of the splendid results attained during the past year in the
campaign against the feather-trade, it seems high time that bird protection-
ists take up another phase of the subject that comes much nearer home
to every household in this country than does the killing of plume birds.
This is the cat question. There is I think no doubt that for years past the
greatest destructive agency to our smaller song and insectivorous birds
has been cats.

In an editorial in ‘ Forest and Stream’ for November 15, 1913, that is well
worth reading, the subject is taken up from the standpoint of the sportsman
and the destruction of young and adult quail effected by cats is rated as
great as that from any other agency. ‘‘The English Keeper,” the writer
says, ‘‘well understands the injury done in the preserves by the domestic
cat and wages against it a war as bitter, and as uncompromising, as that
which he carries on against the stoat or any of the hawks.”

The number of stray cats at large in the United States is enormous.
It is stated in ‘ Bird Lore’ that the number put out of existence in New York.

City by the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals during the first:
nine months of 1905 totaled, 53,938! The stray cats are usually the:

worst offenders and if means could be adopted to effect their slaughter and

to instruct people in the danger that they inflict upon bird life by allowing:
cats to run wild and leaving them behind when they move away, some:

good would be accomplished. The whole question of the economic value
of the cat it seems to us would be a valuable line of investigation. If the
destruction of mice offsets the destruction of game and insectivorous birds
then the cat deserves consideration but if the keeping of cats is to be re-
garded as merely a ‘luxury’ or if they are proven to be more noxious than
beneficial to wild-life then their possession should be guarded with stringent
restrictions, embodying registration or taxation.

In ‘The Warbler’ (Vol. VII, 1913) Mr. G. K. Noble states that stray
cats originally brought out to Muskeget Island to keep the rats out of
hunters’ shacks are playing havoe with the young terns in the protected.
colony although the warden is using every effort to exterminate them.

146 Notes and News. eee

Jan.

In city yards where wild birds are rare and cats abundant the destruction
of transients which happen to pause there during their migration is very
great as any one knows who makes a study of city bird-life.

This subject is by no means an old one and has been agitated frequently
before but apparently with no definite action.

Is it not time that the sportsmen, the Department of Agriculture and the
Audubon Societies join forces in giving the cat question serious attention?

In the November number of ‘British Birds’ Mr. H. F. Witherby states
that he received a letter from Mr. A. C. Theron dated from ‘‘Riet Vallei,
District Lindley, Orange Free State,” stating that a Swallow had been
captured bearing a ring with his name and address. As Mr. Theron gave
neither the number of the ring nor the date of capture he asked him for
these particulars and received a reply and the ring itself. The ring is
number £937, and Mr. Theron stated that the bird was captured at Riet
Vallei on March 16th, 1913, and adds, ‘I do not know when it arrived.”
This ring was placed on a nestling Swallow by Mr. R. O. Blyth at Skel-
morlie, Ayrshire, Scotland, on July 27th, 1912.

In a recent number of the Austral Avian Record (Vol. II, p. 61) Mr.
Gregory M. Mathews brings up a question of nomenclature which is
perhaps the most serious that remains to be settled, i. e., the so called ‘one-
letter difference’’. He says, “‘It is well known that the code of the American
Ornithologists’ Union differs from the International Code, in that the latter
would compel the usage of ‘one letterism’ in differentiating valid generic
names whereas the former does not.”” He goes on to say that the A. O. U.
“have subscribed to the International Commission’s Opinions while not
observing the Code,’ and that they hope to amend it to agree with their

own, adhering in the interval to their own rules. He further adds that

while the result is quite speculative ‘“‘the trend is in favor of the Ameri-

‘cans.”’

The above is quite unintentionally a little misleading, due to the ambigu-
ity or indefiniteness of the International Code upon the point in question.
It is touched upon in the recommendations to Article 36 as follows, ‘It is

‘well to avoid the introduction of new generic names which differ from
generic names already in use only in termination or in a slight variation

in spelling which might lead to confusion. But when once introduced
‘such names are not to be rejected on this account.”’ ‘‘The same recom-
mendation applies to new specific names’’ etc. The latter clause of the
first sentence sounds like a rule but I am informed by the Secretary of the
‘Commission that it “is a recommendation not a rule.” In other words
the Commission has not yet been able to come to a final vote on this matter,
although as Mr. Matthews further states in his article quoted above, the
recent Opinions of the Commission ‘‘suggest that ‘one-letterism’ will be
abolished,” that is to say that names differing only in termination and
other slight variations in spelling shall be regarded as identical.

ee Peargl Notes and News. 147

In revising its Code the A. O. U. Committee recognized the great difficul-
ties involved in this problem. On the one hand is the confusion of having
a number of names so nearly alike that it is difficult to distinguish them
either by sight or sound, and on the other the difficulty of deciding just
how great a difference in spelling shall constitute a recognizably different
name. The only method that appeared practical was to state certain
classes of differences which are to be recognized as establishing different
names in nomenclature and certain others which are not. This was done
in remarks under Canon XXX, and the classes cover probably a large
majority of the cases that will occur.

It will thus be seen that the A. O. U. Committee did not repudiate the
International Code but only a ‘Recommendation’ of the International
Commission. They found themselves able to go further in the matter of
an official vote on this question than the International Commission did
and embodied in a ‘Canon’ what the latter body was compelled to leave
an open question. This in no way affects ultimate agreement upon any
more definite method of settling the question that may be suggested in the
future.

In asimilar way the A. O. U. Committee found the ‘elimination method’
of fixing genotypes as set forth in the International Code indefinite, in-
asmuch as it left the method of applying elimination entirely to personal
opinion, with necessarily conflicting results. The A.O.U. Committee
therefore adopted in their revised Code the ‘first species method’ which
yielded definite results. The International Commission recognized the
weakness of elimination and at their next meeting adopted the method
of ‘subsequent designation.’ This was at once substituted by the A. O. U.
for the ‘first species method’ in the interests of uniformity both being
definite methods.

This statement is made to show that instead of being antagonistic the
history of the two codes has ever been one of harmony. Indeed so closely
are they in agreement that the A. O.U. has never felt the necessity of
adopting by name either the International Code or the Opinions, the latter
however have been regularly accepted by the Committee so far as they
affected the American Check-List, as fast as they were published.

Messrs. WitTHEerRBY & Co., 326 High Holborn, London, W. C. announce
the publication of a work on ‘Indian Pigeons and Doves’ by E. C. Stuart
Baker, with twenty-six coloured plates and over 200 pages. This will be a
‘companion volume to Mr. Baker’s ‘Indian Ducks and their Allies.’ Price
£2, 10s. net.

Tue “Chicago Ornithological Society”? was organized by ornithologists
of Chicago and its vicinity in December, 1912, with the following officers:
President, Dr. R. M. Strong; Vice-presidents, Mr. L. J. DeVine and Mr.
G. L. Abbott; Secretary-Treasurer, Mr. Ralph Chaney; Corresponding
Secretary, Mrs. P. B. Coffin. The society has undertaken among other

148 Notes and News. Auk

Jan.

projects an ornithological survey of the region about Chicago. Persons
who may be interested in becoming members of the society are invited
to send their names to the chairman of the membership committee, Mr.
J. L. DeVine, 5338 Woodlawn Ave., Chicago. Meetings are held at
8:15 Pp. M. on the second Tuesday in each month in Room 24, Zoology
Building, The University of Chicago.

At the annual meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union in Novem-
ber last it was decided to increase the membership of the Committee on
Classification and Nomenclature from seven to eleven with the object
of having it organize as two subcommittees, one of four members to con-
sider matters of nomenclature, the other of seven members, to cover syste-
matic and geographic questions, especially the acceptance or rejection of
proposed new forms.

The president Dr. Frank M. Chapman has reappointed the old committee
consisting of J. A. Allen, William Brewster, Jonathan Dwight, Jr., C. Hart
Merriam, Charles W. Richmond, Robert Ridgway and Witmer Stone; and
as the four additional members he has named, Joseph Grinnell, E. W.
Nelson, Harry C. Oberholser and T. 8. Palmer.

At the recent meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union in New York
City, the advisability of changing the time of meetings from fall to spring
was considered. This innovation was favored for two principal reasons:
First, to make it possible for those members to attend who, for business.
or other reasons, were unable to leave home in the autumn. Second, mem-
bers residing on the Pacific Coast are very anxious that the stated meeting
in 1915 be held in San Francisco while the Worlds Panama-Pacific Exposi-
tion is in progress. It was the consensus of opinion that spring was the
most favorable time to hold this meeting and to successfully carry out the
plan, it was thought advisable to allow at least a year to intervene between
the Washington and San Francisco meetings. This would give members
throughout the country ample time to plan in advance for the journey
across the continent. In this connection it is to be remembered that the
expense of the transcontinental trip will be greatly reduced if a considerable
number of members and their friends attend.

With the above plan in mind, the Committee of Arrangements has de-
cided to name Easter week, beginning with April 6, 1914, as the best time
for the Washington meeting.

The local Committee recognizes the fact that the interval between the
meeting held in New York in November and the meeting to be held in
Washington in April is short, but, notwithstanding this, believes that the
novelty of a spring meeting and the manifold attractions of Washington
in April, when the city is at its best, will secure a full attendance.

PUBLICATIONS OF THE

AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION

FOR SALE AT THE FOLLOWINC PRICES:

The Auk. Complete set, Volumes I-XXIX, (1884-1912) in origi-
nal covers, $99.00. Volumes I-VI are sold only with complete
sets, other volumes, $3.00 each; 75 cents for single numbers.

Index to The Auk (Vols. I-XVII, 1884-1900) and Bulletin of the
Nuttall Ornithological Club (Vols. I-VIII, 1876-1883), 8vo, pp.
vii + 426, 1908 Cloth, $3.75; paper, $3.25.

Check-List of North American Birds. Third edition, revised,
1910. Cloth, 8vo., pp. 426, and 2 maps. $2.50, net, postage
25 cents. Second edition, revised, 1895. Cloth, 8vo, pp. xi +
372. $1.15. Original edition 1886. Out of print.

Abridged Check-List of North American Birds. 1889. (Abridged
and revised from the original edition). Paper, 8vo, pp. 71, printed
on one side of the page. 25 cents.

Pocket Check-List of North American Birds. (Abridged from
the third edition). Flexible cover, 3} X 5¢ inches. 25 cents;
10 copies for $2.00.

Code of Nomenclature. Revised edition, 1908. Paper, 8vo, pp.
Ixxxv. 50 cents.
Original edition, 1892. Paper, 8vo, pp. iv + 72. 25 cents.

We would be pleased to furnish The Auk, Index and Check-List

to your library at 15% discount.

Address JONATHAN DWIGHT, Jr.

Sei ae stests: New York, N, Y.

American Ornithologists’ Union

Check-List of North American
Birds

Last Edition, 1910

Cloth, 8vo, pp. 480 and two maps of North America,
one a colored, faunal zone map, and one a locality map.

The first authoritative and complete list of North
American Birds published since the second edition of
the Check-List in 1895. The ranges of species and
geographical races have been carefully revised and
greatly extended, and the names conform to the latest
rulings of the A.O. U. Committee on Nomenclature.
The numbering of the species is the same as in the
second edition. Price, including postage, $2.75.

POCKET EDITION
A pocket Check-List (3% by 5% inches) of North
American Birds with only the numbers and the scientific
and popular names. Alternate pages blank for the
insertion of notes. Flexible covers. Price, including
postage, 25 cents; or 10 copies for $2.00.

Address JONATHAN DWIGHT, Jr.

134 W. 7Ist St. New York City

eS a oe
‘ec fas 5 r 7 . ‘
A i eg

ee ee ee ee ae

‘
New |

Aaa CONTINUATION OF THE | ge
ries, BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB ly.) yxxI

The Auk

H Quarterly Journal of Ornithology

Tee eee oe os

AF

Vol. XXXI- APRIL, 1914 No. 2

PUBLISHED BY

The American Ornithologists’ Union

__ CAMBRIDGE, MASS.

CONTENTS

AMONG THE BrirRps OF THE HasteRN Supan. By John C. Phillips. (Plate XIII.) 149

Tue Ferrvucinous RovuGu-ieG, Archibuteo ferrugineus IN Montana. By BE. S.
Cameron. (Plates XIV-XVIII.) - e 5

Brirps as DresTROYERS OF GRASSHOPPERS IN Caurrornia. By Harold C. Bryant 168

Ow THE Hasits anpD BEHAVIOR OF THE Herrine Guui, Larus argentatus Pont.
(Concluded.) By R. M. Strong. (Plates XIX—-XX.) . 5 : 178

An Ecoxrogicat Stupy or THE BREEDING Birps oF AN AREA NEAR CHOTEAU,

Mont. By Aretas A. Saunders 3 ‘ . ; 5 A 4 200
Dogs a GrReBE SPREAD Its WinGs Just Brerore Divine? By Verdi Burtch.
(Plates X XI-X XII.) , 5 ‘ : : : , ; ‘ ; : 211
Birps or AuTauGa anp Montcomery Countiges, ALABAMA. By Lewis S. Golsan

and Ernest G. Holt. (Plate XXIII.) - c 4 5 - é 3 E 212
ACADIAN CHICKALDEES (Penthestes hudsonicus littorialis) 1In BOSTON AND VICINITY

IN THE Fauut or 1913. By Horace W. Wright : 5 : 3 : ; 236

GENERAL Nortres.— The Western Grebe in Ohio 243; American Merganser (Mergus
americanus) at Boston, Mass., in Midwinter, 243; Two Unrecorded Specimens of the
European Widgeon from Massachusetts, 243; Notes on the Habits of an Old-squaw
(Harelda hyemalis) and two Lesser Scaup Ducks (Aythya affinis), 244: American
Egret (Herodias egretta) in Rhode Island, 245; Notes on an Unusual Flight of Stilt
Sandpipers (Micropalama_ himantopus), 246; Franklin’s Grouse in Colorado, 246;
Sharp-shinned Hawk in Maine in Winter, 247; Extreme Emaciation in a Specimen
of the Snowy Owl (Nyctea nyctea), 247; Another Species Added to the Avifauna of
South Carolina, 248; The Arkansas Kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis) in Rhode Island,
248; Capture of Myiarchus crinitus (Linn.) in Eastern Cuba, 248; An Unusual
Observation on the Crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos) at Lubec, Maine, 248: Starlings
(Sturnus vulgaris) at Providence, R. 1., 249; Starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) in Cambridge,
Mass., 249; The Rusty Blackbird (Huphagus carolinus) in Connecticut in Winter,
250; The Bobolink (Dolichonyx oryzivorus) as a Conveyer of Mollusca, 250; Cow-
bird Notes, 250; Evening: Grosbeak (Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina) at Boston,
Mass., 251; The White-winged Crossbill (Loxia leucoptera) in the District of Colum-
bia, 251; Unusual Nesting Site of the English Sparrow, 252; Swainson’s Warbler
(Helinaia swainsoni) at Guantanamo, Cuba, 253; Magnolia Warbler in Colorado,
253; Canadian Warbler in Colorado, 253; The Short-billed Marsh Wren (Cisto-
thorus stellaris) on Long Island in Winter, 253; The Red-bellied Nuthatch (Sitta
canadensis) Feeding among Weeds, 253; The Acadian Chickadee (Penthestes hud-
sonicus littoralis) at Watch Hill, R. I., 254; The Identity of Hypodes cinerea Cassin,
255; Some Marshalltown, Iowa, Notes, 255; Two Species New to Colorado, 256;
Unusual Occurrences at Madison, Wis., 256; Effect of Cold on Moult, 257.

Recent Lirerature.— Millais’ ‘British Diving Ducks,’ 259; Reichenow’s ‘ Die. Vogel,’
261; ‘Oologia Neerlandica,’ 262; Phillips on African Birds, 263; Bunker on the
Birds of Kansas, 263; ‘Swarth on Geese of the Branta canadensis Group, 264; Job
on the Quest of the Canvasback, 264; Mearns on Additional New Birds from Africa,
265; Grinnell’s ‘Second List of Birds of the Berkeley Campus, 265; Baker’s ‘Indian
Pigeons and Doves,’ 265; Menegaux’s Reprint of the Ornithology of the Echo du
Monde Savant, 266; Mathews’ ‘The Birds of Australia,’ 267; The South Australian
Ornithologist, 267: Mullen’s ‘Guide to Selborne, 268: Sarasin on the Birds of New
Caledonia, 268; Hellmayr on the Avifauna of Timor, 268; Elms’ ‘A Pocket-Book of
British Birds’ and other ‘Handbooks,’ 269; Miss Keezel’s ‘Bird Study Note Book,’
269; Shufeldt on Extinct Ostrich Birds of the United States, 269; Valuable Eco-
nomic Reports, 270; Bird Enemies of the Philippine Locust, 270; Report on Intro-
duced Pheasants in Massachusetts, 271; The Ornithological Journals, 273; Orni-
thological Articles in Other Journals, 281; Publications Received, 284.

‘CCoRRESPONDENCE.— The Gannets of Bonaventure, 287; Researches of Gerhard Heil-
mann on the Origin of Birds, 287.

Notrs anp News.— Stopping the Traffic in Bird Plumage, 289; Heredity and Sex, 290;
Meeting of the Wilson Ornithological Club, 290; Meeting of the Delaware Valley
Ornithological Club, 291; Dinner of the Linnzan Society of New York, 291; The
Spring Meeting of the A. O. U., 291.

“THE AUK,’ published quarterly as the Organ of the AMERICAN ORNITHOLO-
@ists’ UNION, is edited, beginning with the Volume for 1912, by Dr. Witwer
STONE.

Trerms:— $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 Wust 71st St., New York, N.Y. Foreign Subscrib-
ers may obtain ‘THe Aux’ through R. H. PORTER, 9 Princes STREET,
CAVENDISH SqQuaRE, W., LONDON.

Articles and communications intended for publication, and all books
and publications for notice, should be sent to Dr. WITMER STONE,
AcapEMy 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.

SdITMHd AVYONVATA SNOINWNIdVD

TX ALV Td IXXX “TOA “ANV FHL

Yo

Wik AUK:
A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF

ORNITHOLOGY.

Wok, XXXI. APRIL, 1914. No.2

AMONG THE BIRDS OF THE EASTERN SUDAN.
BY JOHN C. PHILLIPS.
Plate XIII.+

Loox1nG back on our short collecting trip into the eastern part
of the Sudan, the Blue-Nile basin, it is remarkable how strongly
the first few days of the trip stand out in memory. The novelty
of great spaces, of the groaning, toiling camels, of the burning
noons and delicious nights, soon dissolves into an everyday exis-
tence, and one week becomes almost exactly like the next; so
exactly, in fact, that after a month or more one ceases to remark
on the weather and almost forgets he is living out of doors. A
feeling rather steals over one that this is not the open air, but a
great glass house, steam heated and weather proof.

Behold us then launched suddenly from the dusty train into the
brilliant moonlight at Sennar. It was Christmas Eve, and all day
long the train had been crawling away from Khartoum, over
dusty durrah fields, at an average rate of just twelve miles an hour.
Amidst great confusion we detrained our nine camels, giving three of
them an opportunity to escape, which, camel like, they soon took
advantage of.

In a large thorn enclosure we stowed away our luggage, made
our beds and turned in. Supper was a brief affair that night.
The full moon glared down upon us, a striped hyena gave his very

1Female Caprimulgus eleanore Phillips, three quarters natural size.

149

[ Auk
April

150 Puruuips, Birds of the Sudan.
musical call, and from the sky above came the clamor of hundreds
and it seemed thousands of European Cranes. Off in the distance
was the confused sound of the village, donkeys, dogs and drums all
jumbled together and softened into a weird sort of chant.

During the night we fought off the many hungry dogs, but not
until they had stolen all our available lunch for the coming day.
It was cold by 4:00 a. M., and we were out early, trying to warm
up. At dawn we took our guns and strolled off into the great fields
of durrah grain, then mostly harvested. For miles around Sennar
there is hardly a tree left, the Blue-Nile flows drearily through a
deep channel with high mud banks, with great sand bars and
beaches at their bases. The current is swift and the water clear,
coming as it does from the mountain region of Abyssinia, but by
January this river is usually too low for steamboat navigation.
Birds were about these fields in great numbers, but not of many
kinds. First must come the cranes which winter all the way from
Khartoum to Rosseires. They are mostly the Grey Crane of
eastern Europe, Megalornis grus grus, but there are some of the
smaller Demoiselle Cranes and a few African Crowned Cranes.
No books had given us any idea of the enormous numbers of cranes
on the Blue-Nile. It was by far the most notable bird sight of
the region, and pleasing because unexpected. These cranes spend
the night on the river sands in flocks of hundreds and always far
away from any cover, so that they are perfectly safe. They
feed inland mostly where there is cultivation and never seem to
pass along the same flight lines. Their wariness is remarkable
’ and it was pleasant to see such a safe retreat for these splendid
fowl. I wondered why bird fanciers were made to pay ninety to
one hundred and twenty-five dollars for a living pair, but no doubt
on their breeding range they are scattered and hard to trap. By
the end of February nearly all of these cranes had moved away
from Sennar.

Other birds we saw that first morning were doves in endless
numbers, their calls resounding in every direction. Here we
obtained Turtur isabellinus, which we did not get again. Other
turtle doves were very abundant, and the little long-tailed Cape
Dove was seen everywhere, walking about the path in front of us,
always very tame. This attractive bird is now imported alive

Pe
oe)

\ Gor agen Puituirs, Birds of the Sudan. 151

into America in large numbers. Shrikes of two kinds were common
and a large blue hawk, Melierax metabates, was very conspicuous.
This, the commonest large hawk of the country, is very sluggish
and quite tame. Once, riding along a trail we passed one sitting
in a low thorn tree, when to our astonishment he came crashing
to the ground and lay there completely paralyzed. When we
picked him up he offered no resistance and seemed perfectly limp,
although he still grasped a freshly killed sparrow in his talons.
On dissection we could find nothing diseased about this bird except
possibly a small hemorrhage back of the ear. This was the first
time we had ever seen a bird struck down from apparently natural
causes, but he might have sustained a blow previously.

The most noticeable small birds around Sennar were Stone-chats,
the common Isabelline Wheatear, a migrant, and the White Wag-
tail, also a wanderer.

We have delayed too long around Sennar and must get south-
wards, and can only pause to mention a few of the striking birds.
The traveller up the Blue-Nile notices a fairly sudden entrance to
the more African, or more tropical birds, though the bare scenery
of leafless thorn forest is far from tropical in appearance. About
El-Mesherat, or a little before, one gets into patches of dense bush
near the river, with elephant grass, baobab trees, a few palms and
here and there wild fig trees whose glorious foliage of dark green
leaves gives the sun smitten traveller a dense shade all through the
dry season. Hidden in these trees are the wary green Fruit Pi-
geons. Bird life, numerically at least, is remarkable in the bush
about here. Dense swarms of plain colored Weaver Finches,
mostly of two species and now of course in winter plumage, whirl
about with a perfect roar of wings, looking like swarms of bees.
No one can imagine the size or density of these flocks, which at
first are really startling as they hurtle over one’s head. We thought
that one well directed shot would often kill a hundred. Imagine
the feelings of an Arab when one of these flocks takes possession of
his durrah patch, for it spells ruin in a short time. The children
are all put to work with strings and movable scarecrows to frighten
birds away, and they are kept busy all day long. The hanging
nests of weaver finches are a conspicuous feature of the Sudan
landscape, and sometimes a small thorn tree will hold twenty or
thirty of them.

152 Puruuips, Birds of the Sudan. ree

‘In the neighborhood of Karkoj and El Mesherat (latitude about
13 N.) we began to see Green Monkeys in the taller trees, and here
and there the beautiful little Oribi, an antelope which will survive
long after the great animals of the eastern Sudan have been crowded
‘out. About in this latitude also, Hornbills of two species become
common, though the small red-billed one, Lophocerus hemprichi is
much the more plentiful. Prominent in the memory of those
burning hot noons is the rising call of this bird, “ Weet, weet,”
repeated till it reaches a crescendo, when the performer straightens
up, opens his wings and bobs up and down. This is almost the
only sound heard through the heat of the day, when bird life is
hushed and the natives are fast asleep in their conical straw huts.

The large Brown Hornbill is a very different bird. He is wild,
usually seen singly, and inhabits high trees where he emits a loud
anvil-like note, at first single, then double, and accompanied by a
flapping of the wings. There is another sort, the great Abyssinian
Ground Hornbill, which is rare and we did not see it.

A shy and very beautiful bird of the Blue-Nile is the Red-breasted
Bush-shrike, whose crimson underparts gleam through the thickets
like a living flame. These birds have responsive notes, the male
and female always combining in producing one call. I cannot do
better than quote from Dr. G. M. Allen’s notes on this subject.
“Usually one bird gives a loud rich-toned whistle, “a-wheeo”’ the
first syllable very faint; the other bird instantly replies with a harsh
‘churr,’ given either at the same instant, or following so closely
that it is hard to distinguish the exact moment. Sometimes I have
heard two different birds respond to a single bird whistling. More
rarely the ‘wheeo’ is given in response to a call from the other, a
harsh ‘churr churr.’ The two birds of a pair usually keep close
together.” Dr. Allen thought that the male gave the first note,
the whistle.

As one gets south, parrots become much more plentiful. They
are of two sorts. A long-tailed kind, the commoner, ranges
pretty far north wherever there are large trees, and breeds high up
in holes, even in January and February. They crack the nuts of
the Laloab tree, a fruit much used by the antelopes and also very
good to quench one’s thirst. This parrot and its nearly related
but larger Indian cousin are both seen breeding at large in the

cieerirly “il Puiuuirs, Birds of the Sudan. 153
zoological gardens in Cairo. The short tailed Meyer’s Parrot with
orange spots on the bend of the wings, is a small and very lively
bird, exceedingly hard to collect, and only common in the southern
part of our region.

It is hopeless to try to give any idea of the large number of species
which we encountered in the two months, January and February,
and a poor time of the year it was at best. In the way of game
birds the Helmeted Guinea-fowl stands first, though in gameness
he certainly stands at the foot of the list. This bird is seen all over
the eastern Sudan, often in incredible numbers, and I can truth-
fully state that I encountered one flock containing a thousand head,
a great bluish mass of moving fowl which ran ahead of me, occasion-
ally rising by the hundred and alighting again. Flocks of a hun-
dred or more were too common to be remarked upon. This species
seems to live by sheer force of numbers, its stupidity is notorious,
and it is preyed upon by all the small and véry numerous carni-
vores, by the abundant hawks and by long lines of string nooses
set by the Arabs. An English resident told me he had never seen
its nest and A. L. Butler makes the same statement in ‘The Ibis.’
He thinks it must nest only in the rainy season, when travel is very
difficult and the whole country is a sea of mud. In January, there
were still some very young looking birds mixed in with these big
flocks.

The francolin of the country is Francolinus clappertoni, a rather
large and handsomely marked partridge which occurs mostly along
the strips of heavy elephant grass near the river. In the morning
it gets out onto the open edges of the grass and rises briskly and
rather quietly, like a pheasant. It might make quite a good game
bird, but its flesh, though white and fine looking, is rather a disap-
pointment, for like that of the guinea fowl it is tough and dry.
Perhaps if the birds could be hung in a cool place the result
would be different.

The river birds of the Blue-Nile and its tributary the Dinder are
not numerous, for there is very little food on the sandy, shifting
shores. That patriarch of all birds, the Whale-headed Stork, or
Shoe-bill is only found on the White Nile, and the great Goliath
Heron we did not see at all, though it does occur in the eastern
Sudan, more commonly perhaps in the summer season of flood.

154 Puruures, Birds of the Sudan. Ao

The only common heron was a plain, grey looking species, Ardea
melanocephala, which fed on insects in the great, open, damp
“meres.” These “meres” are a common feature on the Dinder
River, where they attract great herds of game, holding as they do,
water and succulent grasses till late in the dry season. With these
herds of game enormous flocks of Little Egrets associate, and a
lone old buffalo bull would often have a number perched on his
back. The stomach of one of these Little Egrets contained lizards,
locusts, and to our surprise, a butterfly.

We saw the curious Hammer-head Stork, an ugly and lonely
looking bird quite often, and always by himself, and there was a
Night Heron which we did not get.

The Egyptian Goose brings up thoughts of the departed great,
for he figures so often on the tombs of the early dynasties as to have
a real historical significance, while his egg had in those times a
religious meaning. Apparently he was domesticated by the early
Egyptians, but if so, this art was lost very long ago. Hayne, in
his book on domestic animals, discusses this point and quotes St.
Hilaire’s account of an attempt in France to add this bird to our
poultry. The attempt extended over a number of years, 1839 to
1845, and was partly successful, inasmuch as the birds increased in
weight and grew lighter in color, while their breeding and laying
time began to be extended. Nothing permanent, however, was
accomplished and this species is now only an ornament and not a
very desirable one either, for its temper is very uncertain and it is
often dangerous in a collection of smaller water fowl. This goose
exists at present in Egypt and on the Nubian Nile only in little
scattered troops, while its great stronghold is the lower White-
Nile. On the Blue-Nile we saw it in scattered pairs and little
flocks. Its flesh is tough and dry.

There are scarcely any other water fowl on the Blue-Nile, except
the curious Comb Ducks; but wading birds, mostly of common
migratory species, are numerous. Among the resident shore birds
the most attractive by far is the very common little Egyptian
Courser, Pluvianus egyptius. I think this is the prettiest shore
bird I have ever seen, very tame, with flight like a Spotted Sand-
piper, and the most beautifully marked and crested head, and a
spotless chest crossed by a broad black band. This is the famous

| Puiuuies, Birds of the Sudan. 155

“Crocodile-bird” of the Greeks, and in. Arabic it is called the
“Crocodile Watcher.’ It is doubtful whether this bird ever really
feeds inside the crocodile’s mouth. The sand bars are alive with
these little fellows, and they feed busily around the very jaws of
the huge reptiles with absolute unconcern. They are said to bury
their eggs.

The common resident plovers are the African Thick-knee or
Stone Plover, and the handsome Spur-winged Plover. These
latter are conspicuous Lapwings with white faces, black breasts
and black head caps.

We made a special point of collecting large numbers of nightjars
and bats. As often as we had time we would take our guns at
sunset and wander down near the river for the evening flight, when
we were camped in a suitable spot. For the bats we tried to get an
open piece of bare sand where we could find them in the dark, but
for the nightjars we picked out open spots in the tall elephant grass.
This was a delightful time of day. The glare of the afternoon was
over, the last line of women and girls filed back to the village with
waterjars gracefully poised on their heads, huge flocks of weaver
birds were settling for the night, whirring down by thousands and
disappearing in the tall grass with much chirping and rustling, the
last doves were flying back after their evening drink, while the wind
dropped steadily to the universal calm of the winter night. Every
once in a while a flock of weavers would rise out of the grass with a
dull roar, only to settle immediately, and often the first night-hawk
of the evening would frighten them into a panic as he sailed over
their roosting place. When it was almost dark the grass region
would become alive with two species of nightjars, the long-tailed
and the Egyptian. The numbers of these birds about Mangangani
was really remarkable. The former has a single clucking note and
is the commoner of the two. We often sprung it in the woods in
parties of three or four in the daytime. It is a very handsome bird
with a tail in the male ten or eleven inches long, a broad white bar
across the primaries and another across the wing coverts. The
female has a shorter tail. The Egyptian nightjar is a pale colored
short-tailed species. The third kind is the famous standard
winged species, in which the male has a pair of elongated raquet
tipped primaries, reaching twenty-one inches in some cases. The

156 Puiturps, Birds of the Sudan. [ ‘peli

Arabic name “Abudjenah,” or “The father of the four wings”
well describes the appearance of the male in flight. Heuglin says
that these ornamental plumes are at first perfect feathers, but by
December the barbs on the basal part of the shaft begin to drop
out. This process continues until April, when nothing is left but
the bare shaft. In our specimen of February the shaft is bare
except for the terminal two inches.

We found this species rare and very local.. Each male seems to
have a separate feeding range which he works night after night.
They come out very early from the bush and cease their flight
earlier in the night than the other kinds.

At Fazogli we were fortunate in securing an entirely new species
which I called Caprimulgus eleanore. (Plate XIII.) It is a large,
dark and finely marked nightjar, most nearly related to an Indian
form, C. monticola. Africa is rich in Caprimulgide and there may
remain a number of rare species still undiscovered.

I must omit most of the smaller birds in this account, but a few
may be mentioned. We found a little colony of a plain-colored
swallow at Fazogli, breeding in burrows dug in the ground. This
bird, Chelidon griseopyga, is apparently rare, for Butler does not
mention it in his various papers on Sudan birds, and the British
Museum Catalogue only recorded three specimens. The burrows
of these birds, which I cannot find have ever been noticed before,
were some ten feet long and six to ten inches below the surface of
the open plain. The nest of one we dug out was made of straw, and
three feet from the blind end, containing partly fledged young on
January 25. Whether this bird digs its own burrow in this hard
baked loess is still an open question; but I think this probable.
So far as I know, only one other swallow, Hirundo pucheti from the
Congo, nests in this manner. Its burrows (Ornis 1885, p. 587)
were supposed to be those of animals. They were three feet long
and were found at an obtuse angle, the angle holding the nest and
being at the deepest part.

We got four kinds of bee-eaters, one, the magnificent red-breasted
Merops nubicus, is the most glorious of its kind. It is very large,
with a long, pointed tail, habits like a swallow and a breast and
back which seem to reflect the glory of the sunset. These birds
were scarce till we reached the Dinder River, and we lamented our

ean | Puiturps, Birds of the Sudan. 157

inability to shoot one, for they flew very high and we never could
find their roosts. One day Dr. Allen was riding along the road,
mounted as usual on a small, gray donkey, his gun across the
saddle-bow. A flock came flying over, the collector raised his gun,
fired, replaced his gun, caught the bird in his lap, wrapped it up and
dropped it into his bag, without the donkey ever changing his pace
or wagging anear. I call this a good performance, but as a game-
shooting companion often remarks, “They do come easy, some-
times.”’

I want to say a word about the indicators, or honey guides,
which have caused so much comment from all African travellers.
We found two kinds. The natives call them “Manéch” and treat
them to a great deal of ceremony and a little set speech, the meaning
of which we did not get. Most ornithologists concur, I think, in
the belief that the honey guides do not guide, but merely attract
one to honey by their presence in its neighborhood. There was
one bird, however, at Mangangani, which persistently followed me
about, and chattered in an amazing manner. I thought I never
would shake him off, and I am almost convinced that he was follow-
ing me and talking to me, too.

We got ten species of hawks, eight of thrushes, eleven of old
world warblers, seven of shrikes and bush shrikes, and eleven of
ploceids or weavers. Several of the ploceids are kinds seen com-
monly in cages. The long tailed Paradise Whydah, with rectrices
that certainly impede its progress, and the beautiful little Cordon-
blue of aviculturalists. This little gem of bright cobalt blue, so
delicate and short-lived in captivity, was everywhere common,
and associated in little flocks with the Small Red Weaver, Lagono-
sticta senegala. ‘These little mixed flocks were most confiding, and
we saw them everywhere.

The ostrich, which is rare, we did not get a sight of. It, with
various species of cranes, storks, herons and the Giant Hornbill,
is protected by law.

Most of the resident Blue-Nile birds belong to Abyssinian types,
and are therefore different from the White-Nile forms only a short
distance away. The mammals also tend towards Abyssinian,
rather than central African forms.

Early workers in the eastern Sudan and Abyssinia were Riippell

158 Puitups, Birds of the Sudan. [ Fenn

and von Heuglin, while of late years Reichenow, Neumann and
others have done a great deal of systematic work. Mr. A. L.
Butler, present Superintendent of Game Preservation at Khartoum,
has given us interesting papers on Sudan birds since 1905. He is
a keen observer, and has the interests of the great game and the
birds very much at heart. He has been instrumental in many
reforms such as limiting the slaughter of the sand-grouse near
Khartoum, protecting the giraffe, ete. It is hoped that the Govern-
ment will always be able to find such men, and that the policy of no
arms for the Arabs and large sanctuaries for the game animals can
be continued.

Were space sufficient, I should like to speak of many of the other
groups. We had to leave just when some of the birds were begin-
ing to assume their spring plumage and to sing. A little later the
common weavers change from dull browns to orange, yellows and
reds, and must be a gorgeous sight.

The Sudan has a curious attraction, and what it is no man can
say, but as I look back I think of two pictures; one a crisp Febru-
ary morning breakfasting by candle light and watching the com-
plaining camels as they are led in out of the still dusky thorn trees,
while the first flights of cranes and weavers appear against a pale
pink dawn. Next it is noon on a winding path amid the sweet
smelling thorn bush. Nothing is heard but the tireless scuff-scuff
of my camels’ feet, on the dusty path, while hornbills flap from the
branches as we pass, and the sun blares down through the leafless
trees.

Tue AUK, VoL. XXXI. PLATE XIV.

i

MI

ia

|

(

i View or Nest No. 1 or THE FrerruGINOoUS ROUGH-LEG. SHOWING GAP
! TO BE CROSSED.

wee | Cameron, The Ferruginous Rough-leg. 159

THE FERRUGINOUS ROUGH-LEG, ARCHIBUTEO FER-
RUGINEUS IN MONTANA.

BY E. S. CAMERON.

Plates XIV-XVIII.

NESTING.

Tuts splendid bird is undoubtedly the most powerful hawk met
with in Montana, where it is usually called eagle, and its carrying
power is remarkable as the sequel will show. It does no harm,
but, on the contrary, wages unceasing warfare against such pests
as prairie dogs (Cynomys), gophers (Thomomys), and meadow mice
(Arvicola), and should therefore be universally protected; neverthe-
less it has unfortunately become very scarce, excepting in one or
two favored localities where it is strictly preserved. Although a
good deal has been written about the Ferruginous Rough-leg,
as the hawk is called in the American Ornithologists’ Union
Check-list, I am not aware that it has hitherto been studied or
photographed at the nest. It used to be abundant in Montana,
as evidenced by the fact that Dr. J. A. Allen found it “next to
Falco sparverius, the most common species of the Falconidae,” and
himself discovered several nests containing young. He continues:
“The nest is often a very large bulky structure, sometimes three
or four feet in diameter, built of coarse sticks, mixed with the ribs
of antelopes and buffaloes. It is placed on the ground or rocks,
usually near the summit of isolated buttes. The same nest is
apparently occupied for a series of years and annually repaired.’

I have seen the eyrie of this species in many varied situations in
Montana; such as trees, on pillars or ledges of rock, and the
shoulders or summits of badland buttes. The female begins to
lay at any time from the middle of April until the end of the first
week in May, according to the season, and deposits two, three or

1Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural History, Vol. XVII., June,
1874.

160 Camuron, The Ferruginous Rough-leg. [ pur

April
four handsome eggs of variable shade, but usually with rich blotches
of umber brown on a creamy or greenish white ground. The eggs
are half as large again as those of the Common American Buzzard
Buteo swainsoni. The Ferruginous Rough-leg appears to incubate

for about twenty-five days, but I have not been able to time her

exactly. The young birds are full-fledged and leave the nest when
about two months old but do not acquire the full adult plumage for
four or five years. Their call for the parents is at first soft and low,
(like the piping of young Golden Eagles), but develops into a
pleasing whistle by the time they are ready to leave the nest. The
hungry fledglings become very excited when they see one of their
parents approaching, and have a parrot-like trick of working their
heads and necks while snapping their beaks at the same time. If
handled, they resent it with their bills as well as their feet, and, in
my experience, are the only raptores to use the bill in defending
themselves. The Ferruginous Rough-leg is very fond of standing
upon one leg, keeping the other concealed among the feathers, and

is so depicted by Ridgway in Fisher’s ‘Hawks and Owls of The

United States.’ As Dr. Fisher well remarks (op. cit. p. 92, 93),
“When this hawk is hunting its flight appears labored and heavy,

but when circling in the air its flight is graceful and resembles.

closely that of the Golden Eagle.”

My own endeavors to observe Ferruginous Rough-legs at the

nest were to a great extent frustrated by outside interference.
In 1899, a pair nested upon the apex of a badland butte near my
ranch, and the female was sitting hard upon two eggs during the
first week in May. The nest appeared to be in an unfavorable sit-

uation, exposed to every wind, was lined with dried grass, and com-

posed of sage brush stalks, creeping cedar, and cedar drift-wood
sticks. The latter were the largest sticks I have ever seen used in
any nest, not excepting eyries of the Golden Eagle. Unfortunately,
a road wound by the nesting site, and the hawk was wantonly killed
before she had succeeded in hatching her nestlings. She might
easily have escaped when first startled from the nest, but was un-
willing to forsake her eggs, and flew screaming in circles above them
until she was shot. The victim was a fully adult female, and in
life must have been a truly magnificent bird. Her tail was entirely
snow-white except for a few small streaks of bright chestnut, and

=

ThHEGAUK, VOLE Dnt

ANOTHER Vinw oF Nest No. | wit NESTLINGS.

PLATE

XV.

ee : Cameron, The Ferruginous Rough-leg. 161

her legs and ‘flags’ were of the latter color barred with black. To
the casual observer, the color of these parts will mark the chief
difference between adult and immature birds. In first and second
plumage, at least, the legs and thighs are of such pale buff as to
appear white excepting in brilliant sunshine. Moreover, the tail
of the young bird has four dark bars and is white for the basal half
only, the terminal half being light slate color.

In May, 1905, a second pair of hawks constructed an eyrie in
a cotton-wood tree about six miles from my Dawson County ranch.
A shepherd who happened to camp with his sheep wagon at this
place boiled and ate the three eggs, whereupon the disgusted birds
deserted it. Yet a third pair nested upon a ledge of a high butte
during 1908, when two eggs were laid, but the almost full-fledged
young were discovered by some sheep shearers in July, who killed
one and took the other captive. From three nests, therefore,
no young birds were reared, and one adult was inexcusably sacri-
ficed.

Last summer, Mr. W. R. Felton, an engineer of the Chicago,
Milwaukee and Puget Sound Railway kept four nests of this hawk
under observation for me, and visited them whenever his work of
building a branch line between Lewiston and Great Falls allowed
him time. These four nests were within a radius of four miles
from the engineer’s headquarters at the Square Butte Ranch, in
Chouteau County, and others were reported seven miles away.
Besides the above, Mr. Felton found four disused but well preserved
eyries,— two of them within a quarter of a mile of an occupied nest.
All eight nests were placed upon rocky ledges or points. They
were constructed of the same materials, which consisted of sage
brush and greasewood sticks, with some soapwood intermixed, and
lined with dry cow manure. As will be seen from the measure-
ments, the loose pile of sticks made the new nests remarkably high,
but they settled considerably before the young had flown. A
brief history of the four nests and their occupants condensed from
Mr. Felton’s notes follows: Nest No. 1, which was only two miles
north of the Square Butte Ranch, and easily visible from there
through powerful binoculars, was visited almost every day. This
particular nest was picturesquely situated on a rocky point of the
‘Chalk Cliffs’ northeast of the geologically famous “Square Butte,”

162 Cameron, The Ferruginous Rough-leg.

.

[Apri
which despite its modest name is an immense laccolith constituting
an isolated spur of the Highwood mountains,— 2600 feet above the
prairie. In reality the so called ‘Chalk Cliffs’ consist of an outcrop
of white sandstone, chiefly in the centre of a range of grass-covered
hills whose green summits rise in strong contrast above the white
corrugated rocks. This sandstone stratum has been worn into a
series of perpendicular cliffs, pure white above, but stained light
brown below by lignitic matter and projecting spurs are carved
into fantastic pinnacles and mounds. One promontory in particu-
lar is a regular sawtooth ridge. The nest here shown is poised
upon the apex of a pillar which terminates a knife blade pro-
jection of 3537 feet elevation, and suggests in some photographs
the prow of a ship. As there is a sheer vertical descent on three
sides, and the surface of the connecting ridge suddenly breaks off
leaving a wide fissure in the rock between it and the nest it is a
task of no small difficulty to reach the latter and one best suited
to a sailor or a cat. It can only be accomplished by approaching
the eyrie from above, and then crawling along the ledge, when by
dropping into and crossing the gap, which is well shown in the
photograph, the nest can be attained. Mr. Felton, making light
of the danger, climbed frequently to the nest, and made numerous
exposures with a small Kodak, at the range of a few feet. The nest
was four feet in height, and three and a half feet in diameter, and
was higher than any Montana eyries of the Golden Eagle (Aquila
chrysaétos) known to me, which species had also nested in the
‘Chalk Cliffs.’! The hawks carried green alfalfa to the nest for
decorative purposes, and Mr. Felton noticed a fresh supply there
on three separate occasions. When found on May 18, the eyrie
contained three newly hatched young, but only two reached
maturity, as one of the nestlings disappeared on July 9, when
fifty-two days old. Mr. Felton conjectured that it had been blown
out of the nest by a violent thunder storm, but the two stronger
birds might have ejected their weaker brother. In any event, the
outcast would soon have been picked up by some four footed or
winged marauder. The two remaining fledglings permanently

1In his recently published ‘History of The Birds of Colorado,’ Mr. W. L.
Sclater mentioned (p. 182) a Golden Eagle’s nest which measured ‘six feet in
diameter and nine feet high.’

PLATE XVI.

THE AUK, VOL. XXXXT.

i YounG FERRUGINOUS ROUGH-LEGS BEFORE THEY couLD FLY.

THEVAUK, VO, son od: PLATE XVII.

1. A SawrootH RinGcEe at NESTING SITE OF FERRUGINOUS ROUGH-LEG.

29. Nesriincs oF Frerrucinous ROUGH-LEG.

ren ol Cameron, The Ferruginous Rough-leg. 163
left their nest on July 25, when about nine weeks old. While
watching at this nest at 2 o’clock in the afternoon, Mr. Felton
observed a Great Horned Owl flying along the cliff face in an east-
erly direction. The owl passed close to the nestlings, when one
of the soaring hawks, presumably the female, was seen to swoop at,
and strike the interloper, which thereupon dived obliquely to the
ground. The hawk made two more dashes at the sitting owl, and
a short squabble ensued each time between the birds, but when
Mr. Felton reached the place the owl was nowhere to be seen and
the hawk had returned to her nestlings. As the Great Horned Owl
is a powerful and ferocious bird, which even attacks and eats large
hawks (see Fisher, “Hawks and Owls of the United States,’ p. 175),
it undoubtedly beat off its assailant without difficulty.

A second eyrie was also placed in the ‘ Chalk Cliffs,’ in a similar
situation, a mile to the east of the one above mentioned. This
nest, which was two feet high and three feet in diameter, contained
three eggs, one of which proved infertile. As in the case of the
first eyrie described, a three weeks old nestling was evicted from its
home on June 31, to fall fifty yards below on the steep hillside where
it was found and restored to its nest by Mr. Felton. Its preserver
had the satisfaction of witnessing the first flight of both birds on
July 12. They were noticed to be very much on the alert, and
Mr. Felton, desiring to obtain a photograph, crawled cautiously
from aboye to within five yards of the nest. As he raised his Kodak
both hawks took alarm, and boldly launched themselves from the
eyrie in the direction of the creek below. After holding a straight
course for about a quarter mile the fledglings seemed to lose heart;
they circled right and left, and, again meeting, returned together
to the cliff. So far their graceful flight had been marked with
almost adult ease; but both betrayed inexperience when trying to
alight and capsized awkwardly upon the ledge. Near this place
a curious, unused eyrie of the Ferruginous Hawk was fixed against
the vertical wall, to all appearance like a Cliff Swallow’s nest, but
the heavy structure was in fact supported by an invisible ledge.

No. 3 eyrie was situated in the Surprise Creek brakes, and built
upon a conical gumbo point which terminated a knife blade ridge
some thirty-three yards below the bench above. From this nest
there was a sheer fifty feet drop in front and at both sides. It was

164 Cameron, The Ferruginous Rough-leg. eer
a large straggling edifice, three feet high and the same in diameter at
the most compact part. Near this eyrie were the four unoccupied
nests above mentioned. When Mr. Felton first discovered this
nest, on May 18, the female hawk was incubating four eggs, and the
young birds of about a week old were found on June 6. At about
a month old the nestlings were taken for pets by some Swede rail-
road contractors, greatly to the annoyance of the engineer, who
desired that as many as possible of his protégés should be safely
fledged. The young hawks were allowed full liberty in the con-
tractor’s camp and would fly away in the morning and return
at night, but on July 28 they disappeared altogether. According
to Mr. Felton’s observations and my own the Ferruginous Hawk
develops its flymg powers very quickly, and I have known a two
months old female of this species to take flights of from two hundred
to three hundred yards without a wind. As with the genera Aquila
and Buteo, the male is a week later than the female in acquiring
the full power of flight.

The fourth eyrie, which contained four eggs, was placed upon
the summit of a sand rock among pines, and here four birds were
reared, which, as observed by Mr. Felton, took flight on July 17.
This nest was not measured until the day of the final departure of
its occupants, when.it had settled so much as to be only a foot and a
half high, although three and a half feet in diameter.

Foop.

So far as I have been able to observe in Eastern Montana, the
Ferruginous Rough-leg feeds chiefly upon prairie dogs and meadow-
mice, though not averse to snakes. In my opinion it never takes
frogs. Like Golden Eagles, these hawks often hunt amicably in
pairs, and then appear to be more courageous, attacking mammals
as large as jack-rabbits. On July 29, 1907, Mr. Lance Irvine,
foreman of the Crown W. Ranch in Custer County, Montana,
when out riding, surprised a pair of Ferruginous Rough-legs with a
freshly killed jack-rabbit, which weighed about eight pounds, and
could not therefore be carried away. From the description this
pair would consist of a bird of the year with one of its parents. On

¢

THE AUK, VoL. XXXI. PLATE XVIII.

1. Fut FLEpGED FrErRRuUGINOUS RoUGH-LEG, ABOUT SEVEN WEEKS OLD.
2. FrMALE FrerRRuGINous RouGH-LEG NINE WEEKS OLD.

eer ig Cameron, The Ferruginous Rough-leg. 165
May 28, 1893, my wife and I witnessed the capture of a prairie
dog by two of these hawks, and one of them was proceeding to
devour it as we rode up. The methods of the crafty coyote and the
Ferruginous Rough-leg are identical in ‘dog-towns.’ Both wait

_ patiently, the hawk also on the ground, for a prairie dog to amble

afield from its burrow, and thereupon make a dash, the first terres-
trial, the latter aerial, to intercept it. A prairie dog always en-
deavors to gain its own burrow when danger threatens, and is
marvellously quick to reach it, but if cut off from home, the beast
becomes so bewildered that it neglects the nearer intermediate
holes. When two coyotes, or two hawks hunt together, the fate
of the intended victim is sealed, but with one assailant only, it
has an even chance.

Mr. W. R. Felton made many valuable observations on the food
habits of these hawks during the nesting season, and discovered
the fact, new to science, that they prey upon birds as well as on
mammals. Over the whole course of his observations until the
young birds had flown, prairie dogs were found to largely exceed
all other diet, but until the nestlings were about two weeks old
their food consisted partly of Meadowlarks (Sturnella neglecta).
While very little food was found in nest No. 1, taking into considera-
tion the frequent visits paid to it, there were seen altogether: nine
prairie dogs, one cotton-tail rabbit, two bull snakes, one thirty-one
inches long, and some remains of Sharp-tailed Grouse and Meadow-
larks. On two separate occasions, while Mr. Felton kept watch
near this eyrie, the wary female frequently passed and repassed
overhead with a Meadowlark in her talons, as subsequently identi-
fied. The bill of fare at all four eyries was similar, and Meadow-
larks, as demonstrated by their down and feathers, were provided
for the nestlings. The following interesting collection of remnants
was seen at No. 4 nest. Four prairie dog skulls, the skeletons of
two bull snakes, one of them being very large, the leg of a Sharp-
tailed Grouse, the wing and scapulars of a Magpie, and the primaries
of a Meadowlark. Grouse and Magpie remains were not found
until July 17 and 21, and were proved by the feathers to belong to
young birds, although I do not doubt that a Ferruginous Rough-leg
would be quite capable of capturing an adult sitting grouse. When
I was standing below the nest designated No. 1, on October 13,
1912, three Magpies alighted by it.

166 Cameron, The Ferruginous Rough-leg. ee

To the best of my knowledge this species never attempts to take
poultry of any kind, and my own observations are strongly con-
firmed by Mr. W. P. Sullivan, for sixteen years manager of Mr.
Milner’s beautiful Square Butte Ranch, where these hawks have
always been protected on account of the numerous gophers (7hom-
omys) which they destroy. As above narrated, several pair breed
annually upon the ranch, and are constantly flying around the
buildings, yet no chickens have ever been molested. Mr. Sullivan,
who is a close observer of nature, considers that, after the young
are flown in the fall, these hawks subsist chiefly upon gophers, and
he has described to me (in lit.) their method of capturing them as
follows :—

“T have watched the hawks often through glasses in our alfalfa
field after the first crop has been taken off. The pocket gophers
get pretty busy tunnelling, and pushing all the loose, damp earth
up in piles on the surface. The hawks fly slowly over the field
until they discover a fresh pile of damp earth. Here they will alight
softly, and wait for the gopher to push close to the surface. They
will then spread their wings, and, rising a few feet in the air, come
down stiff-legged into the loose earth when the gopher is transfixed
and brought out. I have seen them eat the gopher where caught,
and at other times carry it away.”

In the summer of 1903, about an acre of ground at the Square
Butte Ranch was cpvered with piles of building material, such as
lumber, posts, and heavy shed timbers which had been collected
there the previous year. Numbers of cotton-tail rabbits lived
under these piles, and provided an occasional meal both for the
hawks and for the ranch cat, which was a female tabby. On a
certain day Mr. Milner, owner of the ranch, happened to be engaged
in conversation with Mr. Sullivan near a pile of posts upon which
the cat was basking in the sun with one eye open for a chance rabbit
as usual. A Ferruginous Rough-leg, with nestlings in the white
cliffs, was gyrating low over the buildings, but neither the gentle-
men nor the eat took particular notice of this familiar sight. Both
men were, however, startled by a loud whirring noise, when to their
intense surprise they saw that the hawk had lifted the now be-
wildered and struggling cat from her couch on the posts and was
slowly bearing her aloft. It seemed at first to the astonished

Poe | Cameron, The Ferruginous Rough-leg. 167

spectators as though the hawk would actually succeed in disposing
of this troublesome quarry, since it continued to rise easily with its
burden to a height of about twenty-five feet. By this time however
the fully aroused victim was stirred to a desperate effort, and it
became clear that the audacious hawk had ‘bitten off more than it
could chew.’ In Mr. Sullivan’s words the tabby “twisted around,
gave a terrible splutter and scream and clawed the hawk with a
vengeance.” The latter, flapping wildly, at once relaxed its grip,
while pussy nothing loath, withdrew her claws, fell to the ground,
and dashed under the posts. Numerous downy feathers, floating
gently to the ground convinced the onlookers that the chagrined
hawk had none the best of the encounter. Temporarily tired
of cats, it now soared to a great height and returned with empty
talons to the chalk cliffs. The cat in question was a very small one,
and Montana cats are notably thin in summer; but, allowing for
these facts, the victim must have weighed six pounds at least.
Nevertheless, Mr. Sullivan feels sure that, had the cat behaved like
the rabbit for which she was mistaken, the hawk would successfully
have conveyed the quarry to its eyrie in the rocks. As the nest
was two miles distant this would seem an extraordinary feat,
and presumably transcend any hitherto published records of the
kind. I quite admit that under favorable conditions of wind the
female hawk might transport a five or six pound jack-rabbit to the
eyrie; but that any cat-lifting hawk should ever surpass what this
one achieved seems to me improbable. The dexterous application
of the cat’s raking claws would not fail to prevent it, as in the above
remarkable instance.

Where a rabbit succumbs to the shock of the hawk’s constricting
grip, the agile and wiry feline, on the other hand, is stimulated to
offer a desperate resistance, and like Mr. Sullivan’s protégé is little
the worse for the encounter. It cannot be told whether the hawk
was mistrustful of rabbits after this event, but the cat became so
suspicious of a flying object that she would race for the wood-pile
if Mr. Sullivan threw his hat into the air.

168 Bryant, Birds as Grasshopper Destroyers. ane

BIRDS AS DESTROYERS OF GRASSHOPPERS IN CALI-
FORNIA.

BY HAROLD C. BRYANT.

CONSIDERABLE evidence of the interrelations existing between
bird and insect life has come to light in connection with investiga-
tions into the economic status of certain birds carried on under the
auspices of the California State Fish and Game Commission and
the University of California. Some of the best evidence came
from an investigation of a grasshopper outbreak in the vicinity of
Los Banos, Merced County, California. A part of the results of
this investigation was published in the University of California
‘Publications in Zoology,’ volume 11, pages 1-20. In the present
paper additional matter is combined with a part of that previously
presented, the whole being now offered with a special view to the
problem of insect destruction by birds in California.

Certain sections of California are annually troubled with grass-
hoppers, and there is seldom a year when they do not cause con-
siderable damage to crops in some part of the state. Reports of
damage caused by grasshoppers in 1912 first began to be received
in June. The western part of Merced County, and parts of Kings
and Kern Counties were most affected. In the vicinity of Los
Banos, Merced County, where the investigation was carried on,
grasshoppers give some trouble each year but their depredations
in 1912 were more extensive than usual. On many of the ranches
the entire summer crop of alfalfa was destroyed. The only control
measure resorted to was burning over of pasture and alfalfa land.
As most of the grasshoppers already had wings when the burning
was done, the majority escaped unharmed. Garden truck and
small trees in the infested areas were attacked by the pests. Corn,
tomatoes, and even onions were stripped of every leaf. In many
instances small shade trees, even including eucalyptus, were com-
pletely defoliated.

The species of grasshopper causing the damage was the differ-
ential grasshopper, Melanoplus differentialis. The only other
species noted at the time were Camnula pellucida, Conozoa behrenst,
and Parapomala calamus.

a rg sal Bryant, Birds as Grasshopper Destroyers. 169

An estimate of the numbers per square yard in the infested areas
was obtained by counting the numbers disturbed by the observer
at each step. Little damage could be noted where grasshoppers
were less than fifteen to the square yard. Where damage was
greatest alfalfa fields averaged about twenty-five to the square
yard. Insome pasture land along the irrigation canals the number
was estimated at thirty per square yard.

This will give the reader an idea of the conditions existing at the
time observations hereafter recorded were made.

The neighborhood of Los Banos, largely due to the great irriga-
tion system and to the large amount of land which has been
‘swamped,’ supports a very large bird population. Water birds
and shore birds are very abundant along the canals and in the
marshes, whereas the pasture lands, the alfalfa, and the trees,
furnish food and cover for many land birds. During a week’s stay,
July 10 to 17, 1912, twenty-two species of water and shore birds
were recorded and forty species of land birds. Censuses taken
indicated that the Bicolored Redwing was the most abundant bird
and that the Cliff Swallow, Barn Swallow, Western Meadowlark,
Linnet, Western Kingbird, and California Shrike, listed in the
order of their abundance, were also common.

Observation showed that the following species of birds were
feeding on grasshoppers. Only those birds actually seen with
grasshoppers in their bills were recorded.

Western Meadowlark, Sturnella neglecta.

Bicolored Red-wing, Agelaius pheniceus californicus.

Brewer’s Blackbird, Euphagus cyanocephalus.

Bullock’s Oriole, [cterus bullock.

Arkansas Kingbird, Tyrannus verticalis.

California Shrike, Lanius ludovicianus gambeli.

English Sparrow, Passer domesticus.

Although observation in the field furnishes some evidence as to
the kinds of birds feeding on an insect and the quantity consumed,
yet it is on stomach examination that we must depend for accurate
evidence as to the numbers of insects taken. In this instance a
determination of the numbers of grasshoppers taken by the bird
was made easy because of the presence of the mandibles of the
insects — hard parts which remained undigested. Experiments

Auk

[April

Bryant, Birds as Grasshopper Destroyers.

170

@ 18
oz
0g

¢ 19
06
ST

OOT
[saoydos Zz]

sroddoyssei3
jo que Jog

ssoddoyq
-sseis

jo ‘ON

— | 0°00
— | 0001
— | 0001
¢'96 | G's

0g 0°96
0% 0°86
g° Z'66
oe 0°26
09 06
0°¢8 “GT
G2p | 92a
= 00r
— 00T
a 00T
a 00T
= 00T
== 001

II ‘OT
0€ ‘ZI
‘8
00°F

0S 6

GI-8
00°F

¥-8
00°%
0€ ‘ZI
00 ‘Ff
0€ :OT
00 °%
O€ :Z1
00°7
OT ‘OL
pvop puno,y

Beye
puv oinystg
aInjseg
ainyseg
PPG FBOUM
oInjstg
paeyoig
BSE
pue oinyseg
BTeV
ainysed
pus BBV
so[nL,
aInysed
SEV
VETS
puv oingseg
oInystd
aiInjsed
oinjseg
YSiVyy

|

|

mu ANArnwatTt HN

mA eH

seen

pooy poojy jeunue
Q]TGeIISIA queso J3dg
4u99 Jog

ep jo oury,

Pied:
2h [OLS L

syoeui0}s

.
.
.
.

"ses OMTIGG BIUIOFTEO
se eeeceereeoes MOTTEMG WIBG
o isv ary ee t's #8) MOTE MG EITC)
apaneeaatray niisietts *modiedg yst[sury
eee e none * prllqyov[g § JoMoIg
Ce =) (0) 80) § ool[ng

"teres IBTMOpPBITA] 10489 A

eeccececes ‘SULM-poyy potofoolly,

eee eens *SUIM-poy po1o[ootg
eee * prLqypovy[g poepBvey-MOTo A
“+s yIBrTT pouLOF] BIUIOFTRO
Sees See Oe SO Cel yov[d

eee wees * parqauryy SesuByIV
SSN ANG) SUIMOIING

"***"WOIOPT weer s,AuoyyUYy

Se OROOOIER ci) 115

se eee eee “UO01OFT anid YBoIr)

se10edg

‘CaNINVXa SCUIA AO SLNALNOO HOVWOLS ONIMOHS ATAVL

Pee | Bryant, Birds as Grasshopper Destroyers. Wig

by other investigators as well as some performed by the writer
show that insects such as grasshoppers are digested by birds in
from three to four hours. Consequently the number of grass-
hoppers destroyed each day must be at least three times the num-
ber found in a stomach.

The following table gives the results of the stomach examinations.
In spite of the comparatively few stomachs of each species examined
the results should give a fairly accurate idea of the extent to which
birds in the infested areas were feeding on grasshoppers.

Considering the capacity of the bird, the Burrowing Owl (Speo-
tyto cunicularia hypogea) must be considered the most efficient
destroyer, twenty-eight grasshoppers having been found in the
one stomach examined. Blackbirds and Meadowlarks however,
exceeding in numbers of individuals, were probably doing the most
effective work.

The comparative destruction of grasshoppers per day by single
individuals and by the total number of each species is crudely

COMPARATIVE DAILY DESTRUCTION OF GRASSHOPPERS

BY BIRDS.
Average number of grasshoppers
per day by
total individuals
Species one bird of species

Anthony’s Green Heron (Butorides virescens

anthony?) 42 1050
Kalldeer (Oxyechus vociferus) 33 5445
Burrowing Owl (Speotyto cunicularia hypogea) 84 1260
Arkansas Kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis) 8 1280
Black Phoebe (Sayornis nigricans) 9 180
California Horned Lark (Otocoris alpestris

actia) 8 88
Bicolored Red-wing (A gelaius gubernator cali-

fornicus) 29 78,590
Western Meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta) 48 24,720
Bullock’s Oriole (Icterus bullock) 45 4050
Brewer’s Blackbird (Huphagus cyanocephalus) 9 225
English Sparrow (Passer domesticus) 2 100
Cliff Swallow (Petrochelidon lunifrons lunifrons) 3 2265
California Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus gambelz) 12 1200

Destruction per square mile by total bird
population 120,453

14 Bryant, Birds as Grasshopper Destroyers. [ reer

represented in the table on p. 171. It should be here stated that
censuses of the bird population by species were taken and are used
in this calculation. The comparative numbers of the different
species were calculated by averaging the two censuses taken and
using the average per square mile as a multiplier.

Although the table is probably far from accurate, yet it gives
some idea of the comparative destruction afforded by the different
species. It will be noted that such birds as the Bicolored Red-
wing and the Western Meadowlark, birds of small capacity, far
outrank in destructiveness birds with large capacity, because of
their greater numbers. Red-wings, Meadowlarks, Orioles, King-
birds, and Shrikes appeared to be feeding almost wholly upon
grasshoppers. Probably more than three-fourths of all the destruc-
tion by birds was accomplished by these five species. It should
be of interest to note that these are mainly birds against which
complaint is made upon the score of crop destruction. Even
though the Bicolored Red-wing averaged but nine grasshoppers
per bird in those examined, yet, on account of the numbers of
individuals, it must be considered the most valuable destroyer.
The one stomach of a Brewer’s Blackbird examined probably does
not demonstrate the true character of this bird’s food at this time,
for in other instances this blackbird has been found to be more
insectivorous than the Bicolored Red-wing. The average Western
Meadowlark must have consumed at least fifty grasshoppers a day.

Certain birds examined and found to contain but few grasshop-
pers doubtless fed to a larger extent on these insects when they were
of smaller size. The swallows, for instance, owing to their small
size, were unable to eat a large grasshopper. If the investigation
could have covered the entire time of the outbreak, it would proba-
bly have been found that certain birds were far more efficient
destroyers when the insects were small than when they became
larger.

Fortunately some material collected at Los Banos the same
month in 1911 was available. This afforded a comparison of the
food of the Western Meadowlark and the Bicolored Red-wing in
two successive years. As grasshoppers were less numerous in the
summer of 1911, it has been possible to obtain information as to the
comparative destruction by these birds when grasshoppers were in

vol a= a Bryant, Birds as Grasshopper Destroyers. Ny 3

relatively normal numbers and when they were in abnormal num-
bers. A glance at the following table will show the percentages of
the different kinds of food taken and the average number of grass-
hoppers taken per bird.

COMPARATIVE DESTRUCTION OF GRASSHOPPERS IN TWO
SUCCESSIVE YEARS.

WESTERN MEADOWLARK.

Per cent Per cent Average number Total
Number of animal vegetable grasshoppers per cent
birds Date food food per bird grasshoppers
10 July 11, 22, 1911 99.0 1 5(0) @ 83.1
5 wih, wie ee 99.2 8 16 96.2

BIcoLORED RED-WING.

6 June 22; July 6,1911 83.5 16.5 2 37.0
4 July 13, 16, 1912 96.0 4.0 9 81.2

Meadowlarks took very nearly the same percentage of animal
food each year, showing that at this time of year the bird is almost
wholly insectivorous. The availability of grasshoppers as a diet
appears to have influenced the birds taken in 1912 for they averaged
sixteen grasshoppers apiece as against seven taken by the birds
collected in 1911. A greater difference in kind of food is to be
noted in the Bicolored Red-wing.

As the number of grasshoppers in 1911 compared to the number
in 1912 is not definitely known, it is impossible to say whether
these birds changed their food habits in direct proportion to the
number of grasshoppers or whether they were taken in an unequal
proportion due to the extreme availability of the insects in 1912.
The fact remains, however, that Meadowlarks and Bicolored Red-
wings, and probably all other insectivorous birds, not only took
greater numbers of grasshoppers when they were abnormally
abundant, but also forsook certain usual articles of diet such as
weed seeds and beetles, thus causing an increased percentage of
grasshoppers to be taken as food.

One of the most interesting things which came out in the investi-
gation at Los Banos was the evidence that at least one of the

174 Bryant, Birds as Grasshopper Destroyers. reer

shore birds and one of the herons had turned their attention to the
grasshoppers. One hundred per cent of the food of a Killdeer was
made up of grasshoppers, eleven having been eaten. The Killdeer
being a common bird in the locality and having a greater capacity
than smaller birds must be considered an effective destroyer.
An Anthony’s Green Heron collected along a canal contained
fourteen grasshoppers.

Such then, are the conditions to be expected during an outbreak
of grasshoppers. Birds flock to infested areas and also change
their food habits to meet the abundance of a particular kind of
food, thus doubly increasing their efficiency in helping to bring
back normal conditions.

Let us now compare conditions to be expected in localities
where grasshoppers exist in more nearly normal numbers. Since
birds which forage on the ground feed to an especially large extent
upon grasshoppers, we will depend upon the analysis of the food of
such a bird for evidence. As an illustration of this type there is
no better bird than the Western Meadowlark.

The Eastern Meadowlark is noted as a bird which feeds exten-
sively on grasshoppers, 29 per cent of the food for the year being
made up of these insects. Beal (U. S. Dept. Agric., Div. Biol.
Surv., Bull. 34, p. 66) has pointed out that the eastern bird sur-
passes the western in the number of grasshoppers destroyed. He
further states that nearly every species of bird in the east eats a
larger percentage of these insects than does the related species on
the Pacific coast in spite of the fact that in the west grasshoppers
are available for a longer period each year.

Further evidence furnished by the examination of nearly two
thousand stomachs of Western Meadowlarks taken in all parts of
California and in every month of the year has shown that the
western bird, although not equaling the record of the eastern bird,
in reality takes larger quantities of grasshoppers than was at first
supposed.

Fourteen and two tenths per cent of the total food of the Western
Meadowlark for the year in California is made up of grasshoppers.
An additional 5.2 per cent is made up of crickets (Gryllus) and an
additional .9 per cent of Jerusalem crickets (Stenopelmatus). Five
hundred and eighty-seven or 30.5 per cent of the nineteen hundred

Gerrans 1 Bryant, Birds as Grasshopper Destroyers. Lio
and twenty Meadowlarks examined had eaten grasshoppers and
an additional three hundred and thirty-nine had taken crickets.

The number of grasshoppers taken by Western Meadowlarks
was found to vary greatly in different parts of the state. Evi-
dently the number taken was governed by the availability of the
insect. Meadowlarks collected at Eureka, Humboldt County,
had eaten but very few and these had been taken in but three
months of the year. Birds collected in the Sacramento and San
Joaquin valleys had consumed large quantities. Of Meadowlarks
collected at Red Bluff, Tehama County, over 28 per cent of the
food for the year was found to be made up of grasshoppers and
27.5 per cent of the food for the year of Meadowlarks collected at
Newman, Stanislaus County.

Birds in the vicinity of Los Banos, Merced County, must con-
sume a similar amount of grasshoppers for during the five months,
March to July inclusive, a time of year when these insects are not
found in maximum numbers, Meadowlarks from this vicinity
showed that 25.2 per cent of their food was made up of these
insects.

Some interesting evidence of the change of food habits to meet
the abundance, or better the availability, of grasshoppers is fur-
nished by the results of an examination of the stomach contents of
Meadowlarks collected in 1911 and in 1912 at Newman, Stanislaus
County. Sixty per cent of all the birds of this species collected in
this locality during the year 1911 had eaten grasshoppers and 27.5
per cent of the food taken was made up of these insects. In 1912
when grasshoppers were far more numerous, nearly 42.5 per cent
of the food of the same number of birds taken during the same
month was made up of grasshoppers.

A similar change of food habits to meet local conditions was
exhibited by Meadowlarks collected at Hollister, San Benito
County, in 1911. In this locality over 18 per cent of their food
was made up of crickets (Gryllus sp.) and but 7 per cent of grass-
hoppers. In the month of August only did grasshoppers exceed
crickets in the food and then only by one per cent.

The highest percentage of grasshoppers taken by Western
Meadowlarks in any one month was by four birds collected at
Salinas, Monterey County, in June, 1911, 93.7 per cent of all their

Auk
April

176 Bryant, Birds as Grasshopper Destroyers.
food being made up of grasshoppers. Four Inyo County Meadow-
larks taken in August showed that 82.5 per cent of their food was
made up of these insects.

Meadowlarks taken at El Toro, Orange County, showed one of
the best records. Grasshoppers had been taken every month of
the year and made up very nearly 42 per cent of the food. As an
average of a dozen birds collected each month during a year was
available from this locality this must give a fair idea of the extent
to which Western Meadowlarks feed upon grasshoppers in this
vicinity; viz.

TABLE SHOWING NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES OF GRASS-
HOPPERS CONSUMED BY WESTERN MEADOWLARKS
TAKEN IN THE VICINITY OF EL TORO, ORANGE
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

Average number of Average per-
Number of Number of grasshoppers per centage of
1911 birds grasshoppers ir grasshoppers
June 13 53 4.0 43 .2
July 7 59 8.4 17.5
August 19 314 16.5 93.9
September 6 75 1255 96.3
October 13 122 9.3 61.9
November 8 115 14.3 66.6
Totals and

averages 66 738 10.1 73.3

The average destruction per day can be obtained by multiplying
the figures of the table by three. The numbers given are the
numbers actually found in the stomachs. The fact that sixty-six
Meadowlarks taken in the six months when grasshoppers are
abundant, and in a locality where outbreaks are almost unknown,
averaged ten grasshoppers apiece or thirty a day, furnishes con-
vineing evidence of the large toll exacted by this bird. The fact
that 96.3 per cent of the food of six birds taken in September was
made up of grasshoppers is also significant of a preference for this
Insect.

It can be seen therefore, that no small part of the food of the
Western Meadowlark is made up of grasshoppers. In fact the only

yah Sacre 7 Bryant, Birds as Grasshopper Destroyers. ae
other insect making up a larger percentage of food is the ever-
present beetle.

The individual records of meadowlarks show that the numbers
of grasshoppers taken is very large as well as the percentage taken
as food. From fifteen to thirty average-sized grasshoppers are
usually consumed every four hours. Meadowlarks collected near
Stockton, San Joaquin County, March to April, 1911, averaged
nearly six grasshoppers apiece, thus showing a daily average of
over seventeen. The same birds averaged ten crickets per day.
Grain, weed seeds, and other insects made up the larger part of the
food. A young meadowlark was fed 28 small grasshoppers (half
an inch in length) at one meal. The capacity for the destruction
of grasshoppers is therefore very great. The extent to which this
capacity is used is dependent on the availability of the insect.

Such is some of the evidence regarding the destruction of grass-
hoppers by birds in California. It allows of the conclusion that
birds are really a significant agent in the destruction of these pests.
It does not allow of the conclusion that they can be relied upon to
limit their numbers below the point where damage can result.
Man demands too great a readjustment of natural conditions to
permit of complete dependence on the natural order of things.
But because artificial means of controlling insect pests must be
used, the value of a knowledge of the interrelations of organisms
is in no way lessened.

In a study of this kind we can at best but discover the more
obvious relations between birds and insects. Occasionally we can
infer that certain interrelations exist which are not capable of being
demonstrated by direct evidence. For instance: The failure of
birds to check an insect outbreak after insects have appeared in
abnormal numbers is evident to all. The success in preventing
insects from becoming abnormally abundant is not apparent.
In fact no absolute proof of their good work in this connection is
obtainable. It must simply be inferred from data regarding the
food of birds and their relation to insects when they appear in
abnormal numbers, that the regulative influence exerted at times
when normal conditions exist is just as important if not more
important than their influence under abnormal conditions. It
seems safe to conclude that the regulative influence exerted by
birds keeps pace with the fluctuations of insect life.

178 Strone, Habits of the Herring Gull. Apu

ON THE HABITS AND BEHAVIOR OF THE HERRING
GULL, LARUS ARGENTATUS PONT. (Concluded.)

BY R. M. STRONG.
Plates XIX-XX.
VII. Reactions To STIMULI.

1. Auditory.— I know of no experimental work on the reactions
of gulls to sound stimuli, but I have made numerous observations
in the field and with my captive gulls which show that hearing
is reasonably keen in these birds, especially under certain circum-
stances. The bird shown in Plate VII, Fig. 2,! was easily startled
during the earlier part of my tent studies by the small though sharp
noises made by the shutters of my cameras. During the course
of the day, this gull became less and less sensitive to such noises.
and to other slight sounds which came from my tent, though one
end of the tent was hardly five feet away. The responses finally
consisted of little more than short turns of the head. A pistol shot
from a boat fully a quarter mile away from shore caused a wild
panic on the island. Little attention had been given to the boat
before the shot was fired and boats could come nearer without
causing a disturbance so long as no shooting occurred.

On another occasion, the sharp noise made by a falling timber on
the beach caused great alarm among gulls which could hardly have
seen the fall. Great excitement was caused during the night of my
stay on one of the Strawberry Islands by the noise produced by a
falling board which was blown down from a position against my tent.
It is improbable that many gulls if any could have seen this board
fall. The resemblance of such noises to that made by the firing
of a gun undoubtedly explains the intensity of the reactions.
Many and perhaps all of the adult gulls had learned the significance-
of a gun shot.

My captive gulls when tested by some simple experiments on
Sept. 27 and 29, 1913, were not much disturbed by any noises which

1See Auk, January, 1914.

Tut Auk, VoL. XXXI. PLATE XEX.

1. Guus Factne THE WIND IN A STORM.

2. YounG GULL, HALF GROWN BUT STILL IN Down PLUMAGE, PANTING.

eerie Hy Strone, Habits of the Herring Gull. 179
I made out of their sight, though they responded to various sharp
sounds or to a sudden shrill whistle by quick turns of the head.

2. Visual reactions.— Like practically almost all birds the Her-
ring Gull is predominately visual in its behavior. It also appears to
be unusually alert to visual stimuli. Rapid movements, especially,
are noticed as is the case with most seeing animals, so far as we
know anything of their reactions to visual stimuli.

Standing outside of my tent, I could distinguish the form of a
man inside through the thin tent cloth, in certain positions with
reference to the sun’s rays. Small portions of the man’s figure
were also visible to me through narrow openings at the corners of
the tent. It does not seem probable to me that the gulls could fail
at least occasionally to get such glimpses for they often came
within a few feet of the tent and it was evidently under constant
scrutiny. Nevertheless, neither the gulls nor any other birds
appeared to notice these evidences of the presence of a man inside.
The visual images afforded under such circumstances were of course
of very low light intensity and of vague outline. They were also
very incomplete and often only small portions of a human form
would be even faintly visible. At any rate they seemed to lack the
intensity or completeness necessary for arousing the associations
connected with the appearance of a man in the open.

On the other hand, I obtained some interesting evidences of
sensitiveness to very small visual stimuli under other circumstances.
In the course of my tent studies, I found a need for new openings

before the series of apertures which appears in Plate IV, Fig. 1, had
been prepared. A large pocket-knife blade was used for the pur-
pose, and the cloth was cut cautiously. On two occasions the knife
blade slipped through the cloth, unexpectedly, exposing a large
portion of its length. These occurrences were the causes of small
panics among a number of the gulls in the vicinity. The appear-
ance of a small portion of my hand through one of the corner
openings caused considerable excitement even when no rapid
movements were involved.

I used my camera, however, at the openings with considerable
freedom after the first hour or so of quiet watching inside the tent.
The lens was often pushed partly through an opening without
arousing any significant disturbance. It was a dark object and it

180 Strona, Habits of the Herring Gull. [ peer

was moved slowly, whereas the shining steel of the knife blade came
into view suddenly.

In spite of the failure of the gulls to be disturbed by possible
glimpses of the man inside the tent, there is abundant evidence that
these birds see unusually well, as compared with most birds, in
weak light. As will be discussed in the section of this paper which
deals with the nocturnal activities of gulls, these birds are often
active at night. My captive gulls if very hungry will eat in con-
siderable darkness when their food is placed in a customary position,
even when it is not easy for me to make out more than the bare
outlines of the pieces of food. Thus on May 3, 1918, I fed my
gulls at about 8 p.m. The sky was clouded, and there was barely
enough light to follow the movements of the birds from a position
about fifteen feet away. The birds, which were thoroughly hungry,
moved about somewhat uncertainly but they fed promptly from the
two dishes in which their food was placed. When these birds were
still partly in the nestling down plumage, on the evening of July 8,
1911, I made some notes on their movements at night. There
was some light from the moon which was at half phase. I found
the birds swimming or standing at the edge of the water in their
enclosure, and they seemed to move easily in the semi-darkness.

During even the darker portion of the night that I spent on
Middle Strawberry Island, I had plenty of auditory evidence
that both adult and young gulls were more or less active when it
was too dark for me to see anything of the birds. The moon set
about 1:00 a. M., and there was no light except that furnished by
the stars. Adult birds were evidently flying occasionally, and juve-
nals were occasionally heard peeping.

On many occasions, food has been brought to my captive gulls
in paper wrappers. Often the package has been placed on the
ground more or less completely open. When the paper is flapped
by wind, the gulls show a good deal of apprehension. At one time
they would not approach the package, although they could see that
food was inside. They have become more accustomed to the
flapping paper but have not entirely lost their fear of it. This
experiment has been attempted only occasionally.

Even when there has been no flapping paper, great distrust has
been shown for the package, when the contents were covered by

Le

i Ov eamad | Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. 181

it though not entirely hidden. Under such circumstances, food
is removed with slow and timid approaches followed by quick
retreats. Flapping pieces of paper were for over a year very dis-
turbing to the captive gulls, but after they had been fed daily for
some weeks with food placed on a sheet of paper, their fear of
moving paper decreased greatly.

3. Reactions to Chemical Stimuli— During considerable por-
tions of the time that I have had the captive gulls, I have conducted
experiments on their reactions to chemical stimuli. A preliminary
statement! concerning the results of this work has already been pub-
lished, and I plan to publish another fuller account later. In
general, I may say here that I have found my captive gulls showing
what I interpret as a dislike for pieces of liver that had been dipped
in solutions of table salt or in weak acids. The following notes are
extracted from my records of the first experiment. On July 11,
1911, I placed a number of pieces of herring in a strong solution of
table salt in a pan just before feeding the gulls. Another pan con-
tained similar pieces of herring without any salt. The birds were
very hungry not having been fed since the previous evening. All
three birds showed great aversion for the salted fish. Two ate
of the salted food at once and the other joined them in a moment.
The response was immediate, one bird disgorging what it had swal-
lowed. Another dropped what it had taken, and the third swal-
lowed only one piece. All three birds ran to water in less than a
minute and drank heartily, though they had taken very little of the
solution. They did not return to the food during twenty minutes
that I waited. Experiments with other materials were carried on
after this until Sept. 6, 1911, when a 10% solution of sodium chlor-
ide was employed. Pieces of liver were placed in the solution.
The birds were exceedingly hungry and ate voraciously paying no
attention to the salt solution. On Sept. 23, a 20% solution of
common table salt was tried with pieces of liver. The birds were
not so hungry at this time. One went to the dish containing the
salt solution and picked up a piece of liver with the tip of its beak.
After a few minutes of cautious manipulation of the liver it was
taken into the bird’s mouth only to be hurriedly ejected. The gull

1Strong, R. M. 1912. The Sense of Taste in Birds. Science, N. 8., Vol.
XXXV, No. 911, June 14, p. 940.

182 Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. bees

at once jumped into the swimming tank and drank water, washing
its beak vigorously. The other gulls did not take any food on this
occasion while I was present. Later, similar reactions were ob-
tained with weaker solutions of table salt and also with weak acids.
Food was often rejected, even when the taste was just perceptible
to me under the conditions of the experiments.

So far, I have almost no significant results with bitter and sweet
solutions, although a great many tests have been attempted. This
has been surprising to me as results were obtained readily with
chicks and ducklings for the same solutions, with food, however,
which would hold more of the solution.

The point of greatest interest to naturalists, perhaps, is the
reaction to salt solutions, as it has long been a question to what
extent sea birds drink sea water or tolerate it in their food. My
gulls were fresh-water birds, of course, as they came from Green
Bay, but field observations on salt-water gulls are in agreement with
my experimental results, so far as they go.

Thus Anthony ! states “That gulls drink sea water and can thrive
on it is a fact not to be questioned, but I am of the opinion that
when fresh water can be obtained without too much trouble they
will drink it in preference. Several years ago I camped for a few
days on the beach near a small fresh-water pond; during my stay
sea gulls were constantly flying in from sea to drink, bathe, and
preen their feathers. Many single birds were noted flymg from
as far as the eye could reach direct to the pond; after a few moments
of rest and a drink, they returned to the sea in a manner that very
plainly indicated that they had business there and had happened
in merely to get a little fresh water.” Several species of gulls were
discussed in this article, including the Herring Gull, but, unfortu-
nately, no single species is designated for the observations just
quoted. Furthermore, Anthony does not give any evidence for his
statement that gulls drink sea water. My own observations indi-
cate that Herring Gulls, in cold weather, at least, do not need to
drink often. They do not wander far from land relatively, and they
are probably usually within a reasonable distance from fresh water.

Though fish and other meat that has begun to spoil are eaten to _

1 Anthony, A. W. Random Notes on Pacific Gulls. Auk, 1906, Vol. XXIII,
No. 2, pp. 129-137.

ae a Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. 183

some extent by very hungry gulls, fresh food is evidently preferred.
My captive gulls never touch spoiled liver, for instance, if not very
hungry, though fresh liver is taken promptly at such a time. Liver
which has just begun to spoil, if eaten, is not taken with the same
greediness, and a smaller quantity is swallowed. The first piece of
tainted meat may be taken eagerly and sometimes partly swallowed
only to be rejected. One or more pieces may be swallowed in haste
if the birds are exceedingly hungry, before signs of disgust appear.
Other pieces are handled with care on the same occasion, if touched
at all. Bread which has been soaked in water that has contained
such food as fresh raw liver, is eaten more eagerly than when plain

’ water is used to moisten the bread.

It is a common practice of my captive gulls to carry some of
their food to their swimming tank where they play with it in the
water. A piece of liver is held in the beak and moved about under
water with quick jerks of the head or it is dropped in the water to be
seized before it has sunk far. This performance happens more
frequently when the food has been lying in a chemical solution or
when it has accumulated considerable dirt as a consequence of
having been dragged on the ground. Such rinsing of the food does
not occur at every feeding but is usual. The extent to which the
food is thus treated also depends on the degree of hunger. When
very hungry, food is bolted in a few seconds without much playing
with it except sometimes for the last piece taken if hunger has been
satisfied by the amount of food placed before the birds.

The behavior just described suggests some observations made by
Anthony ! with another species of gull. “I was one day watching
some Western Gulls, a few yards from me on a wharf, when a large
piece of salted fish was thrown out from an adjacent boat house.
It fairly glistened with a thick incrustation of salt, and I was some-
what curious to see if the gulls would eat food so highly seasoned.
No sooner had it fallen than it was seized upon by a gull and as
quickly swallowed; but from the surprised actions of the bird it
was evidently not to his liking; no sooner had it reached the stomach
than it was ordered out again. Dropping the fish on the wharf,
the bird eyed it for a moment..... Then picking up the fish it flew

lop. cit., p. 135.

184 Strone, Habits of the Herring Gull. reer

down to the water, and holding it under the surface shook its head
from side to side violently ‘sozzeling’ the meat about for several
seconds. It was then taken back to the wharf, laid down and
inspected, and carefully sampled; this time, however, it was not
bolted as at first but held for a moment in the mouth and rejected,
and carried back to the water where it was even more roughly
laundered. This operation was repeated several times and the
piece of fish, which must have weighed four ounces at the outset,
was reduced to half that size before it reached a state of freshness
that suited the palate of the gull.”

4. Other Reactions.— It is generally known that birds have a
special development of nerves and endings of general sensation
about the mouth with large trigeminal nerves for the sense organs
involved. It is consequently reasonable to expect that my gulls
when suspiciously manipulating food of uncertain palatableness em-
ploy their general sensation to a large extent. We donot know to
how great an extent general sensation and the taste sense are used
relatively by birds, but such information as is available indicates
that the former plays the larger part. It has been shown by
Botezat ! for the birds which he studied that taste endings occur
only in the back part of the mouth cavity and especially at the en-
trance to the gullet. In some birds they were also found at the
base of the tongue, but they were never numerous.

On p. 181 of this paper, I described the behavior of one of my gulls
when it started to eat liver which had been lying in solutions of
table salt for a few moments. The piece of liver was manipulated
in the front part of the mouth at the tip of the beak by the appar-
ently suspicious bird. No avoiding reactions resulted and the
food was often swallowed. Such a result suggests that the region of
the mouth where tactile endings occur is first used in testing food.
It is quite probable that the salt solution adhering to the piece of
liver did not stimulate the tactile endings of the bird in the experi-
ment and so was swallowed with a consequent strong stimulation of
taste endings as the food slipped into the gullet. I have made
similar observations on this behavior of my gulls when given un-
certain food, on a number of occasions. It is not improbable that

1 Botezat, E. Die Nervenendapparate in den Mundteilen der Voégel und die
einheitliche Endigungsweise der peripheren Nerven bei den Wirbeltieren. Zeitschr.
f. wiss. Zool. Bd. 84, 1906, s. 205-360.

Pata Ty Strrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. 185

mutual relations of stimuli exist between the tactile sense of the
mouth region and either smell or taste or between all three. Read-
ers who may be interested in the physiology of the beak region are
referred to Edinger’s ! suggestions.

Gulls regularly show a positive reaction to strong air currents,
that is, they face a heavy wind whether standing or swimming
and usually when flying. This reaction is illustrated in Plate XTX,
Fig. 1, where an adult and a number of juvenals are seen facing a
heavy wind. Rain was falling when the picture was taken.

When the wind is exceptionally heavy, especially if rain is falling,
gulls are commonly seen flying and they face the wind a large part
of the time. During an exceedingly violent storm which occurred
in the early afternoon of July 15, 1911, when I was on one of the
Sister Islands, all of the gulls able to fly took to the air. Their
flight manoeuvres were similar to those which gulls so often show
over a beach during a gale, at other times of the year. It is obvious-
ly more convenient to face a heavy wind as the bird’s body is adapted
to meeting air currents head on with little horizontal resistance.

Extremes of temperature apparently give gulls considerable dis-
tress. On a hot day, the brooding gull pants a great deal even
when perfectly quiet on the nest.

Young gulls, especially if excited, pant constantly when the
temperature is as high as 90° F. (see Plate XIX, Fig. 2). My captive
gulls become very uncomfortable, apparently, and pant a great
deal after taking only a few short flights of several yards each in their
enclosure on a hot day. At such times they seek water and, if
undisturbed, indulge in much bathing.

In zero weather (Fahrenheit) my captive gulls though well fed
and fat appear to suffer from cold, especially after eating cold
food. If the ground is covered with snow or ice in zero weather,
the gulls squat upon their feet, apparently to keep them protected
by their plumage. They rarely stand up at such times except
when disturbed or to obtain food. They also show their sensitive-

1 Edinger, L. The relations of comparative anatomy to comparative psychol-
ogy. Jour. Comp. Neur. and Psych., Vol. 18, 1908, No. 5, pp. 437-457.

Also see Vorlesungen iiber den Bau der nervésen Zentralorgane des Menschen
und der Tiere. Bd.2. Aufl. 7, 1908 (or a still later edition). Leipzig, F. C. W.
Vogel.

186 Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. ree

ness to cold by shivering although probably in perfect health. Wild
gulls with abundant opportunities for flymg apparently keep warm
by being active, and I have not seen them showing such distress
from cold.

VIII. Sprctant Activitizs.

1. Flight.— The great power in flight and especially the wonder-
ful soaring performances of the Herring Gull are almost too well
known to be discussed here. The wing strokes are relatively slow
and the are covered by the elbow is not large as is characteristic of
birds with long wings.

I have witnessed on several occasions both on the Atlantic Ocean
and on the Great Lakes the peculiar ability of the Herring Gull to
follow or accompany a ship in the face of a strong head wind by
soaring flight only, as described so well by Brewster.!

It is a matter of common observation that gulls indulge in soaring
manceuvres over a beach when a heavy wind is blowing off the water.
At such a time they may often be seen soaring sidewise as well as
forwards. I have seen Herring Gulls cover more than 200 yards
in a single rapid sail sidewise along the beach, always facing the
wind and not losing altitude. The Herring Gull is unusually skil-
ful among gulls in soaring, and some of its feats are, to my mind,
the most difficult to explain of all soaring phenomena.

The manner in which the feet are carried has been discussed by
Anthony.? When starting flight the feet hang downward, some-
times until the bird is a number of yards from the starting place,
and they are dropped just before alighting.

2. Bathing and Drinking.— References have already been made
in this paper to the frequency with which Herring Gulls bathe in
warm weather. My captive gulls enjoy swimming and bathing
in their tank, even in winter, so long as the temperature of the air
is not very much below freezing. When swimming the Herring
Gull sits high on the water, probably in part because of the large
amount of air contained in the dense ventral plumage. Possibly

1 Brewster, W. Notes on the Flight of Gulls. Auk, 1912, Vol. XXIX, No.1,
pp. 85-92.
2 op cit., p. 132.

Wtcee | Strona, Habits of the Herring Gull. 187

this extreme buoyancy which also involves a large pneumatisation
of the skeleton, explains the fact that gulls do not often dive to the
extent of completely immersing their bodies.

When bathing, the Herring Gull dips its bill and often the entire
head into the water with rapid bowing movements. At the same
time the wings are flapped vigorously and water is splashed over
the entire body. The performance is more or less the same whether
the bird is floating on water or standing in shallow water.

During the colder weather of the winter, my captive gulls are
deprived of all opportunities for bathing, as their tank is emptied.
They become very dirty, consequently, in a city like Chicago.
With the coming of spring, the tank is refilled and a regular orgy
of bathing follows. Each bath lasts for several minutes and is fol-
lowed by feather dressing and partial drying of the plumage. Then
another bath is taken. This may continue for an hour or more.
In the course of two or three days the plumage becomes quite clean.

On July 29, 1911, I found a young Herring Gull at one of the
Strawberry Islands in well developed plumage and apparently old
enough to fly. It was sitting quietly on the ground at the base of a
tree at least fifty feet from water. On examination, I found the
bird to be very much emaciated; it was too weak to make effective
efforts to escape, in fact it could not stand upright. I took the
gull to the water and gave it a chance to drink. It was evidently
very thirsty, and drank eagerly. After taking what water it
wished, the bird took a bath going through such movements as its
limited strength and my grasp would allow. During the following
week, I gave this bird frequent opportunities to bathe always hold-
ing it in my hands, and the bath was always taken without hesita-
tion. The principal features were a plunging of the head under
water with a quick removal, followed by a shake of the head which
splashed water over the body. This bird ate ravenously but it was
too weak to stand up for any length of time, and died in about two
weeks. An autopsy was performed by a pathologist who was
unable to find any other explanation for its death than the starva-
tion the bird had experienced before I found it.

During the bathing performance the gull appears to drink more
or less water, but it is difficult to say how much is taken. In hot
weather there appears to be considerable water drinking by brood-

188 Strone, Habits of the Herring Gull. Aout
ing birds. The gull which appears in Plate VII, Fig. 2,1 was studied
carefully from my tent for several hours on June 26 which was a
very warm day. During the middle of the day this bird made
trips to the beach edge for water so frequently that I timed some
of the periods. I found that the intervals between drinks varied
from three to ten minutes. There was more or less bathing each
time the bird went to water. I did not note any water drinking
by gulls not brooding, at the breeding place.

My captive gulls seem to need very little water to drink in cold
weather. During the first winter it was my practice to take
warm water to the gull yard which would not freeze over imme-
diately. In the winter of 1911-12, the temperature was below 0° F.
for some weeks and during quite a portion of this time there was
neither snow nor ice in the place occupied by the gulls. No other
opportunities were present for the gulls to secure water than in their
food or in the very slight amount of water which adhered to the
food, mostly liver. I never saw any evidence of interest in the water
which I brought to the gulls, and they seemed to thrive without it.

3. Perching.— The Herring Gull being a web-footed bird would
not be expected to have a perching habit, nevertheless it does perch
sometimes, after a fashion. One of my captive gulls may be seen
in Plate XX perched on the side of the swimming tank, a position
not infrequently assumed by these birds on leaving the water.
On July 29, I saw Herring Gulls perched in the foliage of the upper
outermost branches of tall trees on one of the Strawberry Islands.
They did not remain there long and they presented the appearance
of standing on foliage rather than on single limbs.

Other observers have reported seeing Herring Gulls perched in
trees. Thus Clarke? saw these birds perching in pine trees while
their nests were being photographed. Fleming? noted Herring
Gulls roosting on some dead pines at night. Of course there is no
such gripping of the perch by the feet of a gull as is done by a true
perching bird.

1See Auk, January, 1914.

2 Clarke, C. K. Ontario Notes. Auk, 1901, Vol. XVIIT, No. 4, p. 401-2.

3 Fleming, J. H. Birds of Parry Sound and Muskoka. Auk, 1901, Vol. XVIII,
No. 1, p. 34.

THEVAUK] VOlLs Xoo PLATE XX

HeERRING GULLS IN JuvENAL PLUMAGE. ONE Brirp PERCHING AND ANOTHER SWIMMING.

ol, ee Strona, Habits of the Herring Gull. 189

IX. Comparison oF DiurNAL AND NoctTurRNAL BEHAVIOR.

As Herrick" has well said, there is no repose by day or night in a gull
colony. Adults take naps at all hours, either while on the nest or
standing near. Often they simply doze with the head drawn close
to the body and the eyes shut, or the bill may be tucked inside a wing
with the eyes either open or closed in view. During the day
groups of gulls stand about dozing as may be seen in Plate X, Fig. 2.

In order to get an idea of the entire daily cycle of activities at a
gull breeding place, I spent a night at one of the Strawberry Islands.
I arranged my trip so that it would cover those hours not included
on other days. Ward also spent a night at a gull colony and
I quote his interesting account? of his experiences as follows:
“Sleep seemed to occur perhaps a little more frequently during
the warmer hours of the afternoon than at other times, though
pretty evenly distributed through the twenty-four hours. The
birds sometimes stood, but more frequently squatted on the ground
and turned their heads over their backs and tucked them under
their wing feathers. Sleep was of very short duration, as fights,
panics and alarms of various sorts followed one another too closely
to allow of unbroken repose for more than a few minutes at a time.
The night that I spent among them there was less sleep than during
the day. The sun set about half past seven; but at eight o’clock
the colony was as busy as ever fighting, making abortive nests and
screaming. At ten minutes past eight the moon arose, and ten
minutes later nearly all the gulls suddenly took wing in what I
conceived to be a panic, until shortly afterwards I spied a large
flock of them on the water in the direction of the moon. Later
they worked around the island, so that I was between them and the
moon, and IJ could then see that they were busily fishing. My
notes continue up to a quarter of three, when I fell asleep with the
gulls still on the water and noisy. When I awoke at twenty min-
utes after four the sun was up, most of the gulls were on the island
and many young were teasing a few adults for breakfast.”

On July 7, 1911, at 7:20 in the evening, I was on the island and

1 Herrick, F. H. The Home Life of Wild Birds. Revised Ed. 1905. Put-
nam’s Sons, New York and London. pp. 112.

2Ward, H. L. Notes of the Herring Gull and the Caspian Tern. Bull. Wis-
consin Nat. Hist. Soc., Vol. IV., No. 4, October, 1906, p. 132.

190 Strona, Habits of the Herring Gull. [Att

I left the next morning at 7:05. My blind was erected, and I was
inside ready for work at 7:45 when my companion left the tent and
went away in the motor boat that had brought us. Within ten
minutes, the gulls had settled down to normal activities, i. e. when
the boat had gone a fair distance from shore. The “challenge”
and mewing cries were made a number of times during the following
half hour. I also heard the quack of a Red-breasted Merganser
occasionally during this period, and a Bronzed Grackle flew near
the tent. At 8:25 a Spotted Sandpiper call was heard, also a very
young gull apparently calling for food. By 8:40 it was too dark
to see my writing, and the gulls were quieter. There was an out-
break of noise, however, at 8:43 which lasted for a minute or so.
I used a small pocket electric flash light, carefully concealed during
the night, to see my watch and to make notes.

About 9:30 when the sunset glow was practically gone, a board
was knocked down from one end of my tent, making a noise which
alarmed the whole colony, and no birds came near my tent except
in flight, so far as I could determine, until daybreak. The moon
set about 1:00 A. M., and there was only starlight. I could not see
any birds but I could hear them flying about all night giving the
alarm cry, at intervals. The gulls were less noisy from 1:00 to
2:45. Small juvenals were heard calling occasionally through the
night.

Shortly before 3:00 the first glow of approaching day appeared
in the east, and the gulls began to settle down near my tent.
They also became very noisy especially with the challenge cry.
At this time I noted a female Red-breasted Merganser playing in
the water not many feet away. Song Sparrows were singing, and
Bronzed Grackles were active. A few minutes later a very small
juvenal gull ran to the edge of my tent some fifty feet from where
I first saw it. It passed within five feet of two adults who gave it
no attention. The sun rose about 4:20, and at 4:25 two adult
gulls came within three feet of my tent where they remained about
aminute. They then flew away a short distance and returned to a
point about ten feet distant. No birds were seen on nests, as the
incubation season was over on this island.

At 4:40, I noted gulls bathing, and at 5:00 I saw a very small
juvenal paddling ashore. A fight occurred between two adults

ea al Strone, Habits of the Herring Gull. 191

which was broken up by the interference of a third adult. About
the same time I saw an attack on a juvenal gull by an adult
resented by another adult. Challenge cries and mewing calls
made a great noise at this time. Other juvenals which had been
standing near the place where the attack was made disappeared.

A few moments later, I saw three gulls worrying a Great Blue
Heron in full flight, much as kingbirds harass a crow. The heron
finally disappeared in the woods on the largest of the Strawberry
Islands where a heronry was located and from which I had heard
noises throughout the night.

Another fight between adults occurred at 5:15, and as usual with
no apparent injury to the participants. When the contest was
over, the two birds faced each other and made a feint at renewing
hostilities. Then they went through the challenge performance
simultaneously.

At 5:25, I noted that I had seen no feeding and that most of the
juvenals gave no evidence of desiring their parents, but at 5:45
I saw a downy juvenal teasing an adult for food and a feeding
occurred a few minutes later. After the feeding, both birds drank
water, and the adult swam out from shore about twenty feet where
it took a bath. I noted at 6:25 that downy juvenals were standing
idly most of the time or dressing their plumage. An adult ap-
proached a juvenal, and another adult flew to the spot, apparently
to drive the first adult away.

I was unable to determine what the gulls were doing during the
darker part of the night after the setting of the moon, beyond the
flying already mentioned. Judging from the sounds, many of
them were on the water as was the case during Ward’s night
at Gravel Island. Whether the falling of the board had anything
to do with the absence of the gulls from at least my part of the
island is uncertain. As the birds left Gravel Island at nearly the
same time in the evening according to Ward’s observations, there is
some reason to believe that the board accident was not responsible.
It is conceivable that there was some fear of the tent in the darkness
which did not exist in daylight. Or possibly, the birds feel safer
on the water at night and are in the habit of remaining there
in a flock during a major portion of the night, when uneasy.

During the night of July 5 and 6, 1907, I camped on Partridge

192 Strone, Habits of the Herring Gull. At

Island in Lake Superior, about one mile from Gull Island, where a
colony of gulls were breeding. In the latter part of the night just
before dawn, I heard the cries of gulls flying overhead. The night
had been very dark as the sky was clouded.

Some observations on the nocturnal activities of Herring Gulls
have been reported by Schuster.!. He noted these birds feeding
on the river Mersey at Liverpool. Large quantities of food, thrown
into the river at night from ships, are stated to be responsible for
this nocturnal feeding. The gulls are described as flying and feed-
ing silently.

Various writers speak of gulls “roosting” at night, and my cap-
tive gulls apparently sleep during the night, as a rule. It seems
probable that gulls usually rest during the night, except during
the breeding season or when food is especially available at night.
It is also probable that gulls are not active when the darkness is
intense.

X. VARIABILITY AND MOoDIFIABILITY IN BEHAVIOR.

According to Herrick * whose conclusions are in general supported
by my own observations: “The life of birds is one of instinct irradi-
ated by gleams of intelligence. Their mental faculties exhibit a
wide range of gradation from excessive stupidity to a fair degree of
intelligence with strong associative powers of things with ideas.”

In my study of the Herring Gull, I have been especially interested
in attempts at determining the extent of the “gleams,” a fascinat-
ing but very elusive topic. The resourcefulness which animals show
in new situations and the extent to which their behavior may be
modified by new conditions may be considered fair criteria of their
intelligence. Variability in behavior, however, has some bearing
on the problem of intelligence. We must recognize perhaps two
types of variability in behavior which do not indicate intelligence
as it is commonly understood. They may even tend towards con-
fusion in our analyses of behavior, as acts which may seem to

1 Schuster, W. Méwen als Nachtvogel. Zool. Beob. Frankfurt a. M. Jahrg. 47;
No. 3, S. 79, 1906. :

2The Home Life of Wild Birds. Revised Ed. 1905. G. P. Putnam’s Sons,
peel:

oy xx sina Strona, Habits of the Herring Gull. 193

indicate resourcefulness or adaptiveness may be only variations in
stereotyped behavior.

It is to be expected that so-called pure lines or strains may be
found among the behavior characteristics of a species as well as in
other characters. Some of these strains may possibly be the result
of or be accentuated by such segregation as is afforded by separate
breeding places. Unfortunately we know nothing concerning the
relationships of individuals in one colony to those of another. We
have no information concerning whether gulls breeding at one of the
Strawberry Islands, for instance, have interbred in recent years
with Gravel Island gulls. Furthermore, we have no data as yet,
concerning the existence of definable pure lines in the morphologi-
cal characters of Herring Gulls.

The other type of variability in behavior is not associated with
pure line inheritance. It represents simple chance variations from
the average type of behavior which are to be expected just as we
find variations in morphological characters.

In the section of this paper which deals with the general behavior
of juvenal gulls, I mentioned variability in the behavior of some
newly hatched gulls. A single bird in one nest showed no terror,
whereas two nestlings of essentially the same age in another nest
were in great distress from fright over the presence of human
intruders. I can think of no reason for considering that either
the quiet bird or the frantic pair were more intelligent or that
either form of behavior was adaptive. Nor have we reason to
believe that it was a case of pure line differentiation. It seems
quite possible that chance variations in the metabolic states of the
birds or possibly in their nervous organization were responsible
for the difference in reaction to our presence. It is conceivable
that the reactions would have been either similar or reversed if
we had approached the nests a few hours later.

A large amount of variation has been noted in the choice of
materials used in constructing the nest. Evidently the Herring
Gull uses what is available with a preference for finer and softer
materials. It seems probable to me that such nest building, which
is evidently mostly instinctive or stereotyped, is not absolutely
without the elements of intelligence. There must be adaptation
of special materials which may be found, to use and location.

194 Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. yes

Though the general form, size, and location of the nest are char-
acters of the species, the variations which fit the nest to its special
location, for instance, are no more stereotyped than various acts
of man which are called intelligent.

As a consequence of persistent nest robbing, gulls at certain
breeding places have been reported as taking on a tree nesting
habit. I know of no evidence worth considering for believing that
the recent ancestors of such birds were tree nesters, and we have
every reason for considering the inherited choice of location for
most Herring Gulls as on the ground.

We have already seen in this paper that even the structure of the
nest may be modified in adaptation to the location in a tree. More
skill is shown in weaving the nest, according to reports, so that it
will hold together in its tree location. Of course it may be said
that tree nesting by the Herring Gull may be due to a so-called
latent instinct which appears when persecution compels the bird
to seek a safer place for its nests. We have however, no reason to
believe that instinct behaves in inheritance differently than other
characters. Our knowledge of the laws of inheritance does not
furnish any basis for thinking that an instinct for tree nesting can
exist for long periods of time in a species that has another habit,
without itself appearing.

Herrick ! seems to consider tree nesting for the Herring Gull to
be a variation without much significance. He found a small
percentage of gulls nesting in trees at a height of from six to ten
feet. In his judgment, this position affords no protection to the
birds. I have seen no nests above the ground though trees and
bushes cover most of the ground on all but two of the islands where
I have seen gulls breeding.

To me such tree nesting as Audubon? described suggests real
resourcefulness, but we know too little about it to be warranted
in making any generalizations concerning the intelligence it may in-
volve. Insome colonies tree nesting may possibly be the inherited
habit or instinct of certain strains or “pure lines” of Herring Gulls.

The nestling offspring of tree nesting gulls are reported as re-

1 Herrick, F. H. Nests and Nest Building in Birds. Part II. Journ. Animal
Behavior. July-August, 1911. Vol. I, No. 4, pp. 244-277.

2 Audubon, J. J. Ornithological Biography. Edinburgh. 1835. Vol. III,
pp. 588-589. ;

ane | Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. 195
maining in the nest when observed, though gulls of the same age
on the ground would never be found in the nest but would always
be hiding. That tree nesting juvenals do not leave their nest until
they are able to do so without injury, is probably due to a realiza-
tion of the danger involved in such an attempt. This remaining
in the nest under such circumstances may possibly be regarded
as intelligent behavior of perhaps a low order which prevails over
any blind instinct to leave the nest to hide when intruders appear.
Just how much this behavior is tied up with instinctive activity
is of course beyond our knowledge.

The promiscuous feeding of juvenal gulls at Gravel Island ap-
peared to me to be a variation from the probably usual habit of
parents feeding their own offspring. Unfortunately we lack data
for establishing the extent of this variation. It could easily be the
consequence of the congested life on the island. I have noticed
that juvenal Wilson’s Terns seek food of any adult that may happen
to come near them with food in its beak, but all of my observations
indicate that the parent tern probably feeds only its own offspring.
The gull must go through the somewhat complicated process of
regurgitation which seems far from voluntary. Large numbers of
juvenal gulls crowding about an adult who perhaps sees its own
offspring in the mob may be able to snatch the food regurgitated
without regard to parental relationships.

A large number of so-called lower birds like ducks, coots, ete.
and the various species of gulls learn rather rapidly where they may
feed and breed without molestation by man. In the course of
only a week, wild ducks become far less shy on bodies of water in
or about cities than when they arrive, a matter of common observa-
tion. Gulls likewise recognize even more positively that they are
relatively safe in such places, but they are exceedingly wary wher-
ever shooting occurs. Such discrimination undoubtedly involves
at least the rudiments of intelligence even though the activities
in question may be largely instinctive.

I had hoped to carry on some experiments on modifiability in
behavior with gulls, but my time was taken up so largely with the
general observations which I thought should come first that only a
single experiment was started. An entire nest was moved four
feet to one side at a distance of about one hundred feet from my

196 Strone, Habits of the Herring Gull. fee

tent. The nest was under observation for several hours, and what
appeared to be the owners were seen standing about the spot where
the nests had been located. Though the birds seemed to be dis-
turbed, they did not make any significant demonstrations of excite-
ment, and they did not attempt to brood the eggs. Such an experi-
ment should be started earlier in the season.

XI. MIGRATIONS.

After the breeding season is over, there seems to be a general
movement southward. Thus on and after August 25, 1913, for
instance, I saw a number of Herring Gulls, including both adults
and juvenals, at Woods Hole, Massachusetts. I do not know how
much earlier they may have been in the vicinity. Each day that
I saw them they were in flocks with Laughing Gull adults and
juvenals. So far as I know, Herring Gulls do not now breed south
of Maine on the Atlantic coast. These birds had probably mi-
grated from a point at least as far north as Maine.

“Gull Dick” as reported by Mackay ! was in the habit of return-
ing year after year to the region of the Brenton Reef Light ship in
Narragansett Bay during early October. This bird left for the
north in early April. In a report to Dutcher and Baily ? it was
stated that about 800 Herring Gulls arrived at Great Duck Island
off the coast of Maine on March 12, and their numbers increased
steadily until the 20th of May. Herring Gull adults and juvenals
appear about Chicago in considerable numbers during the winter,
and they are fairly common during a large part of April. The
spring migration and the beginning of the breeding season appar-
ently occur considerably later on Lake Michigan than on the At-
lantic coast, a fact probably connected with the late clearing of the
ice on the upper Great Lakes.

On September 21, 1911, my captive gulls, then juvenals, became
very restless, and they ate very little food for seven days. On the
24th, I spent half an hour in my gull yard. The food that I had
placed there on the previous day had not been eaten, and the gulls

1 Auk, IX, 1892, pp. 226-228.
2 Auk, XX, 1903, pp. 417-431.

Govan Strone, Habits of the Herring Gull. 197
paid no attention to the fresh supply I left. They were very restless
and they were almost constantly flying about their quarters, often
rising to the top of the enclosure, the most unusual feature of their
activities. They went to the swimming tank which appears in
Plate XX, frequently, though one of them prevented the others from
spending much time on the water by driving them away. The
gulls alighted frequently on the edge of the tank as shown in
Plate XX, and they often remained there two or three minutes
except when the belligerent gull drove the others away.

I have never seen so much activity by these birds as at that time
. except possibly on two or three other occasions which were also at
the time of gull migrations. Unfortunately, it has not been practi-
cable for me to watch the birds carefully during periods when mi-
grations occur. The performances just described suggested to me
the possible existence of a migration impulse as the cause. This
suspicion is strengthened by the observations of others on the
behavior of other captive wild birds at migration times, but it must
be admitted that my notes on these performances of my gulls have
only suggestive value.

SumMMARY.!

1. The Herring Gull is gregarious in habit, but it is also quarrel-
some. Some of the fights are undoubtedly the consequence of
invasions upon nesting precincts as stated by Herrick, but many are
probably due to simple belligerency. This bird is often a great cow-
ard and may be routed by smaller birds, the crow for instance. The
fights between adults have always been harmless, in my experience.
Herring Gulls will fight fiercely for food when very hungry.

2. Herrick’s conclusion that the frequent killing of the young by
adults is the consequence of the instinct to guard a nesting precinct
probably holds true in many cases. There is, however, some evi-
dence that this is not always the explanation. Juvenals sometimes
attack younger birds just as savagely as the adults do and in the
same manner.

3. Other birds often nest safely even on a small island densely
populated by breeding gulls.

1This section is not complete. It includes principally the more important
conclusions of this paper.

198 Strona, Habits of the Herring Gull. [Auk

4. The Herring Gull nests usually in places the most inacces-
sible to man that are available. The breeding place is usually on
an island not inhabited by man. When seeking food or aside from
the breeding season, this bird is frequently to be seen near human
habitations on the coast or following vessels.

5. This gull is practically omnivorous in its habits according to
the observations of various writers. Animal food is preferred,
but other food may be eaten if the bird is hungry enough.

6. The Herring Gull does not dive for its food to any extent,
and it never plunges vertically into the water as Terns do.

7. Breeding begins later in Green Bay and on Lake Michigan
than at points on the Atlantic coast much farther north. This
difference is very likely due to the accumulation of ice in the
northern portions of the Great Lakes, which does not disappear
until after the beginning of spring.

8. The nests are made of such material as is available, but fine
materials are preferred.

9. The offspring are shaded by the parents on a hot day until
they are strong enough to leave their nest and seek a shaded spot.

10. The young are given food which is first regurgitated upon
the ground. There may be promiscuous feeding of young birds
by adults not their parents.

11. Young Herring Gulls not yet old enough to fly usually hide
when human intruders appear as is the case with other members of
the order. Sometimes only the head may be hidden but the bird
sits perfectly still. If removed from its hiding place, the hiding
instinct is replaced by the instinct to run away. The juvenals
able to fly join the adults at such a time, in the general panic, over-
head, or they fly away some distance, usually to water.

12. Herring Gulls which I have had in my possession since they
were in the nestling-down plumage were less mature in plumage at
two years than is indicated by Dwight for birds of that age. It is
my judgment that Herring Gulls rarely breed before they are three
years old. All of the breeding Herring Gulls which I have seen
were adults, so far as I could determine.

13. It has been my experience that the young are at least two
months old before they begin to fly well.

14. I have given especial attention to the voice of the Herring

ae Srrone, Habits of the Herring Gull. 199

Gull. The most frequent sounds are the “challenge” and the
. “alarm” cry. A “mewing” sound is fairly common. These
cries all involve characteristic positions, especially the “challenge”
and “mew.” The “challenge” seems to represent a variety of
emotional states but, in general, excitement. The young have a
characteristic squeal or chatter which is high pitched. It is used
in calling for food or with a little modification when frightened.
My captive gulls began to use what appeared to be a rudimentary
“challenge” cry in September of their first year. I have heard
this only a few times.

15. Both vision and hearing are keen in the Herring Gull, as
appears to be the case with most birds.

16. It has been my experience that the Herring Gull has nearly
as good darkness vision as man at least. During the breeding
season or when food is best obtained at night, this bird is very
active at night. My captive gulls will eat, if very hungry, when
there is barely light enough for me to distinguish their food.

17. Food which is wet with solutions of either table salt or acids
is rejected. My birds detect the presence of these solutions even
when they are very weak to my taste.

18. Meat is eaten much more readily when it is fresh. The
extent to which spoiled meat is tolerated varies directly with the
degree of hunger.

19. It is a common practice of these birds to rinse food of un-
certain palatableness or when it is dirty, in water.

20. Some evidence was obtained concerning the use of nerves
of general sensation in testing food.

21. A positive reaction is shown to air currents. In a severe
storm, gulls leave the ground and indulge in flight manceuvres.

22. The Herring Gull is sensitive to extremes in temperature.
In very cold weather, the feet are kept protected by the plumage
a large portion of the time.

23. There is a large amount of bathing, especially in hot weather.
In very cold weather, no water seems to be required beyond that
present in the food obtained.

200 SaunpERs, An Ecological Bird Study. [ Ree

AN ECOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE BREEDING BIRDS OF
AN AREA NEAR CHOTEAU, MONT.

BY ARETAS A. SAUNDERS.

THE subject of the ecological associations of various forms of
life has recently been given considerable attention. Most of the
studies that have been made along this line, however, have been
of plant life. Such studies of animal life, and particularly of bird
life, have been comparatively few. This is probably because
animals, and particularly birds, can move about from place to
place, and are consequently less closely related to any one ecological
association. In the breeding season, however, birds are fairly
stationary, remaining in the vicinity of their nests. At this time
they are confined to certain associations, which evidently depend
on the character of their food and the locality chosen for their
nesting sites. Sometimes a given species is confined to a single
association and makes up a component part of its life. At other
times a species may be found in several different associations, and
may be less common in one than another. Occasionally a species
nests in one association, but obtains its food largely in another.
The study of these associations and the proportionate abundance
of the different species of each is not only of great scientific interest,
but also has an important bearing on the problem of obtaining an
accurate census of our birds, and on the problems of the preserva-
tion of wild life.

In forestry, the study of the forest types, which is merely a
simpler name for an ecological association of forest trees, is of great
importance. In my work with the United States Forest Service
in Montana, I was frequently called upon to study and map these
types. Through this work I obtained a closer insight into these
associations and their relations to other forms of life. In the local
lists of birds which I have published for the different parts of Mon-
tana where my work has been located, I have attempted to describe
the more important associations and list the species breeding in
each. I have always hoped, however, for an opportunity to make
a deeper study of these associations, showing the proportions of

a a SaunveErs, An Ecological Bird Study. 201
the different species in each association, and the actual abundance
of each species figured on an acreage basis. In the nesting season
of 1912, I found such an opportunity. It was not in the mountain
forests as I had hoped it would be, but in the vicinity of the little
prairie town of Choteau, in Teton County, Montana. Here,
with the exception of a short period from May 28 to June 5, I was
confined to office work all through the spring and early summer,
until August 5, when I finally left for a trip to the mountains.
During this time I had my early mornings, evenings, Sundays and
holidays free to explore the country in the immediate vicinity of
Choteau, in search of birds and birds’ nests.

On the southeast side of Choteau was an area, watered by a
small stream known as Spring Creek, which I found to be an ex-
cellent place for birds. While I often explored other areas in the
vicinity, I found this one to be the most accessible, and was on it
almost daily throughout the spring and summer. Early in June,
after most of the migration was over and when the nesting season
for most species was just beginning, I decided to make an ecological
study here. I blocked out, roughly, a rectangular area, which by
later measurements I found to be about 1400 by 8250 feet, and to
contain about 265 acres. On this area I started to determine as
closely as I could, the actual number of birds of each species,
breeding in each association. I could not very well hope to find all
the nests, particularly of the ground nesting birds, but I found that
I could get my numbers accurately by noting the number of male
birds of a species in song. I found that during the period of early
morning song, practically ever male bird was participating. By go-
ing over the area carefully each morning, and noting the numbers
of birds of each species that were in song I soon had my census of
the singing birds. The non-singing birds were most of them
conspicuous for other reasons and easily found. It is possible that
I may have missed a few birds that nested on the area. A Sharp-
tailed Grouse might have had its nest in the cinquefoil brush, as
several did in similar places outside the area. A Sora could have
nested in one of the cattail sloughs and escaped my notice. It is
also possible that there were more nests of the Mallard on the area
than I found. With these exceptions I am quite certain that I
counted all the nesting birds on the area. Of course I repeatedly

202 SaunpErs, An Ecological Bird Study. Fei

found stragglers and visitors on the area which were not nesting
there, but my repeated visits served to show which birds belonged
there regularly.

I found five separate ecological associations on the area. These
representing most of the commoner ones of the prairie region of this
part of Montana. Associations of this region not represented here
are the prairie bench, the willow thicket, the rush slough, and the
alkaline ponds and lakes. At the time of the study I used a rough
sketch map to indicate the location of the various associations,
not taking time to measure out and map each one accurately. The
following fall I did this work, using a hand compass and pacing the
distances, in the same manner in which forest type mapping is
done, and divided the area among the different associations as
follows.

Grass meadow 172 acres.
Cinquefoil brush GSeinn
Cottonwood groves Say
Stream border SR gs
Cattail sloughs 2 a
Total 265 acres.

The grass meadows, as can be seen from the above figures,
formed much the largest portion of the area. This association
consists of flat stretches along stream valleys, having a rich, moist
soil, and covered with a growth of tall, wild grasses and weeds.
These are commonly cut over in this region for hay late in August,
but never while birds are nesting, because growth is not fast enough
to make a heavy crop so early in the year. In spite of the fact
that this association covers the largest proportion of all in the area
studied, the number of both species and individuals found in it was
comparatively small. They are as follows.

No. Acreage

Species. of pairs. per pair.
Western Savannah Sparrow 12 14
Western Meadowlark. 7 25
Bobolink. 4 43

Total 28 rae

Rega | Saunpers, An Ecological Bird Study. 203

In giving the numbers of these species by pairs, I am assuming
that every male bird found singing regularly on the area had a
mate. This of course might not be the case. It was difficult to
observe these birds except when they were singing, and I did not
see females of any of the three species, regularly. I found only one
nest in this habitat, that of a Western Meadowlark. These birds
were not the only ones found in this association, however. Other
species, nesting in other associations often obtained food in this
one. These other species were Marsh Hawk, Short-eared Owl,
Brewer’s Blackbird, Thick-billed Red-wing, Cowbird, and Long-
billed Curlew. All except the last are treated under other habitats,
but the Curlews nested entirely outside the area studied.

The next association in size is that of the cinquefoil brush.
This habitat is a peculiar one that I have not seen elsewhere in
Montana. It occurs on flat areas, with a moist soil, but less rich
than that of the grass meadow association, and usually very
rocky, and liable to be somewhat alkaline. The principle vegeta-
tion is the Shrubby Cinquefoil (Dasiophora fruticosa) which grows
in scattered clumps and patches, much in the same way that Sage-
brush grows on the plains in other parts of Montana. Between
the cinquefoil bushes is a growth of various species of grasses and
weeds, and a few other shrubs, such as willows, wild rose, Wolf-
berry (Symphoricarpus occidentalis), Buffalo-berry (Shepherdia
argentea), and Silver-berry (Eleagnus argenteus). Both species
and individuals of birds are more numerous in this association than
in the grass meadow, probably partly because the shrubs form better
concealment for nesting sites. 'The numbers of species and individ-
uals found in this association on the area studied are as follows:

No. Acreage

Species. of pairs. per pair.
Brewer’s Blackbird 22 3
Cowbird \ 4 ie
Western Vesper Sparrow 4 LY,
Clay-colored Sparrow 3 22
Mallard eS 34
Western Yellow-throat 1 68
Marsh Hawk 1 68
Short-eared Owl. 1 68

Total 38 1.8

204 SaunvDERS, An Ecological Bird Study. pes

The large number of Brewer’s Blackbirds was partially accounted
for by the fact that a colony of thirteen pairs was nesting in the
area. These birds did not live entirely in this association, but did
much of their feeding in the grass meadow association. After their
nesting was over, in July, they gathered into flocks with their
young and were frequently found in the cottonwood groves. I
have little doubt about the correctness of my count of this species.
It was easy to observe all the forty-four individual birds at any
time while they were nesting, if the whole brush area was covered
thoroughly. This is because of the habit the birds have of pro-
testing at anyone’s intrusion near their nests, always keeping
together in pairs, and following him about, hovering over his head,
or perching conspicuously on the bushes. Whenever I entered the
colony, I was always able to count the thirteen pairs of birds.
Each pair kept so close together that I was able to count them in
that way instead of individually. Ten of the nests of this species
were actually found, nine in the colony, and one outside of it.

With the Cowbirds, I found considerable difficulty in getting a
correct count. Since they had no fixed nests of their own, and
wandered about from day to day, on and off the area, I found that
an accurate count was out of the question. They were found most
frequently in the cinquefoils, but also fed considerably in the grass
meadows, and were occasionally seen in the cottonwoods, where
observations showed that they laid their eggs frequently. My
estimate of the numbers of this species, is merely the result of my
judgment, after observations on the area throughout the nesting
season. I believed six pair to be the average numbers found on the
entire area during the nesting season, and counted four of these in
the cinquefoil brush and two in the cottonwoods. I actually
found but two eggs of the species in the cinquefoils, one in the nest
of a Brewer’s Blackbird, and the other in the nest of a Western
Vesper Sparrow.

Both the Vesper and Clay-colored Sparrows were counted by
noting the singing of the male birds as was the case with the species’
nesting in the grass meadows. The females were not commonly
seen. One nest of the Vesper Sparrow was found and none of the
Clay-colored Sparrow. Both birds of the pair of Western Yellow-
throats were seen, and the male was observed in song frequently.

heads | SaunveErs, An Ecological Bird Study. 205
The nest was not found however. This bird I consider rare and
unusual in this association, its proper place being in the willow
thicket association, where.it is fairly abundant.

The Mallards on the area should probably not be expressed as
pairs. I found two nests of the species, under the cinquefoil
bushes, but observed only the female birds, and then only when I
flushed them from their nests. These birds evidently fed principally
in the sloughs or along the creek. I have never observed the drake
Mallard around the nest, and do not believe he is ever found there.
I occasionally saw one or two drakes on a slough not far outside of
this area, that may or may not have been mated to the ducks
nesting on the area. I believe that the ducks left this area entirely
with their broods as soon as the eggs hatched.

The nests belonging to the Marsh Hawks and Short-eared Owls
were both found, and a detailed study of each made.! These birds
lived on a much larger area than that included in this study and a
correct proportion of their numbers to those of other species could
be better obtained by a study of a much larger area, figuring their
numbers on the basis of the square mile rather than the acre.
They obtained food largely from the grass meadow association, as
well as the cinquefoil brush.

The cottonwood grove association was even more densely popu-
lated with birds than the cinquefoil brush. This association
occurs on flat areas along streams, in a soil quite similar to that of
the cinquefoil brush association. In fact my observations show
that the cottonwood grove is slowly encroaching upon the cinque-
foil brush, the cottonwood trees seeding in under the shade of the
cinquefoils, growing up through them, and ultimately crowding
them out. This process forms an interesting ecological succession.
The principal tree of the cottonwood groves in this part of Montana
is the Narrow-leaved Cottonwood (Populus angustifolia.) It
occurs both as grown trees, averaging fifty or sixty feet in height.
and as younger trees forming a second layer under the older ones.
The ground cover is largely tall shade loving herbs, and occasion-
ally thick tangles of vines. The species found in the eighteen acres
of this association were as follows.

1 See Condor, Vol. XV, pp. 99 to 104 and 121 to 125.

206 Saunpers, An Ecological Bird Study. on

No. Acres per

Species. of pairs. pair.
Western Robin 8 225
Magpie + 4.50
Yellow Warbler 4 4.50
Least Flycatcher 4 4.50
Western Wood Pewee 3 6.00
Western Goldfinch 3 6.00
Cowbird 2 9.00
Red-shafted Flicker 1 18 .00
Western Chipping Sparrow 1 18 .00
Cedar Waxwing 1 18 .00
Black-headed Grosbeak 1 18 .00
Western Nighthawk 1 18 .00
Western Crow 1 18 .00
Total 34 0.53

These figures show that the Robin is by far the most abundant
bird of this association. I believe that my count of this species
on the area is absolutely correct, for not only did I find the eight
male birds, singing in their respective corners of the cottonwood
grove each morning, but I also observed all eight of the females
regularly, and found all of the eight nests. The Robin may have
been a little more abundant on this particular area than it usually
is in this habitat, but my observations in other places go to show
that it is regularly the most abundant nesting bird of the cotton-
wood groves in all parts of Montana that I have visited.

The Magpie is an earlier nester than any of the other species.
Its nests were easily found because of their bulk and conspicuous-
ness and as all four were thus found, there is no doubt about the
count being correct. These birds, however, left the area, after
the nesting was over, which was before most of the other species
were nesting. If they had not done so, perhaps the other species
would not have nested so abundantly.

The next three species were all easily found because of the sing-
ing of the male birds, and I have little doubt about the correctness
of the count. I found two nests of the Yellow Warbler, two of

ica SaunpeErs, An Ecological Bird Study. 207

the Least Flycatcher and one of the Western Wood Pewee. The
Goldfinches evidently did not begin nesting until late in July, just
before I left for the mountains and I found no nests. During June
there were often more than three pairs on the area, there being a
small band of birds roving about the vicinity that were evidently
not mated. By July, however, the birds had evidently chosen
mates and I was able to find the three pairs regularly.

Concerning the Cowbirds, the same remarks are true here as in
the cinquefoil brush association. I found more eggs of this species
in the cottonwoods, but did not observe the birds themselves there
so frequently. I found nine eggs of this species in nests of this
association; four in nests of the Yellow Warbler, two in a nest of
the Chipping Sparrow, and one each in nests of the Least Fly-
catcher, Cedar Waxwing and Black-headed Grosbeak.

Of the remaining six species, I found the nests of all except the
Nighthawk, so have undoubtedly a correct count of them. The
Chipping Sparrow and Black-headed Grosbeak are usually rare in
this association, the former being common only in the evergreen
forests of the mountains in this region. The latter belongs more
properly to the willow brush association, where it is much commoner
than in cottonwood groves. The Cedar Waxwing often occurs in
greater numbers in this association than my count of one pair
would indicate, but since this species varies in abundance from year
to year, and is very irregular in occurrence and nesting, my count
per acre would no doubt be accurate if applied to a larger area.

I am not quite sure that the Nighthawks nested in this associa-
tion. I found them there all through the latter part of June and
all of July, and observed both birds, resting and sleeping on the
horizontal limbs of the cottonwoods. I have never found a nest
of this species in this association, however, but have always found
them on the prairie benches, or in the mountains along barren ridge-
tops. Why they frequented the cottonwoods so much unless they
nested there, I cannot say, for there were no prairie benches within
half a mile. These birds had certain favorite spots on the cotton-
wood limbs on which to rest, and after I had learned where these
were I could locate both birds any day that I wished to. They
were certainly mated, for their plumage showed that they were
male and female, and I had observed courtship early in the season,

208 Saunvers, An Ecological Bird Study. [ out

when another rival male was in the vicinity for a few days. I
once observed a similar case of Nighthawks staying in a cotton-
wood grove through the breeding season, at Bozeman, Mont., and
in that case saw the two young with the parents in August. I was
then informed by a person whose information I had usually found
to be unreliable, that Nighthawks often laid their eggs in a hollow
spot on the upper surface of a horizontal cottonwood limb. Think-
ing this might possibly be the case with my Choteau birds, I climbed
the trees, and examined the favorite perching places of these birds,
but found nothing. There was a curious warfare between these
Nighthawks and the Western Wood Pewees inhabiting this grove.
The Nighthawks were fond of the same sort of horizontal limbs for
perches that the Pewees chose for nesting sites, and whenever a
Nighthawk attempted to alight on a limb near one of the Pewee’s
nests, the male Pewee drove it off with a ferocity that showed his
relationship to the Kingbird.

Because I found certain birds nesting on the area, whose presence
was due to the stream which crossed it, I found it best to add
another association, the stream border. Perhaps this association
could have been more easily figured in terms of length of the stream,
but for the sake of uniformity in comparison with the other asso-
ciations, I figured it as closely as I could in acres. This association
consists mainly of the banks of the stream, a typical prairie stream,
with deep pools and shallow rapids but no very swift places. It
was bordered by occasional stony bars, and by steep clay banks
three or four feet high. The banks were mostly grass grown, but
there were a few clumps of young cottonwoods, buffalo berry
bushes, and birches (Betula fontinalis). The birds found nesting
along the stream border were as follows.

No. Acreage
Species. of pairs. per pair.
Spotted Sandpiper 4 1.25
Kingbird + 1.25
Killdeer 2 2.5
Kingfisher 1 5
Total 11 0.45

The Spotted Sandpipers nested on the stony bars along the edge
of the stream, and I located three of the four nests. The Kill-

Ee | SaunpeErs, An Ecological Bird Study. 209

deers evidently nested in similar places, but I did not succeed in
finding the nests. There was no doubt but that the nests were
there, for each pair of birds was to be found regularly in a certain
spot, protesting at my presence. The Kingfisher’s nest was plainly
visible in the steep clay bank of the creek. The Kingfishers them-
selves, evidently did not live entirely within the area in question,
but fished the stream up and down for a considerable distance
both above and below the area.

In other parts of Montana I had always classed the Kingbird as
a member of the cottonwood grove association. Here however,
these birds depart from their ordinary habit, and build their nests
in bushes bordering the streams. I found all four nests, and not
one was at an elevation of more than four feet. All were on the
bank of the stream, and two were built so that they overhung the
water, one of them only about three feet above the surface, and
almost on a level with the bank. This nest was beside a pool
in which the boys of Choteau go swimming. Several of the boys
informed me that a nest had been in that particular spot for several
years. This information was supplied at different times by diff-
erent individuals, so I have no doubt that it is correct.

The cattail slough association consisted of two small sloughs,
with water in them about eighteen inches deep, and grown thickly
with cattails, I found but two species in this association. They
are as follows.

No. Acreage
Species of pairs. per pair.
Thick-billed Red-wing 5 0.4
Bittern 1 2.0
Total 6 0.67

I found all five nests of the Red-wings, one in one slough, and four
in the other. The actual number of adult birds was less than ten,
for the Red-wings showed evident signs of polygamy. The single
nest in the first slough was guarded by a pair of birds, but the other
four nests, though I saw all four females, evidently had but two
males.

Whether the Bittern nested or not I could not be quite certain.
I saw but one bird, which pumped every evening from one or the

210 SaunDERS, An Ecological Bird Study. Yen

other of the two sloughs, or occasionally from a third slough out-
side the area. I rather suspected that there was a Bittern’s nest
in the larger slough, with the four Red-wings, but I failed to find it.

Summing up the five different associations, we have 112 pairs of
birds nesting on the area of 265 acres, making an average of 2.36
acres per pair. This however does not cover all of the birds found
on the area during that time. Others went there occasionally and
often stayed for several days. There were of course, many mi-
grants in spring, and some of these remained during the first half
of June. Other birds, evidently not migrants, that occurred more
or less frequently, are as follows. A male Red-eyed Vireo stayed
in the cottonwoods and sang for several days, late in June. He
was not there long enough to have had a mate and nested. A
Warbling Vireo that had a nest somewhere in the shade trees in
Choteau, occasionally visited the cottonwoods. A Cooper’s Hawk
appeared one evening in July. I found it devouring the remains of
a young Brewer’s Blackbird. On May 25 a pair of Bronzed
Grackles appeared. They were evidently mated and might have
nested on the area, but I had not at that time determined to make
an ecological study, and believing that they would jeopardize the
safety of other nesting birds on the area, I collected them both.
This is the only pair of these birds I have ever seen in this region,
which must be at about the western limit of their range.

There may be some question concerning the value of such a
study as I have presented. The figures given represent only the
conditions on a small area, and more extensive studies will be neces-
sary to prove whether or not they will hold true if applied to a
larger tract. I hope to make further studies along this line, pro-
vided the opportunity is again presented. A census of breeding
birds could probably be most accurately obtained by studies of
associations on an acreage basis, supplemented by studies of a
whole region, which would give the proportion of the area of the
region covered by each association. The methods of work which I
have used will probably be of some value to others who wish to
make similar studies in the future, but they can undoubtedly be
improved upon.

a +/ ei hop ty oi
De ee Cae

s
.
A ee tee i tw ree et

ai Ty] ee
? vf
7 ‘ 7
i =F
»y r
per :
.
a ve

“DSNIM 40 HLONGT PAISSHOXO

‘NGGS SI LOdg MUVd WAHL qUGHM LOOAV NAAM AAVH OL SUVAddVY AGO GH], “aus

INaUVddY AHL qonadgy GINOM SIH I,
HIIM ‘ONIAIC, 40 LOY NI agayx) S/TIMDATOHY 40 HdVUDOLOH A AO LNANGOUV ING

-NGLN]T SONI aqagaqNvdxy dO ,LSOH
‘ ’

2

his,

Up,

Pe cape, a ae
be ~.

f

‘TWXX SL Id IXXX “TOA “ANY FHL

Teie ING VOL, XO. PLATE XXII.

1. BurrurE-HEAD AND HoLpauu’s GREBE.

2. Howpamui’s GREBE.

3. Houpa@ii’s GREBE IN AcT OF DIVING WITH ‘GHost’ oF Ex-
PANDED WINGS.

VA raed B Burton, The Diving Grebe. 211

DOES A GREBE SPREAD ITS WINGS JUST BEFORE
DIVING?

BY VERDI BURTCH.

Plates XXI-XXII.

On March 10, 1912, I got a remarkable photograph of a Holbeell’s
Grebe (Colymbus holba@lli) in the act of diving. It had been a very
cold winter and Keuka Lake was frozen over early in January with
the exception of the channel through the bar at Branchport, N. Y.
Here there is a continual current flowing into and out of the harbor
and this keeps the channel open even in the most severe weather.
This open area is usually about ten to fifteen rods in diameter and
here about six hundred wild ducks, Canvas-backs, American Scaups,
American Golden-eyes and a single Buffle-head passed through the
same ordeal as described by Alvin R. Cann in ‘The Auk’ for 1912,
(Vol. X XIX, p. 437), while the conditions were the same as pre-
vailed on Cayuga Lake where his observations were made. At
the time of which I write the sole survivor of the entire flock of
ducks was the little Buffle-head. We had just had several days of
very severe cold and the open area was much restricted. This
morning I found a Holbeell’s Grebe with the Buffle-head. It dived
as soon as I went near and when it came up uttered a “ pup-pup-
put” and dived again. It would stay up but a moment between the
dives and sometimes stayed under water so long that I began to
fear that it had come up under the ice but it eventually came up
in the open area each time. As it was above water only a moment
each time it was rather difficult to focus the camera and make an
exposure before it dived again. Once when it came up quite close
to me, I focused and released the shutter at the very instant it
started todive. The resulting picture shows a dark area represent-
ing the depression in the water where the Grebe sat at the beginning
of the exposure, the ‘ghost’ of its wings fully spread out behind as it
started to lunge forward and the Grebe itself nearly submerged a
full length ahead. It would seem to me that the wings were in-
stantly spread and closed again as the Grebe lunged forward, the

DA ys GoLsaNn AND Hout, Birds of Alabama. [ Apel

impression on the photographic plate being made during the in-
stantaneous pause when the wings were fully spread before closing.

The figure at the bottom of Plate X XI shows a reproduction of
the photograph actual size while Plate XXII is an enlargement
with the ‘ghost’ of the wings intensified. The left wing appears
to be too long but if we imagine the center of the bird’s back to
have been where the black spot appears on the photograph, which
was no doubt its position, then the proportions would be about
right.

BIRDS OF AUTAUGA AND MONTGOMERY COUNTIES,
ALABAMA.

BY LEWIS S. GOLSAN AND ERNEST G. HOLT.
Plate XXIII.

THE counties of Autauga and Montgomery are just a little
southeast of the center of the state of Alabama the southeast corner
of Autauga and the northwest corner of Montgomery adjoining
along the Alabama River.

This region lies well within the Austroriparian Fauna of the
Lower Austral Zone; the most conspicuous breeding birds charac-
terizing it being: Chamepelia p. terrestris, Catharista wrubu,
Dryobates v. audubont, D. p. pubescens, D. borealis, Colaptes a.
auratus, Antrostomus carolinensis, Sturnella m. argutula, Peucea @.
bachmani, Guiraca ec. cerulea, Lanius 1. ludovicianus, Protonotaria
citrea, Dendroica d. dominica, Geothlypis t. ignota, Mimus p. poly-
glottos, and Sitta pusilla.

The mean temperature and precipitation at Montgomery (taken
from Mohr’s “ Plant Life of Alabama,” p. 97 are as follows:

Annual. Winter. Spring. Summer. Fall.
Mean temperature Degrees F. 63.3 50 66.6 80 65.4
Rainfall Inches S14 AT Oa eee 8.54

THE AUK, VOL. XXXII. PLATE XXIII.

1. Lookinc over Berar Swamp, Pinus PALUSTRIS IN FOREGROUND.

bo

Derr Poot In Bear Swamp, TREES ARE PINUS TAEDA, MAGNOLIA VIR-
GINIANA, ILEX CORIACEA, ETC.

3. SrreEeT Lake, Catoma Swamp, Sapa GLABRA IN FOREGROUND,

DIUM DISTICHUM IN THE LAKE.

Taxo-

Roa | GoLsaNn AND Hott, Birds of Alabama. 213

Maximum temperature 106 degrees in July, minimum 5 degrees
below zero in February. Both these extremes, however, are very
exceptional, the mercury seldom rising above 100 degrees or falling
below 10 degrees.

Autauga County is covered by a belt of sands and pebbles,
the Central Pine Belt, and is generally rolling or hilly, but the
southern part of the county bordering the Alabama River is more
or less level. It was in this southern portion that most of our work
was done, principally in the country around Autaugaville, Booth
and Prattville.

Autaugaville lies in a large flat tract extending northward from
the Alabama River about six miles and then rising rather abruptly
into rolling hills. Bear Swamp occupies most of this flat area.
The swamp is heavily timbered with cypress (Taxodium distichum),
‘gum’ (Nyssa sylvatica, Nyssa aquatica and Liquidambar styra-
ciflua), pine (Pinus teda), beech (Fagus americana), magnolia
(Magnolia fetida and M. virginiana), tulip (Liriodendron tulipifera)
and is thick with an undergrowth of smaller trees and shrubs, such
as swamp red bay (Persea pubescens), holly (Ilex opaca and I.
coriacea), red maple (Acer rubrum) fetter bush (Pieris nitida) and
“possum haw’ (Viburnum nudum), besides a variety of vines and
briers (Rubus argutus and Smilax bona-nox) all too abundant for
comfortable traveling and a little cane (Arundinaria tecta) which
is disappearing. On the surrounding hills are found pine (Pinus
echinata, P. teda and P. palustris), mostly second growth, and
‘serub’ oaks of several species (principally Quercus minor and Q.
marylandica with an occasional Q. pagodefolia and Q. schneckit),
also an occasional hickory, black and sweet gum, honey locust
(Gleditsia triacanthos) and quite a lot of sparkleberry (Vaccinium
arboreum) and huckleberry. Grapes (Vitis estivalis, V. vulpina and
V. rotundifolia) are abundant. The once beautiful hills, covered
until recent years with almost unbroken verdure, are now in places
almost bare, and the whole face of Nature seems devastated by
that most potent engine of destruction— the saw mill. The
noble long-leaf pine is now being replaced by short-leaf and old-
field second growth.

The character of the country surrounding Booth and Prattville
is essentially the same as that of the Bear Swamp region, only the

214 Gorsan anp Hour, Birds of Alabama. Lami

swamps are confined to small areas along the streams. The plant
associations of these swamps are practically identical with those
of Bear Swamp. Around Prattville the hills contain more gravel
and are more denuded than those surrounding Bear Swamp.

Montgomery County lies almost wholly within the Central
Prairie Belt, a very fertile region of black, calcareous soils. The
topography has very little relief, varying from level to gently
rolling. In this county Barachias was the center of our observa-
tions, so we shall confine our descriptions to that immediate vicin-
ity. The two principal features are the broad, undulating hay
fields, destitute of trees except for an occasional straggler left upon
some drain ditch, and Catoma Swamp. While most of the country
is open, there are patches of woodland, some quite large, here and
there, principally in low places or along some sluggish stream
or slough.

These woods are chiefly deciduous with some scattered pine
(Pinus teda and P. echinata), for the most part being made up
of oaks (Quercus alba, Q. minor, Q. lyrata, Q. michauxii, Q. terana
or schneckit, Q. digitata, Q. nigra, Q. phellos, etc.), hickories (Hicoria
ovata, H. alba, H. myristiceformis), hackberry (Celtis mississippien-
sis), elms, honey locust (Gleditsia triacanthos), ete., with-an under-
growth of crabapple (Pyrus angustifolia), haws (Crategus) of many
species, dogwood (Cornus florida) and buckeye (Aisculus pavia).
The Spanish moss (T7llandsia usneoides) which disappeared for a
number of years is again locally abundant, hanging in long, grace-
ful festoons even from the undergrowth. Along the ditches and
sloughs cottonwood and willow are abundant and sycamore is by
no means uncommon. Wherever an old unused field is found one
is almost sure to find in it a patch of plums (Prunus angustifolia),
and if it be near the swamp, sloes (Prunus umbellata) too. The
hedges of osage orange (Toxylon pomiferum) which are everywhere,
constitute another characteristic feature of this country.

Catoma Swamp is an almost unbroken stretch of timbered low-
land lying along either bank of Catoma Creek, a tributary of the
Alabama River. Although in the aggregate it covers a large
amount of country it is usually very narrow, in some places scarcely
more than half a mile wide. It differs from Bear Swamp princi-
pally in having a dryer, firmer soil, dense cane brakes (Arundinaria

oa | GoLsaAN AND Hott, Birds of Alabama. 215

macrosperma and A. tecta) and an abundance of palmetto (Sabal
glabra).

The principal trees are cypress (Taxodium distichum) hornbeam
(Carpinus caroliniana), ‘gums’ (Liquidambar styraciflua and Nyssa
sylvatica), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), holly (Ilex opaca),
dogwood (Cornus florida) and persimmon (Diospyros virginiana).
Vines and briers of many kinds are abundant.

The following list is based on sporadic observations covering a
number of years, principally during the breeding seasons. As
no systematic study has been attempted (as evidenced by the lack
of migration data) until very recently, of course it cannot be ex-
pected that the list is complete or that the data given are conclusive;
so we submit the list for just what it may be worth, hoping that it
may prove of some interest, treating as it does of the avifauna
of a region so little studied by ornithologists.

Neither of us can claim the distinction of being an ornithologist
and until recently, we have centered our attention upon odlogy,
endeavoring to make as complete a collection as possible of the eggs
of birds breeding in this neighborhood. Consequently the data
given upon breeding birds are more complete, and we have in most
cases included nesting data for each county. The most complete
data available, however, are from Autauga County.

Ornithological knowledge among the hunters of this section is
generally vague and unreliable and besides ourselves we know of
no one in either county who takes an active interest in the study of
birds. We have thus been forced to rely almost entirely upon
our own notes and have used reports from others only when we
were reasonably sure of their accuracy.

We are greatly indebted to Mr. Arthur H. Howell, Assistant
Biologist, U. S. Bureau of Biological Survey, for many valuable
suggestions as well as for reading the manuscript; and to Mr. H. C.
Oberholser, Ornithologist of the Survey, for identification of speci-
mens.

The vernacular names in quotations are those by which the birds
are known locally. Except where specifically stated to the con-
trary all notes refer to both counties.

1. Podilymbus podiceps. Piep-BinteEp GreBE. ‘ DIpAPPER.’—
One or two pairs occasionally to be found in favorable ponds at any season

216 GoOLSAN AND Hout, Birds of Alabama. reeT

of the year. Although we have found no nests, the birds have been ob-
served throughout the breeding season and we think it safe to assume that
they breed here. They have been almost exterminated by so-called sports-
men.

2. Gaviaimmer. Loon.— One taken near Prattville in Autauga Co.,
winter of 1889 or 1890, and one at Barachias in April, 1905. Afew reported
to occur on the Alabama River in winter.

3. Sterna antillarum. Least Tern.— The only record we have of
the Least Tern in this neighborhood is from ‘‘ A. M. R.” in Forest and
Stream, Vol. XX, No. 17, p. 323: ‘‘ Two specimens seen in Montgomery
County, one of which I obtained and carefully identified. It was a young
male and had probably strayed up from the coast.’’

4. Anhinga anhinga. Water Turkry.— These birds have been
observed in the more inaccessible parts of Bear Swamp, but none in very
recent years. A pair were seen in Bear Swamp in July, 1883, and others
were frequently killed in fall prior to this date.

5. Phalacrocorax auritus subsp. Cormorant.— Seven seen and
one killed on a mill-pond near Bear Swamp, in July, 1909.

6. Fregataaquila. Man-o’-war-Birp.— One found dead about three
miles north of Prattville, after a severe storm, about 1905 or 1906.

7. Lophodytes cucullatus. HooprEp MerrGanser. ‘SUMMER
Ducx.’— Occasionally seen in mill ponds and in Bear Swamp. Perma-
nent resident. No nests discovered but broods of young observed on
several occasions. Also reported to occur on the Alabama River.

8. Anas platyrhynchos. Mauuarp. ‘GREEN-HEAD.’ — Winters in
small numbers on rivers, creeks and ponds. Reported as the commonest of
our winter ducks.

9. Anas rubripes. Buiack Duck. ‘Buack MAa.uarp.’ — Occurs
in some numbers during winter on the Alabama River and is frequently
taken by gunners.

10. Nettion carolinense. GrrEN-wiNGED TEAL.— Reported to oc-
cur in small numbers on the Alabama River in winter. Fine male taken
January 9, 1913, at Barachias on a small creek at the edge of heavy timber.

11. Querquedula discors. BLur-wincep TEAL.— Reported by
hunters as the first of the ducks to arrive from the north. Common on
the Alabama River, where about 200 were reported, Sept. 20, 1912.

12. Dafilaacuta. Prntart.— Reported by hunters as a fall and spring
migrant on the Alabama River, a few remaining through winter.

13. Aix sponsa. Woop Duck. ‘Summer Duck.’ — Observed
throughout the breeding season, in small numbers, in swamps, marshes and
ponds. Reported also on the Alabama River.

14. Marila valisineria. Canvas-Back.— Occasionally seen during
winter in Autauga Co. Reported as occurring on the Alabama River
but uncommon.

15. Marilacollaris. Rinc-NeEckep Ducx.— Winters in small num-
bers on creeks, ponds, sloughs, etc. (Autauga Co.).

SS eee

oe GoLsan AND Hott, Birds of Alabama. 217

16. Branta canadensis canadensis. Canapa Goose. ‘ WILD
Goose.’ — Observed in considerable numbers during migrations. Occa-
sionally taken by hunters on the Alabama River and reported as occurring
in small numbers throughout the winter.

17. Botaurus lentiginosus. Brrrern.— Winters in small numbers,
more abundant in late winter and early spring. Observed as late as
May 28th in marshes near Autaugaville — possibly breeding.

18. Ixobrychus exilis. Least Brrrern — Observed about the Bear
Swamp region.

19. Ardea herodias herodias. Great Biur Heron. ‘ Bia BLUE
Crane.’ — Permanent resident and tolerably common in Bear Swamp and
marshes near the Alabama River. Also recorded from Catoma Swamp.

20. Hydranassa tricolor ruficollis. Lourstana Heron. ‘ LITTLE
Crane.’ — Uncommon summer resident on the Alabama River and adja-
cent marshes (Autauga Co.).

21. Florida cerulea. Lirrix Biur Heron. ‘Lirrie Bue
Crane.’ — Summer resident on ponds, creeks and marshes and in Bear
Swamp. Slightly more numerous than the Louisiana Heron (Autauga
Co.).

22. Butorides virescens virescens. GREEN HeERoN. ‘ FLy-UP-
THE-CREEK.’ — Common summer resident. Found in slightly more open
country than the preceding herons. Breeding record: May 7, 1911,
swampy pasture near Prattville; nest small, frail platform of sticks on
limb, and against body of tree; 10 ft. from ground in pine. Bird took
flight when approached within 20 yards. Three newly-hatched young
and one pipped egg. (L.S. G.)

23. Nycticoraxnycticoraxnevius. BLAcK-cROWNED Nicut HERON.
— One observed breeding in Yellow-crowned rookery, April 23, 1911.
Nest of sticks, typical heron’s platform, 70 ft. (estimated) up in crotch of
tall cypress in lagoon near Alabama River, Autauga Co. (L.S.G.)

24. Nyctanassa violacea. YELLOW-cROWNED NicHT HERON.—
Common summer resident, breeding abundantly in small rookeries in Bear
Swamp and swamps along Alabama River. Breeding records Apr. 12,
1908, Bear Swamp; nest a bulky platform of large sticks, no lining, 5 ft.
out on first limb of a black gum, 50 ft. above the water. The tree stood
in remote part of swamp among many other gums and cypresses in
open water, i. e., free from undergrowth. Five slightly incubated eggs.
(E.G.H.) May 8, 1909, Bear Swamp; nest the usual platform of sticks,
8 ft. out on limb of tupelo gum, 30 ft. above water 3 ft. deep; five nearly
hatched eggs covered with gnats. One other occupied nest about 20 paces
away. (L.S.G.) April 23,1911, swamp near the Alabama River, Autauga
Co.; nest Jarge platform of sticks 40 ft. up in large second growth cypress,
in lagoon about 3 ft. deep, thickly set with trees of same size and species;
three fresh eggs. Twenty-five or more occupied nests in immediate vicin-
ity, including one of the Black-crowned. (L.S.G.) The scenes in these
rookeries are weird, not to say gruesome, especially in late afternoon when

’

218 GouLsaNn AND Hott, Birds of Alabama. [ Aut

the dark, coffee-colored waters are lighted for a little while by the rays of
the setting sun slanting down between tall cypresses and gums, and the
death-like stillness is broken by the wild, unearthly ‘‘ quwarks ” of the
herons.

25. Grus americana. WuxHoorina Crane.— In late November or
early December, 1899, Mr. Thomas Hook saw five or six of these birds in
marshy meadows and swamps on a creek near the Alabama River, 6 miles
from Prattville.

26. Rallus elegans. Kine Rain. ‘Marsu Hen.’ — Found breed-
ing in both Autauga and Montgomery Counties. Not well known on
account of its retiring habits. Data: May 30, 1908, Barachias; nest a
slightly concave mass of Sorghum halepense, 8 in. in diameter and about
one inch deep, woven together about stalks of high grass on ditch bank in
open hay field; ditch about 2 ft. deep, containing only a few inches of
water; eight nearly hatched eggs. (H.G.H.) June1, 1912, Autauga Co.,
near Autaugaville; nest of coarse grass in slight depression of ditch bank
in marshy old field within 10 inches of water 18 inches deep, and 4 inches
above the water; twelve eggs moderately incubated. (L.S.G.)

27. Porzana carolina. Sora.— Frequently observed in early spring,
One specimen seen June 1, 1912, in the edge of Bear Swamp (Autauga Co.).

28. Coturnicops noveboracensis. YELLOW Ratr.L.— Frequently
found; common in fall and early spring on open hay fields at Barachias.

29. Ionornis martinicus. PurPLE GALLINULE.— One specimen
taken in summer, some years ago, in Autauga Co.

30. Fulica americana. Coor.—A specimen taken in 1911, about
May 20th, near Swift Creek, Autauga Co. Reported by hunters as
abundant during fall and spring migrations on the Alabama River, a few
remaining throughout the winter.

31. Philohelaminor. Woopcock. ‘Swamp PARTRIDGE.’ ‘SNIPE.’
— Permanent resident in rather smal] numbers in Autauga Co., inhabiting
marshes, swamps and wet pastures. Rare in Montgomery Co., though
apparently increasing. Mr. C. N. Hinderer reported 9 birds near Mont-
gomery on January 5, 1913 and 20 in the same vicinity on January 12th.
Several were taken each time.

Jan. 25, 1913, we observed a bird giving its remarkable flight song,
above an open flat near Bear Swamp. Three were performing at once.
Jan. 281 had a better opportunity to observe this phenomenon, alone, down
by the swamp in a small, bushy field. After a series of “‘ scapes,’’ each
preceded by a kind of hiccough, the bird would rise on rapidly beating
wings, in a spiral, the wings making a whistling or “ chippering”’ sound
that at first I attributed to the bird’s vocal organs. Just before its down-
ward plunge the bird would chirp rapidly, much after the manner of a
little chicken; then it would drop suddenly to the ground, almost to the
same spot it had just left and begin the performance all over again. As
the birds do not come out until after sunset, almost night in fact, it 1s very
difficult to see them even when outlined against the westernsky. (E.G.H.)

32. Gallinago delicata. Wutson’s Snipe. ‘Snipe.’ — Very com-

Vol. a |
1914

GousaNn AND Hott, Birds of Alabama. 219
mon during March and April in open, marshy fields of Montgomery Co.
Small numbers spend the entire winter. Late in the afternoon of Jan. 9,
1914, when driving home from the Barachias station, I saw a snipe fly into
the telephone wires beside the road and fall gasping to the ground. I
ran and picked it up and discovered that it had broken one of its neck
vertebre. (E. G. H.)

33. Pisobia maculata. PrcTorat SanppipER.— Four taken at Bara-
chias, March 30, 1913.

34. Pisobia minutilla. Least Sanpprrrr.— Two taken at Bara-
chias, March 30, 1913, in a boggy pasture.

35. Ereunetes pusillus. SemipatMAaTep SaNnppPipER.— One taken
while feeding around a pool from an overflowing well at Bear Swamp, May
23, 1913.

36. Totanus melanoleucus. Greater YELLOW-LEGS.— Several
taken near Montgomery by Mr. C. N. Hinderer.

37. Helodromas solitarius solitarius. Sorirary Sanppiper.— A
male taken in a pasture at Barachias, April 22, 1913, and one taken near
Bear Swamp, May 23, 1913.

38. Bartramia longicauda. UpLanp PLover.— Seen occasionally
in Autauga Co. Regular spring migrant in Montgomery Co., but dimin-
ishing very rapidly. Stragglers have been reported during the fall
months. One pair once observed to remain throughout the entire summer
on a large hay farm at Barachias. One recorded at Barachias, March 7,
1913 — an exceptionally early record.

39. Actitis macularia. Sporrep SanpprpeR.— Tolerably common
summer resident in swamps and adjoining low fields (Autauga Co.).

40. Oxyechus vociferus. Kinuprnr. *KiLiupEE.’— Common per-
manent resident, more abundant in winter. In summer the vicinity of
water is always preferred; in winter, found in almost any open country,
old fields preferred. Quite common in winter in small flocks on open hay
fields of Montgomery Co. The Killdeer is apparently a very light sleeper
as its note can be occasionally heard out on the wintry, wind-swept fields
at almost any hour of the night.

41. Colinus virginianus virginianus. Bon-wuHiTE. ‘ PARTRIDGE.’
*“‘ Quarn.’’— Abundant permanent resident. Breeding records: May 30,
1909, Autauga Co., near Prattville; eleven fresh eggs in depression in
ground under scrub oak bushes at foot of oak sapling stump on scrubby
hillside; lined with leaves and pine needles. (E.G. H.). Sept. 19, 1909,
Autauga Co., near Autaugaville; eleven tresh eggs in arched nest of grasses
on ground in grassy pea-field. (L.S. G.)

42. Meleagris gallopavo silvestris. Witp Turkrey.— Rather rare
permanent resident. Numbers greatly reduced ‘during recent years.
Habitat: Hills and swamps alike, breeding principally on hills (Autauga
Co.). Formerly common in Catoma Swamp, Montgomery Co., now re-
ported scarce throughout the county.

43. Ectopistes migratorius. PasseNcER PicEeon. ‘WiLp Pic-

220 GOLSAN AND Hott, Birds of Alabama. Apill
EON.’ — None recorded within 35 years, and scarce even before that time.

However, they once occurred in numbers in both counties. Last seen
about spring of 1878.

44. Zenaidura macroura carolinensis. Mournine Dove. ‘ Dove.’
— Abundant permanent resident but not sonumerous asformerly. Breed-
ing records: April 10, 1908, Barachias; two slightly incubated eggs on a
frail platform of pine twigs and needles on first horizontal branch of large
pine 10 ft. above ground and about 15 ft. from trunk of tree. (E.G. H.).
July 8, 1909, near Autaugaville; one fresh egg (set incomplete) on platform
of grass, pine needles and a few feathers, 40 ft. up in pine and 12 ft. out on
branch. Open hillside. (L. 8. G.)

45. Chemepelia passerina terrestris. Grounp Dovr.— Toler-
ably common in low lands between Bear Swamp and the Alabama River.
Occasionally seen elsewhere in Autauga Co. Small numbers reported in
Montgomery Co. Nesting data: May 28, 1911, Autauga Co., on Alabama
River near Autaugaville; two slightly incubated eggs in frail nest of weed
stems and grass in depression beside clod of earth in cultivated field.
Bird almost touched before leaving nest. (L.S. G.)

46. Cathartes aura septentrionalis. Turkry VuLture. ‘ TurR-
KEY Buzzarp.’’ — Common permanent resident, but not nearly so numer-
ous as the Black Vulture. Breeding records: March 31, 1894, near Pratt-
ville; two slightly incubated eggs in old pine log near small stream flowing
through wooded ravine. (L. 8. G.) April 11, 1909, Bear Swamp; two
moderately incubated eggs deposited in depression in rotten wood on
ground inside of hollow giant tulip tree in thick swamp. Old bird came
out with rush and vomited as it took wing at entrance. (L.8.G.) It is
a source of never ending pleasure on a summer day, to lie on my back
in the shade of a pine on some high hill and watch these majestic fliers
mount higher and higher, in wide, easy circles, until a mere speck against
the blue vault above, or lost to view entirely. I have seen the Black Vul-
ture rise to such a height as to be barely visible with a six-power binocular.
The two species are characteristic birds of our southern landscape. (E.G.H.)

47. Catharista urubu. Buack Vutturr. ‘Carrion Crow.’ —
Abundant permanent resident. Nests containing eggs discovered between
extreme dates of March 10 and May 8. Many nesting data for both
counties. April 8, 1906, Barachias; two slightly incubated eggs deposited
on debris at bottom of hollow stump about 8 ft. high in midst of briers
and palmettos in swamp pasture. The chimney-like hollow was the only
approach to the nest. (E. G. H.). April 13, 1909, Bear Swamp; two
eggs containing very large embryos, deposited on ground between trunks
of two pines and a white bay (Magnolia virginiana) in thick swamp.
(E. G. H.) The Black Vulture is not so graceful a flier as the Turkey
Vulture, but is the more powerful of the two, and whenever a dispute
arises, perhaps over some savory morsel, the Turkey Vulture always comes
out second best.

48. Elanoides forficatus. SwaLLow-TaILtEpD Kitrr.— One seen May
1, 1909, at Barachias, flying steadily southwestward.

rial GoLsaNn AND Hott, Birds of Alabama. 221

49. Ictinia mississippiensis. Mussissipp1 Kirr.— A small number
appeared as summer residents in the vicinity of Bear Swamp between the
years 1886 and 1889. Apparently killed out since that time.

50. Circus hudsonius. Marsu Hawk. ‘ Rassir Hawk.’ — Com-
mon winter resident. A typical winter bird of the broad hay fields of Mont-
gomery County and one of the most difficult to approach.

51. Accipiter velox. Swarp-sHinneD Hawk. ‘Littte BLvE
Darter.’ — Permanent resident, much more in evidence in early spring.

52. Accipiter cooperi. Cooprrr’s Hawk. ‘ Bia Biur Darter.’—
Tolerably common permanent resident, also much in evidence in early
spring about poultry yards.

53. Buteo borealis borealis. Rrep-rarLep Hawk. ‘ Bia CHICKEN
Hawk.’ — Tolerably common permanent resident. Breeding records:
April 9, 1909, Bear Swamp; one slightly incubated egg in large nest of
large sticks, lined with rootlets and trash, about 54 ft. up in crotch of large
pine; nest 3 ft. in diameter outside; birds very shy. (L.S.G.) Set of
two eggs taken at Barachias, Montgomery Co., but data lost.

54. Buteolineatuslineatus. Rep-sHouLppRED Hawx.— This form
occurs with us in winter. A female (specimen No. 189) in the State
University Museum was taken in Hale County in August.

55. Buteo lineatus alleni. FLormpaA ReED-SHOULDERED Hawk.
‘CuickEN Hawk.’ — Common permanent resident. Much more numer-
ous than the Red-tail. Breeding records: Mar. 28, 1909, near Pratt-
ville; three very slightly incubated eggs in nest of large sticks, lined with
green pine needles, placed 36 ft. from ground in crotch of hickory leaning
out over wooded hillside. Nest measured: inside, 7} in. diameter and 23
in. deep; outside, 24 in. widest diameter. (E.G. H.) April 11, 1909,
Catoma Swamp, near Barachias; nest of large sticks, lined with moss,
bark and green leaves, placed in crotch of large water oak about 50 ft. up.
Inside dimensions: 8 in. in diameter by 2 in. deep; outside, 11X17 in.
Contained one pipped egg and one young about two days old, covered with
buffy down. (E. G. H.).

56. Buteo platypterus. Broap-wincep Hawk. ‘CuHIcKEN Hawk.’
— Uncommon permanent resident. Breeding record: May 22, 1912, near
Booth; two eggs with well developed embryos, in large nest of sticks, lined
with grass, rootlets, etc., about 25 ft. up in crotch of short-leaf pine on
barren hillside. (L. 8. G.)

57. Haliwetus leucocephalus leucocephalus. Bautp HEacie.—
Occurs as a rare, irregular visitant. On Dec. 18, 1913, while exploring
Bear Swamp we came unexpectedly upon a bunch of about a dozen Black
Vultures, behaving strangely, in a pine thicket on the edge of an old
beaver pond. We noticed a great commotion, which at first we attributed
to our presence, but the birds instead of rising and flying away, kept flying
about among the branches of the pines and one individual dropped to the
ground and literally ‘‘took to his heels,’’ disappearing in the thick brush.
Then, just as it took flight, we noticed among them a much larger bird,

222 GoLsaANn AND Hott, Birds of Alabama. [ peer

which we instantly recognized by its tail and great alar expanse, as a
Bald Eagle. Perhaps it had intended making a meal of one of the vul-
tures or forcing them to disgorge —there’s no accounting for tastes!
A former resident of these parts used to tell of once having seen an eagle
take a “buzzard”’ on the wing, at this same place (about 1880). Ours is
the first record of a Bald Eagle in this vicinity in perhaps fifteen years.

58. Falco sparverius subsp. Sparrow Hawx.— Very common per-
manent resident. Breeding record: April 11, 1910, near Autaugaville;
four fresh eggs, deposited on debris at bottom of nest cavity, 6 in. deep,
used previous season by Flicker; hole 20 ft. up in dead pine in cultivated
field. (L.S.G.) Thisis one of the characteristic birds of the broad, open
hay lands of Montgomery Co., where it undoubtedly does much good by
preying upon the hordes of grasshoppers that overrun the fields. Both
subspecies sparverius and paulus undoubtedly occur here though we cannot
substantiate this statement with our own records. F.s. paulus is probably
the breeding bird.

59. Pandion haliaétus carolinensis. Osprey.— Rare. Individuals
occasionally seen throughout the year at Rawlinson’s Pond, near Autauga-
ville.

60. Aluco pratincola. Barn Owxi.— Owing to its strictly nocturnal
habits, this bird is not well known, and so far has not been recorded in
Autauga Co. It has occasionally been taken at Barachias. On Jan.
8, 1912, an old, hollow oak, standing in a grove not over 200 yds. from a
residence at Barachias was cut, and three young, about 5 or 6 weeks old,
discovered in the cavity which was littered with quantities of pellets —
bones, hair, ete., of rats and mice.

61. Asio wilsonianus. LonG-EARED Owu.— Seen in 1909 and heard
in 1911, near Bear Swamp.

62. Asio flammeus. SHort-rarED Owt.— Occasionally common in
open hay fields at Barachias, usually during fall.

63. Strix varia alleni. FLormpa Barrep Ow1.— ‘Swamp Owt.’
““ Hootine Own.” — Very common permanent resident. Nesting data:
March 27, 1910, east end of Bear Swamp; one heavily incubated egg de-
posited on debris at bottom of large cavity, 4 in. deep, 25 ft. up in large
postoak. (L.S. G.)

64. Otus asio floridanus. Fiorma Screech Own. ‘Squince
Ow..’ ‘DeratH Owt.’ — Tolerably common permanent resident, lo-
cally abundant. Breeding records: April 10, 1908, Barachias; four moder-
ately incubated eggs, deposited on debris at bottom of cavity, 12 in. deep,
20 ft. up in old willow tree. Tree on ditch bank in open oat-field about
200 yards from residence. (E. G. H.) April 10, 1910, near Prattville;
three moderately-incubated eggs deposited in old woodpecker’s nest-
cavity 124 ft. from ground in old pine snag on wooded hillside. Cavity
contained a few woodpecker’s feathers. (L. 8. G.)

65. Bubo virginianus virginianus. Great HorNeED OwL. ‘HORN
Owt.’ ‘ PrnEY-woops Owt.’— Common permanent resident but not

pa eX || Gotsan AND Hott, Birds of Alabama. 223

nearly so abundant as the Barred Owl. Breeding record: Jan. 30, 1897;
two nearly hatched eggs in old crow or hawk-nest, 50 ft. above ground in
second growth pine thicket, near Prattville. (L. 5. G.)

66. Coccyzus americanus americanus. YELLOW-BILLED Cuckoo.
‘Rain Crow.’ — Very common summer resident. Breeding records:
Barachias, May 19, 1907; four pin-feathered young in shallow nest of
sticks in haw thicket. (E.G. H.) Booth, August 11, 1912; nest 25 ft.
up in small pine, beside road in woods. Bird knocked cut one egg, con-
taining well developed embryo, as observer passed under tree. (L.S. G.)

67. Coccyzus erythrophthalmus. Buack-BILLED CucKoo.—
Known only as a migrant. One taken, Oct. 16, 1898, near Bear Swamp,
Autauga Co. Alsc taken in Montgomery Co. One seen at Barachias,
May 2, 1913.

68. Ceryle alcyon alcyon. BruttTep KinerisHer. ‘ KINGFISHER.’
— Moderately common permanent resideni, infavorable localities. Breed-
ing record: Autauga Co., near Autaugaville, April 16, 1910; two fresh
eggs (set incomplete) deposited in chamber at end of 4 ft. tunnel in sandy
bank of old road; tunnel 3 ft. below surface; bird removed from nest by
hand, forming quite an attachment for the hand. Tunnel contained a
small quantity of fish bones and scales. (L.S. G.)

69. Dryobatesvillosus auduboni. SoutTHERN Hairy WoopDPECKER.
‘Sapsucker.’ — Moderately common permanent resident. Breeding
record: Prattville, March 31, 1894; four slightly incubated eggs in nest
cavity excavated 15 ft. up in dead China tree in farm yard. (L.S. G.)

70. Dryobates pubescens pubescens. SouTHERN Downy Woop-
PECKER. ‘ LITTLE Sapsucker.’ — Tolerably common permanent resi-
dent. A quiet, unsuspicious bird, often allowing a very close approach.
Breeding record: Prattville, April 2, 1894; four nearly fresh eggs in cavity
excavated by bird, 10 ft. above ground in Chinatreeinfarm yard. (L.S.G.)

71. Dryobates borealis. RErp-cocKADED WoopPECKER. ‘SaApP-
SUCKER.’ — Locally abundant, especially in pine woods (Autauga Co.).
As far as we have been able to observe, this species invariably nests in
live pines. Breeding record: June 4, 1895; four eggs, incubation slight,
in decayed heart of live pine on wooded hillside, near Prattville, Autauga
Co. (L. 8. G.). Rather an uncommon species in Montgomery County,
probably because of the scarcity of large tracts of pine timber.

72. Sphyrapicus varius varius. YELLOW-BELLIED SAPSUCKER.

‘Sapsucker.’ — Tolerably common winter resident.
73. Phleotomus pileatus pileatus. Pineatep WoopPeckKER.
‘Lorp-cop.’ ‘Woopcock. ‘InprAN Hen.’ — Rare permanent resi-

dent, locally common in Bear Swamp. One pair recorded in Catoma
Swamp, Feb. 4, 1906. Breeding record: Bear Swamp, April 14, 1909;
four heavily incubated eggs deposited on rotten wood at bot‘om of hole
in rotten pine snag about 40 ft. high, in almost impenetrable brier patch
(Rubus) in one of most inaccessible parts of the swamp; hole about 18 in.
deep and 33 in. in diameter at opening, widened to 7 or 8 in. at bottom;
entrance 29 ft. above ground. (E. G. H.)

224 GoLtsan AND Hout, Birds of Alabama. Api

74. Melanerpes erythrocephalus. ReErpD-HEADED WoopPECKER.
‘ Rep-HEAD.’ — Abundant summer resident, a few commonly remaining
through the winter in Autauga Co. Winters in much larger numbers in
Montgomery Co. Typical habitat: Dead timber in fields and new grounds,.
and more open woods or groves. Breeding record: Four miles from Pratt-
ville, May 30, 1909; four very slightly incubated eggs deposited in hole,
excavated by the bird, about 20 ft. up in dead pine in new ground. (E.G.H.):

75. Centurus carolinus. Rep-BeLiiep Wooppecker. ‘GUINEA
Sapsucker.’ — Common permanent resident. More strictly a bird of
the heavy woods than most of the other woodpeckers. Breeding record:
Near Prattville, July 11, 1909; three fresh eggs (set evidently incomplete):
deposited upon debris at bottom of cavity, 10 in. deep, excavated by the
birds, 50 ft. up in decayed pine standing on cleared hillside. (L. 8. G.)
Several sets taken as early as May.

76. Colaptes auratus auratus. Fuickrr. ‘ YELLOW HAMMER.’ —
Very common permanent resident. Frequently found feeding on the
ground in winter in company with blackbirds and meadowlarks. Breeding
record: Barachias, April 20, 1908; nest cavity a large hole about 18 in.
deep, excavated by the birds, about 23 ft. up in dead top of willow standing:
on ditch-bank in open oat-field. The nest was torn into when under con-
struction, but nothing daunted, the birds finished it and deposited two eggs:
upon the chips at bottom before it was noticed again. Waiting until
another was laid, one egg was removed, leaving two in nest, April 20.
Four other eggs removed, one each on 21st, 22nd, 23rd and 24th. April
24th there were only two eggs in nest and one was taken, leaving one, but
on the 27th nest wasfound empty. Altogether six eggs were laid. (E. G. H.):

77. Colaptes auratus luteus. NorrHerN F.iicker.— Common
winter resident.

78. Antrostomus carolinensis. CHucK-wILL’s Wuipow. ‘ WuHIP-
POOR-WILL.’ — Toleraby common summer resident, especially in pine
woods country. Breeding record: Autauga Co., near Autaugaville, May
9, 1909; two fresh eggs deposited upon oak leaves on hillside covered with
scrub oak; set just completed. (L. 8S. G.)

79. Antrostomus vociferus vociferus. Wutip-PooR-wILL.— Known
only as an uncommon migrant in Autauga County.

80. Chordeiles virginianus chapmani. FLoripa NIGHTHAWK.
‘Buu Bar.’ — Common summer resident, very abundant in early fall.
Breeding record: Autauga Co. near Autaugaville, May 16, 1909; two fresh
eggs deposited on bare, gravelly ground between two bunches of broom
sedge, in sparse growth of pine and scrub oak on high hill. (L. 8S. G.)
Subspecies virginianus certainly should occur during migration, but we
have taken no specimens.

81. Chetura pelagica. Cuimney Swirt. ‘CHIMNEY SWEEP.’ —
Abundant summer resident, breeding only in chimneys, so far as we know.
Especially abundant in early fall. Breeding record: 33 miles from Mont-
gomery, May 18, 1905; three fresh eggs (set probably incomplete) depos-

Vol. aa |
1914

GoLSAN AND Hott, Birds of Alabama. Papa)
ited in nest of small twigs attached to inside of chimney of residence.
(E.G. H.) Autauga Co., 5 miles from Autaugaville, June 20, 1909; nest
of small sticks glued 9 ft. up in chimney of old house; five eggs slightly
incubated. (L. 8S. G.)

82. Archilochus colubris. Rusy-rHroaTeD HumminesirD. ‘Hum-
MINGBIRD.’ — Moderately common summer resident. Breeding record:
Autauga Co., 4 miles from Independence, May 19, 1912, two eggs, almost |
hatched, in nest of moss and cotton covered with lichens, 11 ft. above
ground and 8 ft. out on Jimb of small post oak in mixed woods. (L.S. G.)

83. Muscivora forficata. Scissor-TaILeD FLtycaTcHER.— One taken
years ago (about 1889 or 1890) in early spring in Autauga Co., by L. S.
Golson.

84. Tyrannus tyrannus. Kinasirp. ‘Bre Martin.’ — Common
summer resident. Preterred habitat: Fields, pastures and open woods.
Breeding records: Barachias, June 6, 1907; nest of thistle-down, lined
with rootlets, about 6 ft. above ground in small hackberry, on bank of
slough in open field; three eggs, heavily incubated. An occupied nest of
an Orchard Oriole was in the same tree. (E.G.H.) Autauga Co., near
Autaugaville, May 26, 1909; compact nest of weed stems, cotton, and wool,
lined with fine rootlets, 20 ft. above ground and 16 ft. out on limb of post-
oak on open hillside. Three very slightly incubated eggs. (L.S. G.)

85. Myiarchus crinitus. Crestep FiuycatcHEerR. ‘ YELLOW KING-
BIRD.’ — Common summer resident of wooded areas bordering fields.
Breeding record: Near Autaugaville, May 26, 1910; nest a large mass of
small twigs, straw, etc., lined with feathers and snake skin, in martin box,
50 ft. up on windmill tower in farm yard. Five eggs, slightly incubated.
(L. S. G.) Also found nesting in natural cavity in tree in farm yard at
Barachias.

86. Sayornis phoebe. Pua@sr. ‘Tick Birp.’— Tolerably com-
mon winter resident, arriving in October and departing late March or early
April. Found in almost any situation.

87. Myiochanes virens. Woop Pewee. ‘Tick Brrp.’— Com-
mon summer resident. Preferred habitat, in Autauga Co., pine thickets.
Found commonly in deciduous woods in Montgomery Co. Its plaintive
note is one of the most characteristic sounds of the long summer days.
Breeding record: Autauga Co., near Autaugaville, May 30, 1910; nest of
weed-stems and lichens, 20 ft. above ground, saddled 8 ft. out on small limb
of small long-leaf pine in pine thicket on dry hillside; three eggs, moder-
ately incubated. (L.S. G.)

88. Empidonax virescens. AcapIAN FLycaTcHER.— Common sum-
mer resident of swampy woods and banks of streams. Breeding record:
Bear Swamp, May 28, 1912; nest loosely built of moss, hair and spider
webs, 12 ft. above ground on terminal twigs of large limb of water oak;
three fresh eggs. (L.S. G.)

89. Cyanocitta cristata florincola. FiLormpa Biur Jay. ‘ Jay-
BirD.’— Abundant permanent resident, preferring thickets. Breeding

226 GOoLsAN AND Hott, Birds of Alabama. heen

record: Barachias, April 22, 1906; five slightly incubated eggs in nest of
twigs, cotton and mud, placed 9 ft. up in pear tree in orchard. (E.G. H.)
Near Autaugaville, April 26, 1910; nest of rather large twigs and mud,
lined with grass and rootlets; 30 ft. up in large post oak in farm yard;
four fresh eggs. (L.S. G:)

90. Corvus brachyrhynchos paulus. Howell. SourHern Crow.1—
Tolerably common permanent resident. Numbers greatly reduced during
last 20 years and experience has taught them to be very wary. Breeding
record: Bear Swamp, March 23, 1910; nest of large sticks, lined with bark,
pine needles, smaller sticks, grass and mud; 52 ft. up in crotch of pine;
four fresh eggs. (L.S. G.)

91. Dolichonyx oryzivorus. Bopsouink. ‘Rick Birp.’ ‘Oar
Birp.’ — Observed in Autauga Co., only between dates of about April 20
and June 10. Quite abundant in May in oat fields near Bear Swamp
where sometimes hundreds congregate, doing considerable damage to the
oats which are at that season in the milk. Occurs quite numerously also
in Montgomery Co.

92. Molothrus ater ater. Cowsnrirp.— Seen occasionally during
July and August near Bear Swamp feeding most unconcernedly among
cows in the pastures. In winter both sexes join the flocks of Red-winged
Blackbirds which rove over the country.

93. Agelaius pheniceus predatorius.2 REep-wiINnGED BLACKBIRD.
— Permanent resident, common in favorable localities. More abundant
in winter, occurring frequently in flocks of hundreds, occasionally thousands
(in Montgomery Co.). Apparently being replaced during winter in
Autauga Co., by the Rusty Blackbird, as the latter is becoming more
abundant and the Red-wing less so. Mixed flocks of males and females
and Cowbirds frequently seen and also often observed associated with
grackles. Nesting data: Autaugaville, May 11, 1912; nest of grass and a
little trash, 20 in. above water 8 in. deep, in bunch of marsh grass, near a
lumber yard; three moderately incubated eggs. (L. 8S. G.) Subspecies
pheniceus also, may possibly breed here. A female (W. C. Avery No. 70)
in the State University Museum was taken at Greensboro (much to the
north of us) on June 2.

94. Sturnella magna magna. MrapowLarK.— Occurs as a winter
resident.

95. Sturnella magna argutula. SouTHERN MEADOWLARK. ‘FIELD
Larx.’— Common permanent resident in Autauga County, much
more abundant in Montgomery County, where the great open hay fields
are fairly alive with them. Sings through the winter. Breeding
records: Barachias, June 2, 1907; five incubated eggs in arched nest of

1cf. Auk, 1914, p. 115.

2cf Mearns, Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., 1911, p. 227. A. p. pheniceus said to =
floridanus of the A.O. U. Check-List and pheniceus of the Check-List becomes
predatorsus.

Vol. |
1914

GoLsaNn AND Hott, Birds of Alabama. 227
grasses in depression in open hay field. (E.G. H.) Autauga Co., near
Booth, May 15, 1910; nest of fine grass, arched with coarse grass in depres-
sion under bunch of grass and two thistles in open pasture; four eggs, heavily
incubated. (L. S. G.)

96. Icterus spurius. OrcHARD OrIOoLE.— Common summer resi-
dent of orchards, hedge rows, thickets, etc. Breeding record: Barachias,
June 6, 1907; semi-pensile nest of green grasses, lined with thistle down 10
ft. up in small hackberry hanging over slough in open field; five fresh eggs.
The green grass of the nest was hardly distinguishable from the leaves of
the tree, even at close range. An occupied nest of a Kingbird was in the
same tree. (EH. G. H.)

97. Euphagus carolinus. Rusty Biacksirp.— Abundant winter
resident, preferring swamps, moist meadows, etc. Apparently increasing
in numbers (Autauga Co.).

98. Quiscalus quiscula quiscula. Purrte Grackir. ‘Crow
BLAcKBIRD.’ — Permanent resident in favorable localities. Abundant
in winter and generally distributed in large flocks. Near Autaugaville all
nests found were in old woodpeckers’ holes in dead pines standing in
water, where some dozen pairs regularly breed. Data: Autaugaville
April 28, 1912; nest a large mass of coarse grass, lined with finer grass, in
old enlarged woodpecker’s hole in dead pine in marsh; four considerably
incubated eggs. (L.8. G.)

99. Quiscalus quiscala seneus. Bronzep GrackLE. ‘Crow
Buacksirb.’ — Found in company with the Purple Grackle in flocks in
the winter.

100. Carpodacus purpureus purpureus. PurpLte Fincu.— Ob-
served to frequent hillsides and fields contiguous to Bear Swamp; some
even seen in barn yards, between Jan. 2 and Mar. 17, 1912. Observed
occasionally during severe winters in past years (Autauga Co.).

101. Passer domesticus domesticus. ENG.LisH Sparrow. ‘ Town
Birp.’ — Very abundant about towns and also in the country about houses,
stables, etc. Permanent resident.

102. Loxia curvirostra minor. Crossprtu.— Flock of 25 or 30 seen
feeding in a red juniper tree in a farm yard near Bear Swamp about 1883;
several taken. No record since.

103. Astragalinus tristis tristis. GotprincH. ‘ Witp Canary.’
“Lerruce Brrp.”— Common permanent resident. Summer habitat:
Moist pastures and old fields and woods bordering streams and ponds.
Generally distributed in winter (Autauga Co.). Not so well known in
Montgomery Co.

104. Pocecetes gramineus gramineus. VrsPER SparRow. ‘GRASS
Sparrow.’ — Very common winter resident of grassy fields, associated
generally with the Savannah Sparrow.

105. Passerculus sandwichensis savanna. SavaNNau SPARROW.
‘Grass Sparrow.’ — Abundant winter resident of grassy fields, associ-
ated generally with Vesper Sparrows.

228 GoLsaNn AND Hott, Birds of Alabama. ati

106. Ammodramus savannarum australis. GrassHoppER Spar-
row.— Taken occasionally at Barachias, Montgomery Co. Habits not
well known. Apparently frequents sedge fields.

107. Zonotrichia albicollis. Wuirr-rHroaTepD Sparrow. ‘ YEL-
LOW-HEADED Sparrow.’ — Abundant winter resident of briers, thickets
and fence rows.

108. Spizella passerina passerina. Cuippinc Sparrow.— Tolera-
bly common permanent resident. Habitat: Dry woods, fields, etc. Breed-
ing record: Bear Swamp, May 17, 1910: three fresh eggs; nest of weed
stems and grass, lined with hair and moss, 16 ft. up in post oak and 10 ft.
out on branch; tree on edge of swamp. (L.S. G.)

109. Spizella pusilla pusilla. Fretp Sparrow. ‘ Grass SPARROW.’
— Common permanent resident of fields and open country in general.
Breeding records: 33 miles 8. E. of Montgomery, April 30, 1905; three
eggs in nest of fine grass on ground in hay field; incubation advanced.
(E.G. H.) Bear Swamp, May 7, 1910; nest of grass, loosely built, lined
with finer grass, 2 ft. up in small cluster of sweet gum bushes in edge of
swamp; four slightly incubated eggs. Within 6 ft. of Towhee’s nest on
ground. (L. 5S. G.)

110. Junco hyemalis hyemalis. SLare-coLorep Junco. ‘SNow-
BIRD.’ ‘ WHITE-TAILED SPARROW.’ — Common winter resident. Found
in small flocks, sometimes associating with Field, Chipping and White-
throated Sparrows, generally about bushy places.

111. Peucza estivalis bachmani. BacHuman’s Sparrow.— Rather
uncommon permanent resident; more in evidence in spring and summer.
Known to breed, but no sets taken by us.

112. Melospiza melodia melodia. Sone Sparrow.— Common win-
ter resident of weedy pastures and old fields, invariably near water. Gen-
erally associated with Swamp Sparrows.

113. Melospiza georgiana. Swamp Sparrow.— Abundant winter
resident of damp situations generally, but has also been taken on dry hill-
sides. Prefers wet, weedy bottoms.

114. Passerella iliaca iliaca. Fox Sparrow.— Uncommon winter
resident.

115. Pipilo erythrophthalmus erythrophthalmus. TowHrr.—
‘ JoreE.’ — Common winter resident. It is difficult to determine whether
most of our winter Towhees are subspecies erythrophthalmus or canaster,
but as three out of four birds taken in December and January proved to be
canaster we are inclined to believe that this form predominates. If this
is true, then canaster certainly migrates, because Towhees are vastly more
numerous with us in winter than in summer.

116. Pipilo erythrophthalmus canaster Howell. Ataspama Tow-
HEE.! ‘JorEE.’— Uncommon permanent resident; abundant in winter,

icf. Auk, 1914, p. 115.

ian | GoLsan AND Hott, Birds of Alabama. 229
when thickets and brief patches are fairly alive with them, associated with
White-throated Sparrows. Breeding records: Bear Swamp, Autauga Co.
June 23, 1909; nest of grass and pine needles, enveloped in oak and beech
leaves, 73 ft. from ground in vine-covered bush; three eggs, one pipped and
other two rotten. (L.S.G.) Another nest discovered May 7, 1910, on
ground under muscadine vine in Bear Swamp, contained four fresh eggs.
(i. 5. 'G.)

117. Cardinalis cardinalis cardinalis. Carpinau. ‘ Repprrp.’ —
Very common permanent resident; breeding from April 10 to August 20.
An inhabitant of thickets and brier-patches throughout the woods and
swamps. Breeding records: Barachias, April 10, 1908; nest of grasses
and leaves in plum tree, about 3 ft. above ground in open field; three fresh
eggs. (E.G.H.) Autauga Co., near Autaugaville, April 18, 1909; nest
of leaves, pieces of bark and little sticks on vine-covered mock orange limb
over thickety ditch; three fresh eggs. (L. S. G.)

118. Zamelodia ludoviciana. Rosk-BREASTED GROSsBEAK.— Male
taken at Barachias, April 26, 1909; female seen May 2, 1913.

119. Guiraca cerulea cerulea. Biur Grosspeax.— Common sum-
mer resident of old fields, thickets and hedge rows. Data: Four miles
S. E. of Montgomery, July 3, 1908; nest of leaves, paper, weeds and grass,
lined with grass and horse hair, placed in crotch about 5 ft. up in osage
orange hedge on roadside; four nearly hatched eggs. (E.G. H.) Au-
tauga Co., near Autaugaville, June 6, 1909; nest of leaves, weed stems and
wool, lined with rootlets and a little hair, 2 ft. up in blackberry briers on
open hillside; three eggs considerably incubated. (L. 8. G.)

120. Passerina cyanea. Inpico Buntinc. ‘Swamp BLUEBIRD.’—
‘Common summer resident of old fields and ditch banks, preferring damp sit-
uations. Data: Barachias, June 4, 1908; nest of grass and leaves, lined
with fine grass, suspended 3 ft. from ground in crotch of hackberry bush
on ditch bank in open hay-field; three eggs, incubation just begun.
(E.G.H.) Autauga Co., near Autaugaville, May 22,1910; compact nest
of cane leaves and weed stems, lined with fine grass and wool, firmly
fastened 4 ft. up in clump of sweet gum bushes on edge of swamp and
cultivated field; three fresh eggs. (L.S. G.)

121. Spiza americana. DickcisseL.— Rather common summer res-
ident of the hay fields of Montgomery Co.; rare in Autauga Co. Data:
Barachias, June 20, 1909; nest of weed stems, lined with grasses, 2 ft. up
in small bush in hay field; four eggs, very slightly incubated. (E. G. H.)
Autauga Co., near Autaugaville, May 14, 1911; nest of weed stems, grass
and cotton, 2 ft. up in oak bush growing out of drain ditch in large open
field; four slightly incubated eggs. (L. 8S. G.)

122. Piranga erythromelas. Scartet TANAGER.— Known only as
a spring migrant. Not common.

123. Piranga rubra rubra. Summer Tanacer. ‘Bere Brrp.’
‘Summer Reppirp.’ — Abundant summer resident, generally distributed.
Data: Autauga Co., near Autaugaville, May 19, 1912; four considerably

230 Gorsan anv Hout, Birds of Alabama. ‘on

incubated eggs in nest of weed stems and grass, lined with clean, white
straw; nest 5 ft. from ground, 6 ft. out on limb of post oak on wooded
hillside. (L. 8. G.)

124. Progne subis subis. Purpre Martin. ‘Gourp Martin.’
“ Martin.” — Common summer resident, distribution depending upon
preparations made for it. Not known to breed except in gourds or bird
boxes erected near farm houses. Data: Autaugaville, May 28, 1911;
nest a few sticks and oak leaves in bird box at negro’s house on edge of
swamp. Five heavily incubated eggs. (L.S. G.)

125. Hirundo erythrogastra. Barn SwaLLtow.— Occurs regularly
in migrations. Has been reported as late as May 6.

126. Iridoprocne bicolor. Tree Swattow.— We are unable to find
a record of this swallow in our note-books, though it undoubtedly occurs.
“A.M. R.” in Forest and Stream (Vol. XX, No. 17, p. 323) says it was
*‘ occasionally seen on the Alabama River ” at Montgomery.

127. Riparia riparia. Bank SwaLtow. ‘Sanp Martin.’ — Found
breeding in bluffs of Alabama River at Washington Ferry, May 5, 1895;
two fresh eggs in cavity at end of 18 in. burrow; set incomplete. Bird
taken from nest. (L.S. G.)

128. Stelgidopteryxserripennis. RovuGH-wINcEDSwaLitow. ‘SAND
Martin.’ — Occurs in some numbers during spring and summer. No
authentic nesting record, but most probably the species breeds here.
(Autauga Co.).

129. Bombycilla cedrorum. Crpar Waxwinc. ‘CEDARBIRD.’
‘Seau.’ — Rather common winter resident, tarrying until June. Irregu-
lar however

130. Lanius ludovicianus ludovicianus. LoGGrERHEAD SHRIKE.
‘ButcHer Birp.’ ‘FrReNcH Mockincpirp.’ ‘ Catsirp.’ — Common
permanent resident, apparently most numerous in winter. They do a
great deal of good by destroying large numbers of grasshoppers, large beetles
and even mice. On the prairies of Montgomery Co., especially, they are
indefatigable in the destruction of grasshoppers. Data: Barachias,
May 26, 1908; nest of weed stems, lined with wool, thistle down, leaves,
grass, and rootlets, 33 inches wide by 2 inches deep, placed 15 ft. up on hori-
zontal branch of hackberry; five fresh eggs. (E.G.H.) Autauga Co.,
near Autaugaville, April 2, 1910; large, well-buiJt nest of briers and plum
twigs, lined with grass, hair and feathers, 53 ft. up in crotch of haw bush on
ditch bank in old field; five heavily incubated eggs. (L.’S. G.) ;

131. Vireosylva olivacea. Rep-EYED Vireo. ‘ Hancine Birp.’ —
Common summer resident of groves and the more open woods. Data:
Autauga Co. near Autaugaville, May 26, 1910; nest of bark, plant fiber,
etc. lined with grass, suspended between fork of sweet gum 8 ft. over
dry ditch through old field; three nearly fresh eggs. (L.S.G.).

132. Lanivireo flavifrons. YELLOW-THROATED VIREO.— Rather com-
mon summer resident, frequenting thicker woods and taller trees than
the Red-eyed. One nest discovered with four almost grown young on

ai

as GoLsANn AND Ho xt, Birds of Alabama. 231

May 15,1910. Typical vireo nest, swinging from branchlets of sweet gum
tree on edge of Bear Swamp, Autauga Co. (L.S. G.)
133. Lanivireo solitarius subsp. BLuE-HEADED VIREO.— One seen
_ in edge of Bear Swamp on November 25, 1912.

134. Vireo griseus griseus. WHITE-EYED VIREO. ‘ HANGING
Birp.’ — Common summer resident of swamps and damp thickets. Es-
pecially numerous in Bear and Catoma Swamps where his energetic ‘‘ Ship-
it-to-the-railroad, Ship!” can be heard at any hour of the day during the
hotsummer months. Data: Barachias, May 17, 1909; four young in typi-
cal vireo nest suspended from fork of blackberry brier in patch in damp
woods. (E.G. H.) Autaugaville, May 1, 1910; nest a beautiful cup-
shaped structure of corn shucks, weed stems, and lichens, lined with fine
grass, suspended in small fork of alder limb in bush-grown marsh; four
heavily incubated eggs. (L. S. G.)

135. Mniotilta varia. Buack anp WHITE WARBLER.— Rather com-
mon summer resident, more abundant in spring. Only nest recorded dis-
covered April 25, 1891, near Autaugaville; four eggs, very slightly incu-
bated, in well made nest in hollow under roots of small bush leaning out over
wooded hillside. (L. 8. G.)

136. Protonotaria citrea. PRorHonorary WARBLER. ‘SWAMP
YELLOWBIRD.’ — Common summer resident of swamps. Data: Autau-
gaville, June 16, 1912; five well-incubated eggs in cavity of small, live beech
over creek. Cavity filled to depth of one foot or more with moss and
trash and a nice little nest cupped into it about 24 in. below entrance;
lined with black rootlets and fine weed stems. (L.S.G.)

137. Helinaia swainsoni. Swarnson’s WarBLeR.— Rare summer
resident of Bear Swamp. A pair observed April 15, 1912. (L.S. G.)

138. Helmitheros vermivorus. Worm-fatTinc WaRrBLeR.— Taken
at Barachias, May 1, 1913.

139. Vermivora bachmani. Bacuman’s WarBLeR.— One _ seen
April 16 and another Aug. 26, 1912, Autaugaville. (L.S.G.)

140. Vermivora pinus. Biue-wincep WarBLeER.— One pair ob-
served throughout the early summer of 1912 and as late as July, in creek
swamp at Autaugaville.

141. Compsothlypis americana americana. ParuLa WARBLER.—
Tolerably common summer resident of swamps and low woods, more
abundant in spring. Eggs once taken at Barachias, but no data available.

142. Dendroica estiva estiva. YELLow WarBLEeR.— Very uncom-
mon about Bear Swamp; recorded also from Barachias. One nest taken
about June 20, 1903, near Autaugaville, but unfortunately the record has
been lost; female was taken and male seen.

143. Dendroica coronata. Myrrte Warsier— Common winter
resident.

144. Dendroica magnolia. MacnoriA Warpier.— Observed dur-
ing spring migrations near Prattville, Autauga Co.

145. Dendroica cerulea. CrRULEAN WARBLER.— One pair seen in
trees on river bank, Autauga Co., May 11, 1913, apparently nesting.

x

232 GousaNn AND Hott, Birds of Alabama. Au

146. Dendroica pensylvanica. CHESTNUT-SIDED WARBLER.— Fine
male taken at Barachias, April 29, 1913, and another seen next day in
Catoma Swamp.

147. Dendroica striata. Biack-poLt WarBLer.— Male taken at
Barachias, April 22, 1913, in open woods.

148. Dendroica fusca. BiackpurNIAN WaARBLER.— Common dur-
ing spring migrations in Autauga Co. One seen as late as May 12, 1912.

149. Dendroica dominica dominica. YrLLOw-rTHROATED WaArR-
BLER.— Rather common spring and summer resident. Prefers large growth
woods, both hills and Jowlands (Autauga Co.).

150. Dendroica virens. BuLack-rHroaTED GREEN WARBLER. Male
seen near Prattville, April 27, 1913, and specimen taken at Barachias,
April 30.

151. Dendroica vigorsi. Pine WarBLEeR. ‘YELLOW PINE Birp.’—
Rather common permanent resident. It is one of the few birds that sings
throughout the long, hot summer days, and even the chill of mid-winter
is not enough to dampen its ardor. Data: Barachias, April 30, 1909;
small compact nest of grasses and very small weed-stems, lined with hair,
thistle down and several feathers; saddled on extreme end of limb of
small pine, 20 ft. above ground in mixed woods; four moderately incubated
eggs. (E.G.H.) Bear Swamp, April 3, 1911; nest 35 ft. up in pine on
edge of swamp; four fresh eggs; nest completed a week or more before
first egg was laid. (L.S. G.)

152. Dendroica palmarum palmarum. Paum WarsiLer.— Occurs
in considerable numbers during spring migrations, tarrying several weeks.
Subspecies hypochrysea very probably occurs.

153. Dendroica discolor. Prarrizs Warsiter.— Common summer
resident, arriving generally in March. Prefers dry hillsides covered with
shrubby growth. Data: Near Autaugaville, June 18, 1909; nest of soft
plant fiber, lined with fine grasses, 4 ft. up on leaning post oak sapling on
scrubby hillside; three nearly fresh eggs. Another nest discovered May 12,
1912, contained three eggs. (L.S. G.)

154. Seiurus aurocapillus. Oven-pirp.— One taken at Barachias,
May 1, 1913, in heavy undergrowth.

155. Seiurus noveboracensis subsp. WatTer-Turusu.— Taken at
Barachias, April 22 and 30, 1913. Both subspecies noveboracensis and
notabilis may occur.

156. Seiurus motacilla. Lovuistana Watrr-THrusaH.— Uncommon
spring and summer resident of swamps (Autauga County).

157. Oporornis formosus. Kentucky WarsLer. — A few pairs
breed every year in the vicinity of Bear Swamp; also found breeding in
Catoma Swamp. Data: Catoma Swamp, near Barachias, April 22,
1906; four fresh eggs in nest on ground at foot of a cane, within about
2 ft. of an old swamp road; nest a small, compact structure of black root-
lets inclosed in a loose mass of cane leaves. (E.G. H.)

158. Geothlypis trichas ignota. Fiorina YELLOw-THROAT.— Com-

Bi

Ee ime " GousANn AND Hout, Birds of Alabama. 233

mon permanent resident, more abundant in spring and summer. Nesting
data: Bear Swamp, May 15, 1910; nest of fine grass upon cane leaves in
bunch of broom sedge, 3 in. above ground, in sedge field adjoining swamp;
four eggs, slightly incubated. (L. 8. G.) Subspecies trichas probably
occurs during migrations.

159. Icteria virens virens. Y®rLLOwW-BREASTED CHat.— Common
spring and summer resident of thickets about the fields. In Autauga Co.,
always near water. Data: Near Montgomery, June 3, 1907; nest of
grasses, 3 ft. up in osage orange bush on roadside; four eggs, well incu-
bated. (E.G.H.) Near Autaugaville, May 12, 1912; four fresh eggs in
nest of grasses, etc., 18 in. above ground in open woods. (L. 8. G.)

160. Wilsonia citrina. Hooprp Warsier.— Common spring and
summer resident of swamps and damp woods. Data: Bear Swamp,
Autauga Co., May 28, 1909; nest of weed stems, pine needles and cane
leaves, lined with fine plant fibers, 2} ft. up in shrub, in thick, boggy swamp;
three eggs, slightly incubated. (L. 8. G.)

161. Setophaga ruticilla. Repsrarr.— Occurs commonly in both
counties during migrations and probably breeds. It was observed in Bear
Swamp almost constantly from April 1 until July 10, 1913.

162. Anthus rubescens. Pirit. ‘ Prarrin Sparrow.’ — Common
winter resident. Prefers the old fields in Autauga Co., commonly following
the plow in winter and spring. A typical winter bird of the open prairies
of Montgomery Co., where it is abundant, generally occurring in loose
flocks of 25 to 150.

163. Mimus polyglottos polyglottos. Mockinapirp. —Common
premanent resident, preferring the vicinity of habitations. Extreme nest-
ing dates, April 16, and June 27. Data: May 5, 1907, near Pratt-
ville; four fresh eggs; nest of twigs, lined with fine rootlets, placed in tangle
of Smilax briers in haw bush about 6 ft. above ground. Bush in open
pasture hardly 20 yds. from stables. (EH. G. H.)

164. Dumetella carolinensis. Carsirp.— Irregular summer resi-
dent of both counties, generally more or less common. Has been observed
in Montgomery Co., on March 24, 1912, and January 6, 1913. Stragglers
may spend the winter. Data: June 1, 1905, Carter Hill Road, 34 miles
out of Montgomery; nest of twigs and leaves, about 7} ft. up in osage
orange hedge on roadside; three eggs, incubation advanced. (HK. G. H.)
May 21, 1911, near Prattville; nest of grass and small twigs, 6 ft. up in
alder bush in wet pasture; four fresh eggs. (L. S. G.)

165. Toxostoma rufum. Brown TurasHer. ‘ THRASHER.’ —
Commonly spoken of as ‘‘ Brown Thrush,”’ when an attempt is made by the
average person to be particularly correct. Very common permanent resi-
dent of briers, thickets, hedge rows, swamps, etc. Data: April 14, 1907,
near Prattville; nest of twigs about 8 ft. up in bush growing in midst of
brier patch on edge of cultivated field; four eggs. (E.G. H.) April 28,
1909, Barachias; three young, pin-feathers just started, in nest of twigs,
about 9 ft. up in crotch of haw tree. (E. G. H.)

234 GoLsaNn AND Hott, Birds of Alabama. ren

166. Thryothorus ludovicianus ludovicianus. CaroLiInA WREN.
‘WreEN.’ — Common permanent resident, preferring no particular habi-
tat, though perhaps found oftener in swamps in winter. Persistent singer.
Data: April 8, 1911, Bear Swamp; nest about 2 in. above ground, in small
clump of bushes, vines, etc., made of black rootlets and lined with hair and
snake skin; five slightly incubated eggs. (L. 8. G.)

167. Thryomanes bewicki bewicki. Brwick’s WREN. ‘ WREN.’
— Common winter resident, exhibiting a fondness for brush heaps, and
piles of fuel wood about yards. It is much more confiding than the Carolina
Wren and it is not at all unusual for it to hop on the window-sill or doorstep.

168. Nannus hiemalis hiemalis. WintTeER Wren.— An uncommon
winter resident of swamps, inhabiting brush heaps, logs, fallen tree tops,
etc.

169. Cistothorus stellaris. SHort-si~tLED Marsa Wren.— Appar-
ently very uncommon, though on account of its retiring habits it may be
more numerous than supposed. Specimen taken at Barachias, Jan. 9, 19138.

170. Telmatodytes palustris iliacus. Lone-BILLED Marsh WREN.
— Male taken Oct. 26, 1913, in old field near Autaugaville.

171. Certhia familiaris americana. Brown CrrerpER.— Uncom-
mon winter resident.

172. Sitta carolinensis atkinsi. FLoripaA WHITE-BREASTED NUT-
HATCH.— Rather common permanent resident, much in evidence in early
spring. More numerous in Autauga than in Montgomery Co. Data: Au-
tauga Co., vicinity of Bear Swamp, March 17, 1911; nest of hair, feathers
and fine bark in hole in short, dead limb of large live pine tree on wooded
hillside. Hole about 60 ft. above ground and afoot deep. Five eggs, very
slightly incubated. (L.S. G.)

173. Sitta pusilla. Brown-HEeapep Nutwatcu. ‘ CHA-cHA.’ —
Common permanent resident, more in evidence in spring. Especially -
numerous among old pine snags standing in the fields of Autauga Co.
Not so common in Montgomery Co. Data: near Prattville, April 15,
1906; nest of wool, cotton and pine mast in hole 33 ft. from ground,
in pine snag standing in cultivated field; six eggs, slightly incubated.
(E. G. H.)

174. Beolophus bicolor. Turrep Titmouse. ‘ Tom-tit.’ —
Common permanent resident, preferring dry situations and not averse to
the vicinity of human habitations. Seems to have a fondness for oaks.
Data: Near Autaugaville, July 9, 1909; nest of rotten wood, hair, etc.,
in large, natural cavity in half dead scrub oak on wooded hillside; opening
of cavity about 4 ft. above ground and nest one foot below opening; four
slightly incubated eggs. (L. 8. G.) Near Autaugaville, May 15, 1910;
nest of cotton and very fine grass in natural cavity 7 inches deep, 12 ft.
from ground in post oak in open woods; five fresh eggs. (L. 8. G.)

175. Penthestes carolinensis carolinensis. CAaroLiIna CHICKADEE.
— Common permanent resident, generally distributed throughout woods
and swamps. Data: Barachias, March 29, 1908; nest of lichens, lined

Vere ial GoLsAN AND Hott, Birds of Alabama. 235

with wool and fine grass fibers, in hole 6 in. deep in rotten stump about 2 ft.
high; nest entrance 18 in. above ground; low woods; five eggs, incubation
just begun. (E.G. H.) Near Autaugaville, April 16, 1909; five fresh
eggs; nest in hole in rotten oak stump, 5 ft. above ground on wooded hill-
side. (L.S. G.)

176. Regulus satrapa satrapa. GoLDEN-cROWNED KINGLET.—
Rather common winter resident. Generally found associated with the
Ruby-crowned and often with Chickadees.

177. Regulus calendula calendula. Rusy-crowNep KiInGLET.—
Rather common winter resident, more numerous than the Golden-crowned.

178. Polioptila caerulea cerulea. BuiuE-Gray GNATCATCHER.—
Common summer resident. In Autauga Co., preferring scrub oaks.
Data: Autauga Co., near Booth; April 17, 1910; nest of moss, lichens,
cotton, ete., (much like a hummingbird’s), 4 ft. out on branch of oak, about
22 ft. above ground, on wooded hillside; three slightly incubated eggs.
(L. 8S. G.)

179. Hylocichla mustelina. Woop TurusH. ‘Swamp Sparrow.’
— Very common summer resident, inhabiting alike moist and dry situa-
tions. Data: Booth, April 27, 1908; nest of moss and leaves, lined with
grasses, 8 ft. up in fork of haw bush on roadside in woods; three fresh eggs.
Nest contained no mud. (E. G. H.) Barachias, May 12, 1909; four
incubated eggs in nest of leaves and mud, lined with rootlets, 63 ft. up in
haw bush in woods. (E.G. H.)

180. Hylocichla ustulata swainsoni. OLive-saAckep THRrRusH.—
Two taken April 30, 1913, in low woods-pasture at Barachias. Two more
taken in same place May 2.

181. Hylocichla guttata pallasi. Hermir THruse. ‘Swamp Spar-
Row.’ — Rather common winter resident, found in summer haunts of the
Wood Thrush.

182. Planesticus migratorius migratorius. Rosin.— Abundant
winter resident.

183. Planesticus migratorius achrusterus. SourHERN Rosin.—
Rare breeder. Two pairs nested in 1890 in yard of Mr. John L. Cobbs in
Montgomery. (W.C. Avery, Am. Field, XXXV, 1891, page 55.)

184. Sialia sialis sialis. BLursirp.— Common permanent resident.
Almost exterminated by severe winter of 1894-1895, but gradually in-
creasing generally. Considerably smaller numbers of breeding birds ob-
served during spring and summer of 1912, in Autauga Co., than in past few
years. Data: Autauga Co., near Prattville, April 15, 1906; nest mere
bunch of dried grass and feathers in hole 63 ft. up in pine stump in open pas-
ture; five fresh eggs. (E.G.H.) Vicinity of Bear Swamp, Autauga Co.,
May 31, 1909; four nearly fresh eggs in well made nest of grass in hole
10 ft. up in dead elm in cornfield on edge of swamp. (L.S. G.)

236 Wriaut, Acadian Chickadees in Massachusetts. [ ree

ACADIAN CHICKADEES (PENTHESTES HUDSONICUS
LITTORALIS) IN BOSTON AND VICINITY IN
THE FALL OF 1913.

BY HORACE W. WRIGHT.

AN unprecedented incursion of Acadian Chickadees into the
territory about Boston and in Eastern Massachusetts began to be
observed on October 29, and their presence has been recorded in
various localities throughout the month of November and to the
period of midwinter, 1914. On the date above named three indi-
viduals were seen in South Sudbury not far from the Wayside Inn
at a roadside bordered with a considerable extent of white pine
growth. Their characteristic tones in calling at once made identi-
fication easy. This occurrence in itself was unusual, for I knew of
no previous record of even three birds of this species having been
seen together in Eastern Massachusetts. In November, 1904,
I had seen four birds in as many different localities between the
Ath and 25th days (Auk, XXII, Jan., 1905, p. 87). The records
of other observers, which are within my knowledge by publication,
are of a single individual, or in one instance two birds, and of but one
bird, rarely two, in a season, in years rather widely separated.

It was with increased interest, therefore, that two days later,
October 31, I met two more Acadian Chickadees, one in the Law-
rence woods at West Medford in growth of red cedar, and the
second near the western shore of Spot Pond in Middlesex Fells,
Stoneham, in white pine and oak growth. On the following day,
November 1, three more birds were found in cedar-grown pastures
in Belmont, two being seen together moving from one red cedar
to another in company with Black-capped Chickadees, and the
third bird a quarter of a mile farther on in similar growth. Upon
visiting the Public Garden on the next day, November 2, within
a few minutes of my entrance, the voice of hudsonicus was heard,
and the bird was presently seen in an English hawthorn, calling
sufficiently often to reveal its movement from this tree to others,
all deciduous, for there are no permanent evergreens within the
Garden. Two Brown Creepers were this bird’s nearest companions.

oan Ht Wriaut, Acadian Chickadees in Massachusetts. 237
Two hours later the voice of hudsonicus was heard at Charlesgate,
proceeding from a bird closely pursued by a House Sparrow along
the embankment bordering the Charles River Basin. On a visit
to the Melrose section of the Fells on the following day, November
3, three more birds were seen, two feeding upon stalks of golden rod
at the border of woodland, and the third a mile distant in the Med-
ford section in young white pines.

Up to this time thirteen individuals had been seen in a period of
six days in nine different localities. On November 6 in a walk
through Wayland into the border of East Sudbury the voice, now
come to be not infrequently heard, revealed a bird once again in
red cedar growth, among Golden-crowned Kinglets and Black-
capped Chickadees, with Fox Sparrows scratching on the ground
and a Winter Wren occasionally scolding and appearing among
the stones of the pasture wall. A week later, November 13,
four birds were seen in the Belmont pastures feeding together on
stalks of golden rod, patches of which stood among the not thickly
growing red cedars. The four were observed at one and the same
view several times as they successively moved from one patch to
another. When occasionally they flew into the cedars, it was but
to return presently to the golden rod. They called scarcely at all,
but fed silently. No Black-capped Chickadees were in the im-
mediate vicinity, but Goldcrests flitted among the cedars. On
November 18 a bird, apparently alone, was seen at the extreme
northern end of the Fells in the Winchester section in cedar and
pitch pine growth; and a mile distant on Bear Hill the voice of
another was heard among the cedars.

On November 22 I again very leisurely traversed the cedar-
juniper-grown pastures of Belmont, which constitute an area of
half a square mile or more, with the definite intent of scoring as
far as possible the exact representation of hudsonicus within its
range. The result was nine birds, namely, 2+2+1+2+1-+1.
These were all moving from one cedar to another, or feeding upon
stalks of weeds, or picking seeds on the ground. In the locality
where the four birds had been feeding together on the 13th, no
hudsonicus was noted, but among the Golden-crowned Kinglets
was an Orange-crowned Warbler well revealed on a barberry bush,
and among the rocks in the glen was a Winter Wren. In a trip to

238 Wricut, Acadian Chickadees in Massachusetts. [ ‘Ago

North Scituate on November 25 with Mr. Richard M. Marble
three birds were seen in an extensive growth of red cedar about a
mile inland from the beach. These were actively moving with
Black-capped Chickadees. Across the highway in thick growth
of horse-briar a Carolina Wren had just been seen, and below the
cedars in a swampy deciduous wood we disturbed a Black-crowned
Night Heron roost, sixteen birds taking flight. On November 26
the call was heard in the Arnold Arboretum in its northern section.

These several records indicate that at least twenty-five different
individuals were noted within the period of October 29 to Novem-
ber 26 inclusive, and, perhaps, five others should be added as not
having been already enumerated. In most instances the calls were
but little heard. The birds have been much less inclined to voice
themselves than is the Black-capped Chickadee. No song note
has been heard on any occasion. Cedar growth proves to be espe-
cially attractive to them. One bird, watched for a time at North
Scituate, was seen to be picking at the green undeveloped berries
of ared cedar. They have mostly been found in trees of low growth,
whether pine or red cedar, and usually at a range below the eye, not
infrequently on stalks of golden rod, and sometimes on the ground.

To my own records I am able to add the records of other observers
who have codperated to adequately emphasize the extent of this
Acadian incursion into this vicinity. They are:

Three birds seen by Mr. William Brewster on his place at Con-
cord, October 27, and observed at intervals up to November 4.

Eight or ten birds seen or heard by Mr. James L. Peters at Har-
vard and vicinity. The first bird noted was in his father’s orchard
in company with Blackcaps on October 27, 28, and 29, appearing
successively at almost the same hour in the afternoon on the three
consecutive days. On November 2, Mr. Peters states, he was
awakened by the notes of an Acadian Chickadee under his window,
perhaps the same bird. On November 4 and 7 two birds were
seen in the orchard regarded as newly arrived. In each of five
other localities, within or near the town of Harvard, Mr. Peters
saw a single bird on dates between October 30 and November 11.
One of these was collected by him, and was identified by Mr. Ou-
tram Bangs as P. h. littoralis.

One bird seen by Miss Anna K. Barry on a farm in Gleasondale,

SE eee

Te | Wricut, Acadian Chickadees in Massachusetts. 239

October 30, “near the edge of a pasture, feeding on the seeds of
golden rod, in company with two Black-capped Chickadees.”’

Three birds, or more, seen by Mr. Outram Bangs in Wenham-
Hamilton on October 30 or 31.

One bird seen by Mr. and Mrs. C. A. Robbins of Onset at
Sagamore Beach on November 2.

Two birds seen by Mr. Richard M. Marble in Harvard Forest,
Petersham, November 4, and on the 15th day “one more.”’

Six birds seen by Dr. Walter Faxon and Dr. Winsor M. Tyler
on the Belmont lands, November 6; five again seen on the Sth.
Dr. Tyler writes, “The five and six birds kept together in a loose
flock, and we thought they were associated with Kinglets rather
than with P. atricapillus. We watched the chickadees from within
three feet and once a bird perched six inches from Mr. Faxon at
the height of his knee.”’ It is very probable that in my own ac-
counting most of these individuals have been enumerated. On
November 20 Dr. Tyler collected one from a flock of four, again
seen in Belmont, for the Harvard University Museum. He states,
“This bird was identified by Mr. Bangs as an extremely small
specimen of P. hudsonicus littoralis,” thus deciding the question
whether our rare visitants were P. h. hudsonicus or P. h. littoralis.

Four birds seen together by Mr. G. B. Wellman on Bear Hill in
the Middlesex Fells, Stoneham, on November 8. Mr. Wellman
writes, “After about one hour spent looking around I at length
heard the voice of hudsonicus on the north side of the hill... .and
came upon four birds, all of them in most beautiful plumage and as
tame as they always are in the mountains. All four were at times
but three feet from my hand. Their sides, it seemed to me, were
of a deeper rufous color than in the summer.” At a distance from
these Mr. Wellman heard the call of a fifth bird.

Five birds seen by Dr. Glover M. Allen with Mrs. Allen in the
Arnold Arboretum on November 22. Dr. Allen states, “The
flock of five was with one Golden-crowned Kinglet among the
spruces at sunset, calling and twittering softly a good deal. Two
went to drink at the little brook, hopping down from a birch to the
water. They kept to the inside of thick spruces rather low down,
but one or two moved out to the ends of the boughs to show
themselves.”” Dr. Allen had seen one bird in the Arboretum on

240 Wricut, Acadian Chickadees in Massachusetts. [ Apuil

November 15, “following,” he states, “a flock of four or five Black-
capped Chickadees and half a dozen Golden-crowned Kinglets.
It was the last to leave Hemlock Hill, crossing the road to the north,
and quickly flitted into a low evergreen silently, then for an instant
into a large white oak, and then quickly darted into another low
evergreen, whence I once heard his characteristic note.”

One bird seen by Miss Annie W. Cobb in Arlington on November
22. Miss Cobb states that the bird was in a pine grove off Forest
St., was first heard in the tall pines and later was seen feeding in
low bushes at the edge of the grove, and that Black-capped Chicka-
dees and Kinglets were its companions.

Two birds seen by Dr. Walter Faxon on Granny Hill in Lexing-
ton, November 24; one seen by Dr. Faxon and Dr. Tyler on the
following day; and two birds again seen by both observers on the
26th. Dr. Tyler states that these three records represent probably
only two birds. He further writes, “We have found the Acadian
Chickadees, as you have, associated with P. atricapillus and Regu-
lus satrapa, frequenting cedar pastures and pine woods; oftenest,
perhaps, feeding in barberry bushes, golden rod, and small gray
birch growth; often too on the ground.”

One bird seen by Mr. F. S. Dane in Lexington im a distant part
of the town from the locality of the other records on November 29.

A bird, on the testimony of Dr. John B. May, brought in to his
sister, a teacher at Gloucester, in a disabled condition, which after
a time revived and was able to fly away, on a day about the last of
November.

Two birds seen by Dr. G. M. Allen by Jamaica Pond on Novem-
ber 30, moving through the elms; no companions with them.
Probably these same two birds were seen by me on December 9 in
planted hemlocks near the pond, and one of them by Mr. H. L.
Barrett on January 7 in the same growth.

On December 10 eight of the company of Belmont birds were
again found by me in a careful search through the juniper-red
cedar-grown pastures. They were either feeding on juniper or on
the ground about it, there being no snow on the surface.

Four birds seen by Mrs. Edmund Bridge in Cohasset, December
9, among growth of cedar and feeding on golden rod stalks.

Three birds seen by Mrs. Bridge and companions on Castle Hill,

ete se | Wricut, Acadian Chickadees in Boston and vicinity. 241

Ipswich, December 27, feeding in the conifers, and again observed
on January 10. The same three birds, undoubtedly, were seen by
Dr. Charles W. Townsend and Mr. Francis H. Allen, on January 11,
gleaning on the larch trees on Castle Hill.

In early February these Acadian Chickadees in the vicinity of
Boston were no longer in evidence. None could be found in the
Arboretum, Olmsted Park, Belmont, Harvard, Lexington, or other
places as far as heard from. The latest record furnished me was
of the Arboretum birds, seen by Dr. G. M. Allen on January 23
among the same conifers in which they had previously been ob-
served. Some were picking on the ground under the thick spruces,
others were in the trees, Dr. Allen states. They were very quiet,
giving only the slight single call-note, not characteristic. Five or
six inches of snow lay upon the surface, but the ground was bare
under the spruces. On the tenth of February a careful search by
Mr. Barrett and myself failed in finding them. On February 2
I had searched the Belmont pastures also without finding any.
Mr. Peters at Harvard saw none after the middle of November,
Dr. Faxon and Dr. Tyler at Lexington none after the first of De-
cember. They seem to havé disappeared with the Golden-crowned
Kinglets, with whom they were the closest companions. These
usually pass mostly out of evidence by early January in the vicinity
of Boston.

Whether the Eastern Massachusetts birds moved farther south
or had begun a return migration northward is an interesting point
remaining undetermined. ‘Bird-Lore’ of February, 1914, page
52, furnishes evidence that the migration in November extended
as far southward as Hartford, Connecticut, two birds having
appeared at the feeding-tray of Miss K. C. Robbins in Wethersfield
on or about November 13 and continuing for some time to make
almost daily visits to her hospitable board. Two other birds were
seen at West Hartford by Mr. George F. Griswold on November
27. Mr. Arthur G. Powers in his Hartford bird-census of December
25 states that he was unable to find a pair of Acadian Chickadees
on that day, although they had been seen only a few days before
and had been seen frequently for a month previous. These Con-
necticut records with a single exception are the first for the state,
as shown by the official publication, ‘The Birds of Connecticut’

242 Wriacut, Acadian Chickadees in Boston and vicinity. [ eet
by John Hall Sage and Louis Bennett Bishop, M. D., the previous
occurrence having been that of a single bird collected by Mr.
Robert Morris, while shooting in a wooded ravine a few miles from
New Haven on November 13, 1875. Warwick, R. I., reported one
bird seen on December 25, “the second record for Rhode Island,”
on the statement of Mr. H. S. Hathaway; and Rhinebeck, N. Y.,
reported two birds in the “ Bird-Lore’ Christmas census.

In September, 1913, the southward movement of Acadian Chick-
adees was observed at Jefferson, N. H., where on the mountains
the species breeds, but is only occasionally noted on the hillsides and
in the valleys. Beginning with the fifth day one, two, or three
birds were observed almost daily in various localities throughout the
month and into early October, some in our immediate neighborhood
on the Highland and three on our place, September 29 and 30.
Their presence indicated an unusual movement, for in no previous
season had the species been as much in evidence among the south-
ward moving migrants.

The records furnished me present an aggregate of over forty in-
dividuals which have been noted by the several observers in fifteen
different towns or distinct localities. These records with my own
aggregate seventy or more individuals; thirty-five of these have
been seen in Boston and its immediate vicinity. The number re-
corded, it would seem probable, must be but a fraction of those
which entered the eastern part of the state, so few localities have
been reported, while others which afford equal attractions to the
species have not been heard from-and probably have lacked ob-
servers. The incursion, therefore, so far as all previous records
show, has been unprecedented, beginning in late October, attain-
ing its maximum in early November, continuing into December and
January, and apparently ending before February.

One suggestion has been offered tentatively as an explanation of
this remarkable flight, namely, that an insect pest, the spruce-bud
worm, a tortricid moth (Tortrix fumiferana), having destroyed the
season’s new growth over extensive areas of spruce and pine forest
in New Brunswick and Maine last summer, these forests were ren-
dered unattractive to, and perhaps incapable of supporting their
natural quota of, Acadian Chickadees, and hence the southward
migration reaching to southern New England.

Sota 4 General Notes. 243

GENERAL NOTES.

The Western Grebe in Ohio.— On Tuesday morning, October 28,
1913, while passing Lake Glacier in Mill Creek Park, near Youngstown,
Ohio, I observed a Grebe on the lake, which I was satisfied was the Western
Grebe, 4ichmophorus occidentalis.

I consulted Mr. Volney Rogers, the Park Superintendent, and he agreed
with me that the appearance of the Western Grebe in this locality was of
sufficient importance to justify the taking of this bird, and on Thursday,
October 30, I shot it.

The skin is now at the Carnegie Museum in Pittsburgh, Pa.— Gro. L.
Forpyce, Youngstown, Ohio.

American Merganser (Mergus americanus) at Boston, Mass. in
Midwinter.— On the Charles River, December 30, 1913, at 8.45 o’clock
A. M. there appeared to be a movement towards the west, that is up the
river, of American Mergansers. There was no wind, although the vane
pointed west. Some skim ice in the river. I first saw eight drakes, and
one female resting on the water near the edge of the ice, they soon took
wing and passed by me. At this time there were three females diving
near the stone wall, and two other females farther out. Then came a
flock of twenty-two or three, about half and half males and females, they
flew past me and were about thirty-five yards high, no notice was taken
by those flying, or those resting on the water of each other. I also saw a
few others resting on the water. During a period of fourteen years I have
never seen so many of these birds in one day in Charles River. Those
heretofore observed being in the spring where the ice breaks up, and the
average seen during those fourteen years would not be more than a dozen
or fifteen a year. On the afternoon of the above date at four and a quarter
o’clock p. M. I saw a lone Ruddy Duck (Frismatura jamaicensis) in brown
plumage.— Grorae H. Mackay, Nantucket, Mass.

Two Unrecorded Specimens of the European Widgeon from
Massachusetts.— As the European Widgeon (Mareca penelope) has so
rarely been taken in Massachusetts I wish to record a specimen in my
collection taken at Ipswich, on October 25, 1909. The bird, an immature
male, was shot by a gunner and sent into the Boston markets where it was
recognized by Mr. John H. Hardy, Jr., through whose kindness it came
into my possession.

Mr. A. C. Bent permits me to record another specimen, in similar plum-
age taken at Bridgewater on November 9, 1903, by Mr. J. E. Bassett and
now in his collection (No. 1886, Coll. A. C. Bent). This is the first record
of the occurrence of the species in Bristol County.— F. Seymour Hersey,
Taunton, Mass.

244 General Notes. [par

Notes on the Habits of an Old-squaw ( Harelda hyemalis) and two
Lesser Scaup Ducks (Aythya affinis).— December 14, 1913, I found ona
a section of the lagoons of Jackson Park, Chicago, Ill., a male Old-squaw
and two female Lesser Scaup Ducks after a change in the weather from
unusually warm and pleasant to cold with a brisk northeast wind. The
Old-squaw remained until December 28; the Scaups were last seen Decem-
ber 22 when ice had formed over a greater part of the lagoon. All of the
birds were tame, and continued about their affairs even when one was
standing on the shore, providing he remained quiet, thus affording an
unusual opportunity for observations on their habits.

It was not possible to watch the birds continuously throughout a day’s
time, but they were observed at varying intervals, which taken together
come close to constituting a day’s time from daybreak to dark and it
was possible to check some observations by a few repeated periods. The
following account, therefore, should give a fair idea of their general be-
havior.

The section of the lagoon on which they alighted is about 275 feet long
and 125 feet wide in its broadest portion, extending in an east and west
direction, at the east end opening on Lake Michigan and connecting on the
west with the long river-like chain of lagoons which traverse the greater
part of Jackson Park mainly from north to south.

The following is a summary of my observations. The Old-squaw was a
quiet, totally silent bird, in contrast to the active Scaups, one of these
at least, being very noisy. In feeding, the Old-squaw remained in deep
water, never coming in so near shore as did the Scaups. The-food, with
the possible exception of the algae about the piling, could not be ascer-
tained. Whatever it is, it would seem to be swallowed under water,
always in the case of the Old-squaw, and with only one exception in the
case of the Scaups. One of these was once seen to be engaged with food
of some sort on coming to the surface after diving. In all probability the
food was mainly animal. On January 13 an immense swarm of sluggish
minnows, extending nearly across the lagoon, was noted at the west bridge,
and these fish would have fallen an easy prey to an expert diver. That
the Old-squaw is more expert in diving than the Scaups is indicated by its
choice of the deeper water, and the much less time occupied in feeding.
The male Scaup which appeared December 27 was once seen to go in close
to shore where the water was too shallow for diving and feed by immersing
its head only.

Whether the birds are active at night is an interesting question. Judging
by their quiet behavior at dusk and their alertness at dawn one would
say SO.

Presumably the occurrence of the Old-squaw with the Scaups was
due to a gregarious instinct rather than to sexual attraction. In general
‘in the various activities the Scaups took the initiative, and paid little
attention to the Old-squaw, finding sufficient company in themselves,
while the Old-squaw followed them about through sheer loneliness. In

Gare P| General Notes. 245

going to a feeding ground the Scaups followed the Old-squaw only when
they themselves were thoroughly hungry, judging by their actions, and
would probably have gone even if he had not. Even when the Old-squaw
did precede, the Scaups were the first to dive. It is not improbable that
the Old-squaw is a faster swimmer than the Scaups, and this may account
for his preceding them at times. It has been noted that when the birds
were thoroughly alarmed, the Old-squaw first tried to escape by swimming,
while the Scaups took wing at once. More often the Old-squaw followed
the Scaups a little way and then turned about, due no doubt to a grega-
rious instinct which was quickly overcome by an impulse to sleep, or the
fact that he was satiated with food. Occasionally he completely ignored
them, and this was at a time when satiety or the sleep impulse or both
were strongest. Almost invariably the Old-squaw would not allow the
Seaups to come too near, and remained about twice as far from them as
they were from each other, at least while inactive, and all were scattered
somewhat while feeding. Generally the Old-squaw moved away when a
Scaup approached him too closely; in one instance he was seen to wake
suddenly and rush at the nearest Scaup with open bill, a phenomenon
I have seen among the ducks in the big flying cage at Lincoln Park,
Chicago.

How strong the gregarious instinct is in ducks is shown in the behavior
of the solitary individuals of different species which alighted on the lagoon
after the Scaups had left, both river ducks and sea ducks. There is little
likelihood of sexual attraction between the members of different subfamilies,
indeed, a Black Duck generally kept to itself at the western end of the
lagoon, being at one period of observation close to a Mallard, a member
of its own subfamily, just on the other side of the bridge, but separated
by a flood-gate.

The gregarious instinct would seem to be further confirmed in the case
of the Old-squaw twice following a gull for a short distance during the
absence of the Scaups, as if mistaking it for a duck. Herrick ! cites a case
of a shrike attempting to impale prey in a maple, under the pressure of a
strong impulse not being able to distinguish the maple from a thorn bush.
This author also states that all intelligence gives way under the presence
of stronger instincts. The case of the Old-squaw and the gull, it seems to
me, is somewhat analagous to that of the shrike— Epwin D. Hutt,
Chicago, Ill.

American Egret (Herodias egretta) in Rhode Island.— Seeing Mr.
Noble’s record of the American Egret on Martha’s Vineyard reminds me
to record the following observation. In August, either on the 15th or 16th,
1913, while crossing the road that skirts the salt marsh just after crossing
Stone Bridge, Tiverton, on to the Island of Rhode Island, I noticed from

1 Herrick, F. H. Instinct and Intelligence in Birds. III. Pop. Sci. Mo.
77: 82-97, 1910.

246 General Notes. el

an automobile a white heron —I think undoubtedly of this species — feed-
ing by one of the pools. Mr. Lyman Underwood, who was spending
the summer in the same township with me (Nonquitt, Mass.), saw several
white herons a day or so later at the same place, as he also passed in his
automobile, and later I was asked by residents of Wareham, Mass., if
white herons should be seen in that locality. Apparently there was a
flight during August, 1913. R. Heser Howe, Jr., Thoreau Museum,
Concord, Mass.

Notes on an Unusual Flight of Stilt Sandpiper (Micropalama
himantopus).— While walking through the Boston Markets on August 12,
1912, I was surprised to find large numbers of Stilt Sandpipers offered for
sale. This species is rather uncommon and although a few generally occur
each fall I had never before seen more than twenty or twenty-five in the
market at one time. On this date nearly every stall had bunches of them
and at one place I saw a large hamper filled with shore-birds nearly all of
which were this species. There were a few Yellow-legs and Ruddy Turn-
stones in the lot but I estimated that there were not less than two hundred
Stilt Sandpipers in this one stall. The proprietor, whom I personally know,
informed me that all came from Ipswich, Massachusetts, or the immediate
vicinity. I could not learn from the other dealers where their birds had
been shipped from but there is little doubt that practically all came from
points along the Massachusetts coast.

The presence of so many birds in the market would seem to indicate an
unusual flight along the coast and the following observations’ made on
Long Island, N. Y., on the same date by my friend, Mr. John Treadwell
Nichols, of the American Museum of Natural History, may throw some
light on the extent of this flight. With his kind permission I quote the fol-
lowing from his letter.

“On August 12, 1912, I observed an unusual flight of Stilt Sandpipers
at Mastic, Long Island. In about three hours time, in the early morning,
approximately 200 birds passed by a single set of stool (decoys). They
were in flocks of varying size, and mixed with them were a very few Lesser
Yellow-legs and Dowitchers. The Stilt Sandpipers taken and observed
(and [ imagine all the rest) were in barred plumage.” — F. Seymour H=R-
sey, Taunton, Mass.

Franklin’s Grouse in Colorado.— While recently securing data and
notes on the ‘“‘game birds” of Colorado from Mr. Bryan Haywood, who
has for years shot these birds all over the west, I was pleased to learn that
Mr. Haywood had shot a Franklin’s Grouse (Canachites franklini) at
Palmer Lake, Colo., in September, 1896. I accept this record unhesitat-
ingly because the bird was shot, and examined, and because Mr. Haywood
is thoroughly familiar with the species, having killed many in Montana.
This bird can be classed only as a straggler in Colorado, and this record is
the first, so far as I know, for the state — W. H. Brereton, Denver, Colo.

Rica pI General Notes. 247

Sharp-shinned Hawk in Maine in Winter.— On January 6, 1914, a
bird was brought to me for identification. It had flown into one of the
storehouses on the post on January 3 and died January 5. It proved to
be a very large male Sharp-shinned Hawk (Accipiter velox).

This is the fifth record of the occurrence of this bird in Maine during
the winter months.— LizuTeENaNnT G. RautpH Meyer, U. S. A., Ft. Mc-
Kinley, Me.

Extreme Emaciation in a Specimen of the Snowy Owl (Nyctea
nyctea).— On the first of January, 1914, I received from Mr. Edward 8.
Schmid, of Washington, D. C., a fine specimen of this owl. The bird had
died about an hour before it came into my hands. It had been captured
in northern Virginia while sitting on a low bush in the woods, the captor
simply walking up to it and slipping a bag over the bird as it sat there,
apparently in a dazed condition.

When I first picked the specimen up it seemed to me to weigh but little
more than a handful of feathers, so light was it. After removing the
entire skin, from base of beak to claws, a most remarkable looking specimen
was presented to my view. The bird had been shot with coarse (No. 4)
shot, apparently a long time before its death, but the pellets were only
in the superficial muscles of the back and pinion; whether they had de-
prived it of flight or not I cannot say. However, it was very clear that
this owl had not eaten anything for a great length of time. All the evi-
dences of extreme emaciation were present, and to a degree never before
witnessed by me in any bird. The stomach was entirely empty, and all
the organs and viscera of the thoracic cavity and abdomen were reduced
almost to a state of atrophy. There was no adipose anywhere, but the
most remarkable sight was the muscles. These were all flabby and of a
very pale flesh-color; and the entire system was reduced almost to its
tendons and fascie. As to the large pectoral muscles, they were so thin
that the sternum and ribs could be seen through them, and I am very sure
they were useless for the purpose of flight.

Sir Richard Owen, in describing the nervous system in birds, makes no
mention of the coracoid bones in owls being pierced, antero-posteriorly,
by a foramen near the middle of their shafts for the passage of a nerve.
This I long ago pointed out to be the case in Speotyto (Bull. U. 8. Geol.

and Geogr. Surv. of the Terr., 1883, p. 107), and in regard to the character:

in this genus I stated: ‘This foramen transmits a branch of that cervical
nerve coming from between the twelfth and thirteenth cervical vertebre.’”

Now in this extremely emaciated Snowy Owl the nerves and vessels:
could all be traced and studied with remarkable ease and celerity. In it,
the aforesaid nerve, passing, as usual, through the coracoid bone, is the
most anterior one of the brachial plexus, with which it is incorporated in
the common sheath, making no anastomotic connections with the other
branches.— R. W. Suureipt, Washington, D. C.

YAS General Notes. [April

Another Species Added to the Avifauna of South Carolina.— On
‘the afternoon of December 15, I heard that a strange bird had been seen,
‘since the morning of the 9th, around Chisolm’s Mill on the Ashley River
‘at the foot of Tradd Street, Charleston, and on going down on the morning
‘of the 16th, I shot the bird, after a chase of ten minutes, as it lit on a side
fence. It proved to be an Arkansas Kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis) a new
species for this state. The bird is a young male in somewhat frayed plum-
age. The flame-patch on the crown is very indistinct.

On dissection I was very much surprised to find that the stomach con-
tained, besides insect remains, a fiddler crab and about a dozen seeds.
The wintcr dearth of insect life probably forced the bird to resort to this
unusual food.

In coming to South Carolina this Kingbird had wandered one thousand
miles east of its regular route. This record is the seventh east of the
Mississippi and the southernmost, by over 400 miles, of the four Atlantic
state records. The skin is now in the Charleston Museum.— E. BuRNHAM
CHAMBERLAIN, Charleston, S.C.

The Arkansas Kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis) in Rhode Island.—
Last fall I spent at Watch Hill, R. I. The migration reached its height
on September 24. I was working towards a small swamp, trying to
count the birds, as the trees, bushes and grass were literally swarming with
them. A large flycatcher suddenly flew out of an oak tree in front of
me, and settled on a dead branch near the ground about 75 feet away.
While on the wing it looked exactly like a Kingbird, and as this would
have been an uncommonly late date I hurried up to get a closer view with
my binoculars. What was my surprise when I discovered that my King-
bird had bright yellow underparts and no white band on the tip of its tail.
There was no doubt but that it was an Arkansas Kingbird. The slate gray
back with a very faint tinge of olive and the absence of any rufous on the
tail distinguished it from the Crested Flycatcher, not to mention that
its shape and flight and habits were totally different. I watched it for
half an hour, several times getting within very close range. This is the
first record for the state of Rhode Island— Lupitow Griscom, New York
City.

Capture of Myiarchus crinitus (Linn.) in Eastern Cuba.— A spec-
imen of the Crested Flycatcher, in fine condition, was shot on February 18,
1913, in the woods at the San Carlos Plantation at Guantdénamo, Oriente
Province. This is the fourth record for the Island, and the first for eastern
Cuba, as Gundlach’s three records are from the western end.— Cuas. T.
RaMSsDEN, Guantanamo, Cuba.

An Unusual Observation on the Crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos) at
Lubec, Maine.— I have seen non-raptorial birds of various species attack
other birds in self defense, or in defense of their nests and young, but

ga | General Notes. YAO

today (December 31, 1913) while on a tour of the local places where
birds are to be found in winter, I made an observation new to me,
and while actually interesting and thrilling, it was exasperating and dis-
appointing. While walking along a stretch of sandy beach with a com-
panion we suddenly flushed a belated shore bird, without having time to
bring our glasses to bear upon it; from the shape of its wing, mode of flight
and general coloration we were quite sure that it was a Sanderling. The
bird took a course directly ahead of us, and along the water’s edge; so we
followed hoping to positively identify it.

Three hundred yards in advance of us, sitting on the beach was a flock
of about two hundred Crows quietly basking in the sun. As soon as our
bird drew near them it swerved out over the water, when one of the Crows
rose and flew directly at it.

The smaller bird dodged repeated attacks and was drawing ahead, when
another Crow at the farther end of the flock, seeing the escape flew out to
intercept it and turned the Sanderling (?) back, giving the first assailant an
opportunity to swoop down and deliver a telling blow with its wing. The
smaller bird fell, but recovered itself before touching the water. Then
to avoid its two assailants it was obliged to fly towards the land and directly
over the large flock of Crows, when about twenty of their number rose in a
bunch and bore the unfortunate to the beach, all endeavoring to get at it
at the same time. As soon as we discovered the little fellow’s real danger,
we ran and shouted, but they did not heed us until close upon them, when
they flew off leaving nothing but a small piece of breast with feathers
attached, the body being carried away.

We followed them up from one place of alighting to another hoping to
find a wing or some part of the body but without suecess.— CLARENCE H.
Cuark, Lubec, Maine. :

Starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) at Providence, R. I.—It may be of
interest to the readers of ‘The Auk,’ in following the movements of the
Starling to know they have appeared in Providence, R. I. My business
requiring my presence in this city for a few weeks, on the morning of
November 23, I started out with my field glass to see what could be seen
here in the line of bird life. In passing through Swan Point Cemetery I was
not a little surprised to encounter a flock of about forty Starlings, many of
them in full summer plumage; they were constantly in song, many
times singing notes quite like our Bluebird. I have had other excellent
observations of them covering a date as late as December 6.

In the same section on December 1, 1912, I found two Mockingbirds
but have failed to record them this season.— E. E. Capuc, Boston, Mass.

Starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) in Cambridge, Mass.— A flock of Starlings
numbering about sixty birds appeared at Fresh Pond in Cambridge, in
late November, 1913. They were first seen by me on the 27th day and
have been successively observed up to the middle of February, the time of

250 General Notes. pee

the writing of this note. Occasionally the flock has been divided and
fewer individuals only have been seen; yet it appears to have remained
essentially intact, for on February 4 and 13 the number was reckoned as
fifty or more. On December 25 seventy-three birds were actually counted,
as they passed in squads in the same direction from one group of trees to
another group. On January 30 one was singing very prettily, perched high
and alone in an oak. This is the first flock to appear in the vicinity of
Boston. A single bird only has been hitherto reported, seen at Squantum
Head, March 26, 1912 (Auk, X XIX, July, 1912, p. 394), which disappeared
and was not further noted. The Cambridge flock has remained in and about
the Fresh Pond reservation. It is interesting that an employee in the park,
who told me that he was fifteen years from Ireland, recognized these birds
at once on their appearance, feeling sure they were what were called in the
Old Country ‘Stares,’ in England, Starlings. He was pleased to have the
identification confirmed.— Horacr W. WricuHt, Boston, Mass.

The Rusty Blackbird (Huphagus carolinus) in Connecticut in Win-
ter.— On January 18, 1914, I observed two Rusty Blackbirds in Edgewood
Park, New Haven, Conn. The birds were in a portion of the park that is
rather swampy in character. These swamps are evidently fed by springs,
as the shallow water does not freeze throughout the year. This makes
the third winter record for this species in Connecticut. The other two are
both December dates and are regarded, probably correctly, as instances of
late fall migration (Birds of Connecticut, 1913, p. 115). It is interesting
to note that both of these December records — one by Mr. C. H. Pangburn
and one by myself — are from this same swampy area in Edgewood Park.—
Aretas A. SAunDERS, New Haven, Conn. —

The Bobolink ( Dolichonyz oryzivorus) as a Conveyer of Mollusca.—
On April 18, 1913, there appeared some flocks of northward bound Bobo-
links; a rare bird at this time of the year, as they usually pass at night,
without stopping, on their northward trip; quite the contrary to their
fall migrating habits, when they stay with us, in great numbers for nearly
a month. I shot three or four birds, all males, and was very much sur-
prised to find live Mollusca among their feathers; having sent some of the
snails to Dr. H. A. Pilsbry, of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Phila-
delphia, for determination, he kindly informed me that they were Succinea
riisei (Pfr.) known from the Islands of St. Croix and Porto Rico, but not
from Cuba. It would be interesting to know the date of arrival of the
Bobolinks at Porto Rico in the Spring of 1913, and thus tell whether the
shells came from there or from St. Croix.— Cuas. T. RAMSDEN, Guan-
tanamo, Cuba.

Cowbird Note.— May 30, 1909, I was lying partly hidden behind a log
at Westerly, R.I., and trying to discover the nest of a pair of Black and

Piola | General Notes. 951

White Warblers (Mniotilta varia) by the actions of the old birds. A short
time after taking up my position a female Cowbird (Molothrus ater) came
flying through the trees and lit but a short distance away. From time to
time I glanced at her to see what she was up to but was unable to see that
she had moved a muscle for some twenty minutes, for which time she re-
mained hunched up as if asleep. Then she flew straight to the nest of a
Red-eyed Vireo (Vireosylva olivacea) which though but ten feet from my
hiding place, was so well concealed that it had escaped my attention. After
remaining on the nest about two minutes she flew out of sight among the
trees. Upon investigation I found the nest to contain two eggs of the
rightful owner and one of the Cowbird.— A. Brazier Howe, Covina, Cal.

Evening Grosbeak (Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina) at Boston,
Mass.— On December 29, 1913, while going through the Arnold Arboretum
looking for birds, a friend and I saw one which we took to be a female
Evening Grosbeak, although we failed to get a good view of it. The next
day I went alone to the same spot and found the bird feeding on the ground
near a hop-hornbeam tree. I approached slowly within two rods of it and
watched it for nearly half an hour. The markings were very distinct in
the bright.sunshine and there was no doubt about its identity. I could
not make out whether it was feeding on grass and weed seeds or something
else. At length on the approach of a man from the opposite direction it
flew up into the hornbeam and from there to the big oak, where I left it.
I saw it again on January 1 and 2 and was told that it was seen in the same
spot December 31. That makes in all five successive days and would
seem to indicate that it intended to stay there for some time.— Epwarp H.
ATHERTON, Roxbury, Mass.

The White-winged Crossbill (Loxia leucoptera) in the District of
Columbia.— Within the close of the rectory of Trinity Episcopal Church
at Takoma Park, D. C., are three scrub pines, Pinus virginiana, of medium
size, densely laden with cones. Two of these, one on each side of the walk
leading to the steps, extend their branches within ten feet of the front
porch where, alone, I was quietly sitting in a rocking chair about 3 Pp. Mm.
October 23, 1913, literally basking in the hospitable rays of the sun rapidly
declining after a bright, but rather brisk, wintry day. I had been on
the porch but a few minutes when I discovered several birds assiduously
searching the cones in the further one of these two trees. Their movements
strangely suggested paroquets and were accentuated by plaintive notes
constantly emitted. They were White-winged Crossbills, eight in number.
They gradually worked their way to the tree directly in front of which I
was sitting, and ultimately reached the very ends of the branches within
ten feet of me. I followed their every movement for upwards of fifteen
minutes. They left the tree precipitately ina body. About three quarters
of an hour later I saw and heard them in a grove of larger pines two squares
distant.

252 General Notes. Lape

This is the first definite published notice of the White-winged Crossbill
in the District of Columbia, and the only other satisfactory record of the
species in the District is that of Mr. James H. Fleming, of Toronto, Canada,
who saw one in the grounds of the Department of Agriculture in November,
1906 (Richmond MSS).

Mr. Jouy included the species in his ‘Catalogue of the Birds of the
District of Columbia’ ! but this was nothing more than a nominal list and
the basis for the inclusion of the bird does not appear.

There are other records of the species in papers on the ornithology of the
District and vicinity, but they are all of birds seen or taken in adjacent
portions of Maryland. The authors of ‘Avifauna Columbiana’? say:
“We said of these species (Loxia curvirostra minor and Loxia leucoplera)
in the original edition that both undoubtedly sometimes make their appear-
ance in severe winters, though we had not been able to ascertain the fact
with certainty. It has since been established, and both the Crossbills
have been introduced as stragglers in Mr. Jouy’s catalogue. Mr. William
Palmer states in a note addressed to us:....‘I have myself never seen the
White-winged Crossbill here, but Mr. Henry Marshall has specimens which
he shot at Laurel, Md., about eight years ago, probably 1874, since which
time he has seen none.’”’

One is said to have been taken about 1864 by Mr. Drexler, but there
is no certainty that this was in the District. Mr. Oldys’ records one
as having been accidentally killed on August 12, 1907, at Oxon Hill, Md.,
about four or five miles southeast of Washington.’ Prof. Cooke adds
nothing to the foregoing in his ‘Bird Migration in the District of Colum-
bia,’ 4 and Dr. Richmond’s inclusion of the species in his ‘List of Birds
Found in the District of Columbia,” published in Mrs. Maynard’s ‘Birds
of Washington’ is based upon no additional records— R. W. WILLIAMs,
Takoma Park, Md.

Unusual Nesting Site of the English Sparrow.— As the English
Sparrow (Passer domesticus) will cheerfully nest in almost any situation,
unusual nesting sites would seem to be almost an impossibility, but never-
theless I think that the following should be put in that class. Near my
home during the summer of 1909, between Westerly and Watch Hill, R.I.,
there was an artificial ice plant. In the outside sheathing of this building
was cut an opening through which ran a steam exhaust pipe, and as the
hole was cut a little large, there was a handy entrance to the interstices
of the wall, about an inch and a half square. On July tenth I discovered
that a pair of English Sparrows had a nest full of large young in this retreat.
Upon investigation I found that the pipe was hot enough to blister one’s

1 Field and Forest, II, 155, March 1877.

2 Bulletin No. 26, U. S. Nat. Museum, 2nd. Ed., 1883.

2 Auk, XXIV, 442.

4Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, X XI, 115, April, 1918.

ie

7.

Pisa | General Notes. 253

hand, and past this the old birds were obliged to squeeze while entering
and leaving. The nest proper was a foot or so further along. I cannot see
how the young birds could exist for a day without being partially roasted.
They must have had to endure over 150 degrees of heat.— A. BRAzIER
HowE.u, Covina, Cal.

Swainson’s Warbler ( Helinaia swainsoni) at Guantanamo, Cuba.—
T shot a male of Swainson’s Warbler on January 18, 1914, in the heavy timber
at the San Carlos Plantation, Guanténamo, Cuba. The bird was feeding
on the ground among the dry leaves, was not a bit shy, and in fine plumage.
This is the first record for this end of the island, and the second for Cuba;
the other being by Gundlach at Cojimar near Havana, on the north coast.
Cuas. T. RAmMSDEN, Guantanamo, Cuba.

Magnolia Warbler in Colorado.— I secured a male of this species
Dendroica magnolia in Denver, Colo., on May 20, 1913. This is a rare
warbler in this state; and it is interesting to see that all the previous records,
numbering six, show the birds as occuring in May, between the 17th and
the 22nd, the single exception being May 12.— W. H. Breraroxp, Denver,
Colo.

Canadian Warbler in Colorado.— A female of this species, Wilsonia
canadensis, was shot by the writer at Parker, Colo., on Sept. 9, 1913.
Parker is about fifteen miles east of the ‘foothills,’ and nearly sixty miles
west of the only other locality in the state where this warbler has been
seen, to wit, Lake, Lincoln Co., where it was reported by Aiken as seen and
shot, on May 23, 1899.— W. H. Breratoup, Denver, Colo.

The Short-billed Marsh Wren (Cistothorus stellaris) on Long Island
in Winter.— On December 28, 1913, Messrs. George W. Hubbell, Jr.,
Nicholas F. Lenssen and I were at Jones Beach, Long Island, for the
purpose of studying waterfowl. During the afternoon, while searching
for Myrtle Warblers and sparrows in a large tract of bay-berry bushes
Mr. Lenssen found a bird unknown to him, which proved to be a Short-
billed Marsh Wren. It was perched on a bush about a foot from the
ground eyeing us with great curiosity. The bird by its actions was half-
dead with the cold, as it permitted the three of us to approach within four
feet, and finally flew away passing between two of us who were not more
than two feet apart. It was finally stunned with a bay-berry stick and
caught alive. This is the fourth record of the occurrence of this species on
Long Island, and so far as I know, the first winter record for New York
state. The specimen is now in the American Museum of Natural History.”
— Lupiow Griscom, New York City.

The Red-bellied Nuthatch (Sitta canadensis) Feeding among Weeds.
— The Red-breasted Nuthatch occurred in unprecedented abundance in

254 General Notes. Aut

northeastern Philadelphia during the fall of 1912, making that year a
notable one for its irregular invasion. It arrived as early as September 4,
when I observed the first one, which is my earliest record by 21 days, and
remained until November 12.

A remarkable- feature, to me, about the occurrence of this little Sitta
here during that fall, was their habit of frequenting water courses fringed
with dense growths of giant ragweeds (Ambrosia trifida), in which they
sought food on the thick stems, petioles and leaves, often feeding close to
the ground. I always regarded this nuthatch as a denizen of the forest
and its occurrence in these weedy growths surprised me. They exhibited
no fear as I entered the weeds, and if I kept quiet, they fed fearlessly within
close proximity of me, often only a yard away.

On September 12, I observed in Ambrosia weeds along Frankford Creek,
at Frankford, seven Red-bellied Nuthatches, four being in sight at one
time. This is the largest number of these birds I have ever seen at one
time.— Ricuarp F. Miter, Frankford, Phila., Pa.

The Acadian Chickadee (Penthestes hudsonicus littoralis) at Watch
Hill, R. I.— On the morning of October 30, as I stepped from the house, it
was obvious that there was a phenomenal flight of Chickadees (P. atri-
capillus), they were everywhere, in the bushes, hopping over stones in a
field, and strung out along a telegraph wire. Some hours later I was
walking down a road through some woods, bordered on each side by tangles
of vines and bushes, full, of course, of the omnipresent Chickadees. Sud-
denly close behind me I heard a familiar, hoarse, tsi’h-a, da’y, da'y, bringing
back memories of days spent in the north woods. I turned quickly around,
discovered an Acadian Chickadee about twelve feet away working his way
through the vines, calling repeatedly to his comrades, the Black-capped
Chickadees, not far away. The dark brown cap, the brownish back and
the rufous sides contrasted very markedly with the gray, black and white
of atricapillus. Even at a distance of 100 feet I found that the Acadian
was easily distinguishable from the common species with binoculars.
The next day, October 31, a flock of four were feeding in some bushes bor-
dering the golf-grounds. As this was the second record of the occurrence
of this species in the state, and there was what might almost be called a
flight for so rare a bird, I tried to collect one with a cap and golf-sticks but
was unsuccessful, succeeding merely in getting very close. On November
5 several miles away on Napatree Point I saw a single Acadian Chickadee
in a little tree near some cottages, and a little farther on two more climbing
over acrate. These were the last birds I saw.

When I arrived in New York City, I received interesting confirmation
of my observation in that this species had been noted around Boston by
several observers in several localities. Recently, I have been informed
that they have been reported from Connecticut. Previous to this winter
its status in southern New England seems to have been as follows — very
rare winter visitor to Boston, one record for Rhode Island, and one for
Connecticut.— LupLow Griscom, New York City.

COE rimmeeal| General Notes. 955

The Identity of Hypodes cinerea Cassin.— In the January number
of the ‘Journal fur Ornithologie’ Dr. O. Neumann suggests that the
type specimens of Cassin’s Hopsaltria cinerea (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila.,
1856, p. 253 — afterwards Hypodes cinerea) are the same birds that he refers
to as ‘‘Muscicapa?”’ in the Proceedings for 1859, p. 51. As Dr. Neumann
states I have already given my opinion that these birds which later became
the types of Muscicapa cassini Heine are referable to Muscicapa lugens
Hartlaub. Upon comparing them with the description of Hypodes cinerea
I think there is no question but that Dr. Neumann’s conjecture is correct
and that they are the types of this species also. . So far as I can ascertain the
Du Chaillu specimens were not labelled at all until Cassin studied them
and they were then mounted. Undoubtedly he failed to label them after
publishing his description or his label was removed when they were mounted
and they then became mixed with the second Du Chaillu collection and
were redescribed under the caption ‘‘ Muscicapa sp.’’? upon which descrip-
tion Heine based his name.

My ‘Catalogue of the Muscicapide’ was based upon the specimens and
as there was no specimen marked Hypodes cinerea I did not include it, not
knowing indeed that it belonged to thisfamily. Later in my Catalogue of
Cassin’s types (Proceedings for 1899, p. 39) I stated that it was not to be
found, which is not remarkable under the circumstances!

I consider that Dr. Neumann is right in placing both this bird and
Parisonia olivascens Cassin in Alseonax, so this species should now be known
as Alseonax cinereus Cassin of which both Muscicapa cassini and M.
lugens are pure synonyms.— WitTMER Stone, Acad. Nat. Sci., Philadelphia,
a.

Some Marshalltown, Iowa, Notes.— During the fall migration of
1913 it has been my good fortune to secure specimens of several species of
birds which are uncommon in this vicinity.

Pelecanus erythrorhynchos. Waite Prertican.— On September 28,
four of this species were shot in this vicinity. Three of these were taken
by hunters and brought into town and the fourth was discovered by the
writer a day or two later. Some one had shot it, stripped off the wings and
left the body to decay. Of the three birds brought to town the writer
secured one and the other two were secured by one of the stores for window
display. The specimen I secured was an immature bird too badly shot
for the sex to be determined.

Charadrius dominicus dominicus. Go.iprn PLover.— On October
4, I had the good fortune to secure a female golden plover. The bird was
alone on a mud flat and took wing as I approached. This was the only
individual that I noted but a hunter told me a few days later that he secured
four at the same place on about the same date.

Cathartes aura septentrionalis. Turkey Buzzarp.— An immature
female was taken on October 4, and another one noted. The second bird
remained in this vicinity until the twelfth.

Buteo lineatus lineatus. Rep-sHouLpERED Hawk — A specimen of

256 General Notes. Re

this species was taken October 25, in the heavy timber along the river. The
sex was not determined. This is the only individual of this form I have
ever noted in this vicinity.

Pandion haliaetus carolinensis. Osprey.— On September 20, while
walking along the river I noted two of this species flying over the water.
After waiting on the bank for over an hour I secured one, an adult female.
The other one remained about the same place for several days and then
disappeared.— Ira N. Gasrretson, Marshalltown, Towa.

Two Species New to Colorado.— Recent investigations in the orni-
thological collections of the Colorado Museum of Natural History, have
revealed some interesting facts and important records heretofore un-
published.

One of the most noteworthy of these is an adult specimen of the rare
Yellow Rail (Coturnicops noveboracensis) taken and identified as an imma=
ture Porzana carolina by Mr. L. J. Hersey of this city. As the bird is.
unquestionably fully adult, the ‘immature’ on the label is obviously an
error by Mr. Hersey. The specimen is in fairly good condition and appears:
to be typical. It was taken at Barr, Colo., some time during July, 1906,
exact date not given, which would suggest the possibility of a breeding
record.

I also desire to record a specimen of Sennett’s Night-hawk (Chordeiles:
virginianus sennetti) taken at Barr, Colo., Aug. 8, 1910, by Mr. Hersey.
The identity of this specimen was ascertained by Mr. H. C. Oberholser
of the Bureau of Biological Survey, Washington, D. C.

Both of these specimens form first records for their respective species in
Colorado, and, in the case of the rail, one of the few for the western United’
States.— F. C. Lincoun, Denver, Colorado.

Unusual Occurrences at Madison, Wis.— Toxostoma rufum..
Brown THRASHER.— A specimen in normal condition was taken January
25. The stomach contained the skins and seeds of the wild grape.

Passerherbulus lecontei. LeContr’s Sparrow.— Three were seen:
on October 12, and one collected. Another seen October 19.

Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina. Eventnc GrosBEAK.— Two:
female birds were seen December 14.

Porzana carolina. Sora Raim—On December 28 while walking:
through a frozen marsh two Soras were seen running through the rushes.
One bird was caught and found to be minus the right wing. The extreme’
minimum temperature for December was 13° and mean minimum 25.9°;,
mean monthly temperature 32°. It is not extremely unusual for a few
Soras to remain until the marshes freeze, but this would seem to be a case:
of unusual endurance. En passant Butler in ‘Birds of Indiana’ writing:
of this species says “they are very sensitive to cold.’”? — A. WiLLiAM
Scuorcer, Madison, Wis.

a

Digi i General Notes. 257

Effect of Cold on Moult.— In the American Naturalist for 1908 Mr.
C. W. Beebe reported some experiments on male Scarlet Tanagers and
Bobolinks to determine the effect of external factors on moult and its se-
quence. His birds, confined in the dark, and rather over fed, held their
nuptial plumage all summer and winter, and when brought into normal
conditions the following spring, moulted from nuptial to nuptial, thus
reversing the proper order.

In 1911 I made an experiment on a male Mallard Duck to determine
primarily the effect of cold upon the moult. I chose a Mallard of the toy
variety because of its small size. At the same time I took as a control
another male toy duck and placed them both in crates of similar sizes,
about two and one half by one and one half feet.

The experiment was begun on April 15, 1911, when of course all Mallards
are still in full dress. I was enabled to keep the bird to be experimented
upon together with another animal experiment in a special room of the
Quincy Cold Storage Plant in Boston, thanks to the kindness of Mr. G. V.
Crocker. The room was kept at an even temperature of 25° F. Rarely
it got as warm as 30° or as cold as 22°. It was practically dark, though
lighted at times by electricity.

Both the cold room duck and the control duck were fed on the same
ration of hard grain. Notes were made of both birds from time to time,
and the cold room bird was visited about every ten days.

The observations in detail are added, but to sum up, the cold room bird
kept his winter plumage all summer without shedding a feather and was
taken out about November first and placed with the other ducks at Wen-
ham. He remained the same all winter and moulted very early in the
spring, rapidly assuming eclipse plumage.

The control duck, likewise closely confined, but out of doors assumed an
eclipse plumage, although not a perfect one, and when liberated at the
same time as the other bird, took on a delayed and rather imperfect winter
dress. Both birds were very fat, but otherwise in perfect health through-
out the whole period.

It is perhaps to be regretted that the control bird was not kept through
the summer in the dark, as this would have tended to rule out the light
factor. This factor may or may not have had a positive effect.

It is certain that close confinement alone greatly delayed and rendered
less perfect the spring to summer and summer to winter moult in the
control bird, but it had no such effect as the cold and dark plus the confine-
ment. The sequence of plumage was certainly governed by the season,
as no attempt was made on the part of the cold room bird to change his
left over winter dress when he was liberated in November.

The following notes were made at the time.

April 15,1911. Experiment started.

June 24: The cold room bird showed no moult, breast worn from the bars
of the crate, and a small area of skin around both eyes denuded of feathers.
Other mallards at Wenham were beginning to moult at this date.

258 General Notes. Apa

July 2: Control duck shows delayed moult, which is not to be wondered
at on account of lack of exercise. So far only head and breast feathers
affected.

July 27: No change in cold room bird.

August 8: The control duck shows black under tail coverts nearly gone,
green on occiput and hind neck only, with a patch of it on the throat.
White neck ring reduced, and absent dorsally. Breast nearly all moulted
except for few old feathers at lower margin of the chestnut area. Flanks
are moulting. The common mallards show at this date a much later and
more complete eclipse plumage.

August 13: Cold room bird, no change except increased wear of feathers.
Belly and under tail coverts badly worn. Sex feathers intact. Feathers
coming back around eyes.

August 22: Cold room bird no change. Control bird, eclipse dress
progressing slowly. The belly, however, is not yet moulted and there
are still traces of neck ring laterally. Some of the mallard stock in perfect
eclipse at this date; others slightly lacking. A good deal of variation
among them. None show any white neck ring now, but several have
greenish heads.

September 14: Cold room bird no change.

September 21: Control bird shows a beginning of the return of winter
plumage, but eclipse has not been perfect.

Oct. 28: Cold room duck same asa month ago. (He was removed a few
days after this, and remained without change all winter. The control was
also liberated, but did not quite get back into full plumage and remained
below par all winter.)

March 5, 1912: Control bird was noted as in ragged plumage with slight
admixture of eclipse feathers on breast and on head. Cold room bird
same — full winter dress but worn.

June 12: Control bird has started in to moult early, far earlier than any
other mallard or toy mallard on the place. Breast spotted, belly partly
moulted, sex feathers still intact, head brownish. The cold room duck is
not so far advanced as the control, but more so than the other toys and
mallards. Some mallards have not shed a feather yet. The center of the
chestnut area of the cold room duck is changing and spotted, but not upper
and lower margins, which are still pure chestnut, with young feathers
underneath old feathers. Sex feathers intact.

From this time on eclipse plumage was rapidly assumed by both birds,
and a stage maintained somewhat ahead of the other ducks on the place.—
J.C. Paiuures, Wenham, Mass.

am fF

igi Recent Literature. 259

RECENT LITERATURE.

Millais’ ‘ British Diving Ducks.’ '— The literature of ornithology more
than that of any other branch of zoédlogy is noteworthy for the splendidly
illustrated folios and quartos which combine in such a pleasing way the
labors of the artist and naturalist. It is gratifying to know that the day of
such works is not yet passed — indeed the latest addition to this class of
literature, Mr. Millais’ ‘ British Diving Ducks,’ has few equals in point
of beauty of illustration, while the text is far ahead of the older illustrated
works in its comprehensive and scientific treatment of the subject.

There are charming colored plates of the adult birds by Thorburn,
figures of the ‘eclipse plumages’ by O. Murray Dixon, and of the young
by Grénvold, while reproductions in monochrome of paintings, mainly by
the author, illustrate flocks of ducks in action, especially, in courting dis-
plays which are extremely attractive and instructive. Photographic
reproductions taken direct from skins illustrate changes of plumage with
great detail.

The habits of the several species are described quite fully and with
abundant quotations from the works of European and British authors.
We notice here and there however a tendency to carelessness in matters of
quotation, mis-spelling of names of authorities, etc., while the literature of
the subject especially as regards American writers has not been so exhaus-
tively covered as one would desire in a work such as Millais has brought out.

In nomenclature he follows the latest list of British birds except that he
includes Steller’s Eider in the genus Somateria and groups together the
Golden-eyes, Bufflehead, Old-squaw and Harlequin under Clangula,—
being thus an extremist among generic ‘lumpers.’ No less than six races
of the Eider are mentioned, one being the very distinct S. dresseri usually
regarded as a species, while others are so slightly differentiated as to be in-
distinguishable — at least from the data presented. For example a new
form, S. mollissima britannica, is described as smaller than mollissima or
borealis and larger than feroeensis with the bill dull olive green above,
shading into French blue-gray below, and again into pale yellowish near
the nail. The bill of mollissima is given as olive green. No subspecies
are discussed under other species and no other new names are proposed.

1 British | Diving Ducks. | By | J. G. Millais, F. Z. S.,M. B. O. U., Etc. | Author
of ‘The Mammals of Great Britain and Ireland,’”’ ‘‘Newfoundland | and its
Untrodden Ways,” ‘‘The Natural History of British Surface-| Feeding Ducks,”
“The Wild Fowls in Scotland,” ‘‘The Natural | History of British Game-Birds”
ete.| Vol. I. With thirty-two plates (twenty-two of which are coloured) | by
Archibald Thorburn, O. Murray Dixon, H. Grénvold | and the Author | Long-
Mans, Green and Co. | 39 Paternoster Row, London | New York, Bombay, and
Calcutta | 1913 | all rights reserved. Large 4°. pp. 1-141.

Vol. II | with forty-two plates (seventeen of which are coloured) pp. 1-164.
£12 12s. for the two volumes.

260 Recent Literature. Apuil

It is Mr. Millais’s discussion of plumage changes in the diving ducks that
naturally attracts most attention. He was formerly a strong adherent of
the theory of ‘ aptosochromatism ’ — color change without molt — and
the reviewer! some years ago had occasion to challenge his views on the
plumage change of the Sanderling,? showing that the feathers that were

supposed by Mr. Millais to undergo change of pigment remained unchanged

from their emergence from the pin feather sheath until lost in the next
molt.

While Mr. Millais has now in a great measure abandoned his earlier
views, he is still loath to relinquish entirely the possibility of direct color
change. Hespeaks of the wearing away of the surface of a feather so as to
disclose underlying pigment of a different color as a possible explanation of
certain changes, ‘‘ but,’’ he adds,“ it does not explain the remarkable ‘ rise’
of colour that comes with the curly feathers of the tail [of the Mallard] in
August. These feathers (which are only renewed once in the year) come
in rich brown with a black center. So they remain for a short period, but
late in September as they elongate and curl, they begin to turn black until
by the end of the month they are jet black. A rise of colour must therefore
be in course of movement the whole period as the feather elongates and
must prove that there is a means of transmission either through veins
or figment [sic] cells of infinitesimal size.”” While our author quotes Mr.
Pycraft in opposition to his views, he makes the rather weak contention
that Mr. Pycraft did not use a very high power microscope in his investi-
gations, and possibly failed to see the “‘ infinitesimal cells’ to which he
alludes. He however makes no reference to Dr. R. M. Strong’s able
paper on ‘ The Development of Color in the Definitive Feather ’ # which

to our mind dismisses the possibility of any change of pigmentation such as _

Mr. Millais claims and we are inclined to think that the changes which he
still attributes to ‘ aptosochromatism ’ will eventually be fully explained in
the same manner as were those of the Sanderling. It is in discussing
plumage change especially that Mr. Millais shows his lack of familiarity
with the publications of American ornithologists; at least he makes no
allusion to them.

The long series of photographs of Eider skins illustrating the molt of
this species could we think have been made far more useful if they had been
differently arranged. Mr. Millais’ method of judging the progress of molt
by the date is not satisfactory as the individual variation in plumage on a
given date is very great, and few series if any will show a regular gradation
if arranged chronologically.

Apart however from his explanation of some of the color changes that
he describes, there is little that calls for criticism in Mr. Millais’ beautiful
volumes. They form a charming addition to ornithological literature and

1Stone, Witmer. Jbis. April, 1901, p. 464.
2: Millais, J.G. Ibis. October, 1896, p. 451.
3 Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., XL, pp. 147-186, 1902.

aati Recent Literature. 261

a work of reference which will be in much demand but which on account of
its costliness will be available to but few who have not access to the larger
scientific libraries—W. S.

Reichenow’s ‘ Die Végel.’ !— The subtitle ‘ Handbook of Systema-
tic Ornithology ’ well defines this important work. We have had numer-
ous works on birds in which the families and some of the leading genera
and species are described but which make no pretence of completeness
beyond the higher groups. There are also Hand-Lists of species which are
merely lists with the briefest possible statement of geographical distribution.
Here, however, is a work which presents the bird life of the world in syste-
matic order and attempts to mention all the more distinct species by name
with a brief description and statement of geographic range, presented in
the case of the larger genera in the form of a ‘key.’ There are full diag-
noses of families, subfamilies and genera accompanied frequently by keys
while numerous text figures and references to other works add to the
utility of the text.

The author has had to use his own judgment as to how many species
deserve mention under each genus, and as this is purely a matter of per-
sonal opinion, others will of course differ with him in some cases. Under
Buteo the North American species mentioned are borealis, swainsoni,
brachyurus and albicaudatus, but lineatus and platypterus are omitted.
This is perhaps an oversight as such closely related forms as Archibuteo
lagopus and sancti-johannis both appear.

On the whole however Dr. Reichenow has. we think, been very successful
in his difficult undertaking. With the constantly increasing number of
geographic races that are being named — many of them binomially — it is
becoming more and more necessary, for practical purposes, to have the more
obviously distinct forms picked out in some way or other, and the present
attempt is therefore particularly welcome. As an indication of how com-
plete Dr. Reichenow’s treatment is I have compared the number of species
mentioned by him under several families with those given in Sharpe’s
Hand-List. The latter, of course, includes numerous slightly differenti-
ated subspecies which naturally have no place in a work such as ‘ Die
Vogel.’

Platycercide Reichenow 73, Sharpe 84
Carpophagidee Gh 75 e 81
Ibididze ee 28 e 34
Colymbid fy 18 ce 25

In the matter of genera the author is decidedly conservative while in his
nomenclature he fails to follow the International Code. We find Vultur

1Die V6gel. Handbuch der systematischen Ornithologie von Anton Reichenow.
Zwei Bande.— Erster Band, mit einer Karte und 185 Textbildern nach der Natur
gezeichnet von G. Krause. Stuttgart. Verlag von Ferdinand Enke. 1913. Roy.
8vo. pp. 1-529. Price, 15 marks. The Second Volume to appear in the summer
of 1914.

i
7 F.
5

262 Recent Literature. fe

retained for V. monachus, Strix for the Barn Owls, Merganser and Mergus
for two different genera, Mycteria for the Jabiru, Tantalus for the Wood
Ibis, ete., etc. It is unfortunate that in such an excellent work as ‘ Die
Vogel’, which could do so much towards uniformity in nomenclature, the
modern system should not be adopted. The classification is also conser-
vative and many generally accepted relationships are not admitted. The
‘Owls still remain among the Birds of Prey, the Pigeons and Sand Grouse
are separated by the Phasianide, while the Gulls and Shore-birds are
widely separated, etc.

An introduction covering pp. 1-67 treats briefly of structure, classifica-
tion, zodgeography, nomenclature etc. with a useful concordance of the
names of the various parts of a bird in Latin, German, English, French and
Italian.

Altogether ‘ Die Végel’ promises to be one of the standard works of
reference on the birds of the world from the systematic standpoint, and
contains more information of this kind than any other book of the same
size — more probably than any other work except the ‘ British Museum
Catalogue’ or the still uncompleted ‘ Tierreich.’— W. 8.

‘ Oologia Neerlandica.’ — The four parts of Mr. Van Pelt Lechner’s
work which have appeared since our last notice bring this admirable
publication to completion. The unusually high standard of both plates and
letter press is fully maintained and the work will take its place as one of
the noteworthy publications dealing with birds’ eggs— an example of
what can be done in scientific oélogical investigation.

These parts deal largely with the Terns, Shore-birds, Rails, Herne! etc.,
and the plates are particularly handsome. Some of them are identical with,
or very closely related to, American species and hence the discussion of the
coloration of their eggs and the characters by which they may be distin-
guished are of great interest to American odlogists. Still more interesting
however are the discussions of shell layers of the Falconide and other
groups and the generic characters which their coloration furnishes, Buteo
and Accipiter for instance have the first layer green and the second white,
while in Falco both are white, the latter colored superficially. In all the
Falconide there is a third thin layer of mucus which bears spots in all the
genera mentioned. The author points out the errors that have resulted in
making gross comparisons between the eggs of certain species, when the
colorations compared arise from different shell layers and are therefore not
comparable. In comparing eggs of Coturnix and Perdiz the author finds
that the spots on the eggs of the former are contained in a superficial layer
of glutin, under which is an unspotted layer, yellowish or grayish brown in
color, which corresponds with the surface layer of the Perdix eggs. The fun-

1‘**Oologia Neerlandica’’ Eggs of Birds Breeding in the Netherlands. By
A. A. Van Pelt Lechner. Parts IV-VII. Jan., Aug., and Nov. 1913, and Feb.,
1914.

et na a Recent Literature. 263

damental layer in both cases is colored with o6cyanin. This gives some idea
of the thorough study of the shell structure and coloration that Mr. Lechner
has conducted, a line of investigation which has been utterly neglected by
American ‘ odlogists ’ but one well worthy of pursuit if they would sub-
stantiate the claim that their large series of egg shells are collected for the
benefit of ‘science.’ One can readily appreciate how such investigations
may yield data of much phylogenetic value. We congratulate Mr. Lechner
upon the character of his work and upon its progress towards completion,
while the publisher deserves the highest credit for a beautiful piece of
book-making.— W. 8.

Phillips on African birds.— Drs. J. C. Phillips and G. M. Allen spent
two months beginning December 25, 1912, on the Blue-Nile and Dinder
River, in Sennar, Sudan, and obtained a collection of 340 birds, represent-
ing 150 species. A briefly annotated list of these is published by Dr.
Phillips in the Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zodlogy,! with a
short account of the trip. Descriptions of two new forms, Caprimulgus
eleanore and Passer domesticus chephreni were described previously,? while
in the present number of “The Auk’ appears an article on the author’s im-
pressions of the bird life of the Sudan and a color plate of the new Nightjar.

Dr. Phillips found the mid-winter bird-life, especially at the mountain at
Fazogli, far less rich and varied than has been reported by summer visitors
and evidently, as he points out, there must be considerable local seasonal
movements among the resident species.— W. S.

Bunker on the Birds of Kansas.— During the years 1911 and 1912,
Messrs. C. D. Bunker and T. A. Rockland made extensive explorations
along the south, west and north borders of Kansas, collecting about 1700
skins in forty-one different counties. Meanwhile, Miss Arta Briggs has
carefully reidentified the collection of birds in the University of Kansas
Museum and brought the nomenclature up to date. Eight forms new to
the state list were obtained on the field trips, while Miss Briggs has detected
twenty-seven species and subspecies not contained in Prof. Snow’s last edi-
tion of this ‘ List of the Birds of Kansas,’ published in 1903. These have
been incorporated in the new list of Kansas birds? which Mr. Bunker,
assisted by Miss Briggs and Mr. Dix Teachenor, here presents and which
has been brought up to date in matters of nomenclature though primarily

1 Notes on a Collection of Birds from the Sudan. By John C. Phillips. Bull.
Mus. Comp. Zool. Vol. LVIII, No. 1, pp.1-27. December, 1913.

2Two New African Birds. By John C. Phillips. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash.
Vol. XXVI, pp. 167-168. June 30, 1913.

The Birds of Kansas. By C. D. Bunker, of the University of Kansas Mu-
seum. Kansas Univ. Sciences, Bull. VII, No. 5, June, 1913, pp. 137-158. An
inserted slip states that ‘‘ equal credit should be given to Miss Arta Briggs and
Dix Teachenor for this publication.”’

264 Recent Literature. Fen;

based upon the fifth edition of Dr. Snow’s list. The total number of species
and subspecies is 379 as against 348 given by Dr. Snow. The Oregon
Junco, Loggerhead Shrike and Long-billed Marsh Wren recorded by him
are omitted as no evidence of their occurrence could be found.

It is unfortunate that the species added to Dr. Snow’s catalogue are not
listed separately as it is difficult or impossible to pick them out of the main
list. The paper makes a convenient summary of our present knowledge
of the Kansas avifauna and will be of much assistance to local students of
Kansas birds.— W. S.

Swarth on Geese of the Branta canadensis Group.!— Mr. Swarth
bases his study upon a series of 153 skins mainly from California and his
conclusions go far to straighten out the confusion that has prevailed re-
garding the relationships of the four races of Canada Geese.

He finds that the breeding bird of California is true canadensis while
occidentalis is entirely restricted to the humid northwest coast region where
it is nearly resident, never migrating as far south as California. These are
both large birds with the throat usually entirely white and the collar on
the lower neck usually absent, the former form being light gray below,
the latter dark brown.

Branta c. minima is the smallest form, with a bill notably smaller than
in either of the above but presenting the greatest variation in coloration.

B. c. hutchinsi forms a perfect series of intergrades between canadensis
and minima, and like the latter is very variable in color characters. The
smaller races breed in the far north, minima on the Alaskan coast of Bering
Sea and the Aleutian Islands;. hutchinsi farther east. The numerous
intergrades indicate that their breeding areas merge one into the other but
the alleged breeding of hutchinst in Alaska would seem to need careful
confirmation. Mr. Swarth has produced a careful and valuable piece of
work.— W. 8.

Job on the Quest of the Canvasback.? — Mr. Job with three compan-
ions spent three months of the past year on Lake Winnipegosis, northern
Manitoba, studying the breeding ducks and other water fowl. His main
object was to secure young of the various species, especially Canvasbacks,
for breeding experiments which he is carrying on in Connecticut. He suc-
ceeded, with the aid of incubators and brooders, in hatching and raising
about 200 young ducks of ten species, as well as some Coots, while a few
young were caught alive in the marshes. Mr. Job tells the story of his

summer’s experience in a most delightful way and illustrates his article’

1A Study of a Collection of Geese of the Branta canadensis group from the
San Joaquin Valley, California. By Harry S. Swarth. Univ. of Cal. Publ. in
Zool., Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 1-24, pls. 1-2. Nov. 20, 1913.

2In Quest of the Canvasback. By Herbert K. Job. Outing, February, 1914,
pp. 515-525.

a

Se a Recent Literature. 265
with a number of excellent photographs of the young ducks and snapshots
of flocks of old birds on the wing. This is Mr. Job’s second experiment in
securing young wild ducks, the previous summer having been spent at Lake
Manitoba when about 100 young, of the later breeding species, were ob-
tained, although he was then too late for the Canvasbacks. The further
experiments of the author in rearing these birds will be watched with inter-
est and all bird-lovers and sportsmen will join in his hope “ that they may
duly multiply and help to replenish the earth in our eastern districts 50
woefully lacking in these splendid wild fowl.’”’ — W.S.

Mearns on Additional New Birds from Africa.!— Dr. Mearns’
latest contribution to African ornithology consists of the description of ten
new subspecies contained in the several collections recently added to the
U. S. National Museum collection. These are Pogonocichla cucullata
helleri, Mt. Mbololo; Cossypha natalensis garguensis, Mt. Gargues; C.
natalensis intensa, Taveta; Bradypterus babeculus fraterculus, Escarpment;
Sylvietta leucophrys keniensis, Mt. Kenia; S. brachyura tavetensis, Taveta;
Zosterops senegalensis fricki, Thika River; and Z. virens garguensis, Mt.
Gargues, all in British East Africa; while from Abyssinia are described
Sylvietia whytii abayensis, Gardulla; and Melamparus afer fricki, Dire
Daoua.— W. 8.

Grinnell’s ‘Second List of Birds of the Berkeley Campus.’ ?—
Intensive studies like the present are always interesting especially to those
interested in keeping records of bird migration and fluctuation from day to
day. After all, the list of birds from the farm, the college campus, or the
city yard is only the county or state list on a small scale.

The campus of the University of California comprises 530 acres and is
fortunate in including some truly wild.land and considerable diversity of
environment. Mr. Grinnell’s list now numbers 97 species, while the mean
population in individuals is approximately 8,000. The usual number
of species seen per day is remarkably constant as shown by the following:
July 3, 29 species; February 11, 26; March 25, 22; January 20, 20; Oc-
tober 18, 27.—W. S.

Baker’s ‘Indian Pigeons and Doves.’ ?— This is another sumptuous
work similar in all respects to the same author’s ‘Indian Ducks.’ The

1 Descriptions of Ten New African Birds of the Genera Pogonocichla, Cossypha,.
_ Bradypterus, Sylvritta, Melaniparus and Zosterops. By Edgar A. Mearns.
Smithson. Misc. Collns., Vol. 61, Number 20, pp. 1-8. Nov. 29, 1913.

2 A Second List of the Birds of the Berkeley Campus. The Condor, XX. Janu-
ary, 1914, pp. 28—40.

3Indian Pigeons | and | Doves|By|E. C. Stuart Baker |F. Z. S., F. L. S.,
M. B.O.U.| Author of ‘‘Indian Ducks and their Allies’ | with twenty-seven
coloured plates from drawings by | H. Grénvold and G. E. Lodge | Witherby & Co.|
326 High Holborn, London|1913. roy. 8vo. pp. i-xv + 1-260, 26 plates.
£2 10s. net.

266 Recent Literature. re

text is printed on a heavy rag paper while the plates are beautiful repro-
‘ductions in color of the paintings of Messrs. Grénvold and Lodge. The
general plan of treatment consists of keys to the genera and species, syn-
‘onymy and vernacular names of each species, full description of male,
female and young, distribution, nidification, general habits, and considera-
‘tion of the species as a game bird. Fifty-one species and subspecies are
‘treated, of which twenty-six are figured on the plates. The pigeons of
India present a great diversity of coloration, startling to one familiar only
‘with the few dull plumaged species to be found in North America. There
are fifteen different species of Green Fruit Pigeons (Treronine), five species
of the large green and gray Imperial Pigeons and one nearly pure white
(Carpophagine), the wonderful bronze green Nicobar Pigeon (Calenadine),
the Emerald Dove (Phebide), eleven True Pigeons (Columbine), sixteen
Ring Doves, Turtle Doves, ete. (Columbine) and the Indian Ground Dove
(Geopeliine).

The accounts are full and complete, and often furnish entertaining
reading matter while the excellent descriptions, synonymy and beautiful
plates make the work important as a reference volume, and a magnificent
addition to any library of ornithological books. The nomenclature is
thoroughly up to date— W. S.

Menegaux’s Reprint of the Ornithology of the Echo du Monde
Savant.!— The ‘Echo du Monde Savant’ is one of the rarest and least
known of scientific periodicals. It was published in Paris from 1834 to
1846, but only a few complete files are preserved even there, while in Amer-
ica we know only of two incomplete sets, both in Washington— one in the
Patent Office Library and the other in that of the Department of Agricul- ©
ture.

The chief writer of ornithological articles was R. P. Lesson, who contrib-
uted from 1842 to 1845, while in 1836-7, I. Geoffroy St. Hilaire published
a ‘ Cours d’Ornithologie.’

In Lesson’s articles occur many new generic and specific names and it is
the frequent need of consulting these in present day systematic ornithologi-
cal work, that makes a reprint such as Prof. Menegaux has undertaken
most welcome.

The reprint is well printed on good paper and is apparently carefully
prepared in point of accuracy of transcription. It is therefore particularly
unfortunate to find that it is not a complete collection of Lesson’s publica-

1 Articles | d’Ornithologie | de | R. P. Lesson | Médecin, Pharmacien en Chef de
la Marine | Professeur a l’Ecole de Médecine navale de Rochefort | Parus dans
l' Echo du Monde Savant | de 1842 4 1845. | Reimpression faite par les soins | de |
A. Menegaux | Professeur agrégé de l'Université, | Assistand d’Ornithologie | av
Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle de Paris | Paris | Edition de la Revue Francaise
d’ Ornithologie. | 55, rue de Buffon, 55 | En vente 4 Munich | Chez MM. Dultz et
‘Co, Libraires | 6, Landwehrstrasse, 6| 1913. Svo. pp. 1-282. With frontispiece
portrait of Lesson. 10s. net. to subscribers.

aire | Recent Literature. 267

tions in the ‘ Echo.’ It would seem that Prof. Menegaux entirely over-
looked a series of papers entitled ‘Index Ornithologique’, until the reprint
was completed. He then published two numbers of the series on a supple-
mentary leaf, pp. 281-282. A number of new generic names proposed in
the other numbers do not, however, appear at allinthe reprint. Such are,
in 1842: Gymnogyps col. 1037, Setogyps, Sarcogyps, and T'rigonoceps, col.
1038; in 1843; Ichthyophaga, col. 14, Chondrohierax, col. 61, Chelictinia,
col. 63, Cunistrix, col. 540 and Cyphorhina, col. 1068. These are all to be
found in the lists of genera published by Waterhouse or Richmond, which
makes their omission the more remarkable. It is to be hoped that a
supplement may be prepared containing all the articles omitted from the
present reprint along with an alphabetical index to all the new genera and
species proposed by Lesson in the ‘ Echo’ which would materially aid the
systematist who desires to consult the work.— W. 8.

Mathews’ ‘The Birds of Australia.’!— The latest part of Mr.
Mathews work completes the shore-birds and cranes and begins the ibises.
The same thoroughness of treatment and detailed discussion of matters
of nomenclature which have marked the previous parts are maintained
but the author’s exhaustive studies in connection with the preparation of
his recent ‘ List of Australian Birds,’ have so nearly completed the syste-
matic side of the subject that one finds scarcely any new names proposed
in thisnumber. A new genus Subglareola with Glareola ocularis as its type
is the only one that we note — W.S.

The South Australian Ornithologist.? — The activity of ornithologi-
cal study in Australia is evidenced by .he appearance of another journal
devoted to the subject. Whether this is to be a quarterly or monthly we
are not informed, nor is there any indication as to where it is published or
how it may be obtained. The editorial committee however, with one ex-
ception, are founders of the ‘South Australian Ornithological Association’
organized in 1899 at the South Australian Institute and Museum.

In glancing over the pages of the new journal we note that it adopts the
principles of nomenclature set forth in the International Code and elabo-
rated for Australian birds by Mr. Gregory M. Mathews but which are
rejected — we hope only temporarily —by the Royal Australasian
Ornithologists’ Union and ‘The Emu.’ The ‘South Australian Ornitholo-
gist’ thus places itself in line with the leading journals of other countries.
The papers in the initial number comprise: ‘A History of Ornithology in
South Australia,’ by R. Crompton; ‘The Avifauna of Melville Island,
Northern Territory,’ by F. R. Zietz, in which we note nine new subspecies.
There are also; an account of Rhipidura tricolor; a description of Halcyon

1The Birds of Australia. Vol. III, Part 4. December 31, 1913.
2 The South Australian Ornithologist. Vol.I, No.1. January 1914. Editorial
Committee: F. R. Zietz, (President), A. M. Morgan, S. A. White, R. Crompton.

268 Recent Literature. rect

macleayii ceruleus subsp. n. by Edwin Ashby; and several notes. We
congratulate the Editors of the new journal upon the appearance of the first
issue and hope it may have a successful career.— W. S.

Mullens’ ‘ Guide to Selborne.’!— This little brochure intended
originally for the anniversary trip of the British Ornithologists’ Club is
admirably adapted for the use of any visitor to the historic residence of
Gilbert White. The points of interest are mentioned and described just as
the visitor would approach them, and one who is familiar with the ‘ Natural
History of Selborne’ gets a much clearer idea of the relative position of the
various buildings, trees, etc., by reading this guide even if he be not fortunate
enough to be a visitor. The appended synopsis of Gilbert White’s life is
an interesting biography and an accurate character sketch of the naturalist.

In this connection we might call attention to another delightful contribu-
tion to the same subject which although published some years ago may not
be familiar to the readers of ‘The Auk’, this is ‘A Selborne Pilgrimage,’ by
Dr. Cornelius Weygandt, an associate of the American Ornithologists’
Union, which appeared in ‘The Atlantic Monthly’ for August, 1905.— W.5.

Sarasin on the Birds of New Caledonia.” — The first part of the zoél-
ogy of Sarasin and Roux’s ‘ Nova Caledonia’ consists of the account of the
birds of New Caledonia and the Loyalty Islands by Dr. Fritz Sarasin.
Eighty-seven species are listed, together with several subspecies, and a
comparative list of the birds of the two island groups is added as well as a
list of nine species from the New Hebrides and a good bibliography of 84
titles.

In the main list the following are described as new: Pseudogerygone
flavilateralis lifuensis, Lifou; P. rowxi, Ouvea; Mytagra caledonica wveaensis,
Ouvea; M. c. mareensis, Mare; Diaphoropterus nevius simillimus, all three
Loyalty Isls.; Zosterops lateralis nigrescens, Mare and Ouvea; Merula
mareensis larochensis, Mare; Aplonis atronitens minor, Lifou and Ouvea;
Columba hypenochroa uveaensis, Ouvea; Porphyrio calvus caledonicus,
New Caledonia.

As imported birds are listed, Acridotheres tristis, Estrilda astrilda and
Passer domesticus. Three plates illustrate this important paper.— W. 8.

Hellmayr on the Avifauna of Timor.? — This excellent paper covers
all the birds known from the island which comprise 140 species. Among

1 Guide to Selborne and Synopsis of the Life of Gilbert White. By W. H. Mul-
lens. Bull. of the British Ornithologists’ Club,CXC. pp. 1-27. Witherby & Co.
1913. Price 2s. 6d. net.

2 Die Vogel Neu-Caledoniens und der Loyalty-Inseln. von Dr. Fritz Sarasin.
Nova Caledonia, Zoologie, Band I, Heft I. Mit 3 Tafeln in Lithographie und
6 Abbildungen im Text. Wiesbaden. C. W. Kreidels. Verlag. 1913.

3 Zoologie von Timor. Ergebnisse der unter Leitung von Joh: Wanner im
Jahre. 1911 ausgefiihrten Timor-Expedition Herausgegeben von C. B. Haniel
I Lieferung. Die Avifauna von Timor von C. E. Hellmayr. Mit einer Far-
bentafel. January 10,1914. 4°. pp. 1-112.

Volos call Recent Literature. 269

these or in the discussions on their relationship we note the following new
forms proposed: Pachycephala orpheus wetterensis, Wetter Isl.; Philemon
timoriensis pallidiceps, Wetter Isl.; Halcyon australasia tringorum, Roma
Isl.; Trichoglossus hematodus flavotectus, Wetter and Roma; Falco longi-
pennis hanieli Bonleo, West Timor. The plate illustrates Diceum hanielt
and Planesticus fumidus schlegelii.— W.S.

Elms’ ‘A Pocket-Book of British Birds’! and other ‘Handbooks.’
— This little volume, truly a ‘ pocket edition,’ contains more information
on British birds in a compact form than any book with which we are ac-
quainted and would seem to be just the thing for American bird students
who visit England and desire to become acquainted with some of the native
birds. The information is arranged under clearly indicated headings:
haunts, observation, plumage, language, habits, food, nest site, materials,
eggs, etc. Messrs. West Newman & Co. have also published a somewhat
similar though far less complete book on ‘ Familiar Indian Birds’? by Gordon
Dalgliesh and a larger work on ‘ Practical Bird-keeping ’* consisting of
reprinted articles from the Avicultural Magazine of 1911-12. This work
brings under one cover a vast amount of data concerning the breeding
and keeping of wild birds of all sorts, a pastime more widely practiced in
England than in America but with many devotees on both sides of the
Atlantic— W. S.

Miss Keezel’s ‘Bird Study Note Book.’ 4— This is a copy book, six
and a quarter by eight and a quarter inches, with columns for recording the
name, date of arrival, coloration, etc., of each species of bird observed.
It will doubtless be helpful to teachers conducting a children’s bird class,
although many of them will doubtless prefer to use perfectly blank books
and rule them according to their own ideas.— W. 8.

Shufeldt, on Extinct Ostrich Birds of the United States.* — A dis-
cussion of the relationships of the fossil avian genus Diatryma, with numer-
ous quotations form various authorities. The author regards the genus as:
more nearly related to Struthio than to the Gastornithide where it has
been placed by some writers.— W. 8.

1A Pocket-Book of British Birds. By E. F.M.Elms. London, 1906. West,
Newman & Co., 54 Hatton Garden. Small 8vo. pp. 1-150. 1906. 2s. 6d.

2Familiar Indian Birds. By Gordon Dalgliesh. S8vo. pp. 1-90. West,
Newman & Co. London. 1909.

3Practical Bird-Keeping. Edited by J. Lewis Bonhote. West, Newman &
Co. London. 1913.

4Bird Study Note Book for Intermediate and Grammar School Grades. By
Clara Cozad Keezel. Single copies, 27 cents, postpaid. Discount for Quantities.
Garnet, Kansas.

5 Extinct Ostrich Birds of the United States. By Dr. R. W. Shufeldt. Aquila,
1913, pp. 411-422, pll. I-V. (In Hungarian and English).

270 Recent Literature. [April

Valuable Economic Reports.— Mr. E. H. Forbush, State Ornitholo-
gist of Massachusetts, in his annual report? discusses a number of interesting
topics. The feeding and attracting of wild birds are discussed, and also the
apparent poisoning of birds by the excessive spraying of trees. The
Starling has reached several stations in Massachusetts and additional
evidence of its driving away native birds and taking possession of Flickers’
nests is presented. There is also an extended discussion as to the damage
done by Reedbirds to the rice crop of the South Atlantic States and the
shooting of the birds for market rather than as a protection to the rice.
The rice industry has for the most part moved westward to Louisiana and
the marketing of Reedbirds in South Carolina has greatly decreased in
recent years.

Mr. W. L. Finley continues his reports as State Game-warden of Oregon,
in a series of monthly bulletins under title of ‘ The Oregon Sportsman,’ ?
while an exceedingly attractive brochure with many illustrations describes
the good work that he has accomplished during 1911—1912.3

Bird Enemies of the Philippine Locust.4— A report on this subject
by D. B. Mackie which we wish were more definite and detailed is never-
theless worth quoting because of the high rank it assigns to the bird enemies
of this notable pest.

“Birds — There are no natural enemies which attack the locust so
persistently in all stages as birds. They often congregate where the locust
swarms are and remain for days or weeks at the swarm eating their fill as
often as they desire. Their importance as locust exterminators cannot
be too strongly emphasized. Unfortunately, many of our most persistent
locust feeders are not wary in their habits and are ruthlessly snared when-
ever chance offers. Investigations of the value of birds as locust feeders
are limited to cases where individuals have been taken and their stomach
contents examined.

“Twenty-four species of locust-eating birds have been identified, in
the following families:

Turnicide (1) Alcedinide (4)
Coraciide (1) Corvide (1)
Ardeidz (2) Sylviide (2)
Falconide (3) Fringillide (2)
Artamide (1) Anatide (2)
Phasianide (2) Cuculide (1)

Meropide (2)

1 Fifth Annual Report of the State Ornithologist of the Massachusetts State
Board of Agriculture. By Edward Howe Forbush. 1912. January 8, 1913.
pp. 1-34.

2 The Oregon Sportsman. Vol. I, Nos. 1-4.

3Game and Fish Protection and Propagation in Oregon, 1911-1912. By
William L. Finley, State Game Warden. pp. 1-23.

+ Mackie, D. B., Philippine Agr. Review, VI, No. 11, Nov., 1913, p. 541.

Vol. ae |

1914 Recent Literature. Parts

“These species represent only a small number of the birds which have
been observed but not taken for identification.”” — W. L. M.

Report on Introduced Pheasants in Massachusetts.'— There has
recently been printed as Document No. 2049 of the Massachusetts House
of Representatives, a valuable summary of the history of introduced
pheasants within the state. Originally introduced in 1896, from 100 to
2500 have been liberated annually by the Game Commissioners, and the
bird is now fairly common. The report touches upon the use of pheas-
ants as game in other countries and other parts of the United States.
Details are given of the life history, and methods adopted in rearing the
birds. The special adaptability of pheasants to artificial propagation is
the prime reason for their extensive distribution.

An open season on pheasants was allowed during only one year since
their introduction. The birds increased and reports of damage began
to come in. The Commission says: ‘‘ During the past two years numerous
complaints have been made relative to damage to farm crops. Many verbal
complaints have been received of which we have no record. Of the formal
reports which have been filed at this office, 21 persons complained of damage
to corn, 15 to garden truck, 3 to peas, 2 to tomatoes, 2 to fruit, 1 to potatoes.
In many instances the potential value of the crop partially or wholly de-
stroyed reaches several hundred dollars, instances being cited where three
entire plantings of early sweet corn were pulled up. In some cases fictitious
claims have been made, where the damage attributed to the pheasants was
done by domestic fowl and by crows. There is no question that in certain
localities where the pheasants have increased abnormally very great
damage may result unless an effective check is applied, and while in many
instances real damage has been done to crops, we have many unsolicited
testimonials to the fact that pheasants, though numerous, have never
done appreciable damage.”

Examination by the Biological Survey of stomachs collected at localities
where damage to crops was attributed to the birds, resulted in the following
showing: 37 percent of the food counts in the bird’s favor; 27 percent is
adverse, and the remainder practically neutral. Many notes on pheasant
food based on field observations and on a few other stomach analyses are
included.

The most interesting part of the pheasant report comprises the able
recommendations regarding public policy in relation to the bird. ‘“ Apart
from the insect-eating capacity of the bird, it has a high food value as a
table bird. The present market price is $2.50 to $3 a pair, and many
thousand dollars’ worth of pheasants are imported annually.

“It would be logical, therefore to increase as much as possible the number

1 Special Report of the Massachusetts Board of Commissioners on Fisheries
and Game, relative to the Habits of those birds commonly known as Pheasants.
Doc. 2049 Mass. House of Representatives, 1914.

2i2 Recent Literature. [april

of birds raised in Massachusetts, feed them upon the insects for the sup-
pression of which the public is spending annually at least a million dollars,
and each autumn kill the surplus old birds for food.’”’ Admitting that
damage is caused in some cases, the Commissioners continue: ‘“ Thus,
while the individual farmer may have actually been damaged in a very
substantial way, the community has been benefited by the insect-eating
value of the pheasant, and the State should reimburse the farmer for dam-
age to his crops in cases where substantial damage could be shown; or,
in case of persistent damage, provision should be made for killing the indi-
vidual pheasants which have thus acquired the perverted habit of eating
as special food farm products of particular value to man.”

This is a clear convincing statement of a necessary corollary to the
theory of state ownership of wild game. Massachusetts has advanced
further than any other state in the practical working out of game protection
under this theory. For years it has reimbursed cultivators for losses occa-
sioned by deer, and it now proposes to apply the same method to the
pheasant problem. As a matter of fact the principle set forth must be
applied to all wild animals protected by the state. If citizens are unable
legally to protect their property then they must in justice be paid by the
state when they suffer loss on account of animals which are the property
of the state.

The reviewer has hitherto argued for exemptions in state protective laws
in favor of owners whose property was being damaged The Massachu-
setts plan is however more logical, more in accord with modern ideas as
to strict and comprehensive protection, and is simpler in operation. In
Massachusetts, reports of damage are now investigated jointly by a repre-
sentative of the game commission, and one of the state board of agriculture
in coéperation with the complainant. The damage is assessed, and the
amount paid. Thus the matter is definitely settled in one transaction.
Permission to kill injurious animals, for a few days or a season, would
involve long drawn out and expensive inspection and seems not nearly so
practicable a scheme as the Massachusetts plan. We must do something
to satisfy complainants or our protective laws will create antagonists instead.
of supporters. Massachusetts is doing this in a sane and logical way and
other states would do well to follow her example.

A contingency beyond remedy by the process outlined above, is damage
caused by the increase or incursion of overwhelming numbers of any
species. Such an emergency could be met by declaring suitable open
seasons, and by instituting codperative destructive measures.— W. L. M.

Peis. Recent Literature. O73

The Ornithological Journals.'!

Bird Lore. Vol. XVI. No.1. January-February, 1914.

Impressions of the Voices of Tropical Birds. By L. A. Fuertes. Second
paper — Tinamous, Partridges and Solitaires—— These delightful papers
illustrated by bird portraits drawn in the author’s well known style, give
one a more vivid idea of neotropical bird life than anything that has ap-
peared for a long time.

Notes on How to Start a Colony of Purple Martins. By T. L. McCon-
nell.

Winter Feeding. By W. L. Skinner.

City Nighthawks. By C. G. Abbott.— Breeding on a house roof in
Brooklyn.

Migration of N. A. Sparrows. (Red-polls and Purple Finches.) By
W. W. Cooke.— Plumages by F. M. Chapman, color plate by L. A. Fuertes.

Bird Lore’s Fourteenth Christmas Census — 179 lists are published,
while many others were for one reason or another rejected. This illustrates
the almost unwieldly proportions to which these returns have grown.
Mr. E. H. Perkins contributes a consideration of the variation in abundance
of a number of winter species based on the Christmas-day lists from 1901
to 1911 and the editor contributes ‘ Notes on Winter Birds’ and proposes a
‘Coéperative Study of Migration’ selecting the Red-winged Blackbird,
Robin and Pheebe as the first three species for study. The Wood Thrush.
By T. G. Pearson with color plate by L. A. Fuertes is the Educational
Leaflet.

The Condor.—Vol. XV. No.6. November—December, 1913. Henry
B. Kaeding. By Joseph Mailliard.

Notes on the Eggs of the North American Limicole. Referring princi-
pally to the Accidental Visitors. By H. Massey.

Some Further Notes on Sierran Field-work. By M. 8. Ray.— Mainly
near Pyramid Peak.

Identification by Camera. By W. L. Dawson.— Two photographs of
Yellow-legs, Northern Phalarope, etc.

Some Curious Nesting Places of the Allen Hummingbird on the Rancho
san Geronimo. By Joseph Mailliard— On hanging rope loops, ete.

The Birds of San Martin Island, Lower California. By H. W. Wright.—
With numerous illustrations.

A Mnemonic Device for Color-workers. By W. L. Dawson.— This is
followed by a ‘partial critique,’ which deals with the nomenclature of
colors adopted by Mr. Ridgway, the claim being made that ‘ Payne’s Gray’
for instance, is meaningless as a name. The author seems to think that a

1The names of the editor and publisher of each journal will be found in the
January number of ‘ The Auk.’

274 Recent Literature. pee

nomenclature can be devised which will recall a given color. This we very
much doubt and it seems to us a case exactly parallel to that of syllabic
notation of bird song (cf. Auk, 1913, p. 472). There may be some people
endowed with a color sense similar to the gift of absolute pitch in music,
who can tell the relationship of a given shade to one of the primary tints,
but they must be exceedingly rare, and if we have to match our colors with
the book it is easier by far to locate “Payne’s Gray’ by the index than to
find ‘‘ the double-gray half-tint of spectrum blue ”’ according to the system
tentatively suggested by the author, and imagine the consternation of the
modern describers of new races of birds who glory in reducing their de-
scriptions to two or three lines if they had to use such a nomenclature!
Mr. Ridgway’s names are simply intended as ‘ check-marks’ by which the
colors described by one author may be found by another. Numbers.
would have been simpler but the danger of ruinous typographical errors.
would have been very great.

Preliminary Report upon the Disease Occurring among the Ducks of
the Southern San Joaquin Valley during the Fall of 1913. By Frank C.
Clarke.— Estimated that 25,000 birds had perished at the time the in-
vestigation was made. Examinations and experiments show either a.
mineral or organic poison in the water as the cause of the disease.

The Condor. Vol. XVI. No.1. January—February, 1914.

Direct Approach as a Method in Bird Photography. By W. L. Dawson.
— Illustrated by some remarkable photographs of shore birds, ibises, ete.

Notes on the Derby Flycatcher. By Adriaan Van Rossem.— In Sal-
vador. :

Some Notes on the Nesting of the Sharp-shinned Hawk. By H. J.
Rust.— Admirable photographs show the development of the young.

The People’s Bread. By W. L. Dawson.— A critique of ‘ Western
Bird Guide.’

A Second List of the Birds of the Berkeley Campus. By Joseph Grinnell.

The Wilson Bulletin. Vol. XXV. No.4. December, 1913.

Experiments in Feeding Hummingbirds during Seven Summers. By
Althea R. Sherman.— A most valuable contribution to the habits of the
Ruby-throated Hummingbird. Bottles of syrup eventually attracted al-
most the entire attention of the birds to the exclusion of flowers. Arti-
ficial flowers attached to the tops of the bottles were found quite unnecessary,
the birds drinking as readily from the exposed bottles. Six hummingbirds:
consumed in twenty days three cupfuls (9252 grains) of sugar made into:
syrup. The detailed observations are extremely interesting.

Nest Life of the Catbird. By I. N. Gabrielson.— A detailed study of
the feeding of the young, etc., similar to the author’s previous paper on the
Brown Thrasher.

Bird Notes from the South West. By J. L. Sloanaker.— Near Tucson,
Arizona.

An Unusual Flight of Warblers in the Missouri Valley. By T. C.
Stephens— Annotated list of 19 species observed at Sioux City, lowa,
during the spring of 1913.

Vols oid. el Recent Literature. 275

The Odlogist. Vol. XXX. No. 12. December 15, 1913.

Two Months in the Everglades. By O. E. Baynard.

Preliminary List of Water Birds of the Middle Delaware Valley, A Cor-
rection. By R. F. Miller— Records queried in these columns are admitted
to be without foundation and the list ‘‘ purposely written to excite the
professional ornithologists to adverse criticism”! ‘The Odlogist’ can
hardly afford to publish such articles.

The Odlogist. Vol. XXXI. No.1. January 15, 1914.

Bachman’s Sparrow, A Summer Resident in Southern Pennsylvania.
By 8S. S. Dickey.— Several birds found and watched in the extreme south-
western corner of Pennsylvania. Unfortunately they were not positively
identified.

The Odlogist. Vol. XXXI. No.2. February 15, 1914.

Nesting of the Northern Raven in Pennsylvania. By 8.8. Dickey.

The Ibis. X Series. Vol. II. No.1. January, 1914.

Notes on the Nidification of some Birdsfrom Burma. By H. H. Harring-
ton.— On some 40 species the nesting of which is not mentioned in Hume’s
‘Nests and Eggs.’ A colored plate contains figures of many of the eggs.

Notes on Birds observed in Katanga, Belgian Congo. By L. Beresford
Mouritz.

An Ornithological Expedition to the Eastern Canary Islands. By
David A. Bannerman.— The first installment of this extended report on
the results of Mr. Bannerman’s expedition, May—June, 1913, to the islands
of Fuerteventura, Lanzarote, Allegranza, Graciosa and Montafia Clara.
Excellent views of the scenery and color plates of Hematopus niger meade-
waldoi and Sazicola dacotie muriele are given.

A List of the Birds of Melville Island, Northern Territory, Australia.
By Gregory M. Mathews.— An Annotated list of 167 species, observed
apparently on an expedition undertaken in 1911-12, although there is no
statement on this point or as to who collected the specimens and made the
field notes!

Obituaries.— Alfred Russell Wallace, Richard John Ussher, William
John Ansorge, Ora Willis Knight and Anton Fritsch.

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. No.CXCII. Novem-
ber 27, 1913.

Chairman’s address on the progress of ornithology.

Mr. Bannerman described his trip to the Canaries.

H. H. Harrington described as new Proparus ripponi, Burma; Stachyris
nigriceps coltarti, Margherita; Izxulus flavicollis hartertit, Burma; Siva
cyanuroptera oatsi, Byingyi Mt.; Alcippe fratercula yunnanensis, Mts. of
Yunnan.

W. R. Ogilvie-Grant called attention to the fact that young starlings
from the Shetland and Orkney Islands were sooty black instead of brown.
He also exhibited Clangula islandica from Iceland in eclipse plumage.

Hon. W. Rothschild discussed the genus Bradyornis, describing as new
B. pallidus sharpei from Abyssinia (= B. pallida auct. nec Miiller). He
also described Casuarius foersteri sp. n., S. E. New Guinea.

276 Recent Literature. Lane

W. P. Pycraft summarized his investigations on the possibility of color
change in feathers. He did not believe such change possible and pointed
out its inherent difficulties as well as the weakness of the supposed evi-
dence in its favor. His views were endorsed by all who discussed the
question. He further contended that the eclipse plumage was not pro-
tective but was a misplaced winter plumage. This view was opposed by
Mr. Rothschild who regarded it as a case of Miillerian mimicry for the
protection of the female when looking after her brood.

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. No. CXCIII. De-
cember 23, 1913.

Hon. W. Rothschild exhibited some immature birds, with feathers
similar to those of the adult in pattern but with more or less of the color
of the young. These further illustrated Mr. Pycraft’s theory that such
feathers replaced others which had been accidentally lost just before the
regular molt and while they anticipated the molt so far as pattern was
concerned they absorbed some of the immature pigment which was still
present.

EK. Hartert described as new Icterus xanthornus trinitatis, Trinidad;
Euphonia fulvicrissa omissa, Colombia; E. elegantissima vincens, Costa
Rica; Tangara aurulenta goodsoni, W. Ecuador; Fringilla celebs ombriosa,
Island of Hierro (Ferro).

C. Chubb described two new forms of Rheas, Pterocnemia tarapacensis,
Tarapaca, and P. t. garleppi, Bolivia; and pointed out the differences
between this genus and Rhea.

H. H. Harington described three new birds, Pellornewm ruficeps granti,
Travancore; Pterythius xanthochloris occidentalis, N. W. Himalaya; and
P. pallidus hybrida, Chin Hills.

W. R. Ogilvie-Grant exhibited a specimen of Porzana carolina shot
in the Hebrides, Nov. 12, 1913.

E. C. Stuart Baker, exhibited and described the female of Ithagenis
cruentus kusert Beebe.

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. No.CXCIV. Janu-
ary 29, 1914.

The following new birds were described: By E. Hartert, Milvus milous
fasciicauda, Cape Verde Isls. By W. R. Ogilvie-Grant, Lanius yemenensis,
Yemen. By H. H. Harrington, Trochalopterum erythrocephalum godwint,
N. Cachar Hills. By S. Clarke, Salpornis salvadorii occidentalis, N. Ni-
geria. By C. Chubb, Nothocercus salvadorii Ecuador.

British Birds. Vol. VII. No.7. December 1, 1913.

Richard John Ussher, A Memoir. By R. M. Barrington.

Breeding of the Roseate Tern in Ireland. By G. R. Humphreys.

The “British Birds’? Marking Scheme. By H. F. Witherby.— In
1913, 14,843 birds were ‘ ringed’ making a total of 46,823 in five years.
The percentage of ‘ recoveries’ up to 1913, was 3.3 per cent, or 971 out of
31,980. The total number of species ‘ringed’ is 143 of which 31 were water
birds, the largest percentages of recoveries were from Mallards and Wood-
cock, 50 out of 222 and 15 out of 141 respectively.

. aa

Ee ots =| Recent Literature. OT

British Birds. Vol. VII. No.8. January 1, 1914.

On the Breeding-habits of the Dartford Warbler. By P. F. Bunyard.

The Dusky Warbler in Orkney. A New British Bird.

Several notes on habits of the Cuckoo.

British Birds. Vol. VII. No.9. February 2, 1914.

Erythrism in the Eggs of British Birds. By Rev. F. C. R. Jourdain
and C. Borrer.

The Avicultural Magazine. Vol. V. No.1. November, 1913.

The Red-headed Titmouse. By H. D. Astley.— Colored plate of
Agithalisus erythrocephalus.

The Priceless Value of the Live Bird. _ By Reginald Phillipps.

Birds of Paradise in the West Indies. By C. Ingram.— Sir Wm. Ingram
purchased Little Tobago Island and liberated there 44 Greater Birds of
Paradise in September, 1909, and three more in 1910 and 1912, all of these
were in the brown immature plumage in which the sexes are indistinguish-
able. It was feared that most of the first lot were males, consequently
the three specimens supposed to be females were liberated later. A visit
in January, 1913, and reports from the guardian, indicate that the colony
is holding its own, and that the males have assumed the distinctive coloring
of the head, but not the side plumes. The reported breeding of a pair has
not been satisfactorily verified.

The Oyster-Catcher. By H. Willford.— Photographs of the brooding
bird.

The Avicultural Magazine. Vol. V. No. 2. December, 1913.

Hornbills. By G. Renshaw.— Photographs of Bucorax cafer and
Sphagolobus atratus.

Wild Ducks from an Incubator. By H. K. Job.— Reprinted from
‘Outing’ (continued in January Number).

Bird Notes from Port Sudan. By Mrs. N. E. Waterfield.

The Avicultural Magazine. Vol. V. No.3. January, 1914.

My Sunbirds’ Aviary. By a Lover of Birds in France.— Colored plate
of Ethopyga seherie.

The Avicultural Magazine. Vol. V. No. 4. February, 1914.

The Sun Bittern. By D. Seth-Smith.— Plate of the bird in display;
from painting.

Foreign Doves at Liberty. By Marquis of Tavistosh— Successful
establishment of several species on his estate.

A Few Bird Notes from Southern Provence. By Lady Wm. Cecil.

Bird Notes. Vol. IV (N.S.). No. 10. October, 1913.

Visits to Members’ Aviaries. By W. T. Page (continued in November).
— Interesting descriptions and photographic illustrations.

Bird Notes. Vol. IV (N.S.). No. 11. November, 1913.

A Day on the Farnes in August. By F. Dawson-Smith.

Bird Notes. Vol. IV (N.S.). No.12. December, 1913.

Breeding of Turtle Dove Hybrids. By E. Sprankling.— Turtur turtur X
T. risorius hybrids are fertile.

278 Recent Literature. [Aa
The Austral Avian Record.— Vol. II. No. 4. December 29, 1913.
New Species and Subspecies of Australian Birds. By G. M. Mathews.—

Twenty-four species and subspecies and two new genera.

The Emu. XIII. Part 3. January, 1914.

This number is taken up largely with the account of the thirteenth
meeting of the Royal Australasian Ornithologists’ Union, held at Adelaide,
November 23-25, 1913, at which Mr. A. H. E. Mattingley was elected
president. The field trips in connection with the meeting are of particular
interest, especially the trip up the Murray with views of the Cockatoo Cliffs
and the White Cockatoo at the entrance to its nesting burrow. In the
proceedings we are gratified to note the unanimous passage of a motion
by Capt. 8S. A. White to recommend the use of trinomials in ‘The Emu’
for all subspecies. We have felt certain that on sober second thought Aus-
tralian ornithologists would come into line with the rest of the world in mat-
ters of nomenclature and this is a move in the right direction. Other
papers are:

Notes on Some North Queensland Birds. By W. Macgillivray —An
extensive annotated list.

Descriptions of Two New Eggs. By H. L. White.

New Subspecies of Honey-eater. By H. L. White —Entomophila borealis
a subspecies of EH. picata but published as a binomial.

New Parrot for Australia and Description of Eggs. By W. Macgilli-
vray.— Eclectus pectoralis, a Papuan species.

Search for Amytornis woodwardi in the Northern Territory. By H. G.
Barnard. ;

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol.21. No.10. October, 1913.

Phyllastrephus chlorigula schusteri Reichenow n. sp., Nguruge Mountain,
German East Africa.

The Swimming of the Dipper. By H. Geyr von Schweppenburg.

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 21. No. 11. November,
1913.

On the generic names Hirundo and Strix and on Totanus ochropus.
By A. Reichenow.— Opposes any change in these names or their applica-
tion.

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol.21. No.12. December,
1913.

Remarks on the Temperament of Hybrid Canaries. By Fritz Braun.

Fringilla celebs solomkoi n. subsp. By M. Menzbier and P. Suschkin.—
From Krim and the western Caucasus.

Cannibalism in Captive Young Gulls. By Hialmar Rendahl.

Cisticola cisticola jordansi subsp. nov. By Ed. P. Tratz.— From Oporto,
Portugal.

Ornithologische Monatsberichte, Vol. 22. No.1. January, 1914.

Call Notes and Song of Pratincola torquata rubicola. By C. Schmitt
and H. Stadler.

Garrulus glandarius iphigenia n. subsp. By P. Suschkin and E. Ptus-
chenko.— From Koreis, 8. Coast of Krim.

Pega | Recent Literature. 279

Alca impennis taken in the year 1848 in Norway? By H. Grote.—
Quotation from Nilsson’s Skand. Fauna. 1858.

Aigotheles bennetti wiedenfeldi subsp. nov. By A. Laubmann, Dutch
New Guinea.

New African Species and Subspecies. By O. Neumann. Lobivanellus
senegallus major, Mts. of N. E. Africa; Criniger swainsoni, ‘Sierra Leone’
probably = Gambia or Senegal, Bleda syndactyla ogowensis, Umpokosa,
Lower Guinea; Xenocichla flavicollis soror, Congo to N. Cameroons;
Bradypterus sjéstedti, Meru and Kilima Njaro; B. alfredi albicrissalis,
E. Ruenzori; B. cinnamomeus pallidior, Mts. west of Tanganyka; Apalis
griseiceps uluguru, Uluguru Mts.; Thamnolea cinnamomeiventris usambare,
Usambara Mts.

A New Metallic Starling. By E. Hartert and O. Neumann.— Lam-
procolius sycobius nordmanni, Mossamedes.

Journal fiir Ornithologie. Vol.62. No.1. January, 1914.

The Avifauna of the Southeastern Part of the State of South Australia.
By E. Eylmann.— Description of a trip made in 1912-13, with an anno-
tated list (to be continued).

On some African Horned Owls. By O. Neumann.— Nomenclature
of the species.

The Biology of the Little Bittern (Ardetta minuta). By F. von Lucanus.
— With seven illustrations.

Between Migration and Breeding-time on the Meander, (continued).
By H. Weigold.

The Jay of the Tyrrian Islands, with Remarks on Some Nearly Related
Forms. By A. Laubmann.— Garrulus glandarius corsicanus and G. g.
ichnuse, ete.

On “ Calamoherpe Brehmii Miiller.””’ By H. Schalow.— Colored plate.

An Ornithological Travel-picture in North Algeria. By O. Graf Zedlitz.
— Followed by a list of nidological observations made on the trip.

Supposed Uniques of the Philadelphia and Vienna Museums, and their
Systematic Position. By O. Neumann. ‘ Parisoma olivascens Cassin’
= Alseonax olivascens (Cassin); ‘Hypodes cinerea Cassin’ = Muscicapa
cassini Heine = M. lugens Hartl and should stand as Alseonax cinereus
(Cassin);! ‘Hremonula hypoxantha Pelz.’ =the female of Nectarinia
platura Vieill.

Proceedings of the German Ornithological Society at the Annual Meeting
held at Dresden, October 4-6, 1913.

Ornithologische Monatsschrift. Vol.38. No.11. November, 1913.

Noteworthy Phenomena in the Bird Life of the Island of Juist in the
North Sea, in the Winter of 1911-12. By Dr. E. Arends.

Ornithologische Monatsschrift. Vol. 39. No. 1. January, 1914.

Annual reports on the various protected bird colonies, with a number of
excellent reproductions of photographs.

lef. antea, p. 255.

ee

280 Recent Literature. La

Ornithologisches Jahrbuch. Vol. XXIV. Nos. 5, 6. October-
December, 1913.

On the Ornithology of the Island of Corsica. By Dr. A. Laubmann
(continued).

The Search for the Oystercatcher (Hamatopus niger). By R. V. Than-
ner.— With notes on other birds of the Canaries.

Ornithological Observations in Sauerland [Germany]. By W. Henne-
mann.— Annotated list of 112 species.

Proceedings of the Bavarian Ornithological Society. Vol. XI.
No. 4. December 5, 1918. (In German.)

On the Musical Pitch of Bird-song. By C. Schmitt and H. Stadler.

Parus bokharensis Licht and its Geographic Races in Turkestan. By
A. Laubmann.

Description of two new Bird-forms from South-eastern Peru. By J.
Graf Seilern.— Capito tucinke, and Thamnophilus ethiops kapouni both
from Carabaya.

Spring and Autumn Migration at Bamberg [Germany] in 1912 and 19138.

By A. Ries.
Two New Bird-forms from Trinidad. By C. E. Hellmayr and J. Graf
Seilern.— Vireo chivi vividior and Glaucis hirsuta insularum.

Description of two new Neotropical Tanagers. By C. E. Hellmayr.—
Compsocoma somptuosa venezuelana, Cumbre de Valencia Venezuela and
Allapetes pallidinucha papallacte, Papallacta, E. Ecuador.

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. Vol. V. No. 56. December 7,
1913. -

The Protection of Wild Animals in British East Africa. By G. Babault.
Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. Vol. VI. No.57. January 7, 1914.
Three Birds of New Caledonia on the Road to Extermination. By F.

Sarasin.— Rhinochetus jubatus, Tricholimnas lafresnayanus and Nym-

phicus weaensis.

On Dryocopus eburneirostris Lesson. By A. Menegaux.— Has been
unable to locate the description in ‘Echo du Monde Savant,’ where it was
supposed to have appeared.

Song Birds in the Neighborhood of Vendome. By M. E. Coursimault.—
Songs given in musical notation (continued in February).

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. Vol. VI. No. 58. February 7, 1914.

Notes on Birds Observed and Collected in Algeria. By Count Zedlitz.—
To be continued, 36 species in this instalment.

Ardea. Vol. II. No. 4. December, 1913. (In Dutch.)

The Black Woodpecker ( Dryocopus martius). By W. H. De Beaufort.

The Bittern (Botaurus stellaris). By A. Burdet.— With photographs
of brooding bird.

Observations at the Lights of the ‘Hoch van Holland.’ By G. J. Van
Oort.

Revista Italiana di Ornitologia. Vol. II. No.4. April-June, 1913.

The Willow Warblers of Italy, especially Phylloscopus tristis. By T.
Salvadori.

———— EE eee

eo gia 4 Recent Literature. 281

A Study of the Species of the Genus Rhodophoneus. By T. Salvadori.

Variation in the Plumage of Cotwrnix coturnix produced by an exclusively
animal diet. By F. Cavazza.

Berajah. 1913. Text of Parus salicarius, pp. 1-4, and plates XI-XII,
XV-XVIII.

Falco. IX. No.1. January, 1914.

Comparison of two works of Prof. Martorelli, which Treat of Falco
feldeggi. By C. Vallon.

Sarudny on the Blue-throats of Turkestan. By H. Grote.

Ornithological Articles in Other Journals.!

Seth-Smith, D. Hybrid between Peacock and Guinea-fowl, and
between Calophasis mikado and C. ellioti (Abst. Proce. Zool. Soc. London.
No. 127. February 10, 1914.)

Chamberlain, E. B. Local Fauna.— Seven records for Charleston,
§$.C. (Bull. Charleston Mus., IX, No. 8. December, 1913.)

Baxter, Evelyn V. and Rintoul, Leonora J. Two New Scottish Birds.
(The Scottish Naturalist, No. 24, December, 1913.)— Melodious Warbler
(Hypolaius polyglotta), and Indian Stonechat, (Sazxicola torquata indica).

Clarke, W. Eagle. On Some Rare and Interesting Migratory Birds
Observed at the Orcadian Island of Auskerry in the Autumn of 1913.
(The Scottish Naturalist, No. 25, January, 1914.)

Best, May G.S., Turner, E. L., and Haviland, M. D. Notes on Bird-
life in the Outer Hebrides as Observed During May and June, 1913. (The
Scottish Naturalist, No. 26, February, 1914.)

Panton, H. Relationship of Species— Relationship of bird genera as
indicated by hybridization. (The Zoologist, No. 870 and 871, Dec. 15,
1918. Jan. 15, 1914.)

Warren, R. On Some Gulls Observed in Ireland — Iceland and
Glaucous Gulls. (The Zoologist, No. 871, January 15, 1914.)

Jones, H. V. Parasitism in Relation to Birds. (The Zoologist, No.
872, Feb. 15, 1914.)

Stubbs, F. J. Corophium longicorne: An Ornithological Study of a
Crustacean. (do.).— An interesting study of this erratic ‘shrimp’ and
the numerous birds which fed on it at time of greatest abundance.

Selous, E. A Diary of Ornithological Observation made in Iceland
During June and July, 1912 (do.).

Church, Sir A.H. Notes on Turacin and the Turacin Bearers. (Proc.
Zool. Soc. London, 1913, pt. III, pp. 639-643.)— Turacin does not occur in
Dasylophus as stated by Krukenberg but is restricted to the Musophagide.

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
obligations to Mr. J. A. G. Rehn for a list of ornithological articles contained in
the accessions to the library from week to week.

ee Oe

282 Recent Literature. Auk

Mitchell, P. Chalmers. Observations on the Anatomy of the Shoe-
bill (Baleniceps rex) and Allied Birds. (do. pp. 644-703, 4 plates.)

Mitchell, P. Chalmers. The Peroneal Muscles in Birds. (do. pp. 1039-
1072.)

Darwin, Horace. Migration Routes. (Nature, November 27, 1913.)
Judging from experiences on aéroplanes he thinks birds follow rivers and
coast lines by sight in the day time and by hearing at night. Ponds and
rivers are not distinguishable from grass fields at night from an aéroplane
except for the reflection of the moon.

Stanwood, Cordelia J. A Glimpse of the Winter Wren. (Nature and
Culture, Vol. V, Nos. 9-10, Feb.—Mar., 1914.) —Study of nest and young.

Trowbridge, C. C. On the Origin of the Flocking Habit of Migratory
Birds. (Pop. Sci. Monthly, March, 1914.) — Considers it due to the pro-
tection it offers, especially the ‘echelon’ formation by which every bird is
able to see both forward and to one side.

Grieve, Symington. Notes upon some Rare New Zealand Birds, and
Exhibition of Skins, Skeletons and Eggs. (Proc. Royal Phys. Soc. [Edin-
burg]. Vol. XIX, No. 4, pp. 63-78, 1913.) — Numerous interesting notes
on ihe various species of Apteryx and list of specimens of A. haasti.

Macfie, J. Observations on two Tame Ravens and other Birds. (Glas-
gow Naturalist, V, No. 4, 1913, pp. 117-119.)

Paterson, J. The Return of Summer-Birds to the Clyde Orca in 1913.
(do. No. 3, pp. 81-89.)

Anonymus. Birds. 1912-1913. (Annals of the Cyprus Nat. Hist.
Soc.) — Notes on Birds of Cyprus. ;

Nichol, M. J. Some Notes on the Eggs of the Sudan Crowned Crane.
(The Cairo Sci. Journ. Vol. VII, No. 86, November, 1913, p. 255.)

Jackson, Sir F. J. Notes on the Departure and Arrival of European
and Asiatic Bird Migrants in Uganda, 1913. (Jour. E. Afr. and Uganda
Nat. Hist. Soc., VI, No. 7, December, 1913, pp. 87-88.)

van Someren, V. G. L. Ploceus interscupularis. (do. p. 76.) — Full
description of male and female, the latter hitherto unknown, with color
plate.

Jackson, Sir. F. J. On Honey Guides. (do. p. 78.)— Apparently led
hunter up to wild animals on two occasions.

Ogilvie-Grant, W. Ona New Larkfrom the Cape Provence. (Ann.S.
Afr. Mus. XIII, pt. 2, October 16, 1913.) — Calandrella sclateri capensis.

Poche, F. Supplement to C. O. Waterhouse’s Index Zoologicus, No. II.
(Zo6l. Annalen, VI, No. 1, pp. 33-42.) — Contains numerous bird genera
but the ornithologist will find them all referred to ‘ Reptilia.’ It would
seem that in a list of this kind the convenience of maintaining the Class
Aves would far outrank the importance of setting forth the author’s views
as to its claims as distinct from the Reptilia.

Paris, Paul. Researches on the Uropygian Gland in Birds. (Arch.
Zool. Exper. et Gen. vol. 53, No. 4, 1913, pp. 139-276.)— In French.

Brother Alphonsus. Our Birds in the Spring of 1913. (Amer.

Pe ota il Recent Literature. 283

Midland Nat., January, 1914, pp. 201-206.) Birds of Summer, 1913, and
Autumn, 1912. (do. p. 248-253, 243-247.) —Observations at Notre Dame,
Indiana.

Vestal, A.G. An Associational Study of Illinois Sand Prairie. (Bull.
Til. State Lab. Nat. Hist., X, September, 1913, pp. 1-96, pll. I-V). Birds
and Mammals briefly considered.

Butler, A. W. Notes on Indiana Birds. (Proc. Indiana Acad. Sci.,
1912, pp. 53-65.)

Wamich, Paul. The Development of the Vertebre of Birds. A Con-
tribution to the Sauropsida Question. (Archiv. fur. Naturgesch., 1913,
No. 6, pp. 1-34.) In German.

Hammling, Julius. Ornithological Observations and Notes from the
Province of Posen [Germany] completed. (Zeitschrift. Naturwes. Arbeit].
XX, 1-6, pp. 1-97, 1913.) In German.

Varges-Liineburg, Helme. List of Birds Observed in Liineburg
[Germany] in the years 1911-1913. (Jahresshefte des naturwis. Vereins.
Liineburg, XIX, 1910-13, pp. 83-96.) In German.

Lebedinsky, N. G. A Contribution to the Morphology and Develop-
ment of the Bird’s Pelvis. (Jenarsche Zeitschrift fiir Naturwiss., L, pt. 4,
1913, pp. 647-774.) In German.

Liebmann, Willy. The Protective Apparatus of Seeds and Fruit
against the attack of Feeding Birds, Pt. II. (do. pp. 776-838.) In German.

Gyldenstolpe, Nils. Birds Collected by the Swedish Zoological Ex-
pedition to Siam, 1911-1912. (Kungl. Svenska. Vetensk. Akad. Handl.
Vol. 50, No. 8, pp. 1-76, pl. I, 1913.) (In English.) — An Annotated list
of 191 species with a zoogeographic and ecological consideration of the
bird-life of Siam. Criniger lénnbergi from the dense evergreen forests of
northern Siam and Rubigula johnsoni from Sakerat on the Korat plateau,
are described as new.

Porter, C. E. Bibliography of the Ornithology of Chili. (Boletin del
Museo Nacional. IV. No. 2, pp. 197-206, April-December, 1912.)

Rahmer, C. F. Contributions to the Ornithology of Chile. (do.
pp. 207-209.) — Observations on Molothrus bonariensis. (In Spanish.)

Dabbene, Roberto. Distribution of Birds of Argentina according to
the work of Lord Brabourne and Chubb ‘The Birds of South America.’
(Boletin de la Soc. Physis. [Buenos Aires]. I. No. 5, pp. 241-261, 1913.)
The list contains as foot-notes many corrections to the author’s ‘Syste-
matic Catalogue of the Birds of the Republic of Argentina.’ (An. Mus,
Nac. Buenos Ayers, 1910.) In Spanish.

Job, H. K. Notable Progress in Quail Propagation. (Forest and
Stream, Dec. 20, 1913.)

Eaton, D. H. The Last Surviving Passenger Pigeon. (Forest and
Stream, February 7, 1914.) —In the Cincinnati ‘ Zoo.’

Jewel, L. L. Canal Zone Bird Species. (The Canal Record, January
28, 1914.)—A nominal list of 251 species of Passeres and Hummingbirds.

Brabourne, Lord and Chubb, Charles. A Synopsis of the Genus

284 Recent Literature. [Apri

Tinamus. (Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist. (8) XII, No. 72. December,
1913.) — Twelve forms representing six species are recognized from South
America, of which Tinamus tao septentrionalis Cumana, Venezuela, and
T. robustus inexpectatus, Salidero, N. Ecuador are described as new.

Ridewood, W. G. Guide to the Exhibition of Specimens Illustrating
the Modification of the Structure of Animals in Relation to Flight. . (Brit.
Mus. Special Guide, No. 6. 1913.)

Eckardt, W. K. Practischer Vogelschutz. (Theodore Thomas, Leip-
zig.) (1913?) — A handbook of bird protection. (In German.)

Parkin, Thos. The Grey Friars, Winchelsea and its Rookery. (Hast-
ings and East Sussex Naturalist, Il, No.2. August 14, 1913.) — An inter-
esting illustrated article on the Rooks, picturing the large nests built in
colonies. This is a continuation of a series of papers in Vol. I of the same
journal on Heronries and Rookeries of East Sussex.

Horring, R. Birds Observed at the Danish Lights in 1912. (Viden-
skab. Meddel. fra Dansk naturhist. Forening i Kjobenhayn. Bind 65.
1913.) In Danish.

Publications Received.— Baker, HE. C. Stuart. Indian Pigeons and
Doves. Roy. 8vo. pp. i-xv + 1-260, pll. 1-26 + frontispiece, all colored.
London, Witherby & Co., 1913. £2. 10s. net.

Bannerman, David A. An Ornithological Expedition to the Eastern
Canary Islands — Part 1. (The Ibis, 1914, pp. 38-90.)

Bonhote, J. Lewis. Practical Bird Keeping. 8vo. pp.i-xvi + 1-142,
pll. I-XVI + colored frontispiece. London, West, Newman & Co. 1913.

Bryant, Harold C. A Determination of the Economic Status of the
Western Meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta) in California (Univ. of Cal. Publ.
in Zool. 11, No. 14, pp. 377-510, pll. 21-24. 5 text figs., Feb. 27, 1914.)

Bunker, C.D. The Birds of Kansas. (The Kansas University Science
Bulletin, VII, No. 5, June, 1918, pp. 187-158).

Christy, Miller. Birds-nesting and Bird-skinning. 8vo. pp. 1-138.
London, T. Fisher Unwin. 1888.

Dalgliesh, Gordon. Familiar Indian Birds. Second edition. 8vo.
pp. 1-90. London, West Newman & Co. 1909.

Elms, E. F. M. Pocket Book of British Birds. 8vo. pp. i-viii +
1-150. London, West Newman & Co. 1906.

Fleming, James H. Birds of Toronto, Ontario. Reprinted and repaged
from The Natural History of the Toronto Region. 1913. 8vo. pp. 1-26.

Forbush, Edward Howe. Fifth Annual Report of the State Ornitholo-
gist of Massachusetts. Reprinted and repaged from the Sixteenth Annual
Report of the State Board of Agriculture. pp. 1-34, pll. 1-6. Boston,
19138.

Grinnell, Joseph. A Second List of the Birds of the Berkeley Campus.
(The Condor, XVI, January 20, 1914, pp. 28-40.)

Hellmayr, C. E. (1) Critical Notes on the Types of Little Known
Species of Neotropical Birds, Part II. (Novitates Zoologicae, XX, Febru-

Vols ota ] Recent Literature. 985

ary, 1913.) (2) Description of two New Birds from the Timor Group of
Islands. (do., December, 1912). (3) Die Avifauna von Timor. (Zool.
yon Timor, I. Lieferung, Stuttgart, 1914.)

Keezel, Clara C. Bird Study Note Book. Published by the author.
Garnett, Kansas. 19138. 27 cts., postpaid.

McAtee, W.L. Five Important Wild-Duck Foods. (Bull. U.S. Dept.
Agr. No. 58, February 7, 1914.)

Mathews, Gregory M. The Birds of Australia. Vol. III, Part 4.
4°. pp. 301-380, pll. 167-177. London, Witherby & Co. December 31,
1913.

Mearns, Edgar A. (1) Descriptions of Ten New African Birds of the
Genera Pogonocichla, Cossypha, Bradypterus, Sylvietta, Melaniparus, and
Zosterops. (Smithson. Misc. Coll., Vol. 61, No. 20. November 29, 1913.)
(2) Descriptions of Eight New African Bulbuls. (do. No. 25. February
16, 1914. [Reced. March 11, 1914].)

Mullens, W. H. I. Guide to Selborne. II. Synopsis of the Life of
Gilbert White. (Bull. Brit. Ornith. Club, No. CXC, pp. 1-27.) London,
Witherby & Co. 2s. 6 net.

Phillips, John C. (1) Two New African Birds. (Proc. Biol. Soc.
Wash., XXVI, pp. 167-168, June 30, 1913.) (2). Notes on a Collection of
Birds from the Sudan. (Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., LVIII, No. 1, pp. 1-27,
December, 1913). (3) Reciprocal Crosses between Reeve’s Pheasant and
the common Ring-neck Pheasant Producing Unlike Hybrids. (Amer.
Nat., XLVII. November, 1913.)

Reichenow, Anton. Die Végel. Handbuch der systematischen Orni-
thologie. 1. Band. Roy 8vo. pp. 1-529, fgg. 1-185, pl. 1. Stuttgart.
Ferdinand Enke. 1913. M. 15.

Shufeldt, R. W. (1) Use of Material by Young Nature Students.
(Nature Study Review. 10,No.2. February, 1914, pp. 49-53.) (2) Some
American Wild Fowl, Part I. (The Guide to Nature, VI, No. 8, Decem-
ber, 1913, pp. 202-205. (3) do. Part II. (do. VI, No. 9, January,
1914, pp. 227-229). (4) Extinct Ostrich Birds of the United States.
(Aquila, 1913, pp. 411-422, pll. I-V.)

Swales, Bradshaw H. A Critique of Barrow’s “ Michigan Bird Life.”
Reprinted and repaged from The Wilson Bulletin. March, 1913. pp.
1-12.

Swarth, Harry, 8. (1) A Revision of the California Forms of Pipilo
maculatus Swainson, with Descriptions of a New Subspecies. (The
Condor, XV, pp. 167-175. September, 1913). (2) A Study of a Collection
of Geese of the Branta canadensis Group from the San Joaquin Valley.
California. (Univ. of Cal. Publ. in Zool., 12, No. 1, pp. 1-24, pll. 1-2, 8
text figs. November 20, 1913.)

Lechner, A. A. Van Pelt. “ Oologia Neerlandica.” Eggs of Birds
Breeding in the Netherlands. Pts. IV-VII. January, August and
November, 1913. February, 1914. Small 4°. The Hague, Martinus
Nijhoff. Price, £1. 1s. per part net.

286 Recent Literature. Aa

Stanwood, Cordelia J. Winter Wren (Nature and Culture, Vol. V,
No. 9-10. March, 1913).

Abstract Proc. Zool. Soc. London, Nos. 126, 127, December 2, 1913,
February 10, 1914.

American Bird-House Journal, The, II, No. 1, January, 1914.

American Field, The, LX XXI, No. 5, January 31, 1914.

Ardea, II, No. 4, December, 19138.

Austral Avian Record, II, No. 4, December 29, 1913.

Avicultural Magazine, (3) V, Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5, December, 1913-
March, 1914.

Bird Lore, XVI, No. 1, January—February, 1914.

Bird Notes and News, V, Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8, 1913.

Boletim do Museu Goeldi, Vol. VII (1910), 1913.

British Birds, VII, Nos. 7, 8, 9, 10, December, 1913—March, 1914.

Bulletin Brit. Ornith. Club, Nos. CXCII-CXCIV, November 27, and
December 23, 1913 and January 29, 1914.

Bulletin Charleston Museum, IX, No. 8, December, 1913, and X, No. 1,
2, January and February, 1914.

Condor, The, XV, No. 6, November—December, 1913, XVI, No. 1,
January—February, 1914.

Forest and Stream, LX XXI, No. 26-LX XXII, Nos. 1-12.

Ibis, The, (10) II, No. 1, January, 1914.

New Jersey and Pennsylvania Audubon Bulletin, No. 3, December 1,
1913.

Odlogist, The, XXX, No. 12, December, 1913, XXXI,~Nos. 1, 2,
January, February, 1914.

Oregon, Sportsman, The, I, No. 4, December, 1913.

Ornithologische Monatsschrift, 38, Nos. 11, 12, November—December,
1918; 39, No. 1, January, 1914.

Ornithologisches Jahrbuch, XXIV, Nos. 5-6, October-December,
1918 (Dec. 23, 1913).

Ottawa Naturalist, The, XXVII, Nos. 9, 10, 11, December, 1913-
February, 1914.

Outing, LXIII, No. 5, February, 1914.

Philippine Journal of Science, The, VIII, No. 4, August, 1913.

Proceedings, Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. LXV. Pt. III. September-
December, 1913.

Records of the Australian Museum, IX, No. 4, X, Nos. 6, 7, Oct. 24,
Oct. 10, and Dec. 19, 1913.

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie, V, No. 56, December, 1913, VI, Nos.
57-58, January—February, 1914.

Science, N.S. XX XVIII, No. 991-XX XIX, No. 1003.

Scottish Naturalist, The, 1913, No. 24, December, 1913, Nos. 25, 26,
27; January—March, 1914.

South Australian Ornithologist, The, I, No. 1, January, 1914.

Verhandlungen Ornith. Gesellsch. Bayern, XI, No. 4, December, 1913.

Vol, aa Correspondence 287

University of California, Annual Report, January 24, 1914.

University of Michigan Museum, Report of Director, November, 1913.

Wilson Bulletin, XXV, No. 4, December, 1913.

Zodlogist, The, (4), XVII, Nos. 204, 205 and 206. December, 1913-
February, 1914.

CORRESPONDENCE.
The Gannets of Bonaventure.

Epitor or ‘THE AUvK,’ Sir:

With reference to your review of ‘The Gannet, a Bird with a History,’
may I use your columns to make a request for more information about the
early history of the important Gannet settlement upon Bonaventure
Island, which lies some way to the south of Cape Gaspé in the Gulf of St.
Lawrence? I learn from Mr. F. A. Lucas that in 1813, Commander
Wakeham of the cruiser ‘Princess,’ was in the vicinity of Bonaventure,
on which he did not land, but understood that the Gannets had been es-
tablished there a long time. But one would like to have some definite
written information about them, and proof of their presence on the island,
not only in 1813, but at a much earlier date, which ought to be obtainable.
Unfortunately neither Audubon nor Dr. Henry Bryant went to Bona-
venture, nor does there appear to be a record of any naturalist having
actually been there before 1881, in the summer of which year it was visited
by Mr. William Brewster and Professor Hyatt, who were members of a
small party organized by The Boston Society of Natural History for
scientific exploration. Mr. Brewster did not actually land on Bona-
venture, but great numbers of Gannets were flying about when he sailed
past it, although the weather was too misty to permit of a good view of the
cliffs.

J. H. Gurney.
Keswick Hall, Norwich.

Researches of Gerhard Heilmann on the Origin of Birds.

Epitror or ‘THe Aux’:

Last autumn my attention was called to the unusual and very excellent
work now being published by the Danish ornithologist, Mr. Gerhard
Heilmann, of Copenhagen. Through my correspondence with this pains-
taking researcher, it came about that I was in a position to be of some slight

288 Correspondence. [ ant

service to him in this country in securing the data of literature and other
material.

Mr. Heilmann still stands in need of some similar assistance, a part of
which I have been unable to secure for him in Washington. The litera-
ture gives no trouble as we have large libraries here; but I should very
much like to borrow, for short periods of time and for the purpose of mak-
ing photographs, some of the following specimens, namely, (1) a good
example of a nestling Hoatzin (Opisthocomus cristatus) in alcohol; (2)
specimens, also in alcohol, of the male reproductive organs of any of the
ratite birds but especially of the common ostrich; (8) microscopic slides
of the spermatozoa of any of the Ratite or of reptiles; (4) alcoholic speci-
mens of anything showing the pecten of the eye in birds or reptiles, and (5)
any other specimens along similar lines. For the loan of such material I
will be glad to meet the expense both ways, and full credit will be given to
the individual or institution loaning it in Mr. Heilmann’s forthcoming work,
which is now in hand and in part published.

This work has the general title of ‘‘Our present knowledge in regard to
the origin of Birds,’’ and is published in Danish in The Journal of the Orni-
thological Society of Denmark (Copenhagen). It is profusely illustrated by
drawings made by the author and selected from the works of other authori-
ties on the subject. Parts I and II have already appeared, the first in
Hefte I and II, Vol. 7, Jan. 1913, and the second in Hefte I and II, Vol.
8, Oct., 1913. There is an excellent introduction to these researches
in Part I, wherein the contributions of Liitken, Huxley, Balfour, and others
are quoted and compared. Chapter I is a classic in itself, for all the early
bird-forms are compared and beautifully figured, such as Archeopteryz,
Hesperornis, Phororhacus, Pachyornis, and numerous others, full credit
being given to Marsh, Owen, Dames, Brehm, Sternberg, and others.

Part II is a remarkable production, treating, as it does, of the ‘“‘ Resem-
blances between Aves and ancient or prehistoric Reptiles.’”’ The figures
are extremely interesting, and the labors of Cope, Cuvier, and many other
authorities are compared. In Section II of this chapter, wherein the
principal species of Dinosaurs are taken up, Mr. Heilmann gives us some
of his own very clever restorations, and the works of Dollo, Pycraft, and
many others are reviewed and compared in commendable detail.

An almost unique feature of the work, as thus far published, is the
comparison of the modes of locomotion in birds and reptiles, existing and
extinct. Here the admirable studies of Saville Kent and others come into
play with striking examples to illustrate the author’s views. Work of
Americans in these fields is used with good effect, as the contributions by
Schuchert, Lull, Eaton, Osborn, and’ others.

Mr. Heilmann intends to complete this work in five Parts; the next Part
(III) will be devoted to comparative embryology; Part IV, to the Anatomy
and Biology of Aves and Reptilia, and, finally, Part V, to a recapitulation
and summing up of conclusions. Mr. Heilmann has extended to me the
right to bring this work out in English; and should my time admit of it,

a re | Notes and News. 989

after the Parts have all appeared, I trust to be able todoso. Inthe mean-
time, however, I hope our application for assistance in the matter of
material, as set forth in this letter, will result in obtaining in this country
what has been asked for above.

Faithfully yours,

R. W. SHUFELDT.
3356-18th Street, Washington, D. C.
January 8th, 1914.

NOTES AND NEWS.

Tue feeling at the present moment against the traffic in wild bird plumage
is stronger and more widespread than ever before. Following the lead of
the United States, England has a bill in Parliament prohibiting the importa-
tion of plumage, and from practically all other countries come letters
endorsing this stand. Quoting from the winter number of ‘Bird Notes
and News’ we find the following from Prof. C. G. Schillings, the distin-
guished German naturalist: ‘‘The United States has found the only satis-
factory solution of this question. Only direct prohibition will reach the
core of the matter. . . . We German friends of nature and of the birds
only wait anxiously that England, too, may get its Feather Importation
law. We certainly willfollow. If Australia, North America, England and
Germany close the market, the trade will die out.”

‘German Fashion’ for October 26, 1913, says: ‘“‘Thanks to the prohibi-
tion of import into America and the coming Plumage Bill in England, the
end is at hand of the use of the Egret in fashionable Millinery.”

In a discussion at the Academy of Sciences at Paris, M. Perrier,
Director of the Natural History Museum, protested strongly against the
destruction of birds. He begged the Academy to decline the trade offer
of $2000 for the best method of domesticating egrets in farms. It was a
mere blind, he said, to gain time and divert attention; everyone knew
that these birds could not be domesticated.

In Holland Professor Swaen states that steps are being taken to prepare
the public for a favorable reception of a bill to prohibit importation of
wild bird plumage, and similar statements and letters of approval come
from Denmark, Austria and Switzerland.

The direct effect of the American tariff prohibition is shown with great
clearness when one studies the catalogues of the London feather auctions.
In the ‘N. Y. Zoological Society Bulletin’ for January, Dr. Wm. T. Horna-
day states that “exactly ten days from the signing of our tariff law by

290 Notes and News. Ami

President Wilson, the London feather market suffered a tremendous
decline. Out of 1174 lots that were offered 368 had to be withdrawn
because of bad prices and no buyers.”

Among the lots that had to be withdrawn in consequence of the closing
of the American market he cites: 1203 Greater Birds of Paradise, 22810
Kingfishes, 761 Emu, 3381 Pheasants, 54076 wing and tail quills of
Condors, Hawks and Eagles, and 2494 ounces of Egret plumes (=to about
14,964 birds).

Wir the broadening of ornithological study, the student of birds is
brought more than ever to a consideration of various questions bearing
upon evolution —the inheritance of characters, relation of color patterns to
environment, meaning and origin of secondary sexual characters, etc. Birds
were favorite subjects with both Darwin and Wallace for study in connec-
tion with the theories of both natural and sexual selection and are admira-
bly adapted for the purpose, as well as for the study of other allied problems.

The ornithologist of today cannot however afford to base his studies ex-
clusively upon external conditions and to ignore the wonderful advances
that have been made in recent years in the study of cells, especially of germ
cells, which have placed the whole problem not only of heredity but of
sex in an entirely new light. The enlightening experiments in breeding
which have often corroborated the theories that originated in cell study
must also demand his attention.

The study of the bird in relation to its environment is as important as
ever but the student must at the same time be familiar with the results
achieved in this new line of investigation.

It is often difficult for one to take up a subject of this kind and follow its
development through a voluminous and widely scattered literature, but
in this instance we have the whole subject clearly and concisely set forth in
a little volume by Dr. Thomas H. Morgan, ‘ Heredity and Sex,’ ! one of the
series of Columbia University Lectures. ‘The Evolution of Sex,’ ‘The
Mendelian Principles of Heredity,’ ‘Secondary Sexual Characters,’ ‘Par-
thenogenesis’ and ‘Sex-linked Characters,’ are some of the topics discussed.
Birds are constantly referred to and the work while hardly to be classed as
strictly ornithological literature is one well worthy of the ornithologist’s
attention.

Tue first of the proposed annual meetings of the Wilson Ornithological
Club was held in Chicago on February 5 and 6, 1914, and plans were
formulated for similar yearly gatherings at points in the middle section of
the country. For an initial gathering it was well attended and the busi-
ness done will mean much for the cause of ornithology throughout the
region which the Club especially covers. Such a movement will, we feel

1Columbia University Press. New York, 1913. 8vo. pp. 1-282.

aw Notes and News. 291

sure, prove of immense benefit to the A. O. U. and will pave the way for a
meeting of the latter body in Chicago or vicinity some time in the near
future.

Tuer Delaware Valley Ornithological Club held its twenty-fourth annual
meeting on the evening of January 14, 1914, at the Academy of Natural
Sciences, Philadelphia. The following officers were chosen for the ensuing
year, President, Stewardson Brown; Vice-President, Henry W. Fowler;
Secretary, J. Fletcher Street; Treasurer, Samuel C. Palmer; Editor of
‘Cassinia,’ Robert Thomas Moore. The meetings have been well attended
during the year and a number of interesting communications have been
made. Among others may be mentioned the ‘Musical versus the Syllabic
Method of Recording Bird Song,’ by R. T. Moore; ‘The Embryology of a
Bird,’ by Dr. Samuel C. Palmer; ‘Notes on Birds Observed on a Trip
through Florida and Texas,’ by James A. G. Rehn, ‘On Kirtland’s Warbler
in Michigan’ by Dr. Max M. Peet, and ‘Fish-eating Birds,’ by Henry W.
Fowler.

The Club is preparing to increase its corps of bird migration observers
and will be glad to furnish blank schedules for making returns to anyone
in eastern Pennsylvania or southern New Jersey who desires to aid in the
work.

Tue Linnean Society of New York, held its annual dinner at the Hotel
Endicott, New York City, on the evening of March 24, 1914. Dr. Daniel
Giraud Elliot was the guest of honor.

Tue coming Thirty-second Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. to be held at
Washington, D. C., April 6-9, 1914, marks a new policy on the part of the
organization. The first and second meetings were held in September,
the fifth in October, and several early in December, but all the others in
November, usually during the second week in the month.

The objects of the change to April were explained in the January issue
of ‘The Auk’ and it is to be hoped that many members who were hitherto
unable to be present will this year find it possible to attend, and also
that the change from autumn to spring will not prove inconvenient to
those who through many years’ attendance have become thoroughly iden-
tified with the meetings.

The circular issued by the local committee states that an invitation has
been received from Dr. Frank Baker inviting the members to visit the
National Zodlogical Park, a delightful spot where in April many wild
native migrant birds may doubtless be seen as well as the foreign species
which are, from force of circumstances, resident there. Further possibilities
in this direction are opened up by the additional announcement that if
weather conditions will permit there will be short field excursions under

292 Notes and News. Apu

the guidance of local members, and “it is recommended that walking _
shoes be included in the baggage.”

If this spring meeting proves the success that we hope it may, there is:
no reason why the field trips may not eventually become as important a
part of the program as in the case of the Royal Australasian Ornitholo-
gists’ Union, where regular ‘camp outs’ are held after the meeting and
observations of much importance are made.

At any rate let us urge every member of the Union to make a point of
being in Washington on April 7, prepared to help make this the best meet-
ing that the A. O. U. has held.

PUBLICATIONS OF THE

AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS? UNION

FOR SALE AT THE FOLLOWINC PRICES:

The Auk. Complete set, Volumes I-X XIX, (1884-1912) in origi-
nal covers, $99.00. Volumes I-VI are sold only with complete
sets, other volumes, $3.00 each; 75 cents for single numbers.

Index to The Auk (Vols. I-XVII, 1884-1900) and Bulletin of the
Nuttall Ornithological Club (Vols. I-VIII, 1876-1883), 8vo, pp.
vii + 426, 1908 Cloth, $3.75; paper, $3.25.

Check-List of North American Birds. Third edition, revised,

1910. Cloth, 8vo., pp. 426, and 2 maps. $2.50, net, postage

25 cents. Second edition, revised, 1895. Cloth, Svo, pp. xi +
372. $1.15. Original edition 1886. Out of print.

Abridged Check-List of North American Birds. 1889. (Abridged
and revised from the original edition). Paper, 8vo, pp. 71, printed
on one side of the page. 25 cents.

- Pocket Check-List of North American Birds. (Abridged from
the third edition). Flexible cover, 3} X 5¢ inches. 25 cents;
10 copies for $2.00.

Code of Nomenclature. Revised edition, 1908. Paper, 8vo, pp.
Ixxxv. 50 cents.
Original edition, 1892. Paper, 8vo, pp. iv + 72. 25 cents.

We would be pleased to furnish The Auk, Index and Check-List

to your library at 15% discount.

Address JONATHAN DWIGHT, Jr.

434 W. 7ist St., New York, N. Y.

ec Ori i

Check-List of North American —
Birds |
Last Edition, 1910

Cloth, 8vo, pp. 480 and two maps of North America,
one a colored, faunal zone map, and one a locality map.

The first authoritative and complete list of North
American Birds published since the second edition of
the Check-List in 1895. The ranges of species and
geographical races have been carefully revised and
greatly extended, and the names conform to the latest —
rulings of the A. O. U. Committee on Nomenclature.
The numbering of the species is the same as in the
second edition. Price, including postage, $2.75.

POCKET EDITION ‘’

A pocket Check-List (32 by 5% inches) of North
American Birds with only the numbers and the scientific
and popular names. Alternate pages blank for the
insertion of notes. Flexible covers. Price, including
postage, 25 cents; or 10 copies for $2.00.

Address JONATHAN DWIGHT, Jr.

134 W. 7Ist St. New York City

CONTINUATION OF THE New

Series,
BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB Vol. XXXI

‘The Auk

H Quarterly Journal of Ornithology

iL~ ie fa © cn ale Fs ete Ma’
7 ee wld. o3 ry * as 5 ae :
CC rrr ese eee; ee —_
’ : >
\ {j
’
1 ly] | we
N | .
i i] )
{ |
| i
H |
yet | .
: f \
| le aN
“Vy :
‘ wi
4 ¥ 7 SS
\ gj f
\ : \' h Ss nS
X . | ae
, 4 | \
; { .
P 1 {4i) \
yf ay
A » Ss
aN \\ ‘i bs
‘ =a i =
R A RS
y Me :
S | | TS
. v, A \ Ss
. MW S
h {
Hee :

Vol. XXXI JULY, 1914 No. 3

Pee ee Saree So ee

PUBLISHED BY

The American Ornithologists’ Union

CAMBRIDGE, MASS.

. Entered as second-class mail matter in the Post Office at Boston, Mass,

“ae

Ps
an -

‘gos
oa

CONTENTS

PAGE

Tue Movu.tts anp PLUMAGES OF THE ScoTERS — GENUS O1pEmIA. By Jonathan
Dwight, Jr., M. D. (Plates XXIV-XXX) A 6 ; 293

A List oF BIRDS FROM THE VICINITY OF GOLDEN, Cotorapo. By R. B. Rockwell
and Alex. Wetmore. (Plates XX XI-XXXIITI) z 4 s 2 : 309
Earty Recorps OF THE WILD TuRKEY. By Albert Hazen Wright ‘ < 334

OsTEOLOGY OF THE PASSENGER PIGEON (KHctopistes migratorius). By Dr. R. W.
Shufeldt. (Plate XXXIV) 2 358
Noves ON THE LovursiaNa CuappnrR Ratu (Rallus cre pitans saturatus) IN TEXAS.
By George Finlay Simmons . : s : , a - 3 3 % 363
A New Svusspeciges oF DenprRaGaPpus (Dendragapus obscurus flemingi) FROM i
SouTHERN YUKON TERRITORY. By P. A. Taverner 5 < ; F 3 385

AN UNDESCRIBED GALAPAGOS RACE OF OCEANODROMA CASTRO. By John Treadwell
Nichols . A : : 2 : < 5 ‘ : 3 F f : 388

THIRTY-SECOND STATED MEETING OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION.
By John H. Sage . : ; ; 3 ; é 5 : . : . 3890

GENERAL Notes.— A Misinterpretation, 394; Concealing Postures of Grebes, 395;
Herring Gulls at Sea, 397; Glaucous Gull (Larus hyperboreus) on Fresh Pond, Cam-
bridge, Mass., 397; European Widgeon (Mareca penelope) at Boston, Mass., 397;
An Egret on Long Island, 398; The Woodcock Carrying its Young, 398; A Feeding
Habit of the Ruddy Turnstone, 399; Willow Ptarmigan in Montana, 399; Choucal-
cyon versus Sauromarptis, 399; The Bobolink breeding in Southeastern Pennsyl-
vania, 400; Evening Grosbeak in Pennsylvania, 400; Nuttall’s Sparrow (Zonotrichia
leucophrys nuttalli) wintering in King Co., Wash., 400; The Bahama Swallow in
Cuba, 401; The Coahuila Cliff Swallow (Petrochelidon fulva pallida) in Texas, 401;
The Tufted Tit — A New Record for Canada, 402; Blue-Gray Gnatcatcher (Poliop-
tila cerulea) at West Haven, Conn., 402; Three New Birds for Champaign County,
Illinois, 402; New Bird Records for Arizona, 403; Birds transporting Food Supplies,
404.

RecEeNT LirerRaTuRE.— Ridgway’s ‘The Birds of North and Middle America,’ Part VI,
406; Chapman on New Birds from Colombia, Venezuela and Ecuador, 407; Mearns
on New African Birds, 408; Thayer and Bangs on Birds of the Arctic Coast of East
Siberia, 408; Stresemann on the Birds of Ceram, 409; Mathews’ ‘The Birds of
Australia,’ 410; ‘Die Schwalbe,’ the Austrian Bird Migration Report, 410; Grinnell
on the Mammals and Birds of the Lower Colorado Valley, 411; Bangs and Phillips
on Birds from Yunnan, 412; Bangs on New Birds, 413; Oberholser’s Monograph of
the Nighthawks, 413; Allen’s ‘The Red-winged Blackbird,’ 414; Beebe’s Prelimi-
nary Pheasant Studies and Other Papers, 515; Chandler on the Feathers of Circus
hudsonius, 415; Bett’s ‘Birds of Boulder County, Colorado, 416; Walpole-Bond’s
‘Field Studies of Some Rarer British Birds,’ 416; Stresemann on Early Accounts
of Birds of Paradise, 417; Wright and Allen’s ‘Field Note-book of Birds,’ 417;
Bryant on the Economic Status of the Western Meadowlark, 417; Field Studies of
Nestling Birds, 420; Economic Ornithology in Recent Entomological Publications,
421; Hewitt on ‘The Protection of Birds in and around Ottawa,’ 422; Menegaux
on Birds as Enemies of Mice, 423; A Note on ‘The Effect of Extent of Distribution
on Speciation,’ 423; Henshaw’s ‘Birds of Town and Country,’ 423; The Ornithologi-

cal Journals, 424; Ornithological Publications in Other Journals, 4380; Publications

Received, 432.

Notes anp News.— Obituary: A. OC. L. G. Giinther, 435; G. E. H. Barrett-Hamilton,
435; Publication of Reports of Expeditions, 486; Progress of Bird Protection, 437;
Roosevelt Brazilian Expedition, 438; Book Notices., 438.

‘THE AUK,’ published quarterly as the Organ of the AMERICAN ORNITHOLO-
aists’ UNION, is edited, beginning with the Volume for 1912, by Dr. Witmer
STONE.

Trerms:— $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 York, N.Y. Foreign Subscrib-
ers may obtain ‘Tae AvuK’ 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 Dr. WITMER STONE,
AcaApEMY 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.

aaa
ey cree fo

eo.

‘dv 2 ‘YOSnsA“O 6 ‘dv ° OddvVDO 9 ‘dV ° ‘VYHDIN'O ‘€
‘ANE ¢ ‘VLYTIOIdSudd O 8 Anf ° ‘IGNVYT94d ‘O ‘s ‘ANE ° “VWNVOINANV ‘O 7
‘GV 2 ‘VLVTHOlIdSudd “O *Z ‘GV ° ‘IGNY194aqd ‘0 + ‘dV ° ‘“YNVYOINAWYV 'O ||

VINACIO SANAD

THE AUK:

A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF

ORNITHOLOGY.

VoL. XXXI. JULY, 1914. No. 3

THE MOULTS AND PLUMAGES OF THE SCOTERS,—
GENUS OIDEMIA.

BY JONATHAN DWIGHT, JR., M. D.
Plates XXIV-XXX.

THE Scoters are a group of sea-ducks best known when adult by
their black plumage and bright colored, bulging bills. They are
widely distributed during the breeding season in the arctic and
sub-arctic portions of the Northern Hemisphere and move south-
ward in the winter to temperate latitudes where they are found in
great numbers. Three species, nigra fusca, and carbo, are peculiar
to the Old World, and three, americana, perspicillata and deglandi
are found in the New, where along our Atlantic coast they are
popularly known to many of our gunners as “ Coots.”

Historically considered the Scoters are of respectable antiquity,
for the very early writers on birds have had something to say about
them. In 1555, Belon (L’Hist. Nat. Oyseaux) seems to refer to a
sea-duck, and in 1560, Gesner (Icon. Animal., p. 76) mentions
“Anas fera fusca” but at best fourteenth century descriptions are
too vague and imperfect to make much out of them. In 1634,
however, Aldrovand, (Ornith., il, p. 234) not only describes the
common European species fusca under the title “De anate nigra,
rostro nigro, rubro & luteo” but also inserts a strange-looking
wood-cut of the duck with the white wing band and eye-crescent

293

[ Auk

294 Dwiaut, Plumages of the Scoters. uly

most conspicuous. In 1650-1653, Jonston (Nat. Hist. Avium,
p. 98) mentions this bird which he figures on plate 49 with a white
wing band, calling it “ Anas fusca fera,” but the first author recog-
nizing two species seems to have been Willughby (Ornithol. 1676).
At p. 363 he proposes the name “ Velvet-Duck”’ for “ Aldrovandus
his black Duck,” reproducing the latter’s wood-cut on plate LXX,
and calling the bird “ Anas niger major.’ He describes a second
- species at p. 280 which he calls “ Anas niger minor,” figuring it on
plate LX XIV, and this is evidently what is known as nigra today.
In 1713, Ray (Synop. Avium, p. 141) describes “ Anas niger” (=
fusca) and “ Anas niger minor” (= nigra) and in 1746 Linneus
(Fauna Suecica, p. 38, Nos. 106, 107) describes “ Anas fusca’ and
what seems to be an immature nigra, but like most of the old writers
much is made of the unimportant characters which are shared by
many birds, and the real differences are completely missed. This
failing, however, I am sorry to say is not confined entirely to the
pioneers in ornithology.

In 1750, Edwards (Nat. Hist. Birds, iii, p. 155) describes the
“Great Black Duck from Hudson’s Bay” which his colored plate —
the first of any Scoter — shows is perspicillata, and in 1758 Linnzeus
(Syst. Nat. i, pp. 123 and 125) gives the names “ Anas fusca,”
“Anas nigra” and “ Anas perspicillata” to the three species that
retain his specific names to this day. In 1760, Brisson (Ornithol-
ogie, vi, pp. 420-427) describes at considerable length the three
species as “ Anas nigra” (= nigra), “ Anas nigra major” (= fusca)
and “ Anas nigra major Freti Hudsonis” (= perspicillata) and many
later writers might be cited. It would be out of place to review
their statements in this brief sketch for a volume could be filled
correcting and explaining the many blunders that have been made.
My chief object is rather to clear up such obscurity as still remains.
It may be of interest, however, to call attention to the fact that the
two American species of Scoters were long confused, americana with
the European nigra and deglandi with fusca, and not until 1831 did
Swainson and Richardson (Faun. Bor. Amer., ii, p. 450) recognize
americana as distinct, while it was 1850 when Bonaparte (Rev.
Crit. Orn. Europe, p. 108) separated deglandi. Finally, carbo was
recognized as a full species in 1887 by Ridgway (Man. N. Am.
Birds, p. 112) under the name stejnegert. There are therefore in all

Mea Dwiaut, Plumages of the Scoters. 295

six species in the genus Oidemia, the heads of which (Plate XXIV)
have been drawn and colored true to life and in most cases from
fresh birds by Mr. Henry Thurston. The feathering of the bills is
diagnostic of each in all plumages.

The question of genera need not detain us long. I am not one
who believes in making generic distinctions so fine that nothing
is left except monotypic groups and it seems to me that there
should be some difference between a genus and a species. Unless
we recognize the six species now in Oidemia as congeneric, there
should be six genera. Fleming (Philos. of Zool., ii, p. 260, 1822)
established the genus Oidemia (later spelled idemia) and although
five other genera have since then had more or less vogue, there
seems no good reason for recognizing any of them.

In view of all that has been written about the Scoters during the
many years that they have been known to ornithologists, it would
seem superfluous to add to a literature that already seems replete
were it not that very little has been published bearing directly
upon the moult itself and the way that it is related to plumages.
Over a dozen years ago I took up the study of the moult of the
Scoters making use of specimens that were freshly killed. In this
way it has been possible for me to follow the plumage changes
much more accurately than merely with dried skins and now with
the large series at hand that were first so studied, I am prepared to
show some new facts and correlate a good many others that have
been imperfectly understood. My own collection includes the
following specimens, viz. Oidemia americana, 18 adult males, 6
adult females, 10 young males and 3 young females; O. perspicil-
lata, 23 adult males, 6 adult females, 21 young males and 10 young
females; O. deglandi, 23 adult males, 9 adult females, 10 young males
and 22 adult females; O. carbo, 2 adult males; O. fusca, 3 adult
males; and O. nigra, 3 adult males, 1 young female, and 1 downy
young. The bulk of my specimens came from Long Island, New
York, but besides my own birds I have examined fully as many
others in other private and public collections kindly placed at my
disposal. As a consequence I have had no dearth of material
except perhaps of breeding birds, and have been able to piece out
very complete series of most of the species, representing every
month in the year.

296 Dwicut, Plumages of the Scoters. [ae

The question is sometimes asked: How may the age of ducks be
determined? There are several ways of approximating this in
wild birds. Of course young birds show several skeletal characters
that persist for many months, but the plumage — once it is known
— gives us the clue that lasts the longest. It is singular that none
of our American authorities since Nuttall in 1834 has ever made
mention of the important emarginate first, or distal primary of
adult males of americana, nor have foreign writers on the moult of
nigra recognized its value. The like feather in young birds of this
species is of quite a different shape, a fact of importance because,
until a bird is a year old, the primary marks him as a young bird
no matter what sort of plumage he may assume. For the reason
that neither this nor the other primaries in ducks are moulted
more than once in a year this one feather is a key to the many so
called “immature” plumages. I have illustrated (Plate XXV) the
differences between the tapering feather tip in young males (Figs.
1-4) and the cut or emarginate tip in adults (Figs. 5-8). The
same condition prevails in the European species nigra as shown by
Plate XXVI (Figs. 1 and 5) where, for comparison, I have also
placed male perspicillata (Figs. 2 and 6), deglandi (Figs. 3 and 7),
and fusca (Figs. 4 and 8) young and old. I have also added Plate
XXVII making a similar comparison between young and adult
females of americana (Figs. 1 and 5), deglandi (Figs. 2 and 6), fusca
(Figs. 3 and 7) and perspicillata (Figs. 4 and 8). This method,
which consists of holding the feather over blue-print paper, might
be called an avian Bertillon system with wing tips instead of fingers
for identification, and I feel confident that it may hold some future
possibilities. While a great variation is here shown by the wing
prints it should be noted that even where the differences between
the young and the adult bird overlap, there is a tendency for the
adults of the Scoters to have larger, wider feathers, with the excep-
tion of americana and nigra which alone have the singular cut
or emarginate primary in the adult.

As the moults of all the Scoters of the New World, and probably
those of the Old are the same and the sequence of plumages identi-
cal, a better understanding of them may be obtained by taking
them up in natural sequence. The growth of new feathers always
begins at definite points, just as it does in other birds, and extends

THE AUK, VOL. XXXII. PLATE XXV.

DisTAL PRIMARIES OF OIDEMIA AMERICANA.
Adult males, Figs. 5-8.

Young males, Figs. 1-4,

Sh

»

= = rae '
as Py.
‘ ~~
nm
r =
gt ee 7 j it
= ‘ ot te =”

‘
y
Xs

¢
- ts —e -
r ‘
* _ .
tr - 7 *
as ¢ 7 = =
4. ’ 7
oe —
Pe |
a
2
;
’
Hoe = pa
i t
- .
.
fz bs : .
; ; f
ie '
haa

RHE AtiKe \VOld Oko PLATE XXVI.

DisTaAL PRIMARIES OF MALES

Oidemia nigra, young male, Fig. 1; adult, Fig. 5.
perspicillata, “ IO e = sci ee TOO:
deglandi, es = Fig. 3; Fig. 7

)»
)
fusca, "s ae Fig. 4; + Fig. 8.

NPIS ee ba yy aif é
5 op

THE AUK, VOL. XXXI. PLATE XXVII.

DisTAL PRIMARIES OF FEMALES.

Qidemia americana, young female, Fig. 1; adult, Fig. 5.

se deglandi, ss J Fig. 2; a Fig. 6.
e z to]
“cc fusca, “c oe Fig. 3: (73 Fig. Pf.

perspicillata, ~~ ck Fig. 4; a) chez

“i

A

we

>

a)
ao

mee

~~

Mor aria Dwicut, Plumages of the Scoters. 297
along definite paths. This shows clearly in the Scoters where the
black feathers of the head begin to show chiefly anteriorly and the
moult moves slowly backward, leaving a gap on the neck before
it joins the spot on the breast and back where a similar backward
movement has been in progress (Plate XXVIII, Fig. 2; XXIX,
Fig. 2; and XXX, Fig. 2). Feather growth next extends along
the sides and flanks and the last area to be affected by a moult is
the middle part of the abdomen (Plate XXVIII, Fig. 3; X XIX,
Fig. 3; and XXX, Fig. 3), although in the downy chick this area
is clothed before the wing-quills sprout.

There is no haphazard growth. Moult may be delayed, espe-
cially in females, or it may be checked in some young birds before
it has extended as far as it does in others, but birds of the same age
have approximately the same plumages. The difficulty has always
been to classify plumages and moults by name, and this is particu-
larly difficult in the Scoters because there is no month in the whole
year when some individuals may not be found moulting. Espe-
cially is this true of young birds arriving from the northern breeding
grounds, in full juvenal plumage, some showing the growth of a
few winter plumage feathers in October and others being no farther
advanced in March. Furthermore some males have become largely
black by January while others are at a similar stage in April, so
that young birds may be found in active moult throughout the
entire winter. Specimens examined when freshly-killed show many
pin feathers that easily escape notice in skins and I am convinced
that there are two moults concerned in the changes of the first
winter, a partial postjuvenal and a partial prenuptial. Both
produce black feathers in the male and brown ones in the female,
but where one leaves off and the other begins it is impossible to say.
As we find new black feathers among old black ones we may as-
sume such birds have undergone two moults, but as a rule we find
new black among brown feathers only which indicates the post-
juvenal moult and the growth of first winter feathers. When such
growth occurs in spring birds however it seems rather absurd to
call them first winter feathers rather than first nuptial, but we must
either do this, consider the first winter plumage suppressed in
some individuals, or consider the postjuvenal moult as aborted and
its place taken by the prenuptial. It is merely a question of what

298 Dwicut, Plumages of the Scoters. sce

is the best way of expressing facts and as the stages of moult and
of plumage overlap and it is simplest to draw an arbitrary line
somewhere.

During the first winter, the knobs and bulgings of the bills of
males gradually appear as well as the colors that are peculiar to
them and to the legs and feet. The iris, brown in all females, in all
young birds of both sexes and in the adults of americana and nigra,
in males becomes pale yellow during the winter and by the end of
the year white in deglandi, carbo, fusca and perspicillata. After
the complete first postnuptial moult in August, young birds are
scarcely distinguishable from adults, although in some the plumage
is not so black and the bills are less bulged. From now on
adults, both male and female, not only have a complete postnuptial
moult each August or September, when through simultaneous loss
of all the wing-quills, they lose the power of flight, but they also
undergo a partial prenuptial moult in March and April which
involves the body plumage and the tail, never the remiges of the
wings. I have yet to see an adult bird of any of the species taken
in the spring which is not in active moult, and that this stage of
moult should have been completely overlooked is a matter that
may well surprise us. I do not find evidence of any eclipse plumage
in the Scoters as is claimed by a recent writer, a point to be dis-
cussed later. With these preliminary remarks which apply indis-
criminately to any of the Scoters, we may take up each species
in turn and show the development of its plumages and moults. I
cite by number only such specimens as seem worthy of special
notice in order to fix a day or to emphasize a fact.

Oidemia americana.

Natal Down. The only specimen examined (Am. Mus. No.
76845, Gichiga, N. E. Siberia, Aug. 17) is one about half grown and
-it already has acquired some of the juvenal plumage. The bird
seems to be indistinguishable from a younger specimen of nigr
(J. D., Jr. No. 30919, July 30) from Norway. It is dark brown
above and lighter below, an indistinct collar separating the breast
from the still whiter chin and throat; a dark brown cap is indis-
tinctly outlined foreshadowing that of the next plumage. The

THE AUK, VOL. XXXI. DATEL Cos VL

OIDEMIA AMERICANA.

Fie. 1. Juvenal plumage, male and female. Figs. 2 and 3. Juvenal plumage plus first winter, male.
Fig. 4. Adult male. Fig. 5. Adult female.

ch ¢
fin

as

:
2 eas +=
= *

'

j Me re
=jpa” > i lee, Se gre: ey
Pine Rs
a » Psa = th

v ;
oe Vie mies n
y ie — oa
vd, ks eae nee
‘)

7 fe : a
— ah, _ ” — wis

ws ee Mee

ee | Dwicut, Plumages of the Scoters. 299
wing-quills are just showing with the down still adherent at their
apices. The tail is grown and much worn illustrating the fact that
in the duck, a water fowl, the tail develops earlier than do the
flight feathers which is contrary to the order of moult in land birds.
The scapulars and breast feathers are partly grown.

Juvenal Plumage (Plate XXVIII, Fig. 1), acquired by a com-
plete post natal moult, and in this dress the sexes are alike although
females average a little smaller in most of their measurements.
It is unsafe without dissection to attempt to distinguish the sexes
until feathers of the first winter plumage begin to appear together
with the later changes in the color and form of the bill in the male.
Young males arriving from the north in October (J. D., Jr., No.
9798, Oct. 26) and in early November (J. D., Jr., No. 4716, Nov. 8)
soon begin to show a scattered growth of black feathers and later
the females show brown feathers but the juvenal dress may be worn
in some cases for several months before the postjuvenal moult sets
in. A spring female (J. D., Jr., No. 4867, March 4), for example,
is wholly in juvenal plumage with merely a few new feathers be-
gining to appear. OQ. nigra and americana are practically alike in
this plumage, being brown above with a dark cap and lighter below,
but the bill of nzgra is rather heavier; deglandi, carbo, fusca and
perspicillata are brown above, lighter below and show two large
white spots on the side of the head, and deglandi, carbo, and fusca
have white wing patches.

1st Winter Plumage (Plate XXVIII, Figs. 2 and 3), acquired by a
partial postjuvenal moult which never includes the wings and
seldom the lower surface of the body. At most the head, neck,
back and sides become black in males and a much less extensive
growth of brown feathers occurring relatively later takes place in
females. The tail too is moulted, the rectrices showing irregulari-
ties in their replacement. The moult probably progresses slowly
but it must be remembered that in the winter while we see individ-
uals in all stages no doubt they begin to moult at widely different
dates and it is impossible to say just how long any one bird has
been actually moulting. I am convinced that males which are well
advanced by January, also undergo a prenuptial moult in April
or May, like adults, but it is difficult to tell whether the specimens
which are moulting at this late period are undergoing a much

300 Dwicut, Plumages of the Scoters. [fs
delayed postjuvenal or a distinct prenuptial moult. The results
are the same so far as the plumage is concerned, the new feathers
being black in each case, but, if there be a prenuptial moult, three
different generations of feathers can be found while as a rule only
two are demonstrable. The most developed specimen I have seen
(J. D., Jr., No. 4412,<7, April 20), is almost wholly black except the
wings and a few scattered brown feathers on the abdomen and the
back, but we have no means of knowing how many birds reach this
advanced stage — probably very few. The abdomen, as a rule,
becomes darker anteriorly and posteriorly as the feather edgings
are narrower here and sooner show the dark basal part as they wear
off and the fading is considerable.

Shortly after new feathers appear, the bill of the young male
begins to take on the colors of the adult and still more gradually
assumes its shape. The colors may closely approximate, by the
end of the winter, those of the adult, but the shape is not perfected
for at least a year, the swelling of the hump not being marked in the
first winter birds although the yellow color may be brilliant. The
bill of the female and the legs and feet of the male remain dusky,
adults differing very little from young birds.

No matter how black the plumage may be nor how bright ihe
colors of bill or feet, young males may infallibly be told from adults
by the shape of the first primary (Plate XXV) which is not replaced
until the first postnuptial moult. The iris in americana is always
brown in both sexes at all ages.

1st Nuptial Plumage. This is either the first winter plumage plus
more or less wear, being therefore a mixture of much worn juvenal
and less worn first winter feathers, or it is, in part, the result of a
first prenuptial moult. It is pretty well established from observa-
tions on birds in captivity that no ducks breed until their second
year.

2d Winter Plumage, acquired by a complete first postnuptial
moult. It is probable that this moult begins in July, but a lack of
specimens prevents me from giving exact dates. A specimen of
Dr. L. B. Bishop’s (No. 557, August 28) is a male that has nearly
completed this moult and acquired the emarginate primary. There
are enough worn brown juvenal feathers remaining to show that
the bird never had assumed much of the first winter dress. As a

ee ral Dwicut, Plumages of the Scoters. 301
rule the moult is almost completed when the birds reach our lati-
tude. At this time the characteristic emarginate distal primary
is assumed replacing the uncut juvenal feather (Plate XXV)
and the yellow hump of the bill has in some cases reached full
development. The plumage is now wholly black. As early as
October 26 (J. D., Jr., No. 9796) I have seen a specimen that had
ceased to show any signs of moult while others as late as November
12 (J. D., Jr., No. 11983) still show a few pin feathers growing on
several of the feather tracts. There is a difference in the intensity
of the black in fall specimens and we may suppose the blackest are
birds several years old although it is probable that individual
variation is the real factor. At all events, the duller birds are the
ones that in the course of the winter show the most wear and
become more or less brown in the second spring. It may be noted
that the growth of the hump of the bill tilts the nostril from the
more horizontal position it has in the young male. The nostrils
of deglandi and perspicillata being wholly within the zone of the
uplift do not lose their relative positions.

2d Nuptial Plumage (and all later nuptial plumages) acquired by
a partial prenuptial moult involving the body feathers and the tail.
Contrary to general opinion an extensive moult takes place at this
period in both sexes. No birds of many examined in March and
April fail to show abundant growth of new feathers. As these,
however, are black like the old ones they replace, no change in the
appearance of birds is affected save that the plumages look fresh
and new.

3d Winter plumage (and all later winter plumages) (Plate XX VITI,
Fig. 4, #; Fig. 5, 9) acquired by a complete second postnuptial
moult. Differs only from the first postnuptial plumage in that a
black emarginate primary replaces a similar one instead of replacing
a plain brown juvenal feather as at the first postnuptial moult. A
large part of the variation in intensity of color in plumage, bills and
feet is probably in consequence of some adults being only one year
old while others are two or more. The adult female is uniformly
dark brown above and below, whereas the juvenal female is much
lighter below and shows a more distinct cap.

302 Dwieut, Plumages of the Scoters. ae

Oidemia perspicillata.

Natal Down. I know of no specimen in collections.

Juvenal Plumage (Plate XXIX, Fig. 1) acquired by a complete
postnatal moult. Females are a little smaller, but in plumage the
sexes are alike, the color being brown with two conspicuous white
patches or rounded spots on the side of the head. These vary in
size, sometimes nearly merging; the anterior is whiter and smaller,
and the posterior is also smaller than in deglandi and they tend to
become whiter with wear and fading. The absence of white on
the wing separates this species from deglandi, carbo and fusca and
the feathering of the bill is, of course, diagnostic. Birds in this
plumage much worn may be found late in the winter but as a rule
the growth of the first winter dress begins in October rather earlier
than in americana.

1st Winter Plumage. (Plate XXIX, Figs. 2 and 3) acquired by a
partial postjuvenal moult the extent of which is variable. A few
black feathers at the corners of the mouth, along the margin of the
bill, and on the interramal space may begin to show by early
October (J. D., Jr., No. 34151, co’, Oct. 2).

I have some specimens that are as far advanced in December
(J. D., Jr., No. 8045 o, Dec. 6) as others are in March (J. D., Jr.,
No. 7419 o, March 17) or even April, such birds having the head,
neck, fore-part of the body, the sides, scapular region and rump
black and a single white nuchal patch. Females are more back-
ward and more limited in their moult and the new feathers are
brown instead of black. The tail is renewed during the first winter
and colors come gradually into the bill and feet of males. The
change in the shape of the bill is slower, a wrinkling of the black
bosses being the earliest sign, but the winter has gone before bills
and feet can be mistaken for those of the adult. The iris is brown
in young males, becoming yellow and finally white when the bird
is about a year old.

It is of interest that young males acquire only the posterior or
nuchal, of the two triangular white areas that mark the head of the
adult. The area where the frontal patch is developed in the old
male is covered by black feathers in the young bird. The two juve-

PLATE XXIX.

THE AUK, VOL. XXXI.

OIDEMIA PERSPICILLATA.
Fig. 1. Juvenal plumage, male and female. Figs. 2 and 3. Juvenal plumage plus first winter, male.
Fig. 4. Adult male. Fig. 5. Adult female.

a

ee Dwicut, Plumages of the Scoters. 303
nal white spots on the side of the head are completely obliterated
by black feathers as the postjuvenal moult progresses and the fresh
white nuchal patch becomes more or less prominent varying indi-
vidually greatly in extent and purity of color.

1st Nuptial Plumage. Practically the same as the first winter
with wear added which creates greater havoc among the brown
juyenal, than among the black first winter feathers. In some
birds, perhaps many, there is a prenuptial moult which adds black
feathers to those already grown or replaces them. Yearling birds
do not breed and are late in beginning the postnuptial moult. A
specimen (J. D., Jr., No. 4867) taken September 4 well illustrates
wear as well as the delayed postnuptial moult in immature birds,
for the brown feathers of wings, tail, lower parts and back are the
worn and faded juvenal feathers, the black ones of head, neck,
breast, and sides are of first winter (or perhaps first nuptial) while
here and there a few black feathers of the second winter plumage are
just beginning to appear. It might well be November before such
a bird as this would complete his moult.

I find no evidence of an “eclipse” plumage as is claimed but can
understand how retained brown and worn feathers of an earlier
plumage could be mistaken for an “eclipse” growth.

2d Winter Plumage, acquired by a complete first postnuptial
moult, at which the adult plumage is assumed. The male now has
two white triangles on the head and the colored bulging bill, and
the female assumes a plumage much darker than in the first winter.
She loses to a large extent the two juvenal white spots on the side
of the head for which are substituted an obscure anterior and a
more conspicuous posterior whitish spot, both of them obscured by
the dusky feather tips which later are worn off. The female too
has an indistinct cap which is blacker than in deglandi and she may
or may not have an indistinct white nuchal patch similar to the
male,— the individual variation is considerable.

2d Nuptial Plumage (and all later nuptial plumages) acquired
partly by wear, mostly by a partial prenuptial moult confined
chiefly to the head and sides. Many birds examined in March and
April show the growth of new black feathers among the old. A
specimen (Amer. Mus. No. 102082) of May 19 still shows new
growth giving the abdomen a mottled look and the sides a blacker
tint.

304 Dwieut, Plumages of the Scoters. eves

3d Winter Plumage (and all later winter plumages) (Plate
XXIX, Fig. 4 o’, Fig. 5 9) acquired by a complete second post-
nuptial moult. A specimen (Am. Mus. No. 90694 o, July 28)
has moulted the body plumage, but still retains the wings and tail,
another (Am. Mus. No. 119177 <’, Aug. 4) is at about the same stage
and still another (No. 7151 co’, Sept. 1) is at the flightless stage
having shed the wing quills. Still another (Am. Mus. No. 76208 o,
Aug. 24) is the most advanced and has new flight-feathers, tail and
body feathers mostly grown. The less highly developed bills and
the browner plumage of some birds may or may not indicate less
mature birds, but on account of individual variation it is impossible
to guess the age of such specimens with any certainty, after they
lose the last of the juvenal feathers. We must know the age of the
feathers if we wish to know the age of the bird.

Oidemia deglandi.

Natal Down. Dusky brown above and dull white below, whitish
under the eye and a white patch of down foreshadowing the white
wing patch. :

Juvenal Plumage (Plate XXX, Fig. 1) acquired by a complete
postnatal moult. The white speculum distinguishes this species
from all the Scoters except fusca and carbo which it closely resembles
in this plumage. The light patches on the sides of the head are
as a rule rather larger than those of perspicillata and are often of a
dingier white. The posterior spot is the larger of the two and the
anterior is apt to be brownish towards the bill. There is much
variation, the light area often extending to the forehead and some-
times almost coalescing with the posterior spot. The feathering of
the bill is diagnostic. Birds wholly in this plumage may be found
from October (J. D., Jr., No. 474, 9, Oct. 21) to April (J. D., Jr.,
No. 34134 2, April 18).

_ 1st Winter Plumage (Plate XXX, Figs. 2 and 3) acquired by a
partial postjuvenal moult, more or less of the brown body plumage
being replaced by black feathers in the male, brown in the female;
the white head patches are obliterated in the male, merely dulled
in the female. A band of dark brown feathers develops in males
along the sides and flanks, but it is less conspicuous than in the

ee

PLATE XXX.

OIDEMIA DEGLANDI.

Fig. 1. Juvenal plumage, male and female.
Fig. 4. Adult male.

Figs. 2 and 3. Juvenal plumage plus first winter, male.
Fig. 5. Adult female.

- ——
va bi he

See

vo | Dwicut, Plumages of the Scoters. 305
adult. The color of the bill soon approximates that of the adult
but the upward swelling of the culmen seems to require a year or
more for its full development, as indicated by specimens that are
adult in plumage. The white of the secondaries is not so extensive
as it is in adults, but this is a variable character.

It is worthy of careful note that no white crescent below and
behind the eye develops until the first postnuptial moult. The
little feathers of the lower eyelid, brown in the other species, in
this one are dingy white in the juvenal dress and fade whiter, and
when the new feathers of the first winter grow they are either a
dingy white or more often tipped with brown or black which is lost
as the tips wear off, but no white feathers grow during the first
winter on the area where the white crescent of the adult is found.

1st Nuptial Plumage. Practically the same as the first winter
plus wear or with a partial prenuptial moult and therefore chiefly a
mixture of juvenal and first winter feathers, and sometimes those
added by the prenuptial moult.

2d Winter Plumage acquired by a complete postnuptial moult.
Adult characters are now assumed except that the bill has less of a
“hump” than in older birds, but there is doubtless great individual
variation. The brown band along the sides is now conspicuous
and wears and fades because of its color more than do the black
feathers of adjacent parts. In fusca and carbo, however, this band
is as black as the breast and abdomen adjacent. A bird belated
in moult (Am. Mus. No. 115554, September 17), has new wings
and tail, but still retains brown juvenal feathers below and on the
back, while about the head and elsewhere are scattered many
brown greatly worn feathers; the white spot below the eye is small,
the bill is sloping but its color is bright.

In the adult female the obliteration of the white spots of the
side of the head is much more complete than in perspicillata and
the feathers that grow upon them are basally whiter and often
merely tipped with black especially those of the posterior spot.

2d Nuptial Plumage acquired by a partial prenuptial moult as
shown by many specimens moulting in April and May. As this
plumage is the same as the winter the only obvious effect is to
freshen up the bird. A specimen (J. D., Jr., No. 8238 o') of May 8
shows the brown band much worn with the darker new brown

306 Dwieut, Plumages of the Scoters. eure

feathers coming in, while elsewhere black are replacing black-and
are not obvious unless studied in the fresh bird. A similar specimen
was taken May 20 (J. D., Jr., No. 8242) and I have seen several
others. Still another (J. D., Jr., No. 29981) of June 26 shows
much wear and fading especially on the wing-quills where the
pattern of each overlapping primary is impressed on the protected
feather beneath. As this bird was perhaps crippled and certainly
was one that had not gone north in migration, the late date of
feather growth may thus be explained.

3d Winter Plumage (and all later winter plumages) (Plate XXX,
Fig. 4, o, Fig. 5, 2) acquired by a complete second postnuptial
moult. Birds are now fully adult.

Males with a knob on their bills are probably a year and a half old
at least and those with the biggest knobs two years old or more.

The variation in size and in color is very considerable, part of it
being due to age and part of it being individual. The depth of
color in the plumage, the size of the eye-crescent and of the white
area on the wings is also variable.

Adult females are quite sooty and in fresh plumage are devoid
of white about the head but as the feather-tips wear away, exposing
the white basal portions of the feathers more or less distinct white
patches appear on the sides of the head, especially over the site of
the posterior juvenal spot. The wear is most marked in breeding
specimens. Females do not assume bills with knobs, nor are the
bills colored except a band near the nail.

Oidemia carbo.

The plumages and moults of this species seem to correspond to
those of O. deglandi which it most resembles, but I have seen only
eight specimens all told. It differs from deglandi in a bill with a
concave knob that suggests a battle-ship so marked is the over-
hanging protuberance, the loral feathering extending farther for-
ward than the frontal, and the latter rounded or flattened instead
of extending into an angle. Besides this it is very large and the
adult male has black flanks and sides, instead of brown as in deg-
landi, a character which it shares with fusca. The feathering of
the bill seems to be diagnostic (Plate XXIV, Fig. 6), and its color
seems to be richer than in deglandi.

Nova | Dwicut, Plumages of the Scoters. 307

Oidemia nigra and Oidemia fusca.

It would be folly for me with the limited material I have examined
to attempt to follow, as I have done with the three American
species, the moults and plumages of these foreign species, but for-
tunately we may turn for this to J. G. Millais’ “British Diving
Ducks,” 1913. In this splendid work will be found the best
accounts yet published of the moulting of certain ducks and I agree
with almost all of the views expressed therein regarding Scoters.
Still, I regard the term “immature” as too vague to cover the situa-
tion satisfactorily and I find no mention is made of the prenuptial
moult of adults, nor of the emarginate primary of nigra, while the
occurrence of an “eclipse” is claimed for nigra, fusca and even
perspicillata. I will quote Mr. Millias’ own words regarding the
“eclipse” in the Velvet-Scoter (fusca).

“The most interesting feature, however, is a patch of whitish brown
eclipse feathers behind the eye and the bill which had evidently come in in
July and give the bird a female appearance. In front of these feathers is a
jet black patch which has, however, only been renewed once in the plumage
change (July-November). The breast and lower parts are brown and the
tail and wings are being renewed. The bird was incapable of flight when
I shot it.”

His photographic plate of the bird shows a dorsal view with the
head turned to one side and without actually having the specimen
in.hand I must say that the “eclipse” feathers look suspiciously
like worn feathers of an earlier plumage and probably were ac-
quired at the prenuptial moult. Such feathers frequently persist
on these (and other) areas and I have a specimen of the closely
related deglandi (Am. Mus. No. 119176 o& ad., June 2, Mackenzie
River delta) which matches the one in question very nearly, new
black, growing among the brownish feathers near the bill. I con-
sider my bird as beginning the postnuptial moult, for the flight
feathers and tail are old and there are comparatively few evidences
of moult elsewhere. Specimens of perspicillata and americana
show no signs whatever of “eclipse” in July, August or September,
although some birds are browner than others about the head,
which is merely individual variation. The feathers of perspicillata

308 Dwicut, Plumages of the Scoters. ene
and deglandi on an average are whiter basally than are those of
nigra, fusca and americana.

I find adult specimens showing the prenuptial moult both in
nigra and fusca. An adult of nigra (J. D., Jr., No. 14233 oJ ad.
mid-March, near Liibeck) shows new growth well advanced and
another nigra (Am. Mus., No. 26893 o ad., May 18, Havre) still
shows growth of new black feathers among rusty old black ones.
An adult specimen of fusca (J. D., Jr., No. 24553 of ad., May 5,
Norway) shows chiefly rusty black feathers with new ones growing,
while in another bird (J. D., Jr., 14234 @ ad., June 8, Norway)
the growth seems to have ceased. It will be observed that the
prenuptial moult in American Scoters runs over in point of time
almost if not quite into the postnuptial and I really do not see
where an “eclipse” could come in, but I do see how “whitish
brown” feathers may well be found behind a fresh patch of “jet
black” without invoking the aid of an “ eclipse.”

It is evident that Mr. Millais is in some doubt about it for he
pens the following regarding an “eclipse ” in nigra, viz.:

“The principal moult towards maturity commences in July when the
bird is one year old. A number of temporary brown feathers, which may
be called the first eclipse appear on the head and neck these being again
shed in late October.”....

“ Like all the Scoters the local common Scoter has only a slight eclipse
plumage if it may be so called. At the end of July a few dull brown
feathers appear on the cheeks and neck. Below the lores and on the throat
many of these feathers are of a dirty white color and it gives the old male a
certain resemblance to a female and for which they have doubtless been
mistaken. No author that I can discover mentions having seen this
eclipse plumage which is retained to late in the autumn but I have examined
two males killed in August in Iceland which exhibit this dress.”

It seems to me that the facts have been observed correctly but
interpreted wrongly. As I have stated before, the Scoters are
moulting practically throughout the whole year and to say where
one moult begins and another ends is not an easy matter. I have
endeavored to show when certain characters of plumage are acquired
and that the definite sequence in feather growth furnishes a key to
the age of specimens. Unless the age of specimens can be deter-
mined very little progress is possible in settling questions of moult
and plumage.

THe AUK, VOL. XXXII. PLATE XXXII.

1. Looxour MounTAIN FROM THE West. SHOWING THE GENERAL ToPo-
GRAPHY OF THE ARBA.
29. Genesen Mountain From THE NortH. LocaTED AT THE WESTERN
EpGr or THE REGION TREATED.

Vol. XX) RockwELL AND WeTMoRE, Birds of Golden, Colorado. 309

A LIST OF BIRDS FROM THE VICINITY OF GOLDEN,
COLORADO.

BY R. B. ROCKWELL AND ALEX WETMORE.
Plates XXXI-XX XIII.
FORE-WORD.

In any section of the country, where an appreciable amount of
ornithological field work has been done, it is more or less difficult
to plan a season’s work, which will not conflict with, or duplicate,
that already done by others. It was only after some thought,
therefore, that the section in eastern Colorado covered in this
paper was decided upon, because of its accessibility, and for the
results which we hoped to obtain. Here we were enabled to study
the conditions found from the plains level to an altitude of 7600
feet, presenting characters of the greatest interest to the naturalist
and giving considerable diversity of forms.

GENERAL ACCOUNT OF THE REGION.

The region as a whole which we covered, extended from Turkey
Creek Cafion, three miles south of Morrison, to Tucker’s Gulch,
four miles north of Golden, and reached from the eastern extremity
of the Table Mountains at Golden, to a point about seven miles
west of Golden. Clear Creek runs through the northern part of
the area, coming out of the foothills through a steep, precipitous
cafion, and flows eastward between the two Table Mountains,
where its gravelly bed occupies a flat valley. , These Table Moun-
tains (known respectively as the North and South) are huge, flat-
topped buttes, with their sides covered with thickets of plum brush,
etc., and their stony tops supporting level expanses of grass with a
few alkaline pools, furnishing brackish water.

Bear Creek comes out of another deep cafion at the town of
Morrison, and flows through a level valley, sunken perhaps fifty
feet below the surrounding plains level. Turkey Creek next to

310 ROCKWELL AND WETMORE, Birds of Golden, Colorado. aes
the south resembles Bear Creek, but the cafion through which it
flows while deep and rugged supports more vegetation than either
one of the other two.

A peculiar rock formation known as the “Hogback” of which
the Table Mountain forms a part, extends approximately north
and south parallel to the line of the foothills, making a valley here
averaging two miles in width. Golden itself, lies right at the base
of the foothills, and has an altitude of 5655 feet, while Clear Creek
east of there is perhaps one hundred feet lower. The Table Moun-
tains rise to 6550 feet on the north and 6300 feet on the south,
and the foothills go up abruptly to 7600 feet, on the highest point
of Lookout Mountain. Along the foothills are numerous gulches
winding out of the mountains and of these, Chimney Gulch, im-
mediately west of Golden, affords the readiest access to the higher
country. In the lower portions the sides of these gulches were
covered with plum brush, ninebark, mountain maple, and other
shrubs, while higher up were groves of quaking aspens and pines.
South of Chimney Gulch comes Dead Man’s Gulch, Coon Gulch
and Mount Vernon Cajion, the first two very steep and rocky, and
the latter descending to the plains more gradually. Magpie
Gulch opens into the north wall of Clear Creek Cajion, and is
barren with hardly any trees or shrubs, while Tucker’s Gulch north
of here, opening on the plains directly, is equally barren and little
of interest was found in these two.

This district has (subsequent to the period covered by these
notes) taken on added interest through the creation of the “ Denver
Mountain Parks” which include practically all the territory
covered in this list. By means of a special tax levy funds have
been made available for the purchase of extensive acreage at vari-
ous places best adapted for scenic view-points, and at the present
time (1913) an extensive system of splendid roadways is being
constructed, which when completed will form a network of beauti-
ful driveways making the entire district easily accessible to auto-
mobiles and other conveyances. A remarkable “Funicular Rail-
way” operated by electric power which rises to a vertical distance
of eleven hundred feet in twenty-seven hundred feet of track from
the valley back of Golden to the top of Lookout Mountain is now
in operation, and is widely patronized. The city now owns over

ete sd RocKWELL AND WETMORE, Birds of Golden, Colorado. oll
one thousand acres of land and the entire “ Mountain Park ” plan
as outlined by the civic expert, Mr. Frederick Law Olmsted con-
templates the eventual expenditure of over two million dollars.
The ‘“ Denver Mountain Parks ”’ bid fair to develop into one of the
scenic features of Western America, and it will be interesting indeed
to note the effect of this vast campaign of development and im-
provement upon the future distribution and abundance of bird
life within the park district.

DISTRIBUTION AREAS.

The plains area covering all of the low country and extending
practically to the base of the foothills and on the warm slopes of
the Table Mountains nearly to their summits was characterized
by growths of Helianthus, Opuntia, Atriplex, a species of Peritoma,
ete., while broad-leaved cottonwoods grew along the streams and
even extended up some of the gulches beyond their mouths. The
creek bottoms supported dense growths of wolf berry and other
shrubs, forming with the cottonwoods favorable cover for retiring
species. Characteristic birds of this region were Icterus bullockz,
Agelaius p. fortis, Carpodacus m. frontalis, Astragalinus p. psaltria,
Ammodramus s. bimaculatus, Melospiza m. montana, Passerina
amena, Icteria v. longicauda, Dendroica a. estiva, Geothlypis t. occi-
dentalis, and Dumetella carolinensis.

In the gulches, lining the bottoms and forming thickets on their
steep sides were found various shrubs as Prunus, Symphoricarpus,
Crategus, Opulaster and Acer glabrum. The Oregon Grape (Ber-
beris aquifolium) was abundant, Amelanchier sp. and Heracleum
lanatum less so. The Narrow-leaved Cottonwood (Populus angus-
tifolia) grew in Turkey Creek Cafion and in Chimney Gulch
were dense growths of Ninebark. Pipilo m. montanus, Oreospiza
chlorura, Vermivora virginie, and Salpinctes obsoletus were more
common in this intermediate area with many other birds ranging
in from above or below.

On the summit of Lookout Mountain (Plate XX XI) occurred
growths of Lepargyrea canadensis, Rubus strigosus, Epilobium,
Vaccinium, Alnus, Populus tremuloides and many others. Cyano-

S12 RocKWELL AND Wetmore, Birds of Golden, Colorado. [fay

citta s. diademata, Penthestes g. gambeli, Dendragapus o. obscurus,
Nucrfraga columbiana, Loxia c. bendiret and other boreal birds which
need not be mentioned here were common. Birds at this altitude
were not as abundant as lower down but were far more interesting
to us because of their northern affinities.

MIGRATION.

The spring migration here at the edge of the foothills was on an
average about a week later than it was on the plains east of Denver,
showing in all probability, that the birds came into this region
from the plains area. Some species, as the Juncos, which had
wintered in the foothills, moved down toward the mouths of the
gulches and then migrated north, so that we noticed two distinct
movements here, that of spring migrants from the south advancing
up the gulches, and that of winter residents coming out of the foot-
hills and leaving for the north.

Some species that had nested higher in the mountains began
coming down in August into this country so that during this
month we found considerable movement among the birds, noting
several species as Sphyrapicus thyroideus, and Myzochanes r.
richardsont, that had not nested here but which became common
then. Others as Selasphorus platycercus, Spizella p. arizone and
Sialza currucoides increased greatly in numbers at this time.

There was a general tendency among the young birds of the
higher zone breeders to work down the slopes through July and
August, and this movement was more marked when the true migra-
tion began in September. Bird life in the higher altitudes was at ~
all times rather local in its distribution and some localities, which
appeared favorable to the presence of birds, as Mount Vernon
and Turkey Creek Cajfions, supported a very small number of

species and individuals.

Our first trip into this region was made March 28, 1909, on which
date we discovered practically no signs of approaching spring in
the mountains and the typical winter birds were the only ones seen.
Following this we made weekly one day trips almost without .
exception until November 14, on which date the last sign of sum-

heey wa RoOcKWELL AND Wetmore, Birds of Golden, Colorado. 313

mer bird life had disappeared, and the long mountain winter had
begun. During the spring, snow storms and cold wet weather
tended to retard bird movements, and a heavy sleet storm occurred
as late as May 23 in the mountains. The season, from what we
could learn, appeared to be a week later than usual, and the late
rains caused unusual growths of vegetation in the mountains.
Good weather continued throughout the summer and there was no
appreciable amount of cold until the middle of August. Fall
migration had ceased by November 7, and practically all the regu-
lar winter birds had arrived by that time.

The total number of trips made to this section was twenty-three,
which being distributed uniformly over a period of seven months
gave us ample opportunity to make a good representative collec-
tion of the birds of the region, with the exception of certain species
of rare or unusual occurrence, whose presence might only be de-
tected in a period of years, not months. Therefore, this paper
is not offered as a complete list of the birds of the section, but
rather as a basis for comparison between the distribution of bird
life on the plains and in the closely adjacent mountains. A few
notes made subsequently in this region are for convenience in-
cluded here.

SUMMARY.

The field work recorded in this paper was all done in a restricted
area along the eastern foothills of the mountains around Golden
and Morrison, both in Jefferson County, Colorado. The region
covered embraces, in the main, a range of elevation between 5600
and 7600 feet giving the zonal variation in bird life usual to similar
changes in altitude.

The work done was so distributed throughout the spring, sum-
mer and fall that we were enabled to gain an idea of the distri-
bution of the bird life during these seasons, and also to gather
considerable data on migrations, spring and fall, and vertical
movements to and from the higher altitudes. ‘Twenty-three col-
lecting trips were made between March twenty-eighth and Novem-
ber fourteenth, so that winter conditions were encountered both
at the beginning and at the end of the period.

a

314 ROCKWELL AND WETMORE, Birds of Golden, Colorado. July

The total number of species of birds noted was 109 and speci-
mens were taken of practically all of these, in many instances in
large series. The following records are of particular interest, and
will be found discussed more fully in their proper places; Bubo ».
lagophonus; two supposed hybrids of Junco h. mearnst X Junco
aikeni; Passerina cyanea, Catherpes m. conspersus and Sialia s.
sialis. As much material as possible bearing upon life histories
was gathered, and this is embodied under the proper headings in
the following pages.

Annotated List.

1. Spatula clypeata. Snovetter.— A flock of eight birds seen on
the small reservoir on top of Lookout Mountain, August 17, 1913, is the
only definite record of wild ducks for this district; but other species un-
doubtedly occur sparingly during migrations.

2. Recurvirostra americana. AmericaAN Avocet.—One bird seen
at the reservoir on Lookout Mountain, July 18, 1913, is the only record.

3. Actitis macularia. Sporrep SAnppipeER.— An immature female
taken at the reservoir on top of Lookout Mountain, July 25, at an elevation
of 7500 feet. This bird is in typical immature plumage and has the down
feathers still attached to the tips of the rectrices. There is reason to
believe that it was raised here, as Mr. E. J. Oslar informed us that he ob-
served a pair nesting at this reservoir during the summer of 1908. These
birds were noted also occasionally along Clear Creek, below Golden, but
were not common.

4. Oxyechus vociferus vociferus. Kinuprpr.— Two immature
females were taken August 1, near an alkali pool on South Table Mountain
and during the entire month of August they were common in boggy open-
ings along Clear Creek. On November 14, two were heard calling below
Golden during a heavy snow storm.

5. Colinus virginianus virginianus. Boswuitre.— This species
(the progeny of introduced birds) is now a fairly common resident along
Clear Creek. A few were seen October 3, as far west as Rockdale, almost
between North and South Table Mountains.

6. Phasianus torquatus. RING-NECKED PHEASANT.— While these
._ birds are quite plentiful on the plains (having been introduced some years
ago in considerable numbers), they do not wander up into the mountains
to any extent. However, a few are seen each summer in the fields on top
of Lookout Mountain up to at least 7500 feet elevation. The farmers in
this locality seem to think they are increasing in numbers in the higher
altitudes.

7. Dendragapus obscurus obscurus. Dusky Grousn.— It was

yee er ama | RockwELL AND Wetmore, Birds of Golden, Colorado. 315

rather a surprise to find this bird here so near Denver, and while they were
not common, we saw frequent signs of their presence and occasionally
came across the birds themselves. Their favorite food was the kinnikinnick
berry which grew in abundance on Lookout Mountain, and all the grouse
observed were seen there. We found feathers scattered about their dust
baths in sunny places and noted their tracks in the snow leading through
the forest growth. They were wilder here than they are back in the moun-
tains, and when flushed went off with a clucking note. On September 19,
we found a flock of seven in a weed-grown field and one was taken while
the others, all nearly grown young, flew into some pines. The one taken
on that date still retains the juvenile plumage about the head and traces
of it persist along the median breast line. The band on the tail is also
darker than in the adult.

8. Zenaidura macroura marginella. Western Mournine Dove.
— Common everywhere, from Clear Creek to the top of Lookout Mountain,
the first arrival being noted April 25. The first nests were found at about
7500 feet, on May 23, when two were examined. One of these nests was
built on a large flat rock on the very edge of a great precipice. The nest
was built entirely of pine needles, was shaded by a dwarfed cedar and
contained two eggs, one being a runt egg which measured only .76 X .61
inches. Two weeks earlier we found nests on the plains. This species
continued common about Golden until the third week of August when
most of them disappeared. At this time they became more abundant in
the vicinity of Morrison and were perhaps attracted there from the sur-
rounding country by the grain fields which were being cut. Three taken
in Turkey Creek Cafion August 29, had eaten sunflower seeds and another
small black seed which we did not recognize. The larger part of the birds
were gone by the middle of September, though one was noted on Clear
Creek November 16.

9. Cathartes aura septentrionalis. TURKEY VutturE.— Noted
occasionally from April to September. One seen on Bear Creek, below
Morrison, April 14, and another at an altitude of 7500 feet above Golden,
on August 18. The last bird recorded was seen on Lookout Mountain,
September 26.

10. Accipiter velox. SHARP-SHINNED Hawx.— First noted on April
14, and seen from then until the middle of May. The first bird of the fall
was seen in Chimney Gulch, September 19, when one dashed into a flock
of Western Chipping Sparrows near us, but failed to kill. They were fairly
common for a month after that, more being seen along Clear Creek than in
the foothills.

11. Buteo borealis calurus. WersTERN Rep-TalL.— Seen occasion-
ally all through the spring and summer, but more common during fall
migration. The last bird was noted October 2.

12. Falco sparverius phalena. WESTERN Sparrow Hawx.— This
was the common hawk everywhere in the creek bottoms and the foothills.
The first one was noted in Chimney Gulch, April 18, and after that they

316 RoOcKWELL AND WETMORE, Birds of Golden, Colorado. [fue
were common. The birds were very noisy through the first week in May
when nesting began, but during the summer months were not so noticeable.
By October the moult was over and they were in full plumage. Ten of
eleven specimens taken were submitted to Mr. H. C. Oberholser who
pronounced them all phalena. There is some variation in measurements
and the smaller specimens are much paler than eastern birds.

13. Asio wilsonianus. LoNG-EARED Owx.— Occasional along Clear
Creek in early spring and late fall. Found nesting on Clear Creek about
four miles east of Golden, April 24 and May 15, 1901.

14. Otus asio maxwelliz. Rocky Mountain Screech Owi.—
This species was fairly common along Clear Creek up to the foothills,
where it is resident and breeds during April, but could be overlooked easily
on account of its retiring habits. A nesting female was noted April 3, in a
hole in a cottonwood. No owls were seen at all in the foothills and only
once did we find an “owl pellet”? on Lookout Mountain. The single
specimen taken appears to be typical mazxwellie.

15. Bubo virginianus lagophonus. Great Hornep Owi.— An
adult female taken October 2, in a gulch on North Table Mountain, was
the only one seen. This bird rose from some rocks on a side hill and when
shot fell with a broken wing. While we were endeavoring to capture it,
we noticed a strong odor of skunk and upon skinning the specimen we found
the stomach to be crammed with skunk hair and bones. This bird was
submitted to Mr. H. C. Oberholser who identified it as B. v. ES
making the second record for the state for this bird.

16. Dryobates villosus monticola. Rocky Mountain Hatry
WoopreEckER.— During the spring these birds were rare, and a female
taken April 25, in the barren hills north of Clear Creek was the only one
seen. On August 22 we saw a magpie in close pursuit of one on Lookout
Mountain. They darted in and out among the pines and as they passed
me, I dropped the woodpecker, finding that it was an adult female in
worn plumage. Two were seen September 19, and after this date they were
fairly common, several being seen on every trip. One taken October 2,
was in full plumage. A specimen was taken on Clear Creek below Golden,
November 6.

17. Dryobates pubescens homorus. BatTcHELDER’S WOODPECKER.
— Rather rare in the region included in this paper. One taken on Bear
Creek near Morrison April 14, and another noted April 16, on Clear Creek
below Golden. We made special search for this small woodpecker but
found it rarely.

-18. Sphyrapicus thyroideus. WuILLIAMSON’s SapsuckER.— Tolera-
bly common on Lookout Mountain during the first part of the fall migra-
tion, but none seen during the spring. This was one of the birds that came
into this region from the higher altitudes. An immature female taken
August 8, was the first one seen. This bird was still in first plumage and
both adults and young were moulting until the last of September when they
disappeared. They were seen only among the pines at 7500 feet, and were
very shy so that we probably overlooked some of them.

THE AUK, VoL. XXXI. PLATE XXXII.

1. “Nest” anp Eacs or REp-SHAFTED FLICKER BUILT BETWEEN STUDDING
or WALL or FRAME Dwe.urnc. Movuntatn Rat’s Nest at RIGHT.

2. YounG LONG-CRESTED JAY. Just Out or NEST.

Vol. XXX1T] RockwELL AND Wetmore, Birds of Golden, Colorado. SLL

19. Melanerpes erythrocephalus. RrpD-HEADED WoopPECKER.—
An adult male was taken on Lookout Mountain at 7500 feet on May 23,
and on June 6 others were seen in a valley near by preparing to breed.
They were not as common however as they were along the streams on the
plains. A small series of Colorado birds appears to have the bill averaging
a trifle more slender than average Kansas specimens, otherwise there is
apparently no difference between the two. ‘

20. Asyndesmus lewisi. Lewis’s WoopPrECKER.— Fairly common
in the foothills. Our first record was made May 16, when an adult male was
taken, and afterward they were seen all through the spring and summer,
up to October 16, which is the last date on which they were noted. They
usually frequented rather barren hillsides where they perched in dead pines
to watch for passing insects, which they captured after the fashion of a
great awkward flycatcher. Once or twice we heard them give a rattling
call not unlike that of Centurus carolinus, in the spring, but as a rule they
are silent. By the last of July their family duties were over, and the
birds were then found in parties of half a dozen or more and continued in
these flocks well into September, until time for migration.

21. Colaptes cafer collaris. Rep-sHarrep FLICKER.— This was the
only common woodpecker seen. They winter commonly on the plains,
and on April 11 one was seen excavating a nesting hole at 7000 feet. They
nested from the plains to the top of Lookout Mountain and were common
during the summer, nests with young being found June 6. A Red-shafted
Flicker built its nest between the clap-board siding and the lath and plaster
inside wall of one of the cottages on Lockout Mountain. Upon its becom-
ing a nuisance the hole it had made through the clap-board was repeatedly
covered with a piece of wood nailed over the opening, but in each case the
parent flicker promptly bored through the obstruction. This nest was
separated only by a two-by-four beam from a cosy nest which had recently
been occupied by a mountain rat (Plate XXXII, fig. 1). During Septem-
ber and October they were found in small flocks and spent much time
searching the crevices of the rocks for insects. One specimen has all but
two rectrices colored as in C. a. luteus.

22. Phalenoptilus nuttalli nuttalli. PoorwiLu.— Two of these
birds were seen May 23, and one was taken. The first one was on a steep
rocky hillside, covered with brush at about 7,000 feet. The bird flushed a
few feet away, flying for a short distance with an irregular wing beat and
then settled into a steady flapping rather owl-like flight. When alight-
ing it darted suddenly to the ground, usually in an open space. The
second was flushed higher up, just below the top of Lookout Mountain.
It flew out from under a flat rock where it had taken refuge from a heavy
sleet storm. This bird disappeared among the pines and we could not find
it again. Mr. E. J. Oslar says that he has found them rather frequently
in Coon Gulch where they probably breed occasionally. The single bird
taken is typical P. n. nuttalli.

93. Chordeiles virginianus henryi. WESTERN NIGHTHAWK.—

318 ROCKWELL AND WETMORE, Birds of Golden, Colorado. res

This species was fairly common from the level of Golden upward. It was
first noted May 16, and was fairly common during migration. A female
taken July 25 showed no signs of having incubated. In the fall they were
seen in small flocks migrating southward, and were last seen September 19,
when a flock was noted high above the top of Lookout Mountain.

24. Aéronautes melanoleucus. WHITE-THROATED Swirt.— This
bird was first seen May 16, when we found twenty or more feeding along
the side of Lookout Mountain. The wind was blowing a gale and the
black and white forms of the swifts crossed before us with almost incredible
speed. We would hear a twitter, see a flash and the birds would be far
beyond gunshot in less time than it takes to tell it. We tried in vain to
secure a specimen and finally gave up in disgust. A week later it was cooler
and we found a small flock of them coursing low down, just back of Golden,
where one was taken. They were now in pairs and were about ready to
breed. They are not as noisy as Chetura pelagica and appear smaller on
the wing than they really are. They nested somewhere in the mountains
nearby as they were seen all through June and July. On August 8 we took
two more from a flock on Lookout Mountain. One of these had the throat
crammed as full as it would hold with flying ants. The last bird was noted
September 26.

25. Selasphorus platycercus. Broap-TaInep HUMMINGBIRD.—
This species was rare here in the foothills although there was an abundance
of flowers, and none were seen until June 6, when one was noted above
Guy’s Gulch. In August they became more common and were seen until
the first of September. An immature female was taken August 8 on Look-
out Mountain at about 7500 feet.

26. Tyrannus verticalis. ARKANSAS Kinapirp.— This species was
noted only a few times. On the plains further east where they were com-
mon, the first were seen May 9, but they were not observed near Golden
until May 23. The last were seen August 22, when three immature birds
were taken in an open field on top of Lookout Mountain. This was the
only time we found them at this altitude — 7500 feet.

27. Sayornis sayus. Say’s Paa@spr.— Fairly common on the plains.
The first one was seen April 11, though further east they arrived at least a
week earlier. On July 25 I took a young bird that had been out of the nest
about a week, and several more were seen, that had undoubtedly been
hatched in or close to Golden. Their call notes resembled those of the
adults but were softer as is usually the case. Adults taken at the same
time were in very worn plumage. An immature male was taken in a field
on Lookout Mountain September 19, which was the only time they were
noted at 7500 feet and was also the last record for the fall.

28. Nuttallornis borealis. Outve-stipep FLycatcHER.— We made
only two records here for this species. An adult female was taken on May
16, at 6,000 feet in Chimney Gulch, and on August 8, another was seen
on Lookout Mountain in company with some Western Wood Pewees.

29. Myiochanes richardsonirichardsoni. WrsterN Woop PEWEE.

Vol. SX) RockwELL AND Wermore, Birds of Golden, Colorado. 319

— This species was not found until the beginning of the fall migration.
On August 8 we saw two, one of which was taken, and from this date until
the end of the month they were fairly common, among the pines at about
7500 feet. They were found usually with flocks of Mountain Bluebirds
that were feeding there. The last was seen in Turkey Creek Cafion on
August 29.

30. Empidonax wrighti. Wricut’s FiycatcHer.— A single bird
was taken in Chimney Gulch at an altitude of 6,000 feet on May 16. Small
flyeatchers were practically absent from this region, and none of the species
common in the higher mountains were found. Another Empidonax how-
ever was noted above Guy’s Gulch on June 6, but was not identified
with any degree of certainty.

31. Otocoris alpestris leucolema. Drsrert Hornep LarK.— On
August 11 we found a scattering flock of these birds around an alkali pool
on South Table Mountain. Two young birds about half grown and an
adult male in worn plumage were taken. On the two Table Mountains and
in their vicinity was the only country suited to these birds and they were
seen nowhere else. On November 14 numbers were observed passing over
in a snow storm and some of the flocks lit on the gravel bars in Clear Creek.

32. Pica pica hudsonia. Macprm.— The large size, loud notes and
striking coloration of these birds made them a conspicuous part of the
landscape and when they were not in sight themselves, we could usually
see their bulky nests. There were full sets of eggs in many nests the second
week in April, and in the higher altitudes incubation was well under way
by May 1. By the middle of June the young birds were following the
adults about or sitting in the trees near their nests if still unable to fly.
The old birds were wise enough to keep beyond gun-range and not many
were taken. They were very inquisitive and usually when we sat down to
eat lunch one or two were in sight watching us. They would make a
complete circle around us and as soon as we left came down to investigate
our resting place. A hawk or an owl they followed with as much eagerness
as crows do in the east and they were even seen in pursuit of other birds.
One day when we had laid several birds in the shade beside a rock and
were a few rods away among the pines a magpie came down and seizing a
blue-bird made off with it. On another occasion three or four devoured a
Mourning Dove. One evening in November a long straggling flock of at
least fifty birds was seen flying across a valley, but usually we saw no more
than half a dozen together. The thickened anterior edge of the nictitating
membrane was colored a brilliant orange in adults though this could not be
seen unless the corner of the eye was pushed back. This spot was more
brilliant in spring than in fall and was more noticeable in the males than in
the females though present in both. It served no apparent purpose and
was probably merely for ornament.

33. Cyanocitta stelleri diademata. Lona-crestep Jay.— A com-
mon bird in the foothills above 7,000 feet. Rather a large series was
collected from April to November showing them in all stages of plumage.

320 ROcKWELL AND Wetmore, Birds of Golden, Colorado. [sus
July 18, young were taken in the dull first plumage (Plate XXXII, fig. 2),
and adults with the feathers much worn. By the end of the first week in
August adults and young were moulting about the head and the old birds
had regained most of the rectrices and remiges, and by the first of Septem-
ber the adults were in good condition, with the exception of the crest,
while the young still showed the first plumage about the head and breast.
By October 1 all were in full plumage, though up to this time the crests
were still imperfect. In the present series there is a great variation in the
number and distinctness of the black bars on the rectrices, apparently
irrespective of age or sex, though a large per cent of the adult males appear
to have these bars heavier. In one specimen there are only six of these
bars, all very indistinct and obsolete on the proximal half of the feathers
while another shows eighteen narrow bars, the last three extending under
the upper tail coverts.

The sixteenth of May a pair of these birds evidently had a nest on Look-
out Mountain but we could not find it. A week later however the birds
were still in flocks, and not until the first of June were all mated. The
first young — noisy and not as wary as the adults — were seen July 18, and
after this date they werecommon. About the middle of August they began
moving down the cafions, and were occasionally seen below 7,000 feet while
two months later — during the latter part of October, they were seen com-
monly at the mouths of the cafions, and one was noted in Denver the last
of September. There were more of these birds in Turkey Creek Cafion
than anywhere else in the entire region, and here we were rarely out of
sight or hearing of them. In September and October many of them fre-
quented thickets away from the pines where they were usually found.

34. Aphelocoma woodhousei. WoopuHousr’s Jay.— Half a dozen
of these birds were seen on Clear Creek April 3 and one taken. They were
seen also in Magpie Gulch April 25, and a pair in Chimney Gulch May 16,
but were not noted again.

35. Nucifraga columbiana. Cxiarkn’s Nutcracker.— May 2 we
found a flock of a dozen of these birds at the head of Chimney Gulch and
took three of them. They were rather wild and hard to approach but
when one was taken the others stopped for an instant. The feathers are
very long and lax making the birds appear larger in life than they do in the
hand. Those taken are much darker colored than fall specimens in fresh
plumage, and one had the feathers of the breast smeared with pitch.

36. Cyanocephalus cyanocephalus. Pion Jay.— This bird was
heard a number of times in Chimney Gulch in the spring and on September
26 one flew over our heads across a cafion. None were taken.

37. Molothrus ater ater. Cowsirp.— Only one was seen in the
vicinity of Golden, although it is undoubtedly of regular occurrence. An
adult male was found about a bunch of horses on July 25, below the mouth
of Coon Gulch but was not taken.

38. XKanthocephalus xanthocephalus. YEeLtuow-HnapED BLAcK-
BIRD.— Seen a few times in April and May along Clear Creek. The first
bird of the season was noted on Bear Creek April 14.

el mal RocKWELL AND WeETMoRE, Birds of Golden, Colorado. 321

39. Agelaius phoeniceus fortis. TuHick-BILLED REDwinGc.— Com-
mon along the creeks and in marshy growths along the edge of the foothills.
The males wintered and were found in large flocks. In the spring they
frequented thickets of plum-brush and growths of cat-tails as roosting
places when not feeding, and when disturbed flew out with a loud roaring
of wings. They were singing by the middle of April and the females
arrived from the south about the end of the month, though the two sexes
still flocked separately. By the middle of May they were paired and in
some cases two broods were raised. Three were seen May 23 at 7,500 feet,
the only time that we saw them ‘ on top,” and we saw several pairs south
of Golden July 25, that evidently had young in the grass though we could
not find them. By September 1 they were gathered in flocks, and the
moult was nearly completed by the end of the first week in October. All
the specimens taken are true fortis and this is the breeding form clear to
the base of the foothills. Two adult males in rather worn breeding plum-
age had the middle wing coverts paler than in the spring birds but this was
undoubtedly due to the wear on the feathers. Otherwise the series is very
uniform both in coloration and measurements.

40. Sturnella neglecta. WrsterN MEADOWLARK.— Common along
Clear and Bear Creeks and to the top of Lookout Mountain wherever there
were open fields. They were noted along the creeks April 3, but were not
seen at 7500 feet until April 18. They bred here and were common all
summer and a few stragglers remained until the last of September. In
October they were found in straggling flocks between the foothills and the
Table Mountains south of Golden and were then in full plumage. They
winter in some numbers along Clear Creek below Golden and up the Platte
to Morrison.

41. Icterus bullocki. Butiock’s Ortote.— This species was tolera-
bly common in the cottonwoods on Clear Creek and in the town of Golden.
They arrived in the spring about May 10. None were seen in the foot-
hills.

42. Euphagus cyanocephalus. Brewrr’s Buiackprrp.— Found
along Clear Creek and in the town of Golden. The first week in May the
males were seen strutting before the females with bills pointed up, moving
the head rapidly up and down in a vertical direction, at the same time
giving a thin sibilant “see see.’”’ In the fall, the birds were found along
Clear Creek in small flocks, and were noted here until the last of October.

43. Pinicola enucleator montana. Rocky Mountain PINE
GrosBEAK.— An immature male taken in a thicket of quaking aspens on
the top of Lookout Mountain November 7, 1909. No others were seen
though we made a careful search for them.

44. Carpodacus cassini. Cassin’s PurPLE Fincu.— Half a dozen
were seen on Bear Creek below Morrison April 14, and on April 25 we took
an adult male in Tucker’s Gulch north of Golden. They were not seen
again.

45. Carpodacus mexicanus frontalis. House Finca — Fairly

ale ROcKWELL AND WETMORE, Birds of Golden, Colorado. [fas
common in Golden and also seen along Clear Creek. April 11 a pair were
evidently ready to build in an old boiler house north of the C. & S. tracks
near Golden. They were seen in this vicinity all summer and in August
we took one on South Table Mountain. In November they were gathered
in flocks in the Clear Creek bottoms where several more were taken.

46. Loxia curvirostra bendirei. Brnprre’s Crosspinu.—A good
series of Crossbills collected on Lookout Mountain in April and May are all
referable to this subspecies. The first ones were seen April 18, when we
encountered a small flock and they were fairly common up to May 238.
Usually they fed in the pine trees on the cones and were hard to locate when
silent. Their bills however made a loud cracking noise when feeding,
betraying their presence and the birds themselves were very tame. On
one occasion we observed a flock of about 50 feeding on the ground around a
spring but when flushed they went back into the pines and remained quiet,
their throats being full of seeds. In none of those taken were the sexual
organs developed and there were no indications of their having bred at
any recent period, all the birds taken being adults. Some of the males
taken were very brightly colored and all were in very good condition.

47. Acanthis linaria linaria. Reppo_tt.— Two of these birds seen
on Clear Creek April 3, and one taken. During the latter part of March
others were seen but they had all gone north by the end of the first week in
April.

48. Astragalinus tristis. Go.tprincH.— May 6 there were large
flocks of migrating Goldfinches in the cottonwoods along Clear Creek and
they were seen occasionally until the first of June. They were not noted
again until the last week in October and on November 6 a small flock was
seen on Lookout Mountain at 7,500 feet. Probably both tristis and pallidus
occur here but this cannot be stated positively on account of lack of mate-
rial. An adult male taken May 31 at Castle Rock, Colo., is intermediate
between the two, but apparently nearer tristis. An adult female from
Willard, Colorado, taken October 22, is true pallidus, being larger, paler and
grayer than eastern birds. These are the only Colorado specimens
available at present.

49. Astragalinus psaltria psaltria. Arkansas GoLtpFrincH.— Dur-
ing the summer this species was fairly common in Golden and casual along
Clear Creek. September 19 a small flock was seen at the mouth of Chim-
ney Gulch and from then until October 10, they were fairly common up to
7,000 feet, usually being seen in flocks of from four to six, probably family
parties.

50. Spinus pinus pinus. Prine Siskrn.— The series of this bird in
the present collection shows the usual variation of color, irrespective of age
or sex. Some have a very distinct buffy tinge on the under parts and these
have the dusky streaks on the ventral surface much narrower ‘and paler in
color. The first birds were noted on Lookout Mountain April 18 and the
first week in May they were feeding like Astragalinus tristis in flocks in the
tops of the cottonwoods along the creek bottoms. These flocks did not

Poi | RockWELi AND Wetmore, Birds of Golden, Colorado. 329

break up until the first of June and the birds were nesting by the middle of
the month. They bred apparently from the plains up into the mountain
parks and were most common in the mountains. By July 18 young were
seen out of the nest, and from then until October 10 they were common on
Lookout Mountain. During the fall months they were quicker and more
restless seldom remaining long in one locality. The adults were very
anxious about their young and were continually making short circling
flights out over us when we were near, calling excitedly and betraying
themselves by their anxiety. Immature birds were still moulting the first
week in October.

51. Passer domesticus. ENcaiisH SpARROw.— Common in Golden
and around some of the ranch houses.

52. Pocscetes gramineus confinis. WrsTERN VESPER SPARROW.—
Common on the plains and found in the highest altitude in the region in
question wherever there were open fields. There is very little variation
in a small series of these birds except in freshness of plumage, which is due
entirely to the season. The first one was seen April 18, and by May 2 they
were common. Two broods were raised, the first in May, the second in
July. The males had a second song period about the middle of the latter
month and on August first there were apparently many nests with young
on South Table Mountain, as females were seen frequently with food in
their bills. From then until the middle of September they were very
retiring and the last ones, a small flock scattered over a knoll on North
Table Mountain, were noted October 2 and one was taken.

53. Passerculus sandwichensis alaudinus. WersTeERN SAVANNAH
Sparrow.— Noted in September around the reservoir on top of Lookout
Mountain.

54. Ammodramus savannarum bimaculatus. WrsTERN GRASS-
HOPPER SparRow.— July 25 we heard the weak song of this bird near a
little spring on the flat south of Golden and after a short search discovered
the bird perched on a weed and secured it.

55. Chondestes grammacus strigatus. WrsTeRN Lark Sparrow.
— Fairly common in the open near Golden, but not found as frequently as
farther east. None were noted here after the middle of June.

56. Zonotrichia leucophrys leucophrys. WHITE-cROWNED SPAR-
row.— An adult female taken September 19 is the only specimen of this
variety taken. The relative abundance of this and the following subspecies
can only be determined by more extended observations. Z. 1. lewcophrys
should be the first one to occur in the fall and this is true in the present case
while Z. 1. gambeli was not found until September 26.

57. Zonotrichia leucophrys gambeli. GamBeEL’s SpPAaRROwW.— Com-
mon migrant. Inthe spring the first one was taken April 25, and they were
found up to May 9, from the plains to the top of Lookout Mountain. In
the fall the first one was noted September 26. They had reached the height
of their abundance October 10, and the last one was seen November 7.
They frequented the bushy thickets in the gulches and were especially

324 RockKWELL AND WETMORE, Birds of Golden, Colorado. [ jul

-

common along a dry gully south of Golden. Spring birds have the in-
distinct white throat patch more pronounced than fall birds and one imma-
ture male taken November 7 showed a few black feathers in the crown.

58. Spizella monticola ochracea. WrsterN TREE SpARROW.— The
last bird was seen in the spring, April 3, and the subspecies did not appear
again until October 17. The first were seen at the plains level and a week
later they were common and were taken at the highest altitude on Lookout.
Mountain. Up to November 7 all taken were adults with the exception of
a single immature male taken October 24. After that date the immature
birds were the commoner of the two. In no way did these birds differ
from the eastern variety in habits. With the heavy snows in November
the greater number moved from the mountains to the lower level of the
various creeks.

59. Spizella passerina arizonz. WersterRN Cuippinc SpAaRROW.—
Common during the spring and summer and very abundant from the last
of August to the tenth of October. In a large series of this subspecies
there is no approach to S. p. passerina of the Eastern United States. Adults
only were taken up to August 22, when they were in worn plumage. On the
29th young birds in the first striped plumage were taken, and a week later
some specimens had completed the moult into the winter dress. The
striped birds were taken up to September 26, and others were variously
marked at that time according to the stage of development of the moult.
October specimens were in perfect condition. There is much variation in
immature birds as to the amount of rufous concealed in the crown, and also
in the distribution of the black occipital stripes. In some cases these are
uniform over the entire top of the head, and in others they are restricted
to the lateral line.

The first bird was taken April 25 near Golden and they were fairly
common up to July 25, when they began to increase in numbers and
probably were coming down out of the mountains. August 1 on South
Table Mountain there were large flocks, composed largely of adults, feeding
among the loose rocks near some water holes. At our approach they strag-
gled off giving only a faint “tsip”’ as a call note. The adult birds were
common to the first of September but by the 19th of the month only the
immature specimens were found. They were common from Golden to the
top of Lookout Mountain and it was a curious fact that those at the lower
levels were all in worn plumage and moulting, while those higher up had
attained the full winter dress. They were found in large flocks and were
continually on the move. Stray birds kept dropping in every few minutes
to good feeding grounds and when a large flock was started they went off
through the bushes and over the hills at a rapid rate.

October 10 stragglers were common but the large flocks had disappeared
and the last bird was seen October 17.

60. Spizella breweri. Brewer’s Sparrow.— August 1 we took four
of these birds on South Table Mountain, three adults and one immature.
The birds were very shy and retiring, probably due to the season and the:

Rta | RocKWELL AND WETMORE, Birds of Golden, Colorado. 325

”

condition of their plumage. The only note given was a low “ tsip.”” They
undoubtedly occur regularly but this was the only time we observed them.

61. Junco aikeni. WuitTr-wincep JuNco.— Common in the late
fall but only seen once in the spring. Two specimens were taken April 11
at an altitude of 7500 feet and the bird was not found again until October
24. Several were taken on this date and on November 7 they were as
common as any of the other Juncos. In actions they were similar to the
other Juncos but in mixed flocks they could usually be distinguished by
their large size. On one occasion we saw them “ fly-catching”’ after
insects, from a thicket of plum brush. Some of the immature females in
the present series have merely a trace of the white wing bars, but can be
readily distinguished from hyemalis by their large size.

62. Junco hyemalis hyemalis. Siare-cotorep JuNco.— Speci-
mens were taken April 11 at Golden, and April 14 at Morrison, but we can
say nothing more concerning the status of this bird. None were observed
with certainty in the fall.

63. Junco hyemalis connectens. Suureipr’s Junco.— Winter
resident and common migrant. From April 11 to 14 appeared to be the
height of the spring migration, and most of the birds were found along the
edge of the foothills. After the latter date they were not found again
until October 24, while on November 7 they were common with the other
Juncos in large mixed flocks and were working back into the foothills.

64. Junco hyemalis montanus. Montana Junco.— This should
be a regular winter resident but in rather a large series of Juncos there are
only two specimens. One taken April 25 which is hardly typical (being
near true hyemalis) and one October 10.

65. Junco hyemalis mearnsi. PrinK-sipED JuNco.— This was the
common Junco of the region and was found in the spring up to May 2,
much later than any other of the migrant varieties of the same genus.
The first fall specimen was taken October 2, and by the tenth of the month
they were common again. These birds had the habits common to the genus
so that no mention need be made of them here. They were found from the
plains to the highest points in the region. There are four specimens that
appear to show hybridization with J. aiken, as in all there are present
quite well defined wing bars, though otherwise the birds are similar to true
mearnst. These are all immature males taken in October and November.
One has been examined by Mr. H. C. Oberholser, who has confirmed the
identification as J. h. mearnsi X J. aikeni. It may be stated here that
there are two specimens in the Colorado Museum of Natural History in
Denver and one other in the collection of the State Normal School at
Greeley, Colorado, which show the same characteristics.

66. Junco phzeonotus caniceps. Gray-HEADED JuNco.— Com-
mon summer resident down to 7500 feet. During the migration found
down to the plains. The first one was taken April 14 below Morrison, and
they were common up to the first of June when all were found in pairs at
7500 feet. They were ready to breed and frequented the thickets of

326 ROCKWELL AND WETMORE, Birds of Golden, Colorado. nes
quaking aspens and low pines. The males perched quietly in the pines
from 6 to 30 feet from the ground and gave their pleasant trilling songs
every minute or two. This song seemed louder and clearer than that of
J.h. hyemalis, but this may have been imagination on our part. One nest
which was found May 30, 1918, contained 4 fresh eggs and was built in a
depression in the ground under a thick net-work of low hanging branches
of a young Douglas Fir on asparsely wooded hillside (Plate X XXIII, fig. 1).
The nest was of usual construction and thickly foliated branches bending
down to the ground offered almost perfect concealment. The nest was
discovered by the female flushing noisily at a distance of several feet.
After June they disappeared, probably going to a higher altitude, and were
not taken again until September 19. They were fairly common during
the fall and became abundant with the other species of Junco the last of
October. Some of the females in the series have the rusty patch on the
back much paler than others. One immature female, taken November 7,
has a rufous line on each side of the crown extending backward to above the
auricular region, while another of the same sex taken October 2, shows
faint rusty tips to the feathers on the occipital and nuchal regions.

67. Melospiza melodia montana. Mountain Sone SparROow.—
Common resident, more abundant during migrations. Found as usual in
thickets and weed patches not far from water. All the specimens taken
come from the plains level, but on October 24 we heard one near a spring
on Lookout Mountain. November 14 the birds were common along Clear
Creek, though there was six inches of snow and the bushes were veritable
snow banks from the masses that had caught in the branches.

68. Melospiza lincolni lincolni. Lincoitn’s Sparrow.— First
noted May 2; common until May 28. None appeared to breed here, and
in the fall they were taken from September 26 to October 10. This bird
was found in the brush covered gulches and although frequenting the same
localities as the song sparrow, also occurred back in the foothills away from
water.

69. Pipilo maculatus montanus. Spurrep TowHErn.— Summer
resident, very common. ‘The first one was seen May 2, by the 16th they
were common, and by the 23d they were preparing to breed. The first
nest was found May 30 built under a bush at the edge of a bank. It
contained four fresh eggs and several more were found from then until the
middle of June (Plate XX XIII, fig. 2). The first young were taken July 18
and on this same date the males began to sing again, preparatory to raising a
second brood. They were moulting all through September and the last
one was taken October 17. These birds frequented the thickets and bushy
draws from the plains to the top of Lookout Mountain, and were noisy and
rather conspicuous. When pursued however they took good care to keep
out of sight in the bushes. The song was simpler than that of Pipilo e.
erythrophthalmus consisting usually of a simple trill, but there were many
puzzling variations which led us at times into looking for some new bird.
The ordinary call note was a harsh mewing “‘jo-ree’”’ The call note of the

THE AUK, VOL. XXXI. PLATE XXXIII.

1. Nest anp Eacs or GRAY-HEADED Junco. BuILT UNDER LOW SPREADING
BRANCHES OF SMALL DouGLAs FIR ON OPEN WOODED HILLSIDE.

2. Nest AND Eacs OF SPURRED TOWHEE. BUILT AGAINST BASE OF QUAKING
ASPEN ON STEEP SLOPE OF RAVINE.

yeipe| RockwELu AND WeTMoRE, Birds of Golden, Colorado. 327

young birds was a thin “‘tseet.”” In aseries of forty of these birds there are
apparently no true arcticus. Many of them have as much white on the
outer tail feathers as the latter subspecies and some of these have the same
measurements for the tail itself, but all have the coloration much deeper
and the rufous of the flanks exactly as in montanus. A large number of
breeding birds have the above characteristics, and so appear to be slightly
intermediate, but are much nearer montanus, and cannot be mistaken when
compared with Kansas specimens of arcticus.

70. Oreospiza chlorura. GREEN-TAILED TOWHEE.— Common sum-
mer resident, but not as abundant as the preceding species. The first
ones were seen May 16, and during migration they were found as low as the
mouth of Chimney Gulch. Later however they were not seen below 7500
feet, and June 6 they were nesting. Young just out of the nest were taken
July 18, and July 25, the males were in full song again, so that probably a
second brood was raised. The last bird of the year was seen October 2,
and they were seen on the plains 20 miles from the foothills September 7.
The males had a rather pleasing song and also a mewing call note, very
similar to that of Dwumetella carolinensis. The call of the young birds
could not be distinguished from that of the young of P. m. montanus. The
adults spent much time on the ground. On one occasion one ran across an
open space and was shot by mistake for a chipmunk. An immature female
in full fall plumage taken October 2 had the rufous of the crown obscured
by grayish olive-green tips to the feathers.

71. Zamelodia melanocephala. BuLack-HEADED GrosBEAK.— Tol-
erably common along Clear and Bear Creeks and seen occasionally in the
town of Golden where they were noted May 20 and June 6. We have no
fall records for this species.

72. Passerina cyanea. Inpico Buntine.— An adult male was taken
on Clear Creek below Golden on August 1, 1909. Attention was attracted
to the bird by its song and it was followed and secured. Another one was
heard in the same locality later on but could not be located. The latest
exact date given by Cooke in his “‘ Birds of Colorado ”’ is June 6, so that
our bird is apparently the only mid-summer record for the state.

73. Passerinaamona. Lazuti Buntina.— Fairly common summer
resident in certain localities. They were not noted until the first of July
here but probably arrived the last of May. They were found in the dry
brush covered gulches opening into the foothills and like P. cyanea heat
appeared to make no difference to them. The males sang from the tops
of dead trees in the blazing sun and when approached dropped down into
the dense thickets of plum-brush, where it was impossible to find them.
Usually they took good care to keep out of gun range and flew back and
forth across the draws ahead of us. The song was somewhat on the order
of that of Dendroica estiva and both sexes had a sharp chipping call note.
Young birds out of the nest were found August 8, and by September 1 the
birds had disappeared.

74. Calamospiza melanocorys. Lark Buntina.— This bird was

328 RocKWELL AND WmetTmor#, Birds of Golden, Colorado. [Fats

not observed here until July 25, when about a dozen males were found at the
foot of the eastern slope of Lookout Mountain, below Dead Man’s Gulch.
They were apparently located here as they kept in the same locality, and
as only one female was seen we took them to be incubating. On the plains
country to the east this species was common from May 12 on and was
breeding June 13, but the Golden birds appeared to have arrived later. On
August 1 we found loose flocks feeding over the top of South Table Moun-
tain which had evidently come up from the warmer levels below. These
were moulting rather badly and were very wild. The birds disappeared
entirely by the last of August though they lingered a little later in the
plains country.

75. Piranga ludoviciana. WersteRN TANAGER.— A male seen
August 8 among the pines on Lookout Mountain was the first one noted
here. On October 2 we took two among the cottonwoods on Clear Creek
and saw several others. They were in good plumage and were exceedingly
fat. This species should be of regular occurrence during migrations.

76. Petrochelidon lunifrons lunifrons. Curr SwaLtow.— This
species arrived May 12 and was of transient occurrence during the migra-
tion. A few pairs nested under the eaves of a house near the School of
Mines in Golden and were seen flying over the surrounding country
until September 1.

77. Hirundo erythrogastra. Barn SwautLtow.— This species first
appeared May 16 and was fairly common in the open region around Golden
until September 1. In August they were in small flocks and the old birds
were feeding their young of the second brood. The last seen were noted
on Clear Creek October 2.

78. Tachycineta thalassina lepida. NortTHERN VIOLET- GREEN
SwaLLow.— First seen May 16 and fairly common then at the base of the
foothills. During the first week of June they were seen at 7500 feet and
after this were not found again until August 8. Then one or two family
parties were found on the top of Lookout Mountain and the adults were
feeding the young. Not seen after September 1.

79. Bombycilla garrula. Bonrmian Waxwina.— Found in flocks
on Clear Creek during the middle of March and a few noted April 3, but
none taken.

80. Lanius borealis. NortTHerN SuHrike.— First seen October 24,
and fairly common after that along the creeks and bushy thickets. None
were seen during the spring.

81. Vireosylva gilva swainsoni. WESTERN WaARBLING VIREO.—
One taken May 23 in Chimney Gulch and one or two seen occasionally
during the summer along Clear Creek. Last found Spetember 9, during
the fall migration.

82. Vermivora virginiz. Virarnta’s WarBLER.— Common mi-
grant and summer resident from the beginning of the foothills up to nearly
seven thousand feet. Most abundant at 6000 feet. These birds were
first seen May 16 when they were common. The first of June they were

volt RockKwELL AND WETMORE, Birds of Golden, Colorado. 329

nesting and by July 18 had young out of the nest. They disappeared by
the end of the first week in September. The Virginia’s Warbler resembles
Vermivora r. rubricapilla in its habits, except that it frequents the bushes
instead of the high trees, and has a song almost exactly like that bird. In
the late summer they were found in family parties and could be located
usually by the sharp chipping notes of the adults. The brushy draws and
thickets of Chimney Gulch were a favorite resort with them but they were
more often heard than seen.

83. Vermivora celata celata. ORANGE-CROWNED W ARBLER.—
Fairly common along Clear Creek from May 6 to May 16. Not noted
during the fall.

84. Vermivora celata lutescens. LUTESCENT WarBiEeR.— Found
in the spring from May 6 to May 16, and taken once on Lookout Mountain
Sept. 19. The relative abundance of celata and lutescens cannot be gauged
from the meager series in the present collection. We have two of the
former and four of the latter, and of these all but one lutescens were taken
in the spring.

85. Dendroica estiva estiva. YELLOW WarsieR.— Arrived by the
end of the first week in May and was noted along Clear Creek and in the
town of Golden allsummer. During the spring migration a few were seen
in the small draws near the mouth of Chimney Gulch. Two adult males
taken agree closely with Kansas specimens.

86. Dendroica coronata. MyrTLe WarsiER.— Found sparingly
along Clear Creek below Golden, from the first to the sixteenth of May.
None were seen in the foothills nor was the species noted during the fall.

87, Dendroica auduboni auduboni. AvupUBON’s WARBLER.— Ar-
rived about April 25 and was common until May 20 along Clear Creek.
Only a few were seen in the foothills, though a female was taken on Lookout
Mountain as late as June 6. It was probably a stray here however as it is
doubtful if the bird breeds this low down. During the fall it occurred
sparingly in the foothills from September 5 to October 10 but was not
observed in abundance at any time.

88. Oporornis tolmiei. MaAcGILLIVRAY’S WARBLER.— First seen on
the edge of the foothills May 16 and was common from the mouth of Chim-
ney Gulch up to seven thousand feet by May 23. They were very restless
and active and had a sharp chipping note besides the song. They were
fairly common all summer in this locality. The last one, a female, was
taken September 26.

89. Geothlypis trichas occidentalis. WESTERN YELLOW-THROAT.—
Occasional along Clear Creek during the summer, but more common
further east in the plains country, where they arrived May 5.

90. Icteria virens longicauda. Lona-TarLep Cuat.— Several noted
in a draw on South Table Mountain facing Clear Creek on August 1 and
one taken. They were still in full song and as usual were very secretive.
We heard them several times during August along Clear Creek.

91. Anthus rubescens. AMERICAN Prerr.— Tolerably common mi-

330 RockWELL AND Wetmore, Birds of Golden, Colorado. fule

grant. Noted once May 16, and in the fall seen from October 10 to
November 1 in the open flat between the foothills and the hog-back. These
birds were all seen in the air and were not observed feeding.

92. Oreoscoptes montanus. Sacre THRASHER.— August 1 we found
a few of these birds in the scattering bushes on South Table Mountain.
They were very shy and were seen at a distance perched in the bushes,
looking like big wrens. Two immature birds in juvenal plumage were
taken but we found it impossible to secure any of the adults. They were
not seen again but will probably be found occurring locally in similar
localities.

93. Dumetella carolinensis. Carsirp.— Tolerably common along
Clear Creek during the spring migration and a few remained for the sum-
mer. Last seen September 7.

94. Salpinctes obsoletus obsoletus. Rock Wren— Common
summer resident on rocky hillsides. First. seen May 2 when it was fairly
common and part of the birds appeared to be mated. They were more
often heard than seen and usually scolded and sang from among rock slides
and boulders above or below us where it was useless to follow them. On
South Table Mountain they were more abundant than anywhere else and
were also tamer than usual. A yqung Rock Wren just old enough to fly
was taken by hand because of its weakened condition, and upon examina-
tion was found to be infested with large white grubs several of which had
buried themselves deep into the bird’s head and were gradually sapping
its vitality. These grubs were nearly one half inch in length and were
all buried out of sight under the skin. All the birds in the brood with the
exception of this one were apparently fine healthy specimens. The last
birds of the year were taken at the base of North Table Mountain October 2,
where they were probably migrating as they were unusually silent.

95. Catherpes mexicanus conspersus. Caton Wren.— On April
11 we found two of these birds in Magpie Gulch north of Clear Creek Cafion.
They were on a rocky hillside about 400 feet above the bottom of the
Gulch and our attention was attracted to them by the clear song of the
male, barely audible above the rushing of the snow water at our feet. We
secured one of these birds, the male, but lost the other. Another was seen
back of Lookout Mountain on May 24 and on July 25 we heard a male
singing from a rock slide in Coon Gulch, but could not get toit. August 1
we took an immature female on South Table Mountain in full plumage and
these constitute our records for this bird. It has been noted from this
region before by Mr. Test of Golden and this is one of the most northern
localities in the state where it has been found, though Mr. L. J. Hersey
notes that it is common in Boulder Cafion. The presence of the bird
here in July and the capture of the young bird in August that had just
attained full plumage would tend to show that it bred here.

96. Troglodytes aédon parkmani. Western House Wren.—
Fairly common summer resident. First seen May 9, and fairly common
then in the mountains. They nest commonly in bird-boxes and nooks

Vol, XXXT) RockwELL AND WETMORE, Birds of Golden, Colorado. 331

around all the cottages on Lookout Mountain, becoming very tame and
raising two broods. ‘They were last seen October 2.

97. Certhia familiaris montana. Rocky Mountain CREEPER.—
First seen September 19, when one was taken in the pines on Lookout
Mountain. They were heard and seen occasionally up to the last of
October in this same locality, but we took no more specimens. None were
noted during the spring.

98. Sitta carolinensis nelsoni. Rocxy Mountain NutTHatTcH.—
Common resident in the foothills and found sparingly along Clear Creek
and Bear Creek. Most of them preferred the higher altitudes and were not
found below 7000 feet. In August the young birds began to work down the
slopes and by September 1 they were scattered over the entire region. The
molt was not wholly finished until the first of October.

99. Sitta canadensis. Rrp-BREASTED Nuruatco.— One taken on
October 10 on Lookout Mountain was the only one seen. Our attention
was attracted to it by its thin piping note, but it was fifteen minutes before
we could locate it among the pines and another ten before it was finally
secured.

100. Sitta pygmea pygmea. Pyamy NursatrcH.— One of the
commonest birds in the mountains above 7,000 feet. In April and May we
found them in flocks of twenty-five or thirty hunting fearlessly through the
pines, giving their soft notes continually and traveling rather rapidly.
They were paired by the first of June and on the 6th, we found a nest con-
taining five fresh eggs. The nest was in an old woodpecker hole in a stub
about twenty feet from the ground, and was made up of feathers, hair, ete.
The adults were much excited when we approached, and it took only a little
search to find the nest. All through August we found small family parties
of these birds and by September they were in full plumage, much brighter
colored than in spring. Nearly all the specimens in the large series taken
have the feathers of the abdomen much worn, probably by the rough bark
of the pines. About the first of October they greatly decreased in numbers
though a few were noted until the close of our collecting trips in November.

101. Penthestes atricapillus septentrionalis. LONG-TAILED
CuicKapEE.— During the spring and summer we found these birds spar-
ingly along Clear and Bear Creeks but they did not appear in the foothills
until September 26. By the middle of October they were fairly common
and continued so until our observations ended. With the coming of snow
in the mountains in November they increased in numbers along the creeks
and were found in small flocks. In the mountains they appeared to avoid
the pines and spruces as feeding grounds, and were found only in the
quaking aspens or occasionally in clumps of mountain maple.

102. Penthestes gambeli gambeli. MounrTain CHICKADEE.—
Common resident in the mountains above 7,000 feet. They were very
common until the first of May and then decreased in number. A few were
noted during June at the highest altitudes, and by July 18 they were leading
their young through the pines. July and August specimens were very

332 ROCKWELL AND WETMORE, Birds of Golden, Colorado. aves
ragged and not until September 19 were birds in full fall plumage taken.
These birds were found almost entirely in the pines and had about the same
habits as the preceding species. The Mountain Chickadee could be
distinguished by its notes with ease as it drawled them out in a different
tone from that of P. a. seplentrionalis. During August the young worked
slowly down the slopes of the mountains and on October 16 were seen on
Clear Creek below Golden and from this on were common there.

103. Regulus calendula calendula. Rusy-crowNEp KINGLET.—
Noted once in the spring but fairly common in the fall migration. The
first one was seen September 19 and the last one October 19. In the moun-
tains they were found in the quaking aspen thickets, but the first week in
October they were also common along Clear Creek.

104. Myadestes townsendi. TowNnsEenp’s SoLiTaiIrE.— Common in
the mountains above 7,000 feet and occurring down to the plains. During
the spring it was first seen April 18 and was common singly or in small
flocks until May 2. The birds were ground feeders and were eating
Kinnikinnick berries and what insects they could pick up. In their
actions they reminded us strongly of Robins at times and again of Bluebirds.
They always chose the topmost twig of a tree for a perch, and dead limbs
were favorites with them, but on windy days they took refuge within the
pines. We found it rather hard to approach them though usually they
only flew a short distance. In the fall the first bird was taken August 22,
but they were not found again until October 10. They were fairly common
until November 7, when the last one was seen. On this date they were
found in sunny hollows on the side slopes and were singing a low warbling
song. In the fall they were much more common in the gulches at the lower
levels, and were feeding on choke-cherries to some extent. The one taken
August 22 was moulting from the spotted juvenal plumage. Fall birds
showed more white on the tertials than those secured in the spring.

105. Hylocichla ustulata swainsoni. O.ivrE-BAcKED THRUSH.—
Common migrant in the spring but not noted in the fall. First seen May
9 and the last one taken June 6. On the latter date we secured a single
bird in a thicket of quaking aspens on Lookout Mountain, and on picking
it up noticed a hard lump in the throat. On dissection we found it to be a
medium sized ground beetle whose claws, catching in the cesophagus had
swung the body around and held it there partially closing the aperture.
Several other insects were lodged against the obstruction but the bird did
not appear to be distressed by it as it was fat and in good plumage. Mr.
E. J. Oslar kindly identified the beetle as Aphodius sp., a common repre-
sentative of the family Scarabeide. This wound was apparently at least
two weeks old as the gullet was healed completely and the skin dried down
hard around the obstruction.

106. Planesticus migratorius propinquus. WestTerN Rospin.—
Common everywhere. On the plains they were paired by the end of the
first week in April but in the mountains we found them occurring in loose
flocks as late as June 6 though they began breeding immediately afterwards.

Vol. *<*1) RockwEtt AND Wetwore, Birds of Golden, Colorado. 333
They were very restless and flew back and forth across the ridges and were
usually rather wild. The moult began the last of July and by the middle
of September specimens in full plumage were taken. At this date we found
flocks of young probably of the last brood scattered among the bushes
between six and seven thousand feet, while on top there were similar flocks
in full winter plumage. It was also noticed that during the spring the birds
of the plains level that bred early assumed the summer plumage at the same
time, while the birds in the mountains did not change for nearly a month
later. During October Western Robins were found in the gulches in large
flocks, feeding on haws and thorn apples.

107. Sialia sialis sialis. BuLursrrp.— A single bird taken at the foot
of Dead Man’s Gulch, May 2, was the only one seen. They appear to be
rare in this locality, though there are numerous records of their occurrence
in the state. The present bird — an adult female — averages a trifle paler
than Kansas specimens, but agrees with them in measurements.

108. Sialia mexicana bairdi. CurstTNuT-BAcKED BLUEBIRD.— A
pair collected June 6 on Lookout Mountain were the only ones seen. These
birds had a nest containing five incubated eggs, in a woodpecker hole in a
pine about 30 feet from the ground on a steep hillside at the edge of an open
pine grove. The cavity was about ten inches deep by three inches in
diameter and the eggs were laid on a very scant lining of fine inner bark,
quite neatly cupped. The nest did not resemble that of the Mountain
Bluebird in any particular.

109. Sialia currucoides. Mountain Biurpirp.— Fairly common
summer resident throughout the region, but not as abundant as at higher
altitudes. We found the first ones already mated April 25 and from then
on they were fairly common. A Mountain Bluebird built its nest in the
wall of the same cabin used by the Flicker noted above. The entrance to
the nest was less than two feet above the ground and the eggs themselves
rested in a cranny between the timbers about a foot below the opening.
This is undoubtedly one of the lowest bluebird nesting sites on record.
During August there were large flocks principally of young birds among the
pines at 7500 feet where they fed on the ground or caught insects on the
wing. The only note given was a low turr-r- similar to that of the eastern
bluebird. We collected quite a series of these young birds expecting to
find that part of them were S. m. bairdi, but were disappointed in this.
During September we noticed occasional small flocks, but none were seen
after the first of October.

334 Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. eres

EARLY RECORDS OF THE WILD TURKEY.!
BY ALBERT HAZEN WRIGHT.

OnE of the best criteria for the determination of our most dis-
tinctive and indigenous forms is the perusal of the journals and
accounts of foreign sojourners in this country. The wild turkey,
“ America’s noblest game bird” probably receives more extended
notice in this manner than any other North American avian form.
Furthermore, according to our own chroniclers, no bird enters the
life of the early days of this country more than it.

The explorer, La Salle (Jan. 1687) finds,? “the Plenty of wild
Fowl, and particularly of Turkeys, whereof we killed many, was
an ease to our Sufferings, and Help to bear our Toil with more
Satisfaction.”’ The early pioneers say,’ “the breast of the wild
turkey we were taught to call bread.” Their neighbors, the
aborigines, pray, “O great being! I thank thee that I have
obtained the use of my legs again, that I am able to walk about and
kill turkeys....”’ The noted guest of this country, Lafayette,
takes wild turkeys back with him to his farm at La Grange where
he exerts,° “himself to multiply their numbers.” Some courtly
travellers like Lady Wortley have,® “a great fancy for tasting and

1 The general literature of the wild turkey is quite extensive, and we can mention
only a few of the better and more important accounts. They are: Pennant,
Thomas, An Account of the Turkey. Phil. Trans., LX XI, 1781, pp. 67-81, also
Arctic Zool., pp. 291-300; Buffon, Complete Oeuvres de, Tome XX XI, Nouv. Ed.
Oiseaux II, Paris, 1824, pp. 178—209 (orig. edit. Ois. II, pp. 132-162); Bennett,
EK. T. The Gardens and Menagerie of the Zoological Society Delineated. Lon-
don, 1835, Birds, Vol. II; Newton, 1896, pp. 994-996; Grinnell, G. B. Forest
and Stream, 1909, pp. 852, 891, 892; MclIlhenny, E. A. Outdoor World and
Recreation, Jan.—_Mar., Dec. 1913, Jan. and Feb. 1914; Beckmann, John. A
History of Inventions and Discoveries. 2nd edit. corrected and enlarged. 4 vols.
Vol. II, London, 1814, pp. 350-372.

-2Joutel, M. A Journal of the last Voyage Performed by M. de la Salle to the
Gulph of Mexico, ete. Translation, 1714, p. 82.

3 Howe, Henry. Hist. Colls. of the Great West. Cincinnati, 1873, p. 210.

4 An Account of the Remarkable Occurrences in the Life and Travels of Col.
James Smith, etc. Lexington, 1799. Reprint, Cincinnati, 1870, p. 96.

5 Levasseur, A. Lafayette in America in 1824 and 1825; etc. Transl. by
Godman. Phila., 1829, Vol. II, p. 120.

6 Wortley, Lady Emmeline Stuart. Travels in the United States, ete. During
1849 and 1850. New York, 1851, p. 128.

Mer el Wrrcut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. Bou

trying fall sorts of unearthly, half-supernatural dishes.... As
it was, we asked for wild turkey.... I believe these things. ...
are accounted very good and it amused us trying and experimenta-
lizing on them.” In this connection, J. F. Cooper remarks,’ “Of
fowls there are a rare and admirable collection!.. . it would do
your digestive powers good to hear some of the semi-barbarous
epicures of this provincial town expatiate on the merits of... wild
turkies, and all the et ceteras of the collection.”

Other travellers always bring their muskets with them? “to
shoot the wild geese and turkies that some of our travellers in
America describe so fluently,....”’ They “were always on the
watch for an opportunity of practising (on shipboard), believing
that they should have such excellent sport in America shooting
wild turkies.” Early in life, the native youth is taught the wiles
of the turkey hunter. “One important pastime of our boys was
that of imitating the noise of every bird and beast in the woods.
This faculty was not merely a pastime, but a very necessary part
of education, on account of its utility m certain circumstances.
The imitations of the gobbling and other sounds of the wild turkeys,
often brought those keen-eyed and ever watchful tenants of the
forest within reach of the rifle. The Indians, when scattered about
in the neighborhood, often collected together, by imitating turkeys
by day, and wolves or owls by night.” “Apropos of the rifle... .
The inhabitants of this country... . (were) wonderfully expert
in the use of it: thinking it a bad shot if they (missed) the very head
of a....wild turkey, on the top of the highest forest tree with a
single ball.t In fact, this ability to hunt the turkey successfully
is so well known an accomplishment of the American man that
Fanny Wright (d’Arusmont)? in speaking of better conditions for
American women mentions it as one of the distinctive pursuits or
pastimes of the American man which women can not well emulate.

1 Cooper, J. F. Notions of the Americans. London, 1828, Vol. I, p. 183.

2 Weston, Richard. A Visit to the United States and Canada in 1833. Edin-
burgh, 1836, pp. 23, 28.

3 Kercheval, Samuel. A History of the Valley (Shenandoah). Winchester,
1833, pp. 372, 373.

4Cuming, F. Sketches of a Tour to the Western Country, through the States
of Ohio and Kentucky; etc. Pittsburgh, 1810, p. 30.

5s Arusmont, F. W.d’. Views of Society and Manners in America: in a Series
of Letters, etc., during the years 1818, 1819, and 1820. London, 1821, p. 429.

rt Auk
306 Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. [Fug

Several times the wild turkey enters the vernacular of this
country. Who in his boyhood has not upon certain occasions
had “to walk turkey?” Lieut. Abert gives another saying and
its origin as he understands it.!| “It is related that a white man
and an Indian went hunting; and afterwards when they came to
divide the spoils, the white man said, ‘you may take the buzzard
and I will take the turkey, or I will take the turkey and you may
take the buzzard.’ The Indian replied, ‘you never once said
turkey to me.’”

The chief claim of the turkey with the lay mind of the country
is its place in the festivals of our United States. Both at Thanks-
giving and at Christmas, it holds first place. In 1621, after the
first harvest was gathered and it had proved a good yield, the early
Pilgrims instituted a three day festival, the well known forerunner
of our present Thanksgiving day. At this first feast,? “above all,
they had the turkey, of which they found a ‘great store’ in the
forest,....the turkey, thus early crowned queen of their bounty,
and to which example their descendants, even though they may
have failed to imitate them in other respects, have always been
loyal.” In fact,? “roast turkey, is the great event of the day.
As roast beef and plum pudding are upon Christmas day in Old
England, so is turkey upon Thanksgiving-day among the descend-
ants of the puritans in New England.”

Thus, we see how essential the wild turkey was to the explorer,
how prominent a part of the larder it proved for the early pioneers
and Indians, what sport it furnished our natives, settlers and
foreign sportsmen, and how early it was singled out as our token of
festival joy. Yet, why did we as a nation choose for a national
emblem, a bird not necessarily indigenous and one which previously
had and since has served as an insignium for other countries?

Several travellers (like Vigne, 1832, p. 213, Phillippo, 1859, p.
171) agree that Benjamin Franklin is right when he lodges his
objection to the eagle and prefers the turkey as our national

1 Abert, Lieut. J. W. Notes of. Appendix No. 6 Ex. Doc. No. 41. Emory’s
Reconnoissance, etc. New York, 1848, pp. 501, 502.

2 Love, W. D. The Fast and Thanksgiving Days of New England. Boston,
and New York, 1895, p. 74.

3 Mackay, Chas. Life and Liberty in America. New York, 1859, p. 65.

Ngee | Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. oot
emblem. His argument is so sound and so clever that it will
bear repeating:' “Others object to the bald eagle as looking too
much a dindon, or turkey. For my own part, I wish the bald eagle
had not been chosen as the representative of our country; he is a
bird of bad moral character; he does not get his living honestly;
you may have seen him perched on some dead tree, where, too lazy
to fish for himself, he watches the labor of the fishing-hawk; and,
when that diligent bird has at length taken a fish and is bearing
it to his nest for the support of his mate and young ones, the bald
eagle pursues him, and takes it from him. With all this injustice,
he is never in good case; but, like those among men who live by
sharping and robbing, he is generally poor, and often very lousy.
Besides he is a rank coward; the little kingbird, not bigger than a
sparrow, attacks him boldly and drives him out of the district.
He is therefore by no means a proper emblem for the brave and
honest Cincinnati of America, who have driven all the kingbirds
from our country;.... Iam, on this account, not displeased that
the figure is not known as a bald eagle, but looks more like a turkey.
For in truth, the turkey is in comparison a much more respectable
bird, and withal a true original native of America. Eagles have
been found in all countries, but the turkey was peculiar to ours;
the first of the species seen in Europe, being brought to France by |
the Jesuits from Canada, and served up at the wedding table of
Charles the Ninth. He is, besides (though a little vain and silly,
it is true, but not a worse emblem for that) a bird of courage, and
would not hesitate to attack a grenadier of the British guards, who
should presume to invade his farmyard with a red coat on.’’

INTRODUCTION INTO EUROPE.

The first introduction of the turkey into Europe has always been
a mooted and now rather hackneyed question somewhat remote
from the intent of this paper. Almost every article on this subject
has paraphrased Newton or Bennett or Beckmann or all, and we
will content ourselves with the bare recital of their statements.

1 Sparks, Jared. The Works of Benjamin Franklin. Boston, 1840, Vol. X,
pp. 63, 64.

338 Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. [hip

“Much labour has been given by various naturalists to ascertain
the date of its introduction to Europe, to which we can at present
only make an approximate attempt; but it is plain that evidence
concurs to shew that the bird was established in Europe by 1530 —
a very short time to have elapsed since it became known to the
Spaniards, which could hardly have been before 1518, when Mex-
ico was discovered. The possibility that it had been brought to
England by Cabot or some of his successors earlier in the century
is not to be overlooked, and reasons may be assigned for supposing
that one of the breeds of English Turkeys may have had a northern
origin; but the often-quoted distich first given in Baker’s Chronicle
(p. 298), asserting that Turkeys came into England in the same year
—and that year by reputation 1524 —as carps, pickerels and
other commodities, is wholly untrustworthy, for we know that
both these fishes lived in this country long before, if indeed they
were not indigenous to it. The earliest documentary evidence of
its existence in England is a ‘constitution’ set forth by Cranmer
in 1541, which Hearne first printed (Leland’s Collectanea, ed. 2, vi.
p. 38). This names ‘Turkey-cocke’ as one of ‘the greater
fowles’ of which an ecclesiastic was to have ‘but one dishe,’ and
its association with the Crane and Swan precludes the likelihood
of any confusion of the Guinea-Fowl. Moreover the comparatively
low price of the two Turkeys and four Turkey-chicks served at a
feast of the serjeants-at-law in 1555 (Dugdale, Origines, p. 135)
points to their having become by that time abundant, and indeed
by 1573 Tusser bears witness to the part they had already begun to
play in ‘Christmas husbandlie fare.’ In 1555 both sexes were
characteristically figured by Belon (Oyseaua, p. 249), as was the
cock by Gesner in the same year, and these are the earliest repre-
sentations of the bird known to exist.’’!

Of its introduction on the continent, Bennett gives us the follow-
ing:? “A Frenchman named Pierre Gilles has the credit of having
first described the turkey in this quarter of the globe, in his addi-
tions to a Latin translation of Aelian, published by him in 1535.
His description is so true to nature, as to have been almost wholly

1 Newton, Alfred. A Dictionary of Birds. London, 1896, pp. 995, 996.
2 Bennett, E. T. The Gardens and Menagerie of the Zoological Society Deline-
ated Birds. London, 1835, Vol. II, pp. 213, 214.

eer | Wriaut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. 309

relied on by every subsequent writer down to Willoughby. He
speaks of it as abird that he has seen; and he had not then been
further from his native country than Venice; and states it to have
been brought from the New World.

“That turkeys were known in France at this period is further
proved by a passage in Champier’s Treatise de Re Cibaria, pub-
lished in 1560, and said to have been written thirty years before.
This author also speaks of them as having been brought but a few
years back from the newly discovered Indian islands. From this
time forward their origin seems to have been entirely forgotten, and
for the next two centuries we meet with little else in the writings of
ornithologists concerning them, than an accumulation of citations
from the ancients, which bear no manner of relation to them. In
the year 1566 a present of twelve Turkeys was thought not un-
worthy of being offered by the municipality of Amiens to their
king; at whose marriage, in 1570, Anderson states in his History
of Commerce, but we know not on what authority, they were first
eaten in France. Heresbach, as we have seen, asserts that they
were introduced into Germany about 1530; and that a sumptuary
law made at Venice in 1557, quoted by Zanoni, particularizes the
tables at which they were permitted to be served.

“So ungrateful are mankind for the most important benefits,
that not even a traditionary vestige remains of the men by whom,
or the country from whence, this most useful bird was introduced
into any European states. Little therefore is gained from its
early history beyond the mere proof of the rapidity with which the
process of domestication may sometimes be effected.”

In many respects, Prof. John Beckmann ' of Univ. of Gottingen,
has given us one of the most exhaustive and best accounts of its
introduction into Europe. He presents much of what is written
in the two foregoing quotations and we select only such as supple-
ment these.

“These testimonies (concerning their early discovery in America),
in my opinion, are sufficiently strong and numerous to convince any
naturalist that America is the native country of these fowls; but

1 Beckmann, John. A History of Inventions and Discoveries. Transl. from
German by Wm. Johnston. 2nd edit. corrected and enlarged. 4 vols. London.
Vol. II, 1814, pp. 350-372.

340 Waicut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. [Fx

their weight will be still increased if we add the accounts given us
when and how they were gradually dispersed throughout other
countries. Had they been brought from Asia or Africa some
centuries ago, they must have been long common in Italy, and
would have been carried thence over all Europe. We, however,
do not find that they were known in that country before the dis-
covery of America. It is certain that there were none of them
there at the time when Peter Crescentio wrote; that is to say, in
the thirteenth century; else he would not have omitted to mention
them where he describes the method of rearing all domestic fowls,
and even peacocks and partridges. The earliest account of them
in Italy is contained in an ordinance issued by the magistrates of
Venice, in 1557, for repressing luxury, and in which those tables
at which they were allowed are particularised. About the year
1570 Bartolomeo Scappi, cook to Pope Pius V, gave in his book on
cookery several receipts for dressing these expensive and much
esteemed fowls. ‘That they were scarce at this period appears
from its being remarked that the first turkeys brought to Bologna
were some that had been given as a present to the family of
Buonocompagni, from which Gregory XII, who at that time filled
the papal chair, was descended.

“That these fowls were not known in England in the beginning
of the sixteenth century, is very probable; as they are not men-
tioned in the particular description of a grand entertainment given
by the archbishop Nevil; nor in the regulations made by Henry
VIII respecting his household, in which all fowls used in the royal
kitchen are named. They were, however, introduced into that
country about the above period; some say in the year 1524; others,
in 1530; and some, in 1532....

“ According to the account of some writers, turkeys must have
been known much earlier in France: but in strict examination no
proofs of this can be found. The earliest period assigned for their
introduction into that country is given by Beguillet, who confi-
dently asserts that they were brought to Dijon under the reign of
Philip the Bold, about the year 1385.... De la Mare also is in
an error when he relates that the first turkeys in France were those
which Jaques Coeur, the well-known treasurer to Charles VII,
brought with him from the Levant, and kept on his estate in Gati-

shoe repeal | Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. 341
nois, after he had received the king’s permission to return to the
Kingdom. (before 1450 or 1456).... Equally false is the account
given by Bouche in his History of Provence, that Rene, or Renatus,
king of Naples and duke of Anjou, first brought turkeys into the
kingdom, and reared them in abundance at Rosset.... The
assertion, often repeated, but never indeed proved, that they were
first brought to France by Philip de Chabot, admiral under
Francis I, is much more probable. Chabot died in 1543; and what
Sealiger says, that in 1540 some turkeys were still remaining in
France, may be considered as alluding to the above circumstance.
This much however is certain, that Gyllius, who died in 1555, gave
soon after the first scientific description of them, which has been
inserted both by Gesner and Aldrovandus in their works on orni-
thology. The same year the first figure of them was published by
Belon. About the same time they were described also by La
Bruyere-Champier, who expressly remarks that they had a few
years before been brought to France from the Indian islands dis-
covered by the Portuguese and the Spaniards. How then could
Barrington assert that this Frenchman meant the East and not
the West Indies! They must, however, have been a long time
scarce in France; for, in the year 1566, when Charles IX passed
through Amiens, the magistrates of that place did not disdain to
send him, among other presents, twelve turkeys. This information
seems to agree with the account often quoted, that the first turkeys
were served up, as a great rarity, at the wedding dinner of that
monarch in the year 1570; but it seems the breed of these fowls was
not very common under Charles IX; for they are not named in
the ordinances of 1563 and 1567, in which all other fowls are men-
tioned. In the year 1603, Henry IV caused higglers to be punished
who carried away turkeys from the country villages without paying
for them, under a pretence that they were for the use of the queen.
I shall here also remark, that I can no where find that the Jesuits
are entitled to the merit of having introduced these fowls into
France.

“As these American fowls must have been carried to Germany
through other lands, we cannot expect to find them in that country
at an earlier period. Gesner, who published his Ornithology in
1555, seems not even to have seen them. We are, however, assured

lee

342 Wricxt, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. July

by several authors, such as B. Heresbach (1595), Colerus (1611)
and others, that turkeys were brought to Germany so early as
1530; and in the same year carried to Bohemia and Silesia. Re-
specting the northern countries, I know only, on the authority
of Pontoppidan (1765), that they had been in Denmark two hun-
dred years before his time.

“As these fowls are found at present both in Asia and Africa,
it may be worth while to inquire at what period they were carried
thither, especially as these quarters of the world have been by
some considered as their native countries. In China there are no
other turkeys than those which have been introduced from other
parts, as we are expressly assured by Du Halde, though he errone-
ously adds that they were quite common in the East Indies. They
were carried to Persia by the Armenians and other trading people,
and to Batavia by the Dutch. In the time of Chardin they were
so searce in Persia that they were kept in the Emperor’s menagerie.
In the kingdom of Congo, on the Gold Coast, and at Senegal,
there are none but those belonging to the European factories.”

In addition to these accounts of its introduction into England
and on the European continent, it might be apropos to present
the very interesting hypothesis suggested by a naturalist of this
continent, Prof. Baird. In 1858, he advances the following:!

“Tn conclusion I venture to suggest the following hypothesis,
which, however, is not original with myself: That there are really
three species of turkey, besides the M. ocellata, a fourth species
from Central America, entirely different from the rest. That one
of them, M. americana, is, probably, peculiar to the eastern half of
North America; another, MW. mexicana, belongs to Mexico, and
extends along the table lands to the Rocky Mountains, the Gila,
and the Llano estacado, and a third is the M. gallopavo, or domesti-
cated bird. That it is not at all improbable that the last was
originally indigenous to some one or more of the West India
islands, whence it was transported as tamed to Mexico and other
parts of America, and from Mexico taken to Europe about A. D.
1520. Finally, that the wild turkeys were probably completely
exterminated by the natives, as has been the case with equally large
birds in other islands, as the dodo and solitaire.

1 Baird, S. F. Rept. Pacific R. R. Routes, Vol. IX, 1858, Part II, pp. 613-618.

Vol. X21] Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. 343

“This hypothesis will explain the fact of our meeting nowhere at
the present day any wild turkeys resembling the domestic one.
I have an indistinct recollection of a statement that our barnyard
turkey came originally from Bermuda or Jamaica, but I cannot
speak positively in regard to it.

“The entire subject is one of much interest, and deserves to be
investigated thoroughly. It is quite possible that a careful exam-
ination of the external form and habits of the New Mexican bird
may do much to throw full light on the whole question.”

It is generally agreed that most of the domestic turkeys come
from one or more of the Mexican forms (Meleagris g. intermedia,
merriamt), though the American (M. g. silvestris), Honduran
(M. ocellata) and Floridan (M. g. osceola) forms may also have
contributed. Other varieties of domestic nature may have arisen
by recrossings of domestic breeds with the wild birds as has often
been done to rejuvenate the stock. It is extremely unlikely that
Baird’s hypothesis of their origin from a West Indian form now
extinct is tenable. Most of the early records of wild turkey in
the West Indies are obviously of introduced forms. Oviedo’s
note of 1527 is of this nature, as is John Smith’s note (1609) of a
“store of turkees” in the Bermudas. In the latter region Richard
Norwood asserts (1619) that “By this means (transportation)
the Countrey was so replenished with Hennes and Turkeyes,
within the space of three or foure yeeres, beeing neglected, many
of them forsooke the Houses, and became wilde, and so lived in
great abundance.” In 1596, the Earl of Cumberland also finds
in Porto Rico “some Turkies and Ginnyhens.”’

This theory of Prof. Baird postulates the former existence of a
feral race of which no positive substantiating historical evidence is
forthcoming. In the subsequent records, particularly from 1500-
1600, possibly some additional light may be thrown on the question
of introduction.

THe Recorps FRoM 1500-1600.

It seems best to reexamine some of the original sources of our
early turkey history. The debatable evidence which may refer
either to Craz alector and its allies or to Meleagris follows: Sebas-

344 Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. eves

tian Munster records that Petrus Alonsus in a voyage along the
Venezuelan coast (about 1498) from the Gulf of Paria westward,!
“Tn their woodes,. ...saw innumerable Peacockes, nothing unlyke
oures, saving that the males differ litle from the females.” Of
this same region (1516) Pietro Martire of Anghiera writes (in his
Second Decade) that the natives gave to Vincentius Annez and
his men”? a great multitude of theyr peacockes, both cockes and
hennes, deade and alyve, as well to satisfie theyr present necessitie,
as also to cary with theym into Spayne for encrease.” “In the
marysshes also and fennes of the Regions of Dariena, are founde
greate plentie of Pheasaunts and peacockes, (but not of variable
coloures)...., in the rase of this large lande, Colonus (Columbus)
hymselfe brought and sent to the courte a greate number of every
kynde the which it was lawfull for all the people to beholde, and are
yet dayly browght in lyke maner.” The Pedro de Cieza de Leon
note, often quoted from Pennant, in the original is:* “There are
many turkeys....on the island” — not on the Isthmus of Darien,
but on the Island of Gorgona, southwest of Buena Ventura, Colom-
bia. In the “Narrative of the Proceedings of Pedrarias Davilla
etc. written by Adelantado Pascualde Andagoya”’ we find .that
in Coiba and Cueva (in S. A. below Darien) 4 “they have no other
game in these provinces excepting birds, of which there are
two kinds of turkeys....” The translator, Sir. Clements R.
Markham (1865) remarks in a footnote that “Turkeys are native
of Mexico and do not come further south than Guatemala. The
bird alluded to by Andagoya is probably a Curassow.” In 1590,
Father de Acosta publishes his “ Natural and Moral History of the
Indies.”* He “wondered at hennes, seeing there were some at
the Indies before the Spaniards came there, the which is well
approved, for they have a proper name of the country, and they
call a henne Hualpa, and the egge Ronto, and they use the same

1Eden, Richard. The First Three English Books on America (1511?-1555)
Edited by Edward Arber. Birmingham, Eng., 1885, p. 36.

2ibid., pp. 129, 132.

3 The Travels of Pedro de Cieza de Leon. A. D. 1532-1550. Translated by
C. R. Markham, London, 1864, p. 21.

‘Translated and edited by Clements R. Markham. London, Hakluyt Soc.,
1865, pp. 17, 18.

5 Acosta, Father Joseph de. The Natural and Moral History of the Indies.
Seville, 1590. Reprinted from Eng. Translation of 1604, p. 276.

Vol S2XT) Wnicur, Early Records of ‘the Wild Turkey. 345

proverb wee doe, to call a coward a henne....: wee may conceive
that a henne being so tame a fowle and so profitable, men might
carry them with them when they passed from one place to another
as we see at this day the Indians in their travel carry their henne
with them or chicken, upon the burden they have on their shoulders:
and likewise they carry them easily in their cages of reedes or wood.”

These foregoing notes pertain to northern South American coasts
and to the region from Darien southward. The average ornitho-
logist would logically believe them applicable to curassows or guans,
and no doubt this is the better interpretation. Still, the Wild Tur-
key was domesticated by the Aztecs before the discovery of America
and it might have been distributed to the northern South American
coasts and the West Indies by the Indian method described by
Acosta. Furthermore, the Spanish introduction of the turkey
into more interior provinces of South America may have been but
an extension of the custom possibly begun about the Gulf of
Mexico and the Caribbean Sea before the Spanish arrival. In
this connection, the Inca G. de la Vega says,! “ With the fowls and
pigeons, that the Spaniards brought to Peru, came also the turkey
of Mexico, which was not known before.”

In the early days, as at later periods, the two types of bird
were often confused and both were dubbed “Wild Turkey.” As
late as 1825, Schoolcraft writes,” “The Powhe or Crax alector of
South America, which we have seen mounted in some of our
museums under the name of ‘ Wild Turkey’ is a bird belonging to a
different genus in ornithology; and if alluded to, by the Scottish
historian, (Robertson, Wm. The History of America) would have
been mentioned by its popular name of Indian hen.”

We can now turn to the more certain records. According to
Pietro Martire,? Franciscus Fernandez of Corduba Lupus Ocho
and Christophorus Morantes seek new lands west of Cuba and
come to Yucatan on its northern coast (1517). Here they find
the natives are “accustomed to eate fleshe, and have great plentie

1The Royal Commentaries of the Yneas. By Ynca Garcilasso de la Vega.
Transl. and Edit. by C. R. Markham. MHakluyt Soc. 1871, Vol. II, p. 485. (Orig.

1609-1617.)
2 Schoolcraft, H. R. Travels in the Central Portions of the Mississippi Valley.

[Performed in 1821.] New York, 1825, p. 71.
3 Eden, Richard. p. 187.

346 Wricxt, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. ties

of beastes and foules; as peacockes, and other whiche they francke
and feede in their houses.” In 1518, Grijalva visits Yucatan on
its south coast and reports it ! “hath also great plentie of foules. . .”
In 1519, Cortez? send a side excursion to Yucatan and the natives
bring “with them eight of their hennes beynge as bigge as pea-
cockes, of brownyshe coloure, and not inferior to peacockes in
pleasaunte tast.’”’ In his “Conquest of New Spain,” Bernal Diaz
del Castillo in writing of Montezuma’s aviary mentions ® “turkeys”
among the “many sorts of birds and other things which are bred
in this country.” In his “Fifth Letter to Charles V,” (1526)

Cortez tells of coming suddenly on the natives who 4 “left behind ,

’

many things, principally fowls,....,” upon which they satisfy
their hunger. And many writers have since held that Cortez must
have sent turkeys among his numerous presents to his majesty.

Lopez de Gomara, in 1553, speaks of the turkey and holds that °
“the gallipavo, of all the birds of New Spain, is the best for food.
It is called this (gallipavo) on account of its resemblance in shape
to the peacock (pavon) and to the domestic fowl (gallo). They
are able to make the barb or wen on the head pass through consid-
erable range of coloration.”’ In his Historia de las Indias” he
enumerates © “gallipavos” among the animals of Yucatan. Pur-
chas, in his excerpts from Gomara’s “ Larger Relations of Mexico”
gives us the following regarding Montezuma’s aviary and menag-
erie:’ “There were also other Cages for foule of rapine of all sorts,
as Hawkes, Kites.... This house of foule had of daily allowance
of five hundred Gynea cockes,....”’ “In the lower Halles were
great Cages made of timber: in some of them were Lions, in others
Tigres, in other Ounces,.... They were fed with their ordinary,
as Ginea cockes, Deere....” In “The Voyage of Robert Tomson
into Nova Hispania in the yeere 1555, etc.” we find 8 “as for victuals

libid., p. 188.

2 ibid., p. 193.

3 Hakluyt Soc., Sec. Ser. XXIV, 1910, Vol. II, p. 61.

4 Hakluyt Soc., 1868, p. 80.

5 Gomara, Francisco Lopez de. Hist de Mexico, 1553, p. 343.

“6 Biblioteca de Autores Espanoles. Historiadores Primitivos de
Indias. Tome Primero. Madrid, 1858, p. 181.

7 Purchas His Pilgrimes. Vol. XV. Glasgow, 1906, pp. 536, 535.

8 Hakluyt, Richard. Principal Navigation, etc. Hakl. Soc. Glasgow, 1904,
Woltebx pps oovqio42:

Ret eae Wricut, Harly Records of the Wild Turkey. 347

in the Said Citie (Mexico),....quailes, Guiny-cockes, and such
like, all are very good cheape.”” Also in St. Domingo, “they have
a good store of Guiny cocks and Guinyhens.” In “a relation of
the commodities of Nova Hispania” Henry Hawks, 1572 holds !
“This city (Mexico) is very well provided... .with....victuals,
as... .Guiny-cocks and hennes....” In the “History of the New
World,” Girolama Benzoni of Milan writes? “Two things are
produced in this country which are not found elsewhere in India,
except in the territories of Guatimala, of cape Fonduri, and Mexico
and along the shores of New Spain. One is a species of peacock
that has been brought to Europe, and commonly called the Indian
fowls.” In a footnote appears the following comment: “We
call them turkeys; but in Italy they are still distinguished as galli
d’India.”’

Eighteen years after the completion (1521) of the conquest of
Mexico, explorations in northern Mexico and southwestern United
States become pronounced. Purchas in “The Voyage of Frier
Marco de Nica... .into New Mexico and the adjoining lands, 1539-
1595” says,’ they “have....; great Guinee Cockes”; “A Letter of
Francis Vazquez de Coronado. . . . 1539” remarks,‘ “the great store
of Hennes of the Countrey.”’ A relation (1540) of the same gentle-
man says,° “Wee founde heere Guinie cockes but fewe. The
Indians tell mee in all these seven cities, that they eate them not,
but that they keepe them onely for their feathers. I believe them
not, for they are excellent good, and greater then those of Mexico.”
Of this same journey, Winship’s translation gives more pertinent
notes. Near Bernalillo,’ “They (Indians) made a present of a
large number of (turkey) cocks with very big wattles, ete.” Again,
“there are a great many native fowl in these provinces (among
Tigeux Indians especially) and cocks with great hanging chins.
When dead, these keep for sixty days, and longer in winter, without

1 Hakluyt, R. Vol. [X, p. 380.

2 Benzoni,G. Venice, 1572. Transl. W. H. Smith. Hakl. Soc. London, 1858,
p. 148, 149.

3 Hakluytus Posthumus or Purchas His Pilgrimes. Glasgow, 1905-1907.
Hakl. Soc., Extra Series. Vol. XVIII, p. 54.

4Hakluyt, R. IX, p. 119.

5 Ibid., p. 156.

6 Winship, G. P. The Journey of Coronado 1540-1542. New York, 1904,
pp. 40, 90, 99, 100, 153, 200.

348 Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. Rene

losing their feathers or opening and without any bad smell.”’ In
another place we find the observation, “There are many fowls in
the country tame.” Also, in Cibola, “For foo they have....
some fowls, like those of Mexico, and they keep these more for
their feathers than to eat, because they make long robes of them,
since they do not have cotton.”’ One other record for the same
region comes forty years later, 1581-1583. The natives receive
the travellers! “very courteously, and (bring) them to their
townes, where... .they (give) them... .hennes of the countrey,...”

In Florida, De Soto in 1539 reports that ? “They say, that there
is to be found in it a great plenty of all the things mentioned, and
fowles, guanojos* in yards,....”? In the 1854 translation,
Buckingham Smith gives “guanojos” as “Turkeys, in the lan-
guage spoken by the natives of the Yucayo Islands.”

In 1562, Captain John Ribault finds that 3 “ As we passed thorow
these woods (River of Port Royal) we saw nothing but Turkey
cocks flying in the Forrests,....”’ In 1564, Laudonniere records
that 4 “In this meane space the Indians visited me, and brought
me dayly certaine presents, as Fish, Deere, Turki-cocks....”
In 1586, Nicholas Burgoignon says® that they have there great
store of Turkie cocks,....” The following year, 1587, “The
description of the West Indies,....”’ relates of Florida that
“The foules are Turkey-cocks,....”’ and that the Indians in the
winter time feed on them as well as deer, fish and oysters. The
same year 1587 in the same work © there appears a repetition of the
Ribault note with the addition that these turkeys were in woods
of oaks, cedars, and Lentiskes.

In 1601 Antonio de Herrara begins the publication of his 8
decades on “The General History of the Vast Continent and
Islands of America, commonly called The West Indies.” It treats
of the period from 1492-1554; and in several places, he alludes to
the turkey. Of Griljalva in Yucatan, he says’ “They (Indians)

1 Hakluyt, R. Vol. IX, p. 194.

2 Letter of Hernando de Soto in Florida ete. July 9, 1539, Washington, 1854,
p. 9.
3 Hakluyt, R. Vol. VIII, p. 461.

4TIbid., [X, p. 49.

5 Ibid., IX, p. 114.

6 Ibis, VIII, pp. 451, 456, 461.

7 Herrara, Antonio de. 1725-1726 London, 3 vols. Translation by Capt.
John Stevens, Vol. 2, pp. 126, 349, Vol. 3, p. 353; Vol. 4, pp. 19, 142.

Vol. wal
1914

Wricut, Harly Records of the Wild Turkey. 349
immediately (sent to him) thirty Indians loaded with roast Fish,
Hens,....”’ Concerning Montezuma’s Aviary and Gardens, he
asserts that “they (wild beasts) were fed with Turkeys, Deer...”
Of the province of Tabasco, Mexico, he writes, “This country
abounds in Turkies.”’ Also of Yucatan, we find much the same
assertion. “This country always abounded in Game, especially
in Deer and wild Boars, and therefore the Indians call’d it Ulunu-
luyz yetelzed, that is Land of Deer and Turkey.” In his last note
of this form, he relates a custom of Honduras and Ybueras, “they
....kept the shells of Turkey Eggs that were hatch’d alledging,
that if they were thrown away the Pouts would dye.”

The first description of the Turkey is usually credited to Gonzalo
Fernandez de Oviedo y de Valdes, who was at Darien from 1514—
1517, 1519-1523, later at Cartagena, and in 1535 at Santo Domingo.
He wrote “Historia natural y general de las Indias” in 50 books.
The first volume (19 books) of this work was published at Seville
in 1535, and a brief extract of his Sumario de la Natural Historia
de la Indias appeared at Toledo in 1527. Most of the English
translations apparently are of this 1527 extract which probably has
not the turkey account. He treats both Curassows and Turkeys
as Pavos (Peafowls).!

“There are some peafowls reddish (ruby) and others black, and
the tails have the shape of the peahens of Spain; but in plumage
and in color, some are entirely reddish (ruby), and the abdomen
with a little of the breast white, and the others entirely black, and
in the same manner the abdomen and part of the breast: white;
and both have upon the head a beautiful crest or tuft, of red feath-
ers for the red ones, and black for the black ones, and they are
better to eat than those of Spain. These peafowls are wild, and
some are domesticated in the houses when they are taken young.
The archers kill many of them because they are in great number.
Some say that the pea-cock is red and the pea-hen black; others
are of contrary opinion, and say that the pea-cock is black and the
pea-hen reddish (ruby); others say that they are of two kinds
(géneros) and that the male and female are of both colors and of

1 Biblioteca de Autores Espanoles, etc. Historiadores Primitivos de Indias.
Tome Premero. Sumario de la Natural Historia de las Indias, Capitulo XXXVI,
p. 493. This excerpt transl. by A. J. Lamoureux.

[ Auk

350 Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. July

either of them. If the archer does not hit it in the head or in a
part that kills the said peafowl, though it be struck in a wing or
other part, it goes on the ground afoot and runs rapidly; and as
it is necessary that the archer have a good dog and quick, so that
the hunter should not lose his labor and the game. One of these
turkeys is valued a ducat, and sometimes a castellano or peso de oro
(gold dollar), which is as much as it is to spend a real in Spain.
Other peafowls larger and of better savor and more beautiful are
found in New Spain (Mexico), of which many are carried to the
islands (West Indies) and to Castilla del Oro (Darien), and they
are bred domestically in the homes of the Christians; of these the
females are plain and the males beautiful, and very often make a
wheel (hacen de rueda), though they have not so great a tail nor so
beautiful as those of Spain; but in all other respects as to their
plumage they are very beautiful. They have the neck and head
covered with a carnosity without feathers, which often changes
to diverse colors, when it suits them, especially when they make
the wheel it becomes very red, and when they stop making the turn
sometimes yellow and other colors, and sometimes blackened,
changing color dark and white, many times; and on its face above
the beak the pea-cock has a short teat (pézoncorto), which when
he makes the wheel is enlarged or grows more than a palm; and
from the centre of the breast springs and is worn a lock of coarse
hair as thick as a finger, and these hairs neither more or less than
those of the tail of a horse, very black, and more than a palm long.
The meat of these peafowls is very good, and incomparably better
and more tender than that of the peafowl of Spain.”

Another who has been frequently mentioned with Oviedo in the
earlier turkey accounts is Franciscus Hernandez (Fernandez),
whom Philip I sent to Mexico in 1570-1576. Only portions of his
16 folio work have appeared, and in 1651 (not between 1555-
1598, as Pennant supposed) there appeared the tract on birds.
Concerning Huexolotl (Turkey), he writes, “This is the Indian
Fowl, which some call the Gallipavo, and with which all are ac-
quainted; they are to be found in woods, are twice as large as the
domestic ones, more hardy, and more unsavory, but in other
respects similar to them. Sometimes they are slain with arrows,
and at other times with real warlike weapons. And then there are

Vol. XXX1) wricut, Harly Records of the Wild Turkey. dol

the females, called in the above language Cihuatotolin, which are
smaller than the males: and although most acceptable and whole-
some food, they are nevertheless it would seem to our countrymen,
too moist, excessively oily, and nauseous to some delicate palates.” '

In 1811, Alex. De Humboldt speaks of these last two authors and
adds some interesting notes regarding the early history of the
turkey of Mexico and the domestic one of Europe. He writes as
follows:2 “From Mexico, the Spaniards carried them into Peru,
to Darien, and into the Antilles, where Oviedo described them in
1515. Hernandez has already very well observed that the wild
turkey from Mexico are very much larger than the domestic tur-
kies. At present, one only meets the wild ones in the northern
provinces. They betake themselves to the north, as the popula-
tion increases and as a necessary consequence when the forests
become more rare.... When the English in 1584, arrived in
Virginia, the turkeys already had existed fifty years in Spain,
Italy, and England. This is not the first time this bird passed
from the United States into Europe, as many naturalists have
erroneously stated.”

Earty CoMPARISONS OF THE FERAL AND Domestic Forms.

Early chroniclers, as we of the present, instinctively compare
the wild form with the smaller domestic variety of the poultry
yard; and the literature of North American travel is replete with
such descriptions, some of which appear herewith because of their
intrinsic interest and because of the sidelights they may throw on
domestication and introduction into Europe.

In the French domains of North America, the Jesuits frequently
note them. Allouez at Lake Poygan, Wisconsin (1669-70) says,?
“there we saw two Turkeys perched on a tree, male and female,
resembling perfectly those of France — the same size, the same

1 Hernandez, Francisco. Nova plantarum, animalium et mineralium Mexica-
norum historia — Romae 1651. Tractus Secundus. Cap. LIX, p. 27.

2 Humboldt, Al. De. Essai Politique Sur Le Royaume De La Nouvelle-Es-
pagne. 5 vols. Paris, Tome Troisieme, Livre IV, Chap. X, pp. 233, 234.

3 Thwaites, R. G. The Jesuit Relations and Other Allied Documents. 1610-
1791. Cleveland, 1896, Vol. LIV, p. 219.

oon Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. Fenes
color, and the same cry.” Rasles in the Illinois country, 1723
records,! “we can hardly travel a league without meeting a prodigi-
ous multitude of Turkeys, which go in troops, sometimes to the
number of 200. They are larger than those that are seen in France.
I had the curiosity to weigh one of them, and it weighed thirty-six
livres. They have a sort of hairy beard at the neck, which is half
a foot long.” Poisson at Bayogoulas on the Mississippi, 1727
writes that his host ? “neglected nothing for our comfort; he regaled
us with wild turkey (these are very like domestic turkeys but they
have a better flavor).”

In the southern English colonies, we have a similar set of obser-
vations. According to Fiske,? “On that same voyage (Chris-
topher Newport, carried home a coop of plump turkeys, the first
that ever graced an English bill of fare.”

Of the turkeys in Carolina John Lawson writes in 1714 as fol-
lows:+ “There are great flocks of these in Carolina. I have seen
about five hundred in a flock; some of them are very large. I
never weighed any myself, but have been informed of one that
weighed near sixty pound weight. I have seen half a turkey. feed
eight hungry men two meals. Sometimes the wild breed with the
tame ones, which they reckon makes them very hardy, as I believe
it must. I see no manner of difference betwixt the wild turkies
and the tame ones; only the wild are ever of one color, viz: a
dark gray or brown, and are excellent food. They feed on acorns,
huckleberries, and many other sorts of berries that Carolina affords.
The eggs taken from the nest and hatched under a hen will yet retain
a wild nature, and commonly leave you and run wild at last, and
will never be got into a house to roost but always perch on some
high tree hard by the house, and separate themselves from the
tame sort, although, at the same time, they tread and breed to-
gether. I have been informed that if you take these wild eggs
when just on the point of being hatched, and dip them (for some
little time) in a bowl of milk-warm water, it will take off their

1Tbid., Vol. LXVII, p. 169.

2 Ibid., Vol. LXVII, p. 297.

* Fiske, John. Old Virginia and her Neighbors. Boston and New York, 1897,
Vol. I, p. 122.

‘Lawson, John. The History of Carolina, etc. London, 1714. Reprint,
Raleigh, N. C., 1860, pp. 244, 245.

Pa | Wricut, Harly Records of the Wild Turkey. 300
wild nature and make them as tame and domestic as the others.
Some Indians have brought these wild breed, hatched at home, to
be a decoy to bring others near their cabins, which they have
shot.”

In 1735, Francis Moore finds in Georgia! “Of wild fowl kind,
there are wild turkeys, though but few of them upon the island (St.
Simons), but plenty upon the main. This bird is larger than the
tame turkey, and the cock is the beautifullest of the feathered kind;
his head has the red and blue of the turkey, only much more lively
and beautiful, his neck is like the cock pheasant’s, his feathers
also are of the same color with those of that bird, glittering in the
sun as if they were gilded; his tail is as large, though it hath not
so fine eyes in it as the peacock’s hath. At first, before they were
disturbed by our people, they would strut in the woods as a peacock
does. I have heard some say, that upon weighing, they have found
them to exceed thirty pounds; I never weighed any, but have had
them very fat and large; they are delicious meat and are compared
to a tame turkey, as a pheasant is to a fowl.”

In Pennsylvania, Kalm (October, 1748) observes that? “The
Turkey Cocks and Hens run about in the woods of this country,
and differ in nothing from our tame ones, except in their superior
size, and redder, though more palatable flesh. When their eggs
are found in the wood, and put under tame Jurky hens, the young
ones become tame; however when they grow, it sometimes happens
that they fly away; their wings are therefore commonly clipped,
especially when young. But the tamed turkeys are commonly
much more irascible, than those which are naturally tame. The
Indians likewise employ themselves in taming and keeping them
near their huts.”

Shortly after the Revolution, the number of travellers in this
country increases, and at the end of the eighteenth century and
at the beginning of the nineteenth century, we have several perti-
nent notes. Among Bartram’s numerous remarks on this species,
we find that he when near Darian, on Altamaha River,’ “saw here a

1 Colls. Ga. Hist. Soc. Savannah, 1840, p. 117.

2 Kalm, Peter. Travels into North America, etc. Translated by J. R. Forster.
Vol. I, Warrington, 1770, p. 209.

3Bartram, William. ‘Travels through North and South Carolina, Georgia,
East and West Florida. Phila. 1791, p. 14.

304 Wricut, Harly Records of the Wild Turkey. jue

remarkably large turkey of the native wild breed: his head was
above three feet from the ground when he stood erect; he was a
stately beautiful bird, of a very dark dusky brown colour, the tips
of the feathers of his neck, breast, back and shoulders, edged with a
copper colour, which in a certain exposure looked like burnished
gold, and he seemed not insensible of the splendid appearance he
made. He was reared from an egg, found in the forest, and hatched
by a hen of the common domestic fowl.

“Our turkey of America is a very different species from the
mileagris of Asia and Europe; they are nearly thrice their size and
weight. I have seen several that have weighed between twenty
and thirty pounds, and some have been killed that weighed near
forty. ‘They are taller, and have a much longer neck proportionally
and likewise longer legs, and stand more erect; they are also very
different in colour. Our’s are all, male and female, of a dark
brown colour, not having a black feather on them; but the male
exceedingly splendid, with changeable colours. In other particu-
lars they differ not.”

The following year, 1792, Belknap in speaking of “ Meleagris
gallopavo”’ gives us the following: ! “ Dr. Goldsmith doubts whether
any of this breed have been tamed in America. They certainly
have been tamed; but they are degenerated in size by their domesti-
cation, scarcely any being more than half so heavy as those above
mentioned. The turkey is a rambling bird, and runs with great
speed on the ground. The tame flocks frequently wander, and
cannot be fatted till the snow prevents their excursions.” Priest
three years later, 1795, holds the backwoodsmen and western
settlers think? “The only bird....worthy of their attention is
the wild turkey. An American naturalist (Bartram) says, ‘Why
do not the Americans domesticate this noble bird? They are
much better adapted to bear this climate than the puny breed
their ancestors imported from England. The few that are shot
so far to the eastward as to be brought to our markets bear a great
price.’”’

1 Belknap, Jeremy. The History of New Hampshire. Boston, 1792, Vol. III,
p. 170.

2 Priest, Wm. ‘Travels in the United States of America; commencing in the
year 1793, and ending in 1797, etc. London, 1802, p. 90.

ta | Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. B00

In connection with Heckewelder’s journey to Wabash in 1792,
his translator makes this note:! “Our tame European turkeys are
descended from this wild species, which in the latter part of the
16th century had become known in Germany. They are found
in large numbers in less inhabited regions, west of the middle free
states. Schépf saw them during his journey in great numbers
running about in the woods, hiding in the brushes or setting on
the limbs of trees. They distinguished themselves from the tame
ones, by their uniformity of colors, being black, brown and muddy
white spotted, they weigh 28-30 lbs.” Parkinson, who travels in
America in 1798-1800, in discussing the “Fowls of America”
says,” “There are great numbers of turkeys reared; and very fine
they are. There are likewise wild turkeys, which are something
larger than the tame ones, but so like them, that I should be
unable to distinguish the one from the other. They are black or
rather brown, called copper colour.”” At the same time Michaux
well known to American naturalists writes the following: * “To
the east of the Mississippi, in a space more than eight hundred
leagues, this is the only species of wild turkey which is met with.
They are larger than those reared in our poultry-yards. In autumn
and in winter they feed chiefly on chestnuts and acorns; and some
of those killed at this season weigh thirty-five or forty pounds.
The variety of domestic turkies, to which the name of English
turkies is given, in France, came originally from this species of wild
turkey; and when they are not crossed with the common species,
they retain the primitive colour of their plumage, as well as that of
their legs, which isa deep red. If, subsequent to 1525, our domestic
Turkies were naturalized in Spain, and from thence introduced into
the rest of Europe it is probable that they were originally from
some of the more southern parts of America where there doubtless
exists a species different from that of the United States.”

In 1806, Priscilla Wakefield’s “Excursions in America” appears.
When at Sunbury below Savannah, the traveller comments on

1 Penn. Mag. Hist. and Biog. Vol. XII, p. 166.

2 Parkinson, Richard. A Tour in America in 1798, 1799 and 1800. London,
1805, Vol. I, pp. 299, 115.

3 Michaux, F. A. Travels to the Westward of the Alleghany Mountains, in the
States of Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee, etc. undertaken in 1802.... Transl.
by B. Lambert. London, 1805, pp. 217, 218.

: ~ Auk
356 Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. [Fay

the prodigious size of wild turkeys.' “I saw one, that had been
hatched from an egg found in the forest: he was a noble, majestic
bird, at least a yard high, when he stood upright; his colour was
dark dusky brown; but the feathers of the neck, breast, back and
shoulder, were tipped with copper colour, which in the sun looked
like burnished gold. The American turkeys are twice as large as
those we have in England, particularly as to height as their necks
and legs are longer in proportion. Both the cock and the hen are
brown, not having a black feather on them; but the cock is beauti-
fully adorned with variable shades, as I have already mentioned.”
In 1810 Christian Schultz finds them common at the mouth of the
Ohio. He writes,? “I likewise saw several broods of wild turkey,
produced in a similar way: these are procured by placing the eggs,
which are frequently found in the woods, under a hen or a tame
turkey, and the brood become as much attached to the barnyard
as if they had a claim to it by hereditary right. I shot several
dozens of wild turkeys in descending the river, but could never
discover the least difference betwixt them and those we have
domesticated. They can scarcely be denominated wild, as we
frequently passed within thirty yards of flocks which were drinking
by the river, without their showing the least signs of alarm.”
At the Chickasaw bluff on the Mississippi River, Monteile (June 2,
1817) shoots a very fine wild turkey which proves excellent eating.®
“Tts fat was not confined to a particular part, as with our domesti-
cated turkeys, but spread throughout the flesh, which renders it
much more savoury; they are the same size as the latter, but more
active. We had often seen them upon the banks, surrounded
by eight or ten young ones; but on approaching, they fled to the
forest; all of them appeared to be of a dark brown colour.”

The famous Schoolcraft (1821) in his “Travels in the Central
Portions of the Mississippi Valley” (N. Y., 1825, p. 71) remarks
that “With regard to the (turkey), an opinion has been advanced,

1 Wakefield, Priscilla. Excursions in- North America,.... London, 1806,

pp. 84-87.
2 Schultz, Christian. Travels on an Inland Voyage through the States of New
York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee,.... New York,

2 vols., 1810, Vol. II, p. 19.

3 Monteile, E. A Voyage to North America, and the West Indies, in 1817.
London, 1821, p. 73.

Vol. XXXT) Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. 357

that it is not indigenous to our country; but the assertion of
Robertson on this subject, that this bird was one of those which
Cortes found in a state of domestication, on his arrival in Mexico,
would, it should seem, put to rest all dispute on this point,....
The gallipavo is, in fact, a bird peculiar to North America, and is
found as a wild-fowl throughout all our forests, from Mexico to
the Northern Lakes, without any material variation in its specific
marks. It was unknown to the ancient writers on natural history,
and unknown in Europe, before the discovery of America. Authors
inform us that it was first seen in France, in the reign of Francis I,
and in England, in the reign of Henry VHI. By comparing the
epochs of these sovereigns it appears evident, that the first turkeys
must have been brought from Mexico, the conquest of which was
completed, A. D. 1521 — three hundred years antecendent to
the date of the present remarks.” The following year, 1822-23,
William H. Blane, an English gentleman when a! “few miles from
the village of Hancock (Md),.... put up a large ‘gang’ of wild
turkies that was crossing the road. These birds, which I afterwards
saw an immense number of in the Western States, are much larger
and handsomer, as well as of a more stately gait, than tame turkies.
Their colour is the same as that of the breed which we call the
dark Norfolk. Their plumage is particularly fine, and has a
beautiful gloss, very much resembling that of an English starling,
and which immediately distinguishes them from the domestic
varieties, even when dead. I may here mention that the turkey
originally came from America, and was unknown to the ancients.
Indeed it is now generally allowed by naturalists, that the Melea-
grides of the Romans were Guinea Fowls.”

In 1832, Flint writes of? “The wild turkey (as) a fine, large
bird, of brilliant blackish plumage. It breeds with the domestic
one; and when the latter is reared near the range of the former,
it is sure to be enticed into the woods by it. In some places they
are so numerous, as to be easily killed, beyond the wants of the
people! We have seen more than a hundred driven from one

1 An Excursion through the United States and Canada during the years 1822-23
by an English Gentleman (William H. Blane) London, 1804, p. 85.

2 Flint, Timothy. The History and Geography of the Mississippi Valley. Two
vols. (none). Cincinnati, 1832. Vol. I, p. 73.

308 SHUFELDT, Osteology of the Passenger Pigeon. eae

cornfield.’ About this same time, James Stuart in a journey
from Montgomery to Mobile finds the! “wild turkey abounds in
these (Chattahoochee River) woods, and when fat is an excellent
bird: but as the wild turkeys are shot indiscriminately, they are
often brought to table when they have not been sufficiently fed.
I was always better pleased to see the tame than the wild turkey
on the table.” Finally, concerning the tame form, Zadock Thomp-
son says in 1842, that? “The Domestic Turkey sprung from this
species, and was sent from Mexico to Spain in the 16th century.
It was introduced into England in 1524, and into France and other
parts of Europe about the same time.”

OSTEOLOGY OF THE PASSENGER PIGEON (ECTO-
PISTES MIGRATORIUS).

BY DR. R. W. SHUFELDT.
Plate XXXIV.

As far as I have been able to ascertain, there appears to be but
one living specimen of Ectopistes migratortus in North America,
and that one is a captive at the Zoélogical Garden of Cincinnati,
Ohio, where, at the present writing, Mr. Stephan writes me it is
doing well. When it dies, the species will be utterly extinct in this
country, where formerly it existed in enormous flocks, often num-
bering many millions. Personally, I have witnessed but one
flight of this pigeon, and that was early in the 70’s at New Canaan,
Connecticut, the second day of which I shot about fifty birds.

There has been no complete account published of the osteology
of this bird, and certainly no good figures of its skeleton, though I

1 Stuart, James. Three Years in North America. Edinburgh, 1833, Vol. II,
p. 214.

2Thompson, Zadock. History of Vermont. Natural, Civil and Statistical.
Burlington, p. 101.

THE AUK, VOL. XXXI. PLATE XXXIV.

PASSENGER PIGEON, Ectopistes migratorius.

OsSTEOLOGY OF THE

pera et Pe}

oar’
t
’

=~.
id a
‘ ‘ a
a ‘ #
aa - . -
J .
; P =
P ¥
a e ;
"Ee “e “
i : ied : a.
3 ' bd e =,
t « "y 7 a
4 - *
' H . a-
a Se
4 = adsl Some ae:
: A . } i
‘ \ : * p :
5 < s : * ' P "
; a : ; :
- w a f= ail ~ ae em »
A 2 Ea am OT, SS by) PS

a | SHUFELDT, Osteology of the Passenger Pigeon. 309

referred, in two or three of my earlier papers, to some of the charac-
ters of the latter in connection with the osteology of the American
Columbe generally. It is highly important that such an account
should be published with a plate presenting all the essential charac-
ters of the skeleton. This will be useful at the present time, not
only for comparison with the osteology of existing species, but also
to the paleornithologist, in the event of the discovery of the bones
of this bird in the ages to come.

I am indebted to the U. 8. National Museum for the loan of a
complete skeleton of this species, the only one in the collection, and
the only one of which I have any knowledge (No. 18520, ad.,
Laurel, Md., o&. ?). In connection with this loan, and for the
prompt transmittal of the material, I have pleasure in thanking
Dr. Charles W. Richmond, Assistant Curator of the Division of
Birds, and his aid, Mr. J. H. Riley.

The plate illustrating the present article is a reproduction of the
photograph I made direct of the aforesaid skeleton; it presents the
bones natural size and conveniently arranged for study and com-
parative measurements.

There is nothing peculiar in the skeleton of this species — indeed,
it is about as typically a columbidine one as we would meet with
anywhere; a glance at the plate will be sufficient to convince the
avian osteologist of this fact.

The Skull: — As in all true pigeons and in many fowls, the entire
area of the superior part of the skull is smooth, being more or less
flat transversely in the frontal region, and uniformly convex from
before, backwards, from the vertex of the cranium. Superiorly,

1 Shufeldt, R. W. ‘‘ Notes on the Classification of the Pigeons.’’ Amer. Nat.,
Feb. 1891, Vol. X XV, No. 290, pp. 157, 158.
“‘On the Comparative Osteology of the United States Columbide.”’
P. Z. S., Lond., Mar. 3, 1891, pp. 194-196.
‘On the Osteology of the Pigeons (Columbe).’’ Jour. Morph., Vol.
XVIII, No. 3, Bost., 1901, pp. 487-512. Pls. A, B. This paper is illustrated by
four outline sketches, only one of which is devoted to Ectopistes, namely the pec-
toral aspect of the sternum.
“On Fossil Bird-Bones Obtained by Expeditions of the University
of Pennsylvania from the Bone Caves of Tennessee.’’ Amer. Nat., July 1897,
pp. 645-650. On page 649 it is stated that ‘The Passenger Pigeon is represented
in the collection by subfossil bones from several adult individuals.’ It is shown
that some twelve or more specimens were found, and that the several bones differ
in no way when compared with the corresponding ones of Ectopistes as the species
existed in our avifauna years ago.

lee

360 SHureipt, Osteology of the Passenger Pigeon. Tals

the margins of the large orbits are cultrate, while the posterior
processes at lateral aspect of the brain-case, as the post-frontal and
squamosal, are much reduced. Basis cranit is horizontally disposed,
and the brain-case is of good capacity, while the rather high
foramen magnum is of cordate outline, with the very small occipital
condyle minutely notched posteriorly.

Large vacuities occur in the interorbital septum, as shown in Fig. 1
of the Plate, where, too, we are to observe the bulky pars plana,
and the elongate, narrow, though capacious, external narial aper-
ture.

The superior mandible is nearly straight, being gently decurved
at its apex, and, as a whole, making an open angle with the slender,
straight, zygomatic or infraorbital bar. A lacrymal, which is of
good size, completely fuses with the pars plana in the adult.

A vomer appears to be absent, while the quadrates, the small
pterygoids and the palatine structures are all as we find them in this
group of birds generally — that is, in the typical and smaller
varieties of the wild pigeons.

The mandible is of an acute V-shaped pattern and slender in its
proportions, with a weak and short symphysis.

As to the hyoidean arches, they are as we find them in most pi-
geons, and not unlike those structures in certain of the smaller
species of the tetraonine types, being slender and formed as shown
in Fig. 3 of the Plate. As usual, the glosso-hyal is performed
entirely in cartilage.

In Figure 2 the united sclerotal plates of an eye are shown; there
are some 13 or 14 in either circlet, and they are shaped as we find
them in other Columbe.

The Trunk Skeleton: — Between the skull and the pelvis Ecto-
pistes has eighteen vertebrae, while fourteen unite most solidly
together to form the pelvic sacrum; finally, there are six in the
caudal division of the vertebral column, and all beyond these last
go to form the large, subtriangular pygostyle.

As in many fowls, the three leading dorsal vertebre fuse to form
one bone, and the ribs they support are connected with the sternum
by costal ribs or hemapophyses. This is also the case with the
pair of ribs belonging to the last dorsal vertebra, the remaining
ones being disposed as shown in Fig. 1 of the Plate.

vor et) SHUFELDT, Osteology of the Passenger Pigeon. 361

Broad and somewhat shallow, the pelvis of the Passenger Pigeon
is, nevertheless, capacious, and reminds one of this bone in some of
the Tetraonide. Its sacral roof is a broad, lozenge-shaped one, in
close contact with the ilium upon either side; but codssification
does not take place at any point along the sutural line.

As we might expect in a bird of such powerful flight, the keel or
carina of the sternum is very extensive, with its fore-part thick and
strong. There is a pair of xiphoidal processes on either side,
posteriorly, each having an expanded distal end as shown in Figure
1 of the Plate. Four costal ribs articulate with either costal
border, and a minute manubrium is seen to project in front.

Powerful flight in this bird also accounts for the presence in its
skeleton of a scapular arch, with its usual component bones large
and strong. Os furculum is of a broad, U-shaped form with a
minute hypocleidium below. Either scapula is enlarged posteriorly,
the distal extremity being truncate from within, outwards. A
coracoid is an unusually large, long bone for a bird of the size of this
pigeon, and it is very strong and straight. The os furculuwm does
not meet the scapula, on either side, in articulation, and the free
ends of this arch are but slightly expanded.

The Iimbs: — As we would naturally expect, the skeleton of the
pectoral limb indicates great power of flight. The several bones,
though short, are massive, and in close and extensive contact at
their articulations.

The humerus is short and straight and the shaft correspondingly
stout. Its radial crest is triangular in outline as shown in Fig. 5.

Radius of the antibrachium is also straight, while the massive
ulna exhibits more or less curvature along its entire continuity
(Fig. 4).

In extreme length the humerus measures 4.3 ems.; the ulna 7.55
cems., and the radius, as in the case of the humerus, 4.3 ems. All of
these bones, which is also the case in the pelvic limb, do not quite
come up to these measurements, owing to there having been a
slight obliquity in the point of view as they were placed to be
photographed. This could not be avoided, as the bones of the
limbs are articulated, and I had no right to separate them. The
carpo-metacarpus has an extreme length of 2.9 cms., as in the Plate.
Comparatively speaking, the bones in the thigh, leg and tarsus are

eve

362 SHUFELDT, Osteology of the Passenger Pigeon. July

long and more or less slender; their principal characters are seen
in Fig. 6 of the Plate. The fibula is free, and it extends but two-
thirds down the side of the nearly straight shaft of the ttbio-tarsus.
The latter presents distally in front the little ‘osseous bridge,’
spanning obliquely the groove for the tendons which pass there in
life. With respect to their extreme lengths, the femur measures
3.95 ems.; the tibio-tarsus 5.5 cms., and the tarso-metatarsus 3.0
cms.

In a former paper I have presented the affinities of Ectopistes
migratorius, and this will obviate the necessity of my touching
upon this side of the subject in the present connection, which
pretends to be but a brief sketch of this fine representative of the
Columbe which will shortly be extinct.

EXPLANATION OF PLATE.
(All figures natural size.)

Ectopistes migratorius. No. 18520. Collection U. 8. National Museum.
From a photograph by the author.

Fig. 1. Skull and trunk skeleton; right lateral view, with bones all
im situ.

Fig. 2. Circlet of sclerotal plates of right eye, with the dried enclosing
membranes of the globe attached behind.

Fic. 3. Hyoid arches, seen from below; the cornua are drawn together,
and the glosso-hyal is in cartilage.

Fia. 4. Right pectoral limb, viewed upon its palmar aspect, with all
the bones in situ.

Fie. 5. Left humerus, seen upon anconal aspect.

Fic. 6. Left pelvic limb, inner or measial aspect, with all the bones
in situ. The osseous patella is minute and a caleaneal sesamoid of some
size is to be seen above the hypotarsus.

MOL | Smmons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. 363

NOTES ON THE LOUISIANA CLAPPER RAIL (RALLUS
CREPITANS SATURATUS) IN TEXAS.

BY GEORGE FINLAY SIMMONS.
I. INTRODUCTION.

My observations of the Louisiana Clapper Rail (Rallus crepitans
saturatus) have been of particular interest to me; and, as it seems
there is very little known of this race, it appears advisable to
publish the results of these observations in connection with a review
of the few published records of Clapper Rails from Texas, in order
to work out the range of the bird in that state.

The Rails have always proved somewhat of a mystery, but I
did not realize how little was known of the nesting habits of the
family in general and of the Louisiana Clapper Rail in particular
until I began to search for information on the subject. My
observations by no means cover the complete life history of the
bird, and they are here given merely in the hope that they will
diffuse some light on the habits of a little known species.

I wish to acknowledge my grateful indebtedness to Mr. E. F.
Pope of Colmesneil, Texas, for ready answers to my numerous
inquiries and for his field notes regarding the species under con-
sideration. Among the others who aided me I wish to mention
Mr. R. E. Farley of Port Aransas, Texas, and Mr. John M. Prior
of Corpus Christi, Texas.

II. Previous ReEcorps.

The first record of the Clapper Rail in Texas is that of the late
Mr. Geo. B. Sennett, who, in 1877 under the name Rallus longirostris
Bodd.,! states that “A few of this species were seen about Galves-
ton Bay only, and asingle bird obtained. 3-92 -—14.6020.00X5.75
X2.50. Feb. 28, Galveston.” The first number is that of the

1 Sennett, George B. Notes on the Ornithology of the Lower Rio Grande, from
observations made during the season of 1877. Bull. U. 8. Geol. Surv. Terr., IV,
No. 1, 1878, p. 61.

[eae

364 Smmmons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. aly

specimen; the sign for sex follows; the next four numbers indicate
respectively the length, extent of wings, length of wing and length
of tail. Date and locality follow.

In making a disposition of two Texas specimens in 1889,’ Mr.
Sennett says: “Two specimens in my collection from Texas,
strange as it may seem, are referable only to this form [Rallus
longirostris caribeus]; moreover, nothing like it has been taken
in Florida, which lies almost in direct line between Texas and the
West Indies. There is nothing in this country nor in England as
yet to show the forms of Clapper Rail prevailing along the immense
line of coast extending between the United States and Cayenne,
South America. As it is not the habit of these birds to migrate
over great expanses of land or water, it would indicate that the
Texas caribeus found its way thither along the southern coast of
the Gulf of Mexico; therefore it would be only reasonable to expect
that we shall find this form along the entire Gulf coast of Mexico
and the eastern coast of Central America.”

It is a well known fact that just before his death ? Mr. Sennett
was contemplating the writing of a book on Texas birds, and in
his personal copy of the A. O. U. Check-List he marked the Texas
records in a series of initials which show the authority for the record
and in most cases the locality. In this index of records he referred
all Texas records of Clapper Rails to Rallus crepitans saturatus;
his records appear to be three in number: (1) The February 28,
1877, record from Galveston; (2) records of the species at Corpus
Christi, Texas, during his stay there from April 1 to May 25, 1882;
and (3) records of M. A. Frazar “Lower Rio Grande for G. B.
Sennett from Jany. ’80 to June 1881.” By the term “Lower Rio
Grande” he probably refers to Corpus Christi as well as to the
vicinity of Brownsville, which is the way he used the term in
several of his previous papers on birds.

‘Mr. Sennett, Capt. B. F. Goss, and Mr. John M. Prior composed
the 1882 collecting party at Corpus Christi, and it was on this trip
that one of the specimens of the so-called Caribbean Clapper Rail

1Sennett, George B. The Clapper Rails of the United States and West Indies
compared with Rallus longirostris of South America. Auk, Vol. VI, 1889, No. 2,
p. 164.

2 March 18, 1900.

ee | Summons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. 365
was collected; Mr. Prior tells me that the single specimen collected
at Galveston in 1877 was the second specimen referred to by Mr.
Sennett in his 1889 disposition. After publishing his revision
of the Clapper Rails, and during the middle ’90s, Mr. Sennett
wrote Mr. Prior to pay particular attention to the Rails as he
wished to go further into his disposition of the Texas specimens;
evidently Mr. Sennett’s death cut short further investigation
along this line. As the reader will-see, Mr. Sennett apparently
ignored his disposition of the two Texas specimens of 1889, in later
making his index of records.

In 1889,' Mr. J. A. Singley states under the name R. I. caribeus
as follows: “Marshes near mouth of the Nueces River; only two
taken. A West India form found in the United States only in
Texas.” No dates were given, but in another portion of the same
paper he says that collections were made in that locality from
March 20 to April 24 and from June 16 to 19, 1889. Mr. Singley
evidently read Mr. Sennett’s paper, hence the name.

So far as I can find these are the only published records of Texas
specimens of Clapper Rails.

In the following pages I give heretofore unpublished records of
the nests and eggs, as well as other data which would throw some
light on the life history of the bird.

Skins of the Texas birds are being studied in connection with the
other races of the genus by Mr. Harry C. Oberholser, ornithologist
of the U. S. Biological Survey, who will, undoubtedly, in the near
future make a revision of the forms of the Clapper Rail. There-
fore, in my paper I have made no mention of plumage, measure-
ments, or differentiating marks of specimens of the Louisiana
Clapper Rail.

III. DistrrBuTion.

My own observations have, for the most part, been made on the
coast prairie southeast of Houston, in Harris County, Texas, and
within a seven-mile radius of the court house in that city, this
locality being about 25 miles from Galveston Bay and 50 miles

1Singley, J. A. List of Birds Observed at Corpus Christi and on the Lower Rio
Grande. Texas Birds, Report of Texas Geol. Survey. Austin, 1893, p. 367.

366 Simmons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. ke

from the Gulf of Mexico. Then, too, I have studied the birds
in the marshes on Galveston Bay and in Galveston County.

Mr. E. F. Pope made numerous observations on Bolivar Penin-
sula, Galveston Bay, between July 26, 1911, and the latter part
of March, 1913. In that year and a half he covered well the
extensive marshes from the “Point” to a flag-station called Flake,
eight miles up the peninsula. He found the rail to be a common,
and at times abundant, resident of these marshes where it breeds.

According to Mr. R. E. Farley, the Louisiana Clapper Rail is
resident and breeds on Harbor Island, a small island about three
miles north of Port Aransas, Texas. Formerly abundant, now
scarce, the birds have always been more common from April to
October than in winter.

Mr. John M. Prior’s notes refer mainly to the Harbor Island
rails; on that island he, too, found the birds resident and breeding.
He states that he found them more common in April, May and
June than in winter. In addition to finding the rails on Harbor
Island, he found them on the marshy flats surrounding Corpus
Christi Bay and in the marshes of St. Joseph’s Island.

On June 17, 1909, Dr. J. M. Carroll of Brownwood, Texas,
made a trip to Harbor Island and found the rails breeding and
abundant.

Mr. J. J. Carroll, now of Houston, after writing his paper on the
birds of Refugio County, Texas,! noted the bird as a rare resident ~
in the tall grass and tule marshes which skirt Copano and Mission
Bays. No nests were found, but he felt pretty sure they nested;
for on several occasions eggs were brought him which could have
belonged to no other bird.

Prof. H. P. Attwater of Houston, while at Rockport, Aransas
County, Texas, from 1891 to January 1894, noted Clapper Rails
as common in and about the marshes on the mainland and on the
-small islands in that vicinity. When I questioned him about speci-
mens of the birds, he referred to his journal and found the follow-
ing note, the identification being by Captain C. E. Bendire:
“1 Rail— young bird — 2 — August 8, 1893, Rockport. Rallus

1 Carroll, James J. Notes on the Birds of Refugio County, Texas. Auk, Vol.
XVII, No. 4, Oct., 1900, pp. 337-348.

a | Smmons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. 367
longirostris caribeus (?), identification uncertain.”” He was making
a specialty of the mammals of that locality and could not spare
the time during the nesting season to search for nests.

In his small collection at Galveston Mr. H. P. Nettleton has a
mounted group of an adult and a half grown young of the Louisiana
Clapper Rail, which he collected on Galveston Island in the sum-
mer of 1901. He says that the birds are found throughout the
year in the marshes over Galveston Island, in localities where the
marsh grass is tall enough to offer shelter.

Mr. Frank B. Armstrong of Brownsville, during his many years
of active field work in the Lower Rio Grande of Texas, has never
found the rails south of the flats of Corpus Christi Bay or along
the coast of Mexico, even in winter, which goes to show that they
apparently do not migrate, and that there is no connecting link
between the birds in Texas and those of Central and South Amer-
ica.

Over sixty skins of this bird in the private museum of Col.
John E. Thayer of Lancaster, Massachusetts, were collected by
Mr. Armstrong about Corpus Christi Bay and on Harbor Island.

Thus we find the Louisiana Clapper Rail (Rallus crepitans satura-
tus) ranging in Texas from Louisiana to the marshes surrounding
Corpus Christi Bay.

In the humid subdivision, or Austroriparian, of Lower Austral
zone of eastern Texas, it ranges from the water’s edge as far back
in the semitropic or Gulf strip as the marshes extend — in some
cases thirty-five miles or more from salt water. From the western
edge of this humid subdivision in a southwesterly direction it is
confined to the marshes in immediate proximity to the open salt
water of the bays.

Throughout this range the bird is a permanent resident.

IV. Hapsirat.

At the mention of the word “Rail,” the thoughts immediately
turn towards brackish, sedgy, tide-washed marshes, inhabited by
water snakes, water birds and great numbers of crustaceans.

In just such places along the Texas coast do we find the Louisi-

368 Simmons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. Ful

ana Clapper Rail. But those marshes are only found along the
shores; the marshes inland are much smaller and of course are
not tide-washed.

The extensive marshes on Bolivar Peninsula cover a strip vary-
ing from a half mile to nearly a mile wide, all covered with tall
marsh grass. This low marsh ground extends along the bay side
of the peninsula from the “Point” to Flake. Numerous sluggish
bayous cross this strip and connect with Galveston Bay; in places
these bayous widen into small ponds or lagoons, the edges of which
are thickly covered with tall, rank marsh grass.

A marshy bayou flows through Port Bolivar, on the “Point,”
to the bay, forming quite a pond near the bay shore. About
three-quarters of a mile up from the mouth of the bayou it again
widens into something of a pond or lagoon, known locally as “ Horse
Shoe Lake.” The edges of both ponds are also thickly covered
with tall, rank marsh grass.

Harbor Island, where Messrs. Farley, Prior and Carroll studied
the Rails, has about twenty-five acres well covered with tall
marsh grass and boggy with salt water, indeed a typical salt water
marsh.

Vast marshes extend from Nueces Bay ten miles up the Nueces
River. They are bordered by reeds and sedge, and dotted with
numerous small ponds.

From the timber of the Brazos River bottoms northward and
eastward along the coast is the low, nearly level coast prairie of
Texas. The only vegetation of this prairie is the tall grass, usually
burned brown by the hot summer sun and killed by the cold
“northers” which sweep over Texas in winter; here and there a
huisache (Vachellia farnestana) and an occasional ‘motte’ of three
or four scrubby oaks serve to break the monotony. A few slowly
winding bayous cross this plain, but the water in them rarely ever
flows; these bayous are generally skirted by timber, but many of
them contain marshy spots overgrown with tall grass, reeds and
sedge. At the mouths of these bayous the country is usually so
flat and low that the water spreads over a considerable area,
forming innumerable marshy flats and salt water marshes, where
tall grass, reeds and sedge grow in abundance.

In winter large numbers of ducks and other water-fowl attract

ee Summons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. 369
the hunter, but in summer these marshes are abandoned to the
rails, Mottled Ducks and Herons.

Further inland from the coast, throughout this strip of coast
prairie, are numbers of shallow ponds overgrown with reeds and
sedge, and spots where tall grass and reeds grow over several
inches of water. The few persimmon trees that are found on this
prairie grow in such wet spots and offer admirable nesting sites
for numbers of the smaller birds of the locality.

My favorite spot for the Louisiana Clapper Rail is a small Red-
winged Blackbird colony about six miles south of the court house
in Houston, being a mere damp spot on the prairie covering about
two acres, and overgrown with tall grass and sedge. Two small
clumps of persimmon trees grow in this marsh, one at either end.
About fifty yards east is a railroad track, which here runs south-
ward for a short distance and then westward across Texas to San
Antonio. Though trains rattle and snort past several times a day,
the birds do not seem at all disturbed.

In the persimmon trees nest the Scissor-tailed Flycatcher, King-
bird, Orchard Oriole, Florida Red-wing and Western Mourning
Dove, with more Red-wings and a nesting pair of Maryland
Yellow-throats in the tall marsh grass. Though fully twenty-two
miles from Galveston Bay and fifty miles from the Gulf of Mexico,
this salt marsh might be termed a typical salt marsh, for here nested
a pair of Texas Seaside Sparrows, and not a mile off to the south a
nest of the Mottled Duck with eleven eggs was found in another
such a marsh. The pestiferous Dwarf Cowbird completes the list
of breeding birds of this marsh, for never a year passes but what the
nest of the Orioles contains one or two eggs of this bird.

V. GENERAL ACTIVITIES.

Throughout the coast region of Texas the Clapper Rails are
known as “Marsh Hens,” and are well known to the more experi-
enced hunters as denizens of the marshes and rice fields. Even
when common in a locality they are often overlooked on account of
their secretive habits and reluctance to taking wing to escape
danger.

370 Stmmons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. [aie

When pursued they run swiftly through the grassy jungles and
well-worn runways, nimble runners you must admit, running with
outstretched neck and erect tail. Their nimbleness and ability to
dodge pursuers reminds the Westerner of the actions of the Road-
runner when surrounded on all sides by men. This way and that
they dart, and disappear before the very eyes of the enemy, fading
away into a small clump of the tall marsh grass.

They swim well, with neck erect and sitting high on the water;
they do not swim fast, and when wounded and closely pursued they
dive and hold to the marsh grass beneath the water, head down-
ward, to keep from rising.

They take to wing when pursued only as a last resort. Their
flight is slow and labored, and with dangling legs they soon drop
back into cover. In fact, their flight is so slow and awkward that
it would be difficult for any sort of marksman to miss them.

Doubtless the reader will be surprised that the Rail has ever been
known to perch; indeed, I was more than surprised. On one
occasion, in August 1912, I was surprised to see a Clapper Rail flap
up out of the marsh and light on a flat-topped post of the barbed
wire fence, where it remained for some few minutes, standing there
on the small flat surface as unconcerned as if on its marshy home
ground.

From November 20, 1912, to the latter part of March 1913, Mr.
Pope encamped in a deserted two-story building located on the
bay shore of Bolivar Peninsula, at a point almost due north of
Flake. The front of the building was over water at mean tide, and
was built on piles.

Within a stone’s throw of the rear of this building was a cove with
an unknown depth of silt which was often left bare after a blow
from the north. Around the edges of this cove was a favorite
haunt of the Rails and when the cove was left bare there were
seldom less than a dozen to be seen almost any time wading about
in the silt, and feeding.

Just across this cove was a stranded two-masted schooner, “The
Two Brothers,” which had dragged her anchors and stopped with
her prow just in the edge of a bayou. By taking hold of a line
which dangled from her bowsprit and walking one of the anchor
chains he could cross the bayou, and this was his regular route

Vol ean) Srumons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. 371
when he visited that part of the marsh. He says that he went that
way at least a hundred times, and he does not think he ever crossed
without seeing from one to six Rails scuttle under the after part of
the schooner, which rested on the ground in the tall marsh grass.

When the wind was high enough to keep the mosquitoes from
bothering, Mr. Pope would clamber on the deck of the schooner
and remain motionless till the Rails came out to resume their
feeding, which they would do in about five minutes, if he kept
perfectly still.

Here I quote the following from his notes: “I knew their run-
ways leading under the schooner, and by watching these I could see
them creep out, very slowly and cautiously, turning their heads side
ways to look up. If I so much as flicked an eyelid, they would
dart back. Eventually, however, they became so tame that they
took little notice of my presence.

“Some one has said that a Rail which is quite at ease is very
different in appearance from one that is frightened or at all nervous.
Here I had the chance of a life time to verify the above statement.
When filled with apprehension or frightened, the bird changes from
its normal plump form to one of slenderness, with lowered and
extended head, while the tail twitches or jerks with nervousness at
every step. At ease they assume easy graceful attitudes, with tail
at rest and slightly drooped.”

The game scent of the birds is not very strong. A bird dog
will ‘point’ them, but when the scent is once lost it is not easily
regained.

Ask a hunter if he knows the marsh hen. He will tell you that it
is a bird “like a chicken, and when closely pursued it runs through
the marsh like a rat.”

From the 9th to the 27th of June, 1913, I was encamped at Sea-
brook, on the Bay shore in Harris County, and every day one or
more Rails were seen in a small marsh near the bay shore. On
one occasion I stood for some time with three companions and
watched one of these birds on the edge of the sedge; the bird was
standing on dry bare ground with the tall reeds at its back, and
seemed not at all shy as we stood there forty yards away watching
it. Finally one of the other campers threw a tomato can at
the Rail and it darted back into the marsh.

are Stmmons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. fae

VI. Socrat RELATIONSHIP.

Though not strictly gregarious, the birds to a great extent live
in colonies.

During the breeding season on the Bolivar Peninsula Mr. Pope
found that one locality in particular, near Flake, appeared more
tenanted than other portions of the extensive marshes; there he
found numbers of nests, scattered along the marshy edges of a small
slough or bayou. Indeed, it might have been termed a scattered
colony of nesting birds.

During late summer and early fall the families keep together;
but at the beginning of cool weather there appears to be a general
mixing and scattering of the individuals.

During winter the birds were seen almost every day in small
groups in the marshes and around the edges of the coves near Flake.
In the latter places Mr. Pope often observed as many as a dozen
scattered along a short stretch of silt, wading about and feeding.

He says that “early in March the birds became very noisy,
especially late in the afternoon and about dusk. At this time the ,
birds appeared to congregate in flocks of from four to eight, prepar-
atory to mating; by the first of April the first pairs were observed.”

The twenty-five acre marsh on Harbor Island was especially
noteworthy for its abundance of Rails. So abundant were they
that on three collecting trips at various times Mr. Armstrong
secured about one hundred and fifty specimens.

On his trip to this marsh in June 1909, Dr. Carroll examined
six or eight sets during the day. Besides this there were nests
with incomplete sets and nests with young. In the one day he
could not have covered the marsh thoroughly and probably missed
numbers of nests.

The two-acre marshy spot just south of Houston contained two:
nests, less than a hundred yards apart.

VII. Breepine Hasirts.
Nesting Period.— On Bolivar Peninsula the birds were mating

during March, the first pairs being seen about the first of April.
After that the birds were all apparently mated; but, though the

Vol. or meal

1914 Simmons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. 373

marshes were carefully searched, no nests were found until the
15th of that month. The first eggs were found in the nests on the
next trip, April 26 (1912), one nest containing four and another
five. So that the first egg must have been laid about the 20th of
April.

These two sets were later destroyed by some small mammal
before they were complete and Mr. Pope did not have an oppor-
tunity to learn at what date the birds first began setting.

For the first brood, fresh eggs were found in the nests up to
the middle of May. The first young were observed on the 26th
of that month, already out of the nest and running around, though
evidently newly hatched.

The first egg at Houston was noted on April 17, but that was
unusual, for the dates in that vicinity are practically the same as
those at Bolivar. One nest of eggs at Houston was pipped and |
hatching on May 27, while still another nest had already yielded
its quota of young by the 31st of that month. No second broods
were noted at either Houston or on Bolivar Peninsula.

On Harbor Island nests were found on the 15th of April, and the
first eggs were noted on the 20th. When Dr. Carroll made his
visit to the marsh on June 17, 1909, the birds had just started on
their second nesting; nests with both full and incomplete sets
were found. Mr. Farley says that he thinks the birds sometimes
lay a third set, as he has found eggs as late as the last of August.

Nesting Data.— My best descriptions of the nests of this bird
are contained in my journal for May 27, 1912, and I quote as
follows:

“T entered the Red-wing colony about 10:00 A. M. and began a
search for nests of the birds which I usually found breeding there.
The ground was cracked and hard, the marsh being no longer a
marsh, and the vegetation was burned brownish buff by the hot
summer sun. The two small clumps of persimmon trees at either
end of the marsh were the only groups of timber for miles, and
offered the only shade to be found. The thermometer was ranging
about 89° and I wondered how marsh-loving birds like the Red-
wings could stand the heat and lack of water.

“While beating around in the tall grass near the center of the
marsh I nearly stepped on what I at first took to be a nest of

374 Smmons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. vies

Gallinule eggs, but which on closer inspection proved somewhat
different from any Gallinule eggs I had ever seen; I was indeed
puzzled to make out what they were. The nest was built of flags
and long marsh grass of the same hue as the eggs (brownish buffy),
and was built up solid from the ground about seven inches in a
green clump of the tall marsh grass which in some manner had
withstood the heat of the summer sun. There were four dirty,
cracked eggs in the nest, a few pieces of shell on the ground, and
about ten feet away was a dead young bird half out of the shell.
I picked the latter up to examine it, but dropped it immediately
to take a firm hold on my nose and return to the nest, more inter-
esting to me just then. Taking the four eggs up one at a time and
placing them to my ear, I listened and heard in two of them faint
squeaks like the note emitted by a newly hatched domestic chick.
On the ground about the nest and in the nest were a few small
breast feathers which attracted my attention, by their oddity.
Each feather was brown on the tip for a half inch, the remainder
of the feather being of an ashy hue. A typical water bird feather,
each vein being separate and apart from the next vein, and.not
joined as in a quill. They certainly were not Gallinule feathers;
what were they?

“Still puzzled as to what bird the nest might belong, and not
once thinking of the rails which I had seen feeding in the vicinity
on previous trips, I went on west across the tract to where the
second clump of persimmon trees grew about a hundred yards away.
A barbed-wire fence separated the two clumps, running diagonally
across the marsh.

“About twenty feet away from the nearest persimmon tree in
the second clump and still about ten feet from the fence, I flushed
a large, brown, and slow-flying bird which I saw at once was a
Louisiana Clapper Rail. Flying about a hundred yards, she (for
I took it to be the female) lit in the tall grass without uttering a
sound. After following her flight with my eyes I turned my atten-
tion to the ground from whence she flew and saw a nest similar to
the one containing the four eggs. This nest, however, contained
eleven eggs, duplicates of the first four but having a much cleaner
and fresher appearance. The nest was a mass of material ten
inches high, cunningly concealed in a tall clump of the high marsh
grass, and built of the same material as nest No. 1.

| Simmons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. 3790

“Leaving this nest I circled towards the spot where the Rail had
disappeared, but though I searched for some time I was unable to
find her. I then went on east to the railroad, after having been in
the marsh about a half hour, and continued on my day’s trip.

“On my way home I stopped at the Red-wing colony again to
try and get a look at the Rail on the nest. Slowly I drew nearer
and nearer to the nest, but I could not tell whether there was a
bird on it or not, so still did she sit and so perfectly did she blend
into the background that I was unable to see her until I was
within about three feet of the nest.

“Sitting on one heel while using the opposite knee as an impro-
vised table, I checked down a few descriptive notes and sketches in
my note book, although I feared she would leave the nest while I
was doing so. However, she did not, but remained on the nest
eyeing me ascant, her slightly curved bill nearly sidewise to me.
Dropping my note book and other paraphernalia, I arose until I
was half over the bird on the nest; I could easily have caught her
and might have stroked her as she sat on the nest, had I not been
so slow. But as I remained in that position for several minutes
without moving, she began to get nervous, and while I stood there
watching her she stepped off the nest into a well defined little run-
way or path leading away from it. So slowly did she go and such
time did she take to lift her feet at each step that I could have
counted a second or two between each stride. About twelve feet
away she stopped and half turned to watch me as I examined the
nest and eggs.

“The nest was eight and a half inches across the top from rim to
rim; the cavity was two and a quarter inches deep, being a gradual
slope from rim to rim, with the reeds firmly and smoothly packed
inside. For the most part the nest was composed of reeds and
fragments of reeds or marsh grass from one inch to over a foot in
length; a few were somewhat longer, being the standing blades of
grass which had been bent flat against the ground and folded back
again. The lining was of small fragments of the same buffy, broad-
bladed marsh grass, and packed flat against the body of the nest.

“The majority of the eggs were cracked and pipped and the
young in them kept up a constant twittering and faint squeaking,
and continually stuck the tips of their bills through the small

376 Smumons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. jue

openings they had made; in the morning none of the eggs had been
pipped and I had had no idea how near the eggs were to hatching.
Luckily I carried a pocket set of instruments which included an
egg measure, and hence I was able to take the measurements of this
set before proceeding with further investigation.

“Taking one of the eggs in my hand I enlarged the opening with
the point of my pencil, with which help the young bird emerged.
This newly hatched chick had black feet and a black body, with the
exception of the stomach and rectum which were a rich orange-
pink or salmon color; as is the case with all newly hatched water
birds it was almost all feet. All the while it kept up a constant,
but very faint twitter, punctuated now and then with a tiny cheap,
reminding me, as stated before, of a domestic chick. Its feet and
toe nails were black, as was its bill with the exception of a small
spot over each nostril and at the tip; the spots over the nostrils
were a dirty china white, while the tip of the bill was a dirty white
with a faint pinkish tinge. The pip on the tip of the upper man-
dible was a brilliant china white. The down was still wet and
clung to the bird’s body in places; it was long and black, and very
coarse and straight, resembling black horse hair. Ten of the eggs
were pipped so I opened each in its turn, the healthy young in
each case being taken out and placed with the others on the nest.

“Tn each case the bird’s head was tucked under the right wing
with the tips of the mandibles or pip coming up by the side of the
flank directly under the section of the egg usually covered with a
wreath of spots, nearer the larger end of the egg, but from the scant
markings on the eggs and their being somewhat scattered over the
whole of the surface it was difficult to locate even an apparent
wreath. Every young came out of the egg with its eyes open
although it had entered the world prematurely.

When I held up the eleventh egg, uncracked, to the sun it was
as clear as could be, so I packed it away to be blown when I reached
home. It was infertile, but in perfect condition.

“While I was examining the nest and eggs the parent bird now
and then uttered a note which sounded like the keck of the Red-
winged Blackbird, and several times I looked up to find her within
four or five feet of me as I squatted by the nest, her long bill and
bright eyes pointing my way through the blades of grass.

a | Smimons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. 377
“The eggs in the first nest I packed away, for on my return no

sounds were coming from them, and a little later, on opening the

eggs, I found the young in them to be stiff and dead in the shells.”

As soon as the young are dry they leave the nest, sometimes
within a few hours after they are hatched. When about ten days
old the black begins to shade to brown, the feathers peeping out
amid the down. By the time they are half as large as the adults
they are apparently fully fledged.

May 31, 1913, I visited the locality mentioned above in company
with Mr. R. A. Sell, a naturalist friend of Houston, and we located
a nest from which the young had already gone. There were
several half shells in the nest, and by following the runways through
the tall grass we found several more shells about ten feet away and
one fragment at a distance of twenty feet or more, which leads me
to believe that the parents help the young out of the shell and carry
the shells away as fast as they are cast off. By the time the last
three or four eggs are hatching the first young are dry and out of the
nest, thus keeping the parent busy so that she is unable to help the
last few youngsters.

From Mr. Pope’s voluminous notes I quote the following refer-
ences to nests and eggs: “April 15th I again sallied forth in quest
of nests and on this trip was rewarded by finding two nests evi-
dently just completed but without eggs. Both nests were in the
thick marsh grass near bayous and were located by flushing the
birds. The nests were of marsh grass blades, which were the only
available material in the vicinity, and were placed in the middle
of thick clumps of the same grass. The first nest was a rather flat
affair, about ten inches across with the inside depth of about three
inches; the second was elevated some ten inches in the middle of a
clump of marsh grass that was very thick, completely hiding the
nest so that it could not be seen except by looking down through
the tops of the grass. These two nests were not more than a
hundred yards apart. All around the nests were numerous well-
beaten paths which the birds used.

“April 26th I again visited the two nests; nest No. 1 contained
one broken egg, while on the ground nearby lay three more, also
broken, which had the appearance of having been sucked. The
work was credited to a raccoon as tracks of this animal were in

[ Auk

378 Simmons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. Fuly

evidence in the immediate vicinity of the nest. Nest No. 2 con-
tained five fresh eggs, which were later destroyed by some animal,
either raccoon, mink or opossum, as tracks of all three animals were
in evidence. The eggs were so badly broken up that I could not
ascertain how many the nest contained when robbed, as I did not
visit it again until May 2nd.

“On May 2nd a new nest was discovered, about two hundred
yards from the above site. It was on the same bayou as the-two
last described nests and was built of marsh grass blades, on the
ground amid thick grass stems, and contained two fresh eggs.

“On May 9th I took a set of ten eggs from this last nest. The
majority of the eggs were fresh while a few showed signs of incu-
bation. On this date two more nests were located, the first con-
taining a set of eight eggs, incubation about one-fifth; nest of
marsh grass blades in slight hollow in thick marsh grass on bank
of bayou. This nest was of rather poor structure as compared
with some others found, being quite flat and rather loosely put
together, what there was of it.

“May 12th, my wife fourd nest on bank of pond near the Point.
It was in thick marsh grass and composed of dry blades of marsh
grass, built up about eight inches. It contained one egg, which —
three days later was found lying on the ground about two feet from
the nest and broken in the manner of the others mentioned pre-
viously.

“May 15th I found a nest with seven fresh eggs; visited the nest
on the 18th to find it deserted and no sign of eggs.

“May 26th the first young were observed, as they crossed a
small open glade among weeds and bushes growing near the con-
crete wall of the Fort Crockett reservation, which is situated near
the extreme point of the peninsula. There appeared to be at least
eight young in this lot, and they were quite black and quite lively,
easily evading my attempts to catch them. At later dates at
least four other flocks of young in different stages of development
were observed, but I never was able to secure any of the young.”

Mr. Farley says that the nests in the vicinity of Harbor Island
consist of reeds and tall marsh grass, and frequently the reeds and
tall grass surrounding the nest are drawn together as though the
tops had been platted or tangled so as to make a snug shelter from
rain and sun.

vel | Simmons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. 379

The number of eggs per set in that locality varies greatly, as he
has found the birds brooding on from four to thirteen eggs. He
says that the period of incubation covers about twelve or fourteen
days.

The Eggs.— The four eggs in Nest No. 1 of May 27, 1912, south
of Houston, were cracked and pipped, but measured as follows:
1.68X1.24; 1.691.24; 1.68X1.24; and 1.67X1.23 inches.

The eleven eggs in nest No. 2 of the same date measured: 1.68
1.24; 1.69X1.24; 1.68%1.24; 1.681.238; 1.69X1.25; 1.68X
1.24; 1,681.24; 1.681.238; 1.67X1.24; 1.68X1.25; and 1.69
1.24 inches. In shape they were considerably like the eggs of
the Gallinules, and were of a decided buff tint, a color that might be
described as light brownish buff, and were speckled and spotted
sparingly with different shades of brown and cinnamon and a few
tiny specks of lavender, most of the larger spots being scattered
around the largest circumference of the egg; some of the eggs,
however, had not the least perceptible wreath.

The set of eight eggs collected by Mr. Pope and referred to in
the foregoing notes under date of May 9, 1912, is now in the
writer’s cabinet. The eggs are very irregular in both size and
shape, measuring: 1.76X1.23; 1.73X1.20; 1.83X1.22; 1.79X
129-471 X 1.20; 1.76 1.22-)1.81 <1.20: and 1.82>1.20 inches.
They vary in coloration from almost white to faint buff, with
the larger markings in the form of a wreath nearly at the extremity
of the larger end of the egg; these markings consist of small
splotches, spots, specks and streaks of cinnamon and reddish brown,
and a few clouded spots of light lavender. Some of the spots were
underneath the outer layer of lime of the shell, which is of a rather
smooth texture. Several of the eggs have a few small protuber-
ances rising from the shell, resembling tiny warts. These eggs are
much longer and narrower than the set described from nest
No. 2.

The set of ten eggs collected by Mr. Pope on the same day as
the last mentioned set (May 9) is of a trifle richer coloration than
the set of eight, but otherwise does not vary to any appreciable
extent.

On June 17, 1909, Dr. Carroll examined numbers of nests in the
Harbor Island marsh, each nest containing from seven to ten eggs.

[suty

380 Summons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail.
The eggs varied from “quite pale with large markings to beauti-
fully marked specimens with large and small markings and quite

dark.”
VIII. Votc.

The voice of the Clapper Rail is peculiar indeed, its loud, harsh
cackling resembling that of a Guinea fowl or the sound produced
by some automatic toys. This harsh cackling might be likened
to the sound of: chack-chack-chack-chack-chack-chack-chack-chack,
rapidly repeated. This call is usually heard about the break of
day and again about dusk; sometimes, however, it is heard during
the day time or at night, though rarely.

On Bolivar Peninsula Mr. Pope says that he could always tell
when a “norther’’ was due by the clatter of the Rails, as they
invariably heralded its approach several hours before its arrival.

During the mating season in March, at which time they con-
gregate in small flocks, Mr. Pope says that the birds became very
noisy, especially late in the afternoon and about dusk. At the
start of the nesting season, however, they quieted down.

While I was examining nest No. 2 the parent bird now and then
uttered a note which resembled the keck of the Red-winged Black-
bird.

At times during the early part of the breeding season I have
stopped to watch adult Rails which appeared very ill at ease. The
note uttered under these conditions is a hoarse grunting noise
sounding like bruck or gruck.

The newly hatched young have a constant, but very faint
twitter, and a note reminding me, as stated before, of the cheap of
a tiny domestic chick.

IX. Foon.

The food of the Clapper Rails consists of small crabs, slugs,
snails, aquatic insects, grasshoppers, and occasionally a few seeds.

Mr. Farley writes me that the food of the Rails in the vicinity of
Harbor Island consists of “insects and shells, which they find in
the marsh, and the moss of the salt beach.”

Mr. Pope’s notes on the food and feeding habits are especially

Wola Simmons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. 381

interesting. He found that the best time to make observations
on the feeding habits was shortly after a “norther,”’ which blew
a great deal of water out of the bay into the Gulf, thus causing low
water in the bayous and sloughs which ran into the bay. At such
times the Rails would wade out in the mud and silt where the water
had receded, to gather the small crustacea (minute crabs, etc.)
left stranded.

He says that “ At one point I squatted on my heels and remained
stationary for a few moments and was rewarded by seeing a Rail
walk out of the grass into the mud and begin feeding, which it did
by thrusting its bill into the soft mud and feeling around and
stirring its food to the top, now and then securing a shrimp or small
minnow. I was advised by an old fisherman who lives on the bay
shore about three miles from Flake, that he had often seen these
birds feeding on young Diamond-backed Terrapin, which were
once quite plentiful in this part of the bay and which deposited
their eggs in the shell banks along the shore, the eggs hatching and
the young taking to the adjacent marsh and bayous, probably to
escape their numerous enemies in the bay. There they fell before
the Rails.”

The contents of the stomachs of six of the birds secured on a trip
to the marshes on October 12, 1911, were mostly shrimp, minnows,
afew water bugs and slugs, and two had fragments of small crabs.

From the deck of the schooner, “The Two Brothers,’’ mentioned
previously as being near Flake, on Bolivar Peninsula, Mr. Pope
had an excellent opportunity to watch the Rails feeding. He says:
“On warm days the ‘fiddler’ or fighting crabs would crawl out of
their holes around the old schooner and were eagerly devoured by
the Rails. After catching one of the crabs they would usually re-
move the large claw before swallowing the victim. This was often
accomplished with the assistance of a neighbor who would hold
the crab in his beak while the other wrenched off the objectionable
limb; but this method was not always satisfactory to the bird that
removed the claw, as the one that held the crab usually proceeded
to bolt it while the other was left to hold the claw, or rather to
drop it. On one occasion when the crabs were not plentiful, a
Rail found and tackled an unusually large ‘fiddler,’ which it
mauled around in the mud for some time! without apparent effect.

382 Smmmons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. ae

Suddenly, as if getting an idea, it left the crab and disappeared on
the other side of the schooner, to return a moment later with a
companion, the two soon disarming Mr. Crab. Now, I presume
the same Rail came back; they are so much alike it is impossible to
tell one from the other under such conditions, but from the way the
birds went straight to the spot where the crab was left, I did not
doubt the bird in the lead being the one that found the crab. Which
one got the crab I cannot say, as after scuffling over him, they dis-
appeared from my sight in the tall grass.”

Though chiefly carnivorous, subsisting as they do on small uni- .
valve shell-fish and crustacea, the Rails never probe the mud like
snipe, nor strain it as do the ducks. The food they gather is
always in view and never secured from deep in the mud or silt.

Near Houston, inland from the seaside marshes, the food of the
Rails is chiefly the small snail forms so abundant in the marshes.

X. FAatvALirizss.

Once common, the birds are rapidly becoming scarce. If pro-
tection is not afforded them at once they will soon be wiped out
entirely. Hunters kill numbers of them during the hunting season.
In fact, it is one of the easiest of the water birds to secure on the
wing, and therefore is one of the first to be shot by the amateur
marksman.

Mr. Pope observed that numbers of them fell victims to steel
traps which he had set in the pathways of the mink in the marshes
near Flake. These Rails caught in the traps were usually devoured
by mink if caught in the night, and most of those caught were
taken then. .

The majority of the nests located by Mr. Pope in the Bolivar
marshes in’1912 were usually found destroyed before the sets of
eggs were complete, probably by mink, raccoon or opossum, as
tracks of these animals were in evidence in the immediate vicinity
of the several nests. The eggs remaining in the nests or on the
ground nearby had the appearance of having been sucked. On
Harbor Island Mr. Farley found that the Rails were comparatively
safe from such enemies, there being no raccoons or other small

Mol 2x | Smmons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. 383
animals there to disturb them. Both Mr. Farley and Mr. Prior
commented on the large number killed by hunters and dogs, and
stated that some of the negroes consider the birds quite a palatable
delicacy and gather numbers for the pot.

The Harbor Island Rails face extinction at this very time. A
railroad has been built to the island from the mainland and improve-
ments are being made. In addition to this the birds have been
almost wiped out by collecting.

Probably the greatest factor the Rails have to contend with in
their fight for existence is the flooding of the marshes, both from
high tide and from heavy rains. At such times the birds are
much exposed and bewildered and many drown. In the seaside
marshes they build their nests on the banks of the sloughs or
bayous instead of the higher parts of the marsh, and in rainy spells
numbers of nests are destroyed.

They are naturally very delicate birds and sensitive to the cold
of the more severe winters; many freeze to death where they are
unable to secure shelter.

During November and December 1913 Texas was visited by one
of the most destructive floods of its history, two of the largest
rivers of the state rising and overflowing miles and miles of the
lowlands towards the coast. During that time numbers of the
Rails left the marshes and took to higher ground until the waters
receded. One of these birds was caught in a bewildered condi-
tion in Mr. Farley’s yard in Port Aransas in October.

XI. WINTER.

Most of the winter habits of the birds have been given in the
two preceding divisions of this paper.

In the colder weather they haunt drifts of logs or trash in the
marshes, where they take shelter from the cold north wind and
from rains. But as the thermometer rarely falls below freezing
in this semitropical coast country, the birds are rarely forced to
seek shelter, and their actions and habits then are not noticeably
different from other times of the year.

In winter in the marshes on Bolivar Peninsula Mr. Pope says

384 Stumons, The Louisiana Clapper Rail. july

that the birds were fully as common in winter as in summer, if
not more so. In travelling through the grass the birds had well-
beaten paths about six inches wide, and from the way these paths
were beaten out in the vicinity of the bayous, it would appear that
the birds were much more common.

Marshes inhabited by Rails are always intersected by numerous
well-worn pathways leading through the tall grass, the grass being
pushed to either side and the “marsh hair” being trampled and
beaten down into the mud. These pathways are usually about
five inches wide at the bottom.

XII. Dziscusston.

The Louisiana Clapper Rail is fairly common and resident
from Louisiana to Corpus Christi Bay. It is apparent that the
Caribbean Clapper Rail rarely, if ever, appears in Texas.

The only records of the latter in the United States are the two
specimens from Texas in 1889 (Sennett) and two specimens men-
tioned in Mr. Singley’s 1893 paper. Undoubtedly Mr. Singley
merely followed the lead of Mr. Sennett, as stated before. So the
reader can see that 211.2 Rallus longirostris caribeus is included
in the A. O. U. Check-List of North American Birds on the record
of Mr. Sennett’s two specimens from Texas, the identification of
which he himself later questioned and virtually changed. Would
it not seem best to drop this bird from the Check-List and extend
the range of Rallus crepitans saturatus to include Texas?

Vol ae TAVERNER, New Subspecies of Dendragapus. 385

A NEW SUBSPECIES OF DENDRAGAPUS, (DENDRAGA-
PUS OBSCURUS FLEMINGI) FROM SOUTHERN
YUKON TERRITORY.!

BY P. A. TAVERNER.

In the examination of a collection of Dendragapus obscurus
recently acquired by the Canadian Geological Survey from the
Teslin Lake region, on the Yukon-British Columbia boundary,
it became evident that a new form of the species was probably
represented. Two subspecies have heretofore been recognized
as ranging into Canadian territory, D. o. fuliginosus and richardsont.
Fuliginosus is a dark bird with a light tail band and richardsoni
a lighter one without a terminal band on the tail. The birds
under consideration are without the tail band but are even darker
than fuliginosus.

We had a fair series of both recognized forms from southern
British Columbia, but all in spring and early summer plumage and
hence hardly comparable with the new form which is represented
entirely by late summer and autumn birds. The possibility existed
that the darkness of the new birds but represented the new and
unfaded plumage of the post-nuptial moult; therefore application
was made to the U. S. Biological Survey and its chief Dr. Henshaw
was courteous enough to place at our disposal what summer and
fall specimens there were in the collection of that institution. A
comparison of the specimens, including these, confirms our first
surmise as to the racial differentiation of the forms and I therefore
present the following new subspecies for consideration.

Dendragapus obscurus flemingi new subspecies.
FLEMING’s GROUSE.

Named after Mr. J. H. Fleming, C. M. Z. 8S. in recognition of the value
of his ornithological work in Canada.

Subspecific Characters. Like Dendragapus obscurus richardsoni, with-
out terminal tail band, but darker in general coloration even than D. o.
fuliginosus.

1 Published by permission of the Deputy Minister, Department of Mines.

386

D. o. richardsoni.

Back, “interscapulars and body
color of rump. Olive-brown to fus-
cous.

Tail. Fuscous black. Tail feath-
ers cut off sharply and squarely at
end.

Throat patch.
creamy white?
Sides of head and spotting of
throat patch. Fuscous.

Body color soiled

Around neck below throat patch.
Between buffy brown and olive
brown to clove brown, with some-
times a faint bluish tinge, deepen-
ing in front at lower neck to fus-
cous.

Breast and
mouse gray.

underparts. Light

Description of Type specimen.

Yukon Territory, October 10, 1912.

TAVERNER, New Subspecies of Dendragapus.

[July

July
D. o. flemingi.

Back, interscapulars and _ body

color of rump. Dusky neutral gray.

Tail. Dusky neutral gray. Tail
feathers not having the same
chopped off appearance. Middle

and several lateral feathers slightly
to markedly double-rounded at end.

Throat patch. Body color pure
white.

Sides of head and spotting of
throat patch. Between neutral gray
and deep neutral gray.

Around neck below throat patch.
Between neutral gray and deep neu-
tral gray, deepening in front at lower
neck to dusky neutral gray.

Breast and underparts. Between
neutral gray and deep neutral gray.

Type, adult male, No. 6651 Museum of
the Geological Survey, Department of Mines, Canada.

Near Teslin Lake,

Clement Lewis, Collector.

Back, rump and tail, dusky neutral gray. Central feathers of tail and
some lateral ones double rounded at ends.

Upper tail coverts, fuscous black, finely but sparsely vermiculated with

buffish slate.?

Scapulars, wings and upper wing coverts fuscous, lightening towards
wing tip. All, except flight feathers, finely marked with shades between

rusty? and grayish.?

Some scapulars with white shaft streaks, widening at
terminal to poorly defined marginal spots.

The latter persisting on some

of the lesser coverts as vague spots and narrow borders.
Below, between neutral gray and deep neutral gray, and obscured pos-
teriorly by a white tipping of the feather ends that blends into the white

of the basal under tail coverts.

Lower breast feathers with white shaft lines broadening towards the
flanks and posteriorly where they develop into broad terminal spots,

streaks and bars.

A fine vermiculation of buffy 2 and grayish? overlaying

the body color of the feather tips of the sides.

1 All color terms except where otherwise stated, from Ridgway’s “‘ Color Stand-

ards and Nomenclature,’’ 1912 ed.

2 These terms are not from “ Ridgway’s Color Standards.”’

ol een TAVERNER, New Subspecies of Dendragapus. 387

Under tail coverts dusky neutral gray or black with prominent white
shaft lines and final borders. White increasing towards base of tail until
body color of feathers is hidden.

Head from deep neutral gray to neutral gray darkest on crown and ear
coverts, overwashed with rusty! strongest on forehead at base of bill and
more or less obscuring body colors of darker feathers and at last dying
away at back and sides of upper neck as a faint olivaceous! tinge.

Throat patch, white with irregular deep neutral gray spotting, aggre-
gated on malar region and each spotted feather terminated with small
white border.

Lores, deep neutral gray, with white flecking.

Dark feathers of the breast band creamy white basally, the white grad-
ually encroaching on the dark tips towards the sides, finally usurping most
of the feather and making a semi-concealed white streak down the sides of
the neck to the bend of the folded wing.

The characters of the female are less marked than of the male and
without series for comparison may be difficult of recognition. However,
they average in the same directions as the male being bluer underneath
than richardsoni and darker dorsally, with the rufous! or rusty ! markings
bolder and more decided in character.

Measurements (in inches). Male, average of four specimens.

Wing, 8.25-8.75, (average 8.51); tail, 6.5-6.75 (average 6.33); tarsus,
1.70-1.80 (average 1.75); exposed culmen, .65-.75 (average .71).

Female average of twelve specimens.

Wing, 7.45-8.10 (average 7.70); tail, 5.10-5.75 (average 5.25); tarsal
1.48-1.68 (average 1.55); exposed culmen, .65-.71 (average .69).

Distribution. This description is based entirely on specimens taken
within thirty miles of Teslin Lake, on the boundary between British Colum-
bia and Yukon Territory, Longitude 130°-30’, at the west base of the Cassiar
Mountains. The range of the form cannot therefore be defined, but a
study of the material examined is suggestive.

The male specimens in the series are as follows: — British Columbia:
Trail, Midway and Revelstoke: 7 specimens.

Montana and Idaho: Preuss Mts., Fiddle Creek; and Nyak and Bear-
tooth Mts.: 4 specimens.

Mackenzie; Mackenzie River: 1 specimen.

Yukon Territory, Teslin Lake: 4 specimens.

Wing Tail Tarsus Culmen General Color

Montanaand Idaho 9.06 6.56 1.80 .80 Light
British Columbia 8.90 6.96 i ae ar 15 Slightly darker
Mackenzie 8.75 6.55 1.70 .80 Light
Teslin Lake, Y. T. 8.51 6.33 1.75 ai! Dark.

1 These terms are not from Ridgway’s ‘‘ Color Standards.”’

388 NicHots, Oceanodroma castro. Eis

July
It will be seen that the most southern birds are the largest and
lightest; the northern smallest and darkest while those from lower
British Columbia are intermediate, though closer to the southern
than the northern race. The Mackenzie form, being represented
by but a single specimen in not very high plumage, cannot be
definitely placed in the series though it agrees closely with the
Montana and Idaho specimens. No specimens from the type
locality of richardsoni (the northeast corner of Rocky Mountain
Park, Lat. 53°, Long. 115°) being obtainable I assume from the
above that it ranges up the east side of the Rocky Mountains and
through them south of the International Border in unmodified
form while the intermountain birds, flemingi, as they distribute
northward from the boundary, become smaller and darker. It is
possible that on examination, birds from further north of Teslin
Lake will exhibit these characters in a still more marked degree.

AN UNDESCRIBED GALAPAGOS RACE OF OCEANO—
DROMA CASTRO.

BY JOHN TREADWELL NICHOLS.

In his Monograph of the Petrels (London 1907-10), Godman
says in regard to Oceanodroma castro (Harcourt): “This species is:
a form of O. leucorrhoa, with which it has often been confounded,”
etc. To the writer this seems an undervaluation of the species

-castro. He also thinks that too little emphasis has here been placed
on the hair-like black shafts in the white upper tail coverts of
Leach’s Petrel,— otherwise an excellent comparison of castro and
leucorrhoa is given.

The unfortunately small amount of material at hand for compari--
son indicates the existence of three recognizable races of castro..
Pacific birds have a slightly more forked tail, and the Galapagos:

vo NicuHots, Oceanodroma castro. 389
one a heavier bill with stronger hook. The following table shows
the tail differences; the bill differences are perhaps better shown by
the figures.

Whereas Atlantic and Pacific birds have little chance to inter-
breed, the differences are so slight that. intermediates would be
expected and the relationship is best expressed by considering
them subspecifically distinct.

Oceanodroma castro bangsi ssp. nov.

Type. No. 12413. Collection of E. A. and O. Bangs. @. Collected
1° N. 93° W., February 6, 1901, by R. H. Beck.

Bill heavier and more strongly hooked than usual in the genus. Sooty
black, wing coverts slightly browner. Bases of tail feathers, except middle
pair, broadly white, the shafts of the feathers pale. Upper tail coverts
are almost all lacking in the type specimen, two or three remaining ones
white to the end. Probably the coverts were much as usual in the species,
and the remaining feathers very likely have had black tips worn off. Bill
and feet black. Length (skin) 7.1 in.; wing 6.2; tail 3.6; bill 0.6; tarsus
.95; middle toe and claw 1.0.

The only other specimen at hand, from Cocos Island, has wings
moulting and not comparable. The tail and its coverts are also in

O. c. bangst. O. c. cryptoleucura.

poor condition. Some of the latter have sharp black tips as usual
in the species. Its bill is not dissimilar to that of the Galapagos
bird.

Named for Mr. Outram Bangs, of the Museum of Comparative
Zoology, Cambridge, to whose appreciation of slight differences
our knowledge of racial variation is indebted.

390 Sacn, Thirty-second Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. las

Oceanodroma castro castro (Harcourt).

Outer tail feath- Hook
ers extend be- of Bill
yond inner in . (straight

closed tail Bill distance)
No. 11000 E.A.& o' Porto Santo. Nov. 27, 1902 peasy rhily © Misys) shaky etsy irhat.

O. Bangs
No.15322 Jonathan oc “* a Dec. 6, 1903 -20 59 .30
Dwight, Jr.
Oceanodroma castro cryptoleucura (Ridgway).
No. 10984 Mus. Sandwich Islands. -40 -60 a2
Comp. Zodlogy
No. 10985 Mus. 4 a 238 Oe, .30

Comp. Zodlogy

Oceanodroma castro bangst ssp. nov.

No. 12413 E. A. & @ 1° N. 93° W. Feb. 6, 1901 .34 -62 Ao 13)
O. Bangs (Type)
No. 70299 Amer. Cocos Island. June 18, 1898 —_— -63 .33

Mus. Nat. Hist.

THIRTY-SECOND STATED MEETING OF THE AMERI-
CAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION.

Tue Thirty-second Stated Meeting of the American Ornitholo-
gists’ Union convened in Washington, D. C., Monday evening,
April 6, 1914. The business meeting was held at ‘The New Ebbitt,’
14th and F Sts., and the public sessions, commencing Tuesday,
April 7, and lasting two days, were held in the Auditorium of the
new building of the U. S. National Museum.

Business Session: The meeting was called to order by the
‘President, Dr. Frank M. Chapman. Twenty-six Fellows were
present. The Secretary’s report gave the membership of the
Union at the opening of the present Stated Meeting as 1101,
constituted as follows: Fellows, 50; Retired Fellows, 4; Honorary
Fellows, 14; Corresponding Fellows, 57; Members, 74; Associates,
902.

Since the last meeting (November, 1913) the Union lost twenty-

yor xe ae | Sacn, Thirty-second Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. 391

seven members, three by death, and twenty-four by resignation.
The deceased were:

Dr. Ora Willis Knight, a Member, who died in Portland, Maine,
November 11, 1913, aged 39 years; also the following Associates:
Charles S. Welles, of Elwyn, Pa., who died Feb. 24, 1914, and Henry
W. Beers, who died in Bridgeport, Conn., April 2, 1914, aged 47
years.

The report of the Treasurer showed the finances of the Union to
be in a satisfactory condition, the accounts being audited by a
Certified Public Accountant.

Albert K. Fisher was elected President; Henry W. Henshaw and
Witmer Stone, Vice-Presidents; John H. Sage, Secretary; Jona-
than Dwight Jr., Treasurer; Ruthven Deane, William Dutcher,
Frederic A. Lucas, Wilfred H. Osgood, Chas. W. Richmond, Thos.
S. Roberts, and Joseph Grinnell, members of the Council.

Egbert Bagg, Utica, N. Y.; Dr. Thomas Barbour, Cambridge,
Mass.; Robert Thomas Moore, Haddonfield, N. J.; Robert C.
Murphy, Brooklyn, N. Y., and John Treadwell Nichols, of New
York City, were elected to the class of Members, and the following
twenty-six persons were elected Associates:

Miss Gertrude Mary Allen, New York, N. Y.
G. A. Bolden, Charleston, W. Va.

J. J. Boyle, Washington, D. C.

Mrs. Edward Gay Butler, Berryville, Va.
Miss Stella Risley Clemence, New York, INS
Miss E. 8. Day, Brooklyn, N. Y.

D. Douglas Findlay, Ontario, Canada.
Joseph A. Hagar, Newtonville, Mass.

Miss Helen E. Haynes, Lebanon, N. H.
Frank Hennesy, Ottawa, Ont.

Miss Mabel Hotchkiss, Waterbury, Conn.
Wilbur Wallace Johnson, East Orange, N. J.
Frank H. Main, New York, N. Y.

O. J. Murie, Portland, Oregon.

Free Ottemiller, York, Pa.

Neill Pennell Overman, East Orange, N. J.
Charles Phillips, Minneapolis, Minn.

Miss Anna H. Pierpont, Waterbury, Conn.
E. F. Pope, Colmesneil, Texas.

Charles A. Robbins, Onset, Mass.

Mrs. Stilwell, Philadelphia, Pa.

392 Sac, Thirty-second Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. laue

C. W. Tate, East Orange, N. J.

Titus Ulke, Washington, D. C.

A. W. Upham, Boston, Mass. ~
Mrs. Kate P. Vietor, Brooklyn, N. Y.

Lem Williams, Shonkin, Montana.

Drs. Allen, Chapman, Dwight, Jos. Grinnell, Merriam, Palmer,
Richmond and Stone, and Messrs. Brewster, Nelson, Oberholser
and Ridgway were appointed ‘Committee on Classification and
Nomenclature of North American Birds.’

The following amendment to the By-Laws proposed at the last
Stated Meeting of the Union was adopted:

Article I, Section 7, now reads:

“Associates shall be residents of America, and shall not be
limited in number.”

The object of the change was to permit residents of South and
Central America to become Associates.

Pusuic Sessions. First Day. The meeting was called to order
by the President, Dr. Fisher. :

The papers read during the morning session were as follows:

‘Some Letters from Robert Kennicott,’ by Ernest Thompson
Seton. Remarks followed by Dr. D. G. Elliot who personally
knew Mr. Kennicott.

‘On the Zonary Stomach in the Euphonias,’ by Alexander Wet-
more. Remarks followed by Messrs. Fuertes and McAtee.

‘Visits of Pine and Evening Grosbeaks,’ by Mrs. E. O. Marshall.
Remarks followed by John T. Nichols.

“A Note on the Herring Gull,’ by John Treadwell Nichols. Re-
marks followed by Mr. Rogers, and the author.

“Side Light on the Saw-whet Owl,’ by Ernest Thompson Seton.

The following papers, all illustrated by lantern slides, were
presented at the afternoon session.

“Notes on Lower California Birds,’ by Dr. Paul Bartsch.

‘Notes on the Distribution of Breeding Egrets in the United
States,’ by T. Gilbert Pearson. Remarks followed by Dr. Bartsch.

“Winter Feeding of Birds,’ by B. S. Bowdish.

In the evening the members of the Union and their friends met
at dinner at the Wallis Café.

oh HI Sacu, Thirty-second Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. 393

Second Day. The meeting was called to order by President
Fisher. The papers of the morning session were:

‘The Curious tail molt of Rhinoplax, with exhibition of speci-
mens,’ by Alexander Wetmore.

‘Results of the Federal Bird Migration Regulations,’ by Dr. T. 5.
Palmer. Remarks followed by Drs. Merriam, Bishop, and Chap-
man, Mr. Bond, and the author.

‘Are Insectivorous Birds Decreasing?’ Subject introduced by
Dr. Frank M. Chapman. Remarks followed by Drs. Merriam,
Chapman and Stone, Prof. W. W. Cooke, Mr. Waldron DeWitt
Miller, and the Chair.

At the afternoon session the following papers, all illustrated by
lantern slides, were presented:

‘A Trip to Pelican Island, Florida,’ by Ernest Thompson Seton.
Remarks followed by Drs. Chapman, Bartsch, and T. S. Palmer.

‘Notes on Feeding Birds,’ by Frank Bond.

‘Winter Birds at Ithaca, N. Y.,’ by Louis Agassiz Fuertes.

‘Migration in the Mackenzie Valley,’ by Prof. Wells W. Cooke.

‘With the Terns on Bird Key, Tortugas,’ by Dr. Paul Bartsch.

The following papers were read by title:

‘Anatomical Notes on Trochalopteron and Sicalis,’ by Prof.
Hubert Lyman Clark.

‘The Intimidation Display of the White-breasted Nuthatch,’
by Dr. Arthur A. Allen.

‘Ten Minutes with the Birds of the District of Columbia,’ by
Dr. Paul Bartsch.

‘Random Notes on Bird Preservation,’ by Edward Howe
Forbush.

Resolutions were adopted thanking the Board of Regents of the
Smithsonian Institution for the use of the auditorium in the new
building of the United States National Museum for a place of
meeting, and for other courtesies extended; to the Local Committee
and other Washington members of the Union for the cordial
welcome and generous hospitality shown visiting members; and

“to Dr. Frank Baker, Director of the National Zoological Park, for
his polite invitation to the members of the Union to visit the Zodlogi- *
- cal Park.

The Stated Meeting just closed was the first one ever held in

394 General Notes. ene

the Spring — the change in time being the result of a desire ex-
pressed by numerous members of the Union.

After adjournment short field excursions were made in the
vicinity of Washington, April 9 and 10, by members of the
Union, under guidance of Prof. Cooke and Mr. E. A. Preble of the
Biological Survey.

The next meeting of the Union will be held in San Francisco in
May, 1915.

JoHN H. Saag,
Secretary.

GENERAL NOTES.

A Misinterpretation.— While photography is in many instances the
only accurate and irrefutable means of determining the movements of
rapidly moving objects there appears to be a misinterpretation in connection
with the explanation of a figure in the April ‘Auk.’ I refer to the article,
‘“‘ Does a grebe spread its wings just before diving?” by Mr. Verdi Burtch,
illustrated with Plates XXI and XXII. Figure 3, Plate XXI is a picture
of a diving grebe taken instantaneously at the moment of disappearance and,
as the author tells us, ‘‘ shows a dark area representing the depression in the
water where the grebe sat at the beginning of the exposure, the ‘ ghost’ of
its wings fully spread out behind as it started to lunge forward and the
grebe itself nearly submerged a full length ahead.”

I conclude that the so-called ‘ghost’ is considered to be the vague
photographic impression made at the very beginning of the exposure. The
shutter then remained open until the grebe had reached the almost sub-
merged position at the right. If the exposure had been of that duration a
continuous blurred image traversing the path taken by the grebe would
have been the inevitable result and not, as we have had it explained, “a
‘ghost’ of the wings ”’ followed by a photographically undisturbed area
and then at the very close of the exposure a fairly well defined image of a
grebe diving with its head held erect. In any event the supposed “‘ ghost
of the wings’ would appear dark instead of light as seen in the figure on
Plate XXI and intensified in the enlargement. Why should the grebe
make such an intense and sharply defined image on the photographic plate
just as it is disappearing while during the first part of the exposure practi-
cally no impression was made? It might be argued that the impact with
the water had arrested its progress, but it does not seem possible that this
retardation can come so suddenly and be as great as the relative intensities

et | General Notes. 395
of the first and last portions of this exposure would show. Although I
admit an unfamiliarity with Holbcell’s Grebe, if its methods of diving are
at all similar to those of other grebes and water fowl as a whole, the erect
head (if it is such) at the right side of this photograph appears odd. Ex-
cept when the birds employ a gradual sinking motion the head is thrust
forward and under when plunging and would not be in sight at the time,
the rump was just disappearing.

While I realize that half-tone reproductions do not show all the details
present in the photograph or better still, the negative, it seems that there
has been a misinterpretation of the evidence presented in this picture. A
much more logical interpretation would be that the so-called ‘‘ ghost of the
wings ”’ is nothing more than spray caused by the bird’s rapid plunge and
backward thrust of the feet which, being highly reflective, would quite
naturally appear light; the dark spots are shadows caused by the disturb-
ance in the water; and the grebe may be anywhere from a few inches to

several feet below the surface.— E. R. KatmsBacn, Biol. Survey, Washing-
ton; Ds Gi

Concealing Postures of Grebes.— On October 3, 1913, I was fishing
for bass in the tidal streams at Gibbstown, N. J. At one spot there was
a very shallow ditch some five or six feet in width, containing at the time
possibly six or eight inches of water.

A Pied-billed Grebe (Podilymbus podiceps) had been observed in the
ditch about 11 a. mM. and had made no special effort to get away with the
exception of one or two half-hearted dives, the water of course not being
deep enough. Early in the afternoon I walked down to the ditch with the
hope of getting a closer view of the bird. I could see nothing of it as I
gazed down upon the great mass of water lilies and other aquatic plant
life which abounded in the ditch, but after a moment I became aware of
an oblong body on the opposite edge of the ditch which up to that time had
been taken for a partly submerged and mud-covered leaf but which was
seen to be nervously moving at intervals and producing small circular wave-
Jets on the water which in all other parts of the ditch was perfectly calm.

I partly turned with the intention of taking another step to get a better
view, and was surprised to see a slender snake-like head a few inches in
front of the object I had been watching, turn slowly about on the surface
of the water and follow my movements. The facts were now self-evident,
and the object I had been watching was nothing more than the glossy back
of the grebe, which realizing the hopelessness of trying to escape by diving
had resorted to this method of concealment, flattening itself out, on the
surface of the water with its neck stretched out at full length. The wave-
lets were caused by a nervous movement of the feet beneath the water,
doubtless getting ready for the dash which was about to follow.

I bent over in an effort to get a closer view, and the bird now evidently
frantic with fear made an effort to sink itself breast first in the shallow
stream. The breast and neck were forced beneath the surface, while the

396 General Notes. aes

posterior portion of the body including the feet and legs were at a sharp
angle and completely free from the water. All this time the feet were
paddling the air with terrific rapidity, and the bird seemed to have not
the slightest conception that its body was not completely submerged
although no effort was made to increase its supposed locomotion by using
the wings.

Thinking that I might catch the bird I made one more step forward at
the same time reaching for it with my hands, when it bounded from the
water and with much flapping of wings and paddling of feet succeeded in
covering the few yards down the ditch to the deep water of the sluice where
it immediately dove and disappeared. At no time while making its prog-
ress down the ditch did the bird rise high enough for its wing tips and
paddling feet to clear the water.

April 18, 1914, I found a pair of grebes in an absolutely unprotected
stretch of water on Darby Creek, Delaware Co., Pa. The creek at this
point is some fifteen or twenty feet in width and a low grassy meadow bor-
dering it on both sides, and terminating at the water’s edge in an abrupt
bank some three to four feet in height. A few scattered clumps of alders
grew in the water at the foot of the bank and at this season of the year with
no leafy vegetation in evidence any living object, no matter how small, is
plainly visible. The birds in question dove immediately upon being ob-
served and one was never seen again. The other came to the surface after
a few seconds, a considerable distance up the creek, but immediately dove
again and disappeared. The bird was sighted regularly every morning
following and just as regularly disappeared. On the morning of the
twenty-third with the aid of the glass it was observed sitting quietly on the
surface of the water about a quarter of a mile up the creek.

An hour later while again passing this spot I decided to take another
look at the bird and a sharp lookout was kept for it, but absolutely no
trace of it wasfound. The surface of the water lay like a mirror. Walking
slowly along the bank I scanned the edges of the stream on both sides, but
could see nothing resembling a living object, and I was about to leave the
spot when my attention was attracted by an oblong object at the foot of a
clump of alders directly opposite, and my first thought was that the object
was the carapace of a turtle, but as it was rather early in the season for
turtles I trained my glasses upon the object and was amazed to discover
that it was the grebe. There at the foot of the alders, stretched full length
and flattened out upon the surface of the water in exactly the manner of
the Gibbstown bird, its bill pointed directly towards me, and although
no movement of the head was in evidence it was plain to be seen that the
bird was watching my every movement.

I now called the attention of a friend who was with me to the fact that
the object before us was the bird for which we had been searching, and
although he could see the oblong object plainly enough, he could not
outline the bird. I took another step towards the edge of the bank and as
I did so there departed from the sides of the bird those same small circular

aa 1 General Notes. 397
wavelets and I realized that the bird was moving its feet preparatory to the
dive. The next instant as my friend approached, the bird slipped quietly
from the alders and disappeared head first beneath the surface. The
actions of the two birds were so absolutely alike that I think they must

constitute a regular practice on the part of these Grebes.— Dros E.
Cutvir, Addingham, Pa.

Herring Gulls at Sea.— On page 182 of ‘The Auk,’ Dr. Strong says,
“Herring Gulls do not wander far from land relatively, and they are proba-
bly usually within a reasonable distance from fresh water.”

On February 8-16, I was on a voyage from New York to Madeira. As
we left the American coast, a flock of about forty Herring Gulls accom-
panied us.

They decreased in number, gradually, and, as their numbers decreased,
they fell further behind. Herring Gulls were identified for fully half the
distance to Madeira, but on the sixteenth when the birds came close to the
ship they were found to be yellow-legged gulls which had doubtless come
out from the islands.— RoBEerT BARBOUR.

Glaucous Gull (Larus hyperboreus) on Fresh Pond, Cambridge,
Mass.— Mr. Brewster in his “Birds of the Cambridge Region”’ records
an occurrence of a Glaucous Gull on Fresh Pond in the ‘hutchinsii’ plumage
on November 29, 1899. Iam able to furnish a second record. On March
2, 1914, in the middle of the forenoon one appeared among the Herring
Gulls which were coming in from Boston Harbor to rest and bathe. It
was an entirely white bird and much larger than the Herring Gulls. Ice
covered most of the surface of the pond, but about an open area reaching
to the shore, where the water is received by an entrance pipe, was a col-
lection of Black Ducks and Herring Gulls with a pair of Golden-eyes, a
Mallard Drake, and three Great Black-backed Gulls. Other Herring
Gulls were arriving, and with a squad of these came the Glaucous Gull.
It remained to bathe, successively took two or three flights about, but
returned after each flight to the open water or to the edge of the ice, where
were gathered the Black Ducks. Its position among these at times made
the bird very striking in its complete whiteness. It was still present when
an hour later I came away. The next day again this Glaucous Gull was
present, arriving with Great Black-backed Gulls and Herring Gulls at 11.20
A. M., but the following day it was absent, and it was not seen again.—
Horace W. Wriaut, Boston, Mass.

European Widgeon (Mareca penelope) at Boston, Mass.— On Octo-
ber 24, 1913, two young male European Widgeon appeared on Jamaica
Pond. When first seen, they were very shy and swam restlessly about in
close companionship, occasionally giving the characteristic call of the
species, consisting of two notes, “Whée-you.’”’ They were still present
the following day, and were afterwards viewed from time to time during

398 General Notes. [sus

the remainder of October and throughout November and December.
When in early January ice was forming on the pond, one of the two left
on the third or fourth day; the other remained to January 17, when ice
had covered all but a few small areas of the pond. These young males
showed little or nothing of the creamy buff crown upon their arrival, but
they gradually developed this feature. So at first their true identifica-
tion was difficult, but the two-note call and chestnut color of the head
clearly differentiated them from Baldpates. By December the plumage
of the adult male European Widgeon was quite fully developed, and at the
time they left they lacked little of its completeness. One gained the adult
plumage somewhat earlier than the other, so they could readily be dis-
tinguished. A female Baldpate joined them about December 1 and left
on January 16, one day earlier than the later remaining Widgeon. A cold
wave had brought the temperature at the pond down to 13° below zero
on the thirteenth.

In early December their companions on the pond were 400 to 500 Black
Ducks, the number varying from day to day, several Mallards, a few
Scaup Ducks, 90 to 100 Lesser Scaup, a young male Bufflehead, 3 Ruddy
Ducks, 25 to 60 Mergansers, 8 Coot, and a few Herring Gulls, a collection
of water fowl, the numbers of which had been steadily increasing during
November and were decreasing in late December.

This occurrence of European Widgeon on Jamaica Pond was the first
in Boston and its immediate vicinity, if I am not in error. Like other
wild ducks which visit protected waters, these Widgeons soon become
unsuspicious and allowed near approach. They were objects of interest
and pleasure to many observers throughout their long visit— Horacr W.
Wricut, Boston, Mass.

An Egret on Long Island.— In connection with Mr. R. Heber Howe,
Jr.’s note on the American Egret, in the April ‘Auk,’ and the one by
Mr. G. Kingsley Noble to which he refers, I would like to report a single
bird of this species which I observed at Mastic, Long Island, where it is
very rare, on August 9, 1913. It was identified with certainty.— JoHN
TREADWELL NicHots, New York, N. Y.

The Woodcock Carrying its Young.— It has been the good fortune
of the writer to see recently two successive flights of our native Woodcock
carrying its young nearly as large as itself, sitting upright, grasped and
suspended by the claws of the mother bird. I am told that the sight is an
unusual one, and that a brief account of it may interest your readers.

I was on a little botanizing trip near a river bottom, looking especially
for Golden seal plants and flowers which were somewhat plenty in that
vicinity; the season being late for the flowers, late May or early June. I
have no record of the exact date.

Startled by a loud whirring of wings near by, very like, yet perceptibly
different from that of the Partridge, I saw the slow flight of the bird with its

arta General Notes. 399

burden over the brushwood, but did not then in the brief and surprised view,
distinctly make out the object carried. A few minutes later a second
flight occurred close by, which I plainly observed and noted in its full
particulars. After a time I indistinctly remembered having seen years
before, an engraving of a like scene, which I later found in Chapman’s
Farm Encyclopedia. The print is very lifelike, except that the young
which I saw was relatively larger than here shown— C. C. McDrrmnp,
Battle Creek, Mich.

A Feeding Habit of the Ruddy Turnstone (Arenaria interpres
morinella).— September 7, 1913, at Lincoln Park, Chicago, Ill., I saw about
a dozen of these birds busily engaged in feeding about a large flat-topped
pile of fertilizer to be used on newly-made land. Most of them were dig-
ging in the pile near the edges, a few were perched on the top, while one
or two others were turning over sticks in the usual fashion on the barren
ground a few feet away. Those on top were alert and not feeding; the
others seemed much more oblivious to possible dangers. The feeding
birds reminded one very much of chickens, minus the scratching. When
they were scared away a few alighted on the beach, but the rest, after
circling, came back to the pile. They were unusually numerous compared
to the numbers seen in previous years. They were associated with numer-
ous small sandpipers, and two or three small plovers. The pile stood some
distance from the beach, so that the birds could not have reached it in
running about their usual habitat, and it seems reasonable that this new
habit was formed through imitation of the other shore birds, which are
not so much restricted to beaches.— Epwin D. Huu, Chicago, Il.

Willow Ptarmigan in Montana.— I recently mounted three Willow
Ptarmigan (Lagopus lagopus lagopus) received February 21, 1914, from Mr.
L. W. Hill of St. Paul, Minn., who secured them near Midvale, Montana,
in the New Glacier Park. As I have never before seen any ptarmigan
except the White-tailed species from this region, the occurrence seems
worthy of record.— Harry P. Stanrorp, Kalispell, Mont.

Choucalcyon versus Sauromarptis.— In my “ Revision of the Classi-
fication of the Kingfishers ” (Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., XX XI, 1912, p.
241), I stated that the name Choucalcyon Lesson, Traité D’Orn., 1831,
248, “type by subsequent designation (Gray, 1855), Alcedo gaudichaud
Quoy and Gaim.”’ would have to replace Sauromarptis Cab. & Heine,
proposed on grounds of purism.

Dr. Gregory Mathews has kindly called my attention to the fact that
Lesson himself in 1837 designated as the type of Choucalcyon the bird now
known as Dacelo gigas (Bodd.). Inthe Complément des ceuvres de Buffon,
Oiseaux, 1837, p. 355 (a work which was not available when my paper was
prepared) Lesson writes: “‘ Le type de ce groupe est le grand alcyon de la
Nouvelle-Hollande, que Buffon croyoit provenir de la Nouvelle-Guinée,
et qu’il a figuré enl. 663.” As Buffon’s plate represents Dacelo gigas,

400 General Notes. eave

Choucalcyon therefore falls as an absolute synonym of Dacelo (type by
monotypy D. gigas)— W. DEW. Mitier, Amer. Museum of Natural

History, New York City.

The Bobolink breeding in Southeastern Pennsylvania.— The west-
ern side of the Delaware in southeastern Pennsylvania is flanked by the
“Uplands” which rise from the Coastal Plain along the 100 foot contour.
These Uplands reach westward to the Blue Ridge, one hundred miles away
— a well-watered, rolling country of low hills and mature valley streams.
The land is one of farms — wheat, corn, meadow pasture and grassland.
At my home at Cheyney, on the border of Delaware and Chester Counties,
a typical rural district, I have often seen and heard the Bobolink for a few
days during its northward passage in May. This year (1914) several
pairs have remained and are nesting in a wide field of clover just back of
my house. I hear the tumultuous song of the birds throughout these
early summer days and see the male perched on tree tops, wheeling and
hovering over the field and dropping into the grass, all the while voluble
and ecstatic as the Bobolink always is at this season. There appear to
be several pairs, but I have made an indifferent search for nests and have
not as yet found one. The birds, however, have been with us for the past
three weeks and every day this gladsome voice is a continual delight.

I have never understood just why the Bobolink did not remain with us
when clover and meadow grass were so alluring. They are here this year
and I, for one, am glad of this added touch of more northern summers.—
SPENCER Trotter, ‘‘Pennyscroft,’’ Cheyney, Penna.

Evening Grosbeaks in Pennsylvania.— In February last a flock of
about 400 Evening Grosbeaks (Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina) re-
mained for some days about Lewisburg, Union Co., Pa. Smaller flocks
were also observed during periods of deep snow in Lycoming and Bedford
Counties and some specimens secured.— B. H. Warren, Everhart Museum,
Scranton, Pa.

Nuttall’s Sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys nuttalli) wintering in
King Co., Wash.— For the last two years, a pair of Nuttall’s Sparrows
have spent the winter about our garden. Noticing them for the first time,
during the late Autumn of 1912, and thinking it an unusual occurrence, I
-made an entry of it in my note-book. At the end of a week, I was greatly
surprised to find them still frequenting the shrubbery, as I had thought
them to be merely stopping for a rest, on their journey southward. As
the weather was steadily becoming colder, so much so that a light snow fell,
I was able to encourage them by feeding. In consequence they became
fairly tame, and seemed quite content to remain.

Karly, the following spring, I noticed that they were building in an ivy-
covered house on the lawn. Two broods of young were raised, the parents
becoming exceedingly tame at this time. The entire family remained

tee General Notes. 401

together, until early autumn, all but two of the flock then disappearing.
I have every reason to believe them to be the same pair which remained
during the previous winter, as they displayed the same traits and acted in
precisely the same manner. Together with several Song Sparrows, they
spent most of the day in a willow copse, over a damp place, at the near
corner of the orchard, always repairing, however, to the ivy-covered house
to roost.— TuHro. E. W. Reynoups, Kent, Wash.

The Bahama Swallow in Cuba.— While Governor General of the
Philippine Islands W. Cameron Forbes took much interest in the bird
fauna of the group and he made for the Museum of his Alma Mater — The
Museum of Comparative Zoélogy, at Harvard University — large and very
valuable collections of Philippine birds, and found, he says more real rest
and relaxation, during his short vacations, in bird collecting than in any
other pursuit.

Since his retirement from the Governorship of the Philippines, Mr.
Forbes has kept up his active interest in bird collecting and last winter
during a hurried trip, which included a stop of a day or two each, in Cuba
and Jamaica and a few days in Guatemala secured for us no less than one
hundred and twenty skins.

In Cuba Mr. Forbes collected only at Nipe Bay in the northeastern end
of the island. There he secured on March 7 and 8, 1914, skins of twenty
species of birds, most important of which are two specimens of the Bahama
Swallow, Callichelidon cyaneoviridis (Bryant) which I believe has not
been recorded before from Cuba. The skins both taken March 8, 1914, are
Nos. 65504 and 65505 M. C. Z. and are o@ and @. Mr. Forbes says that
this swallow was exceedingly abundant and generally distributed at Nipe
Bay, feeding in the manner of its kind or resting on the telegraph wires.

Bryant, Cory and others who have written on the birds of the Bahamas,
mention the swallow as present in those islands in the winter months,
but as less abundant there than in spring and summer. It must breed
rather late as Bryant states that in specimens killed so late as April 28 the
genital organs showed no signs of the near approach of the breeding season.

Whether the Bahama swallow is resident in northeastern Cuba or only
occurs there as an abundant winter visitor we cannot say. Mr. Forbes’
discovery deprives the species of the distinction of being the only genus of
birds peculiar to the Bahamas.— Outram Banas, Museum of Comparative
Zoblogy, Cambridge, Mass.

The Coahuila Cliff Swallow (Petrochelidon fulva pallida) in Texas.—
My collector, who has been in Kerr County, Texas, since the first of last
March, sent me among other bird-skins, a fine series of Cliff Swallows,
which at first I thought were Petrochelidon lunifrons tachina Oberholser.
On examining them carefully however, I saw they were different, for they
were too large and much paler than this subspecies. I sent them to Mr.
Outram Bangs, who identified them as Petrochelidon fulva pallida Nelson;

402 General Notes. kves

a Mexican species that I cannot find has ever before been recorded
from the United States. It was previously known from Coahuila and
Tamaulipas.

I have just received word from my man in Kerr County that these
birds are beginning to nest.— Joun E. TuayeEr, Lancaster, Mass.

The Tufted Tit — A New Record for Canada.— On May 2, 1914, at
the far end of the trees on Point Pelee, Ontario, Mr. J.S. Wallace found two
Tufted Tits (Bqaolophus bicolor) one of which at least was very talkative. He
called the writer over and after watching them a short time we secured one.

This bird has been sought at Point Pelee as being the most likely place,
ever since the present contingent began to visit the Point regularly, nearly
ten years ago. The bird occurs every fall on Belle Isle which lies between
Detroit, Michigan, and Windsor, Ontario, and has been vainly sought on
the mainland in Windsor as well as lower down on the Detroit River.

In lower Ontario the Black-capped Chickadee is the only regular visitor
of the family and therefore it was quite an extraordinary event that on
May 2 and 3 we saw not only the Black-cap and the Tufted but the Hud-
sonian as well. The latter was a single bird talking away to himself at
a great rate and very unsuspicious.— W. E. SaunpErs, London, Ontario.

Blue-Gray Gnatcatcher (Polioptila cerulea) at West Haven, Conn.—
On the morning of April 30, 1914, I observed a Blue-gray Gnatcatcher at
West Haven, Conn. The bird was very tame and allowed me to observe
it for some time, part of the time from a distance of not more than fifteen
feet. Six records of this species in Connecticut are recorded by Sage and
Bishop in the “ Birds of Connecticut ’’ (page 176). This constitutes the
seventh record, and the first since 1892.— ArreTas A. SaunprERs, West
Haven, Conn.

Three New Birds for Champaign County, Illinois.— Rare visitors
are the rule this spring and my list of ‘“ An Illinois Ten-mile radius ”’ has
been lengthened by the appearance of the rare Bohemian Waxwing (Bom-
bycilla garrula), the rarer, Yellow-headed Blackbird (Xanthocephalous
xanthocephalous) and the extremely rare American Magpie (Pica pica
hudsonica).

Twelve Bohemian Waxwings visited my residence yard on February 26,
1914, the day following a severe northern blizzard. Examined with glasses

_at sixty feet, each marking was distinctly observed. Cedar Waxwings are
not uncommon with us and are noticeably smaller in comparison with their
northern Gypsy cousins. After a half-hour’s rest they wheeled into the air
as one bird and disappeared in the west.

On April 26, 1914, the first American Magpie recorded in Illinois since
1892, was being harassed by a half-dozen Crows in a hedge on the S. 8S.
Love estate, two miles east of Philo. His white markings and strange
cries and chatterings made of him a conspicuous object. All other Illinois
records are winter ones, and this visit was all the stranger because of its
occurring east of central Illinois.

eet eal General Notes. 403

On April 29, two records were made of the Yellow-headed Blackbird.
These are the first authentic records for the county, although I have a male
in my collection captured in this neighborhood with data lost.

One of the April 29 records, was a lone male in the Meharry orchards
three miles west of Philo. On the same day a second male was observed
on the Gaurd farm three miles north. The last Yellow-head was following
a plow in the field in company with a flock of Bronzed Grackles and was
observed at a distance of twenty feet.

These three new birds for Champaign County gain numbers 197, 198,
and 199 respectively, in my list of ‘ Birds of an Illinois Ten-mile radius.”
The circle is pierced by the fortieth parallel of latitude and lies twenty-five
miles west of the Indiana line — Isaac E. Huss, Philo, Ill.

New Bird Records for Arizona.— The appearance of Swarth’s most
excellent “List of the Birds of Arizona,’ seems to mark an opportune
time for recording several Arizona bird notes that have not yet found their
way into print, and for calling attention to a few printed records that are
not included in Swarth’s list.

Gavia pacifica. Paciric Loon.— One taken by Dr. Mearns September
20, 1886, at Fort Verde, and now in the collection of the American Museum
of Natural History.

Erismatura jamaicensis. Ruppy Duck.— One taken by Dr. Mearns
January 24, 1887, at Peck’s Lake, and now in the collection of the American
Museum of Natural History.

Chen rossi. Ross’s Goosr.— One taken by Dr. Mearns October 24,
1887, at Fort Verde, and now in the collection of the American Museum of
Natural History.

Ardea herodias treganzai. Trecanza’s Heron — Information was
given to E. W. Nelson in August, 1909, that two pairs had nested at a
pond two miles east of Tuba.

Catharista urubu. Brack Vuurure.—Several seen, May, 1890, by
Dr. A. K. Fisher in the Tonto Basin.

Pandion haliaetus carolinensis. Osprey. Several seen by Dy PARC
Fisher, June 26-29, 1892, near Camp Verde; they must have been breeding
not far distant.

Cryptoglaux acadica. Saw-wHeT OwL.— Young in the nest were
found by Dr. Mearns on San Francisco Mountain, June 12, 1887; the
game collector took a specimen December 17, 1893, at La Osa, Sturgis
Ranch, Pima County.

Glauciduim phalenoides. Frrrucinous Prcmy Owu.— Winter rec-
cords are: near Camp Lowell, January 24, 1872 (Bendire), and Phoenix,
February 26, 1897 (Breninger).

Centurus carolinus. Rrp-BELLIED WOODPECKER.— Accidental at Fort
Grant. Ridgway, ‘‘ Birds of North and Middle America.” VI, 1914, 57.

Zonotrichia querula. Harris’s SPARROW.— One was taken by M. F.
Gilman, March 16, 1913, at Sacaton and identified at the Biological Survey.

404 General Notes. kine

Anthus spraguei. Spracun’s Prerir.— A specimen was collected April 4,.
1905, at Fort Lowell and is now in the Thayer collection. It was identified
at the Biological Survey.

Regulus satrapa olivaceus. WESTERN GOLDEN-CROWNED KINGLET.
— A specimen was taken by C. Birdseye, September 14, 1908, in the White
Mountains and is now in the collection of the Biological Survey.

Hylocichla guttata sequoiensis. SierrA Hermit Turusa.— A
specimen was taken by Dr. A. K. Fisher May 14, 1892, at Fort Huachuca
and is now in the collection of the Biological Survey.

The Swarth list enumerates 362 species for Arizona. The above records.
add 9 species, or a total of 371 species now known from the state-— WELLS
W. Cooke, Biological Survey, Washington, D.C.

Birds transporting Food Supplies.— Mr. Chas. T. Ramsden’s in-
teresting note! on ‘‘ The Bobolink as a conveyer of mollusca ”’ suggests to
me the desirability of drawing attention to two other instances of similar
phenomena. Professor G. E. Beyer of Tulane University, who has been a
close student of Louisiana birds for many years, has collected numerous:
Upland Plover (Bartramia longicauda) soon after their arrival upon the
Gulf Coast, which bore beneath their wings from 20 to 40 small snails of
the Genus Physa. In reply to a query about this point Professor Beyer,.
in a letter of August 7, 1911, says: ‘“ The peculiar habit which this bird
has in concealing the snails among the under wing feathers has been known
to me for many years. When first discovered I pointed out this singular
fact to several of my hunter friends. The occurrence, however, was so
regular and was confirmed so often in after years, that I expected the habit
to be generally known. I used to count the number of snails regularly;.
at one time I found as many as forty-one, oftener between twenty and thirty,
never less than ten or twelve. The stomachs of the birds always contain
a number of crushed shells of the snails. Furthermore, the finding of these:
snails is only possible if the birds are obtained shortly after their arrival
from the south, the earliest date of which I always placed about March 22.
I was at the time unable to determine whether the species of snail was the:
same or different from ours, for the genus contains several species. At the
time the ‘ Papabottes’ arrive here, Physa is not common with us and
does not become plentiful until May and June. I am sorry to say that I
became as it were side-tracked in after years as I had intended to continue:
this inquiry and extend it to other migratory birds of a similar nature.”

The notes by Professor Beyer and Mr. Ramsden give us the final phase of
the phenomenon but they do not show how the snails reached the position
in which they were found. The following brief note published by Grace
Ellicott of New Castle, Ind., in ‘The Guide to Nature’? gives an account of
the initial stage of a similar occurrence. Miss Ellicott’s contribution is as

1 Auk, XXXT, 1914, p. 250.
2 Vol. I, No. 5, Aug. 1908, p. 168.

vena General Notes. 405

follows: ‘‘ The occupants of a recently disturbed ant hill were excitedly
crawling about the hill and the adjacent cement walk. They were large,
and to a Blue Jay in a neighboring tree they must have looked luscious, for
flying down, the jay began to pick them up with an eagerness that seemed
to say that this was an opportunity that might come his way but once.
As rapidly as he could do it he seized the ants, with each capture lifting a
wing, sometimes one, sometimes the other, and seemed to deposit his prey
among the feathers back of and underneath it. So quickly he worked and
with such evident eagerness to make the most of this rare occasion that,
as he lifted the wing, putting his bill among the feathers, it often seemed
that he must lose his balance and topple over backwards. But he kept
his poise, worked on with all speed and had laid in quite a store when a
passerby frightened him from his task. Whether this jay had only just
discovered the most convenient of all storehouses for his use or whether
this food was to be carried to the nest for the young, for it was nesting time,
he was most interesting.”

This Blue Jay was therefore taking advantage of the instinct of ants
when disturbed to fasten their jaws onto any object that presents itself.
It must be also that the snails here mentioned have a propensity for cling-
ing to the feathers among which they are placed. These three most inter-
esting observations suggest that numerous birds may have the same or
other wonderful habits about which we are ignorant. They should stimu-
late minute and careful research and comfort those who fear that all the
interesting things have already been discovered.— W. L. McAtusn, Biologi-
cal Survey, Washington, D. C.

406 Recent Literature. [sup

RECENT LITERATURE.

Ridgway’s ‘The Birds of North and Middle America.’ Part VI.1—
This portly volume carries Mr. Ridgway’s great work almost as far as the
Falconiformes, the two groups Coccygiformes (Cuckoo-like Birds) and
Psittaciformes (Parrots), which intervene having been omitted on account
of lack of space, although the former is entirely in type and the latter
nearly completed. It will thus be seen that of the ‘land birds’ Mr.
Ridgway has only the Hawks and the Gallinaceous birds to treat of.

The families covered in the present part are treated in the same thorough
manner that characterized the earlier volumes. Seven of the twelve do
not occur north of Mexico and the West Indies, but the Woodpeckers,
Goatsuckers, Owls, and Kingfishers contain many North American species
and the volume will thus be of much greater interest to those who do not
extend their studies below the southern boundary of the United States,
than was its predecessor. The treatment of the Nighthawks and Horned
Owls follows the recent monographs of Mr. Harry C. Oberholser, since Mr.
Ridgway examined the material with him and coincided with his views.
The new forms proposed in this connection have been elsewhere commented
upon in these columns. In other groups we note: Psilopornis (p. 361), a
new genus with Galbula albirostris as its type, and the following new sub-
species; Hypnelus ruficollis coloratus (p. 382), Encontrados, Venezuela;
Otus asio hasbroucki (p. 694), Palo Pinto Co., Texas; O. a. brewsteri (p. 700),
Salem, Oregon; Glaucidium gnoma grinnelli (p. 791), Humboldt Bay,
California; G. siju vittatum (p. 805), Isle of Pines; Micropallas whitneyt
sanfordi (p. 809), Lower California; and M. w. idoneus (p. 810), Hidalgo,
Texas. A number of changes in the nomenclature of species of the A. O. U.
Check-List are noticed. Dryobates villosus leucomelas becomes septen-
trionalis, while the subspecies D. v. leucothorectes, orius, sitkensis, icastus,
D. pubescens glacialis, D. scalaris eremicus, and cactophilus, Colaptes auratus
borealis, Xenopicus albolarvatus gravirostris, Phleotomus pileatus floridanus

1 The Birds | of | North and Middle America: | A Descriptive Catalogue | of the |
Higher Groups, Genera, Species, and Subspecies of Birds | known to occur in North
America, from the | Arctic Lands to the Isthmus of Panama | the West Indies and
other Islands | of the Caribbean Sea, and the | Galapagos Archipelago. | By | Robert
Ridgway, | Curator, Division of Birds. | Part VI.

Family Picide — The Woodpeckers. Family Momotide — The Motmots.
Family Capitonide — The Barbets. Family Caprimulgide — The Goat-
Family Ramphastide — The Toucans. suckers.

Family Bucconidze — The Puff Birds. Family Nyctibiidee — The Potoos.
Family Galbulide — The Jacamars. Family Tytonide — The Barn Owls.

Family Alcedinide — The Kingfishers. Family Bubonide — The Eared Owls.
Family Todidze — The Todies.

Bulletin of the United States National Museum. No.50. Washington Govt.
Printing Office. April 8, 1914. pp. i-xx+1-882, pll. I-XXXVI.

Veiga | Recent Literature. 407

and picinus are recognized. The California Woodpecker and its races are
separated generically as Balanosphyra Rgdw., while for the Red-cockaded
Woodpecker the generic name Phrenopicus Bp. is used. The genus Ceryle
is divided, Streptoceryle being used for C. alcyon and torquata, and Chloro-
ceryle for C. americana and its allies.

Several races accepted by the A. O. U. Committee are rejected by Mr.
Ridgway as Phalenoptilus nuttallii nitidus Brewster which he regards as
not distinct from P. nitidus; Cryptoglaux acadicus scoteus Osgood which
is considered an individual variation of C. acadicus; and Otus flammeolus
idahoensis Merriam which is referred to O. flammeolus.

Melanerpes formicivora of the Check-List appears as subspecies aculeata
Mearns, true formicivora being exclusively Mexican and in the same way
Dryobates scularis bairdi of the Check-List becomes D. s. symplectus.
Otus asio is considered to apply to the Florida Screech Owl which necessi-
tates the use of O. a. nevius (Gm.) for the common eastern form, while
O. xantusi is made a subspecies of O. asio.

The footnotes throughout the volume are full of important bibliographic
references and synonymy of extralimital forms, while the generic synonymy
in the main text contains numerous names with their types designated
which are not to be found in other general works.

‘ The Birds of North and Middle America’ is essentially a technical work
and only those who are constantly engaged in general systematic ornithology
will really appreciate the enormous amount of labor that the author has
expended upon it. Mr. Ridgway richly deserves the congratulations of all
ornithologists upon the splendid results that he has already accomplished
and their best wishes for his success in the volumes that still remain to be
completed.— W. 8S.

Chapman on New Birds from Colombia, Venezuela and Ecuador.—
Dr. Chapman’s studies of the rich series of South American birds obtained
by the recent expeditions of the American Museum of Natural History are
progressing steadily and two publications relating to them have recently
appeared. In the first ! he calls attention to the need of collections from the
Bogota district of Colombia in order to fix the exact type localities of the
200 species that have been described from there, and describes very briefly
the itinerary of the expedition which he conducted to Bogotd in 1913 for
the purpose of securing the desired material. Some 2300 specimens
representing over 500 species were obtained, and 28 forms are here described
as new either from this collection or from that of the previous expedition.

A second paper? describes the attempt of Mr. Leo E. Miller and Mr. F. X.
Iglseder of the American Museum to reach Mt. Duida on the upper Orinoco.

1 Diagnoses of apparently new Colombian Birds, II. By Frank M. Chapman.

Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., XX XIII, Art. XII, pp. 167-192. March 19, 1914.

2 Descriptions of a new Genus and Species of Birds from Venezuela. By Frank.
'M. Chapman. do., Art. XIII, pp. 193-197. March 19, 1914.

408 Recent Literature. fete

Unfortunately after about three months’ travel, although the base of the
mountain was reached, a return had to be made immediately owing to the
desperate illness of Mr. Iglseder. A collection of 400 birds was secured on
the Upper Orinoco and 600 more at Cristobal Colon, but the avifauna of
the mountain still remains unknown. The following new forms are de-
scribed: Geotrygon parie (p. 194), Cristobal Colon; Neomorphus nigro-
gularis (p. 194) foot of Mt. Duida; Nonnula duide (p. 195), foot of Mt.
Duida; Microxenops (gen. nov.) milleri (p. 196), foot of Mt. Duida. The
new genus is allied to Xenops but with a straight gonys and square tail of
ten feathers, not reaching beyond the closed wings. A third contribution 4
contains descriptions of Leptotila ochraceiventris (p. 317), Zaruma; Speo-
tyto cunicularia punensis (p. 318), Puna Island; Pyrrhura albipectus (p. 319),
Zamora; Tityra semifasciata emeraldae (p. 320), Esmeraldas; and Pitylus
nigriceps (p. 322), Loja — allin Ecuador. Ornithologists will look forward
with great interest to Dr. Chapman’s final reports and the generalizations
which the vast collections at his disposal and his personal knowledge of the
zoogeography of the region will enable him to draw.— W. 8S.

Mearns on New African Birds.?— In this paper Dr. Mearns continues
his studies of the recent collections of British East African birds in the
U.S. National Museum. The new forms, all of which are members of the
Pycnonotide, are as follows: Phyllastrephus strepitans fricki (p. 1), Fana
River; P. cerviniventris lénnbergi (p. 2), Tharaka District; P. placidus
keniensis (p. 2), Mt. Kenia; Chlorocichla flaviventris meruensis (p. 3),
near Mt. Kenia; Andropadus fricki (p. 4), base of Endoto Mt.; A. f.
kitungensis (p. 4), Kitunga; Stelgidocichla latirostris pallida (p. 5), Mt.
Gargues, 7,100 ft.; and S. l. saturata (p. 6), Honi River, base of Mt. Kenia.
—W.S.

Thayer and Bangs on Birds of the Arctic Coast of East Siberia.*—
This paper describes the ornithological results of a trip undertaken by Mr.
Johan Koren along the Arctic coast of East Siberia, west to the Kolyma
River, made possible by the generosity of Mr. John E. Thayer. The
mammals are reported upon by Dr. Glover M. Allen in the same publica-
tion.

Mr. Koren’s notes are of great importance and as he reached the country
before the ice broke up he was able to record thefirst arrival of the migrants.

1 Descriptions of New Birds from Ecuador. By Frank M. Chapman. do.,
Art. XXIII, pp. 317-322. May 22, 1914.

2 Descriptions of Eight New African Bulbuls. By Edgar A. Mearns. Smith-
sonian Misc. Collns, Vol. 61, No. 25. (Publ. 2260) February 16, 1914 [received
March 11.] pp. 1-6.

3 Notes on the Birds and Mammals of the Arctic Coast of East Siberia. Birds.

By John E. Thayer and Outram Bangs. Proc. N. Engl. Zo6l. Club. V, pp. 1-48.
April 9, 1914.

Vol. ran
1914

Recent Literature. 409
The authors say ‘‘ We think no one can read the notes without marveling,
as we have done, at one thing — how birds can withstand such a winter
climate, where 85 degrees below zero Fahr. is not unusual. And yet there
is at the Kolyma a quite varied winter bird fauna.’”’ The list contains 109
species or subspecies of which the following are described as new: Lagopus
lagopus koreni (p. 4) Kolyma; Squatarola squatarola cynosure (p. 23),
Baillie Island, Arctic America, proposed for the American Black-bellied
Plover as distinct from that of Europe; Circus cyaneus cernuus, (p. 32),
Kolyma; Budytes flavus plerus (p. 41), Kolyma; Otocoris alpestris euroa
(p. 43), Kolyma.

The authors protest against being compelled by “ existing Laws” of
nomenclature to adopt Xenus as distinct from Xenos. The A. O. U. Code
explicitly rules that such words are identical and the statement to the con-
trary in the International Code is merely a suggestion and not a part of
the Code, so that they would seem to be perfectly free to follow their
preference in this matter and still have the ‘Laws’ on their side.

Students of North American birds will be interested to learn from this
paper that the Gray-cheeked Thrush is not a mere straggler in Siberia
but breeds regularly as far west at least as the Kolyma River.

Altogether Messrs. Thayer and Bangs have presented an exceedingly
interesting paper as well as a valuable contribution to the ornithology of
a little known region — W. 8.

Stresemann on the Birds of Ceram.'— This paper consists of a list
of 153 species with full synonymy and extended annotations, covering not
only the results of the author’s explorations but those of all other ornitholo-
gists who had previously visited the island and whose expeditions are
treated historically in the preface. The work is characterized by the same
careful preparation and accuracy of detail that mark Mr. Stresemann’s
other publications and forms a valuable monograph of the avifauna of this
interesting island. We note the following new forms: Megapodius duper-
reyii buruensis (p. 41), Buru; Sterna bergii thalassina (p. 57), Rodriguez;
S. sumatrana mathewsi (p. 60), Aldabra; Hemiprocne mystacea confirmata (p.
110), Ceram; Dendrobiastes hyperythra negroides (p. 125), Central Ceram;
Myjagra galeata seranensis, (p. 127), Central Ceram; Pachycephala pectoralis
alfurorum (p. 132), Ceram; Androphilus disturbans musculus (p. 136),
Central Ceram; Zosterops obstinatus seranensis (p. 139), Central Ceram;
Z. o. ternatanus (p. 139), Ternate; Erythrura trichroa pinaiwe (p. 147),
Central Ceram; Dicrurus hottentottus manumeten (p. 148), Ceram. The
plates represent scenery, bills of the Hornbill, Rhyticeros plicatus, and
colored figures of Oreosterops pinaiw, Stigmatops monticola and the new
Androphilus — W. S.
itt A NOs) Eee 2 en ee a

1Die Végel von Seran (Ceram) (Aus den zoologischen Ergebnissen. der II.
Freiburger Molukken-Expedition) Von Erwin Stresemann. Novit. Zool. Vol.
XXI, pp. 25-153, tafeln III-V. February, 1914.

410 Recent Literature. [sane

Mathews’ ‘The Birds of Australia.’ '\— Mr. Mathew’s great work
continues to appear notwithstanding the fact that the author is making a
tour of Australia, the results of which we trust will be of benefit to the book,
the author and Australian ornithology. The present part completes the
Ibises, Spoonbills and Storks and makes good progress with the Herons.
We note no new names that have not already been characterized in the
author’s previous papers and only one point in nomenclature with which
we cannot agree. The generic name Herodias Boie 1822 is used for the
large White Egrets as in the A. O. U. Check-List. We have always held
that this name was a synonym of Egretta Forster, 1817, in-as-much-as Gray
in 1841 designated as its type Ardea garzetta L. His subsequent designa-
tion of A. egretta in 1855 we hold was invalidated by this previous action.
The case was submitted to the International Commission on Zodlogical
Nomenclature six years ago and an opinion has just been rendered (Op.
62, March, 1914) sustaining our contention. It will thus be necessary to
employ Leucophoyz for Ardea egretta L. and its allies — W. S.

‘Die Schwalbe,’ the Austrian Bird Migration Report.?— This
important publication appears at irregular intervals under the auspices
of the Ornithological Section of the Royal Zoological and Botanical Society
of Vienna. The present number comprises ‘ The Question of the Harmful-
ness of the Dipper (Cinclus cinclus) by Dr. L. v. Lorenz; ‘ Observations
and Investigations on the Jay,’ by Curt Loos; ‘ The First Arrival Dates of
Various Migrant Birds in the Spring of the Years 1887 [= 1897] to 1903 by
Dr. Ludwig v. Lorenz with the coéperation of Dr. Morez Sassi; ‘ On the
Influence of the Weather on the Arrival of Migrant Birds in Spring,’ by
Dr. A. Defant.

The last two are of particular interest to all students of migration. Dr.
Lorenz had at his disposal the records of no less than 442 observers located
in an area about equal to that of the state of Arizona. Apparently only
the date of first arrival is recorded by each observer and the mere tabula-
tion of these for the thirty species considered, forms an immense mass of
records. The graphic representation of these data is ingenious. A map is
devoted to each species for each year and the date of arrival at each sta-
tion is indicated by a colored dot. Red represents an arrival between
March 2 and 6; orange, March 7-11; yellow, March 12-16; etc. to blue
and violet, in the order of the spectrum. An early year shows a preponder-
ance of red dots while in a later one yellow or green dots will prevail.

1 The Birds of Australia. Vol. III, Part 5. Witherby & Co. London, March
26, 1914.

2 Die Schwalbe. Berichte Komitees fiir Ornithologische Beobachtungs-Sta-
tionen in Osterreich. Redigiert von Dr. Ludwig Ritter Lorenz von Liburnau.
Neue Folge III, 1902-1913. Herausgegeben von der Ornithologischen Sektion
der K. K. Zool.-Bot. Gesellschaft in Wien. pp. 1-157, pll. 9.

a a

volgid si Recent Literature. 411

Dr. Defant’s report on the influence of weather conditions on migration
deserves careful study. It is interesting to note that in tabulating the
data to show which days are characterized by the greatest number of
arrivals he adopts the same plan used by the Delaware Valley Ornithologi-
cal Club in ‘ Cassinia,’ except that he does not reject the obviously ‘ late
dates.’— W. S.

Grinnell on the Mammals and Birds of the Lower Colorado Val-
ley.'— The latest of Dr. Grinnell’s studies of California birds and mammals
and their distribution has to do with that portion of the Colorado River
valley which forms the southeastern boundary of the state. The expedi-
tion which furnished most of the data and material for the present report
was made possible by the generosity of Miss Annie M. Alexander, founder
of the California Museum of Vertebrate Zoélogy. Dr. Grinnell took per-
sonal charge of the field work and was assisted by Messrs. Frank Stephens,
Joseph Dixon and L. Hollister Jones. The party descended the river
Jby boat from Needles nearly to the Mexican line below Yuma, making
twenty-nine stops, and occupying three months’ time, from February 15 to
May 15, 1910. A collection of 1272 mammals and 1374 birds was secured
as well as many other specimens.

To the carefully prepared annotated list are added chapters on the ‘ Zonal
and Faunal Position of the Region’; the ‘ Associational Areas’; ‘ The
Colorado River as a Highway of Dispersal’; and as a ‘ Hindrance to Dis-
persal ’ and ‘ The Problem of Barriers with Regard to Birds and Mammals.’

Under these headings Dr. Grinnell continues the discussion of the
problems and principles of distribution which has characterized his recent
papers. Attention is called to the “two schools of faunistic students,” one
of which regards temperature as the chief factor in controlling distribution
while the other advocates ‘‘ a composite control, of many factors resulting
in ecologic ‘ associations,’ ’’ and the author attempts td bring these views
into accord on the theory, which we heartily endorse, that they are
due simply to “ difference in perspective.” He recognizes again zones
due to climatic differences; faunas, due to differences in humidity; and
associations, due to environmental conditions — both inanimate and
animate.

Eleven different associations are recognized —the River, Willow-Cot-
tonwood, Tule, Arrowweed, Quail-brush, Mesquite, Saltbush, Creosote,
Catclaw (or Wash), Saguaro, and Encelia (Rocky Hills) — with lists of
characteristic birds and mammals. The species are separated into several
categories according as whether they are exclusively restricted to the given
‘association’ or are at their maximum or minor abundance there. The

1 An account of the Mammals and Birds of the Lower Colorado Valley, with
Especial Reference to the Distributional Problems Presented. By Joseph Grin-
nell. Univ. of Cal. Publ. in Zoology, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 51-294, pls. 3-13, 9 text
figs. March 20, 1914.

412 Recent Literature. [ue
characteristic winter species are included in the lists as well as those that
breed. In discussing barriers the author points out that the degree of
difference between mammals occurring on the two sides of the Colorado,
varies directly as the extent to which the river proves a barrier to their
dispersal. He considers that the ranges of all birds and mammals will be
accounted for by one or more of the several kinds of barriers which he
tabulates, 7. e. (1) Tangible (mechanical), land to aquatic species or bodies
of water to terrestrial; (2) Intangible (non-mechanical); (a) Zonal (tem-
perature), (b) Faunal (humidity), (c) Associational—food supply, breed-
ing places and temporary refuges. He also believes ‘“ that only through
the egency of barriers is the multiplication of species, in birds and mam-
mals, brought about.”

The annotated list includes 150 species or subspecies and is full of original
matter relative to the distribution and relationship of races. Some of the
most interesting notes are those relating to the tendency to red in place of
yellow in the wings and tail of Colaptes chrysoides which the author con-
siders is not an evidence of hybridism; also the discussion of Phalenoptilus,
two forms of which were present, one resident, the other a winter visitant,
and the results of his study of Geothlypis trichas, which lead to the conclu-
sion that there is no recognizable Pacific coast race arizela.

Dr. Grinnell’s recent publications set a very high standard, and one
which writers of faunal papers would do well to follow. The day when a
mere annotated list forms an acceptable contribution to North American
ornithology is rapidly passing and an author will soon be required to be
versed in the various problems of evolution and capable of using his data
in their elucidation— W. 8.

Bangs and Phillips on Birds from Yunnan.'!— A collection of 1376
bird skins made by a Japanese collector in southern Yunnan has recently
been acquired by the Museum of Comparative Zodlogy and a list of the
240 species, with comments, is here presented. The following are described
asnew: Niltava sundara denotata (p. 280), Mengtsze; Cryptolopha trivirgatus
etuncidus (p. 282), Mengtsze; Pericrocotus brevirostris ethologus (p. 282),
Hsienchan, Hupeh, China, W. R. Zappey; P. 6. flavillaceus (p. 283),
Koolloo Valley, northern India; Spizixus canifrons ingrami (p. 285),
Mengtsze; Janthocincla lustrabila (p. 285), Louwkouchat; Pomatorhinus
macclellandi odicus (p. 286), Mengtsze; P. ruficollis reconditus (p. 286),
Mengtsze; Actinodura ramsayi yunnanensis (p. 288). Loukouchai;
Enicurus guttatus bacatus (p. 292), Loukouchai; Janthia practica (p. 292),
Loukouchai; Buchanga leucogenys cerussata (p. 302). Ichang, Hupeh,
China, W. R. Zappey.— W. 8.

1 Notes on a Collection of Birds from Yunnan. By Outram Bangs and John C.
Phillips. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zo6l., Vol. LVIII, No. 6, April, 1914, pp. 267-302.

vob ay Recent Literature. 413

Bangs on New Birds.'— In several recent papers in the Proceedings
of the New England Zodélogical Club Mr. Bangs presents some important
contributions to the ornithology of North and Middle America. He finds
that the Paroquets which formerly ranged over the interior of the United
States from Texas and Illinois to Colorado and the Great Lakes, differ
materially from the South Atlantic and Gulf Coast birds in having
the yellow paler and the green of a decided bluish tint. This form he
names Conuropsis carolinensis interior (p. 94), type locality Bald Island,
Nebraska.

A new race of Calocitta, C. formosa pompata is described (p. 102) in the
same publication from Bolson, Costa Rica, and a third race of Scaled
Quail is separated (p. 100) as Callipepla squamata pallida Brewster from
Arizona, etc., true C. squamata being restricted to southern Mexico.—W. 8S.

Oberholser’s Monograph of the Nighthawks.2 — While some orinthol-
ogists will not agree with Mr. Oberholser’s views as to the amount of sub-
specific subdivision that is desirable there cannot, we think, be any differ-
ence of opinion as to the excellence and thoroughness of treatment that
mark this, the latest of his systematic monographs. The thoroughness of
the descriptions and technical discussion and the fullness of the synonymy
and lists of specimens and localities leave nothing to be desired.

Mr. Oberholser comes to the conclusion that the Nighthawks including
the genera Chordeiles, Nannochordeiles, Nyctiprogne, Laurocalis and Po-
dager represent a family distinct from the Caprimulgide which he here
names Chordeilide. Incidentally he finds differences between the Whip-
poor-will and Chuck-wills-widow which seem to him to warrant their generic
separation and Setochalcis (p. 11) with Caprimulgus vociferus Wils. as
its type, is proposed for the Whip-poor-wills. Of the genus Chordeziles,
three species are recognized, C. rupestris comprising three subspecies, C.
acutipennis, with five subspecies and C. virginiensis with nine. The new
forms are as follows, C. v. howell (p. 57), Lipscomb, Texas, C. a. micromeris
(p. 100), Xbac, Yucatan, C. a. inferior (p. 109), Triunfo, Lower California,
C. r. xyostictus (p. 116), Bogota, Colombia, and C. r. zaleucus (p. 118),
Pebas, Peru. Six plates illustrate the palatal structure of Chordeiles,
Caprimulgus, Antrostomus and Setochalcis and the geographic range of the
various races of Nighthawks.— W. S.

1 An Unnamed Race of the Carolina Paroquet. By Outram Bangs. Proc. N. EZ.
Zo6l. Club, IV, pp. 938-94. Nov. 26, 1913.

The Geographic Races of the Scaled Quail. By Outram Bangs. do., pp.
99-100. March 9, 1914.

A New Magpie-Jay from Western Costa Rica. By Outram Bangs. do., pp.
101-102. March 13, 1914.

2A Monograph of the Genus Chordeiles Swainson, Type of a New Family of
Goatsuckers. By Harry C. Oberholser, of the Biological Survey, United States
Department of Agriculture. Bull. 86, U.S. National Museum, pp. 1-123, pli. 1-16

414 Recent Literature. [ qe

Allen’s ‘The Red-winged Blackbird.’!— Dr. Allen has presented in
this monograph one of the best ecologic studies that has yet appeared, one
that many other ‘ ecologists ’ would do well to take as a model,if they would
save this line of research from degenerating into what has been aptly styled
an “‘ elaboration of the obvious.”” The author points out the correlation of
the distribution of certain species of birds and other animals with certain
environments and certain plant associations, and adds; ‘‘ What are the
adaptations of each species to its peculiar habitat, and how has each
become dependent upon it? Questions such as these demand an intimate
knowledge, not only of every phase of the life history of each bird, but also
of every condition that might be imposed by its surroundings.” With
this prelude he proceeds to study one species, the Red-winged Blackbird
(Agelaius pheniceus pheniceus) in a cat-tail marsh near Ithaca, N. Y.
The detail and thoroughness of his studies are praiseworthy although, he
states, that they form merely an introduction to a true knowledge of the
life history of the bird and its relation to its environment.

The environment of the marsh is first considered and the area is divided
into seven associations the characteristic plants, birds, mammals, reptiles
and amphibians being listed under each. Temperature records for an
entire year bring out the rather surprising fact that the average tempera-
tures of the marsh and the adjacent upland differ by Iéss than a degree.

In the study of the Redwing, migration, mating, song, nesting, young,
fall migration, enemies, molt and plumage, food and food supply, and cor-
relation of changes in food and stomach structure, and in the reproductive
organs are considered. Published data on each subject are briefly quoted,
followed by the results of the author’s investigations. Incidentally one is
impressed with the very little that subsequent writers have added to the
accounts of Wilson, and Nuttall bearing upon many of these topics and
what an opportunity for original contributions has been neglected. Under
migration, Dr. Allen considers the arrival of four categories of birds inde-
pendent of males and females which are well known to migrate inde-
pendently. He distinguishes (1) ‘‘ vagrants’? — very early arrivals,
representing irregular winter residents from not very far southward, (2)
migrant [i. e. transient] adults, (8) resident adults, and (4) resident
immatures. The last do not arrive till the “adults” have built their
nests and consequently extend the breeding season over a considerable
space of time. These facts of migration form another argument against

. the accuracy of comparisons based upon single first-arrival dates which the
writer has emphasized elsewhere.

Dr. Allen’s conclusions are that the Redwing is independent of the
marsh so far as food is concerned, feeding mainly outside of its limits,
that it has taken to nesting in the marsh for the shelter that is afforded

1The Red-winged Blackbird: A Study in the Ecology of a Cat-tail Marsh.
By Arthur A. Allen. Abstract of Proceedings of the Linnzean Society of New York.
Nos. 24-25, 1911-13] pp. 43-128. April 15, 1914.

vou a 4 Recent Literature. ; 415
to it and its offspring. It is generalized in structure and easily adapt-
able, but has as yet shown no specialization to a marsh environment. He
thinks on this latter account that the bird may have only recently deserted
the grassland for the marsh and this view is further strengthened by
the fact that it reverts readily to nesting in the grassland and deserts
the marsh almost as soon as the young are reared. There are many
other important points in Dr. Allen’s admirable monograph which cannot
be touched upon here, but the work is well worthy of the careful perusal
of every ornithologist. ‘Twenty-two half-tone plates illustrate the habi-
tats, nests, birds, ete —W. 8.

Beebe’s Preliminary Pheasant Studies and Other Papers. — Mr.
Beebe presents in a recent paper’ some of the results of his study of the
pheasants preparatory to issuing his monograph of these beautiful birds.
The most important point brought out is the possibility of dividing the
family into apparently natural subordinate groups according to the method
of moult of the tail feathers. In the Perdicine the moult begins with the
innermost feathers, while in the Phasianinz it begins with the outermost.
In Polyplectron, Chalcurus, Argustanus and Rheinardius (Argusianinz of
Beebe) it begins with the third pair from the center, and proceeds both
ways, while in Pavo (Pavoninz) it begins with the next to the outermost.
This character forces Ithaginis and Tragopan into the Perdicinze which is
quite likely their true position.

In another recent paper? Mr. Beebe describes the development and plum-
age changes of the White Ibises basing his studies on the birds in the large
flying cage at the New York Zodlogical Park. In conjunction with Mr. L.S.
Crandall? he calls attention to the stiffness in the down feathers representing
the tail of young ducks and their persistence on the tips of the juvenal
rectrices. This condition is particularly noticeable in the Torrent Ducks
of the Andes, Merganetta. Mr. Beebe has also republished ‘ with additions
an interesting paper on the ‘ Effect of a Postponed Moult upon the Sequence
of Plumage in Certain Passerine Birds,’ which appeared in the American
Naturalist for 1908.— W. 8.

Chandler on the Feathers of Circus hudsonius.>— In this paper the
author describes in great detail the structure of the feathers of the Marsh

1 Preliminary Pheasant Studies. By C. William Beebe, Zoologica, Scientific
Contributions of the New York Zoological Society, Vol. I, No. 15, pp. 261-285.
April, 1914.

2The Ontogeny of the White Ibis. By C. William Beebe, do., No. 12, pp.
241-248. February, 1914.

8 Specialization of Tail Down in Ducks. By C. William Beebe, and Ras Se
Crandall, do., No. 13, pp. 249-252. February, 1914.

4 Effect of Postponed Moult in Certain Passerine Birds. By C. William Beebe,
do., No. 14, pp. 253-258. February, 1914.

5 Modifications and Adaptations to Function in the Feathers of Circus hud-
sonius. By Asa C. Chandler. Univ. of Cal. Publ. in Zool., Vol. 11, No. 13, pp-
329-376, pls. 16-20. March 21, 1914.

416 Recent Literature. [sul

Hawk, a bird selected for study on account of the variety of feather modifi-
cations found in its plumage. The down feathers, filoplumes and various
contour feathers are considered at length and the obvious adaptations are
commented upon, the ‘ conclusions’ are, however, a little disappointing as
we find no original results of the investigation. The paper, however, forms
a valuable summary of practically all the feather structures found in North
American birds and will be a handy reference work on a subject upon which
we have but little easily accessible information.— W. 8.

Betts’ ‘ Birds of Boulder County, Colorado.’ !— Colorado ornithol-
ogy has been receiving much attention during the past few years, but in a
state of its size there is room for many local lists, especially if prepared as
carefully and printed as attractively as the one before us.

Mr. Betts presents an annotated list of 206 species including records of
previous observers to whom due credit is given. Unusual stragglers are
printed in their proper systematic position but in italic instead of heavy-
faced type, which seems to us a desirable practice. Unfortunately the
species are not numbered consecutively, which would have helped materi-
ally to separate the paragraphs relating to the different forms, especially
where the two styles of type occur. The author adds lists of the species
breeding in the several zones while an unpaged supplementary insert gives
asummary of the Boulder County birds occurring at various times of year
contrasted with similar data for St. Louis County, Mo., taken from Mr.
Widmann’s ‘ Birds of Missouri.’ An outline map of the county with
contour lines appears in the introduction along with brief comments on life
zones.— W. 8.

Walpole-Bond’s ‘Field-Studies of Some Rarer British Birds.’ 2? —
This volume seems to contain a vast amount of original observation upon a
number of the rarer birds of England. It consists of eighteen chapters
covering the Dartford Warbler, Pied Flycatcher, Crossbill, Cirl Bunting,
Chough, Raven, Wood-Lark, ‘ Woodcock” [Short-eared] Owl, Hen
Harrier, “‘ Once Common” Buzzard, Eagles, Red Kite, Peregrines, Hobby,
Merlin, Gadwall and Black Guillemot. The information set forth will no
doubt prove a noteworthy supplement to any general work on British birds,
and will be valued accordingly, but the pleasing style in which it is presented
makes the volume interesting reading for anyone with an interest in bird
life whether he appreciate the rarity of the species and the true ornithologi-
cal value of the data or not. In this way it appeals to a much wider circle
of readers than might be supposed.— W. S.

1 Birds of Boulder County, Colorado. By Norman de Witt Betts. The Uni-
versity of Colorado Studies. Vol. X. No. 4, pp. 117-232. December, 1913.
Price, 50 cents.

2 Field Studies of Some| Rarer British Birds | By | John Walpole-Bond |
Author of | ‘‘The Birds of Bromley (Kent) and its Neighborhood”’ | ‘‘ Birds Life
in Wild Wales”’ | and part-author of | ‘‘The Book of the Open Air.’’ | Witherby &
Co. | 326 High Holborn, London | 1914. 8vo pp. i-ix + 1-305. 7s. 6d. net.

yet ee = a Recent Literature. 417

Stresemann on Early Accounts of Birds of Paradise.! — This paper
consists of a series of extracts from the earliest works on New Guinea
which contained accounts of the Paradise birds with comments by the
author. There are also reproductions of two curious Italian water colors
of the second half of the Sixteenth Century in the possession of the Tring
Museum which represent skins of Birds of Paradise.— W.S.

Wright and Allen’s Field Note-book of Birds.? — This work has the
advantage of other similar field note-books in having an outline drawing at
the top of each page upon which the colors of the various parts may be
written while the bird is under observation, producing a quicker and more
accurate result than any written description. Most pages are headed by a
typical passerine bird followed by a few pages of woodpeckers, gulls, herons,
shore-birds, ducks, and hawks. A schedule for data other than colors is
printed below the figure. There are also at the end a list of local migration
dates and a number of cross-lined pages for records of daily observations.
This seems to be an admirable, note-book for the beginner who has yet to
‘Jearn his birds” and is studying the bird in the bush rather than in the
hand.— W.S.

Bryant on the Economic Status of the Western Meadowlark.’ —
After the publication of at least five preliminary papers on this subject,
the results of the special investigation undertaken by the State of Cali-
fornia are now summarized. The present paper differs chiefly from the
bulkier of its predecessors in the larger amount of historical and philo-
sophical matter contained. More attention will be paid to this new
matter, therefore, than to that which has previously been reviewed.*

The reviewer hopes he may be pardoned for taking a more critical view
of this newer, more theoretical material, since his attitude results from no
animus, but from a desire to put things in a proper light. The chief effort
of Bryant’s thesis apparently is to maintain an aspect of originality. Yet
he like others with the same ambition, in the end depends mainly on the
tried and true. Dissatisfaction with the existing order is expressed in the
following paragraph from the preface:

1 Was wussten die Schriftsteller des XVI. Jahrhunderts von den Paradies-
vogeln? Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Ornithologie. Von Erwin Stresemann.
Novitates Zoologice. XXI. pp. 13-24, pls. 1-2. February, 1914.

2 Field Note-Book of Birds. By A. H. Wright and A. A. Allen. Dept. of
Zoology, Cornell University. Including Outlines for the Recording of Observa-
tions and Sheets for Preserving a Check-List of the Birds Seen. Ithaca, Ne
1913. Price, 50 cents; postage, 4 cents. Corner Book-Stores, Ithaca, N. me

3 Bryant, H. C., A determination of the economic status of the western
meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta) in California. Univ. of Calif. Publ. in Zodlogy,
Vol. 11, No. 14, pp. 377-510, pls. 21-24, 5 text figs. Feb. 27, 1914.

4 Auk, Vol. XXX, No. 1, Jan., 1913, pp. 132-133, No. 2, April, 1913, pp. 294—
295, No. 3, July, 1913, p. 453.

418 Recent Literature. Kis

‘“‘ Considerable difficulty has been experienced in that there has been, and
now is, a difference of opinion as to the criteria to be used in the determina-
tion of the economic status of abird. The ideas which have been advanced
in the past, and even those of the present day, appear to be unsatisfactory,
or at least untrustworthy. It seemed, therefore, that a review of past
methods, with the addition of such new ones as appeared to be valuable,
might prove not only interesting but of considerable value to future workers
in the field. A similar lack of information regarding methods of stomach
examination has been evident. A detailed account of the method used in
this investigation, therefore, seems justified.”

To say the least it is rather odd to pronounce untrustworthy, methods
which are used almost without change or improvement in one’s own work.
It is true some pretence is made in this paper of putting unusual weight on
field investigations, periodical weighing of nestlings, determination of time
of digestion, etc., but it is noticeable that the largest and most solid part
of the paper is based on stomach examination. Previous investigators
have used all of these methods, have wrestled with the same problems
and have unanimously settled upon the examination of stomachs as the most
reliable criterion to the economic value of birds. Bryant comes to the
same conclusion on the eightieth page of his paper, saying: ‘‘ It seemed best
to concentrate on the usual method of stomach examination.” (p. 456.)

We cannot believe that the ideas advanced in the past, and even those of
the present day are so very unsatisfactory, when we see how fully they are
adopted and incorporated in Bryant’s discussions. The first paragraph
in the paper is paraphrased from Biological Survey Bulletin 43, the second
paragraph from Bulletin 30, the section on history of methods in Economic
Ornithology differs little from that by Weed and Dearborn,! and that on a
comparison of methods in economic ornithology is largely extracted from a
paper? by the reviewer. The promised detailed account of the methods
of stomach examination is in reality brief, and by no means an improve-
ment on that given by Judd in Biological Survey Bulletin 15, (pp. 12-15).

Notice of originality is served in italics, on page 388, in the following
words: “ The thing that economic ornithology has not afforded us as yet
in a detailed study of the food of a particular bird in a given locality
throughout the whole year.” Evidently this is what Bryant counts upon
as the chief contribution of his paper to economic ornithology. Yet it is
precisely what John Gilmour did in 1894-5,’ for three species of birds, the
wood pigeon, rook, and starling, of which he examined 265, 355 and 190
stomachs respectively, which were collected in all months, chiefly on a
single estate in Fifeshire, Scotland.

As an economic report, the present paper is marred by the extensive
theoretical digressions, but as the previous publications of the State Game

1 Birds in their Relations to Man, 1903, pp. 17-26.
2 Auk, Vol. X XIX, No. 4, Oct., 1912, pp. 449-464.
3’ Trans. Highland and Agr. Soc. Scotland, 1896, pp. 1-93.

Mega | Recent Literature. 419
Commission and Agricultural Experiment Station, not this, are for popular
distribution, little harm is done. There is much to commend in the fresh
point of view manifest throughout the report, for instance, the computa-
tions of quantity of food consumed. One is that some 340 tons of insects
are eaten daily in the breeding season by Western Meadowlarks in the
Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys alone. On pages 461, 487-8 and else-
where Mr. Bryant points out the importance of availability of food modify-
ing choice; this is the conclusion reached by all investigators, that within its
own sphere a bird is most likely to feed on what is abundant or most easily
obtained. The remark (p. 469) that: “ If birds should become numerous
enough actually to control the number of insects, they would doubtless
become a greater pest than the insects themselves,” is eminently sane and
is worthy of the attention of those who would increase birds to the point
where they would render insecticides unnecessary.

The statement of the relative merits of parasitic insects and birds (pp.
470-471) is excellent and is here quoted:

“Tt is readily acknowledged that birds are not the only checks on the
increase of insects. The very large toll taken by them, however, places
them in the front rank as insect destroyers. Parasites can become abun-
dant only when their host becomes abundant and do their work effectively
only after the insect has had sufficient time to cause damage. Birds in
order to keep alive must wage a continual warfare on insect life, no matter
what the abundance. They are evidently therefore, to be relied upon as
more dependable regulators than parasites.”

On pages 480-487 is presented a discussion of the question: ‘‘ Do pro-
tective adaptations of insects protect them from the attacks of birds? ”’
This query is brought forcibly to the attention of everyone who examines
the stomachs of birds, and the general tendency is to answer it in the
negative. Still the problem deserves full consideration, to which Bryant’s
chapter is a valuable contribution. One point in this section emphasizes
the fact that our knowledge of a bird’s food is never final. Having even a
very large number of stomachs, we may collect one more and find in it
items of food unrepresented in any of the others. Bryant found no Cocci-
nellids in the stomachs he examined, and is inclined to take it as an indica-
tion that these beetles are ‘‘ protected.”’ Professor Beal, however, found a
Coccinellid (Hyperaspis dissoluta) in the stomach of a California Meadow-
lark and has found others in those of the eastern species. The fact that
Coccinellide are unusually abundant in California is as apparent from the
stomach contents of birds as from any other evidence, a fact which goes far
to show that these beetles pay their proportionate toll to the bird world.

In concluding, surprise must be expressed that Mr. Bryant’s report
makes no reference to Professor F. E. L. Beal’s article on ‘‘ Our Meadow
Larks in Relation to Agriculture,’! which was written in response to the
same situation that brought forth the publication here reviewed.— W. L. M.

1 Yearbook, U. 8. Dept. Agriculture, 1912, (1913), pp. 279-284.

420 Recent Literature. subs

Field Studies of the Food of Nestling Birds.— Four papers! by
students at the Iowa Lakeside Laboratory, give remarkably detailed ac-
counts of the food of the nestlings of three species of birds.

These papers are selected for discussion not because they are vastly
different from other recent articles on their subject, nor because they lack
in general merit. The flaw the reviewer would point out is perhaps due to
over-enthusiasm on the part of the observers, or perhaps to failure to
realize the difficulty of making exact identifications of insects. Neverthe-
less it is a fault, and a grievous one to publish identifications that could
not possibly have been made under the conditions.

As an example the following is quoted from paper No. 3, on the Catbird:
** Among the 55 beetles fed were recognized may-beetles, click beetles, tiger
beetles, water beetles, and snout beetles of various species. The flies were
mostly fish flies, though house and stable flies were noted.”” (pp. 179-180.)
A mosquito also is recorded. Now the positive identification of a mosquito,
and the distinguishing of the house and stable flies, two obscurely marked
species of the same family require far closer and more definite observation
than could possibly be made on specimens in process of being fed to nestling
birds. Sixty-five identifications of mosquitos are recorded in paper No. 2
(p. 55). It would be of interest to know how it was decided that these
insects were mosquitos rather than midges (Chironomide), fungus flies
(Mycetophilide) or even small crane flies (Tipulide), all of which have a
strong general similarity.

These are only instances; the food notes throughout are more definite
than could reasonably be expected. When a writer says an adult thrasher
on one visit to the nest fed 4 May-flies, on another 5, or 7, or 6, we wonder
how they could be so accurately counted. The number of ants is some-
times given; it would have been an achievement merely to have recognized
that ants were being fed. Wire-worms are often recorded, in spite of the
liability of confusion with very similar Tenebrionid larve.

Enough of illustrations however, the point is this: it should be recognized
that reporting on the food of nestling birds on the basis of field observation
is work for accomplished entomologists, not for amateur ornithologists.
Even with so experienced men on the job little would be learned in many
cases. In this connection it is proper to refer to Weed’s report on “‘ The
Feeding Habits of the Chipping Sparrow.” 2 The observations were made

11. Gabrielson, Ira N. A study of the home life of the Brown Thrasher,
_Toxostoma rufum (Linn.). Wilson Bulletin, Vol. XXIV, No. 2, June, 1912, pp.
65-94.

2. Bigglestone, Harry C. A study of the nesting behavior of the Yellow
Warbler (Dendroica estiva estiva). Wilson Bulletin, Vol. XXV, No. 2, June,
1913, pp. 49-67.

3. Gabrielson, Ira N., Nest-life of the Catbird, Dumetella carolinensis Linn.
Wilson Bulletin, Vol. XXV, No. 4, Dec. 1913, pp. 166-187.

4. A further study of the home life of the Brown Thrasher, Tozrostoma rufum:
Linn. Proc. Iowa Acad. Sci., Vol. XX, 1913, pp. 299-304.

2 Bull. 55, N. H. Agr. Exp. Sta., July, 1898, pp. 101-110.

Weta =| Recent Literature. RE

by C. M. Weed and W. F. Fiske, two competent entomologists. The
parent sparrows visited the nest about 200 times during the day they were
observed. The observers were able to decide in 38 cases that caterpillars
were brought, but a definite identification of a food item to the family was
made in only one instance, and tentative reference to a species or family
in only 10 cases. In the Brown Thrasher paper (No. 1 above), on the other
hand, only 92 identifications out of 1260 are less definite than to the order.
In other words Weed and Fiske were able +o identify to the order or better
only 49 insects brought in 200 visits (proportion 1 to 4), while the author
of Paper No. 1 so identifies 1168 invertebrates brought during 775 trips
(proportion 1.5 to 1).

Professor F. E. L. Beal has watched the feeding of the nestlings of many
species of birds and he has rarely been able to distinguish the character of
the food given; the reviewer in his more limited field has had the same ex-
perience. A great many birds feed by regurgitation and the food is at no
time visible. The reviewer has pointed out ! a good way of getting at the
general character of the food of nestlings, that is, by examination of the
excrement (it may be collected in small cloth bags tied on the birds).
What is needed above all, however, is more careful, more scientific work,
and especially more preparation for the work, and finally publication only
of absolute certainties — W. L. M.

Economic Ornithology in Recent Entomological Publications.—
Three of this year’s publications of the United States Bureau of Entomol-
ogy, contain notes on the bird enemies of insect pests. The sugar-beet wire-
worm (Limonius californicus) does great damage to sugar beets and lima
beans on the Pacific coast. It is one of the click beetles, a group preyed
upon by most insectivorous birds. A list of birds, common in the infested
fields, and which are likely to feed on the beetles is given, in a publication
on this insect 2 in addition to direct proof that the California shrike is an
important enemy. About 70 to 80 per cent of the excrement of this species
was composed of fragments of Limonius californicus.

Another wireworm, erroneously so called, in this instance however, is
said to damage the tobacco crop in Virginia at least $800,000 annually.
This “‘ wireworm”’ is the larva of a moth (Crambus calignosellus) of the
family Crambide. It is stated * that:

“Birds are a factor in keeping the tobacco Crambus in check. Two
species, the quail (Colinus virginianus) and the kingbird (Tyrannus tyran-
nus) were observed by the writer to capture the moths, and others are
known to feed freely on moths of this genus. F. M. Webster states that

1 Bull. 32, U. S. Biological Survey, 1908, pp. 23-24.

2Graf, J. E. <A preliminary report on the sugar-beet wireworm. Bull. 123,
U.S. Bur. Ent., Feb. 1914, pp. 46—47.

3 Runner, G. A. The So-called Tobacco Wireworm in Virginia. Bull. 78,
U. S. Dept. of Agriculture, May, 1914, pp. 13-14.

422 Recent Literature. [Aue

the wood pewee (Myiochanes virens) was observed to destroy large numbers
of Crambus laqueatellus at Haw Patch, Ind., and C. H. Fernald observed
barn swallows feeding on different species of Crambus in Maine. Meadow-
larks frequent weedy fields which harbor the larvee of Crambus, and as these
birds are known to feed on various species of cutworms, they doubtless
feed also on the larve of the tobacco Crambus.”’

The third insect pest, to whose bird enemies the Bureau of Entomology
draws our attention is the rose aphis (Macrosiphum rose). Mr. H. M.
Russell, the author of a bulletin on this plant louse states’ that he has
observed the California House Finch and the White-crowned Sparrow
feeding on the aphides. The latter bird almost cleared a rose bush of the
lice in ten minutes, during which time many hundreds must have been
eaten.

A Canadian publication may be briefly mentioned here for the sake of
correcting an erroneous statement relating to birds as enemies of the chinch
bug. The author, Mr. H. F. Hudson, states:? ‘“ Unlike most of our other
insect pests, which, for a time, seem to gain the mastery of a tract of
country, the chinch bug enjoys almost practical immunity from attack by
birds.”

On the contrary the chinch bug has no such immunity; we cannot expect
birds to specialize on a single species, but there is no doubt that chinch bugs
are taken in their proper proportion to the insect world at large. The fol-
lowing 17 species of birds are known to prey upon the chinch bug: Bob-
white, Prairie Chicken, Redwinged Blackbird, Catbird, Mocking-bird,
Brown Thrasher, Meadowlark, House Wren, Tree Swallow, Horned Lark,
Arkansas Kingbird, Traill’s Flycatcher, Seaside Sparrow, Savannah Spar-
row, Song Sparrow, Tree Sparrow, and Barn Swallow.— W. L. M.

Hewitt on ‘ The protection of birds in and around Ottawa.’ *—
It is a significant proof of the value of bird protection for the Entomologist
of a great country like the Dominion of Canada to lend active assistance
to the forwarding of the plan described in the present paper. At the sug-
gestion of the author, and with the coéperation of the Ottawa Field Natura-
list?s Club, two of the larger public reservations near Ottawa have been
made bird sanctuaries. They will be abundantly supplied with nest boxes
and it is hoped that a great increase in bird population will result.

Dr. Hewitt has had previous experience along this line, having success-
fully used nest boxes to attract birds to an area where their aid was needed
in combating the larch sawfly. This was near Manchester, England.
“Tn the first year (1908), 60 boxes were distributed and 31 per cent were
occupied. The number of boxes was increased yearly until in 1911 there

1 Bull. 90, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture, May, 1914, p. 10.

2 Ent. Circular No. 3, Div. of Ent., Canada Dept. of Agriculture, 1914, p. 12.

8 Hewitt, C. G. The Ottawa Naturalist, Vol. X XVII, No. 12, March, 1914,
pp. 161-171, Pls. 21-23.

ie | Recent Literature. 423
were 347 boxes of which 66 per cent were occupied... . In 1913, 75 per cent
of the boxes were occupied.”

One cannot believe that our birds are so different from those of Europe
that similar success in increasing birds may not be had in this country.
Let us at least make the attempt. Dr. Hewitt’s paper gives directions for
making a cheap form of nest box such as was used in England, and contains
a good general statement of the value of birds. The entomologists of

England and her colonies are unanimous in giving high rank to birds as
enemies of insects.— W. L. M.

Menegaux on Birds as Enemies of Mice.! — This is a collation of the
results published by Dr. A. K. Fisher, in the United States, Dr. George
Rorig in Germany, MM. M. de la Faye and G. de Dumast in France, and
by a few other authors. The economic tendencies of various rodents are
discussed, as well as methods of destroying the animals. It is asserted
that the chief cause of the steady increase of noxious rodents is the destruc-
tion of their bird, mammal and serpent enemies.

Details are given of the food of numerous species of birds of prey, espe-
cially of those common to the old and new worlds. The conclusion is
that birds are an underestimated but indispensable factor in the control of
these and other injurious animals.— W. L. M.

A note on ‘ The Effect of Extent of Distribution on Speciation.’ *
— A paper by Asa C. Chandler, with the title quoted is devoted to an
exposition of certain conceptions apparently brought forward as new.
Nothing could be more obvious, however than the main thesis of the paper,
which is, that wide-ranging orders, families and genera, as a rule contain
proportionally more families, genera and species respectively than similar
groups of more restricted distribution. I do not wish to comment further
on this over-elaboration of a fundamental concept, but desire merely to
point out a prior statement and argument of the case. Professor Dean C.
Worcester in his ‘ Notes on the distribution of Philippine birds,’’* says:
“that in the Philippines the larger the island and the greater the diversity
of its surface, the larger the percentage of genera represented by more than
one species, and the larger the average number of species into which they
are differentiated.” (p. 611.) Earlier versions of the idea undoubtedly
can be found.— W. L. M.

Henshaw’s ‘ Birds of Town and Country.’ ‘— In 1913 the Biological
Survey of the U. S. Department of Agriculture under the direction of the

1 Menegaux, A., Les Oiseaux ennemis naturels des souris et des campagnols,
Rev. Sci. 52, No. 19, May 9, 1914, pp. 586-593.

2 Am. Nat., Vol. 48, March, 1914, p. 129-160.

3 Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus., Vol. 20, pp. 567-625, 1898.

4 Birds of Town and Country. By Henry W. Henshaw. National Geo-
graphic Magazine. May, 1914. pp. 494-531.

424 Recent Literature. hue

chief, Mr. Henry W. Henshaw, issued a pamphlet containing colored pic-
tures from paintings by Louis Agassiz Fuertes of fifty of the common birds
of the United States. The supply was almost immediately exhausted and
in order to extend the educational influence of the pamphlet the National
Geographic Magazine republished it in the issue for June, 1913. The
same journal now presents 64 additional colored pictures, also reproduced
from Fuertes’ paintings illustrating practically all of our familiar birds not
included in the earlier publication. The text which accompanies them is
again by Mr. Henshaw. The educational value of these publications is
enormous and the National Geographic Magazine is to be congratulated
upon the good work that it has fostered in making familiar to thousands of
people the common wild birds of our country. We understand that a
limited number of copies of these two articles as well as some other orni-
thological papers are to be bound and offered for sale by the publishers of
the journal.— W. S.

The Ornithological Journals.!

Bird-Lore. Vol. XVI. No.2. March-April, 1914.

The Electric Current in Bird Photography. By Guy A. Bailey.—
Telescopes and electric push bottons, in a window of the house, control
cameras mounted at feeding stations 100 to 800 ft. distant. Striking
photographs taken by the author’s unique methods are shown.

The Song of the Philadelphia Vireo. By Mrs. E. F. Miller.

Impressions of the Voices of Tropical Birds. By Louis Agassiz Fuertes,
— The third installment of this valuable contribution deals with Orioles,
Flycatchers, Finches and Thrushes, while the fourth in the May-June
issue takes up the Ant Thrushes and Woodhewers, birds peculiar to tropical
America, and of whose habits we know very little. Both Mr. Fuertes’
drawings and descriptions of these species are particularly interesting and
instructive.

Some Ways of the Oregon Towhee. By Mrs. Stephen E. Thayer.

North American Sparrows— The Purple Finches — Migration by
W. W. Cooke, plumages by F. M. Chapman and color plate by L. A.
Fuertes.

Educational Leaflet No. 73 treats of the Whip-poor-will.

Bird-Lore. Vol. XVI. No.3. May-June, 1914.

The Nighthawk in Connecticut. By L. F. Hall and W. I. Smith.

Migration of N. A. Sparrows.— Genera Peucea and Amiophila. Color
plate by Fuertes.

A Coéperative Study of Bird Migration — A call for records of arrival
of the Red-wing Blackbird, Robin and Phcebe brought 57 returns which
have been carefully tabulated by Mr. Chas. H. Rogers.

The names of the editor and publisher of each journal will be found in the
January number of ‘The Auk.’

Learn meal Recent Literature. 435

The educational leaflet is by Frank M. Chapman and deals with the
Roseate Spoonbill, Bruce Horsfall supplying the color plate, while the
Audubon Society department is particularly full and interesting.

The Condor. Vol. XVI. No. 2. March-April, 1914.

History of a Pair of Pacific Horned Owls. By J. B. Dixon.— Fully
illustrated.

Destruction of Birds in California by Fumigation of Trees. By A. B.
Howell.— Orange trees are treated at night with hydrocyanic acid gas to
kill the black scale. Under 200 fumigated trees 92 dead birds were found
the next morning. This would mean 360,000 dead birds per year in the
state, which the author considers slightly in excess of the actual number
sacrificed. A little care in dislodging roosting birds would prevent the
slaughter.

Some Discoveries in the Forest at Fyffe. By Milton 8. Ray.— Interest-
ing photographs of young Saw-whet Owls.

Birds of Sitka and Vicinity, Southeastern Alaska. By George Willett.—
Annotated list of 152 species.

The Condor. Vol. XVI. No.3. May-June, 1914.

The Cooper Club Member and Scientific Work. By Harold C. Bryant.—
An interesting commentary on the work of the club with the prophesy that
future work will be largely along experimental lines in investigation of
behavior with continued economic investigation and much less collecting.

Bird Notes from Netarts Bay, Oregon. By Stanley G. Jewett.

A Sadly Neglected Matter. By Alan Brooks.— Recording of the colors
of soft parts of birds.

Nesting of the Kittlitz Murrelet. By John E. Thayer.

A Change in Fauna. By Fayre Kenagy — At Boulder, Colo.

The Races of Branta canadensis. By Alan Brooks.

The Birds of Teton and Northern Lewis and Clark Counties, Montana.
By A. A. Saunders. Annotated list of 182 species.

The Wilson Bulletin. Vol. XXVI. No.1. March, 1914.

An Intimate Acquaintance with Woodcocks. By Gerald A. Abbott.—
An interesting Study of habits with excellent illustrations from photographs.

Pied-billed Grebe Notes. By Ira N. Gabrielson.— Parent covering eggs
and feigning injury.

The Roll of the Log-cock or Pileated Woodpecker. By E. W. Vickers.

Winter Conditions in Northern Ohio, Winter of 1913-14. By Lynds Jones.

The Effect on the Birds in the opening of the Park and the Building of the
Reservoirs in the Vicinity of Youngstown, Ohio. By George L. Fordyce.—
Greatly increased in number.

A Brief History of the Wilson Ornithological Club. By Lynds Jones.

Die Végel— Handbuch der Systematischen Ornithologie. Critique by
W. F. Henninger.

The Odlogist. Vol. XXXI. No.3. March 15, 1914.

Possible Nesting of Bachman’s Sparrow in Southern [z. e. S. W.] Penn-
sylvania. By S. 8. Dickey.— Birds not positively identified.

Eggs of the Black Swift. By John E. Thayer.

426 Recent Literature. ete

A Flight of Pine Grosbeaks [in N. W. Pennsylvania]. By R. B. Simpson.

The Ibis. X Series. Vol. II. No.2. April, 1914.

Some Notes on the Habits and Distribution of Paradozornis heudet
David. By Capt. Hubert Lynes.— An interesting account of this curious
denizen of the ‘‘ reed-forests’’ of the Yangtze Kiang, China. Mr. Pycraft
is engaged in studying the relationship of the genus from spirit specimens
secured by Capt. Lynes.

Notes on Birds observed in the Bermuda Islands during the Winter of
1912-1913. By John N. Kennedy.— Annotated list of 23 species among
which is Numenius borealis, one specimen observed January 20, 1913.

Notes on a Collection of Birds from Sierra Leone. By Major H. J.
Kelsall.— An extensive annotated list.

An Ornithological Expedition to the Eastern Canary Islands, II]. By
David A. Bannerman.— A very fully annotated list and discussion of the
relationship of the peculiar subspecies.

Description of a strange New Zealand Wood-Hen. By Gregory M.
Mathews and Tom Iredale.— Gallirallus townsoni sp. nov. (p. 293), West-
port, S. Island, with colored plate.

The Moults and Plumages of the Common Moorhen. By C. H. B.
Grant.— This Rail moults all the primaries at oncé as do the ducks and coot.

Remarks on the Geographical Distribution of the Chiff-chaff and Willow
Warbler. By Capt. H. Lynes. :

Size in the Avian Order Tubinares. By J. T. Nichols — Great range in
size thought to be due to intra-ordinal competition.

A Flock of Tubinares. By Robt. C. Murphy.— Nine species seen in one
photograph.

Obituaries of Major Barrett Hamilton and Dr. Giinther.

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. CXCV. February
27, 1914.

Dr. Ticehurst discussed the several races of the Dunlin and their rela-
tionship and the difference between females of the Common and Barrow’s
Golden-eye.

Mr. Rothschild and Dr. Hartert described the following new birds from
the Admiralty Islands, north of German New Guinea. Ninox meeki
(p. 105), Ceyx dispar, Pitta superba (p. 106), Micropsitta meeki, Graucalus
papuensis ingens (p. 107), Edolisoma amboinense admiralitatis, Zosterops
admiralitatis (p. 108), Rhipidura setosa niveiventris (p. 109) and from Rook
_ Island west of New Britain Hdolisoma a. rooki (p. 107).

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. CXCVI. March 31,
1914.

Account of the annual dinner of the Club and the B. O. U. with descrip-
tions of the lantern slide exhibitions.

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. No. CXCVII.
April, 18, 1914.

Mr. E. C. Stuart Baker describes as new Pomatorhinus haringtoni (p.
124) from Darjeeling, India, and exhibited a chick of the very rare Eared
Pheasant (Crossoptilon harmani).

a ea Recent Literature. 427

Mr. Ogilvie Grant exhibited an abnormally marked Widgeon (Mareca
penelope) and discussed the plumage of this and M. americana.

British Birds. Vol. VII. No.10. March 2, 1914.

The Courtship of the Common Gull [Larus c. canus]. By Maud D.
Haviland.

Notes on the Birds of Wiltshire. By G. B. Hony.

Summary of records of Waxwings during the incursion of last winter
(1913-14).

British Birds. Vol. VII. No. 11. April 1, 1914.

A Student of Gulls.— Review of ‘Life and Natural History Notes of
Ewen Kennedy,’ with plates from paintings and photographs of the Greater
and Lesser Black-backed Gulls.

On the Crossing of the Bill of the Crossbill. By Miller Christy.— There
seem to be as many, “‘ dextral’’ as “sinistral”’ bills but much variation in
the extent of the crossing. The crossing is confined to the horny sheaths
alone, the bony structure showing no sign of torsion.

British Birds. Vol. VII. No.12. May 1, 1914.

Snipe and Redshank nesting in Sussex. By Col. H. W. Feilden.

Recovery of Marked Birds.

The Avicultural Magazine. Vol. V. No.5. March, 1914.

Green-winged Doves. By Miss R. Alderson— With color plate of
Chalcophaps chrysochlora.

Notes on some Conures of the Euops group. By Hon. W. Rothschild —
A new form from unknown locality sold alive as ‘‘ C. gundlachi.”

Notes on Tame Serpent Eagles, Spilornis cheela. By E. C. Stuart
Baker.

Aviculture at the Amsterdam Zoological Gardens. By Graham Renshaw.

The Avicultural Magazine. Vol. V. No. 6. April, 1914.

Egg-laying and Nesting Experiences. By Dr. A. G. Butler.

Aviculture in Paraguay. By Lord Brabourne.— An interesting account
of some of the birds of this section of South America.

The Reed Warbler, Acrocephalus streperus. By H. D. Astley — With
excellent photographs of birds and nest.

The Avicultural Magazine. Vol. V. No.7. May, 1914.

Some Hints on Parrot-keeping. By The Marquis of Tavistock.

Bird Notes. Vol. V. No. 3. March, 1914.

Some Punjab River Birds. By H. Whistler.

The Birds of Buena Vista Lake, Southern California. By Wm. 8.
Baily (concluded from February number).— California ornithologists will
find some startling records in this paper, such as Black-winged Stilt (Himan-
topus candidus) and Black-headed Gulls identical with those of England,
etc.!

Birds of the Jhelum District. By H. Whistler (continued in April
number).

The Emu. Vol. XIII. Part 4. April, 1914.

Field Notes on the Spotless Crake (Porzana immaculata). By Miss J. A.
Fletcher.— Illustrated.

428 Recent Literature. [ he

Notes on the Spotless Crake and Western Ground Parrot. By F.
Lawson Whitlock.— Illustrated.

Birds of the Brunnette Downs. By H. G. Barnard.— Annotated list
of 88 species. Trinomial names are admitted in this list but the subspecific
designation is included in parentheses!

Search for Eggs of Colluricincla Woodwardi. By H. G. Barnard.

A Visit to the Gosford Scrubs. By S. W. Jackson.— Notes on 62 species.

Owlet-Nightjar Nestlings. By Harry Burrell.— Photograph of nest in
hollow tree.

The South Australian Ornithologist. Vol.I. Part 2. April, 1914.

Melithreptes gularis loftyi— Southern Black-chinned Honey-eater. By
S. A. White.

Field Notes on Three Species of Malurus (Blue Wrens). By A. A.
Morgan.

Notes on the Southern Black-headed Minah (Myzantha melanocephala
whiter. By F. R. Zeitz.

Additions to “A List of the Birds of Australia.” By Gregory M.
Mathews.— Mr. Mathews’ trip to Australia has already yielded four new
birds, one of which constitutes a new genus, all from North Queensland:
the first from the Pascoe the others from Claudie River. Tyto galei, and
Magillivrayornis (gen. nov.) claudi (p. 12); Agintha temporalis mac-
gillivrayit and Neochmia pheton albiventer (p. 13). 4

Some Birds Occurring at the Reedbeds, on the Adelaide Plains, this
Summer. By S. A. White.

Note on Platycercus hematogaster (Gould). By Gregory M. Mathews.—
This name seems to have been published first in the second part of Gould’s
“ Birds of Australia and Adjacent Islands ” and here applies to the yellow-
vented bird. It must therefore be adopted for that species while Northiella
h. zanda (p. 16), is proposed for hematogaster auct (nec Gould).

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 22. No. 3. March, 1914.

New Species of Birds from Amazonia. By E. Snethlage.

Picumnis buffoni amazonicus (p. 39), St. Antonio da Cachoeira on the
Rio Jary; Conopophaga snethlage pallida (p. 39), Cametd on the Tocantin;
Dysithamnus ardesiacus obidensis (p. 40), Thamnomanes purusianus
(p. 40), Porto Alegre on the Rio Purus; Myrmotherula theringi (p. 41),
Boim on the Tapajoz; Hypocnemis poecilonota nigrigula (p. 42), Boim;
Conopias trivirgata berlepschi (p. 42), Faro on the Jamunda; Pachysylvia
rubrifrons lutescens (p. 43), Boim and Pachysylvia inornata (p. 43), Cameta.

On the Call-notes, Song, Mating Flight, ete. of certain East African Birds.
By L. Schuster.

Three new Iberian forms. By E. P. Tratz.— Parus ceruleus harterti
(p. 49), Leixoes; P. cristatus weigoldi (p. 50), Favaios; Prunella modularis
obscura (p. 50), Oporto.

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 22. No. 4. April, 1914.

Remarks on two new Forms of Linnet from Russian Turkestan. By
N. Sarudny and M. Hirms.— Linota brevirostris korejevi and L. b. pameren-
sis (p. 53).

vo 1 Recent Literature. 429

On Forms of Reed-Tits (Remiza macronyz). By N. Sarudny.— R. m.
loudoni subsp. nov. (p. 58), Lenkoram and River Kumbaschi.

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 22. No. 5. May, 1914.

A New Form of Woodpecker. Dryobates minor transitivus subsp. nov.
By H. Baron Loudon — From Lesden in Livland, where it is a winter visi-
tant (p. 79).

Acanthis hornemanni exilipes and A. linaria holbelli in West Prussia.
By L. Dobbrick.

Journal fiir Ornithologie. Vol.62. No.2. April, 1914.

The Phylogeny of the Turdide. By Dr. J. Gengler.

The Avifauna of the Southeastern Part of the State of South Australia.
By E. Eylmann (concluded).

Contribution to the Migration of Sea Birds. By R. Pessler.

Our Knowledge of the Descent of Birds. By O. Haase.— From G. Heil-
mann’s paper in ‘ Dansk Ornith. Forenings Tidsskrift.’

Ornithologische Monatsschrift. Vol. 39. No.2. February, 1914.

How does the Bird find its way. By E. Giinther.

Leaves of an Ornithological Journal in Corsica. By Dr. H. Boker.

The Bird of Prey and the Bird-world. By O. Uttendorfer—— Discussion
of 2089 cases of birds killed by Hawks, ete.

Ornithologische Monatsschrift. Vol.39. No.3. March, 1914.

Annual Report of the Society for Bird Protection.

Bird Protection and Health Problems. By Dr. H. Helfer.

Color plates of two Birds of Paradise, Paradisea guililmi-secundi and
Ptilhoris albertt.

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. Vol. VI. No. 59. March 7,
1914.

Notes on Birds Observed and Collected in Algeria (continued). By
Count Zedlitz.— Concluded in the May number, 145 species listed.

A Visit to the Ornithological Exposition at Liege. By C. Marcot.

The First Capture in France of Ross’ Gull (Rhodostethia rosea). By
M. E. Seguin-Jard.—— Adult male secured December 22, 1913, at ‘ Pointe
de la Roche,’ coast of Vendée, France.

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. Vol. VI. No. 60. April 7, 1914.

List of Birds obtained or Observed at Dahomey. By Dr. G. Bouet.

Song Birds of the Environs of Vendome (continued). By E. Coursi-
mault.— Musical notations.

Revue Frangaise de Ornithologie. Vol. 6. No. 61. May 7, 1914.

The Age of the Quail. By M. d’Aubusson — Discussion of some points
of Dr. L. Bureau’s paper.

Variations in the Plumage of Melizophilus provincialis. By Dr. Deleuil.

Ardea. Vol. III. No.1. March, 1914.

Migration of Birds in Holland in 1913. By Dr. H. Ekama.

The King Penguins in the Zodlogical Garden at Rotterdam. By Te
Biittikofer — With plate.

The Blue-throats of Holland. By Dr. E. D. Van Oort.

430 Recent Literature. Gon

Studies of Bird Song from a new Point of View. By H. Stadler and
C. Schmitt. (In German.)
Messager Ornithologique. Vol. 3. No.3. 1912.
Remarks on the Ornithology of Turkestan (continued). By N. A.
Sarudny.
List of Birds of the Kjelzer Government. By E. I. Katin.
New Facts on the Geographic Distribution of Birds in Russian Altai and
Abakan.
Cecropsis rufula ferghanensis subsp. nov. By 8S. A. Buturlin (p. 242).
Remarks on Phenicurus semenowi. By N. A. Sarudny.
Winter Migration of Loxia bifasciatain 1911. By B. Ottow.
On the Flight of Birds Against the Wind. ByS. A. Buturlin.
An Ornithological Expedition to Lakes Saissan-noir and Marka-Kul.
W.Siberia. By G. I. Poljakow (continued in Vol. 4, No. 3).
Messager Ornithologique. Vol. 3. No. 4. 1912.
The Summer Bird Fauna of the Delta of Amudarja. By L. A. Molts-
chanow.
Notes on the Ornithology of the Tomsk Government. By H. Johansen.
On Some Birds of the Minsk Government. By A. W. Feduschin.
Cygnus bewicki and Grus leucogeranus in Winterquaters in east Trans-
cancasus. By A. N. Karamsin.
Notes on the Bluethroats (Cyanecula) in Turkestan. By N. A. Sarudny.
Messager Ornithologique. Vol. 4. No. 3. 1913.
Notes on the Ornithology of Turkestan (continued). By N. A. Sarudny.
On Anser albifrons. By N. H. Smirnow.
A White Scoter (Oidemia fusca). By W.E. Uschakow.
On the Molt of Tinnunculus tinnunculus. By W. A. Hachlow.
Short Remarks on a New Form of Rosy Finch, Carpodacus rhodochlamys
kotschubeti. By N. A. Sarudny (p. 165).
Messager Ornithologique. Vol. 4. No.4. 1913.
Notes on the Ornithology of Turkestan (continued). By N. A. Sarudny.
The Biology of the Dipper (Cinclus melanogaster). By S. G. Stecher.—
With half-tone illustrations.
Notes on Some Caucassian Birds. By E. W. Scharleman.
On the Distribution of the Marsh Tits in European Russia. By P. P.
Suschkin.
My Error in Regard to the Forms of Black-headed Goldfinch and a
Correction. By N. A. Sarudny.
_ Remarks on a New Warbler from Turkestan (Phylloscopus collybita
subsindianus subsp. nov.). By N. A. Sarudny (p. 269).

Ornithological Publications in Other Journals.

Stanwood, Cordelia J. The Brown Creeper at Home. (Bluebird,
Vol. VI, No. 5, February, 1914.)

Hyer, E. A. Grinnell’s Water Thrush in Charleston, S. C. (Bull.
Charleston Mus., Vol. X, No. 3, March, 1914.)

ve | Recent Literature. 431

Chisolm, C. Winter Record for Anhingain §. Carolina. (do., Vol. X,
No. 5, May, 1914.)

Miller, W. DeW. Importation of Birds. (Amer. Mus. Journal, Vol.
XIV, No. 2, February, 1914.) — At port of New York.

Baynes, E. H. What One Village is Doing for the Birds. (Amer.
Mus. Journal, Vol. XIV, No. 4, April, 1914.) — Meriden, N. H.

Clarke, Wm. Eagle. On Some Migratory Birds Observed at Fair Isle
during the Spring and Autumn of 1913. (The Scottish Naturalist, No. 27,
March, 1914.)

Brock, 8.E. The Display of the Mallard in Relation to Pairing. (The
Scottish Naturalist, No. 28, April, 1914.)

Baxter, Evelyn V. and Rintoul, Leonora, J. Bird Notes from the Isle
of May in 1913. (The Scottish Naturalist, No. 29, May, 1914.)

Panton, H. Relationships of Species (continued). (The Zoologist,
No. 873, March 15, 1914.)

Gurney, J. H. Ornithological Report for Norfolk, 1913. (The Zool-
ogist, No. 875, May 15, 1914).

Grinnell, Joseph. Barriers to Distribution as Regards Birds and Mam-
mals. (American Nat., XLVIIJI, April, 1914.)

Clark, Austin H. A New Race of the Mandarin Duck from Southern
Japan. (Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, XX VII, May 11, 1914.)— Aix
galericulata brunnescens (p. 87) from Island of Kiusiu.

Riley, J. H. Noteon Anas cristata Gmelin. (do., May, 1914.)— New
genus Lophonetta (p. 100) proposed for it.

Oberholser, H. C. Poecetes gramineus confinis in Louisiana. (do.,
May, 1914.)

Grinnell, Joseph. A New Red-winged Blackbird from the Great Basin.
(do., May, 1914.)— Agelaius pheniceus nevadensis (p. 107), from Quinn
River Crossing, Humboldt Co., Nevada.

Butler, Jefferson. Notes on the Mortality of the Young of Wild Birds.
Under Natural Nesting Conditions and Under Artificial or Protected
States. (15th Ann. Rept. Michigan Acad. Sci., 1913.) — Data show great.
mortality in nesting under natural conditions and apparently a great
saving by the installation of nest boxes.

Cotton, J. D. The Birds of Northamptonshire and Neighborhood.
(Journ. Northants Nat. Hist. Soc. and Field Club, XVII, No. 133, 1913.)

Pellett, F.C. Nest Boxes for Woodpeckers. (Proc. Iowa Acad. Sci.,
XX, 1913.)

Berninghansen, F. Helpful and Harmful Iowa Birds. (do.)

Gabrielson, Ira N. A Further Study of the Home Life of the Brown
Thrasher, Tozxostoma rufum Linn. (do.)

Brother Alphonsus. Migration of Our Birds in the Spring of 1913.
(Amer. Midland Nat., III, 1914.) — At Notre Dame, Indiana.

Seligmann, C. G. and Shattuck, S.G. Observations made to ascertain
whether any Relation subsists between the Seasonal Assumption of the
“ Eclipse ”’ Plumage in the Mallard (Anas boschas) and the function of the

432 Recent Literature. [ an

Testicle. (Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1914, pt. 1.) — Testes spermatogenic
only i in winter and early spring but the change from activity to inactivity
does not correspond in time to plumage change. Eclipse occurs in castrated
bird, but absolute permanent castration is difficult.

js Coburn, C. A. The Behavior of the Crow, Corvus americanus Aud.
(Jour. Aniaml Behavior, IV, No.3. 1914.)

Rennie, John. Egg Coloration in the Cuckoo Cuculus canorus and its
bearing upon the theory of Cuckoo Subspecies. (Proc. Royal Phys. Soc.
Edinburgh, XIX, No. 5, 1914.) — A Study of 300 Cuckoo eggs with
nests and sets in which they occurred shows that while a certain Cuckoo
appears to have a preference for a certain vicinity its preference for a cer-
tain species seems to be only in proportion to the abundance of that species.

Van Oort, E. D. Bird-marking in the Netherlands. III. Recovery of
Marked Birds. (Notes from the Leyden Mus., XXXV, pp. 209-223,
1914.)

Kroulikovsky, L. On the Birds of the Southern District of the Vialka
Government. (Bull. Soc. Ouralienne des Amis des Sci. Nat., XXII, livr.
2, pp. 1-48, 1913.) — Annotated list of 187 species. (In French and Rus-
sian.)

Banjkovski, V. B. Systematic Arrangement of the Russian Represen-
tatives of the Genus Scops. Sav. (Mitth. Kaukas. Museum. VII, lief 2.
pp. 142-162, 1913.) — Text in Russian, resumé in German. :

Schouteden, H. List of Birds obtained at Kiloby Mr. Thelie. (Revue
Zool. Afric., III, fase. 2, pp. 260-272.) — Annotated list of 116 species
from the Congo region west of Lake Albert. The following are described
as new; Campephaga Theliei (p. 266), Chlorophoneus melaniprosopus
ituriensis (p. 267) and C. multicolor Theliei (p. 268), all from Kilo.

Precigon, A. Ornithology of Upper Vienna. (La Revue Scient du
Limousin, XXII, pp. 137-138, 1914).

Hussey, Tacitus. When Passenger Pigeons Were Plenty. (Forest and
Stream, March 14, 1914.)

Anonymus. Some New Facts About Hider Ducks. (do., March 21,
1914.)

Guelf, F.G. Birdsin Lake Ontario Region. (do., May 2, 1914.)

Griscom, Ludlow. An Interesting Ornithological Winter Around New
York City. (Abstract Proc. Linnzan Society, N. Y., Nos. 24-25, April
15, 1914.) — An annotated list of 97 species observed by members of the
Society, during the winter of 1912-13.

Publications Received.— Allen, Arthur A. The Red-winged Black-
bird: A Study in the Ecology of a Cat-tail Marsh. (Abst. Proc. Linn.
Soc. N. Y., Nos. 24-25, 1911-18, pp. 43-128, pll. 1-22.)

Bangs, Outram. (1) An Unnamed Race of the Carolina Paroquet.
(Proc. N. E. Zodl. Club, IV, pp. 93-94, November 26, 1913.) (2) The
Geographic Races of the Scaled Quail. (do., pp. 99-100, March 9, 1914.)
(3) A New Magpie-Jay from Western Costa Rica. (do. pp. 101-102,
March 13, 1914.)

Vor al Recent Literature. 433

Bangs, Outram and Phillips, John C. Notes on a Collection of Birds
from Yunnan. (Bull. Mus. Comp. Zoél. LVIII, No. 6, pp. 267-302, April,
1914.)

Bannerman, David A. An Ornithological Expedition to the Eastern
Canary Islands — Part II. (Ibis, April, 1914, pp. 228-293.)

Beebe, C. William. (1) The Ontogeny of the White Ibis (Zoologica,
Scient. Contrib. N. Y. Zool. Soc., Vol. 1, No. 12, Feb. 1914, pp. 241-248).
(2) Effect of Postponed Moult in Certain Passerine Birds (do., No. 14,
Feb. 1914, pp. 253-258.) (3) Preliminary Pheasant Studies. (do., No.
15, April, 1914, pp. 261-285.)

Beebe, C. William, and Crandall, L. S. Specialization of Tail Down in
Ducks. (do., No. 13, February, 1914, pp. 249-252.)

Betts, Norman DeWitt. Birds of Boulder County, Colorado. (Univ.
of Colo. Studies, X, No. 4, December, 1913, pp. 177-232.) Price, 50 cts.

Bond, John Walpole. Field Studies of Some Rarer British Birds. 8vo.
pp. I-ix + 1-305. London, Witherby & Co. 1914. 7s. 6d. net.

Bryant, Harold Child. A Determination of the Economic Status of the
Western Meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta) in California. (Univ. of Cal.
Publ. in Zool., 11, No. 14, pp. 8377-510, pll. 21-24, 5 text figs. February
27, 1914.

Chandler, Asa C. Modifications and Adaptations to Function in the
Feathers of Circus hudsonius. (Univ. of Cal. Publ. in Zool., 11, No. 13,
pp. 329-376, pls. 16-20. March 21, 1914.)

Chapman, F. M. (1) Diagnosis of apparently new Colombian Birds,
II. (Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., XXXIII, Art. XII, pp. 167-192,
March 19, 1914.) (2) Descriptions of a new Genus and Species of Birds
from Venezuela. (do., Art. XIII, pp. 1938-197, March 19, 1914.) (38)
Descriptions of New Birds from Ecuador. (do., Art. XXIII, pp. 317-322.
May 22, 1914.)

Gabrielson, Ira N. (1) A Further Study of the Home Life of the
Brown Thrasher — Toxostoma rufum Linn. (Proc. Iowa Acad. Sci. 1913,
pp. 299-304. (2) Nest Life of the Catbird — Dumetella carolinensis Linn.
(Wilson Bull., December, 1913, pp. 166-187.)

Grinnell, Joseph. An Account of the Mammals and Birds of the
Lower Colorado Valley, with Especial Reference to the Distributional
Problems Presented. (Univ. of Cal. Publ. in Zool., 12, No. 4, pp. 51-294,
pll. 3-13, 9 text figs. March 20, 1914.)

Gross, Alfred O. Observations on the Yellow-billed Tropic-Bird
(Phaéthon americanus Grant) at the Bermuda Islands. (Auk, XXIX,
No. 1, January, 1912, pp. 49-71, pls. III-XI — now issued under separate
cover as Contrib. from the Bermuda Biol. Station for Research.)

Mathews, Gregory M. The Birds of Australia. Vol. III, Part 5. 4°.
pp. 381-444, pll. 178-189. London, Witherby & Co. March 26, 1914.

Oberholser, Harry C. A Monograph of the Genus Chordeiles Swainson,
Type of a New Family of Goatsuckers. (Bull. 86, U. S. Nat. Mus., pp.
i-vi + 1-123, pll. 1-6. April 6, 1914.)

434 Recent Literature. ae

Ridgway, Robert. The Birds of North and Middle America. Part VI,
(Bull. 50, U. S. Nat. Mus.) 8vo., pp. i-xx + 1-882, pll. I-XXXVI.
April 8, 1914.

Shufeldt, Robert W. (1) A Time with the Owls. (Wilson Bull.
March, 1914, pp. 6-12.) (2) The Laboratory of Comparative Pathology
of the Zoological Society of Philadelphia. (Pop. Sci. Monthly, May, 1914,
pp. 507-513.) (3) Saw-Whets and Pygmy Owls. (Guide to Nature,
March, 1914, pp. 323-325.) (4) Care and Exhibition of Animals in Zoé-
logical Gardens. (do., June, 1914, pp. 13-15.) (5) With Note-book and
Camera in the National Zoélogical Garden at Washington. (Photographic
Times, April, 1914, pp. 125-132. (6) The Biggest Bird that ever Lived.
(Scientific American, March 21, 1914, pp. 248-249.)

Stanwood, Cordelia J. The Brown Creeper at Home. (Bluebird,
February, 1914, pp. 115-123.)

Stresemann, Erwin. (1) Was Wussten die Schriftsteller Des XVI.
Jahrhunderts von den Paradiesvogeln? Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der
Ornithologie. (Nov. Zool., XXI, pp. 13-24, pll. I-II. February, 1914.)
(2) Die Vogel von Seran (Ceram). (Nov. Zool., X XI, pp. 25-153, pll. 3-5.)

Thayer, John E. and Bangs, Outram. Notes on the Birds and Mam-
mals of the Arctic Coast of East Siberia— Birds. (Proc. N. E. Zodl. Club,
V, pp. 1-48. April 9, 1914.)

Wright, A. H. and Allen, A. A. Field Note-book of Birds, Ithaca, N. Y.
1913. Price, 50 cts., postage, 4 cts.

Abstract Proc. Tian Society N. Y., Nos. 24-25, 1911-1913, heed
15, 1914.

Abstract Proc. Zool. Soc. London, Nos. 128-133, February 17—May 5,
1914.

American Museum Journal, The, XIV, Nos. 2-4, February—April, 1914.

Ardea, III, No. 1, March, 1914.

Avicultural Magazine, (3), V, Nos. 5-8, March—June, 1914.

Bird-Lore, XVI, Nos. 2 and 3, March-April and May-June, 1914.

Blue-Bird, VI, No. 7, April, 1914.

British Birds, VII, Nos. 10, 11, 12, VIII, No. 1, March—June, 1914.

Bulletin British Orn. Club, Nos. CKCV-CXCVIII, February 27, March
31, April 18 and May 28, 1914.

Bulletin Charleston Museum, X, Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5, February—-May,
1914.

Condor, The, XVI, Nos. 2 and 3, March-April, and May-June, 1914.

Current Items of Interest (Prepared by Henry Oldys; published by the
Audubon Society, Dist. of Columbia). Nos. 18, 19, 20, 21, July, 1913-
April, 1914.

Die Schwalbe. Berichte des Komitees of Ornith. Beobacht. Sta. in
Oesterreich. III, 1902-1913.

Emu, The. XIII, Part 4. April, 1914.

Forest and Stream, LX XXII, Nos. 13-24, 1914.

Ibis, The, (10), II, No. 2, April, 1914.

a | Notes and News. 435

Messager Ornithologique, III, Nos. 3 and 4, 1912, IV, Nos. 3 and 4, 1913.

Odlogist, The, XX XI, Nos. 320 to 323, March—June, 1914.

Oregon Sportsman, The, II, Nos. 4 and 5, April-May, 1914.

Ornithologische Monatsschrift, 38, Nos. 2,3 and 4. February—April,
1914.

Ottawa Naturalist, The, XX VII, Nos. 11 and 12, February and March,
1914.

Philippine Journal of Science, The, VIII, Sec. D., No. 5, October, 1913.

Proceedings Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, LXVI, Pt. 1. January—
March, 1914.

Revue Frangaise d’Ornithologie, VI, Nos. 59, 60 and 61, March—-May,
1914.

Science, N.S., XX XIX, Nos. 1104-1016.

Scottish Naturalist, The, 1914, Nos. 27 to 30, March—June, 1914.

South Australian Ornithologist, The, I, Part 2, April, 1914.

Wilson, Bulletin, The, XX VI, No.1. March, 1914.

Zoologist, The, (4) XVIII, Nos. 207, 208 and 209, March—May, 1914.

NOTES AND NEWS.

Tue British Ornithologists’ Union has lost two prominent members
during the present year, although both gained their reputations in other
fields than ornithology.

Albert Charles Ludwig Gotthelf Giinther known the world over as a
leader in the science of ichthyology and for twenty years (1875-1895)
keeper of Zoology in the British Museum died on February 1, 1914 in his
eighty-fourth year. Dr. Giinther was born in Wiirttemberg, October 30,
1830, but early in life came to England and became associated with the
Museum. While his actual contributions to ornithological literature were
few, it was through his initiative and support that the ‘Catalogue of Birds’
was published and that alone deserves the thanks of every systematic orni-
thologist. He also originated the Zoological Record and personally edited
the first six volumes.

Gerald Edwin Hamilton Barrett-Hamilton, widely known as an author-
ity on mammals although author of ornithological papers as well, died
on January 17, 1914, on South Georgia Island in the Antarctic, where he
had gone as leader of a British government expedition to investigate the
whale and seal fisheries of the island. He was born in England, May 18,
1871, and his loss while still in the prime of life is a sad blow to the study
to which he was devoted.

436 Notes and News. nes

In the April number of the American Museum Journal there is published
a letter from Colonel Theodore Roosevelt relative to his recent South Ameri-
can expedition. He makes a suggestion that the naturalists who accom-
panied him be permitted to report on the collections that they made and
incidentally touches upon a matter that has no doubt confronted many
persons who have had to deal with the literature of natural history and
which we think demands the serious attention not only of authors but of
institutions which are responsible for the fitting out of expeditions and the
publication of their results.

Colonel Roosevelt says: ‘‘I want to see their work preserved in a volume
and not ina collection of pamphlets. Pamphlets, even scientific pamphlets,
are almost as ephemeral as newspapers,”’ and he adds in regard to Hud-
son’s ‘Argentine Ornithology,’ ‘It has been of the utmost value to us,....
whereas none of us know of the very existence of the multitude of little
pamphlets on Argentine ornithology that were published about the time
this work was published. Really the only use that pamphlets serve are
as bricks out of which some permanent structure can be made.”

Zoologists of course understand the importance of securing as many
type specimens as possible to the museum with which they are connected
and this as well as the natural desire of the author to describe as many new
forms as possible, make it necessary to issue small pamphlets containing
brief diagnoses of the new species secured on any expedition. The present
day rivalry in the field of exploration moreover, makes it imperative that
such publications be issued as rapidly as possible.

The point is however that both the author and the institution responsible
for such publications should feel in duty bound to the scientific world to-
follow up this preliminary work with a comprehensive report on each col-
lection as a whole or upon the results of the entire expedition.

There is apparently an unfortunate feeling on the part of some writers:
and institutions that having, so to speak, ‘‘skimmed off the cream,” their
responsibilities in the matter are ended. The subsequent student in the
same field finds scattered descriptions of new forms but is exasperated by
the lack of any general account of the collection as a whole with field notes
and other details. What a boon it would be to the ornithologist who is
studying the avifauna of Ecuador and upper Amazonia to have a complete
report of the Buckley collections, instead of the scattered diagnoses of new
species from localities the very position of which it requires hours of search
_ to ascertain.

In North America we still lack a report on the birds and mammals of the
recent Mexican Boundary Survey, the Harriman Alaskan Expedition and
others. The value and importance of such reports compared to the brief
preliminary diagnoses of new species can perhaps be appreciated when we
consider the extent of the influence of the zoological reports of the ‘ Pacific:
Railroad Surveys,’ and the number of persons who are familiar with them,
as compared with those who even know of the existence of the preliminary
descriptions of new species obtained by the surveys and published in the:

oa Notes and News. 437

‘Proceedings’ of the Philadelphia Academy. Let us hope that the American
institutions responsible for the recent explorations in Africa and South
America will see to it that they are commemorated in volumes worthy of
the splendid work of the naturalists who accompanied them.

THE work of bird protection goes steadily forward with a constantly
increasing majority of the citizens of our country earnestly supporting it.
The annual report of the National Association of Audubon Societies and
the bimonthly reports in ‘Bird-Lore’ show the wonderful extension of
educational work in the schools, while the splendid work at Meriden, N. H.,
under the direction of Mr. Ernest Harold Baynes shows what a united
community may do in the interests of bird protection, and from hundreds
of other towns come inquiries about practical bird boxes and methods of
attracting the birds, from persons who had hitherto given them no consider-
ation. Legislative interests center about the National Capital and
bird protection won another victory on May 12 when the Senate by a vote
of 45 to 17 passed the House appropriation of $50,000 for the enforcement
of the Migratory Bird Law.

The opponents of bird protection are by no means idle however, espe-
cially Senator Reed of Missouri who opposed the above appropriation as
bitterly as he did the Tariff provision, forbidding the importation of bird
plumage for millinery.

The question of the constitutionality of the Migratory Bird Law will
finally be passed upon by the U. 8. Supreme Court as we learn from a
circular issued by Mr. Wm. T. Hornaday of the N. Y. Zoological Society,
that a decision rendered in the Federal Court of South Dakota, April 18
last upheld its constitutionality while another rendered in the U.S. District
Court of Arkansas on May 27 decided that it was unconstitutional. Scores
of able lawyers have offered their services in supporting the law before the
Supreme Court including Mr. Frederic R. Coudert, one of the most dis-
tinguished members of the American bar.

The law in regard to Reedbirds will we understand be changed to allow
shooting on the Delaware meadows in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Dela-
ware during part of the autumn. Unless this bird could be absolutely
protected, this seems but logical, since it was hardly fair to permit the
shooting in Maryland, Virginia and South Carolina and prohibit it along
the Delaware.

The cat as an enemy of birds is receiving well deserved consideration
but curiously enough proposed legislation against the felines in Massa-
chusetts has divided the humane organizations. The Fish and Game Pro-
tective Association and the Audubon Society are demanding that cats be
licensed while the Animal Rescue League and several Cat Societies are
opposing such action.

Just as we go to press we are in receipt of Mr. Harry 8. Swarth’s ‘ Dis-
tributional List of the Birds of Arizona’ published on May 25 as Pacific

438 Notes and News. [ Sule

Coast Avifauna No. 10. We regret that the delay in distribution compels
us to defer a review until the October number of ‘The Auk.’

The zoological collections which the American Museum of Natural
History has received through the generosity of Colonel Roosevelt, from
the Roosevelt Expedition to South America, amount to twenty-five
hundred birds and four hundred and fifty mammals.

Work was begun by Mr. George K. Cherrie and Leo E. Miller, whom
Colonel Roosevelt took with him as representatives of the Museum, in
the vicinity of Asuncion, Paraguay, in the early part of November. The
next collecting station was in the vicinity of Curumbé. From this point,
the expedition proceeded northward through San Luiz de Caceres to
Utiarity and Tapirapoan.

At Utiarity Mr. Anthony Fiala, who had accompanied the expedition
as photographer and “chief of commissary,” started with Lieutenant
Lauriodo Sta. Anna, and six natives, down the Papegaio, Jurena and Tap-
ajoz Rivers to Santarem.

At Tapirapoan, Mr. Miller left the expedition and with Second Lieuten-
ant Joaquim Manuel Vieira de Mello, Euzebio Paulo de Oliveira, and
Heinrich Reinish, repesentatives of the Brazilian Government, went down
the Gy Paranda and Madeira Rivers to Manaos.

On February 27, the main party, consisting of Colonel Roosevelt, Colonel
Rondon, Lieutenant Lyra and Doctor Cajazeira, of the Brazilian Army,
Kermit Roosevelt, George K. Cherrie and fifteen canoemen, started on what
proved to be a perilous voyage down the hitherto unexplored Rio da Divida,
which was ascertained to flow into the Madeira. The difficulties of trans-
portation were so great that comparatively few specimens were collected
by Mr. Cherrie on this trip. Those which he did obtain, however, proved
to be of exceptional interest.

Mr. Miller made an important addition to the collection at Calama, at
the junction of the Gy Parand and Madeira, and also at Manaos, which he
reached several weeks in advance of Colonel Roosevelt’s party.

DovusuepDay, Page & Co. have just issued a new edition of their well-
known ‘Nature Library’ printed on thin paper, which makes it possible
to condense the whole series into eight handy volumes,- without in any

- way abridging the contents.

i eee gag ny

yea aN

eid
~ ei bnif"s f

Me fa)
’ eer ’

. pawn Leaner oH ui
eo! ark eas es, a pe Pte po wi

‘ , He. Ya) Hat

fk

Laci ibn ait ht hey A

“ec

Soest br

7! “hi ney, i ‘ ;
hine eT Nd aa Pays NU pe .
f ‘i VS -
ny 4 ies ay, wat ap mt

Sih ane mi : wate

PUBLICATIONS OF THE

AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION

FOR SALE AT THE FOLLOWING PRICES:

The Auk. Complete set, Volumes I-XXIX, (1884-1912) in origi-
nal covers, $99.00. Volumes I-VI are sold only with complete
sets, other volumes, $3.00 each; 75 cents for single numbers.

Index to The Auk (Vols. I-XVII, 1884-1900) and Bulletin of the
Nuttall Ornithological Club (Vols. I-VIII, 1876-1883), 8vo, pp.
vii + 426, 1908 Cloth, $3.75; paper, $3.25.

Check-List of North American Birds. Third edition, revised,
1910. Cloth, 8vo., pp. 426, and 2 maps. $2.50, net, postage
25 cents. Second edition, revised, 1895. Cloth, 8vo, pp. xi +
372. $1.15. Original edition 1886. Out of print.

Abridged Check-List of North American Birds. 1889. (Abridged
and revised from the original edition). Paper, 8vo, pp. 71, printed
on one side of the page. 25 cents.

Pocket Check-List of North American Birds. (Abridged from
the third edition). Flexible cover, 3} X 5g inches. 25 cents;
10 copies for $2.00.

Code of Nomenclature. Revised edition, 1908. Paper, 8vo, pp.
Ixxxv. 50 cents.
Original edition, 1892. Paper, 8vo, pp. iv + 72. 25 cents.

We would be pleased to furnish The Auk, Index and Check-List

to your library at 15% discount.

Address JONATHAN DWIGHT, Jr.

134 W. 7lIst St. New York, N.Y.

American Ornithologists’ Union

Check-List of North American
Birds

Last Edition, 1910

Cloth, 8vo, pp. 480 and two maps of North America,
one a colored, faunal zone map, and one a locality map.

The first authoritative and complete list of North
American Birds published since the second edition of
the Check-List in 1895. The ranges of species and
geographical races have been carefully revised and
greatly extended, and the names conform to the latest
rulings of the A.O. U. Committee on Nomenclature.
The numbering of the species is the same as in the
second edition. Price, including postage, $2.75.

POCKET EDITION

A pocket Check-List (32 by 5% inches) of North
American Birds with only the numbers and the scientific
and popular names. Alternate pages blank for the
insertion of notes. Flexible covers. Price, including
postage, 25 cents; or 10 copies for $2.00.

Address JONATHAN DWIGHT, Jr.

134 W. 7Ist St. New York City

era |

BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB )>°"e®

‘The Auk

AH Quarterly Journal of Ornithology

CONTINUATION OF THE New

Vol. XXXI OCTOBER, 1914

PUBLISHED BY

The American Ornithologists’

CAMBRIDGE, MASS.

Entered as second-class mail matter in the Post Office at Boston, Mass.

CONTENTS

PAGE
OBSERVATIONS ON Birnps OF THE SouTH ATLantic. By Robert Cushman Murphy.

(Plates XXX V—XXXIX) ‘ é 3 : 5 : : . : . 439
Ture DEVELOPMENT OF THE STOMACH IN THE EupHonias. By Alex. Wetmore 458
ANATOMICAL NOTES-ON TROCHALOPTERON AND SICALIS. By Hubert Lyman Clark 461
Earzty RecorpDs OF THE WILD TuRKEY. II. By Albert Hazen Wright. : Aer 583

Some WinTER Birps oF OKLAHOMA. By Wells W. Cooke : 473
Notes ON THE Birps or LEON County, FLoripA— THIRD SUPPLEMENT. By
R. W. Williams : : ‘ a s . 494
Tue CaniIrFoRNIA ForMS OF THE Genus Psaliriparus. By Harry S. Swarth.
(Plate XL). ‘ ‘ : : : < : - q P : 499
A Review oFr THE GENUS Phebetria. By John Treadwell Nichols and Robert
Cushman Murphy. (Plate XLI) . 4 = 2 A . - 5 ‘ 526

GerNERAL Nores.— Harlequin Duck in Glacier National Park, Montana, 535; American
Egret (Herodias egretta) at Naushon Island, Mass., 535; Yellow-crowned Night

Heron in Colorado, 535; Red Phalarope (Phalaropus fulicarius) off Boston Harbor °

in Summer, 536; Another Massachusetts Record for the Turkey Vulture (Cathartes
aura septentrionalis), 536; Richardson’s Owl (Cryptoglaux funerea richardsoni) in
N. E. Illinois, 536; Unusual Behavior of a Ruby-throated Hummingbird (Archi-
lochus colubris), 536; Breeding of the Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius pheniceus phe-
niceus) in Nova Scotia, 537; Brewer’s Blackbird (Huphagus cyanocephalus) breeding
in Southern Minnesota, 538; Florida Meadowlark (Sturnella magna argutula) in
Northern Illinois, 540; Evening Grosbeaks at Jamaica Plain, Mass., 540; Chestnut-
collared Longspur in Colorado, 541; The Snow Bunting Again in the Chicago Area,
541; Nevada Savannah Sparrow in New Mexico, 542; A Second North Carolina
Record for Lincoln’s Sparrow (Melospiza lincolni lincolni), 542; Bell’s Vireo in
Wisconsin, 543; San Lucas Verdin (Auriparus flaviceps lamprocephalus) in California,
543; Notes from Springfield, Mass., 543; West Virginia Notes, 544; Some Winter
Bird Notes from the Yellowstone National Park, 546; Some Breeding Birds of
Garrett Co., Maryland, 548; Serious Loss of Bird Life During Spring Migration, 548.

ReEceENT LiTeERATURE.— Eaton’s ‘Birds of New York,’ 550; Swarth’s ‘List of Arizona
Birds,’ 551; Aiken and Warren on the Birds of El Paso County, Colorado, 552;
Mathews’ ‘Birds of Australia,’ 552; The New Nature Library, 553; Bannerman on
Birds of the Canaries, 553; Recent Publications on Economic Ornithology, 553;
Further Observations by Collinge on the Dispersal of Weed Seeds by Birds, 554;
Herman on Useful and Harmful Birds, 554; Food of the Common Partridge (Perdix
perdix) of Europe, 555; The Ornithological Journals, 556; Ornithological Articles in
other Journals, 563; Publications Received, 564.

Nores anp News.— The Extinction of the Passenger Pigeon, 566; The traffic in Rhea
plumage, 567.

a |

INDEX : : - . . < = 569
ERRATA ‘ : “ = { : A S : 2 : oats vs s 593
Dates oF Issue . ; * : 3 F § ‘ : 5 : : 593
ContTENTS . . ‘ : ‘ F . : : : : : A i

‘THE AUK,’ published quarterly as the Organ of the AMERICAN ORNITHOLO-
ed Union, is edited, beginning with the Volume for 1912, by Dr. Wrrwer

TONE.

Trerms:— $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 York, N.Y. Foreign Subscrib-
ers may obtain ‘THe Aux’ through R. H. PORTER, 9 Princes STREET,
CavVENDISH SQUARE, W., LoNDON.

Articles and communications intended for publication, and all books
and publications for notice, should be sent to Dr. WITMER STONE,
AcADEMY 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.

7

aay ay ae»,

Trane ANUS, WOlbs 2OKOX IL, PLATE XXXV.

BLACK-EYEBROWED ALBATROSS OR ‘MOLLYMOKE ’
Diomedea melanophrys.

SA) ALG :

A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF

ORNITHOLOGY.

VOL. XXxi. OcToBER, 1914. No. 4.

OBSERVATIONS ON BIRDS OF THE SOUTH ATLANTIC.
BY ROBERT CUSHMAN MURPHY,
Plates XXXV-XXXIX.

DurinG 1912-1913 the writer made a voyage in the New Bedford
whaling brig Daisy for the purpose of conducting field work at the
island of South Georgia. The birds collected on the expedition
number upwards of five hundred specimens, which are the property
of the Brooklyn Museum and the American Museum of Natural
History. The task of working up this collection is one which will
require considerable time owing to the present dearth of material
for comparison, and pending reports on the taxonomy and life
histories of the South Georgia birds it has been thought advisable
to publish an account in narrative form of the species observed at
sea between the Equator and the subantarctic island which was
the objective point of the expedition.

The Daisy crossed the Line in longitude 28° W., on October 14,
1912. October 16 was spent ashore at the island of Fernando
Noronha, which was the last land sighted until November 23, when
we arrived at South Georgia in latitude 55° S.

October 17, lat. 5° 21’S., long. 32° 44’ W. Strong southerly winds.
A small flock of ‘Mother Carey’s Chickens’ Oceanites oceanicus
(also observed in the North Atlantic) followed us in a rather desul-
tory fashion. They did not approach near to the stern of the brig.
These birds seem to gain confidence with numbers, for when large
flocks follow they usually fly very close.

440 Mourpxy, Birds of the South Atlantic. lone

October 18, lat. 7° 07’ S., long. 33° 04’ W. Many of Oceanites
oceanicus and a single Fregetta grallaria followed all day.

October 20, lat. 10° 21’ S., long. 34° 04’ W. Many of Oceanites
oceanicus followed, their numbers increasing up to the middle of the
afternoon, when they dwindled off again. Three jaegers (Ster-
corarius parasiticus) were noted. <A pair of them tagged after us,
dropping repeatedly into the water and then rising again to pursue
the brig, from nine o’clock in the morning until four in the afternoon.

October 21, lat. 12° 15’ S., long. 33°55’ W. Wind veering to east-
ward, strong. With a rougher sea more of Oceanites oceanicus
followed; also they flew closer to the ship.

October 24, lat. 17° 54’ S., long. 338° 10’ W. Wind northeast.
A shearwater, probably Puffinus puffinus, flew in our wake for a few
minutes about eight o’clock a. M. During the early forenoon we
saw few petrels (Oceanites oceanicus), and these kept well away from
our stern, but the numbers increased up to the middle of the after-
noon. When flying rapidly, and suddenly perceiving food, they
sometimes stopped their headway by flopping down as though
wounded and striking their breasts upon the surface of the water.
Often as they pattered along for some distance on set, slightly
depressed wings, they resembled small scurrying quadrupeds more
than anything else.

October 25, lat. 20° 11’S., long. 33° 35’ W. Weran freely before a
north-northeast wind, furling the fore-and-aft mainsail during the
morning. The few petrels (Oceanites) seen did not follow in our
wake.

October 26, lat. 21° 40’S., long. 34°12’ W. A dull morning after a
stormy night; variable head winds during the day. The first skua.
(Catharacta) was seen shortly before noon. It circled the brig
several times with swift, steady flight. At four o’clock another
skua was seen. I shot it as it rested on the water, lowered the dory
and secured it. I have identified it provisionally as the Falkland

Island race of the Antarctic Skua Catharacta antarctica falklandica
(Lénnberg).

October 27. Two more individuals of Catharacta were seen
toward evening.

October 28, lat. 23° S., long. 35° 45’ W. We encountered cooler
weather and a heavy ground swell, indicative of storms to the

| Murpuy, Birds of the South Atlantic. 441
southward. At six o’clock in the morning the steward came to
notify me that a ‘Goney’ (Wandering or Great Albatross, Dio-
medea exulans) was about. I hurried on deck. Nearby in the
morning sunlight flew the long anticipated fowl of the Ancient
Mariner, even more majestic, more supreme in his element than my
imagination had pictured. He was mature — all white and black—
and as he turned and turned, now flashing his bright under side,
now showing the black that extended from wrist to tip on the upper
surface of his wings, he seemed scarcely to quiver the narrow planes,
but lying on the invisible currents of the breeze, followed his pink-
ish bill wheresoever it led him.

He remained with us only a few minutes, but at noon he came
back again, covering tens of miles in the swift wide circles which he
traversed astern. The lower wing often cut the water in his turns,
and he used his great webbed feet perhaps more than his stubby tail
in steering. Twice he dropped into the sea and allowed us to draw
away a long distance before rising and overtaking us. It was a
curious sight when he prepared to alight under our stern, and then,
changing his purpose, ran heavily along the water for a hundred
yards, before his stiffly set wings could raise his large body into the
air.

During the afternoon he appeared irregularly, approaching incon-
spicuously just above the waves, and suddenly flashing up right
alongside. We saw the last of him about five Pp. M.

October 29, lat. 24° 42’ S., long. 37° 10’ W. At half-past nine in
the morning an albatross, apparently the bird of the previous day,
appeared again, flying even more admirably in a higher wind.
The first ‘Cape Hens’ or ‘Night-hawks,’ Procellaria equinoc-
tialis, were seen shortly after midday.

October 30, lat. 26° 20’ S., long. 38° 04’ W. Strong southeast
winds. Two Wandering Albatrosses (D. exulans) were with us
together, a black and white adult, and a young grayish bird smaller
than its fellow. They performed together in the high breeze, alight-
ing on the water gracefully enough, the strong wind buoying them
until they actually struck the surface. Once they alighted together
and fed in the midst of a flock of Oceanites oceanicus. At six o'clock
p. M., a third albatross appeared.

442 Murpuy, Birds of the South Atlantic. fear

October 31, lat. 27° 15’ S., long. 39° 30’ W. Southeasterly winds.
Many of Diomedea exulans, both old and immature, were seen.
The Oceanites petrels were few.

November 2, lat. 30° 54’ S. Wind still southeast, moderating.
Just at dusk a bird which I identified as the first ‘Cape Pigeon’
(Petrella capensis) flew across our stern. Albatrosses accompanied
us until dark.

November 3, lat. 32° 09’ S., long. 42° 15! W. Winds southwest-
erly, swinging by west toward the north and increasing in violence
throughout the day. Another Petrella was seen at daybreak. In
the strong wind I noticed that the petrels (Oceanites oceanicus) in
our wake always faced the wind diagonally if not directly, with
extended, motionless wings, whenever they pattered on the water.
During the afternoon we were running before the wind, and the
pursuing birds always wheeled and turned away from our stern
before descending to “walk” and feed. While they were flying
with the wind, on the other hand, they kept quite clear of the water.

November 4, lat. 33° 28’ S., long. 45° 42’ W. A strong nor’-
wester blew throughout the night and morning, and we were obliged
to luff into the wind after our lower fore-topsail had been blown
away about two o’clock a.m. At daybreak a single individual of
Fregetta grallaria was seen among the Oceanites. Albatrosses were
within sight all day.

During the morning a flycatcher with a yellow belly, dark olive
back, and broad white superciliary stripe (Megarhynchus sp.), flew
aboard nearly exhausted, and perched in various parts of the rigging.
At noon a species of Silver-billed Tanager alighted on the foresail
yard, followed by a large moth, which like the two storm-beaten
song birds flew off to leeward and its fate. We were approximately
340 miles from the South American mainland.

After noon the weather cleared somewhat, and moderated enough
so that we hoisted the mainsail, reefed, and bent on a new fore-_
topsail in place of the one we had lost. The wind however soon
shifted through west to south and commenced to blow a gale.

Early in the afternoon I began to trail fish hooks from the stern,
and presently a Giant Petrel (Macronectes giganteus) took a bait and
was captured. As the sea became rougher various Tubinares
gathered astern, and we soon had our hands full “ fishing for birds,”’

THE AUK, VOL. XXXII.

5

i Ds ak eravel by
3 and 6. Sooty ALBATROSS,

capens

PLATE XXXVI.

‘Mo.tiyMoKE,’ Diomedea melanophrys.
Phebetria palpebrata, ALSO ‘CAPE Picron,’ Petrella
s, AT TOP OF 6.

Meera | Murpnuy, Birds of the South Atlantic. 443

hauling the smaller species down from the air as animated kites
after they had pounced upon the trailing baits and had started to
fly off with them. Altogether the following thirteen species of
Tubinares were about, and most of them might be seen at a single
glance: — Diomedea exulans, Diomedea melanophrys, Thalassogeron
chlororhynchus, Phebetria palpebrata, Macronectes giganteus, Puffinus
puffinus, strelata incerta, Priofinus cinereus, Petrella capensis,
Halobena caerulea, Procellaria e@quinoctialis, Fregetta grallaria,
Oceanites oceanicus. In ‘The Ibis,’ April, 1914, p. 318, I have
published a photograph which includes nine of these species.
Specimens of Diomedea exulans, Puffinus puffinus, Procellaria
equinoctialis, and Petrella capensis, in addition to the Macronectes
mentioned above, were captured. Next to the Oceanites the
‘“Mutton-birds’ (#strelata incerta) were present in greatest num-
bers. The ‘Cape Hens’ (P. equinoctialis) were very aggressive,
driving off 4strelata, Puffinus, Petrella, Oceanites, ete., and yielding
to Macronectes and Diomedea exulans only after a struggle. Both
Procellaria equinoctialis and Puffinus puffinus dived well below the
surface in pursuit of the baits. The former birds squealed loudly
when caught, and defended themselves actively with their sharp,
dangerous claws. I saw one aberrant example of this species with
a white superciliary stripe and a white patch on the crown. At
nightfall we saw large flocks of the ‘Cape Hens’ settling on the
water.

A great many individuals of Diomedea exulans were seen at close
range on this day, and I noticed that all were characterized by a
pinkish stain on the feathers in the region of the ear. The Sooty
Albatrosses (Phebetria palpebrata) were unique among the species
which followed us in that they seemed to pay no attention to the
trailing fishlines.

The bait taken so eagerly by most of the birds was the fat and
meat of a Loggerhead Turtle (Yhalassochelys) which had been
harpooned from the bow. The birds ignored pork fat as long as
there was turtle meat. After seeing captives drawn on board the
Daisy before their eyes, they were just as eager to bite as before.
They seemed to learn nothing from experience. Even birds which
had escaped from one hook, after having been hauled part way in,
promptly snapped up another.

[Aue

444 Murpny, Birds of the South Atlantic. Oct.

November 5, lat. 35° S., long. 46° 55’ W. Continuation of the
rough weather; southeast wind. Tubinares abundant, but the
‘Cape Hens’ were so extremely aggressive about the baits that
we could catch members of no other species. Petrella capensis and
Phebetria palpebrata were with us in increased numbers, and a
second species of ‘Mutton-bird,’ 4strelata mollis, was represented
by a single individual.

On November 6 there were heavy rains and driving mists all day,
and we could see few birds from the vessel.

November 7, lat. 35° 40’ S., long. 46° 35’ W. Brisk westerly
winds, clear. Astrelata mollis fairly common. One individual of
Priofinus cinereus followed us steadily all day. One of Fregetta
grallaria was observed continually among the Oceanites.

November 8, lat. 36° 16’ S., long. 46° 35’ W. High northwesterly
winds. One of Fregetta grallaria seen with Oceanites all day.
‘Cape Pigeons’ (Petrella) were abundant, and four or five of them
repeatedly dropped to the water under our lee quarter, rising and
overtaking us again after we had drawn away a few hundred yards.
They ran like albatrosses, that is foot after foot along the surface
when launching into flight. They followed a trailing bait by setting
their wings as gliders, keeping the breast just an inch or so above the
sea, and propelling themselves with rapid, alternating strokes of
their feet. In this manner they sometimes covered long distances
without an apparent beat of the wings. They were very noisy and
quarrelsome while feeding. We caught two, which regurgitated
quantities of lard-like fat.

The flocks of Oceanites oceanicus occasionally became much
excited over the trailing bait, although they invariably disregarded
it until after some other species had started the general scramble.
On the evening of this day they (Oceanites) gathered in a cloud, to
the number of a hundred or more, and tugged at the bits of pork fat
until forced away by the larger birds. The Giant Petrels (Macro-
nectes) were their worst enemies. These pot-bellied, vulturine
creatures actually swam or flew out of their way in order to snap
their bills at the smaller birds.

November 9, lat. 36° 46’ S., long. 46° 29’ W. It became calmer
today. At five o’clock in the afternoon I lowered the dory, and
during the next hour collected 36 birds. One was a tern (Sterna

Tue Auk, VoL. XXXI. PLATE XXXVII.

‘Mo LLyMoKE,’ Diomedea melanophrys.
culans.

issogeron culminatus, AND WILSON’S

FouR UPPER VIEWS;
LOWER LEFT; WANDERING Axpatross, D. e

LowWER RIGHT; GRAY-HEADED ALBATROSS, Thalc
PETREL, Oceanites oceanicus.

oa | Morpny, Birds of the South Atlantic. 445
paradisea); all the others Tubinares. Very few of the birds
showed any fear, or were disturbed by the roar of agun. A ‘ Molly-
moke’ (Diomedea melanophrys) hovered over the dory at a distance
of six or eight feet for many minutes. It seemed much interested
in us and followed the little boat whichever way we turned. I
found that a winged specimen of Procellaria equinoctialis could
swim about as fast as a lusty sailor could row. One Fregetta gral-
laria flew nearby as we came on board the brig at dusk.

November 11. Heavy fog; calm; noreckoning. Three‘ Whale-
birds’ (Prion sp.) were observed. The ‘Whale-bird’ or ‘Blue
Petrel’ breeding at South Georgia seems to be Prion banksi, and by
this name I shall designate the species seen in the South Atlantic.

Late in the afternoon a long stick of lumber floated past us. It
was covered with ‘goose barnacles’ and accompanied by the
usual school of fish, and four skuas (Catharacta sp.) were standing
upon it. One ‘Mollymoke’ (Diomedea melanophrys) followed us
throughout the day.

November 12, lat. 39° 41’ S. Brisk northerly winds varying
toward the east. The first large mass of floating kelp (Macrocystis)
was sighted. Prion banksi became abundant. Pheebetria, and a
flock of Sterna (paradiswa?) were noted. One of three ‘Cape
Pigeons’ (Petrella) which followed us fora time had a bright, rose-
colored breast, doubtless due to some oily substance upon which
it had been feeding. The ejecta of captive ‘Cape Pigeons’ were
sometimes pinkish or orange.

November 14, lat. 42° 24’ S., long. 42° 28’ W. Moderate wind,
cold. Early in the morning before any Oceanites petrels had picked
up our track, four of Diomedea melanophrys were following us and
flying forward again and again around the bow. Presently the
first recorded example of Thalassogeron culminatus flew over the
quarter deck almost within arm’s reach. All five of these ‘ Molly-
mokes’ remained with us during the day. They occasionally
dropped to the water for food, and I saw one D. melanophrys dive
quite out of sight in our wake and come up with its bill full of some-
thing. When I put out a baited hook one of them alighted and
examined it, but flew off again without touching it. Thereafter
the birds halted in the air for an instant whenever they spied the
trailing pork fat, but after cocking their heads and eyeing it sharply,

[oce:

446 Murpuy, Birds of the South Atlantic.
they went on their way, refusing to be betrayed. They showed no
hesitation in devouring bits of fat thrown overboard as a lure.

A few of Procellaria equinoctialis were seen, but the most abun-
dant birds of the day were the flocks of Prion banksi and Priofinus
cinereus. Many of the latter species followed us all day long, fly-
ing low over the water, gliding a good part of the time. When
they beat their wings it was with a more rapid motion than the
other petrels; the flight was, indeed, somewhat duck-hke. To-
ward nightfall we passed great bands of Priofinus sitting on the
water. Numbers of Halobena cerulea could be seen among the
flocks of Prion allday. Both of these species travel rapidly, with a
twisting, erratic flight, not unlike that of a Whip-poor-will (Antro-
stomus). The Oceanites were few; several skuas (Catharacta) were
seen in the distance; and one albatross (D. exulans) passed nearby
at sIxX P. M.

November 15, lat. 43° 18’S., long. 41° 10’ W. Colder, witha long,
heavy “Cape Horn swell,” and a strong westerly breeze. One
example of Fregetta grallaria accompanied us during most of the day.
‘Cape Pigeons’ (Petrella) in groups of four and five descended
under our lee quarter over and over again. When they turn back
their heads and preen their feathers on the water they look for all
the world like true pigeons.

Of eight ‘Mollymokes,’ our constant companions, six were
Diomedea melanophrys, and two Thalassogeron culminatus. As
usual, when they saw bait on the hooks astern, they raised their
heads comically, and often wiggled their feet with a running motion,
halted in the air, and assumed extremely awkward attitudes while
deciding whether to descend or to fly on. When alighting they
stretched down the legs and turned the toes upward. Then the
broad webs struck the water at an angle and the birds slid forward
a few feet, and slowly settled down, the wings being held high all the
while.

At sunset birds of a dozen species were about in tremendous
numbers, rioting in the breeze, and_poising frequently over the
Daisy’s quarter deck, obviously interested in the affairs on board.
Just as the sun was sinking beyond the choppy horizon, we heard
a curious, braying call from among the waves. Then, half a ship’s
length to windward, we saw the first penguin (Pygoscelis papua).

Seria | Murpuy, Birds of the South Atlantic. 447

Only its sleek head and bristly tail projected above the surface.
It brayed again, and dived, but during the twilight of the next hour
shoals of these slippery, reptilian birds kept passing us, for we heard
their cries from all directions. The lookout at the masthead had
reported penguins several days previously, but these were the first
I had seen.

November 16, lat. 44° 57’S., long. 39° 51’ W. High southwesterly
and westerly winds; cold, squally. A rainbow was observed just
before sunset. A troop of Diomedea melanophrys and Thalasso-
geron culminatus made up our escort on this date. Competition
for food was becoming keen with them, and they dropped like
falling pillows from considerable heights, assuming the most ridicu-
lous attitude on the way down, whenever food was thrown from the
brig. At evening one of the melanophrys ‘Mollymokes’ flew across
the cabin repeatedly, jerking up its head like a spirited steed, and
showing curiosity in its every action.

Aistrelata incerta was represented by greater numbers than at
any time since November 9. At six o’clock in the afternoon there
was a short but furious southwest squall with rain, and it was a
beautiful exhibition to see the ‘Whale-birds,’ ‘Mutton-birds,’
‘Mollymokes’ and Giant Petrels (Macronectes) rise high in the air
and fly in the teeth of the wind. The giant petrels held their wings
more straightly and stiffly, that is more like the set planes of an air-
ship, than any of the other tube-nosed birds.

November 17. Very cold, with a high wind from the southwest,
and a tremendous sea. Many changes of weather; at one time the
wind veered to the east. Sleet and hail fell occasionally. Birds
were with us all day, Procellaria equinoctialis being conspicuous from
its numbers.

November 18, lat. 48° 39’ S., long. 36° 40’ W. Barometer 29.2
inches at noon; rising at sunset. Temperature40° F. High south-
westerly gale all day, with several brief hailstorms. In the seeth-
ing combers we lay to under fore-staysail and trisail. Dark weather
alternated with bright sunshine. Spray broke over us continually,
but we shipped no heavy seas.

One individual of Fregetta grallaria was present all day with
hundreds of Oceanites oceanicus. Prion banksi was the most
abundant species. When these birds were flying high they turned

lou

448 Murpuy, Birds of the South Atlantic. OGk

almost on their backs in the strong gale. They often skipped along
the water in flocks, and, all springing up together, looked much like
a school of gleaming flying fish. Four Sooty Albatrosses (Phebetria
palpebrata) joined us during the morning and remained nearby for
several hours, flying with the preeminent grace of their kind. Their
white-ringed eyes are conspicuous even at a long distance. The
melanophrys ‘Mollymokes’ were on hand as usual. One or two of
them took a hook but succeeded in shaking it out. While quarrel-
ing in the water over a bit of fat, several of them sidled amusingly
round and round each other, croaking loudly all the while. In
alighting during the gale they sometimes slid along the surface on
their webs for ten or twelve feet, just as boys glide along an ‘ice
slide.’

Late in the afternoon the first example I had seen of the beautiful
Priocella glacialoides flew over the deck and poised for a moment
within a few feet of me. Then it dropped astern and fed on a
piece of refuse, along with other species. At the same time another
petrel white below, brownish above, with a little gray or brown on
its neck, passed about fifty feet away. I believe it was Thalas-
seca antarctica.

All of these wonderful fliers from ‘“ Mollymokes” down to
‘Mother Carey’s Chickens’ (Oceanites), with the single exception
of the Giant Petrels (Macronectes), kept their wings flexed to a
much greater extent during the gale than they had done in calmer
weather; and with each more than ordinarily forceful puff of wind
they bent the manus at right angles to the forearm, thus “shorten-
ing sail”’ still more. The birds rarely, if ever, flew directly before
the wind, but either took it “on the quarter”’ or else headed into it,
raised the body axis, and allowed themselves to be carried’ back-
ward like a kite. The last method was regularly adopted by
Petrella capensis, flocks of these birds covering considerable dis-
tances tail-foremost. The pinions of the longer-winged species
could be seen to be always a-quiver; the gentle, almost unnoticeable
rocking and see-sawing of the wings with the bird’s body as a
fulcrum, the gauging of the angle of the wing-axis with the horizon
according to the sharpness of a turn, all revealing to the observer
the constant action of the mechanism of balance.

But the Wandering Albatross (D. exulans) was more inexplicable

HE TPAUK, VOLE. XOOX PLATE XXXVIII.

1. ‘Care Hen,’ Procellaria equinoctialis.

2. Parasitic JAEGER, Stercorarius parasiticus (3 photographs).
3 and 4. Wutson’s PETREL, Oceanites oceanicus (4 photographs).
5. ScHLEGEL’S PETREL, strelata incerta.

6 and 7. ‘Cape Piceons,’ Petrella capensis.

poe | Mourpny, Birds of the South Atlantic. 449

than his smaller brethren. He seemed to have one style of flight
suitable for all weathers except a calm. The quivering of continual,
automatic balance-stress was evident, but the huge wings appeared
to be set the same whether for hurricane or catspaw, and he flew as
though all directions were downhill. Probably the weight of the
body is a powerful factor in the albatross’s control of his momen-
tum.!

November 19, lat. 49° 40’ S., long. 35° 51’ W. Continuation
of the storm. Fregetta grallaria was observed in numbers for the
first time, only single birds having been noted previously. Halo-
bena cerulea was common.

A few minutes before five p. M., a brief snow flurry came up with
a violent southwest puff. In the midst of the storm three or four
hundred ‘Whale-birds’ (Prion banks) settled on the water near
the stern of the Daisy, and for a quarter of an hour J had an oppor-
tunity of watching them feeding while many of the birds were
within twenty feet of me. I soon understood the significance of
the name ‘scooper’ which is applied by whalemen to the members
of the genus Prion. The birds progressed along the water with an
odd crawling motion, resting the breast upon the surface but hold-
ing the wings about an inch above it, the feet furnishing the motive
power. Then as they scurried along quite rapidly the heads were

thrust under the water and the open lamellated bills ‘scooped’

for food. It was impossible to determine upon what organisms
the birds were feeding. To me the flock recalled a human swim-
ming race in which each contestant was using the ‘crawl stroke,’
for the bodies of the birds were stretched out upon the water in
much the same way. Continuously, however, birds would slip
below the surface out of sight, and emerge a foot or two, or perhaps
a yard, ahead. They did not stay under more than a fraction of a
second except when they shot through the crest of a smallish wave,
as sometimes happened. In a definite field on the water birds were

disappearing below and reappearing with such rapidity that the

area fairly twinkled. About as many were below as above all the
time. There was a very rugged sea, with wide troughs between the
waves, and whenever one of the great rollers with a white and

lef. Nichols, Auk, XXX, 1913, p. 509.

450 Murpny, Birds of the South Atlantic. faun

broken crest came along, the birds did not attempt to dive
through it, but arose from the water at the last moment, flew
through the spume of the comber, and alighted on the downward
slope beyond. . ;

November 20, lat. 50° 12’ S., long. 34° 47’ W. Wind still south-
westerly but moderating. The first Diving Petrels or ‘Divers’
(Pelecanoides urinatrixz) were recorded, two passing us during the
afternoon.

At evening four examples of Phabetria palpebrata, two of Diomedea
melanophrys, and four of Thalassogeron culminatus flew round about
us, and contended more or less for a trailing bait, but we could hook
none of them securely. Nine times out of ten the ubiquitous
‘Cape Pigeons’ succeeded in stealing the baits from the lines
before the ‘Mollymokes’ could disperse them. One ‘Cape Pig-
eon’ alighted in the stern whale boat where it squatted on the
whole length of its metatarsus, and was unable to rise into flight.
I caught it in my hands. The bill in this species is comparatively
soft but the captive nevertheless drew my blood with the sharp-nail
of its maxilla. It also scratched with its feet, but not so severely
as Procellaria equinoctialis. One of the latter tore a shred of skin
from a sailor’s arm with its powerful claws.

The Sooty Albatrosses (Phabetria) were the wariest of the large
birds. They quarreled among themselves when on the water, and
uttered weird, trumpet-like calls. They would not dive for food,
but they seized floating oakum, bits of paper, etc., and shook them
in the water so that the foam flew. Three of these birds alighted
successively astern, and solemnly picked up a chip of wood, possibly
in order to determine whether it were something edible. The
‘Sooty’s’ broken, white, orbital ring gives it a wide-eyed, perpetu-
ally astonished expression.

_ The four culminatus ‘Mollymokes’ dived so deeply for bait that
only their tails and the tips of their wings projected above the
surface.

During the early evening the quartet of Sooty Albatrosses flew
across our deck amidships several times, and watching my oppor-
tunity I shot one so that it fell into the arms of a sailor.

November 21, lat. 51° 37’ S., long. 34° 56’ W. Southwesterly
winds. After noon three Sooty Albatrosses (Phebetria) overtook

poet Murpuy, Birds of the South Atlantic. 451
us again, doubtless the same group which had accompanied us for
several days, and of which I had shot the fourth member.

Three or four Wandering Albatrosses (D. exulans) were seen,
more than we-had counted for many days. They were in the dis-
tance, but there is no mistaking their wing-spread, and broad white
backs, after they have been well noted once. A tern, probably
Sterna paradisea, and one example of Priocella glacialoides, were
identified, and a Prion was observed to scratch its head with its
foot while flying, a rather ‘Sternine’ trick.

November 22, lat. 53° S., long. 35° 25’ W. Quiet sea, heavy
fogs during part of the day; icebergs and floe ice. On this date
the birds were feeding in all directions about us, but they did not
follow in our wake, probably because of the very light wind. The
trio of Sooty Albatrosses (Phebetria) appeared during the after-
noon as usual. Increased numbers of Thalassogeron culminatus
were seen.

A storm blew up from the southeast during the night and we made
little progress.

November 23. It was rough all morning with considerable rain
and wet snow. ‘Lifts’ alternated with bad weather all day.
During the forenoon two Snow Petrels (Pagodroma nivea) flew close
alongside and remained nearby for some time. Later we saw others
flying hither and thither well above the water. A couple of them
brushed the rigging with their wings.

A little after three o’clock the ery “ Land-ho!”” came from
the bow. The mist lifted somewhat, and we made out the snow-
covered highlands of South Georgia. As we drew shoreward our
three Sooty Albatrosses (Phwbetria palpebrata) circled us continu-
ally, poising sometimes on the mastheads and the tip of the bow-
sprit. We saw more Wandering Albatrosses and ‘Cape Pigeons’
than ever before. Some of the latter wiggled their feet with a
running motion as they flew, a trait which I had previously observed
in Prion banksi, 4strelata incerta, and Diomedea melanophrys. At
evening a pure white example of Macronectes giganteus flew by
within a couple of hundred feet.

November 24. A clear and beautiful day. There was some fog
along the coast during the early morning, but it lifted early, show-
ing the abrupt, white-robed mountains under the brightest of skies.
Innumerable birds flew over the water on every side, and for the

452 Murpuy, Birds of the South Atlantic. loon

first time we saw many Tubinarine species flying high — far up
under the light feathery clouds, so that at times the birds were
indistinguishable specks. Macronectes giganteus, Phebetria pal-
pebrata, Diomedea exulans, Thalassogeron culminatus, Procellarva
equinoctialis, and even Prion banksi and Petrella capensis were
among those seen soaring like birds of prey under the blue vault.

The ornithological notes of a four months’ stay in the cold fjords
of South Georgia do not properly belong within the scope of this
paper, so I shall pass to the end of the Antarctic summer when on
March 15, 1914, we pointed the good brig Davsy’s prow toward
the open sea and began the homeward voyage. ‘The afternoon was
calm, and over the sea near shore were myriads of the smaller
Tubinares — Petrella capensis, Pelecanoides urinatrix, Oceanites
oceanicus, and Fregetta grallaria.

March 16. Rough and squally; the mountains of South Georgia
still visible. One individual of Thalasse@ca antarctica seen.

March 17. Brisk southerly winds after a night of “tumbling
ealm.”’ One skua (Catharacta) passed us flying northward. Four
Sooty Albatrosses were about, of which one was the typical Pha-
betria palpebrata, the familiar South Georgia breeding species with a
canescent back. The other three were dark colored on the back and
belly, and contrasted markedly with the first bird. Moreover,
when one of the dark albatrosses flew close to the brig, I saw dis-
tinctly that the sulcus of its mandible was yellow instead of blue,
showing that the three unfamiliar birds were referable to the species
Phebetria fusca, not before identified on the expedition.

Two examples of Thalasseca antarctica were recorded, and Prio-
finus cinereus became common during the day, the first bird being
seen when we were still within a hundred miles of South Georgia.

March 18, lat.49°+ S. Wind west by north. A large number of
Diomedea exulans were noted, many of which were immature and

“in the speckled, chocolate plumage. One example of Phabetria
fusca and several of palpebrata were seen. The numbers of Prio-
finus cinereus had increased, many flying across the cabin roof in
Indian file during the afternoon. In the strong wind they glided
on set wings. Two skuas (Catharacta) passed, flying rapidly and
well above the water, as if upon a definite migration.

| Morpnuy, Birds of the South Atlantic. 453

March 19, lat. 48° 30’ S. Strong northwesterly winds; cloudy.
A Thalassogeron with a light gray head and an all black bill followed
us. It was perhaps an immature example of 7. culminatus.
Astrelata mollis became abundant; two of Priofinus cinereus and
one of Priocella glacialoides were noted. Late in the day we were
accompanied for a while by no less than twenty ‘Mollymokes’
(Diomedea melanophrys).

March 20, lat. 47° 20’ S., long. 34° 25’ W. Light west winds,
brisker during frequent mild rainstorms. A rainbow was observed
late in the afternoon. Diomedea exulans was common. I saw
several Sooty Albatrosses (Phabetria) of both species, and one skua
(Catharacta).

March 21, lat. 45° 50’ S., long. 33° 52’ W. Strong westerly winds
and a rough sea which frequently slopped over the deck during lee
lurches. strelata incerta appeared for the first time on the north-
ward voyage and I saw three or four birds of this species in our wake
throughout the day. A single example of Puffinus gravis also
tracked us during the morning. Oceanites oceanicus and Fregetta
grallaria were noted sparingly. All the Sooty Albatrosses seen
were Phebetria fusca, and when the graceful birds crossed slowly
over our stern, with wings flexed in the high wind, I could see the
orange or yellow sulcus of the mandible quite distinctly. One of
these birds tucked down its head and preened the feathers of its
belly while it flew.

March 22, lat. 43° 20’ S., long. 33° W. A bright, mild day with a
gentle southwesterly breeze. ‘Two yearling albatrosses (Diomedea
exulans), all blackish except for their white faces and under wing
surfaces, flew about in company. At sunset a skua (Catharacta)
circled our main topmast and then flew off toward the east. After
nightfall a few examples of Zstrelata mollis were still seen following
us in the bright moonlight.

March 23, lat. 42° 20’ S., long. 31°45’ W. Northerly storm with
a very rough sea all day. We were obliged to run east, and even
south of east. Enormous numbers of Prion banksi were about,
more than I had seen at any time since leaving the South Georgia
banks. Many typical examples of Phebetria fusca were seen, one
of which, probably a young bird, had a buffish collar.

March 24, lat. 43° S., (dead reckoning). Strong northerly winds.

[sets

454 Murpuy, Birds of the South Atlantic.
Oceanites oceanicus and Fregetta grallaria were abundant. We
caught twelve Wandering Albatrosses (Diomedea exulans) on fish-
hooks. One of these was a nearly fully mature male; three were
adult females; the remainder were younger birds including several
blackish yearlings. When one of the albatrosses was held up by
its feet a squid with a body a foot long dropped out of its gullet.

An example of Astrelata macroptera was recorded for the first
time.

March 25. A severe southerly gale, commencing at 9 Pp. M. of
March 24, continued until early morning of March 26. The sea
was very rough, and running before the wind under short canvas we
frequently shipped water over either rail when we rolled. Now and
then seas broke over our stern. We were able to bend on more sail
about midnight.

Diomedea exulans and Phebetria fusca were about in large num-
bers, the Sooty Albatross with the buff collar being among the others.
4Aistrelata incerta was the petrel seen in greatest abundance. A few
of Puffinus gravis, Oceanites oceanicus and Fregetta grallaria were
seen.

March 26, lat. 38° 50’ S., long. 31°30’ W. Light winds; overcast
sky. The buff-collared example of Phebetria fusca was seen among
many others; Diomedea exulans was numbered by scores. Young
birds of the latter species were “gamming” everywhere on the
water — that is meeting in groups, raising their wings and bills,
and squealing, just as I had often seen them do on the South Georgia
whaling banks. A skua (Catharacta) flew around the ship in a
characteristic way.

At evening, there being scarcely any breeze although the ground
swell was heavy, I lowered the dory and remained down until after
dark. I shot three specimens of Phebetria fusca, and also one or
more of Astrelata incerta, Aistrelata mollis, and Puffinus gravis.

Long after nightfall hosts of Tubinares could still be seen and
heard flying everywhere over the sea.

March 27, lat. 37° 40’ S., long. 30° 58’ W. Strong west wind,
with several rain squalls, heavy sea. The buff-collared Phebetria
was noted throughout the day.

March 28, lat. 35° 20’ S., long. 30° 50’ W. Westerly winds; fre-
quent squalls. Diomedea exulans was the commonest species. One

THE AUK, VOL. XXXII. PLATE XXXIX.

1. Tubinares on the Whaling Banks north of South Georgia Island. *Whale-
birds,’ Prion banksi; ‘Cape-Hens,’ Procellaria e@quinoctialis; and ‘Mollymokes,’
Diomedea melanophrys.

2. Tubinares on the Water: chiefly Wandering Albatrosses, Diomedea exulans;
Giant Petrels, Macronectes giganteus; and ‘Cape Pigeons,’ Petrella capensis.

3. Captive Female Wandering Albatross (on left), and Giant Petrel (on right).

el Mourpny, Birds of the South Atlantic. 455

or more of Puffinus gravis, Aistrelata macroptera, and Fregetta

grallaria were seen.

March 30 and 31, April 1. The first summery days, with quiet
weather, fair skies, and brilliant sunsets. On these three days I saw
no birds save a few ‘Mutton-birds’ (#strelata incerta and mollis).

April 2, lat. 27° 17’ S., long. 31°53’ W. The wind had veered to
northeast on the evening of the first, and it blew half a gale during
the morning of the second, bringing frequent rains. Half a dozen
‘“Mutton-birds’ (Hstrelata incerta) followed us. At night we had
heavy rains with lightning and thunder.

April 4, lat. 25° S., long. 30° 40’ W. Three examples of the
Trinidad Islet Petrel, Hstrelata arminjoniana were identified. It
rained heavily throughout the night.

April 5 and 6. Light southerly breezes; more or less rain. The
only birds seen were Oceanites oceanicus, Astrelata arminjoniana,
and a few terns and boobies (Sula) in the distance.

April 7, lat. 21° 30’ S., long. 30° 04’ W. Calm and hot, with a
light south wind arising late in the afternoon. A few terns and
boobies, Oceanites petrels and scattered examples of strelata
arminjoniana were seen. Shortly before nightfall we sighted
Trinidad Islet, bearing north by west and about 45 miles distant.

April eighth was spent in the waters about the remarkable,
uninhabited, volcanic islet of Trinidad, and the ornithological
observations of the day may well be reserved for a special paper.

The Daisy resumed the northward journey on April ninth, but
bird life was not conspicuous between Trinidad and the Equator
which we crossed on the afternoon of April twenty-fifth. The
little ‘Mother Carey’s Chickens’ (Oceanites oceanicus), our con-
stant companions during nearly the whole voyage, were seen almost
daily, not only as far as the Line but northward to the West Indies
and then to New York. Boobies and terns were frequently noted
in the southern tropic belt, although very rarely were they seen so
closely that I could identify the species. The few other south
Atlantic entries in my notebook refer chiefly to sea birds which
belong typically to the fauna of the north Atlantic; and these may
best be recorded elsewhere.

eiss0ay) yynog | ZF |

eisd0ax) yyNog | a |

It+4+E aN 26

"M/LFoPE ‘SiZT.08 | & |

Pearse Bolas ace pie ee

ended sijaososAq
eyeiqadyed eijaqayg
snqouAYyIO1O[ Yo UOLOZOSse/eY T,
ShyRUIW]Nd WOJesOsseyey J,
sArydourjeu Bapaurol(y
SUR[NXY BapsuIol(T
XIJJVULIN SaplouBda|ag
Isyueq UO

ea[niwo BuBqo[vyy
sisuedeo BI[a1}0q
snayURsIs SoJUOLV IY
BOAT VULOIPOSe

ST[OM v}ela1sGy

BIAOUL BYBlOISHy
sjeoounbes Bre [[a001 7
SOplo[Bloe[s B[[9OI J
BajoIeJ UR BIDSsEyey, |,
sneleuld SNUYOLL
snuggnd snuggng

BILE] B1d 4YOHOLT
SNOTUBIIO SazTUBID()
BopoIvJUB BIVIVY}E,)
snorpiseied sntqesoa1a}q
eesipered Buta}

i=)
oD
ie
N
=
N
(=)
N

c=)
al

™~

"S,F2008 | a
off “S,9Ga12

GE9F ‘S99 | >
“M,P0.88 ‘8.02.92 |

“M,SE.0F “S0FLE
“M.SToGP ‘S,60-88
“M0868 ‘SSTolZ. | =
“M,OToEE “S/PSoLI
“M,POGFE “S/1Zo01

“M

“MZFoEE “S/8E08

eyuoloON Opueudo yy

|
}

JAqUIOAO NY

GQNLIONOT GNV AGOLILY'T

T ATavL
“SaduooOdy dO AUVWWNG :O1LNWILY HLOOS AHL AO Saul

, U0I}BUITyse puo faq ,,
SyoOH eBItT,,
“a Maj e ae
—sfoquiAg

“ac

‘uoseas [erjdnu-alg
*(Sutads) 18q W19A0 N—19q0}0(—)
‘asvAOA PABAYINOS 9Y} WO Uaes
sparq jo siaquimmu pue setvedg

Beal PS ste elas a
HpK[ HK) KR) SPH P+ (ef rielc|
Tete ete el
I il fa et Fc al oer a

Deh eta OGi alse |fte
ao pc al el cod cael legis Re eal
+) ae] +] +] +] +) +/+] *] *
+) |] *| *
Shiels ley altel es pees ee dase
Ale lesdle| a r | Cel elite eae eee tLe lb ane cate Alas
Be fe i haze abe arel teddies esl fica coal lal ical eae Veae fee
Sig ee fae i Men feo hare St ell eth ft led Ou al FS

alae te telets ota liecies|
Teo | Deak! Sealline, GS WIE Seas

EYEE
rm | onli
“pla alata cased

| Pe tapraiietealeal eal iey [aaa Pah oa Se
“ z Sate ae See ey 28 @ Se: SE SE ste
ALK) KKK) KIKI +I 8 aril Ea Cea lee iiste ste yon ao i 2118! ea ele alist | BoD esate eke ete
Pane Mal AB SIEE Git ae
GG | Fo) & G6 | TG) 0G) GT) SE) AT) OT) ST) HT) SE) at] IT) OL} 6 | 8} 2/9} 9) % |] e | Z| |} Te] 08) 62) 82] 22| 92| gall sz| ea| 2z| tz1 og! et! et | zt | oF | St
5 SO tanner 3] /z/8/3/8/8/3/s/8/[s/e/sialsial jalelelelslelel | le
S 5 a SB) (EIS) |S) IS(S/SS/8IS S[s/s] | [kis leis size =

a 4/3/3/4/4/4| |/SlSlsislala 4|3|4/3
[ady yoreyy

“SauOOUY AO

“ACOLIONOT NV GCOLIL VT

Tl WIAdVL
AYVNWOS ‘OILNVILY HLOQOS WHHL AO saulqd

Byeiqodjed viyjequyg
Bosny BIjeqayd
snyouAYyIOIO[ Yd wosodosse [ey J,
SnJVUIWA|ND WOLasosseyey y,
sArydouvjaur vapaulord,
suB[nxd vopauold
XW}BULN saplouRdajag
IsyuBq UOllg

sisuadeo Bi[aag
SN9JUBIIS $9} 0UOLIB IA
BurMofurmie vye[aysiy
SI][OUL By elas

BPBIUT BY BlII4 Sy

Bio} do10 eur By efoay Sy
Seiqooutnbe, vrzel[a0oig
SIPlO]BloV[D B[[ed0IL gy
BooIe}UB BODMSSE[eY
Snadould snuyoldg
SIABIS SNULN

BIe[|BId BYjodoI WT
SNorMevIV0 So}TMRI0()
BolpoIvJUB BjOvIRY}R/)

WOL}BUIIYSA PUOAA,, = 4,

« SOR axIv],, - *

« MOf e,, = ae
—:sfoqurAg

“aosvas jeydnu-yso7
*(muIngne) jludy—yoreyw
‘asvAOA PIVMY}I0U 94} UO LADS
Spiiq Jo Siaquinu pue saredg

458 Wermore, Development of the Stomach in Euphonias. Kose

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE STOMACH IN THE EU-
PHONIAS.

BY ALEX. .WETMORE.

Tue stomach of the small brightly colored Tanagers known as
Euphonias has long been noted as one of the most anomalous in the
avian group, but to my knowledge no explanation for its peculiari-
ties has been attempted. During recent field work in Porto Rico
for the Biological Survey, and in subsequent laboratory investiga-
tions, it has been my fortune to examine critically 51 specimens of
the Porto Rican Euphonia (Tanagra sclatert) and on these examina-
tions the following observations are based.

In the long array of species forming the order Passeriformes the
stomach is composed ordinarily of two parts; a smaller, constricted
glandular portion, the proventriculus, connected with the cesopha-
gus, and a larger, more or less muscular division the ventriculus,
which opens into the duodenum by the constricted pyloric orifice.
In the Euphonias, however, a different development is encountered.
The glandular proventriculus is large and well developed while
the stomach proper. is indicated by a thin, transparent, membra-
nous band or zone which passes over without lessening in size mto
the dilated end of the small intestine, lined internally with project-
ing villi. In addition the passage from the cesophagus down is
direct, without apparent cardio-pyloric flexure, a combination of
peculiarities that stamps this group of species as unique among their
feathered kindred.

Attention was drawn to the intestinal tract of the Euphonias by
Lund in 1829 but he was misled into describing a lateral diverti-
culum of the zonary portion, which he considered as the rudimen-
tary ventriculus. For fifty years his discussion and plates were
quoted and reproduced by other zodlogists so that they are found
in many of the standard texts published during that period. The
eminent English ornithotomist W. A. Forbes reviewed these facts
before the Zodlogical Society of London in 1880, disproving the
presence of Lund’s ventricular diverticulum, but was unable to
assign any reason for the aberrant structure which he found.

Rel Wetmore, Development of the Stomach in Euphonias. 459

In my work in the field I soon learned that the Euphonias fed
eagerly on mistletoe-berries of the genus Phoradendron, clumps of
which were locally common in tree growth. This habit was well
kown to the Porto Ricans and has been reported from various
islands in the Lesser Antilles where these birds are known as “ mis-
tletoe birds.”’ From their restless activity in the tree tops I was led
to believe that they were feeding on insects as well but in the critical
examination of the stomachs, seeds of three species of Phoradendron
and one other of an allied Loranthaceous genus were encountered
alone with absolutely no trace of animal matter. The globular
berries of these mistletoes have a moderately tough skin contain-
ing a seed surrounded by a yellowish-green transparent fluid,
gelatinous in appearance and exceedingly viscid. In feeding the
- Euphonias break this outer skin with their bills and swallow the
single seed surrounded by its adhesive pulp. The seeds pass
through the intestinal canal wholly undigested and the whole mass is
excreted in apparently the same condition as when it was swallowed,
as the feces are amorphous and exhibit practically none of the
white nitrogenous renal matter commonly noticed in other birds.

Though the adhesive pulp surounding the seed is apparently
unchanged by the processes of digestion yet we know that some
part is taken fromit. A large per cent of it is composed of viscin —
or as it is popularly called bird lime — and several gums, and these
act as a vehicle for various salts of potash, lime and magnesia, vege-
table acids and oxide of iron a highly tonic purgative combination.

Arabine present in the gums is readily dissolved, furnishing grape
sugar, other nutritive matter is contained and with the various
salts, of the highest importance to the body, is readily assimilated.
Thus mistletoe apparently furnishes a highly nourishing food from
which the nutritious elements are easily separated by the digestive
juices without preliminary grinding and trituration. A consider-
able amount of bassorin which is contained in the bird-lime is
insoluble in ordinary fluids while in water it becomes viscous which
accounts for the lack of change in appearance of the food in passing
through the alimentary canal. In captivity this bird thrives ona
diet of over-ripe banana, a food which, like the mistletoe berries,
can be assimilated readily without mechanical comminution.
In a wild state however it eats only the mistletoe berries.

460 Wetmore, Development of the Stomach in Ewphonias. hese

The outcome is readily seen. Through a long period of oe
tence on a peculiarly specialized food the ordinary form and muscu-
larity of the stomach has been lost through disuse and specializa-
tion until it has been changed to the simple membranous sac con-
necting the cesophagus and duodenum, now characteristic of the
Euphonias, a digestive tract which is so arranged as to permit the
rapid and unobstructed passage of food through the entire length
of the canal.

The Euphonia, furthermore is enabled to increase its own food
supply as the seeds unharmed by digestion are excreted and cling
by their adhesive coating to the limbs of the trees, starting new
plants which, when mature, produce a new crop of berries. Though
in some parts of the United States, notably Louisiana and Texas,
mistletoe plants increase until the tree host is killed, in Porto Rico
they cause little apparent damage and no effort is made to keep
them down. They were noticeably more abundant on the dry
south coast, where the air soon hardened the gum surrounding the
seeds, than they were on the rain swept north slopes of the moun-
tains, where seeds dropped by the birds are liable to be washed off
before germination and attachment.

Some forms of the family Dicxide notably Dicewm hirundina-
ceum of Australia are called mistletoe birds, and are said to feed
extensively on the berries, but I can find no satisfactory description
of their stomach. The Robin, Bluebird, Cedar Waxwing and others
which occasionally feed on mistletoe berries in the United States
do so locally or rarely and use this food merely to supplement their
ordinary diet. In my studies I have been restricted to the investi-
gation of the Porto Rican Euphonia, through lack of other material
but as parasitic plants of the family Loranthacee, belonging to
either the genus Phoradendron or to others more or less closely
allied, are found all through tropical America in the range of the
Euphonias we may suppose that they are utilized as food by these
species as by the bird which I have studied. This habit sufficiently
accounts for the peculiar stomach found in the group as a whole.

To recapitulate, the Euphonias have long been noteworthy for the
aberrant form of the stomach. In studying the species found on
Porto Rico it has been found that it feeds entirely on the berries of
mistletoe (Phoradendron spp.) a food readily assimilated and one

| Cuark, Notes on Trochalopteron and Sicalis. 461
not requiring a muscular stomach for its digestion. In consequence
we have a degeneration of the ventriculus into a thin membranous
band and a straightening of the stomach to facilitate the passage
of food no cardiac or pyloric constriction being necessary to hold
matter in the ventriculus for digestion as the process of conversion
is carried on wholly by the secretions of the alimentary canal.

ANATOMICAL NOTES ON TROCHALOPTERON AND
SICALIS.

BY HUBERT LYMAN CLARK.

TuHrovuGH the kindness of Mr. Outram Bangs, I have recently
had the opportunity of examining freshly-killed specimens of the
‘Chinese Thrush’ (Trochalopteron canorum) and the ‘South
American Yellow Finch’ (Sicalis flaveola). There is no other
reason for associating these two species in this brief paper than that
they happened to come into my hands at about the same time.
So far as I can ascertain no species of either genus has ever been
examined with reference to either its pterylosis or internal anatomy.
This is my warrant for publishing these meagre notes.

TROCHALOPTERON.

When the plucked carcass of this bird (7. canoruwm) is compared
with that of a Robin (Planesticus migratorius), the most striking
difference is in the width of the feather-tracts. The body of
Planesticus is about one fourth longer than that of Trochalopteron
and proportionately heavier but the feather-tracts are two to four
times as wide. Thus in Trochalopteron, the upper cervical tract
where narrowest is 2 mm. wide, the dorsal diamond-shaped tract
is 13 mm., the dorsal tract posterior to the diamond is 3 mm. and
the sternal tract, where widest, is 5 mm. across. In Planesticus,

levee

462 Cruarx, Notes on Trochalopteron and Sicalis. Oct:

the corresponding measurements are 5 mm., 25 mm., 12 mm. and
11 mm. So far as the shape and position of the tracts is concerned
there is no noteworthy difference, except perhaps the posterior
dorsal tract, which contrasts with the dorsal “diamond” much less
in the Robin than in the Chinese bird. The differences in the wings
of the two birds are so well known, they need not be dwelt on here
but it is at least interesting to note that in Planesticus the relative
lengths of the primaries run thus: 78695432110. In Trochalop-
teron the arrangement is 54632178910 or the seventh primary
may slightly exceed the second and first. The important point is.
that in the robin the wing is pointed by the outer primaries (6-9)
while in Trochalopteron it is the inner primaries (3-6) which give
the point. This is certainly a striking and perhaps an important
phylogenetic difference. In both genera there are 9 secondaries.
and 12 rectrices as usual in passerine birds.

In their internal anatomy I failed to find any point of difference,
between the two genera, which could be considered significant.
In both, the manubrium of the sternum is notably long and large
with a deep fork. In Trochalopteron, it is 6 mm. long, the arms of
the fork are 5 mm. apart at the tip and the fork is 2.56 mm. deep.
These measurements are in the fresh specimen. Of course, on a
dried skeleton they would be much less.

The nostrils of Trochalopteron are very different from those of
the robin but unfortunately this difference is not nearly so well
shown in skins. In the Robin the nostril is a nearly horizontal slit,
largely concealed by a bare membrane, when looked down on from
above; the slit is widest posteriorly where its height is about one
fourth of its length. In Trochalopteron, the nostril is somewhat
kidney-shaped, oblique and quite unprotected by any membrane;
its length is somewhat more than twice the width. Judging from a
hasty examination of a number of skins, I think the character of
the nasal openings is more or less altered in drying. In no other
way can I account for the statement in the British Museum
‘Catalogue’ (Vol. VII, p. 326) that they are “longitudinal, with a.
large operculum.”’ Certainly that description does not apply at al!

to the nasal openings in an alcoholic or freshly-killed Trochaloptero 1.
canorum.

Vol. XXX “4

1914 Wriacut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. 463

SICALIS.

The carcass of this finch has been carefully compared with one of
our American Goldfinch (Astragalinus tristis) without revealing any
differences whatever in the pterylosis. The primary formula is 87
(or 78) 9654321 and the tail is a trifle less emarginate than in the
goldfinch. The nostril is exposed and nearly circular. Nothing
in the internal anatomy is noticeably different from what is found
in Astragalinus. The tongue is possibly a trifle less fleshy. The
tomia are markedly deflexed, a notable difference from the nearly
straight tomia of the goldfinch. On the roof of the mouth in Sicalis,
at the posterior end of the upper mandible is a conspicuous tubercle,
back of which on each side is a minute pit. This tubercle may be
seen in dry skins, as well as in alcoholic specimens, if the bill is
opened. There is nothing like it in Astragalinus. It is also quite
lacking in Serinus, an interesting confirmation of Mr. Ridgway’s
view that that genus is not a close ally of Sicalis. Perhaps it may
be proper to add that my observations on the nostrils and the tomia
of Sicalis and Serinus entirely confirm Mr. Ridgway’s statements
regarding those genera (Birds of North and Middle America, Vol. I,
Du B22).

EARLY RECORDS OF THE WILD TURKEY. II.

BY ALBERT HAZEN WRIGHT.

THe HuntTING AND TRAPPING OF THE WILD TURKEY.

The hunting and trapping of this wary bird has furnished the
literature of out-of-door magazines many an interesting column in
the last forty years, a period following the range (250 years) of the
subsequent notes. These represent most of the present day
methods of capture and cover a wide stretch of country as well as
range of time. Of the general wariness of the species (Michaux,
l. c., pp. 216, 217) writes as follows: ‘‘ The wild turkies, which begin

464 Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. lave

to be very scarce in the southern states, are plentiful in those to the
westward. Inthe most uninhabited parts they are so tame as to be
easily killed with a pistol-shot. In the east, on the contrary, and
particularly in the neighbourhood of the sea-ports, they cannot be
approached without difficulty: they are not alarmed by a noise,
but they have a very quick sight, and as soon as they discover the
hunter, fly away with such rapidity, that it takes a ‘dog several
minutes to come up with them; and when they see themselves on
the point of being caught, they escape by taking to flight. The
wild turkies generally remain in the swamps, and by the sides of
rivers and creeks, and only come out in the morning and evening.
They perch on the tops of the highest trees, where, notwithstanding
their bulk, it is not always easy to see them. When they have not
been frightened, they return to the same trees for several weeks in
succession.” And, of the turkey on the southwestern prairies or
plains near the Upper Red River, Long says,’ “We daily saw —
turkies; but these animals had acquired all the vigilance which
results from the habit of being often hunted, and the entire Want of
thick forests, and even of solitary trees or inequalities of the surface
to cover the approach of the hunter, rendered abortive most of our
attempts to take them.”

The aborigines have several methods of capture. According to
T. Flint (1. c., p. 73) “The Indians and western sportsmen, learn a
way to hunt them by imitating the ery of their young.’’ Several
other devices or practices of the Indians will appear in the following
excerpts. In 1627, Isaac De Rasieries writes of the turkey in New
Netherlands as follows: 2 “There are also very large turkeys living
wild; they have very long legs, and can run extraordinarily fast so
that we generally take savages with us when we go to hunt them;
for even when one has deprived them of the power of flying, they
_ yet run so fast that we cannot catch them unless their legs are hit
also.” °

In writing of Capt. Brant in the Niagara region, P. Campbell
remarks, that ° “they rode on through the woods, and at last fell in

1 James, Edwin. Long’s Expedition to the Rocky Mountains —. Phila., 1823,
2 vols. Vol. II, p. 96.

1N. Y. Hist. Soc. Colls. New Ser. Vol. II, p. 354.

’Campbell, P. Travels in the Interior Inhabited Parts of North America in
the Years 1791 and 1792. Edinburgh, 1793. pp. 202, 203.

Rr | Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. 465
with a large flock of Turkies, and galloped after them as. hard as
they could, until they obliged the Turkies to take wing and get
upon trees, when the party alighted off their horses, and _ shot
seventeen fine Turkies, with which they returned to camp. They
all shot with rifles....He (Lieut. Turner) told me when he was
one day permitted to go along with them to the woods on a shooting
party; that how soon they fell in with Turkies, the Indians pursued
on foot as fast as they could run, bawling and hallowing all the time
to frighten the birds, and when they had thus got them upon trees,
that they shot many of them. Several other persons told me that
this was the surest way to get them. They are so tame or stupid
when they are in the trees, as to stand perhaps till the last of them
be killed; whereas, on the ground, they are so quick sighted and
fleet, that in an instant they are out of sight. An old Turkey Cock
can outrun any man on the ground. Another method practiced,
is that of watching them on the ground until they get up to roost in
the trees in the evening, when the sportsmen may shoot on until the
last in the flock be killed.”

In 1824, John Hunter in the ‘Memoirs of a Captivity among the
Indians of North America,” gives us the following manner of
hunting: ! “The turkey isnot valued, though when fat, the Indians
frequently take them alive in the following manner. Having
prepared from the skin an apt resemblance of the living bird, they
follow the turkey trails or haunts, till they discover a flock, when
they secrete themselves behind a log, in such a manner as to elude
discovery: partially display their decoy; and imitate the gobbling
noise of the cock. This management generally succeeds to draw
off first one and then another from their companions, which from
their social and unsuspecting habits, thus successively place them-
selves literally in the hands of the hunters, who quickly despatch
them, and await for the arrival for more. This species of hunting,
with fishing, is more practised by the boys than the older Indians,
who seldom, in fact, undertake them, unless closely pressed by
hunger.”

~The Indians also used to employ a blow gun. McKinney when

1 Hunter, John. Memoirs—. Third edit. with additions. London, 1824,
pp. 282, 383.

466 Wricut, Harly Records of the Wild Turkey. Fes

on the Tombigbee River describes its operation thus: ' “With the
end in which the arrow is lodged in their mouths, a sight is drawn
upon the object to be shot at; when with a sudden blow into the
reed, the arrow is darted out the other end, and with’a force suff-
cient to kill at twenty or thirty feet birds — and often wild turkeys.”
Concerning this same practice, Timberlake, 1762, when in Cherokee
country, writes:? “There are..turkeys..pursued only by the
children, who, at eight or ten years old, are very expert at killing
with a sar-bacan, or hollow cane through which they blow a small
dart, whose weakness obliges them to shoot at the eye of the larger
sort of prey, which they seldom miss.”

Thirty years after De Rasieries, Adrian Van der Donck in a
‘Description of Netherlands, 1656’ finds that * “Sometimes the
turkeys are caught with dogs in the snow; but the greatest number
are shot at night from the trees. The turkeys sleep in trees and
frequently in large flocks together. They also usually sleep in the
same place every night. When a sleeping place is discovered, then
two or three gunners go to the place together at night, when they
shoot the fowls, and in such cases frequently bring in a dozen or
more. The Indians take many in snares, when the weather changes
in winter. Then they lay bulbous roots, which the turkeys are
fond of, in the small rills and streams of water, which the birds take
up, when they are ensnared and held until the, artful Indian takes
the turkey as his prize.”

The settlers and foreign sportsmen in general try all the Indian
methods and invent others of their own. Latrobe, when at Little
Rock, Arkansas, tries to imitate the turkeys as do the Indians. He
says,’ “Yet I plead guilty to having sometimes tried to coax the
turkeys in rather an extraordinary way...The practical hunter
will induce them to approach him as he steals through the grass,
by skilful imitation of their gobble and piping. But often, as
‘buried in the thick cane brake, and watching one of those little
openings, where the birds sun themselves, I heard the tread, rustle,

1 McKinney, Thos. L. Memoirs, Official and Personal; ete. 2 vols. N. Y.
1846, Vol. I, p. 163.

2 The Memoirs of Lieut. H. Timberlake—. London, 1765, p. 45.

3.N. Y. Hist. Soc. Colls. New Ser. Vol. I, 1841, p. 172.

4 Latrobe, C. J. The Rambler in North America 1832-1833. 2 vols. New
York,.1835, Vol. I, p. 205.

Vol. Scie

hana Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. 467

and voices of the turkeys around me, and have attempted to allure
them to me by an imitation of their notes. I never succeeded in a
single instance. I set up, for example, a weak, amorous, senti-
mental piping like the female, it was in vain! no broad backed,
round-tailed, burly turkey-cock made his appearance. I gobbled
in the most seducing fashion, throwing as much devotion into my
tones as I could contrive; I essayed to compass a thousand blan-
dishments into a few guttural sounds that were permissible, but
these, far from eliciting any sympathetic response, seemed to put
the whole gang to instant though cautious flight; for I invariably
observed that very briefly, after an attempt of the latter kind, every
sound became hushed, but the beating of my own impatient and
disappointed heart. It was evident that there was no mistaking
me for a turkey, and all the birds that I ever brought to the mess,
were the fruits of a less guileful, more straight-forward and sum-
mary mode of proceeding.”

Tibbits, in 1874, in ‘Reminiscences of Early Days in Michigan’
gives a variation of the turkey calling method.! “The wild turkey
was very common, and vast flocks of several hundred were fre-
quently to be met with. The usual method of hunting them, was
for two or three persons to proceed cautiously through the woods
till they came upon a flock, then suddenly fire at random amongst
them, the object being to scatter them in all directions. When
thus scattered they will invariably return to the same spot to get
together again, the old ones coming first to call their young to-
gether. The hunters, hid in some secluded place with their
‘turkey calls’ ready for use, would wait patiently for the return of
the old birds. These turkey-calls consist of the hollow bone of the
turkey’s wing, and, in the mouth of an experienced hunter can be
made to exactly imitate the piping sound of the mother bird when
calling her brood together. Soon the maternal notes of the old
birds are heard, and the hunters respond with their ‘calls,’ luring
them on to certain destruction. After the old birds are killed, the
young ones fall an easy prey to the unerring aim of the skilful marks-
man. The flesh of the turkey is esteemed a great luxury, and one
of the most delicious meals I think I ever ate was made from steak

1 Mich. Pioneer and Hist. Soc. Colls. Vol. I, 1874-76. Wild Animals of Wayne
County, Michigan. By J. S. Tibbits, p. 404.

468 Waicut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. leur

cut from the breast of a young turkey, fried in butter, and partaken
after a hard day’s hunt, in which a companion and myself killed
seven large fine birds.”

In 1777 near Pamlico Sound, Elkanah Watson gives ! “chase to a
wild turkey, that maintained his equal right to the road, like a true
North Carolina Republican; and, in spite of our efforts, he stretched
away upon his long legs, far beyond our reach.” The Hon. C. A.
Murray holds to a somewhat different opinion. In the neighbor-
hood of Kansas River, when he is? “crossing a wooded ravine a
flock of turkeys, containing I think fifty or sixty, rose, and flew to a
neighbouring thicket; as they were on the wing I fired a ball at
random among them; it broke two or three feathers, but killed
none. When my companions arrived, I halted them for half an
hour, and went with the young American lad in pursuit of them;
but they had beat us completely in the thicket, and we saw nothing
more of them. Had we got them out on the open prairie we should
have had excellent sport. A wild turkey runs with exceeding
swiftness, but he cannot keep it up long, and his wings are not.pro-
portioned to the great weight of his body, so as to enable him to fly
far. I have been told, that on a fair plain without trees, an active
Indian or white man, could run one down in little more than an
hour.” The same gentleman recounts a hand-to-hand encounter
he has with a wild turkey at Leesburgh, Va. “I was crossing a
wooded ravine, when a large gobbler (so is the full-grown wild
turkey-cock called here) started from the brushwood; my gun was:
only loaded with very small partridge-shot, but I discharged both
barrels after the flying enemy, accidentally broke his wing; he
came to the ground, and began to run like an ostrich. The little
spaniel pursued in gallant style; but when he came up, was too
small to hurt or hold his antagonist. I threw down my rifle
and joined in the pursuit; at length I got hold of the turkey’s leg;
the grass was slippery with ice, and in his desperate struggle to:
escape he pulled me over on the ground, then he scratched my hands:
with his claws, and nearly blinded me by flapping his great wings

1 Watson, W. C. Men and Times of the Revolution: or Memoirs of Elkanah
Watson. New York, 1857. 2nd edition. p. 46.

? Murray, Hon. C. A. Travels in North America during the years 1834, 1835
and 1836. 2vols. N.Y. 1839. Vol. II, p. 48, I, p. 88.

Bar Al Wricut, Harly Records of the Wild Turkey. 469

over my face and eyes; at last I contrived to seize his neck, and
soon put an end to the contest. As he was too heavy a burthen
for my little companion, I strung him across my back, and shoulder-
ing my rifle, returned in triumph to Leesburgh. During my walk
homeward I felt no disposition to complain of the cold; for inde-
pendent of my accoutrements, the turkey’s weight proved, on my
arrival, to be twenty-eight pounds.”

Flint suggests another method for Kentucky in Boone’s day. He
holds that! “A man stationed near one of these paths (buffalo or
bear paths) could kill game enough, with turkeys — in an hour, to
supply the wants of a month. In Virginia Bruce suggests a
method somewhat akin to that of Tibbits. He writes ? “Of the two
varieties of game (partridge and turkey), it is probable that the
pursuit of the wild turkey afforded the Virginians much exertion as
well as wariness to come up with it and killit. Blinds of pine or oak
boughs were erected at different eligible spots in the woods, and
here, after scattering the flocks with trained dogs, the hunters would
hide themselves, and by skilful use of the yelp, soon call up the con-
fused and unsuspecting birds within range of the guns.”

In the country of the Chickasaws (1724), according to Du Pratz,
a dog is necessary to hunt them.? “The second day I had a turkey-
hen brought to regale me. The discoverer who killed it, told me,
there are a great many in the same place, but that he could do
nothing without a dog. I have often heard of a turkey-chace, but
never had an opportunity of being at one. On coming to the spot,
we soon discovered the hens, which ran off with such speed, that the
swiftest Indian would lose his labour in attempting to outrun them.
My dog soon came up with them, which made them take to their
wings, and perch on the next trees; as long as they are not pursued
in this manner, they only run, and are soon out of sight. I came
near the place of retreat, killed the largest, a second and my dis-
coverer a third. We might have killed the whole flock; for while
they see any men, they never quit the tree they have once perched
on. Shooting scares them not, as they only look at the bird that

1Flint, T. 1832, Vol. I, p. 348.

2 Bruce, P. A. The Social Life of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century. Rich-
mond, Va. 1907, p. 212.

3 Du Pratz, M. Le Page. The History of Louisiana. Paris 1758, London edit.
1774, pp. 134, 135.

470 Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. leur

drops, and set up a timorous cry, as he falls.” In Canada (1844)
Godley reports that ' “ Wild turkeys are tracked in the snow, and
stalked like deer with rifles; they show excellent sport, but are very
scarce in our provinces.” When along the Alleghany River, Pa.
(1807), Christian Schultz relies on an air gun. “It frequently
happens that after shooting one from a tree, you will find it busted
by falling on the ground; they are remarkably tame, and if alarmed,
generally take to a tree, especially if disturbed by a dog. I found
my air gun of great use in shooting this game, for if there were five
or six of them in one tree, I was always sure of bringing them all
down,” and at Cedar Bluffs on the Mississippi, he praises this
weapon as follows: “my air gun which had been charged a few
hours before for the purpose of shooting at a flock of wild turkeys,
was worth a dozen common guns at a moderate distance.”

Quite frequently we find the wild turkey is hunted on horseback.
Anburey, on a journey to Richmond, Va., overtakes * “a flock of
wild turkeys; a couple of spaniels we had with us pursued them, and
it is incredible how swift they run, as neither of us, though we gal-
loped our horses, could overtake them, although they run near two
hundred yards before they took flight; they appeared considerably
larger than ours, and I am told, sometimes weigh thirty or forty
pounds each.”’ In the southwestern country 1849, Marcy reports
one chase by horses in this manner:* A hunter “ discovered a turkey
upon the prairie, and putting spurs to his horse started after him
at full speed. I thought this a novel method of hunting wild tur-
keys, and looked on the chase with a good deal of interest, partic-
ularly as I knew that the quality of our supper depended upon the
result. The turkey was about a half a mile ahead at the start, and
made good running for a short time, but soon found it necessary to
resort to flight. The hunter followed on till the turkey alighted

1Godley, John Robert. Letters from America. 2 vols. London, 1844.
WMolvL “p. 247%

2 Schultz, Christian. Travels on an Inland Voyage through the States of New
York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee, ete. N. Y. 2 vols.
Vol. I, p. 122,123: I, p. 4.

’ Anburey, Thomas. Travels through the Interior Parts of America in a Series
of Letters. 2 vols. London, 1789. Vol. II, p. 342.

4 Report of Capt. R. B. Marcy’s Route from Fort Smith to Santa Fe. 31st
Congress, Ist Session, U. 8. Senate, Ex. Doc. No. 64. July 24, 1850. Washing-
ton, D.C. p. 176:

| Wricut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. 471
and ran into a timbered ravine; he still followed out of sight with
his horse, but soon appeared again with a stick driving the exhausted
bird before him. I expressed much surprise at the facility with
which he run down and caught the turkey; but he informed me
that they seldom ever fly more than twice before they become
exhausted and are easily taken.”

One of the most profitable methods is the so called trap or pen,
more generally used in Virginia than in any other region. Bruce
(l. e., p. 213) in speaking of Virginia in the 17th century writes that
“among the ingenious devices employed for its capture was the
large trap built in the midst of the forest; lured by a long train of
grains of corn to the hole in the ground which led into the trap,
where there was piled up a quantity of the same grains, the turkey
entered unhesitatingly, and once in, was too stupid to find its way
out of the same hole again.” Beverley informs us! “There are
many pretty Devices besides the Gun, to take wild Turkeys; and
among others, a Friend of mine invented a great Trap; wherein he
at times caught many Turkeys, and particularly seventeen at one
time; but he could not continue it so, as to let others in, after he
had entrapped the first Flock, until they were taken out.” An-
burey (I. c. Vol. II, pp. 340, 343) notes this same practice in Vir-
ginia. “Just before we came to Goochland Courthouse, we saw
the manner by which the inhabitants catch them: they make a
long fence of about twelve feet square, securing the top with heavy
logs, but before they covered it over dig a passage from the center,
to the outside of the fence, which is covered over so as to admit
light, and round about the entrance, and through this passage they
strew Indian corn, as well as a quantity for them to feed on when in
the trap, the birds seeing the corn in the inside, keep walking
around to gather it, till they meet that which is laid to conduct
them into the passage, which having consumed, they keep eating
on till they get into the trap, and these foolish birds, when they wish
to get out, instead of returning the way they came in, keep continu-
ally flying up, by which means one or two out of the flock, in the
morning are found dead, and they frequently catch a flock of ten or
a dozen at a time in this manner.” In 1819, Warden (Vol. II, p.
178) practically repeats the above for Virginia.

1 Beverley, Robert. The History of Virginia. London, 2 edit. 1722, p. 252.

472 Wriaut, Early Records of the Wild Turkey. leur

Of Ohio in 1814 and 1815, Walker writes! “Wild Turkeys are
very plenty. I have often set a square pen made of rails, then scat-
tered a little corn about it and into it, and caught eight or ten fine
ones atatime. The pen being covered at the top the turkeys could
not fly out, and they never thought of ducking their heads to get out
by the same passage they came in.” In Michigan, about this same
period, the pen has this description: (Tibbits, J. S., ]. ¢., p. 404)
“The wild turkey is sometimes caught in pens made of poles, some
five or six feet in height and covered over the top to prevent their
escape. A covered passageway is made under the pen large enough
for the turkeys to crawl through. Corn or other grain is scattered
in the passageway inside the pen. The unsuspecting birds, seeing
the grain, commence picking it up, and thus one after another crawl
through the hole into the pen. ‘Once in, forever in,’ for they never
think of putting their heads down to crawl out again.”’

When at the Mammoth Cave, Blane, (1. c. p. 277) an English
gentleman finds, “The manner in which great numbers of wild
turkeys are caught is very simple and curious. A Pen is made by
placing rough hewn rails one above another, so as to form a vacant
space, about six or eight feet long and as many broad, which is
closed at the top by heavy rails laid across. A small trench is then
dug for a yard or two on the outside and continued under the lowest
rail into the interior. In this trench some Indian corn is strewed,
and the turkeys, while employed in picking it up, advance with their
head downwards into the Pen. As soon as they find themselves:
in the enclosure, these stupid birds never think of stooping down, or
they could walk out as easily as they walked in; but instead of this.
they try to force a way out at the top and sides, and continue jump-
ing about in great alarm, till some one in the course of the day
visits the Pen and secures them. JI have known as many as seven
_ or eight caught within four and twenty hours in a single Pen.”

In Canada the same method used to be in vogue. Smith finds?
a “common mode of capturing them is by trapping. This is
effected by erecting a large pen or hut of fence rails, leaving the
lower rail of one side a sufficient height from the ground to allow of

1 Walker, Chas. N. History of Athens, O. Cincinnati. 1869, p. 431.

2Smith, W. H. Canada; Past, Present and Future, ete. 2 vols. Toronto.
1851, Vol. IT, p. 405.

Lee Seal Cooxn, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. A473
the Turkey creeping under it. A long train of barley, corn, or
some other grain is then laid on the ground, leading into the trap;
the Turkeys gather up the grain till they arrive at the trap, when
they follow the bait and creep under the rail; as soon as they dis-
cover the predicament they are in they become so alarmed that
they appear at once to lose all instinct; there is nothing to prevent
them leaving the trap the way they came in, but they seem to not be
aware of that, and remain stupidly staring about them till they are
captured. In consequence of this known stupidity of the Turkey,
trapping is prohibited in Canada, as tending to exterminate the
breed, the Turkey usually wandering in flocks or families, and
the whole flock being thus generally taken at once; whereas, if
they are shot, the chances are that some one of each brood will
escape.”

SOME WINTER BIRDS OF OKLAHOMA.
BY WELLS W. COOKE.

Less has been published about the birds of Oklahoma than about
those of any other state in the Union. It seems advisable therefore
that a record should be made of the notes made during a seven
months’ residence there the winter of 1883-4. The center of
observations was the town of Caddo, on the M. K. and T. Ry.,
twenty miles north of Denison, Texas. The country at that time
— the Choctaw Nation — was devoted principally to the grazing of
beef cattle. Right in the town of Caddo there were a few small
cotton and corn fields, but a half mile in any direction brought one
to the open range, never as yet overstocked, and scarcely changed
from its condition before it was trod by the white man’s foot. Much
the same could be said about the timber. There were no forests
anywhere and no evergreens. The country as a whole was well
grassed prairie, but every little ‘branch’ was fringed with brush,
and when enough of these had united to make a permanently
flowing stream its banks were lined with a thin fringe of trees, which

474 Cooke, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. es

widened as the stream enlarged until it became a bottomland of
tall fine hardwood timber. Such a bottomland existed six miles
south of Caddo along the Blue River and many of the observations
here recorded were made in this timbered area. It had never been
lumbered and the few enormous black walnut logs that had been
marketed — logs so large that twelve yoke of oxen were required
to haul a single log — had made no impression on the tract as a
whole. In fact the conditions, so far as land birds were concerned,
were the same as though the country had never been settled —
making it all the more desirable that bird notes made at that time
should be published for comparison with conditions as they exist
today.

The writer reached Caddo August 27, 1883 and left there April 8,
1884. Although bird observations were a side issue, yet close
watch was kept of the ever shifting bird population, several hun-
dred birds were collected for purposes of identification, while a bird
diary extending over more than eighty foolscap pages serves as the
basis for the following notes. ;

Migrating birds were present during the first week of September;
Barn Swallows and Nighthawks passed each evening and September
10, Tree and Cliff Swallows with Cowbirds were common in
migration. Other duties prevented a visit to the heavy timber of
the bottomland during the whole of the fall and the notes to the end
of November pertain to a strictly prairie country, but it seems prob-
able that September 14—21 was the height of the fall migration of
warblers. September 15, first rain, ending a dry spell that had
lasted since the middle of June; September 21, first ducks of the
season — a flock of Mallards. Scissor-tailed Flycatchers, Swallows,
and Nighthawks continued to drift by the last ten days of Septem-
ber and disappeared early in October. Meanwhile Cowbirds and
Mourning Doves had gradually increased until by October 10, the
former were in flocks of 100-150 birds, and the latter were at least
five times their September numbers. On this last date the first
flock of Canada Geese appeared and flocks of Flickers began to
pass in migration. October 15, first large flock of Meadowlarks,
about 150, drifting southeast; October 26, first flock of Horned
Larks; November 3, first flock of Robins.

By November 6 the Brewer’s Blackbirds and Purple Grackles

~~

wr

aie | Cooke, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. 475

which came in late October had increased until they and the Cow-
birds were present in multitudes. The first week in November
brought the first visitors from the north of the Tree, Song, White-
crowned, and Harris’s Sparrows, Junco, Myrtle Warbler, and Ruby-
crowned Kinglet.

The trees had shed about half their leaves by November 9, the
first norther of the season November 13 froze water slightly and
stripped off many more, while a real norther November 26 tore off
most of the remainder.

The first hard rain of the season, December 3, marked the be-
ginning of the wet season; the ‘tanks’ were filled for the first time
since July, and December 13, the lowlands were half-flooded by a
down pour. A norther and everything frozen December 19; a
temperature of 74° on December 23 and freezing the next day;
real winter from December 24 to January 27, with zero weather on
January 5 and+ 4° on January 24.

The Longspurs began to arrive November 17 and increased
November 26; after the hard freeze of December 19, the most
common birds were the Junco, Tree Sparrow, and Brewer’s Black-
bird. All through December the Cowbirds, Red-winged Black-
birds and Meadowlarks gradually decreased until by Christmas
they had ceased to be conspicuous. The lowest ebb of bird life
was December 24—January 15; after that date, in spite of the cold,
Blackbirds began to increase until by January 20, both they and the
Horned Larks had doubled in numbers.

McCown’s Longspur came January 19; the first spring song
of the Meadowlark was heard January 21; still further increase of
Blackbirds on January 23, followed by Cowbirds two days later.
First spring songs of Red-winged Blackbird and Song Sparrow
January 29, when spring began with a rush, the temperature rose
to 72° and in two days more there was no snow, ice, or frost any-
where. On January 31 there was a fine chorus of song from a
dozen different species, while the Mallard and Green-winged Teal
returned to the tanks and a few flocks of ducks passed north.
Within the next few days the grass started and the Spring Beauty
opened its blossoms.

February 6-14, a second winter.

Savannah Sparrows, Horned Larks, and Smith’s Longspurs were

476 Cooke, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. lee

abundant February 13, and the next day appeared a flock of not
less than a thousand Lapland Longspurs. Innumerable Savannah
Sparrows were present February 16, with the first Chestnut-
collared Longspurs and Le Conte’s Sparrows. By February 18, the
latter were present in hundreds, while the Longspurs, Savannah
Sparrows and Horned Larks showed a decrease. The remainder
of the Longspurs and Horned Larks with all the Le Conte’s Sparrows
left the night of February 19, with the Red-winged Blackbirds and
Savannah Sparrows showing much decrease.

The woodland birds on February 23, showed not much change
from their November condition, except an increase of Field, Song,
and Fox Sparrows. On February 26, Robins, Red-winged Black-
birds, Brewer’s Blackbirds and Cowbirds were common in migra-
tion and a flock of Sandhill Cranes went north at an immense
height.

Real spring began March 5, with a maximum temperature of
79°, the arrival of the Purple Martin, and with a ‘cloud’ of Red-
winged Blackbirds. The bulk of Juncos and Harris’s Sparrows
departed the night of March 9, but were replaced March 15 by large
flocks of Fox, Harris’s, and Savannah Sparrows and Brewer Black-
birds.

The least bird life since February 1 was on February 22, though
at this date Savannah Sparrows were very abundant, but left in the
next 48 hours. In the woods on March 25 Ruby-crowned Kinglets
and Blue-gray Gnatcatchers were common. At the end of the
next ten days a few Savannah and Lincoln’s Sparrows were about all
that were left of the winter visitants. During these days there
occurred the principal migration of Shorebirds, Greater Yellowlegs
and Upland Plover being especially abundant, while vast numbers
of Sandhill Cranes passed north during the day.

I left Caddo April 8 and made no bird notes after April 4, at which
- date the migration of warblers and of the more common summer
birds had scarcely begun.

1. Podilymbus podiceps. Prep-sitLeEp Grespre.— Not rareas a mi-
grant, spring and fall; one September 22, 1883; most likely to be found on
the ‘tanks’ which were so small and shallow that the birds had scant chance
to use their powers of diving and long distance sub-surface swimming.

2. Anas platyrhynchos. Ma.uarp.—One of the few ducks which
remained through most of the winter. It was seen September 21, being

bP rer aaa Cooke, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. 477

the first duck of any kind to arrive in fall migration on the tanks. Ducks
were never common owing to the entire lack of marshes and permanent
water. When everything froze in January all ducks were forced to leave
the open prairies, but mallards were found along the Blue, January 12 and
they returned to the tanks January 31, at which time a few flocks of ducks
began to pass in northward migration.

3. Chaulelasmus streperus. Gapwauu.— A few flocks were noted
in the spring migration from February 19 to April 2.

4. Mareca americana. Winceon.— The first flocks in spring were
seen February 19.

5. Nettion carolinense. GREEN-wiINGED TEaL.— The hardiest duck
next to the Mallard. It was seen in the fall October 6, and remained in
small flocks until all the ponds froze in January. It returned in a few days
and had already become fairly common moving northward by January 31.
A flock was seen April 2.

6. Chen hyperboreus hyperboreus. Snow Goosre.— Probably no
Snow Geese wintered near Caddo, for they were not seen until spring
migration was well under way. Then on March 10, two large flocks were
seen flying north and they immediately became common, five large flocks
being seen in the afternoon of the same day.

7. Branta canadensis canadensis. Canapa Goose.— The first
‘ goose was seen in fall migration October 10, and for the rest of the fall the

species was common flying over toward the south. None alighted near
Caddo, but some must have wintered not far off for they were seen every
few days all winter. The winter of 1881-2, geese were extraordinarily
abundant near Caddo and hundreds were shot for their feathers, the bodies
being thrown away. The next winter they were rare and the same during
the winter of 1883-4. But this latter winter they were numerous a hundred
miles west of Caddo. Canada Geese were common March 3, 1884, migrat-
ing north against a strong wind, and flocks passed daily March 9-16.
A hard thunderstorm broke at 11 p.m. April 1, and a flock of geese over-
taken by the storm, alighted in a dooryard at the edge of town. Hunters
say that this is later than usual for them to be present.

8. Ardea herodias herodias. Great Biue Heron.— Three were
seen February 11, but they probably had not wintered in the immediate
vicinity as they are reported to remain only in the mildest winters and that
of 1883-4 was anything but mild. Not seen again until the regular spring
migration began on March 18.

9. Grus mexicana. SanpHILL CrANE.— Naturally a bird of the open
country, the sandhill crane was a common migrant both spring and fall at
Caddo. The first, a flock of five, passed over November 6, followed on
November 11 by three large flocks that flew over southward with much
noise in the middle of the day. This was only two days before the first
norther of the season carried the temperature below freezing and brought
down many leaves. The cranes did not return until February 26, when a
flock of sixteen went slowly north in the late afternoon at an immense

478 Cooxn, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. ee

height. ‘ Several flocks passed March 8, 16, and 22, and vast numbers
dotted the prairies and passed north in large flocks April 1-4.

10. Rallus elegans. Kina Ratm.— A single bird shot November 1
constituted the only record for this species, which could find scant accom-
modations to its liking around Caddo.

11. Gallinago delicata. Wuson’s Snrpnr.— Never common; a few
scattered birds were seen from October 16 to November 6; the first spring
migrants appeared March 8; and they were present in some numbers
March 12.

12. Totanus melanoleucus. GreaTeR YELLow-Lecs— Seen in
small numbers March 11 and March 25, and they became common April 4.

13. Actitismacularia. Sprorrep Sanprippr.— There was no suitable
country to tempt the migrant Spotted Sandpipers to alight and they were
found only a few times in small numbers, October 1-16.

14. Charadrius dominicus dominicus. Gorpen Pitover— Not
nearly so common as was to have been expected; a few were reported
March 12 and a single one seen March 25.

15. Oxyechus vociferus. Ki1itpEER— The killdeer of course nested
near Caddo and was easily the most conspicuous member of its family.
It was noted all the fall, but was most common October 1, after which time
the numbers became gradually less until by November 6 nearly all were
gone; the last was November 9. A single one was seen F ebruary 22; but
not many appeared until a week later. By March 5 they had become
common and noisy and were most numerous March 15.

16. Colinus virginianus virginianus. Bops-warire.— Abundant resi-
dent; favorable conditions for both food and shelter existed along every
little branch and the number of covies was correspondingly great. No
better quail hunting could be found anywhere than existed the early winter
of 1883 along the edges of the bottomland of the Blue River. The Red-
tailed Hawks however seemed to be fully as destructive to the quail as the
sportsmen and by Christmas the covies had become seriously reduced.

lv. Tympanuchus americanus americanus. Pratrin CHIcKEN.—
The open country around Caddo was especially adapted to the needs of the
prairie chicken and they were one of the common birds. Some 18-20
covies were reared within a radius of a mile of the town and by September
24, these had begun to unite into larger flocks. At least a hundred were
seen in one small field November 6. In the early fall while they were in the
original covies, they would lie well to a dog and gave good sport. As the
flocks became larger the birds became much more wary until by early
December it was difficult to get within even rifle shot. Each flock had
sentinels posted on commanding elevations, and when these gave the
alarm the whole flock was off and seldom flew less than half a mile before
alighting.

18. Meleagris gallopavo silvestris. Wutp TurKkey.— Very common
in the bottomlands a few miles from Caddo. On November 5, twelve large
ones were brought into town as the spoils of a forenoon hunt by one party.

ea | Cooke, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. 479

19. Zenaidura macroura marginella. Western Mournine Dove.
—JIn the late summer and early fall, the mourning dove occurred every-
where in single birds and pairs. By September 10, they had begun to
gather in small parties, and soon after this it was evident that their num-
bers were being increased by arrivals from the north; from September 28
to October 9 they were at least five times as numerous as the summer
population. During the dry spell from September 10 to October 1, they
visited the tanks in large numbers every evening, but as soon as the rains
came they spent the nights on the tops of the hills. By the first of Novem-
ber all the large flocks had gone and only a few scattered birds remained.
The last one seen was November 29, but they were reported occasionally
throughout the winter and returned in spring migration February 23,
though in the spring they were far less common than in the fall.

20. Cathartes aura septentrionalis. Turkey WVuirure— An
abundant summer resident and equally common throughout the winter.
In fact this species and the Black Vulture were so numerous that in the fall
and early winter when cattle feed was good and dead animals were few,
these two species had hard work to get a living. They could be seen sailing
overhead in great flocks seeking for food, or sitting in long lines on the fences.
An animal killed in the morning would be picked clean by night and there
was great quarreling with some fighting over the carcass. After the snows
and freezing rains came cattle began to die by the hundred, and before
spring more than 15,000 died within 30 miles of Caddo. Then, particu-
larly in March, scarcely a Vulture was ever seen in the air. They became
so particular that they would not touch a carcass on the prairie, but select-
ing those that had fallen in or near timber, would gorge themselves, fly
heavily to the nearest tree and stay there until there was room in their
bodies for more of their disgusting food.

There seemed to be considerable increase in the numbers of the Turkey
Vulture during October, especially October 18-20, and probably this is the
time that migrants from the north arrived.

21. Catharista urubu. Brack VuLtture.— Common resident and
though varying in numbers from week to week, this variation is probably
due to wanderings in search of food rather than to any real migration. Its
numbers were on the whole somewhat less than those of the Turkey Vulture;
usually both species flocked together, but on January 16 a flock of 27 was
seen composed entirely of Black Vultures.

22. Elanoides forficatus. Swatiow-rTaiLep Kire.— Common both
in migration and insummer. The first arrived in the spring April 1.

23. Circus hudsonius. Marsa Hawx.— The most common winter
hawk, indeed they were twice as numerous at Caddo during the winter of
1883-4 as all other hawks combined, and were in the proportion of about
three brown-colored to one blue individual. In the spring they fed largely
on Blackbirds. They were seen many times to try to catch smaller birds,
but always failed.

24. Accipiter velox. SHARP-SHINNED Hawk.— A not rare winter
resident; seen January 12 at the Blue River.

480 CookE, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. lane

25. Accipiter cooperi. Coorrr’s Hawk.— A winter resident, seen
for the first time in the fall on September 17.

26. Buteo borealis borealis. Rep-rarLep Hawk.— A common
winter resident; as many as eighteen were seen Christmas day near the
Blue River.

27. Haliaeetus leucocephalus. Batp Eacie.— A winter resident
along the Blue River; seen there January 12.

28. Falco sparverius sparverius. Sparrow Hawx.— One of the
commoner hawks through the winter and probably a resident. It was seen
September 22 and by March 3 most of the wintering birds had departed
and only three individuals were seen from then to March 15. On Novem-
ber 7 a Sparrow Hawk was seen chasing a Shrike — dog eat dog.

29. Strix varia varia. Barrep Owu.— Resident and the commonest
owl or at least the one most in evidence. The pellets thrown up at one time
by an individual of this species contained parts of a Brewer Blackbird, a
Cardinal Grosbeak and a Le Conte Sparrow.

30. Otus asio asio. Screech Owx_.— A common resident.

31. Speotyto cunicularia hypogaea. Burrowina Owx.— Does
not occur right at Caddo, but is a common resident thirty miles to the
northwest.

32. Conuropsis carolinensis. Carotina Paroquet.— According to
the early naturalists, this species was formerly abundant throughout much
of eastern Oklahoma. A sharp lookout was kept for it every time that the
timbered districts were visited, but none was seen. A stuffed one was still
preserved that had been shot near Caddo several years previous. In 1882
a large flock was seen about 18 miles from Caddo; other smaller flocks were
reported from time to time, the last being January 15, 1884 on the Blue
River about eight miles from Caddo. They were, of course, resident.

33. Ceryle alcyon alcyon. KincrisHeR.— Resident, though not so
common as in many other parts of the country.

34. Campephilus principalis. Ivory-BiLLED WoopPEcKER.— Resi-
dent and not considered by the local hunters as any great rarity. Seen on
two visits to the heavy timber of the Blue River — November 29 and Janu-
ary 12.

35. Dryobates villosus villosus. Hairy WooprpEecKER.— Common
resident. .

36. Dryobates pubescens pubescens. Downy WoopprEcKER.—
Common resident; these two woodpeckers were about medium in numbers
as compared with the other species, exceeding the Yellow-bellied and Red-
headed, and being exceeded by the Flicker and the Red-bellied Woodpecker.
On January 12 about a dozen were seen in two miles along the Blue River;
they were already beginning their spring drumming.

37. Sphyrapicus varius varius. YrELLOW-BELLIED SAPSUCKER.—
Rare winter resident; seldom more than one seen ina day’s tramp. It was
not seen in the fringes of timber along the branches, but was found every
time the heavy timber of the Blue was visited.

eo | Cooks, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. 481

38. Phlootomus pileatus pileatus. Pireatep WoopprcKer.— In
the larger forested areas of the river bottoms, a fairly common resident.

39. Melanerpes erythrocephalus. Rrp-HEADED WooDPECKER.—
A winter resident and one of the rarest Woodpeckers. A party of eleven
flew over town September 12, evidently in migration, and two more passed
by September 18, flying at a great height. A very few were present all
winter in the timber along the Blue.

40. Centurus carolinus. Rerp-BELLIED WooprecKkEer.— Resident
and the most abundant Woodpecker near Caddo; some 50-60 were seen
November 29 in a three-mile walk along the Blue River.

41. Colaptes auratus auratus. F.Licker.— None were seen until
migrants began to appear September 18, but it does not follow that the
species could not have been found earlier had the heavy timber been visited.
No more migrants seen until October 14 when they became common.
Through the winter along the Blue they were next to the Red-bellied in
numbers, being most common the last of November and less than half as
common in the middle of the winter. They were still present in fair
numbers March 15, but by March 25 had nearly all departed.

42. Colaptes cafer collaris. Rrep-sHarrep Fiickrer.— A fine male
was collected January 11, being the first one seen. None of the local
hunters to whom it was shown had ever before seen a Flicker with red
wings, so it evidently is an uncommon visitant to the district. The next
day it was found fairly common near the Blue and when this form and
auratus were heard calling alternately as happened several times during
the day, the note of collaris was so much coarser, rougher, and heavier as to
be instantly distinguishable. The so-called hybridus was also noted at the
same time and place and both forms remained common the rest of the
winter.

Thus at Caddo, auratus arrived early in the fall and was a common
winter resident; few, if any, bred there. After auratus had practically
completed its fall migration and settled down to winter numbers, collaris
and hybridus came in together, and during the coldest weather all three
were found in about equal numbers in heavy timberland, though collaris
was perhaps the most abundant. All three forms were still present March
15, but collaris and hybridus left a few days later.

43. Chordeiles virginianus subsp.? NicHTHawK.— A few were
already present the first of September but whether or not they were summer
residents could not be told. By September 9 southward migration was
well started; an increase was noticeable September 18 when they were
most common. Their numbers slowly decreased and the last was seen
October 10.

44. Archilochus colubris. Rusry-rHroaTteED HuMMINGBIRD.— Seen
_ only twice, one bird each day, October 7 and 8.

45. Muscivora forficata. Scissor-TaILeD FLycaTcHeR— A com-
mon breeder, scattered over much of the country; gathering in flocks
September 11; moving southward in the early evening September 14; the

[oce:

482 Cooke, Winter Birds of Oklahoma.
height of fall migration was September 20-22, the flocks seeming to start
for their night’s journey, just before dark. The morning of October 6 a
flock was seen which had arrived during the previous night; they were very
restless, were not feeding, left during the day, and were the last seen. The
next spring they appeared at Caddo, April 11.

46. Tyrannus tyrannus. Kincpirp.— Though of course the King-
bird must nest in that general region, none were seen until September 10:
and then only three birds. Two more were seen the next day and four on
September 14. This completes the record for the whole fall.

47. Sayornis phoebe. Puaspe—A rare migrant and still rarer
winter resident. None were seen until three birds in migration October 18,
paused for a few minutes in town and then hurried on southward. No
more were seen in town but a few spent the winter in the heavy timber
whence they appeared March 8, March 15, and again March 25.

48. Otocoris alpestris praticola. Prairr: Hornep Larx.— The
appearance of a large flock October 26, marked the arrival of this species in
its winter quarters. They soon became common and remained in fairly
constant numbers until the real winter of January when they doubled their
former numbers. When the earth was covered February 13 with a half
inch of fine frozen sleet, the Horned Larks seemed to’be having a hard time
to get aliving. The air was full of swiftly flying flocks that alighting only
to start again before the last straggler had fairly touched the ground.” A
decided decrease was noticeable February 18 and two days later not a bird
was visible in the fields where they have been common all winter. Others
in less numbers soon came to take their places and about March 8 the
flocks broke up and the few remaining birds were seen in pairs.

49. Cyanocitta cristata cristata. Buus Jay.— None were seen
until on October 18, a flock of 18 passed over flying south; seen again
October 25. No more were noted until the timber along the Blue River
was visited November 29; there they were found abundant, in fact they
were everywhere and kept up a constant shower of acorns falling on the
dry leaves. At least 150 seen in a three mile walk. At one time when
passing through a grove of trees which had no acorns not a Jay was visible.
Some of the heavier woods near the smaller streams were visited December
25, and no Blue Jays were seen. The part of the woods where they were
most abundant on November 29, was visited again January 12, and less
than a dozen were seen and scarcely a sound heard. The same conditions
were found on a subsequent visit February 23, and much the same when
another similar stretch of bottomland was visited March 25.

50. Corvus brachyrhynchos brachyrhynchos. Crow.— In early
September, the Crows were scattered singly over the country and probably
represented the birds that had spent the summer in the vicinity. By
September 22, they began to show a decided increase, and then remained
constant in numbers for the next month; after that, they decreased until
during the coldest part of the winter only a few were seen.

51. Molothrus ater ater. Cowsirp.— Already common by Septem-

vel eT Cooks, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. 483

ber 1, in flocks containing both males and females; from September 26, to
October 9, these flocks increased in size until they contained 100-150 birds
inaflock. The increase continued for the next month until by November 2,
they were present in multitudes swarming over the cornfields and around
the barnyards. Then they decreased rapidly and only a few were seen
after November 15. These few remained through the winter and on
January 6 seemed to be nearly through with the winter molt. The first
male in full spring plumage was seen January 17 and two days later there
was a marked increase in numbers, about half the birds being in bright
black plumage.

The bulk of male cowbirds began to arrive about January 22 and they
were common for a month and then about February 20, they seemed to
pass on north and after a few days their places were taken by new flocks
from the south composed mostly of females. They were never common in
the spring as in the fall and their spring numbers at the most formed only a
small fraction of the mixed Blackbird flocks. Few were seen after the first
of March, and a single one March 23 was the last.

52. Agelaius phoeniceus subsp.’ Rep-winGeD BuackBirp.— The
first flock appeared September 10, the species was not yet common by
October 9, and even by November 6, not more than ten flocks had been
seen in all. Two days later they became more common and by November
16 they were abundant and equal in number to the Brewer’s Blackbird.
These mixed flocks gradually decreased until by December 25 there were few
flocks of more than a hundred birds. Yet these small flocks were scattered
so numerously over the country as to make the Blackbirds among the most
numerous species. The last of December the females of the Red-winged
Blackbird were hardly a tenth as numerous as the males. On January 22
the first increase over winter numbers was noted; still further increase
January 29 and the first spring song. Several flocks were passing north in
migration February 16, and by February 20 quite a share of the birds had
passed on north. More flocks flew by heading north February 25, still
principally males, though a few females were seen February 26 and about a
tenth of the flocks on this date were young males. On March 1 it was
noticed that the local flocks feeding around town during the day, were
flying to the woods for the night. Nothing of the kind was seen during the
whole of the winter, the birds keeping all the time in the open country away
from the timber. A cloud of Red-winged Blackbirds was seen for the first
time in the spring March 5, and on March 11 a similar cloud passed by at
noon as though in regular migration. Within a few days they began to
decrease and by March 20 had become so rare that for the rest of the month
only small parties of 6-10 were seen.

53. Sturnella magna magna. MrADOWLARK.— Though probably
resident, they cannot have been common in the fall for they were not noted
among the large numbers of Western Meadowlarks that swarmed over the
country inthe fall. It was not until January 11 that this form was certainly
identified; by January 31 it was in full song and the songs of the eastern

484 Cooxn, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. leer

and western forms could often be heard in the same field. It was fairly com-
mon in migration February 16, but was never common as neglecta was in
the fall, and the migrants passed on north in the course of the next ten days.
A few additional individuals on March 8, were the last ones certainly
identified.

54. Sturnella neglecta. WrsterN MrapowiarK.— A resident,
but much less common in summer than in migration. It began to flock in
the early fall and by September 22, these flocks contained 15-20 individuals;
the size of the flocks increased until on October 15 a flock of about 150 was
seen; alittle later the birds were most numerous in flocks of 200-500. Then
they rapidly decreased, until by Christmas only a few small parties of 3-6
remained sitting on the fences, silent and disconsolate as if debating
whether to continue south or to stay. The first spring song was heard
January 21 but there was not much increase in numbers until about
the middle of February. These migrants soon passed north leaving few
breeders remaining for the summer.

55. Euphagus cyanocephalus. Brewer’s BLackpirp.— Nearly
all the time this was the most abundant Blackbird. That it sometimes
nested there was proved by the fact that in early September a scarcely
fledged bird was caught that must have been reared in the immediate
vicinity. The first flocks came about October 20 and increased so rapidly
that. by November 6-8 when they were most numerous they swarmed
everywhere. Then they gradually decreased until by November 26 they
were less than one-third of their highest numbers, but even at this they
were as numerous as any other species, not excepting the Juncos and Tree
Sparrows. By Christmas the flocks had become still smaller, many small
parties of 6-10, were then seen and few flocks of over a hundred birds. The
spring ‘song’ was first heard January 9 and the male that uttered it was
also going through the regular feather ruffling and swelling of the mating
season. Females at this time were rather scarce and even as late as Febru-
ary 26, when the winter numbers had been somewhat increased by migrants
the flocks were still at least three-fourths males. Additional migrants
came early in March and by March 15, the Brewer’s Blackbird was the most
numerous it became any time in the spring. Nearly all left during the
next week, and the remainder began to pair.

. 56. Quiscalus quiscula eneus. Bronzep GrackLE.—— Became

common October 20, and increased slightly to November 8; then decreased
so rapidly that all were gone in the next four days. When most common
they were not one-tenth as numerous as Brewer’s Blackbird. None
seen at any time through the winter, which is rather strange, considering
how much farther north this species winters nearer the Mississippi.

57. Carpodacus purpureus purpureus. Purpie Fincu.— A party
of about 15, on January 12, were the first seen except a few two days previ-
ously; two were adult males in full breeding plumage, but no song was
heard from any of them. They never became common, but remained

through the rest of the winter until March 18, and were in full song by
March 15.

oa | CooxE, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. 485

58. Astragalinus tristis tristis. GoLtprincH— A common winter
resident, seen after November 12 in small parties of 6-25 birds. They
remained fairly constant in numbers through the winter, the last being
seen March 25.

59. Calcarius lapponicus lapponicus. LapLtanp Lonaspur.—
None were seen until a sudden cold snap in February covered everything
with frozen rain; then on February 13, three were seen; the next day they
were present by hundreds if not by thousands. They swarmed everywhere
for a week and then on the night of February 19, with a clear sky and a
south wind, they disappeared as suddenly as they had come.

60. Calcarius pictus. SmitH’s LonaspurR.— Came November 17,
when there was hardly a sign of approaching winter and the leaves had not
all fallen from the trees. They became common November 26, when the
second norther of the season brought many birds from the north, and they
stayed through heat and cold, ice, snow, and rain, until the bulk left
February 19 and the last February 26. They did not increase in numbers
the second week in February, when the Lapland Longspurs became so
abundant, but they were still common on February 19 and the next day
not one was to be found. The only birds seen after this date were a few
flying north on February 26.

61. Calcarius ornatus. CHESTNUT-COLLARED LonespuR.— Among
the hundreds of Lapland Longspurs that came in February were a few of the
Chestnut-collared. The first were seen February 16, less than a dozen in
all and they remained only a few days; they were seen again February 18,
but on February 20 could not be found nor were they seen again later.

62. Rhynchophanes mccowni. McCown’s Lonespur. Seen only
once, when a flock of 40-50 birds was found February 19.

63. Pocecetes gramineus gramineus. Vrsper Sparrow.— First
identified with certainty in the fall on October 14; flocks were present the
rest of the month, but these soon passed on and the few stragglers left
disappeared soon after November 9. None were seen through the winter
until a spring migrant — a single bird — arrived February 25. No more
were seen until March 11, when they became at once common and remained
so until March 19; still present March 25, but in greatly decreased numbers.

64. Passerculus sandwichensis alaudinus. Western SAVANNAH
Sparrow.— Was already common September 7, and remained so through-
out the winter, but was much less numerous during the coldest weather
than either fall or spring. A decided increase was noted on February 13,
and the next day the birds were common, scattered in parties of five or less.
all over the fields; two days later their numbers still further increased, only
to decrease in another two days and to diminish by at least one half in two
days more. They became rather uncommon the last week in February,
but were common again March 3 and abundant by March 11. On March
21 the Savannah Sparrows outnumbered in the open fields all other species
combined, and were still more common the next day, when in a single field
there were certainly not less than a thousand, and probably over two

[oer:

486 Cooxn, Winter Birds of Oklahoma.
thousand, individuals. They could be seen and heard on all sides all the
time. The next day the numbers remained the same, while the day follow-
ing a walk over the same ground revealed two birds only. A few were still
present when the observations ceased April 4.

65. Ammodramus savannarum bimaculatus. WeEsTERN GRAss-
HOPPER SPARROW.— Though of course it had been present long before, it
was not identified until October 29, and was common November 5. It
left soon after, and was so rare through the winter that the total record was
two birds December 25, one February 9, one a week later, and one March 1.
The first spring migrants arrived March 3.

66. Passerherbulus lecontei. LeContTr’s Sparrow.— Though un-
doubtedly wintering not far distant, it was not seen at Caddo, until a
dozen or more were noted February 16. Two days later it was abundant
in all the open fields, most of these birds leaving the night of February 19;
two individuals on February 26, were the last seen.

67. Chondestes grammacus strigatus. WrsTerRN LARK SPARROW.
— Was common September 1, scattered singly over the fields and roads and
had evidently been there all summer. It left by September 10, and had
not yet returned when the observations closed the first of April.

68. Zonotrichia querula. Harris’s SpARRoOw.— The first seen were
two in town November 8, one with black head and throat patch, the other
with no black feathers. Several were seen November 16 and a small party
November 26. In the bottomland along the Blue River November 29,
not a one was seen, but in the bushes fringing the smaller streams, they
gradually became more common until by Christmas they had become the
most common species. They were in small parties scattered along the
branches and would keep flying ahead of a person until several of these
parties had united to make a flock of 40-50 birds. On December 25, about
one male in a dozen showed the black head and jet black throat, while half
of the rest began to show black feathers among the brownish ones of the
throat and breast.

They were least numerous from about January 15 to February 23. Up to
February 18, no real black-headed bird had been seen in the spring, though
all were showing black feathers on the crown. By March 1 some of the
males were in full plumage. By February 26 they had become common
again in their northward migration showing that many winter to the south
of Caddo. These returning birds spread over the country more than did
’ the winter residents and on March 5 a large party was seen feeding on the
ground in a barn yard on the prairie.

On January 3, they began to appear in town, and on January 7 when
some bird seed was thrown out near the house, a party of some 20 Harris’s
Sparrows almost monopolized the free lunch. Harris’s Sparrow had two
notes, one a clear whistle something like that of the White-throat, and the
other a queer chuckle, while a few days later a third note was distin-
guished like one trying to say ‘chink’ and ‘peep’ at the same time.

By the middle of January the three Zonotrichias had settled into their

aia | Cooke, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. 487

regular numbers; the White-crowned was the least common and was found
almost entirely in weed patches in town and on the edges of the prairies;
the Harris’s Sparrow came next in numbers and most of them kept in the
thickets along the small streams, a few coming into town and still fewer
into the heavy timber; the White-throated, the most common of all, kept
strictly to the bottomlands.

The Harris’s Sparrows remained abundant all winter and on February
23 a few were found in the heavy timber, though still keeping for the most
part to the borders of the woods.

The bulk of the winter residents departed the night of March 9, but their
places were taken immediately by migrants from the south in such numbers
as to make the species on March 15 more common than it had been any
time through the winter. But they left as quickly as they had come, and
a single bird seen March 25 was the last.

69. Zonotrichia leucophrys leucophrys. WHtItTE-cROWNED SPAR-
row.— A single male in full dress November 9 was the first noted. The
numbers increased gradually until by November 29 the species was common
along the brushy streams near Caddo, but on that day was found in small
numbers only, in the heavy timber along the Blue. A norther on Decem-
ber 19, froze everything solid and brought an increase of White-crowns, but
these continued south soon afterwards and by December 25 the species
was rare. It remained so the rest of the winter; it was present all the time
but seldom more than two or three seen in one day. There was no increase
of numbers as spring opened and the last was noted on March 11.

70. Zonotrichia albicollis. Wurre-rHroatep Sparrow.— This was
one of the most abundant birds in the woods throughout the winter. It
was not noted near Caddo during November, but when the heavy timber
was visited for the first time on November 29 it was found to be the most
common bird there, and evidently must have come several days earlier.
It was scattered through the woods in parties of 10-25 birds, most of the
flocks being of the former size; several hundred birds in all were seen.
Though the numbers decreased somewhat during December and January,
yet it continued to be the most common sparrow in the woods through the
whole winter and to February 23. During all this time not one was seen
in town, where all the other sparrows came frequently, but on March 5 its
clear spring song was heard in the village. By this time the bulk had left,
and on March 25 the last one was noted.

71. Spizella monticola monticola. Tree Sparrow.— The first
were noted October 31, but they had probably arrived with cold snap of a
few days previous. They had increased by November 6 and after the
norther of December 19, they became one of the commonest birds. In
the fields and along the edges of the woods they were more common even
than the Junco, but in the heavy timber they were outnumbered by the
White-throated Sparrow. By throwing some bird seed on the south porch
of my house January 7, we had a whole colony of sparrows in plain sight
right under the window. A party of some twenty Harris’s Sparrows almost

488 Cooxn, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. laure

monopolized the free lunch, but one bright Cardinal came occasionally,
with a few White-crowns in plain brown head-gear, while the still more
humble Tree Sparrow made up for its lack of beauty, by keeping steadily
at work and devouring more seeds to the minute than any of the others.

The numbers of the Tree Sparrow remained unchanged through the rest
of January and to February 26. They seemed to have decreased by March
1, and the bulk probably left the night of March 9; by March 11, only a
few were left and none were seen after this date.

72. \Spizella passerina passerina. Cuippinc SpARROW.— Should be
a breeding bird at Caddo, but none were noted until late in October, and
even by November 6 not many had been seen. The species never was
common, and although a few were seen in December and January it was a
decidedly rare bird through the winter. Spring arrivals had not yet been
noted the first of April.

73. Spizella pusilla pusilla. Firmtp Sparrow.— Seems not to breed
at Caddo for none were seen there until several appeared on October 6,
from which time they increased slowly for the next month, until they be-
came fairly common and then remained so throughout the entire winter.
With the opening of spring February 20-23, migrants from the south
caused a notable increase, but these passed on almost immediately taking
with them the winter visitors and before March 25 all had left.

74. Junco aikeni. Wuitr-wincep Junco.— On February 21 one
was shot in my yard in town which was a perfectly typical specimen of this
form in its highest and brightest plumage. It was in company with a
second, and had been seen several times previously since its first appearance
February 14. A single one seen March 7 completed the winter’s record.

75. Junco hyemalis hyemalis. Siars-coLtorep Junco.— A single
bird appeared October 25, but no more were seen until a small party came
November 7, followed November 16 by a further increase. They became
common November 26 after the second real norther of the season. After
the next norther December 19, that froze everything solid, the Junco be-
came one of the commonest birds of the prairie. It was still common
December 25, but much less than the previous week and it soon still
further decreased until, during January and February, while not exactly
rare, yet 1t was far from common and remained so until its ranks were
swelled by spring arrivals February 23. The largest flocks of the whole
season were seen March 1, the bulk of these birds departed the night of
March 9, and most of the remained followed the succeeding night. So
completely did they leave that on March 19 only a single bird was seen and
another one March 26 was the last.

76. Melospiza melodia melodia. Sona Sparrow.— Not only did
it not breed at Caddo, but it was not seen there until late — November 6.
It would have been expected much earlier, but so conspicuous a bird could
hardly have been overlooked. Two days later it had become fairly com-
mon, and on November 29 it was one of the common birds found in the
_ heavy timber along the Blue. It was less numerous there a month later,

poe | Cooke, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. 489

but still remained all winter among the more common birds. The first
full song was heard January 29, and two days later it was a prominent
member of a bird chorus from a dozen different species which was as volumi-
nous as one would expect in the height of spring migration. Arrivals from
the south were much in evidence March 11 and as in the case of several
other of the winter residents, the spring birds passed on within the next
few days and took the winter birds with them. No Song Sparrows were
seen after the few scattering individuals present March 21.

77. Melospiza lincolni. Lincoin’s Sparrow.— Not noted in fall
migration; a single bird seen February 1 and as spring migration had not
yet started it had undoubtedly wintered. One was collected February 9,
but up to and including March 11, only seven birds had been seen, showing
how rare it is during the winter. Then suddenly on March 15, it became
common both in town and in the woods, only to leave for the most part in a
few days. When the record closed on April 4, it was present in about
one-third of its highest numbers.

78. Passerella iliaca iliaca. Fox Sparrow.— Not an abundant
winter bird but still fairly common, and almost constant in numbers from
the latter part of December until spring migrants began to arrive February
23. The first fall arrival was noted December 1 and the last March 15,
on which day migrants were abundant only to disappear at once.

79. Pipilo erythrophthalmus erythrophthalmus. TowHrE.—
The first was noted October 24, and the species did not become common be-
fore the middle of November, but by November 29 it was present in full
numbers scattered commonly through the woods along the Blue River, for
the most part in pairs of a male and a female, many of the males being as
brilliant in dress as ever seen in spring. The numbers decreased by half
as the migrants passed on, and left the species rather common through the
winter until the migrants returned March 8. The increase of numbers was
of short duration, and a long walk on March 15 revealed only three birds
while the last was seen March 25.

80. Cardinalis cardinalis cardinalis. Carpinau.— Abundant resi-
dent. During the fall, cardinals were found among the thick tall weed
patches around the cotton fields; they were silent and so shy that they
were seldom seen, sheltering themselves in the almost impenetrable mass of
foliage. During the latter part of November, when most of the leaves had
fallen, they retreated to the thickets along the streams. Here they stayed
in great numbers until real winter when they began to flock into town, and
as long as snow lasted they could be found everywhere around the houses
where not one had been seen for several months. A dozen Cardinals to-
gether, with the snow for a background, made a most striking and brilliant
picture. :

81. Passerina ciris. Parnrep Buntina.— An abundant breeder at
Caddo, but all had left before this record began the last of August and
none had as yet returned the first of April.

82. Spizaamericana. Dickcissen.— Quite common September 14,

490 Cooker, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. (au

but none seen later than September 25, and they had not yet arrived the
first of April.

83. Progne subis subis. PureLe Marrin.— Fall migrants had for
the most part departed before the last of August, but a few were present
the first week in September and the last left September 12. A party of
five arrived the afternoon of March 5, but disappeared in a few minutes
and did not return until March 11. They were still far from common
March 19 and had received no further increase by April 4: evidently not
a common bird at any time.

84. Petrochelidon lunifrons lunifrons. Cuiirr Swatutow.— Dur-
ing the evenings of the last of August and early September, swallows were in
sight almost continuously moving southward. In August the Barn Swallow
was the most numerous, later its numbers decreased and the Cliff Swallow
became most common. In late August the flight began about 5.30 and
lasted an hour; on September 13, the first group passed at 5.10 and the
last at 6.10. In addition on September 10, probably a hundred Cliff
Swallows were seen during the day circling over the town. At 8 A.M.
September 25, about thirty Cliff Swallows passed in one flock going rapidly
south; and for the next two weeks Cliff Swallows were seen about one third
of the mornings and one half of the evenings, in numbers from five birds to
200, about nine-tenths of them heading straight- south and the rest flying
about in search of food. The last was seen October 9, and none had
appeared the next spring by April 7.

85. Hirundo erythrogastra. Barn SwauLLow.— For several even-
ings the last of August, many barn swallows passed flying westward,
probably to spend the night at a lake not many miles distant. Their
numbers steadily diminished until by September 13 the Barn and Cliff
Swallows were about equally numerous. Three Barn Swallows on Septem-
ber 19 were the last of this species seen, nor had they been seen again by
the seventh of April, though on April 1, they appeared at Gainesville, Tex.,
only a few miles to the southward.

86. Iridoprocne bicolor. Tree Swattow.— Never common, but a
few were seen daily mingling with the flocks of the other swallows, until the
last was noted September 13. It also had not appeared by the first of
April, though by this time it was already present as far north as Chicago.

87. Bombycilla cedrorum. Crpar Waxwine.— The first birds, a
flock of about a dozen, were seen November 29. <A few remained through
the winter, but they were quite rare and showed no increase in the spring.

88. Lanius ludovicianus excubitorides. Wurrr-RUMPED SHRIKE.—
A resident, and one of the commonest birds; seen almost constantly,
sometimes singly, but more often in pairs and sometimes four and five. Its
numbers decreased decidedly after the advent of cold weather, but it
still remained common through the winter.

89. Vireo griseus griseus. Wuite-rYEp VirEo.— Never common
and had already left before the last of August. Returned March 25 when
three were collected and two more seen; all were in full loud song.

een | Cooke, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. 491

90. Vireo belli belli. Brxi’s Virzo.— A single one collected Septem-
ber 8, was the only bird seen in the fall, and it had not yet come in the
spring by April 4.

91. Compsothlypis americana usnez. NortTHERN ParuLa WARB-
LER.— Was not seen in the fall. The first arrived March 25.

92. Dendroica coronata. Myrtte WaRrBLER.— The commonest
warbler in fall, and the only one that remained throughout the winter.
The first — a single bird — was seen November 16 along a small stream.
Since the species was found very abundant the first time the heavy tim-
ber was visited November 29, it probably arrived in the woods somewhat
earlier than it was noted on the prairie. The numbers had decreased
decidedly by December 25, but still it remained fairly common all winter,
though constantly lessening in abundance. It began the middle of March
to return to the edges of the prairie, whence it had been driven to the bot-
tom-land during the winter.

93. Geothlypis trichas trichas. MarYLAND YELLOW-THROAT.—
Three birds seen in all, two September 9 and one the next day; it had not
yet arrived the first of April.

94. Anthus spraguei. SpraGcur’s Pipit.— A flock of 40-50 birds
was seen in an open field February 18 in company with Savannah Sparrows,
Lapland and Chestnut-collared Longspurs. The next day none of these
except the Savannah Sparrows could be found.

95. Mimus polyglottos polyglottos. MocxkincBirpD.— A common
breeder in town but by the first of September the birds had deserted their
nesting sites and most of them must have migrated, for less than half a
dozen were seen during the entire winter. The first full song was heard
February 21, but the birds had not yet become common by the first of April.

96. Toxostoma rufum. Brown THRASHER.— One bird on Septem-
ber 8, was the sum total of all seen in the fall. This seems a very early date
for it to disappear since at this time it was still present in Minnesota, and
it spends the whole winter only a few miles south of Caddo.

Two silent birds were the first arrivals March 8, which is fully as early as
they would be expected to arrive, but no more had been seen to April 7,
though by this date the species was far north of St. Louis. Evidently the
Brown Thrasher was not a common bird at Caddo.

It seems a little strange that not a Catbird was seen at Caddo either in
fall or spring.

97. Thryothorus ludovicianus ludovicianus. CaroLina WREN.——
Common resident; retiring and silent through the winter, but by February
23, its full spring song was heard almost continually, from various directions
and by March 25 it was one of the most conspicuous and noisy inhabitants
of the woods. —

98. Thryomanes bewicki cryptus. TEXAS BEewick’s WREN.—
Not noted until November 8, but it may have been present all the fall in
the bottomland; by November 25 had become quite common around town
and remained so until about December 19. Then its numbers diminished,

[oce:

492 Cooxn, Winter Birds of Oklahoma.
but it was still present all winter. Began to sing February 16, and two days
later was in full spring song. All disappeared after March 19, but the
people of the town said they would return later and be the common House
Wren of the summer.

99. Nannus hiemalis hiemalis. Winter Wren.— Rare both in the
late fall after its arrival November 29, and through the winter until the last
was noted March 25; never more than three birds seen in one day.

100. Certhia familiaris americana. BrowN CREEPER.— Arrived
the same day with the winter wren, November 29, and through the winter
was scarcely more common, but on February 23 they suddenly appeared
everywhere in the heavy timber along the Blue. The wave soon passed
on and a few days later all had disappeared.

101. Sitta carolinensis carolinensis. WHITE-BELLIED NUTHATCH.—
Not noted until the bottomland was visited November 29, though it un-
doubtedly is resident. A dozen birds were seen and they remained in
about the same numbers all winter. None were seen at any time away
from the heavy timber. By February 23, they had become noisy, active,
and conspicuous.

102. Beolophus bicolor. Turrep Tirmouse.— Had not been seen
along the small streams during the early fall, but when the heavy timber
of the Blue was entered November 29 it was found one of the most charac-
teristic birds. At least a hundred were seen, confined entirely to the trees
on the river’s edge; not a titmouse was seen even a gunshot away from the
stream. They were present in about the same numbers on January 12,
but when the same woods were visited February 23, only a dozen were seen
where there had beén a hundred in November. This must have been
merely temporary however, for in March they were just as common as ever,
and in this latter month they left the shelter of the heavy timber and were
found widely distributed. Im November they were noisy, in January
silent, and in March striving to relieve themselves of the surplus of noise
they had accumulated through the winter.

103. Penthestes carolinensis agilis. PLUMBEOUS CHICKADEE.— A
common resident, numerous enough so that 30-40 would be seen in a
day’s walk. It was found for the most part in the heavy timber, but a few
wandered into the fringes of small trees along the streams. I+ was in full
song February 23.

104. Regulus satrapa satrapa. GoLDEN-CROWNED KINGLET.—
. When the bottomlands were visited for the first time, November 29, it was
already common, and had probably arrived a few days earlier; its numbers
were unchanged January 12, but it must have left earlier than most of the
winter residents, for when this same place was examined February 23, it
had already disappeared.

105. Regulus calendula calendula. Rusy-crowNep KINGLET.—
The first came November 7, but it was never common and the last was
seen December 9 before real winter arrived. It returned March 25 and was
abundant for a few days.

Neate | Cooker, Winter Birds of Oklahoma. 493

106. Polioptila czrulea czrulea. Buvue-cray GNaTcATcHER.—
Probably nested but was not noted until September 10; by that time most
of the summer birds had gone, but a few lingered to November 6. No more
were seen until, on March 25, they were so common that a full hundred were
seen in a three mile walk. One bird was heard to give a long, and beautiful
and perfect trill,—a note which was not heard again from a Blue-gray
Gnatcatcher, until the spring of 1913 at Washington, D. C.

107. Hylocichla guttata pallasi. Hermit THrusp.— Two seen
November 29, the first day the bottomland was visited. It remained in
small numbers through the winter and was last seen March 1, though most
likely some birds remained to a later date.

108. Planesticus migratorius migratorius. Roxsin.— A flock of
fifty flying south at 4 p.m. November 3, was the first of the season; no
more were seen until November 29, and then only afew. The number were
never great but a few could be found almost any time, and they began to
sing January 31. Several were seen February 23, while three days later the
numbers had more than doubled. On March 5, a party of Robins was
feeding on the ground, strangely enough every bird seen previous to that
time had been perched on bush or tree. They were most common March
15, but left within the next ten days.

109. Sialia sialis sialis. Buursrrp.— Not seen until September 8,
though of course it had been present all the time, since it breeds at Caddo,
where it is reported to nest in town early in the spring and then spend most
of the rest of the year in the thick woods. To November 29 less than a
dozen had been seen in all, but on that day they were found common in
the heavy timber along the Blue, and they remained so all winter. They
became decidedly less numerous after February 23, and none at all were
seen during the last week in March.

110. Sialia currucoides. Movnrartn Buuesirp.— Seen once during
the fall.

494 Wiuurams, Birds of Leon Co., Florida. Ges

NOTES ON THE BIRDS OF LEON COUNTY, FLORIDA —
THIRD SUPPLEMENT.

BY R. W. WILLIAMS.

In ‘ The Auk’ for October, 1904 (XXI, p. 449) I published a pre-
liminary list of the birds of Leon County, Florida. This included
156 species, all then positively known to occur in the county. In
April, 1906, 17 species were added bringing the total up to 173
(Auk, XXIII, p. 153). The list was still further extended by
the addition of 9 species in my article of April, 1907 (Auk, XXIV,
p. 158), increasing the total to 182.

During the seven years since the publication of the last article,
10 species have been added to the list. These are Horned Grebe
(Colymbus auritus), Herring Gull (Larus argentatus), Bonaparte’s
Gull (Larus philadelphia), Buffle-head Duck (Charitonetta albeola),
Pectoral Sandpiper (Pisobia maculata), Duck Hawk (Falco pere-
grinus anatum), Short-eared Owl (Asio flammeus), Purple Kinch
(Carpodacus purpureus purpureus), and Junco (Junco hyemalis,
subspecies?)

These additions bring the list of species now known to occur in.
the county up to 192.

Some further observations of interest have been made upon a few
of the species included in former articles. These observations, to-
gether with the data respecting the 10 additions above stated, are
here recorded.

The species now added to the list are numbered serially begin-
ning with the number following the last in the preceding article.
The last number, therefore, is the total of species so far recorded
in the county.

List of Species.

183. Colymbus auritus. Hornep Grese.— Probably a regular
winter resident but not abundant. I identified two on December 7, 1908,
in the possession of a negro who had killed them on Lake Jackson and was
peddling them along with some wild ducks.

184. Larus argentatus. Hererrinc Guiu.—I have never seen this
species in the county and believe its occurrence to be sporadic, if not.

vera Wiuuiams, Birds of Leon Co., Florida. 495

accidental. One was seen on Lake Iamonia, in the northeastern part of
the county, by Mr. Ludlow Griscom of New York City, on January 2, 1912.

185. Larus philadelphia. Bonapartre’s Guitu— Two were seen
on Lake Iamonia by Mr. Griscom on December 30, 1911. I have not seen
the species in the county and believe its occurrence to be quite rare.

Aix sponsa. Woop Ducx.— My friend Fred C. Elliot of Tallahassee
found several of these ducks with their young on the Oclocknu River, the
western boundary of the county during April, 1909.

186. Clangula clangula americana. Go.pDEN-EYE Ducx.—TIf I
have ever seen this duck in the county I did not recognize it. Yet I feel
quite sure it must occur here in limited numbers during each winter. Mr.
Griscom saw four in the northeastern part of the county on January 2, 1912.

187. Charitonetta albeola. Burrin-HEap Ducx.— Probably- a
regular winter resident in limited numbers. On December 7, 1908, I
examined a handsome male in the possession of a negro who had killed it
on Lake Jackson that morning. This is the only one of this species I have
positively identified as having occurred in the county.

188. Pisobia maculata. PrcroraL SANDPIPER.— On November 22,
1910, Fred Elliot and I were hunting snipe on the marshes of Lake Jackson,
9 miles north of Tallahassee and adjacent to the old Cotton Plantation,
when he discovered a snipe-like bird in a flock of killdeers. After some
maneuvering he succeeded in shooting the bird. He turned it over to me
and I found that it was a Pectoral Sandpiper, the first known to have been
taken in the county. Strangely enough, the following year, November 12,
1911, he shot another specimen while we were hunting in the identical
locality. These two birds were feeding with killdeers and seemed to be an
integral part of the flock, moving from place to place in perfect harmony
with their hosts. No others were seen. It is probable that a few indi-
viduals of this species regularly occur in the county during the migrations.

189. Falco peregrinus anatum. Duck Hawx.— Late in the even-
ing of December 5, 1911, while hunting snipe on Lake Jackson, 9 miles
north of Tallahassee, I saw one of these birds swoop down, on contracted
wings, upon a flock of Killdeers which were feeding along the edge of a
small pool. Apparently the Hawk had no intention of capturing one of
the killdeers, for when within a few feet of the flock it suddenly changed its
course and shot upward almost as swiftly as it had descended, and disap-
peared in the gathering darkness. This, however, may have been due to
the sudden discovery of our proximity. The whir of the bird’s wings as it
descended first attracted my attention. The killdeers were sensibly
perturbed for a few moments, as they emitted a series of notes indicative of
alarm. This is the only one of these birds I have positively identified in the
county. Another is recorded by Mr. Griscom as having been seen by him
' on December 25, 1911, on the Horse-shoe Plantation, the extensive winter
estate of his family in the northern section of the county, and formerly
the property of the writer’s grandfather, (Bird-Lore, XIV, p. 33). Mr.
Griscom also states in a letter to me that he has seen one or two several

496 WiuuraMs, Birds of Leon Co., Florida. Feers

times in the vicinity of Lake Iamonia. There is little doubt but that the
species is represented in the county by a few individuals each winter, but
their caution is such that they successfully avoid the presence of man.

190. Asio flammeus. SuHorT-EARED Owx.— I have not seen this bird
in the county. Mr. Griscom states in a letter to me that he has seen 6
during his visits of several winters to the Horse-shoe Plantation, 16 miles
north of Tallahassee. It is not surprising that this bird should have been
seen so seldom in the county as it is an inhabitant of marshes, well covered
with long grass and weeds and is not easily flushed.

Antrostomus carolinensis. CHUCK-WILLS-wipow.— Although a com-
mon summer resident, this bird is rarely met with in the county during the
winter months. My friend Fred Elliot and I were returning from a hunt
on-Lake Jackson, late in the evening of December 5, 1911, and as we
entered a lugubrious stretch of woodland along the plantation road, a
Chuck-wills-widow spookishly appeared and settled down on the ground
immediately in front of the horses we were driving. It remained hardly
longer than an instant when it coquettishly flitted a few feet further ahead
and settled down again. This performance was repeated 8 or 10 times, in
fact, until we emerged from the woods. The bird was in jeopardy of the
horses’ hoofs several times, but it evidently knew the strategic moment
to move.

Antrostomus vociferus vociferus. Wutp-poor-wiLtu.— This species
was included as one of the birds of the county in my original article largely
on the basis of a set of eggs which had been taken in the county and which
I identified as those of the Whip-poor-will. I am no’ sure that I had ever
seen this bird in the county prior to November 23, 1909. Just at dusk on
this date I was returning home with my father from a drive and as we were
ascending McDougall’s hill on the eastern edge of Tallahassee, a Whip-
poor-will flew toward us and alighted on a fence post directly in line with
our buggy. On the following day I was hunting with Fred Elliot on the
old Cotton Plantation, 9 miles north of town, when, about noon, another
Whip-poor-will flushed just to the side of our team from the pinewood
brush along one of the plantation roads.

Archilochus colubris. Rusy-rHroatep Hummincsrrp.— I mention
this species here merely to give the earliest and latest dates it has been
seen in the county. March 11 (1903) is the earliest date in my records.
The latest, is October 25 (1906), when I saw one in the grounds of the

state Capitol at Tallahassee.

191. Carpodacus purpureus purpureus. Purrie Fincn— To the
severity of the winter of 1911-12 in the northern and eastern states may be
attributed the appearance of this bird in Leon County. I had never
known it to reach the county prior to this time. _ I first saw it on January
14, 1912, a cold, raw, dismal day, with the thermometer registering around
32°. There were about a dozen of the birds in some brush piled in our yard.
Later in the day I found them feeding in the chick weed which was so
abundant in the yard. Oneé of the birds was in fairly bright red plumage;

pa | Wiuams, Birds of Leon Co., Florida. 497

the others were in the plumage of the females. They were quite unwary
and seemed to be very much at home. The following day I saw a male in
another section of the county and again saw the band of the previous day
in the street near our home. From this time until March 2, when I left
home for Washington I saw the birds frequently in various sections of the
county and they were daily in our yard feeding in the patches of chickweed-
Mr. Griscom saw ten of these birds on Christmas day, 1911, on the Horse-
shoe Plantation, (Bird-Lore, XIV, p. 33).

Passerculus sandwichensis savanna. SavannaH Sparrow.— My
former articles indicate that this is rather an unusual bird in Leon County.
Such is not the fact. It is a very common winter resident, frequenting the
old corn fields in large numbers and often met with in the long, dry grass
of the lake marshes.

192. Junco hyemalis subspecies? December 3, 1911, was a bright,
moderate day and having business at Woodville, in the southern part of
the county, my wife and I set out in our buggy for that place immediately
after breaktast. The county south of Tallahassee is for the most part flat
and sandy and otherwise characterized by vast areas of pines and black-
jack oats with rank grasses interspersed throughout. We had reached
a point about five miles from town, and in country as described, when I
heard the notes, made familiar to me by my experiences in the District of
Columbia, of Juncos. I was not long in locating the birds, some 12 in
number, on the ground and in the trees just off the road. I was not pre-
pared to reduce a specimen to possession, hence am unable to determine
whether these birds were slate-colored or Carolina Juncos. Although
frequently in this vicinity and elsewhere in the county thereafter, during
that winter, I did not again meet with this species. This is the only record
I have of the occurrence of Juncos in Leon County.

Progne subis subis. Purpite Martin.— On the twenty-sixth of Jan-
uary 1911, I left Washington for Milton and De Funiak Springs, Florida,
to take testimony in several cases involving claims to lands in the Chocta-
whatchee National Forest. I stopped at Tallahassee on the twenty-
eighth. On the twenty-nint», a beautiful, spring-like day, my father,
mother, sister, and I were sitting on the back porch about 11 a. M. when
I heard the cheery notes of Purple Martins. I went out to the south
side of our premises and saw two ot the birds leisurely circling over
a neighboring yard. I left that evening for Milton and remained there
and at De Funiak Springs until February 6, when I returned to Talla-
hassee, reaching there on the seventh. During the eight days spent in
west Florida I saw no signs of martins. Reaching Tallahassee I found
them fairly common and apparently established there for the season. I
had never before known these birds to reach the county at such an early
date, although I had preserved a careful record of their arrivals for several
years. J was at home in Tallahassee during the winter of 1911-12 and
saw the martins for the first time on February 20, 1912. Six of these
birds were flying high toward the northeast and at a rapid rate, seemingly

498 Witt1ams, Birds of Leon Co., Florida. es

bent upon reaching some far away point without delay. Between this
date and March 2 when I left for Washington, no others were seen.

Vermivora celata celata. ORANGE-CROWNED WaARBLER.— Observa-
tions since my article of April 1906, establish this bird as a winter resident
in the county. For several winters one was constantly to be seen, or its
strong, unmistakable call note heard, in our yard. Frequently there were
two onthe premises. The earliest record I have of its fall arrival is Novem-
ber 12 (1905), but it undoubtedly reaches the county regularly at an earlier
date.

Compsothlypsis americana americana. ParuLA WaARBLER.—
Although I have never found a nest of this bird in the county, there is no
doubt but that it is a summer resident in limited numbers. Several were
singing sweetly in our yard on April 22, 1911.

Dendroica magnolia. Macnonia WarBLER.— This species is a
regular fall migrant through the county, but in limited numbers. I saw a
handsome male in our yard on October 8, 1911. I have no spring records
but suspect it passes through the county at this season.

Dendroica striata. Buack-poLL WarsBier.— I have heretofore re-
corded this bird as a fall migrant in the county. It also occurs in the spring
migration, but the bulk of them passes over without stopping. My only
spring record is of a single male seen on April 25, 1911, in a pecan tree in
the rear of the First National Bank premises. -

Sitta carolinensis carolinensis. WHITE-BREASTED NUTHATCH.—
This is a winter resident in the county, but not common. I saw one in a
pine tree at Woodville on December 3, 1911.

Hylocichla mustelina. Woop Turusu.— In my first article I re-
corded this bird as a rare migrant in spring. I have since learned that it
also is a rare migrant in fall. On October 8, 1911, I saw one in our yard in
Tallahassee. It was quite disturbed about something as was evidenced by
its nervous movements and frequent notes of alarm so familiar to me in
the District of Columbia where it is a common summer resident and, in the
estimation of many, the sweetest songster there. On the 14th I saw another
in our yard.

7 th ee
ead tia

THE AUK, VOL. XXXII. PLATE XL.

ae oy
— —

z Sa SCL eee

1 Points from which specimens were eramined:
O Psaltriparus m. minimus

A Psaltriparus m. californicus

O Psaltriparus plumbeus

Points from which the species have been recorded previously,
bul from which no specimens were eramined:

@ Psaltriparus m. minimus

4 Psaltriparus m. californicus

ial

DISTRIBUTION MAP
MUSEUM OF VERTEBRATE ZOOLOGY

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Ss ioe: a
hd wet c : a

f
3

La = =a =

DISTRIBUTION IN CALIFORNIA OF THE SPECIES AND SUBSPECIES OF PSALTRIPARUS.

| SwartH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. 499

THE CALIFORNIA FORMS OF THE GENUS PSALTRI-
PARUS:'

BY HARRY S. SWARTH.

Plate XE.

Inrropuction: Throughout the greater part of California,
bush-tits are familiar features of the bird life of the state. Their
wide distribution, covering the Transition and Upper Sonoran
zones, and parts of Lower Sonoran, gives them a range over most
of the state, except certain of the desert regions and the boreal
mountain tops, while the sociable and confiding nature of the birds
brings them into intimate contact with all who care to cultivate
their acquaintance. Consequently the many interesting and curi-
ous aspects of the life history, at least of the California species, are
well known, having been observed and reported upon by various
competent observers.

The status and relationships of the different races of the bush-tit,
however, have not so far been worked out to a satisfactory conclu-
sion, different authorities arriving at markedly different results,
while none of them seems adequately to have covered the situation.
This condition became more and more apparent with the growth
of the ornithological collection of the Museum of Vertebrate Zodl-
ogy. Series after series of bush-tits were brought in from various
parts of the state, taken at all seasons of the year, and presenting
a range of variation that apparently defied explanation by any
known facts or theories regarding the species. The specimens
finally brought together for the present study, however, over four
hundred in number, seem to be quite satisfactorily representative
of existing conditions in the genus in the state of California, enough
so, I believe, to justify the publishing of the conclusions to which
they have assisted. ;

Such a study as the present one is obviously incomplete. Al-
though an excellent representation of material from California is
available, yet the genus under consideration covers a much wider
range than this one state, and the scrutiny of Californian specimens

1 Contribution from the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology of the University of
California.

»

leon

500 SwartuH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. Oct.

inevitably suggests problems and questions to be answered only by
means of extensive series from other points. My conclusions as
herein stated refer only to the California forms of Psaltriparus —
P. minimus minimus, P. minimus californicus, and P. plumbeus.
Of the subspecies P. minimus saturatus, from the Puget Sound
region (not included in the A. O. U. Check-List), the specimens at
hand are too few in number to justify any expression of opinion.
Of the Lower California form, P. minimus grinde, no skins were
examined. Neither did I have examples of any form of P. melano-
tis, and although the variations of this last mentioned species would
seem to have little or no bearing upon any California problem, yet
the relationships of melanotis to plumbeus, and of plumbeus to mini-
mus, are such that only a general survey of the whole group, based
upon at least as much and as satisfactory material from all regions
as has been available from parts of California, could serve to explain
certain of the questions that have arisen.

In the conclusions at which I have arrived I have been influenced
throughout by one belief, a fact sometimes questioned, but of the
truth of which both observation in the field, and the study of
specimens, has convinced me. ‘This is, that the various species of
bush-tits, at least in California and Arizona, are absolutely resident
wherever found. Under this conviction I have sought to explain
every observed variation in specimens on any grounds other than
that of the migration of one form into the habitat of another.

Perhaps it may be worth while to detail some of the evidence on
which this belief is based. Some years ago I published (Swarth,
1900, pp. 14-16, 37-41) a list of birds observed at a point near Los
Angeles, California. Of the one hundred and seventy-five species
included therein only a small fraction were breeders, the bulk of
the list being composed of migrants. Obviously this place was in
an extensively used migration path. In many years’ observation,
continued long after this paper was published, but one solitary
bush-tit was seen at this station, though some three miles to the
northward, and perhaps a little farther southward, the species is
locally a most abundant resident.

In all my experience I have never seen bush-tits in flight sugges-
tive of migration. On the Berkeley campus, as one favorable place
of observation, it seemed apparent that the same flocks of birds in

yeaa | SwartH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. 501
their wanderings traversed what appeared to be quite well defined
paths, flitting from tree to tree, and along the same general lines of
travel, at pretty regularly recurring intervals, week after week,
throughout fall, winter, and spring. Of course it can not be proved
that these were actually the same individuals, but the impression
that they were was strongly conveyed. Other and similar corrobo-
rative evidence occurs to me, while on the other hand, as before
stated, I have no recorded observations suggestive of any migra-
tions by these birds.

Bush-tits, in southern California at least, do wander in late sum-
mer to higher elevations in the mountains than those at which they
breed. Also the capture of birds in winter at such points as Palm
Springs, on the Colorado Desert, or at Victorville, on the Mohave
Desert, as recorded beyond, is undoubtedly due to their straying
from the nearby mountains along some favorable, wooded river
course, or similar attractive path. But these occurrences are not
indicative of any regular migratory habits, which, as stated above,
I do not believe to exist.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: The present study is based primarily upon
the series of bush-tits contained in the collection of the Mu-
seum of Vertebrate Zodlogy, being in fact partly inspired by the
desire to bring the Museum’s catalogues into a more orderly and
consistent arrangement, as regards this genus. The Museum’s
series, inclusive of the Grinnell, Morcom, and Swarth collections,
contains at the present writing three hundred and fifty specimens
of Psaltriparus. In addition to these a small number of skins was
borrowed from several other sources, illustrative of various impor-
tant localities not represented in the Museum collection. The writer
wishes to express his gratitude to Dr. C. W. Richmond, Acting
Curator, Division of Birds, of the United States National Museum,
for the loan of typical specimens of Psaltriparus minimus minimus,
and P. minimus californicus; to Messrs. Joseph Mailliard and J. W.
Mailliard, for examples of P. minimus minimus from several critical
California points; to Mr. William L. Finley, for skins from the
Oregon State Game Warden’s collection, and to Mr. Stanley G.
Jewett, for some from his own collection, representative of both
P. minimus minimus and P. minimus californicus from Oregon
localities. There were also available the specimens in the Los An-

502 SwartH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. Faas

geles County Museum of History, Science and Art, where are
housed the Daggett, Lamb, Law, Richardson, and Willett collec-
tions. Altogether, four hundred and thirty-three specimens were
examined in the present connection.

VaRIATION: There is probably hardly another species of bird, as
plainly colored as the California Bush-tit and with as few distinctive
markings, which shows such a wide range of variation in appearance
in individuals taken under different circumstances. This variation
has proved a constant obstacle toward an understanding of the
several California species and subspecies of Psaltriparus, for it is
only in large series taken at many different points that there appears
to be any sign of law and order controlling the observed differences.
Even the large number of specimens available in the present study
is not sufficient to illustrate all of the phases of the situation, though
it does appear to be ample for the deduction of the conclusions at
which I have arrived.

Birds of this genus are subject to at least four kinds of variation.
They differ: (1) seasonally, through fading and abrasion; (2) at
different ages, adult and juvenal plumages being readily distin-
guishable; (3) geographically (the various species and subspecies,
or geographical races); and (4) in one species, melanotis (not occur-
ring in California), there is sexual difference, the male and female
being strikingly different. But this last is a phase of the subject
that need not be considered here.

SEASONAL VARIATION: The changes in appearance undergone
during the year by the California Bush-tit (P. minimus minimus
and P. minimus californicus), aside from the alteration brought
about by the molt, are unusually striking for so plain colored a bird.
In the Horned Lark (Otocoris alpestris), the Snow Bunting (Plectro-
phenax nivalis) and others, conspicuous patterns are revealed by the

continued abrasion of the feathers; while in birds such as the Blue
Grosbeak (Guiraca c@rulea) the brilliant color of the whole body is
disclosed through the same agency, but in the bush-tits there are
no such underlying markings. The altered appearance is in this
case largely due to change of color,— fading of the feathers, and
not to the removal of feather tips differently colored from the rest
of the plumage. The pileum and the remainder of the upper parts
are differently colored in P. minimus, and are differently affected by

Le a ‘| SwartH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. 503
exposure during the year, so that various combinations result.
This species varies seasonally to a much greater extent than does
P. plumbeus.

The southern California series of bush-tits is the most extensive
one available, and there are enough specimens from this region to
illustrate the change in appearance during the year. Between
birds in the freshly acquired plumage of October, and those in the
frayed feathers of May and June, there is a vast difference. Se-
lected specimens at hand, representing almost every week of the
intervening period, laid out in chronological order, clearly illustrate
the nature of the change, and show that there is some alteration
in appearance from month to month almost throughout the year.
There are sufficient specimens of bush-tits at hand from the central
coast region of California, the Sacramento Valley, and the Sierra
Nevada, to indicate similar seasonal changes in these birds also,
though not enough material to illustrate every step of the trans-
formation at any one point. P. plumbeus, as shown by series of
skins from Arizona, Nevada, and east central California, undergoes
practically the same process of change, though being a more uni-
formly colored bird, the variations are not nearly so striking.

As the described subspecies of the California Bush-tit, P. m.
californicus, P. m. minimus, and P. m. saturatus, are largely dis-
tinguished by varying intensity of coloration, it follows that there
is more or less ‘overlapping’ of this character in the various forms.
Thus a faded example of minimus might be expected to bear a close
resemblance to a fresh fall specimen of californicus, and similarly,
a late spring saturatus would be much like a newly molted autumnal
minimus. Of saturatus I cannot speak with certainty, having but
one or two specimens available, but of minimus and. californicus,
although the above statement is approximately correct, other
features remain which tend to distinguish the forms.

There is, however, still another angle to the problem, for in birds
from different regions abrasion does not proceed with equal speed.
This statement has also been made of the Red-winged Blackbirds
Mailliard, 1910, p. 64), and is probably true of most birds. In
general it appears that abrasion and fading produce much more
marked results in an arid than in a humid region, though, as stated
by Mailliard (1. c.), other factors enter into the question also.

[ocr

504 Swartu, California Forms of Psaltriparus.

It is customary on the part of many to speak slightingly of the
custom of identifying specimens on geographical grounds, that is to
apply to a certain example of bird the name of the subspecies sup-
posed to occur at the point where this bird was collected, as suffi-
cient grounds for identification. Even were this practice generally
as objectionable as some appear to believe, it seems that in the Cali-
fornia bush-tits we have a case where it can be done with perfect
propriety. Examination of large series of specimens discloses the
existence of certain different geographical races, each apparently
resident within its own borders. The color variations of these
races, however, are such that specimens of one, taken at a certain
season, may closely resemble examples of another, taken at a dif-
ferent time of the year. Hence the collector of a few skins, taken at
scattered points and different seasons, could easily be misled as to
the significance of the variations or similarities he observes. It
seems to me that, providing he assures himself of the pertinence of
the limited comparisons possible to him, he is perfectly justified in
naming his specimens on ‘geographical considerations.’

Mott: There is but one molt during the year. This takes place
during the late summer, at the time of the conclusion of family
cares of the adults, and when the young are molting into first winter
plumage. The sequence of changes in P. minimus minimus, as
illustrated in a series from southern California, is (omitting the
natal down) about as follows:

Toward the end of May young birds begin to appear out of the
nests, generally with wing and tail feathers fully developed, in other
words in full juvenal plumage. This is worn without change for
about two months, when, toward the end of July, the post-juvenal
molt begins. There are several specimens at hand showing the
inception of this molt: No. 3269, juvenal female, Reche Canyon,
Riverside County, July 27, 1908; several new secondaries and some
new greater wing coverts. No. 5214 (Grinnell coll.) juvenal male,
Pasadena, July 29, 1902; at practically the same stage, with several
new secondaries and some new coverts, but otherwise still in juvenal
plumage. Other specimens at hand show this molt in progress
until the end of September.

The annual molt of the adults is taking place at the same time,
having begun a little earlier. Birds taken during June have the

Noraa | SwartuH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. : 505
plumage worn and faded, but as yet show no pin feathers. No.
2651, adult female, San Jacinto Mountains, July 11, 1908, is well
started in the molt, with several of the old tail feathers still in place,
but with stubby new ones also appearing, and with some new and
some old flight feathers and coverts, and a mixture of new and old
plumage over the body. No. 6100 (Grinnell coll.), adult male,
El Monte, Los Angeles County, September 22, 1904, has almost
accomplished the change, but careful scrutiny shows that the first
(outer) primary has just begun to appear, and also that there are
many pin feathers and some remnants of the old plumage, scattered
over the head and body. One or two other specimens taken a little
earlier in September are nearly as far advanced; but speaking in
general it is not until the second week in October that the molt can
be said to be entirely over. Two specimens taken at Witch Creek,
San Diego County, October 10, 1908 (nos. 3994, 3995), are in perfect
winter plumage, the earliest taken skins at hand of which this can
be said. The molt is thus shown to be of quite long duration, about
three months for adults, and a little less for the post-juvenal molt.

There are numerous specimens at hand collected in southern
California during fall, winter, and spring, enough to show that while
the birds undergo marked changes in appearance before the follow-
ing summer, it is due entirely to fading and wear of the feathers.
At the completion of the molt, post-juvenal or annual as it may be,
adults and young are practically alike, and can no longer be dis-
tinguished by external appearance.

The molt of P. minimus californicus is illustrated in series from
the Sacramento Valley and the Sierra Nevada. There are speci-
mens in juvenal plumage taken in Yolo County, May 22 and later;
birds beginning to molt, from the southern Sierras in Kern County,
the third week in July; and adults and immatures with the molt
not quite accomplished, from Placer County, the third week in
October. The sequence of events is thus practically the same as
in the southern California bird.

Of plumbeus, adults and juveniles from Arizona, Nevada, and
east-central California show substantially the same changes over
the same seasons.

PLUMAGE VARIATIONS AT DIFFERENT AGEs: Besides the scanty
natal down, worn for a short period by the nestling, there are appar-

leur

506 SwartH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. Oct.

ently but two distinguishable stages of plumage during the lifetime
of the individual: (1) the juvenal plumage, acquired in the nest, and
worn about four months; and (2) the first and subsequent winter
plumages. Adults and immatures are, as far as I can see, abso-
lutely indistinguishable after the autumnal molt, when the young
bird loses the juvenal plumage, and the adult the faded and shabby
last year’s garb, and both don similar covering.

Following are detailed descriptions of selected juvenals and adults
of the various California species and subspecies of Psaltriparus.'

Psaltriparus minimus minimus.

No. 2123; juvenal male in fresh, newly acquired plumage; San
Jacinto Mountains, Riverside County, California; May 24, 1908.
Pileum, buffy-brown; back, hair-brown; under surface of body,
whitish, palest on throat, and darkening to drab-gray on sides and
flanks.

No. 2529; juvenal male in very worn plumage; San Jacinto
Mountains, Riverside County, California; August 25, 1908.
Pileum, avellaneous; back mostly clothed in new feathers; plum-
age of under surface of body abraded so that most of the light col-
ored tips of the feathers are worn away, and the dusky bases show
through. The bird is generally dirty and faded in appearance.

No. 1623 (Grinnell coll.); male, in fresh, fall plumage; Pasa-
dena, California; October 17, 1896. Pileum, olive-brown; back,
rather darker than hair-brown; under parts darker than in the
juvenal plumage, drab-gray on throat and median line of belly,
darkening to drab on sides and flanks.

Although there are distinguishable dissimilarities in coloration
between adults and juvenals, these differences are not great. They
are accentuated, however, by the different textures of plumage in
the two stages. The juvenal, with shorter and fluffer feathers, and
with more extensively light-colored bases, gives a general effect
that is rather mottled and uneven. The adult (first winter and
later), with the plumage more dense and lustrous, has a generally
smoother and better groomed aspect.

1JIn descriptions of colors Ridgway’s Color Standards and Color Nomenclature,
1912, has been the basis for comparison.

me | SwartuH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. 507

No. 2531; adult male, in worn and faded plumage; San Jacinto
Mountains, California; May 28, 1908. Pileum, buffy-brown;
back, a somewhat clearer gray than in the fresh plumage of no. 1623
(described above). Under parts more distinctly whitish, with the
darker drab color practically limited to a small area on the sides.
Rectrices and remiges noticeably faded and frayed.

Psaltriparus minimus californicus.

No. 21059; juvenal female, in fresh, practically unworn, plumage;
Weldon, Kern County, California; July 5, 1911. Pileum, buffy-
brown; back, light grayish-olive. As compared with minimus, the
upper parts are less brownish, and the under parts are of a clearer
gray, with less dusky suffusion. The cap on the pileum is less
sharply defined on the sides of the head.

No. 23319; male in first winter plumage (immaturity deter-
mined from condition of skull); Blue Canyon, Placer County,
California; October 17, 1912. Pileum, fuscous; dorsal surface of
body, dark olive-gray; ventral surface much paler — chin, throat,
and upper breast, almost pure white, darkening to drab-gray on
lower breast and abdomen.

Two adult males and another immature taken at the same time
and place, are practically indistinguishable in coloration. A third
immature male of the same series is appreciably darker, however;
pileum, chetura drab; back, deep mouse gray; under parts less
whitish and more dusky. A distinguishable feature separating
this exceptionally dark colored example of californicus from mini-
mus, is that while in the latter the darker colors tend more toward
the brownish hues, in this bird the colors are more blackish. Al-
though it is unusually dark colored, it is quite unlike any example
of minimus at hand.

Psaltriparus plumbeus.

No. 5884 (Swarth coll.); male, in fresh, winter plumage; Hua-
chuca Mountains, Arizona; October 12, 1907. Pileum, neutral
gray; rest of upper parts grayish-olive. Under parts, whitish, with
a slight dusky suffusion. A brownish colored area, including ear

508 SwartH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. lane

coverts and cheeks, rather sharply defined against the white of the
throat and the gray of the rest of the head and neck. Specimens
taken in early spring (February, March, and April) have lost the
olivaceous tinge on the dorsum, and the upper parts are uniformly
clear gray. Summer specimens (May, June, and July) have the
gray dulled by excessive wear of the feathers.

No. 9956; juvenal female; Huachuca Mountains, Arizona;
July 15, 1896. Practically like adult. The gray of the upper parts
is duller, less of a blue-gray, the brown cheeks are not so sharply
contrasted against the rest of the head, and there is a faintly indi-
cated black line over the auriculars and on the nape. Unlike the
adults, the young of plumbeus exhibit considerable diversity in
markings, and while the above described specimen represents the
plumage perhaps most frequently encountered, there is a large
proportion of birds with more or less extensive black markings on
the head. In a few specimens there is no trace of head markings,
a number have them faintly indicated, as in the specimen described
above, and in others the patterns vary from a narrow line extending
backward from the eye, to nearly as extensive a black marking as
in the adult male of P. m. lloydi (see Swarth, 1913, pp. 399-401).

GEOGRAPHICAL VARIATION: It is, of course, the variation shown
among individuals from different regions, the study of species and
subspecies, that has attracted the attention of most workers in the
group, and the present study of the genus, like most others, is the
outcome of an attempt to correlate with definite geographic areas
certain observed variations in a series of specimens.

Of recent years there have been published three authoritative
accounts of the distribution of the species and subspecies compris-
ing the genus Psaltriparus. These, in order of publication, are
Oberholser’s (1903, pp. 198-201) ‘Synopsis of the Genus Psaltri-
parus, Ridgway’s (1904, pp. 423-436) treatment of the group in
‘his ‘Birds of North and Middle America,’ and the A. O. U.
Check-List, third edition (1912, pp. 352,353). As regards the vari-
ous races of Psaltriparus minimus, the contradictory nature of the
statements contained in these works has caused much confusion
among local students in California. This has resulted in a hap-
hazard use of different names for the same bird, according to the
authority consulted at the time, with, in recent years, a growing

Neer | SwartH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. 509

tendency to ignore the subspecies californicus. Following are quo-
tations of ranges as given in the publications cited.

Psaltriparus minimus minimus.

“Pacific coast region, from San Francisco Bay, California, to
Washington” (Oberholser).

“West slope of coast mountains in Oregon, California, and north-
ern Lower California, north to the Columbia River, south to
Nachoguero Valley, Lower California (also to San Pedro Martir
Mts., and San Fernando?)” (Ridgway).

“Transition and Upper Sonoran zones of the Pacific coast from
southern British Columbia and northern Washington to northern

Lower California” (A. O. U. Check-List).

Psaltriparus minimus californicus.

“ California, excepting the northern coast region; northern Lower
California” (Oberholser).

“Interior districts of Oregon and California east of the Cascade
range in Oregon, and between coast mountains and crest of the
Sierra Nevada in California; north to northwestern Oregon (Wil-
bur, Umatilla County), south to the valley of Kern River (Walker’s
Basin, ete.), southern California” (Ridgway).

“Transition and Upper Sonoran zones of Oregon and California
(except coast strip) from northeastern Oregon to southern Cali-
fornia” (A. O. U. Check-List).

Among these contradictory views it will be noted that one author-
ity restricts minimus to the coast region north of San Francisco
Bay, while another apportions both minimus and californicus to
southern California. The ranges ascribed to minimus and cali-
fornicus by Oberholser are similar to an earlier disposition of the
races by Ridgway (1884, p. 89).

The results of the present study are most nearly in accord with
Ridgway’s later statements; that is, as regards distribution in Cali-
fornia. ‘There has been no Lower California material available,
and while the few specimens at hand from the range of the northern
form named saturatus are not appreciably different from apparently

510 SwartH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. Fee

comparable examples of minimus, still the material is not sufficient
to warrant any generalizations.

Following are statements of the manner of occurrence in Cali-
fornia of the species and subspecies of Psaltriparus found within the
state, as deduced from the specimens assembled for the present
study.

Psaltriparus minimus minimus (Townsend).

Type locality.— Columbia River, probably near Fort Vancouver,
Washington.

Range in California.— Lower and Upper Sonoran zones of a
comparatively narrow strip along the coast at least from the Oregon
line south into northern Lower California. In northern California
east to the Siskiyou and Trinity mountains; directly north of San
Francisco Bay this strip is confined within extremely narrow limits;
in southern California it extends to and includes the northern and
eastern slopes of the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, San Jacinto,
and Cuyamaca mountains. On Santa Cruz Island, of the Santa
Barbara group. ,

Specimens examined from the following localities. Siskiyou
County: Callahan; Horse Creek, Siskiyou Mountains. Shasta
County: Tower House. Humboldt County: Shelter Cove.
Mendocino County: Gualala; Covelo; Mendocino; Mount San-
hedrin. Sonoma County: Guerneville; Freestone; Seaview.
Marin County: San Geronimo; Nicasio; Inverness; Point Reyes.
Contra Costa County: Walnut Creek; Mount Diablo. Alameda
County: Berkeley; Oakland; Piedmont. San Mateo County:
Woodside; Pescadero. Santa Clara County: Palo Alto. San
Benito County: Paicines. Monterey County: Pacific Grove.
San Luis Obispo County: San Luis Obispo; Paso Robles. Kern
County: Fort Tejon. Santa Barbara County: Santa Barbara;
‘Santa Cruz Island. Ventura County: Ventura; Mount Pinos.
Los Angeles County: Glendora; Claremont; Santa Monica Moun-
tains; Cerritos; San Fernando; Pasadena; El Monte; Azusa;
Los Angeles. San Bernardino County; San Bernardino; San
Bernardino Mountains; Reche Canyon; Victorville. Orange
County: Trabuco Canyon. Riverside County: Riverside; San
Jacinto Mountains; Palm Springs. San Diego County: Jacumba;

te | SwarrH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. att

Cuyamaca Mountains; Dulzura; Julian; Campo; Witch Creek;
Point Loma; San Diego. Total number of specimens, 243.

Distinguishing Characters.— From the other two species of the
genus (P. melanotis and P. plumbeus) Psaltriparus minimus is dis-
tinguished by having the pileum differently colored from the rest
of the upper parts, forming a sharply defined “cap.”’ P. minimus
minimus as compared with P. m. californicus, is darker colored
throughout, birds seasonably comparable being contrasted, the
under parts are heavily suffused with dusky, and the flanks are
more distinctly vinaceous. These differences are quite as apparent
in the juvenal plumage as in the adult, sometimes more so. The
general appearance of P. minimus minimus is of a brownish colored
bird, as contrasted with the gray and white tones of P. m. californi-
cus. In measurements minimus and californicus are practically
alike. Compared with plumbeus they have shorter wing and tail,
bulkier bill, and the same length of tarsus.

Remarks.— Of specimens representative of P. minimus minimus,
there are available four skins from Portland, Oregon, practically
topotypes of the subspecies. Three of these, adults taken in May,
are from the collections of W. L. Finley (no. 255) and S. G. Jewett
(nos. 845, 846); the fourth, a young bird, also taken in May, is
from the collection of the United States National Museum (no.
149651). This series, though of few specimens, affords a good basis
for certain comparisons.

In commenting upon the California collections of the various
subspecies, a discussion of the series from each of the different
localities seems to be the method most conducive to a clear under-
standing of conditions.

San Diegan District (specimens from San Diego, Orange, River-
side, San Bernardino, Los Angeles, Ventura, and Santa Barbara
counties). The large number of skins from southern California,
one hundred and sixty specimens from points ranging from San
Diego to Santa Barbara, is fully illustrative of all seasonal variation.
It has been possible, in fact, to make a selection of birds showing,
almost week by week, the change in appearance throughout the
year, and this has been most helpful toward an understanding of
conditions presented in smaller series from other points.

As to the status of the southern California bird, it belongs un-

Di2 Swart, California Forms of Psaltriparus. leur

doubtedly to the subspecies minimus. Examples from this region
are very dark colored, quite as much so as those from any other
part of the coast district —in fact they average duskier on the
under parts than specimens from any other point in California.
The Portland specimens taken in May, mentioned above, are, it is
true, somewhat darker colored than comparable birds taken during
the same month in the San Diegan district; but this, I believe, is
largely due to the more rapid rate of fading in the sunnier, more arid
conditions of the latter region. February birds from Los Angeles
are exactly like the May birds from Portland.

Furthermore, there is no evidence whatever of the existence in
southern California of two forms of Psaltriparus minimus, along the
coast and in the interior, respectively, as given by the A. O. U.
Check-List. But one subspecies occurs in that part of the region
inhabited by bush-tits, from the Pacific Ocean to the western edge
of the Colorado Desert. It would be surprising if it were otherwise,
for there is no other instance (except among the island birds) of two
subspecies of any one species being resident in the San Diegan
district.

Specimens are at hand from various outlying points on the boun-
daries of this district. Two winter birds from Victorville, at the
edge of the Mohave Desert, are unquestionably minimus, and are
doubtless wanderers from the neighboring San Bernardino Moun-
tains. Birds from Mount Pinos, Ventura County, and the nearby
station of Fort Tejon, at the southwestern extremity of Kern
County, are likewise minimus, these localities representing the
extreme limits of the subspecies in this direction. Four examples
from Santa Cruz Island (nos. 3104, 3106, 3265, Mailliard coll.,
no. 5449 Grinnell coll.) are not to be distinguished from the form
occurring on the adjacent mainland. Although the birds are doubt-
less resident upon Santa Cruz, the available material does not reveal
‘development of any characters serving to distinguish a separate
island race.

Santa Cruz District (specimens from San Luis Obispo, Monterey,
San Benito, Santa Clara, and San Mateo counties). There is a
relatively scanty amount of material from this region, but these few
specimens are satisfactorily referable to minimus. In fact the only
ones calling for comment are two March birds from Paicines, San

pet SwartH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. 513
Benito County (nos. 6338, 6339, Mailliard coll.). These are ap-
preciably paler than comparable specimens from southern Cali-
fornia; and from the geographical position of the station the possi-
bility is suggested of their being intergrades with P. m. calzfornicus,
which may be found to inhabit the adjacent San Joaquin Valley.
Unfortunately there is not a single specimen of bush-tit available
from this valley, the greater part of which is a treeless plain and
unsuited to the species. There are parts, however, as in the im-
mediate vicinity of the San Joaquin River, where the birds occur,
recorded in fact from one or two points, and it will be of interest to
learn to which of the races they belong.

San Francisco Bay District (specimens from Alameda, Contra
Costa, and Sonoma counties). Many of the birds from the im-
mediate vicinity of Berkeley and Oakland are strikingly dark col-
ored, but this is undoubtedly due to staining of the feathers from
the smoke of the nearby cities. Gardens and parks, filled with
shrubbery, tempt the birds into the towns, to within a short dis-
tance of manufacturing and business centers, resulting in sooty
plumage in the bush-tits, as with other species.

Three birds from Mount Diablo, Contra Costa County, as well
as eight from the nearby station of Walnut Creek, are all clearly
referable to minimus, demonstrating in this as with other species of
animals, the relationship to the coast fauna of the inhabitants of
this mountain, the easternmost outpost of the coast range at this
point.

A series of nine specimens from Sonoma County (immediately
north of San Francisco Bay), though on the whole referable to mint-
mus, contains several light colored birds, possibly an indication of
intergradation with californicus of the Sacramento Valley.

Northern Coast District (specimens from Marin, Mendocino,
and Humboldt counties). This region should produce the darkest
colored bush-tits of any portion of the state, reasoning from meteor-
ological and geographical conditions, but the fact remains, sur-
prising as it seems, that specimens from the southern portion of
this region do not average as dark as those from the San Diegan
district, and many of them are distinctly pale colored. One juve-
nile (no. 24099) is very similar to comparable examples of californt-
cus from the Sacramento Valley. Certain July adults from the

[aon

514 SwartuH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. Octs

coast of Mendocino County have faded on the upper parts to the
exact color of July adults from the Sierras, though southern Cali-
fornia birds of the same date are darker colored. On the lower
surface, however, the Mendocino birds are distinctly dark, quite
different from the gray californicus.

On the whole, of course, these coast birds are representative of
minimus, but there is not nearly the difference between minimus of
the northern coast district and calzfornicus of the Sacramento Valley,
to the eastward, that there is between southern California minimus
and californicus of the southern Sierra Nevada.

Ridgway (1884, p. 89), in an early paper on the species, comments
upon the paler colors of Marin County specimens, as compared
with typical minimus, disposing of the question by regarding these
birds as intergrades toward the grayer californicus, the range of
which he at that time considered as including the coast of Cali-
fornia south of San Francisco Bay. As the more southern birds are
now known to be of the race minimus, and as, in fact, specimens
from the southernmost extremity of the range of the subspecies
are as dark colored as any, this explanation no longer holds. The
possibility suggests itself that from the extremely narrow delimi-
tations of the range of minimus in Marin, Sonoma, and southern
Mendocino counties, compared with the vast area of country
directly to the eastward swarming with bush-tits of the subspecies.
californicus (for, unlike the San Joaquin Valley, the Sacramento
Valley presents conditions peculiarly favorable to the species),
there is a constant influx of individuals of the more numerous race,
californicus, continually encroaching upon the limited territory of
the coast form. If the latter occupied a wider area the appearance
of intermediates along the border line would not be particularly
exciting of comment, but from the nature of conditions at this point
these paler colored birds are distributed over the entire width of the
restricted coast strip. It seems, in fact, as though there was here
something similar to certain cases commented upon by Grinnell
and Swarth (1913, p. 393), among problems concerning the distribu-
tion of various animals in the San Jacinto Mountains, California,
where, from the narrowness of the region of blending of closely
related subspecies, peculiar conditions ensue.

Among other observed results, types of either one of two strongly

Peet | SwartH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. B15
contrasted faunas were found encroaching to a marked extent into
their neighbor’s territory, Colorado Desert forms into the San
Diegan district, and vice versa. In the particular case in point
we can well conceive of the coast bush-tits throughout this pecu-
arly attenuated strip of appropriate territory being dominated by
the sheer numbers of continually dispersing individuals of cali-
fornicus, and the distinguishing subspecific characters of the birds
suffering in consequence.

South of San Francisco Bay the humid coast strip (Santa Cruz
district) though narrow, is sharply cut off from the violently con-
trasted San Joaquin Valley, which is besides almost destitute of
possibly competing bush-tits, hence there is every reason for the
coast birds preserving their distinctive characters. To the north-
ward, beyond Marin County, the coast region is also definitely sepa-
rated from the interior valleys; but immediately north of San
Francisco Bay, in southern Marin and Sonoma counties, the moun-
tains, which here closely approach the coast, become so low and
broken as to lose much of their effectiveness as barriers, and, as sug-
gested above, there is little to hinder the influx of birds from the
Sacramento Valley, densely populated with bush-tits of the sub-
species californicus. It may well be that not only the peculiar
observed conditions among the bush-tits, but also similar instances
encountered among certain other birds of the same region, are to be
explained by the peculiar combination of circumstances at this point.
These conditions briefly summarized, are: Marked restriction of
territory appropriate to the humid coast races, ineffective barriers
interposed against complementary forms of much greater numbers
occupying adjacent territory, and continual encroachment of
individuals (the radiating overflow) of the latter subspecies.

Northcentral California. Small series of skins at hand from the
Siskiyou Mountains, in extreme northern Siskiyou County, and
from the Trinity Mountain region in southeastern Siskivou County
and northwestern Shasta County, prove rather difficult to allocate.
It seems apparent, however, that these birds must be considered
as intergrades between minimus and californicus, though obviously
nearer the former. In fact certain of the specimens are not to be
distinguished from typical examples of minimus in comparable
plumage, though others from the same localities evidently tend

Auk

516 Swartu, California Forms of Psaltriparus. tae

toward the grayish type. It is evident that in this part of the state
an arbitrary line must be drawn between the ranges of the two
subspecies, and from the material available at the present writing,
it seems as though this division may be indicated about through
the middle of Siskiyou County. The single specimen at hand
from Yreka is of the calzfornicus type, and there are others of simi-
lar character from southcentral Oregon.

Psaltriparus minimus californicus Ridgway.

Type locality.— Baird, Shasta County, California.

Range in California.— Lower and Upper Sonoran zones chiefly.
In extreme northern California from central Siskiyou and western
Shasta County east to the Nevada line; throughout the Sacra-
mento Valley; possibly in the San Joaquin Valley (?); on the
western slope of the Sierra Nevada everywhere below Boreal, and
on the eastern slope, the same zones, north to Carroll Creek, Inyo
County; south to the southern extremity of the Sierras (numerous
specimens from points on Kern River, Walker Basin, etc.), the
Greenhorn Mountains, and, the southernmost point of record,
the Piute Mountains.

Specimens examined from the following localities.— Siskiyou
County: Yreka. Shasta County: Baird. Tehama County:
Tehama; Red Bluff. Glenn County: Winslow. Butte County:
Chambers Ravine; Chico. Sutter County: West Butte; Marys-
ville Buttes. Yolo County: Grand Island; Rumsey. Solano
County: Vacaville. San Joaquin County: Tracy Lake. Modoc
County: Warner Mountains. Placer County: Blue Canyon; Gold
Run. Madera County: Raymond. Tulare County: Cannell
Meadow; Trout Creek. Kern County: Fay Creek; Weldon;
Greenhorn Mountains; Kiavah Mountain; Bodfish; Isabella;
~ Walker Basin; Piute Mountains. Inyo County: Carroll Creek.
Total number of specimens, 110.

Distinguishing Characters— As compared with P. minimus
minimus, of clear gray and white tones of color, rather than of the
brownish hue of that subspecies. Typical californicus is often
almost pure white beneath, noticeably so in the juvenal plumage.
Sides and flanks slightly or not at all tinged with vinaceous.

Vol. Pal

1914 Swart, California Forms of Psaltriparus. 517

Remarks.— There are at hand three specimens from Baird, Shasta
County, California, the type locality of californicus. Judging from
the available material it seems unfortunate that a Shasta County
specimen was selected as the type of the paler colored inland race
of the California bush-tit, for the locality is at the extreme edge of
the territory occupied by the subspecies, and individuals from this
point do not exhibit the best manifestation of the characters of the
form. Birds taken but a short distance west of the type locality
of californicus must perforce be assigned to the subspecies minimus,
while topotypes of californicus are more of the nature of intergrades
beween the pale inland and dark coast races. This view is quite
in accord with the recognized faunal position of the Shasta and
Siskiyou regions (see Merriam, 1899; Anderson and Grinnell,
1903).

Sacramento Valley (specimens from Tehama, Glenn, Butte,.
Colusa, Sutter, Yolo, Yuba, Solano, and Sacramento counties).
Birds from the Sacramento Valley may be regarded as unquestion-
ably representative of the pale, interior subspecies. They are
distinctly grayer than birds from Shasta and Siskiyou counties,
to the northward, and are closely similar to Sierra Nevada birds.
Juveniles from the two regions (Sacramento Valley and Sierra
Nevada) are, in fact, practically indistinguishable; adults from the
former point are perhaps a trifle darker, and are more distinctly
vinaceous on the flanks.

Segregated series from the eastern and western sides of the
Sacramento Valley do not show any correlated differences. In
other words, although the Sacramento Valley series as a whole
tends slightly toward minimus, compared with the exceedingly gray
Sierra birds, there is no perceptible darkening from the eastern to
the western sides of the valley. Eight April adults-from Sutter
County (Sacramento Valley) are slightly darker than three birds
from Raymond, Madera County (in the western foothills of the
more southern Sierras), also taken in April. These series contain
about the best seasonably comparable adults available from the two
regions, though there are plenty of juveniles and old birds in worn
plumage, and tend to confirm the relative positions above accorded
the birds from these sections.

Warner Mountain District (specimens from Sugar Hill; Dry

518 SwartuH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. [ae

Creek; Parker Creek). A series of sixteen specimens (eight adults
and eight juveniles) from this section, presents several points of
interest.. These birds, together with those from the Sierras, ex-
hibit the extreme of grayness in appearance reached by any bush-
tits of this species. Comparing Warner Mountain and Sierra
Nevada birds, taking comparable adults and young of each, there
are no distinguishable differences in coloration. In measurements
the former average a trifle larger. In each of the two series there
are individuals in which the pileum is much less markedly con-
trasted with the back than is the case with specimens from any other
point. In an adult male from the Warner Mountains (no. 15297)
the difference in color on pileum and back is hardly appreciable,
nor are the two areas sharply separated. This bird is strikingly
similar to an adult male from the east slope of the Sierra Nevada
which I have referred to plumbeus (see beyond), in which there is
nearly as distinct a suggestion of a cap, differently colored from the
back.

The Warner Mountain birds average somewhat larger. than
specimens of californicus from other points, as on the western slope
of the Sierras. Aside from this slight difference, however, they
apparently are not to be distinguished from examples from the
central and southern Sierra Nevada. Unfortunately there is a
dearth of data and specimens from much of the region intervening
between the central Sierras and the Warner Mountains, and
whether or not there is continuous distribution of bush-tits between
is one of the points remaining to be worked out.

Sierra Nevada (specimens from Placer, Madera, Tulare, Kern,
and Inyo counties). Fifty-one specimens are available from the
general region indicated above. In this representation there are
small series from two different points on the western slope of the
Sierras, of particular interest when considered together. These
are: Three males from Raymond, Madera County, taken April 19
and 20, 1911; and six males from Placer County: two adults, Blue
Canyon, October 17 and 20, 1912; three immatures, Blue Canyon,
October 17 and 20, 1912; one male, age not indicated, Gold Run,
October 19, 1902. The Placer County birds have all nearly or quite
acquired their fresh winter plumage, and may be considered as pre-
senting the true colors of the subspecies californicus, unmodified

| SwartH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. 519
by any external influence. The Raymond specimens may be
regarded as unquestionably illustrating the same plumage after
subjection to the extreme effects of fading, but before excessive
abrasion reduces all the feathers to the uniformly dirty and undis-
tinctive appearance seen in midsummer specimens.

The differences shown in these two series is little less than start-
ling, being quite as great, though of a different nature, than those
distinguishing certain subspecies, or even species, in the genus.
In the October birds the general effect is of dark gray and slaty
tones, with no suggestion of brown anywhere. To speak exactly,
the tops of the heads of these birds (as described elsewhere in this
paper) are variously fuscous and chetura drab. In the Raymond
(spring) birds the dark gray and slaty body colors have become a
clearer gray above, and nearly pure white beneath, while the pileum
is buffy-brown. With the two extremes brought suddenly to the
attention, it is hard to realize that the observed differences are
merely seasonal changes, such as are undergone by any one indi-
vidual during the year; but that this is the case is forcibly proven
by the comparable changes traced through the seasons in the ex-
tensive series of minimus from the San Diegan district, as previ-
ously described, as well as by certain examples of californicus show-
ing intermediate stages.

Of the numerous specimens at hand from Tulare and Kern
counties, in the southern Sierras, the majority are juveniles, and
the comparatively few adults are either in very worn plumage or
are undergoing the annual molt. The entire series, both old and
young, shows to an extreme degree the pale coloration of this race,
and placed in apposition to a comparable series of minimus, the
difference is strikingly apparent. Sierran birds present the utmost
degree of grayness reached in the subspecies californicus, equalled
only by specimens from the Warner Mountains. Sacramento
Valley birds are slightly darker, the difference being more notice-
able in adults than in the young. Juvenals from the Sierras and
from the Sacramento Valley are practically indistinguishable.

There are three specimens at hand (Richardson coll., nos. 1023,
1025, 1031) collected in the Piute Mountains, Kern County, No-
vember 26, 1907. This small mountain range is a southern outpost
of the Sierra Nevada, and it is notew orthy that these birds, in fresh

[aus

520 SwartuH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. Oct.

fall plumage, are distinctly referable to the Sierran subspecies,
californicus. The peculiar interest attaching to this occurrence
lies in the fact that with certain other California birds comparable
to the bush-tits in local divisions and distribution, we find at the
extreme southern Sierras the southern California (San Diegan
district) representative, rather than the more northern form. Two
of the California towhees (Pipilo maculatus megalonyx and P.
crissalis senicula), and a thrasher (Toxostoma redivivum pasaden-
ense), are examples in point. In fact, from the preponderance of
southern California forms in this region, the latest published map of
the faunal areas of California (Grinnell, 1913, Plate XVI) shows the
San Diegan district as extending northeast into southern Tulare
County. With the bush-tits, however, the San Diegan representa-
tive, minimus, appears to be closely confined to the region west
from, and inclusive of, the coastal ranges. Examples at hand from
Fort Tejon and Mount Pinos are clearly minimus, apparently the
northeastern extreme reached by the subspecies in this region. The
Piute Mountain birds described above, are just as clearly californi-
cus. These two stations are approximately sixty miles apart, and
are apparently the two points at which the subspecies minimus and
californicus most closely approach one another in this part of the
state. The intervening region is mostly barren desert, unfitted to
the species.

There are five immature birds at hand from Carroll Creek, Inyo
County, this apparently indicating the northern limit of californicus
on the eastern slope of the Sierras. Collecting was carried on at
points immediately to the’ northward, where only pluwmbeus was
found.

Psaltriparus plumbeus (Baird).

Type locality.— Little Colorado River, Arizona.

Range in California.— Desert region of the southeastern portion
of the state, in Mono, Inyo, and northern San Bernardino counties.
A discontinuous range, being confined to the Upper Sonoran zone
of the various desert mountain chains and the east slope of the
Sierra Nevada, these tracts being separated by vast expanses of
Lower Sonoran, uninhabited by the species. Has been found in the
Providence Mountains, on New York Mountain (at the east end

oe | Swartu, California Forms of Psaltriparus. bel
of the Providence Mountains), in the Panamint, Inyo, and White
mountains, and on the east slope of the Sierra Nevada, from Carroll
Creek at the south, northward an undetermined distance.

Specimens examined from the following localities.— Inyo County:
Mazourka Canyon, Inyo Mountains; Carroll Creek, Lone Pine
Creek, and Kearsarge Pass, Sierra Nevada. Total number of
specimens, 10.

Distinguishing Characters.— Coloration of adults uniformly
grayish throughout, with no distinctive markings. Upper parts
eray; in fresh fall plumage the dorsum is tinged with olivaceous,
in slight contrast to the head. No decided markings on head,
though the cheeks are brownish, rather sharply defined against
the gray of neck and white of throat. Under parts pale gra, *°-
tically pure white in worn plumage; the flanks frequently wu.
with vinaceous. Juveniles are usually plainly marked as are the
adults, but frequently exhibit head markings of varying extent
and sharpness, similar to those seen in P. melanotis. In measure-
ments, plumbeus as compared with minimus has wing and _ tail
longer, tarsus the same, and bill (both in length of culmen and bulk)
smaller.

Remarks.— Besides the California specimens listed above, there
have been available for comparison series from southern Arizona
and from Nevada, numbering thirty-seven and seventeen skins,
respectively. These satisfactorily illustrate seasonal variation in
plumage, and the series also contain a good representation of birds
in juvenal plumage. The California specimens are for the most
part absolutely like those from Arizona and Nevada. Birds from
the Inyo Mountains and Kearsarge Pass, taken in May and June,
are in worn breeding plumage, and are indistinguishable, either in
color or measurements, from comparable examples from other
regions.

Two specimens from the Sierra Nevada, however, are deserving of
special notice. These are no. 22657, an adult male, taken on Lone
Pine Creek, April 13, 1912, in comparatively unworn plumage; and
no. 21092, also an adult male, taken on Carroll Creek, September 9,
1911, about two-thirds through the annual molt. The Lone Pine
bird has a distinctly perceptible “cap” on the pileum, not nearly
as marked as in full-feathered examples of californicus from the

[Set:

B22 SwartH, California Forms of Psaltriparus.
Sierras, but little less distinct than in a single specimen from the
Warner Mountains (no. 15297). In the Carroll Creek bird the cap
is not so obvious, but might become more distinct with the comple-
tion of the molt. The measurements of both these birds coincide
with those of plumbeus rather than californicus.

It will be noted that these specimens, of intermediate nature, were
taken at the extreme southwestern limits of the range of Psaltri-
parus plumbeus. The ranges of this species and P. minimus cali-
fornicus adjoin at this point, typical examples of the latter being
taken at Carroll Creek, at the same time and place with the aber-
rant specimen of plumbeus described above. It will also be noted
that one specimen of californicus from the Warner Mountains, pre-
viously described, shows a decided leaning toward the characters of
plumbeus. In other words, at the one point where the ranges of
Psaltriparus plumbeus and P. minimus californicus are known to
touch, and at one other point, an extreme eastern outpost of the
latter subspecies, we find specimens of intermediate character, with
difficulty referred to either one of the two. This is suggestive of
much closer relationship between them than has heretofore been
suspected, and it may be that further collecting and observations
in debatable territory will demonstrate the differences to be merely
subspecific, necessitating a return to the trinomial, Psaltriparus
minimus plumbeus, formerly in use.

At present, however, the facts hardly justify such a radical step.
In the first place, the region of blending, even if its existence may be
considered as established, is obviously very narrow, while the inter-
mediate specimens are almost of the nature of hybrids. There is
no gradual change from the characters of one species to the other,
examples of plumbeus from the Sierras being for the most part in-
distinguishable from Arizona and Nevada specimens. It is of
decided interest to note the existence of these doubtful specimens,
as another example of the different kinds of intergradation, and
varying degrees of difference, to be found between what we call
species and subspecies of animals.

In commenting upon P. plumbeus at the eastern border of its
range, where it meets P. melanotis lloydi, Ridgway (1904, p. 430,
footnote) remarks: “The relationship of this form to P. melanotis
lloydi affords a problem very difficult of solution and of exceptional

Vol. =a

1914 SwartH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. O23

interest in connection with the discrimination between species and
subspecies. Judging from specimens alone, it is difficult to escape
the conclusion that the two forms intergrade completely; at least
I find myself unable to satisfactorily refer a very large percentage |
of specimens obtained within the area of overlapping of their
respective ranges. But Mr. Oberholser, who has had excellent
opportunities of studying both forms in life, assures me that they
not only both breed in the same localities in southwestern Texas,
but that they each have distinctive peculiarities of voice, ete.
It is true that apparent intergradation does not involve adult males,
which are always very distinct, the difficulty being in distinguish-
ing those females and some young examples of P. m. lloydi which
have no black on the head from adults (both sexes) of P. plumbeus.”’

These statements are partly applicable to conditions existing at
the opposite, western border of the species’ range, where P. plum-
beus meets P. minimus californicus, in that, as shown above,
specimens were found with difficulty referred to either species.
It can not be urged in this case, however, that the two have any
distinctive peculiarities of voice or habits serving to indicate speci-
fic difference, for in the writer’s experience there are absolutely no
such distinguishing characteristics. Also no evidence of intergrada-
tion in the juvenal stage is at hand, no undoubted example of
plumbeus in juvenal plumage being secured in the debatable terri-
tory. The specimens regarded as intergrades are all mature birds.
But as the young of plumbeus from other parts of its range exhibit
characters remarkably similar to those of P. melanotis, it would be
surprising to find them here developing features similar to P.
minimus.

The whole problem of the inter-relationships of the three species
of Psaltriparus is one of decided interest, the facts so far accumu-
lated being of a suggestive, though tantalizingly inconclusive,
nature. The three species have a continuous distribution, melano-
tis the farthest to the south and east, minimus to the north and west,
and plumbeus occupying middle ground and impinging upon the
territories of each of the others. Melanotis and minimus have
peculiar and different head markings, while plumbeus is a plainly
and uniformly colored bird. The interesting fact has already been
developed (Swarth, 1913, p. 399) that in plumbeus, the middle link

524 SwartH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. lene

in the chain, the young sometimes develop a startling similarity to
the adult female, occasionally even to the adult male, of melanotis.
From the present study it is evident that adults of plumbeus at a
point of meeting with minimus are sometimes of the nature of inter-
grades towards this western form.

Ridgway (1904, p. 430) evidently strongly inclined toward a
belief in the existence of intergradation between melanotis and
plumbeus, and in the specimens discussed in the present paper there
is shown apparent blending between plumbeus and minimus. This
somewhat alters our conception of the relationships of the various
forms of Psaltriparus, and results in a much closer linking together
of the three generally recognized species. I have no intention here,
however, of formally proposing the reduction of the known forms of
Psaltriparus to subspecies under one species. We obviously can-
not express all the inter-relationships of different forms in our no-
menclature, and the generally accepted present treatment of the
species and subspecies of the genus Psaltriparus seems more satis-
factory than any such change would be. It seems evident though,
that in the three forms, melanotis, plumbeus, and minimus, there are
to be distinguished three branches of a parent stem which have
diverged to a point where we are just able to detect traces of their
former union. |

Through some females and young of melanotis and young of
plumbeus, we can observe apparent blending between these two,
for the assumption of features of melanotis by the young of plum-
beus would appear to be either a reversion to common ancestral
characters on the part of the latter, or else it is a rather remarkable
case of parallel development, with, in one species, greater specializa-
tion in the young than in the old, and specialization exactly such

as is shown in a neighboring race. The former belief seems the °

more reasonable. The mergence of plumbeus and minimus is of an
-abrupt and broken nature. From these facts it seems as though the
three ‘species,’ melanotis, plumbeus, and minimus, had advanced
in their evolution to a point where the connecting links were almost
eliminated, only faint traces of their former close union still being
visible. The intermittent appearance of peculiar characters in the
juvenal plumage of one of the species, and the occasional produc-

tion of what appear to be hybrids, may be taken as evidence of this
nature.

Dae | SwartH, California Forms of Psaltriparus. O20

LITERATURE CITED.

AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION ComMITTEB, J. A. ALLEN, CHAIRMAN
AND EpITor.
1910. Check-list of North American Birds. Ed. 3, revised (New
York, American Ornithologists’ Union), 430 pp., 2 maps.
ANDERSON, M. P., AND GRINNELL, J.
1903. Birds of the Siskiyou Mountains, California: a problem in
distribution. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., pp. 4-15.
GRINNELL, J.
1913. A Distributional List of the Mammals of California. Proc.
Calif. Acad. Sci., 3, pp. 265-390, pls. 15, 16 (maps).
GRINNELL, J., AND Swartu, H. S.
1913. An Account of the Birds and Mammals of the San Jacinto Area
of Southern California, with Remarks upon the Behaviour of
Geographic Races on the Margins of their Habitats. Univ.
Calif. Publ. Zool., 10, pp. 197-406, pls. 6-10, 3 figs. in text.
MAILLIARD, J.
1910. The status of the California Bi-colored Blackbird. Condor,
12, pp. 63-70, 2 figs. in text.
Merriam, C. H.
1899. Results of a Biological Survey of Mount Shasta, California.
U.S. Dept. Agric., Div. Biol. Surv., N. Amer. Fauna, 16,
179 pp., 5 pls., 46 figs. in text.
OBERHOLSER, H. C.
1903. A Synopsis of the genus Psaltriparus. Auk, 20, pp. 198-201.
Riveway, R.
1884. Descriptions of some new North American Birds. Proc. Biol.
Soc. Wash., 2, pp. 89-95.
1904. The Birds of North and Middle America. U.S. Nation Mus.,
Bull., 50, part 3, pp. xx + 801, 19 pls.
Swart, H. S. :
1900. Avifauna of a 100 acre Ranch. Condor, 2, pp. 37-41.
1913. The Status of Lloyd’s Bush-tit as a Bird of Arizona. Auk, 30,
pp. 399-401.

526

NicHoLs AND Murpuy, Genus Phebetria.

Auk
Oct.

MEASUREMENTS IN MILLIMETERS (AVERAGE, MINIMUM

AND MAXIMUM). OF SERIES

OF PSALTRIPA RUS

Wing Tail Culmen Tarsus
Psaltriparus minimus minimus 46.8 52.05 7 15.8
10 males from Los Angeles Co., California (46-48) (50-54) (15-16)
Psaltriparus minimus californicus ; 47.2 2,01 feat 15.8
10 males from the Sacramento Valley, California (46.5-49) (50-54) (7-7.5) (15-16 .5)
Psaltriparus minimus vali fornicus 49.5 53.7 7.4 15.8
9 adults from the Warner Mts., California (48-50.5) (51-58 . 5) (7.2-8) (15-16 .5)
Psaltriparus minimus californicus 47. 52.3 7til 6.
5 adults from the Sierra Nevada, California (47-48.2) | (51.5-54.5) (7-7 .2) (16-16.5)
Psaltriparus plumbeus 51 55.3 6.1 16.3
8 adults from Inyo County, California (50-52) (52-59. 5) (6-6.5) (16-16. 5)
Psaltriparus plumbeus 50.4 05 6.1 15.6
10 males from the Huachuca Mts., Arizona (49-51) (53-57. 5) (6-6. 5) (15-16)
Psaltriparus plumbeus é 55.5 6.1 16.1
5 adults from Humboldt County, Nevada (50.5-52.5) | (53.5-60) (6-6.5) | (16-16.5)
[a

A REVIEW OF THE GENUS PHCBETRIA.

BY JOHN TREADWELL NICHOLS AND ROBERT CUSHMAN MURPHY.

Plate XLT.

THE possession by the American Museum of Natural History
and the Brooklyn Museum of a series of skins of Phebetria pal pe-
brata antarctica from South Georgia Island in the Subantarctic
Atlantic, and of two specimens of Phebetria fusca from the temper-
ate South Atlantic, has led us to assemble additional material for
purposes of comparison. Our study brings us to the conclusion
that the east Pacific, or American west coast, Sooty Albatross, which
is the Diomedea fusca of Audubon and the P. palpebrata of the latest
A. O. U. Check-List, (1910), belongs to an undescribed race of
palpebrata. A review of the genus in the light of the material
examined may aid future workers.

The characteristics which differentiate the two well-marked

species palpebrata and fusca can be comprehensively stated in the
form of a key:—

THE AUK, VOL. XXXI. PARES Nl:

1. AputtT Mate anp NESTLING, SoutH GrEorGIA Sooty ALBATROSS,
Phebetria palpebrata antarctica.
2. (a). P. p. auduboni. .(b). P. fusca fusca.

=

Vol. XXXT] — NicHots AND Murpuy, Genus Phobetria. 527

A. Culmen concave in profile; sulcus of mandible narrow, and blue or
purplish in life (dark in dried skins); feathers of back and lower
parts decidedly paler than remainder of plumage. .P. palpebrata.

AA. Culmen nearly straight in profile; sulcus of mandible wide, and
straw-color, yellow, or orange in life (and also in skins); feathers
of back and lower parts dark like remainder of plumage. P. fusca.

Mr. Gregory Mathews in his ‘ Birds of Australia,’ Vol. II, 1912,
p. 294, has published diagnostic drawings of the bills of the two
species.

P. palpebrata is the species having the more southerly breeding
range, but its normal wandering range overlaps that of P. fusca
in the southern temperate zone. Mr. Murphy has seen both to-
gether in the South Atlantic Ocean, and has found the specific
differences striking in life. Curiously enough, the “common”
Sooty Albatross (P. fusca), which is the ‘P. fuliginosa’ of most
authors, now seems to be a far rarer bird in collections than are
representatives of palpebrata.

In naming three geographical races of the two species of Phe-
betria, Mr. Mathews (loc. cit.) has failed to present adequate de-
scriptions and measurements. Recently, however, Mr. Mathews
has personally examined our own material, and has informed us
that he studied a large series of topotypical specimens of Phebetria
palpebrata (Forster) before becoming sponser for the subspecies
huttont and antarctica. We are therefore provisionally recognizing
the following four races of palpebrata and two races of fusca, with
the hope that some investigator who has series of Pacific and Indian
Ocean birds at his disposal may soon make use of our measurements
in fixing the status of the Old World forms.

Phebetria palpebrata palpebrata (Forster).

Diomedea palpebrata, Forster, Mém. prés. Acad. Roy. Sci. (Paris), Vol.
X, p. 571, 1785.

TYPE LOCALITY, lat. 64°S., long. 38° E.

RanGE, Kerguelen Island (breeding), also presumably the Prince Edward
Islands, the Crozets, McDonald and Heard Islands, in the Indian
Ocean.

Although the Kerguelen bird is the typical race of palpebrata it
seems to be the intermediate between the two subspecies next

considered, viz. antarctica of Weddell Sea and huttoni of the New
Zealand region.

528 NicHOLs AND Murpuy, Genus Phebetria. Aue

We have seen but one specimen, a breeding female from Ker-

guelen.
MEASUREMENTS IN MM.
. Tip of bill Middle toe :
Bill id nail Tarsus st ciate Wing, Tail
; )
U.S. N. Mus.
* 68953 @ |
Kerguelen I. 103 72 78 118 502 | 275
|

Pheebetria palpebrata huttoni Mathews.

Phebetria palpebrata huttont, Mathews, Birds of Australia, Vol. II, p. 297,
1912.

Tyrer Locauiry, New Zealand seas.

RanGE, Subantarctic islands of New Zealand (breeding), Australian and
New Zealand seas (Mathews).

Two specimens in the collection of the Museum of Comparative
Zoblogy, Cambridge, Mass., have been compared with a large
series of antarctica from South Georgia. In coloration the two
subspecies bear close resemblances, but the New Zealand birds are
perhaps slightly darker and notably smaller in all their dimensions.

Culmen moderately concave in profile, angular (7. e. with a well
marked ridge) at its base. Groove of lower mandible narrow (cf.
fig. Mathews, /. c., p. 294). Head dark grayish-brown, darkest
in loral region. Back and under surface ashy, rump darker than

back.

MEASUREMENTS.
P Tip of bill Middle toe ; P
Bill We octet Tarsus and elawe Wing} Tail
Mus. Comp. Zool.
* 39880
New Zealand 95 mm. 65 76 112 OZ a2

Mus. Comp. Zool.
* 39881 9
New Zealand 101 69 79 119 486 | 245

gear wal Nicuots AND Murpny, Genus Phebetria. 529

Phebetria palpebrata antarctica Mathews.

Phebetria palpebrata antarctica, Mathews, Birds of Australia, Vol. II, p.
302, 1912.

Tyrr Locatiry, South Georgia (breeding).

RancE, Weddell Sea and South Atlantic Ocean, north at least to 33°
South (Murphy).

In this subspecies the bill is shaped much like that of the New
Zealand and Kerguelen races, but it is larger and heavier, and the
culmen is less acutely ridged at its base. The following descrip-
tion based upon breeding specimens of antarctica contains, of course,
many characteristics common to its congeners :— Bill black, man-
dibular sulcus pearl blue; legs and feet pale flesh color with a
vinaceous and buff wash over the scales; iris olive brown; skin of
mentum blue under the feathers. Head dusky grayish-brown,
nearly black on lores; a white ring, broken in front and on the
anterior half of the lower lid, encircling eye; back and under surface
ashy gray, blending with the dark shade of head, and lightest in
center of back; rump and scapularies dark gray; wings dark brown-
ish-gray, changing to grayish-black on primaries; tail grayish-
black; shafts of quills white or whitish.

A nestling 336 mm. in length is covered with long light gray down
except on the head, where a cap of short, dark gray down is sepa-
rated from the nearly bare throat by a mask-like area of hairy,
light gray down.

The nineteen specimens of this race, which we have had the pleas-
ure of examining, were, with one exception, taken at South Georgia

by Mr. Murphy or Mr. J. G. Correia.

—

530 NicHots AND Murpuy, Genus Phebetria. Fees
MEASUREMENTS.
Bill pla i ‘a Tarsus pape eey Wing Tail
J. G.C. #45, 0 116 75 83 125 506 | 267
Cumberland Bay mm.
R. C. M. #1745, 0
Bay of Isles 115 15 84 122 519 | 263
eG. Ca Mol, ce
Cumberland Bay 116 80 86 131 552 | 274
INGE. MIG? oF
Cumberland Bay 117 76 81 121 519 | 284
R. C. M. * 1507, &
Cumberland Bay 111 80 83 128 522 | 264
JG. GS HAS, uc!
Cumberland Bay 110 76 80 126 541 | 294
R. C. M. * 1506, 7
Cumberland Bay 110 76 81 122 518 | 279
JG G2 He os
Cumberland Bay 110 78 83 122 5238 |.275
J.G. C. #42, 0)
Cumberland Bay 109 77 85 128 521 | 270
R. C. M. #1528, o
Cumberland Bay 108 78 84 128 523 | 260
R. C. M. #1508, ¢
Cumberland Bay 103 75 82 120 503 | 249
JEG KSB, 9
Cumberland Bay 117 76 81 125 506 | 265
J.G. C. #41, 9
Cumberland Bay —_|_-114 73 82 125 525 | 276
JaGeG #46. 9 | |
Cumberland Bay 114 73 84 122 521 | 274
R.C. M. #1527, 9
Cumberland Bay 109 74 80 122 494 | 236
J GuC.2#39,. 9
~ Cumberland Bay 102 72 78 120 490 | 249
J.G.C. #40, 9
Cumberland Bay 98 70 80 11 500 | 270
R. C. M. #1417, 9 116 v5 80 12 526 | 251
OES AUS IS
Long. 35° W.,
R. C.M. #1744, & Di 33 40 48

fledgling in down,
(tot. length 336 mm.)

r ry €
Vol. ae NicHoLts AND Murpuy, Genus Phebetria. 531

1914

Below are averaged measurements of six males which were actu-
ally collected on their nests at South Georgia. The figures estab-
lish a standard of size for adult males of the subspecies antaretica.

Bill Tip of pill Tarsus Middle toe sea Tail
to nostril and claw |
zs peboln syle
Average of 6 breeding
males 113 78 83 125 §25 | 272

Phebetria palpebrata auduboni subsp. nov.

Diomedea fusca, Audubon, Orn. Biogr., V., p. 116, 1839.

Typr Locauity, mouth of the Columbia River, Oregon.

RANGE, west coast of America, north casually to Oregon; breeding range
unknown.

This is the most distinctive of the races of Phabetria palpebrata.
The specimen which of necessity becomes the type is No. 2718
of the United States National Museum collection, the type of
Audubon’s. Diomedea fusca (not of Hilsenberg). This specimen is in
a very bad state of preservation, with the head broken off, and the
feathers soiled with grease in addition to having undergone the char-
acteristic dimming of improperly prepared, aged specimens. From
the color of its plumage it might be assigned to the fusca (Hilsen-
berg) group, where, indeed, Mathews (I. ¢c.) and others have in-
cluded it. The bill, however, shows that it not only belongs to the
species palpebrata but to a race of that species which is farthest
removed from Phabetria fusca. The name which Audubon used
being preoccupied by fusca of Hilsenberg, we have proposed the
name Phebetria palpebrata auduboni.

Since the type is of such limited value for purposes of comparison,
it is fortunate that we have found another specimen in the Museum
of Comparative Zoélogy, No. 3903 collection of E. A. and O. Bangs.
The latter bird agrees with the type in its dimensions and approxi-
mately in the shape of the bill, and also presents what was doubt-
less the original coloration of the type.

932 NicHots AND Murpny, Genus Phebetria. lon

Subspecific distinctions: bill more slenderly built and more
strongly hooked than in other races of palpebrata; culmen more
decidedly concave or ‘saddle-shaped,’ the ridge at the base high
and acute. Head fuscous-black, darkest between eye and bill;
back and underparts dark gray, rump still darker; wings and tail
brownish-black.

The Bangs specimen is reasonably fresh, so that its plumage is
comparable with our own material. The bird is much darker than
any specimens of antarctica or huttoni, though nearer in coloration
to these than to fusca. Possibly auduboni has a more northerly
breeding area than the other members of palpebrata, in which case
its darker plumage would conform with a recognized color principle
among sea birds of the southern hemisphere.

MEASUREMENTS.
]
: Tip of bill Middle toe ees A
Bill souaOsttil Tarsus atime Wing! Tail
|
Type of “D. fusca”’ |
Aud. 108 | 76 84 124 495 | 251
U.S. Nat. Mus. mm. | much
* 2718 (no sex) Ore- worn
gon |
Coll. of E. A. & O. 105 | 75 81 120 502 | 248
Bangs *3903 (no sex) |
“ Between Cape Horn
& San Francisco.”’ |

Phebetria fusca fusca (Hilsenberg).

Diomedea fusca, Hilsenberg, Froriep’s Notizen, Vol. III, No. 5 (49), p. 74,
1822. ;

Tyre Locauiry, Mozambique Channel.

RanGE, South Atlantic and western Indian Oceans, Tristan de Cunha and
Gough Islands (breeding), Prince Edward Islands (?) and the Crozets
Gye

ea ‘NicHoLts AND Murpuy, Genus Phebetria. 033

This species is the P. fuliginosa of authors and is differentiate d
from the palpebrata group by the characters given in our key, p. 527.
In life its most conspicuous mark is the absence of a gray mantle.
Our only specimens are two collected by Mr. Murphy on March 26,
1913, lat. 39° S., long. 31° W., Atlantic Ocean.

Plumage in general sooty black, slightly paler and grayer below,
brownish on crown and middle of back. Bill deep and straight
(see Mathews’ Fig.), less strongly hooked than that of palpebrata;
ridge at base of culmen slight; broad mandibular sulcus yellow;
iris olive; white crescent bordering eye, and whitish quill shafts,
as in other members of the genus.

MEASUREMENTS.
| winy | Tip.of bill’) parsua, | MUAdle toe | wing! Tall
to nostril and claw |

|

80 82 123 481 | 265

R. C. M. #1952, @ | 112 |
/ mm. | |
Be C2 Mi. $1053," 9). |110n\yn!, 76 83 120 | 497 | 237

Phebetria fusca campbelli Mathews.

Phebetria fusca campbelli, Mathews, Birds of Australia, Vol. II., p. 304,
1912.

Type Locauiry, “Australian seas.”

Ranae, Australian seas (Mathews); breeding range unknown.

On its present basis this subspecies is hardly worthy of recogni-
tion for Mr. Mathews states simply that it is smaller in all its
dimensions than the western, typical race. Comparing our meas-
urements of fusca fusca with those given by Mathews for fusca
campbelli, we find notable differences only in the length of the
tarsus. We have seen no specimens from the reputed range of this
subspecies.

Auk

534 NicHoLs AND Murpuy, Genus Phebetria. Oct

CONCLUSIONS.

Summarizing our conclusions on the genus Phebetria, upon the
not wholly sufficient basis of the material studied, we find in the
first place two well differentiated species, palpebrata and fusca, of
more southerly and more northerly distribution respectively, but
of coincident range in an intermediate zone. The last generaliza-
tion may not hold true in the eastern Pacific, where the only known
representative, Phebetria palpebrata auduboni, may have become
part of the fauna of the northern hemisphere in accordance with the
general tendency of the Diomedeide to range northward in that
ocean.

The species palpebrata is in turn divided into two main sections,
one of which includes only auduboni with a range west of America
and Weddell Sea, the other comprising the three pale subspecies
antarctica, palpebrata, and huttoni, ranging from west to east,
respectively, across the Atlantic and Indian Oceans, to the waters
south of Australia, and forming in the same order a decreasing
sequence in size. These three subspecies have a range in latitude
extending from the verge of the true Antarctic at least to the middle
of the southern temperate zone. It seems possible that the ranges
of huttoni and auduboni may be separated by the vast stretch of
the southern Pacific, where the little known Dougherty Island
in latitude 59° S., alone offers even an unlikely possibility as a
breeding ground.

The species fusca is represented by the typical race which inhabits
the temperate southern Atlantic and Indian Oceans, over an area
having its longitudinal center in the neighborhood of the Cape of
Good Hope; and by a geographically separated race, campbelli, not
yet properly known to science, with a range in the Australian seas.

EXPLANATION OF PLATE.

Fig. 1. Phebetria palpebrata antarctica Mathews, adult # and downy
nestling, Bay of Isles, South Georgia, Jan 20, 1913. Photo by R. C.
Murphy.

Fig. 2. a, Phebetria palpebrata auduboni Nichols and Murphy, No. 3903
Coll. of E. A. and O. Bangs, sex undetermined, Eastern Pacific Ocean.
b, Phebetria fusca fusca Hilsenberg, No. 1952 &, R. C. Murphy,
South Atlantic Ocean.

a | General Notes. 535

GENERAL NOTES.

Harlequin Duck in Glacier National Park, Montana.— June 27,
1913, I had the pleasure of observing a pair of Harlequin Ducks ( Histrioni-
cus histrionicus) on Iceberg Lake, in the Glacier National Park, Montana.
The lake, it may be stated, is so called because there is a small glacier com-
ing down to the water’s edge at one side, from which, during the summer,
pieces of ice are frequently breaking off and floating about in the water.
At the time of my visit, however, the lake was mostly covered with ice and
snow, merely a narrow strip of open water 40 or 50 feet wide along the side
opposite the glacier, and in this the brightly clad drake and his more quietly
dressed mate were swimming back and forth. They were comparatively
tame and paid little attention to me as I stood on the shore and watched
them, though they kept in motion continually. The only time they took
wing was to fly over a narrow bit of ice which separated the strip of water
into two parts, and then they only flew far enough to pass over the ice and
dropped back into the water again; later I saw them get out and walk over
the same ice. While I was equipped with a Graflex camera, the day was
very dark and cloudy, raining occasionally, and I did not succeed in getting
a single good negative owing to the fact that I had to make very short
exposures because of the birds being constantly in motion and passing
the line of sight at right angles. Even the strong reflection from the ice
and snow did not help out sufhiciently. It was the chance of a lifetime and
I will never cease to regret not having obtained good pictures. I am very
curious to know if the birds bred there. Perhaps this may meet the eye
of someone who saw them there later in the season.— Epwarp R. WARREN,
Colorado Springs, Colo.

American Egret (Herodias egretta) at Naushon Island, Mass.— I
was much interested in Mr. Noble’s note in the January ‘ Auk,’ on the
American Egret at Martha’s Vineyard. I saw an American Egret fly over
the northeastern end of Naushon Island on July 20, 1913 while I was there
for a visit. On August 11, 1913, when returning from Nantucket my hus-
band and I saw two American Egrets standing at the edge of a green marsh
between Wood’s Hole and Falmouth. These birds looked gleaming white
with the green marsh background.— Lip1an E. Brince, West Medford,
Mass.

Yellow-crowned Night Heron in Colorado.— The writer has to
report the occurrence of this species (Nyctanassa violacea) at Byers, Colo.,
where one was shot on May 3, 1914; the bird was in full nuptial plumage,
and was brought (in the flesh) to Mr. A. T. Allen, taxidermist, of Denver,
Colo., to be mounted. Through his courtesy the writer is able to make
this valuable record, which is, so far as he knows, the second for this state
for this species, and the first one with full data as to location of occurrence,
and date of collection. The sex was not determined.— W. H. Beraro.p,
Denver, Colo.

536 General Notes. (ane

Red Phalarope (Phalaropus fulicarius) off Boston Harbor in Sum-
mer.— On July 11, 1913, when Miss Cleveland, local secretary of the
Massachusetts Audubon Society, and I were returning by boat to Boston,
from Plymouth, a small duck-like, brightly colored bird caught my eye just
as the boat passed the Harding’s Ledge buoys just outside Boston Harbor.
We examined the bird carefully with our glasses, and it proved to be a Red
Phalarope in full plumage, the first of the kind we had ever seen, but
we had good views and were able to positively identify it.— Lip1an E.
Bripce, West Medford, Mass.

Another Massachusetts Record for the Turkey Vulture (Cathartes
aura septentrionalis).— On July 24 of this year, I was watching a Red-tailed
Hawk over Higgins’ Pond in Truro, Cape Cod, Mass., when a large black
bird appeared from the southeast and flew with slow wing-beats across the
pond, rather low and at no great distance from me, and then mounted
soaring into the air. Though I had become familiar with the Turkey
Vulture on a visit to Virginia some years ago, I did not at once recognize
it in Massachusetts, where this species does not ordinarily come into our
reckoning, but soon the size, color, long outstretched wings with the tips
of the primaries well separated, and comparatively long, rounded tail iden-
tified the bird positively as Cathartes aura and presumably of the subspecies.
septentrionalis. Presently it dropped to a lower level and sailed, straight
on motionless wings in the direction of Slough Pond, half a mile away to
the north. On reaching Slough Pond, I failed to find the Vulture but.
startled an immature Bald Eagle from its perch on the farther shore, and
while watching it move off in circles towards the west, I saw two other
soaring birds in the distance, probably the Red-tailed Hawk and the
Turkey Vulture. Meeting with these three fine birds in such close succes-
sion, each one larger than the last, was an interesting experience, and the
Turkey Vulture is uncommon enough in Massachusetts to make it seem
worth while to record the occurrence.— Francis H. ALLEN, West Roxbury,
Mass.

Richardson’s Owl (Cryptoglaux funerea richardsoni) in N. E. Wlinois.—
Richardson’s Owl rarely strays as far south as the United States, and after
more than forty years collecting I had never seen a specimen in the flesh,
until one was brought into the shop of Mr. R. A. Turtle, the taxidermist,
who very kindly presented it to me. It was picked up dead in the street —
Data from label: ‘Mus. H. K.C., No. 17479— @ Chicago, Illinois,
March 5, 1914 — Length 10.25 in., Extent 24.25, Wing 7.25, Tail 4.38,
Tarsus .80, Bill .75. Stomach empty The only other Illinois records
are Rockford, October, 1884, Cicero, December, 1902, and Kenilworth,
December, 1902, all near Chicago.— Hrnry K. Coan, Highland Park, Til.

Unusual Behavior of a Ruby-throated Hummingbird (Archilochus
colubris)— On August 22, 1914, my wife and I were coming through the
extensive piece of swamp-land just east of Chain Bridge in the District of

yo | General Notes. 537

Columbia. It was nearly sundown, and the place was gathering on the
evening shadows, when, within a few feet of where we stood resting for
some moments, there suddenly appeared a male hummingbird (A. colubris)
in hot pursuit of a Carolina Wren (Thryothorus 1. ludovicianus), the latter
leading it a pretty chase through the trees and dense vegetation. Both
were giving vent to their peculiar notes indicating their excitement, while
the hummer seemed bent on doing the wren any bodily harm it could effect
with its bill. Once or twice it lit close to us, and the scolding notes of the
wren brought two other birds of the same species to the scene. These were
likewise immediately charged by the valiant little hummer with great vehe-
mence, which uttered as it did so its little, shrill, squeaky pipings. All
three of the wrens kept dodging these attacks, and it was remarkable to see
the skill with which the hummer shot about after each in turn through the
vines and small branches of the trees and shrubs.

In a few moments, several warblers put in an appearance, among them a
Maryland Yellow-throat (Geothlypis t. trichas), a couple of Parulas (Comp-
sothlypis a. americana), a Magnolia ( Dendroica magnolia), and others which
I could not with certainty identify, on account of the increasing darkness.
Their arrival seemed to still further excite the hummingbird, which shot
first after one, then after another according to their accessibility. In no
instance, however, did I actually see it come in contact with the bird at-
tacked, and always on account of the skill of the latter dodging a direct
charge; for beyond such linear flights, the hummer could only buzz for a
few seconds about the bird he was particularly after in any attack. Neither
the wrens nor the warblers made any counter charges, while the entire
affair did not last over a minute or two, when both assailant and the assailed
flew off in different directions.

Never before in my life have I witnessed such a scene; and I can not
conceive what could have occasioned a hummingbird to behave in such a
manner.— R. W. SHureiptT, Washington, D. C.

Breeding of the Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius pheniceus pheni-
ceus) in Nova Scotia.— On June 21, 1914, after repeated searching, I
found the nest of the Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius pheniceus pheniceus)
in a swamp near Antigonish, Nova Scotia. It was attached to cattail
stems and rank grass, and was placed six or eight inches above the surface
of water in which I stood knee-deep. It contained four eggs, corresponding
exactly in appearance with the description of the eggs of this species given
in F. M. Chapman’s ‘ Handbook of Birds of Eastern North America,’
1912 edition. Unfortunately, I did not actually see the female at the nest,
but she and a male fluttered over my head, or perched in the nearby bushes
while I was examining the nest. They uttered many cries of distress and
anger, and I consider that their actions, together with the situation and
appearance of the nest and its contents, indubitably determine its identity.
I did not collect it, as I did not wish to disturb the birds in any way. A
second pair of the same species was present in this swamp and presumably

538 General Notes. lee

bred there. A male of the species was seen in the swamp on May 2, 1914,
and one or more of the birds was observed there occasionally up to the time
of finding the nest.

The following may also be of interest in this connection. On June 29,
1914, one male and two female Red-winged Blackbirds were observed in a
cattail swamp near Truro, Nova Scotia, and probably within the limits of
the town. The birds were easily and positively identified and presumably
were breeding there. I can find no previous record of the breeding of the
species in Nova Scotia.— Harrison F. Lewis, Yarmouth, Nova Scotia.

Brewer’s Blackbird (Huphagus cyanocephalus) breeding in South-
eastern Minnesota.— It has long been definitely known and of late years
frequently recorded that Brewer’s Blackbird regularly nests in considerable
numbers in northwestern Minnesota, especially throughout the valley of the
Red River of the North and the region immediately adjacent to the east-
ward. A few scattered observations confirm its occurrence as a migrant
further east in the state: — White Earth, Becker Co. April 6, 1885, W. W.
Cooke, (Rep. Bd. Migr. Miss. Val. 1888, pp. 178-4); Bemidji, southern
Beltrami Co., September 8, 1902, (L. O. Dart, MS. List); Parker’s Prairie,
southeastern Ottertail Co., ‘‘ found here and breeds but is rather scarce
during the breeding season,” (Fred Barker, MS. List); and from still further
eastward comes to the Minn. Nat. Hist. Survey a report from Rev. Severin
Gertkin that ‘‘many’”’ were seen on April 9, 1894, and “‘ a small flock ” on

April 8, 1897, at Collegeville, in eastern Stearns County, a locality about .

fifty miles south of the geographical center of the State.

Dr. P. L. Hatch in his ‘ Notes on Minnesota Birds’ 1892, p. 286, has
the following to say in regard to the breeding of this blackbird in Minne-
sota: ‘‘ They breed abundantly along the Red River from Big Stone lake
to the Canadian line, and eastwardly along the shores of the woodland lakes
and streams to Mille Lacs in Crow Wing county, and less commonly con-
siderably further south.” But the latter, and most important, part of this
statement is unsupported by actual data and nothing up to the present
time has been recorded to substantiate the presence of this blackbird east
of the extreme western part of the State in the breeding season. Therefore
the present circumstantial account of a nesting colony of Brewer’s Black-
birds at a locality only thirty miles west of the eastern boundary of Minne-
sota is perhaps worthy of being placed on record, more especially as it is,
‘as far as I can discover, the most eastern locality where it has been found
nesting anywhere in its range.

The place where the birds were found is a swampy meadow of some two
hundred acres in extent, resulting from the drainage, a few years ago, of a
shallow lake or slough, called Palmer’s Lake, a famous resort in times gone
by of many kinds of wild fowl and marsh birds. _ It lies close to the northern
limit of the city of Minneapolis. The discovery of the colony was made by
Mr. F. H. Nutter on May 13 of the present year, 1914, while surveying
this lake bed. Mr. Nutter has for many years been an earnest and intelli-

—__

Mea | General Notes. 539

gent student of our birds and credit is due him for recognizing at once
a bird that he had never seen alive before and had no reason to expect to
find here. With characteristic modesty he kindly delegates to the writer
the making of this report. On the date just mentioned Mr. Nutter found
seven nests, all containing eggs. Four sets were collected and deposited in
the collection of the Minnesota Academy of Sciences, which institution
was the recipient several years ago, of Mr. Nutter’s entire collection of
eggs and nests. The eggs were prepared by Mr. J. W. Franzen, Curator
of the Academy’s Museum and proved to be partially incubated, indicat-
ing that nesting had been begun in the very early part of May.

On May 22, the writer accompanied by Mr. Nutter and Mr. Franzen,
visited the blackbird colony, examined the nests found by Mr. Nutter and
after a little search discovered four additional nests in the immediate vicin-
ity of the others. All contained eggs, four or five in number.

On May 30, I again visited the locality in company with Mr. William
Kilgore, another ardent student of bird life. 'Two more nests were found at
this time. All the nests contained young birds just hatched except one of
those found on the twenty-second in which there were still five unhatched
eggs. So far as our observations went at this time the females alone
were carrying food to the young.

On June 17, Mr. Franzen and myself again visited the marsh and found
all the nests empty, except the one containing eggs on the thirtieth which
had been abandoned before the eggs hatched, one of the original clutch of
five being missing and two of the remaining four being broken. The young
had apparently flown from the other nests, but neither parents nor young
were to be found in the vicinity. This was a disappointment as we were
equipped with an umbrella blind and photographic outfit. However, on
the edge of the marsh a half mile away and close by a farm house, were
found a number of birds where a small accessory colony had been located
on the twenty-second. Here the birds were flying about in a bit of fenced-
in marsh and in the tops of a grove of trees adjacent to the farm house.
Four were shot and one of these proved to be a young of the year nearly
full grown. A female contained an egg just about to be laid, suggesting
that a second or belated nesting was in progress. One female was seen
carrying food but no nests were discovered here. This small colony may
possibly have been composed of the birds disturbed on May 13 in their
nesting operations at the main colony out in the middle of the marsh.

Thus thirteen nests were found in all. We estimated that probably
twenty or twenty-five pairs of these blackbirds were nesting in this marsh,
chiefly in one colony, or rather two closely related colonies, the nests
grouped rather closely about two foci, some five hundred paces apart. The
spot selected was out in the middle of the meadow but close by a thick new
growth of willows fringing the main drainage canal. The nests were all
rather bulky affairs, on the ground and sunk to the rim in the soft marsh
soil and without exception each was placed close to the base of a clump of
Marsh Marigolds (Caltha palustris). When the nests were first built

540 General Notes. lana

they must have been protected only by the early flowering Marigolds for
when discovered by Mr. Nutter on May 13, the grass was but just spring-
ing up, the bog being still frozen hard at a depth of only a foot or so from
the surface, as was discovered on attempting to drive surveyor’s stakes.
By the twenty-second the grass was nearly knee high but was still over-
topped by the Marigolds and the marsh was yet gay with the golden
blossoms. By the time the parents ceased their nesting duties their
domiciles were hidden at the bottom of a miniature forest of luxuriant
meadow grass and marshy plants, more than waist high, with all the origi-
nal land marks obliterated and not a vestige of the early Marigold shelter
to be seen.— Tuos. 8. Roprerts, Minneapolis, Minn.

Southern Meadowlark (Sturnella magna argutula) in Northern Illi-
nois.— In November, 1913, it was my good fortune to attend the Annual
Meeting of the A. O. U. in New York City, and later to pla a number
of collections of birds in the New England States. ;

At different points Meadow Larks were seen, some feng up quite near
the train.

These birds appeared to be much larger than those of northeastern Illi-
nois. This was verified upon examining some Massachusetts specimens
in Mr. Hersey’s collection at Taunton; their large size as compared with
Illinois birds at once attracted my attention. Mr. Hersey and Mr. C. L.
Phillips of Taunton sent me some skins of the Massachusetts birds. Later
in looking over the skins of birds taken in Illinois, and on comparing
them with true Stwrnella magna argutula from Florida, I found them to
be identical. Whether the type of Alauda magna Linn. was this subspe-
cies, or represented the large New England Sturnella magna, I am not able
to say, but the species which breeds in northern Illinois and adjacent
states is not true magna as has been supposed, but argutula. The meas-
urements following are from specimens in my collection referred to Sturnella
magna.

Sturnella magna.

(Measurements in inches).

= Length | y-: : A Mid.

H. K.C. of Skin Wing | Tail | Tars.| Bill eae
|

16850 |Chathamport Mass. | Jan. 29, 1913 | 10.5 | 5.00] 3.63 | 1.63 | 1.25] 1.60

oH
16793 | | ae Nov. 22, 1913] 10.25 | 5.00] 3.60] 1.63| 1.25] 1.60
| ‘ £ & “t 10.15 | 5.00| 3.70] 1.62| 1.30] 1.60

Sturnella magna argutula.

10473 | o| Highland a Til. | Apr. 2, 1906 | 8.50| 4.60] 3.15 | oa 1.20} 1.10

9537 | 9 S “ |“ 25,1905 | 8.00] 4.40| 3.00] 1.45 | 1.15] 1.10

12692 | 9 Lukeus, Fla. Jan. 10, 1906 | 8.30) 4.35 | 3.00| 1.50| 1.20) 1.20

12691) @) St. Marys, Ga. Feb. 19, 1903 | 8.60} 4.65 3.00) 1.50] 1.30) 1.40
| | |

Henry K. Coauz, Highland Park, Ill.

Se | General Notes. 541

Evening Grosbeaks at Jamaica Plain, Mass.— In the April number
of ‘ The Auk,’ Mr. Edward H. Atherton reports an Evening Grosbeak ( Hes-
periphona vespertina vespertina) in the Arnold Arboretum. The bird re-
mained for about six weeks the last date of observation being February 8,
1914.

This however was not the only appearance of this species in the Arbore-
tum this season. On March 15, 1914, with Mr. Ralph M. Harrington of
Cambridge, Mass., and the writer saw two fine males and one female in the
river birches near the superintendent’s house where they were feeding on
the seeds. The males were uttering low whistling notes. The female was
much darker than the bird noted by Mr. Atherton. They were seen several
times in about the same place for just a month (March 15-April 15). A
number of times two males and one female were observed at Quincy,
Mass., and on those identical dates the birds were not to be found in the
Arboretum. Were they the same birds? The two places are only about
eight miles apart— Haro.p 8. Barrett, Jamaica Plain, Mass.

Chestnut-collared Longspur in Colorado.—I have to record the
occurrence of a single male of this species (Calcarius ornatus) at Denver,
Colo., on June 17, 1914. This species is an extremely rare summer
visitor to Colorado; the individual seen on June 17, being the first and
only one seen in the state during more than twenty years’ residence in
Colorado.— W. H. Bereroup, Denver, Colo.

The Snow Bunting Again in the Chicago Area.— In a previous num-
ber of ‘The Auk’! I reported a few records of the Snow Bunting seen by me
in Chicago and vicinity during the fall and winter of 1912, the interest
being that the species is a supposedly irregular visitant here. In 1913 a
few birds again appeared, from one to nine being observed at Jackson and
Lincoln Parks, Chicago, from October 17 to November 22 inclusive. As
did the birds of 1912 these disappeared as soon as the beaches had become
covered with ice. No more were seen until February 21, 1914, when about
twenty appeared at Lincoln Park, not about the beaches, but feeding over
newly made land some distance away.

While it is generally believed that the Snow Bunting is an irregular winter
visitant to this region, it is more probable that it is a regular one. The
records of another observer, J. H. Ferry, who states that the species is
locally a common winter resident here, tend to support this view.? Unless
one makes many excursions to various localities he is likely to overlook the
birds entirely, as they do not, according to Mr. Ferry’s observations and
my own, remain long in a single place.

5. 1913.
¢ 1907.

542 General Notes. ; loon

It is possible that the birds were once irregular here, but have since
become regular, owing to good beaches, their favorite habitat, being formed
along the west shore of Lake Michigan by the building of piers which has
checked erosion in many places, and offered a favorable path of migration
where formerly there were eroding bluffs. It should be noted, however, that
the birds may spread westward from Michigan, where W. B. Barrows !
reports them as regular, and where the lake shore offers an exceedingly
favorable habitat. In this case they may either fly directly across the lake,
or make their way westward along the Indiana shore, where, as in Michigan,
there are excellent beaches.— Epwin D. Hutu, Chicago, Illinois.

Nevada Savannah Sparrow in New Mexico.— On October 19, 1913,
the writer secured an individual of this subspecies(Passerculus sandwichen-
sis nevadensis) at the G. O. S. Ranch, on the headwaters of Sapillo Creek, N.
Mexico. This record, unless the writer reads incorrectly, extends the range
of this subspecies considerably eastward. The writer has to acknowledge,
with thanks, the kindness of Mr. W. DeW. Miller of the American Museum
of Natural History, who diagnosed the skin on which this record is based.—
W.H. Beretoip, Denver, Colo.

A Second North Carolina Record for Lincoln’s Sparrow (Melospiza
lincolni lincolni).— On May 14, 1914, I obtained a superb adult male of
the above species at Morganton, Burke County. This bird was alone, and
very shy, and was captured with difficulty. The song bore a strong re-
semblance to the song of the House Wren. This specimen is now in my
collection.

The first record for Nerth Carolina was based upon a bird taken on May
6, 1893, at French Broad River near Alexander’s by the late John S.
Cairns and recorded by J. W. P. Smithwick, Bull. 144, N. C. Agricultural
Experiment Station, 1897, p. 218. This specimen is now in the ccllection
of Mr. William Brewster, and was given to him by Mr. Cairns.

Lincoln’s Sparrow is evidently a regular migrant through the Piedmont
region of North as well as South Carolina, but as yet there is no record for
South Carolina.— Artuur T. Wayne, Mt. Pleasant, S. C.

Bell’s Vireo in Wisconsin.— On June 28, 1914, while walking through

-a clump of willows near Wingra Lake, Madison, Wis., I heard the song of a
bird which I was not able to identify. Observation of the bird indicated

a vireo and with that clue I believed that I could recognize the song of

Bell’s Vireo which I had heard several years ago. A second visit with Mr.

A. W. Schorger was made on July 1. The bird was found and was again

singing but disappeared before he could be collected. On July 3 Mr.

1 Michigan Bird Life, 1912, p. 485.

Be General Notes. 543

Schorger visited the place and fortunately found the bird still present. He
collected it and it proved to be an adult Bell’s Vireo. The specimen was
forwarded to the Biological Survey for examination and from their records
as well as those of the Kumlien and Hollister list of 1903, it appears to be
the first specimen of Bell’s Vireo taken in Wisconsin. It is now in Mr.
Schorger’s collection — No. 46.

Although the bird acted as though established, remaining in one locality
and singing frequently, no signs of a mate or of a nest could be found. It
seems probable from the size of the testes and his continual singing that
this was an unmated bird and that his presence here does not indicate a
breeding record.— NorMAN DEW. Berts, Madison, Wisc.

San Lucas Verdin (Auriparus flaviceps lamprocephalus) in California.
— I take pleasure in recording the capture of the Cape Verdin north of the
Mexican Boundary.

Some time ago I received from Mr. L. E. Wyant of Los Angeles, a pair
of Verdins which were taken by Mr. H. Wright at Mecca, Cal., March 19,
1911.

These birds were so much smaller and lighter than others in my collection
that I sent them to Mr. Harry C. Oberholser for positive identification,
which proved them to be as I surmised, Auriparus flaviceps lamprocephalus.
They are smaller and lighter in color than the Verdin from Texas. The
type, (No. 117551 Coll. U. 8. Nat. Mus.) was taken by C. H. Townsend, at
Cape San Lucas, Lower California, April 7, 1889 and described by Mr.
Oberholser in Vol. XIX of ‘The Auk’ in 1897. Specimens in my collection
measure as follows:

Auriparus flaviceps.

H.K.C.| | skin | Wing | Tal | Tr. | Bil
H | | |
9326 | | Chochise, Ariz. | Mch. 18, 1890/ 4.10 | 2.25 | 2.05 | .75 | 38
11504, @ Rio Grande, Tex. | Apr. 12, 1880 | 4.20 | 2.20 | 2.15 | .70 | .37

|

A. flaviceps lamprocephalus.
16776| #| Mecca, Cal. | Mch. 19,1911 | 3.87 | 2.10| 2.00] .62 | .31
16777 | 9 | if ce ee oe Seka 2. Ul deOa) |, s62 ten 30
| |

Henry K. Coan, Highland Park, Ill.

Notes from Springfield, Mass.— Anas platyrhynchos.— Sixteen
years ago about a dozen Mallard Ducks were placed in Forest Park, a
public reservation in Springfield, bordering on the Connecticut river, con-
sisting of about four hundred and sixty acres of land, and containing a

544 General Notes. ane

number of small ponds and streams. For the first few years after their
introduction into the park, these Mallards were kept in confinement for a
portion of the time, and wandered at pleasure only when their wings were
clipped, but during later years they or their descendants have been free to go
and come as they pleased, with unclipped wings. Many of these ducks
have bred in the park, and others have disappeared in the spring and re-
appeared in the autumn in increasing numbers. Last winter, at one time,
the park contained between sixty and seventy of these ducks. This year
and last several nests of Mallards have been found in the vicinity of Spring-
field, but a number of miles from the park. In former years this species
of duck was not known to breed in Massachusetts, although it was a regular
migrant in the western part of the state, appearing in spring and autumn on
the waters of the Connecticut river and its tributaries in more or less num-
bers.

Florida cerulea.— On the twenty-second day of July, of the present
year, a Little Blue Heron, in its white plumage was captured in West
Springfield.

Ixobrychus exilis— On the seventeenth day of last June a nest of a
Least Bittern, containing four eggs, was found in Longmeadow. This is
the only record of the nesting of this species in the vicinity of Springfield.

Corvus ossifragus.— On the tenth of last April a Fish Crow was seen
in Forest Park in Springfield. Only on very rare occasions do representa-
tives of this species of bird come up the Connecticut valley as far as this
point. While the bird in question was not taken, a very close inspection
was had, and the observers were guided to the vicinity of the bird by the
easily identified notes that it uttered.

Icterus galbula.— In the latter part of last autumn a Baltimore Oriole
appeared in a thickly settled residential portion of Springfield, and re-
mained in that vicinity until the latter part of December, an interesting
sight to many observers— Rosert O. Morris, Springfield, Mass.

West Virginia Notes.— Bonasa umbellus umbellus.— While on an
observation trip in the Rich Mountains of West Virginia, May 15 to 18,
1914, Mr. Orr R. King saw several Ruffed Grouse with their young. In
the spruce forests of those mountains and in the ‘ cut-over’ areas these
fine game birds are still quite common. In many parts of our state the
Ruffed Grouse is becoming rare.

Cathartes aura septentrionalis. A few years ago the Turkey Vul-
ture was abundant in all the interior region of West Virginia. Now it has
become quite rare in the central hill region of the state, but is common east
of the mountains.

Dryobates villosus villosus.— During the first week of June, 1914, with
two assistants, I made a trip to the Cranberry Glades, at the head-waters of
the Cranberry River. This is a region of unusual interest as may be seen
by some of the notes that follow. Among the Woodpeckers to be found in
the great forests and the ‘ cut-over’ areas the Hairy Woodpecker was by

a | General Notes. 545

far the most common of all. Evidently breeding all through the mountains
at the head of Cranberry, Greenbrier and Cheat Rivers.

Chetura pelagica.— A curious nesting habit of the Chimney Swift
was observed at the foot of Kennison Mountain, Pocahontas County, at
the lower end of Cranberry Glades. A woodsman told us that these birds
sometimes nest among the rocks and in abandoned lumbermen’s shanties.
While we found no nests among the rocks, we did find several nests in an old
house which the lumbermen had used some years before. This particular
building had been used as a blacksmith’s shop- The nests were glued to the
boards on the wall in the attic of the building. The presence of quite a
number of these birds in the vicinity of these old lumber camps seemed to
indicate that this is a common mode of nest-building in these mountain
regions.

Nuttallornis borealis.— Four or five pairs of Olive-sided Flycatchers
were observed in the region round about the glades. The males kept con-
stantly in the highest tree-tops. On account of the date and the actions
of the birds we concluded that they were soon to begin nest-building, though
no nests were found.

Empidonax trailli alnorum.— Several Alder Flycatchers were heard
and seen in the dense alder thickets among the glades. The males were
uttering their characteristic notes. Several old nests were found in the
alder bushes, but no nests of this year. A fine male was taken on June 3+
The measurements of this specimen were as follows — Length, 5.58;
wing, 2.90; Tarsus, .77; tail, 2.30; bill from nostril, .34. The greatly
enlarged testes of this specimen indicate that the nesting season was just
about to begin.

Empidonax minimus.— The Least Flycatcher was found in great
abundance throughout all the mountain region about the head-waters of
the rivers mentioned above. Three nests were found, each with four white
eggs.

Corvus corax principalis.— On three different occasions a flock of four
Northern Ravens was observed flying over the mountains in the region
about the Cranberry Glades. On the fourth of June we were on the top of
Black Mountain, about 4,600 feet above sea level, and the four Ravens came
down in an open field near by. One Raven was observed on the Shaver’s
Fork of Cheat a few days later.

Chondestes grammacus grammacus.— On May 15, 1914, a nest of
the Lark Sparrow was found by Maurice G. Brooks at Frenchton, West
Virginia. The nest contained four fresh eggs. Because of some disturb-
ance the birds left the nest and the eggs were collected (only three of them
being preserved), and are now in the collection of Orr R. King. The meas-
urements of these eggs are as follows — No. 1, .72X.59; No. 2, .73x.60;
No. 3, .77X.61.

Peucea estivalis bachmani. A nest of the Bachman’s Sparrow was
found near French Creek, West Virginia by Paul Cutright in July, 1913.
One infertile egg was left in the nest after the young birds had flown.

546 General Notes. lowe

This egg, the first one taken in West Virginia, is now in the collection of
Orr R. King, Weston, W. Va. During the past ten years this sparrow has
become quite common in many parts of our state.

Dendroica tigrina.— Though the Cape May Warbler is rare in many
places, it is exceedingly common in the interior of West Virginia, in migra-
tion, and, at times, becomes very destructive to the grape crop.

Dendroica czerulescens cairnsi.— Several specimens of Cairns’ War-
bler were taken about the Cranberry Glades showed few of the sup-
posed marks of cairnsi. In almost every respect they were typical speci-
mens of Dendroica cwrulescens cerulescens.

Seiurus noveboracensis noveboracensis.— The Water-Thrushes were
very abundant at the headwaters of Williams, Cranberry, Greenbrier and
Cheat Rivers in West Virginia. At our camp near Cranberry Glades these
birds could be heard almost constantly, and were common in the higher al-
titudes wherever we went.

Oporornis philadelphia.— A great many Mourning Warblers were
seen in the mountains round about the Cranberry Glades and in the more
elevated regions at the head-waters of the Greenbrier and Cheat Rivers.
Previously Dr. Rives had found this bird in the summer in the great spruce
belt, near Davis in Tucker County, and I had found them breeding on
Spruce Knob in Pendleton County. The presence of this northern warbler
ip so many places greatly extends its known breeding range in West Vir-
ginia. No nests were found, but up to June 9 the birds were still abundant
in the regions visited. Three pairs were observed on Shaver’s Mountain
near Wildell.

Hylocichla ustulata swainsoni.— A nest of the Olive-backed Thrush
was found on June 9 on top of Shaver’s Mountain. This nest was placed
in a small red spruce about two feet from the ground, and contained three
fresh eggs. This is the second nest of this species ever found in West Vir-
ginia, and, with the nest which I found on Spruce Knob in 1908, marks
the southern limit of the breeding range of this species. The eggs, which
we needed for scientific purposes, are now in the private collection of Orr
R. King. I believe this species may soon be found as far south as the
Cranberry Glade region, where so many northern forms oecur.— EARLE
A. Brooks, Weston, West Virginia.

Some Winter Bird Notes from the Yellowstone National Park.—
From February 21 to March 1, 1914 I was at Gardiner, Montana, having
gone there to see what I could of the game animals of the Yellowstone
National Park in winter. I spent some of every day during that time in
the Park, sometimes the greater portion of the day. My observations
extended as far as Mammoth Hot Springs, and from there along the Cook
City road for about two miles. On the twenty-eighth I walked to Mam-
moth by way of the “old road’? which takes one up over the hills; the
other days I was up and down the road along the Gardiner River. I also
spent considerable time about the low hills around the field just inside the

Soren General Notes. 547

Park near Gardiner. The following list of nine species would hardly be
worth publishing were it not for the fact that nothing at all seems to have
been published about the winter birds of the Park. I was surprised not to
have seen Juncos and Tree Sparrows. On the banks of a ditch around
and across the field was a dense growth of “ sweet grass’? which seemed
like excellent cover for such species but no birds of any sort were seen
there; possibly because of the lack of any food.

The following birds were seen :—

Anas platyrhynchos. Matiarp.— On February 28 I saw six Mallards
about open water below the military post electric light plant near Mam-
moth, the water being from the stream or ditch which supplies the plant.
A young man living at Gardiner told me that several species of ducks
wintered in the Park, but this was the only one I saw there, but I did see
Golden-eyes in the Yellowstone River between Gardiner and Livingstone,
March first. The warm water from the hot springs flowing into the Gardi-
ner River keeps the latter from freezing.

Ceryle alcyon alcyon. Britten KrnerisHer.— A Kingfisher was seen
on the Gardiner River on February 21, 23, and 27. But one bird was
seen on each occasion, presumably the same individual.

Otocoris alpestris leucolema (?). Drsmert Hornep LAarRK.— Feb-
ruary 28 half a dozen Horned Larks were seen on the old road about a
mile from Gardiner. Possibly this subspecies. ;

Pica pica hudsonia. Macpre.— One seen February 28 near the old
road two miles from Gardiner. The only one of the species observed and
I saw no nests in any of the trees or bushes anywhere that I went.

Corvus corax sinuatus. Raven.— Ravens were seen on five different
days, mostly in the cafion along Gardiner River, but once at Fort Yellow-
stone, Mammoth Hot Springs.

Nucifraga columbiana. Cuarke’s Nutcracker.— This species
was common at’ Fort Yellowstone and Mammoth Hot Springs, and
was noted once or twice in Gardiner Cafion. It was quite tame at the
Fort. 1 was surprised not to see any Rocky Mountain Jays, Perisoreus c.
capitalis.

Cinclus mexicanus unicolor. Dipper, WaTeR OuseL.—Water Ou-
sels were more common along the Gardiner River than I have ever seen
them anywhere, and I noted them daily, half a dozen or nhore each day in a
distance of less than three miles. This abundance of a species which is
apparently numerically limited in individuals is probably explained by the
fact that birds from various parts of the Park were wintering here where
there was open water. Cold weather has no terrors for them, but they
must have open water.

Penthestes atricapillus septentrionalis. LonaG-TratLbep CHICKADEE.
— A few Chickadees of this species were identified in Gardiner Canon
February 23. This species is not given by Dr. Palmer in his ‘ Notes on the
Summer Birds of the Yellowstone National Park.’ I saw Chickadees on
another occasion but could not get close enough to identify them.

548 General Notes. [een

Myadestes townsendi. TowNnsrnp’s SoirarrE.— One individual
seen in Gardiner Cafion February 23 and 26.

When in the Park in the summer of 1904 I saw 3 or 4 Cranes, either the
Sandhill (Grus mexicana) or the Little Brown (G. canadensis), in Gibbon
Meadow, on July 26; and Rocky Mountain Pine Grosbeaks (Pinicola enu-
cleator montana) were seen at the Thumb July 22, and at Upper Geyser
Basin July 23. Neither of these species is mentioned by Dr. Palmer.—
Epwarp R. WarrEN, Colorado Springs, Colo.

Some Breeding Birds of Garrett Co., Md.— During a residence of
fourteen years at Jennings, Garrett Co., Maryland I have had abundant
opportunities to study the birds of the vicinity. I have recorded practi-
cally all of the boreal species listed by Mr. G. Eifrig (Auk, 1904, pp. 234-
250) and have made a few observations which being supplementary to
his seem worthy of record.

Astur atricapillus. GosHawKx.— A pair were present all summer and
nested about three miles above Jennings in 1901 but were both shot by a
native and since the cutting away of the spruce and hemlock forest they
have disappeared as breeders.

Nuttallornis borealis. O.tve-stppp FiycatcHER.— Seen regularly in
spring migration but I have no positive evidence of their breeding here.

Nannus hiemalis hiemalis. Winter Wren.— Formerly . frequent
and still found as a regular breeding bird in this vicinity.

Hylocichla ustulata swainsoni. OLive-BAcKED THRUsH.— A regular
summer resident before the cutting of the spruce timber, but does not now
remain to breed in this vicinity.

Regulus satrapa satrapa. GoLDEN-cROWNED KINGLET.— Formerly a
regular breeder in localities thickly sprinkled with spruce timber but for
the past six years since the last of the spruce was cut the Kinglet does not
remain here to nest— HmRMAN Beur, Jennings, Maryland.

Serious Loss of Bird-Life During Spring Migration.— There is
undoubtedly a very serious loss of bird life every few years during the
spring migration by sudden climatic changes, yet it is only occasionally
that any details of unusual mortality are brought to the notice of those
interested in the subject.

A severe storm of wind or rain with a sudden sharp drop in temperature
will, I have no doubt, kill more small species than we have any realization
of.

After a storm in May, Mr. E. W. Nelson once picked up on the shore of
Lake Michigan forty-four recognizable specimens, including twenty-six
species. This covered a stretch of only two miles.

On May 12, 1888, when the wind blew a gale and the temperature sud-
denly dropped from 64° to 34°, there was a great mortality in bird life
between Chicago and Milwaukee, and probably over a much larger territory.
‘In some localities the ground was strewn with birds, largely warblers. At

voc a General Notes. 549

Racine, Wis., the late Dr. P. R. Hoy personally examined 645 specimens,
including 22 species, of which 437 were warblers. They were picked up
in one locality. Imagine the devastation which must have occurred,
even between these points, right in the tide of the migration.

Another instance has just come to pass, and while comparatively few
specimens were seen that had perished, there is no question but that the
mortality was great.

Mr. W. B. Mershon and my brother Charles E. Deane, reached the
Gaspé Peninsula, Quebec, on June 6, 1914, for salmon fishing on the Grand
Cascapedia River. They learned that from the third to the fifth the re-
gion about had experienced a very severe storm of rain and snow, accom-
panied by a fierce gale of wind. Snow fell to the depth of four inches at
Matapedia and other points, with a temperature down to 34°, and reported
even lower further east. The snow did not remain long except on the high
hills. One guide at Grand Cascapedia reported that he picked up five dead
birds near his barn, while numbers flew into the barn and around the doors
of his dwelling, seeking protection. Other guides reported dead _ birds.
lying around their buildings and along the road, and brought in specimens.
Three that were forwarded to me proved to be females of the Redstart,
Canadian and Blackburnian Warblers. —

That this unusual storm and low temperature was general over the penin-
sula, is shown by the following letter, received from the director of the
Canadian Meteorological Office under date of June 25, 1914.

‘“‘ With reference to your letter of the 23rd. inst. I would inform you that.
between the 4th. and 5th. of June, 1914, quite a severe northeasterly storm
occurred on the Gaspé coast caused by the development and movement of
an area of low pressure from the New England States to the Gulf, taken in
conjunction with the approach at the same time of a pronounced cool wave
from the Hudson Bay Region. The temperature along the Gaspé coast
varied between 36 and 42 degrees. The precipitation was largely rain,
but at the same time wet snow fell locally, and in a few localities the fall is
reported to have amounted to as much as six inches. On the 3rd. there
was also some light local snow in the Gaspé Peninsula, but unaccompanied
by wind, the temperature then fell to the freezing point or a little below.”

Mr. Mershon states that he has never been in a region where warblers
were more abundant in June, his observations covering a series of year
dating back to 1886 — RutTHvEN Deange, Chicago, Ill.

550 Recent Literature.

RECENT LITERATURE.

Eaton’s ‘Birds of New York.’\—The first volume of Mr. Eaton’s ‘Birds
of New York’ was reviewed in these columns in July, 1910, at which time
it was expected that the publication of the present, concluding, part would
immediately follow. An introductory note however explains that the
delay has been due to the regrettable illness of the author. The work as
finally completed follows exactly the lines originally laid down and we
think that the author, the authorities of the State Museum and the people
of New York are to be congratulated upon the production of what is the
most comprehensive state ornithology that has yet appeared.

So closely does the main text of the volume before us follow the plan of
Part I that the remarks of the former reviewer are equally applicable to it.
The accounts and descriptions of species are excellent and the handling
of the quoted data admirable. In fact little or no improvement can be
suggested in the work of the author, but the peculiar system of capitaliza-
tion followed in the State Museum publications, and the exceedingly heavy
coating of the paper upon which the book is printed are unfortunate. The
text covers the ‘land birds’ from the Birds of Prey to the Passeres inclu-
sive, following the order and nomenclature of the A. O. U. Check-List.

In addition there is an introductory chapter on bird ecology and eco-
nomic ornithology, which contains much valuable information, though the
variety of type used in the headings of the several sections leaves one in
doubt as to just how it was intended to divide it. There is also an adden-
dum of two pages covering ‘ New York Bird History since 1910.’

As this work is the only recent state ornithology which attempts to give
original colored figures of all the species, a great deal of interest centers on
the plates. As in the preceding part these are from the brush of Mr.
Louis Agassiz Fuertes and taken all in all constitute a wonderful series of
bird portraits. It is always to be regretted that questions of space and
expense make it impossible for the artist in a work like this to enjoy the
freedom that is allotted to the author. Figures must be crowded on plates,
and where an occasional life size portrait is permitted, the birds are so out
of proportion to those on other plates, or to the size of the page, that we
cannot properly appreciate them. These points however are not the fault
of the artist, nor are the color tones used in the printing, which while gen-
erally good, are noticeably bad in the case of the Song Sparrow which ap-
pears red enough to entitle it to classification under the desert race of the
Southwest.

1 Birds of New York. By Elon Howard Eaton. = Memoir 12, New York State
Museum. John M. Clarke, Director. Part II. General Chapters; Land Birds.
4to, pp. 1-719 (facing leaves to plates counted as pages 545-672), 64 colored plates
and numerous half-tone text illustrations. Albany. University of the State of
New York, 1914.

. oem Recent Literature. 551

The question of background may be a matter of taste, but we think that
when reduced to a minimum, as in the plate of the small flycatchers, the
result is infinitely better than that attained with the abundance of green
leaves seen in the warbler plates, or even the landscapes that are intro-
duced with some species.

In both illustration and taxidermy there may be said to be two possible
objects in view, a bird portrait or a picture, and the addition of accessories
necessary to improve the picturesque effect is bound to detract from the
portrait of the individual bird. A group showing a phase of the life his-
tory may well be a picture but for a work of this kind we prefer the portrait.
As already said, however, perfection in the arrangement of plates and size
of figures is too much to hope for in any work of even quarto size and the
handling of the matter in the ‘ Birds of New York’ has been all that could
be asked, while the work will stand as a monument to both author and
artist —W. S.

Swarth’s List of Arizona Birds.'\— While Arizona has been for many
years past a favorite resort for the ornithologist, no one it seems has ven-
tured to compile a complete list of its birds until Mr. Swarth began the
work some eleven years ago. The varied topography of the state, our
inadequate knowledge of the ranges of many forms and the constantly
shifting nomenclature have tended to make the task anything but an easy
one, and it is fortunate for ornithology that it was left for one who pos-
sessed the perseverance and painstaking accuracy that Mr. Swarth has
displayed.

In general style the list follows Grinnell’s ‘ Check-List of California Birds’
but is more detailed in the statement of ranges and fuller in the citation of
authorities for records quoted. The main list contains 362 species, with a
hypothetical list of 24. There are 152 residents, 72 summer visitants, 57
winter visitants, 30 transients and 51 of casual occurrence.

A brief discussion of the several life zones and their characteristic birds
with an original faunal map follows the list, and a bibliography of 313 titles
and an index complete the work. The first entry in the bibliography is
Gambel’s paper of 1843, and Woodhouse’s account of Sitgreaves’ expedition,
1853, is the only other contribution prior to the Pacific railroad reports,
while up to 1880 there had appeared only 43 papers bearing upon Arizona
birds, so that the literature is for the most part comparatively recent.

Mr. Swarth follows the order and, in the main, the nomenclature of the
A. O. U. Check-List departing only in the recognition of certain forms not
accepted by the latter; in the rejection of the Western Sparrow Hawk as a
distinct race from the eastern bird; and in differences in the rank of several

1A Distributional List of the Birds of Arizona. Cooper Ornithological Club.
Pacific Coast Avifauna No. 10. Contribution from the Museum of Vertebrate
Zoology of the University of California. Hollywood, California. Published by the
Club. May 25, 1914, 8vo, pp. 1-133, with colored zonal map.

502 Recent Literature. feces

forms, in which cases he prefers to follow the works of Mr. Ridgway and
other specialists.

Swarth’s list is a very acceptable piece of work and one of which he may
well feel proud, while students of the ornithology of the southwestern por-
tion of our country will find it a reliable guide to the ornis of one of the
most interesting states, zodlogically speaking, of the entire Union.— W 5S.

Aiken and Warren on the Birds of El Paso County, Colorado.1—
This is an admirably prepared annotated list of 276 species, with an
introductory discussion of topography, life zones, analysis of the bird fauna,
workers in the region and a bibliography. The forty-five half-tones are
from photographs from nature, all but two by Mr. Warren, and furnish
good illustrations of many birds as well as nests and eggs.

We learn from the introduction that Dr. J. A. Allen was the first orni-
thologist to visit El Paso County, his report published in 1872 being the
first list of Colorado birds. Mr. Aiken the senior author of the list came
to Colorado Springs in 1871 and his collection begun soon after his arrival,
is now in Colorado College. Mr. Warren’s residence dates from 1881.

With ample material and long experience in the region of which they
treat, the authors were well fitted to turn out an authoritative work and
have succeeded admirably.

Why a paper of this sort should be published in two parts both ef which
were printed and distributed apparently at the same time, and why both
parts are numbered, ‘‘ 13” in one series and ‘‘ 74” and “75-76” in an-
other, are problems that only those in charge of the Colorado College
publications can explain, while to others they will prove a source of
annoyance and complication.— W. S.

Mathews’ Birds of Australia.?— With part 6 the third volume of this
great work is brought to a close completing the Herons and Bitterns. The
high standard of the previous volumes is fully maintained and so thor-
oughly has the author covered the subject of nomenclature that we find
but one new name dating from this part, i. e. Hemigarzetta (p. 448) a
new generic term for Herodias eulophotes Swinhoe.— W. S.

Bannerman on the Ornithology of the Canary Islands.*— In this
admirable paper Mr. David A. Bannerman gives us a most interesting
account of his visit to this island group and a careful discussion of the birds

.

1 The Birds of El Paso County, Colorado. By Charles E. H. Aiken and Edward
R. Warren. Colorado College Publication Science Series, Vol. XII, No.13. Part
I (pp. 455-496) published May, 1914. Part Il (pp. 497-603) June—September
1914. Price respectively 40 cts. and 75 cts.

* The Birds of Australia. By Gregory M. Mathews. Vol. III, Pt. 6. June 25,
1914.

’ An Ornithological Expedition to the Eastern Canary Islands. Parts I. and
II. The Ibis. January and April, 1914.

ere aa Recent Literature. 553

he found there. The number of ‘island races’ described from the Canaries
is considerable and our author is thoroughly up to date in his recognition
of them and in his use of trinomials in their designation.— W. S.

The New Nature Library.'— It seems but a few years ago that the
only popular works on general natural history were those of Rev. J. G.
Wood and a few others who wrote from a British standpoint and who had
but little to say of American species. The publication of a Nature Library,
exclusively American, was therefore an exceedingly happy idea. The
volumes constituting the original library are familiar to a large number of
nature lovers, and ornithologists who, to be good ornithologists, should
know something of the other classes of animals as well as of plants, have
found them a valuable series of reference volumes. The new thin paper
edition reduces the bulk of the set-about one half and makes them handier
for consultation. It is to be regretted that in getting out a new edition
the groups overlooked in the previous one could not have been included —
the salamanders for instance among the vertebrates, and the beetles
among the insects, as well as the whole series of lower marine invertebrates.
Had the molluses been restricted to North American species as was done in
all other groups these might easily have been added without much increase
in bulk. However the volumes will guide many a student and answer
many a question for the amateur for years to come.— W. 8.

Recent Publications on Economic Ornithology.— Two recent
bulletins of the U. S. Department of Agriculture deal with birds. ‘ Five
Important Wild-Duck Foods’ by W. L. McAtee? is published in response
to a demand for a similar publication which appeared some time ago. In
these days of bird refuges and sanctuaries it is important to know what to
plant in order to furnish food for birds of all kinds. In this paper the
‘Delta Duck Potato ’ and ‘ Wapato ’ both species of Sagittaria, the ‘ Chufa,’
Cyperus esculentus, ‘ Wild Millet’ Echinochloa crus-galli and the ‘ Banana
Water Lily’ Nymphaea mexicana are discussed. ‘ Birds in Relation to
the Alfalfa Weevil’ By E. R. Kalmbach? will be of value to all growers of
forage plants. While at present restricted to northern Utah the pest is
spreading and it is well to remember the part birds play in its destruction
and also to know that young chickens and turkeys are an excellent check
to the weevils if allowed to feed in infested fields.

Mr. H. P. Attwater* has compiled an excellent Bulletin for the Texas
Department of Agriculture entitled ‘ Use and Value of Wild Birds to Texas

1The New Nature Library. Vols. I-VIII. Doubleday Page and Co. New
York. Cloth, $31.50.

2 Five Important Wild-Duck Foods. By W. L. McAtee. Bulletin 58, U. S.
Dept. Agr., pp. 1-19. Feb. 7, 1914. Price, cts.

3 Birds in Relation to the Alfalfa Weevil. By E. R. Kalmbach. 107, Bull.
U.S. Dept. Agr., July 27, 1914, pp. 1-64.

4 Use and Value of Wild Birds to Texas Farmers and Stockmen and Fruit and
Truck Growers. Compiled by H. P. Attwater. 1914. Bull. No. 37, Texas Dept.
of Agr., pp. 1-61. Distributed by the Commission of Agriculture, Austin, Tex.

554 Recent Literature. eee

Farmers and Stockmen and Fruit and Truck Growers.’ The text consists
largely of well selected extracts from standard publications and addresses
by the compiler and others. The bulletin will do a great good, reaching
as it will many people in this vast state who do not see the economic publi-
cations of the National Government.

In this connection mention should also be made of Mr. Shiras’ able
publication on the ‘ Necessity for, and Constitutionality of the Migratory
Bird Law.’! The whole subject is thoroughly discussed and attacks upon
the law ably answered. Mr. Shiras was the author of the original bills
that were presented to Congress and is therefore particularly well quali-
fied to discuss the subject.— W. 8S.

Further Observations by Collinge on the Dispersal of Weed Seeds
by Birds.— Prof. W. E. Collinge has continued his studies of the viability
of weed seeds after passing through the alimentary canals of birds. The
general results given in the present brief report ? agree with those previously
announced, namely, that a surprisingly large number of seeds do pass
through the alimentary tracts of seed-eating birds in condition to germinate.

The special point made in the present paper, and a novel one it is, is
succinctly stated in the following quotation: “it would appear that, in
dry years, such birds as the rook, starling, house sparrow (and probably
many other species) take in a much smaller quantity of grit ‘and soil
than in wet years, in consequence of which a larger percentage of weed
seeds pass through the intestinal canal in an uninjured condition.’”’— W.
L. M.

Herman on Useful and Harmful Birds.— It is a proof of the great
demand in European countries for a book on economic ornithology, as well
as a tribute to Dr. Otto Herman, that his work (originally in Hungarian)
has been translated into both German* and English.’ The artist M.
Titus Csérgey shares the honors as his spirited drawings illustrate all of
the editions. Both of the translations contain additional figures and the
text has in greater or less degree been adapted to local conditions. The
English edition especially has thus been augmented, and properly is pub-
lished as a collaborated work: authors, Otto Herman and J. A. Owen.
While these books are fairly satisfactory manuals of European economic
ornithology, they lack the definiteness and scientific detail that charac-
terize American publications of a similar nature. This is merely a matter
of style, however, as the basis of all of these books is the investigations of
the Royal Hungarian Central Bureau of Ornithology which have included
the examination of thousands of bird stomachs.— W. L. M.

! Necessity for and Constitutionality of the Act of Congress Protecting Migra-
tory Birds. By George Shiras, 3d, pp. 1-99.

* Journ. Economic Biol. IX, No. 2, June, 1914, pp. 69-71.

* Nutzen and Schaden der Végel. Gera. 1903, 333 pp. 95 pls.

‘ Birds useful and birds harmful. Manchester, 1909, 387 pp., 98 pls.

ea | Recent Literature. 555

Food of the Common Partridge (Perdix perdix) of Europe.\— Con-
siderable interest attaches to this article as large numbers of these birds
under the name of Hungarian Partridges are being imported and natural-
ized in this country. The authors give the result of painstaking examina-
“tions of 295 (!) stomachs and crops from birds secured in Hungary. For
the month of August the results given are very complete but they cannot
be considered conclusive for the entire year. The different months are
represented as follows: January, 9 birds; February, 7; March, 4; April, 2;
June, 2; July,4; and August, 257. The large number secured in August
were taken in the hunting season, while the months from September on
are entirely unrepresented. Field observations supplement the detailed
stomach examinations.

The great bulk of the food as shown by tabulation is made up of vegeta-
ble matter of which weed seeds and fragments of plants predominate.
Wheat was found in 147 instances in amounts varying from 1 to 122 grains.
Barley was taken 87 times, oats 47 times and rye 29 times, while smaller
amounts of corn, buckwheat, vetch, timothy, red clover and sorghum
seeds were identified from the stomachs. It is stated, however, that all
these grains are picked up as waste in the stubble so that they do not count
against the partridges. . A few birds taken from January to June had eaten
large amounts of grass.

Among seeds of plants that may be called weeds and others of neutral
value 107 species were identified as of more or less common occurrence.
knotweeds (Polygonum aviculare, convolvulus and lapathifolium) were
taken frequently and the common pigeon grass (Chaetochloa glauca) was
eaten 164 times, as many as 820 seeds being encountered in a single indi-
vidual. Bottle grass (Chaetochloa viridis) seeds too were eaten extensively.
A star thistle (Centawrea cyanea) was eaten 101 times and the long array
of other species occurred in smaller amounts. These are said to be mainly
seeds of plants which grow among crops and along the borders of the fields
so that in eating them the partridges may do a small amount of good.

Insect remains were found in 177 instances though in only eleven cases
did they form any large amount of the contents. One third of the 38
species of beetles eaten were ground beetles (Carabide) but some of these
are not predaceous species and seven of those listed are said to be actually
injurious. Two Coccinellids and one Cicindelid form the remaining
beneficial species. Several Scarabwids were secured, one of which (Phyl-
lopertha horticola) damages oaks while click and leaf-beetles and various
weevils may be noted. Ants form the bulk of the animal food listed and
among them Lasius alienus was eaten 72 times and Lasius niger 57 times.
Of the latter as many as 250 examples were taken from one bird. Cater-

1 Uber den wirtschaftlichen Nutzen des Rebhuhns-Perdix perdix (L.) — Aquila
1912, pp. 166—209.

Vegetabilische Nahrung des Rebhuhns, von Ludwig Thaisz. Die Insectennah-
rung des Rebhuhns (Perdix perdix L.) von E. Csiki.

556 Recent Literature. aus
pillars of 3 species were identified, flies were taken once and locusts (mainly
Stenobothrus sp.) occurred 16 times. The Hemiptera secured were largely
injurious forms and last of all remains of spiders were encountered 4 times.
In conclusion it is stated that the Partridge may be considered beneficial
to agriculture in its food habits as well as of value as a game bird.

Had the results of the examination of the vegetable food been tabulated
in some way the information presented would be more readily available
but otherwise the paper may be commended as a careful piece of work.
It is to be hoped that further investigations may give information of the
food for the last part of the year and supplement the examinations made in
the spring months. The young in the first few weeks of their existence
should consume large amounts of insects.— A. W.

The Ornithological Journals.

Bird-Lore. Vol. XVI. No. 4. July-August, 1914.

At Home with a Hell Diver. Some Observations on the Nesting of the
Pied-billed Grebe. By A. A. Allen— A most important study of the
nest-life of this species, illustrated.

The Morning Bird Chorus in Pasadena [Cal.] By Garrett Newkirk.

Destruction of the Rhea, Black-Necked Swan, Herons and Other Wild
Life in South America. By Leo E. Miller.— Observations made on the
Roosevelt South American Expedition.

Comparative Abundance of Birds. Letters from A. H. Thayer and
Hugo Miinsterberg.— Statements based on memory are practically
worthless.

Migration of N. A. Sparrows. By W. W. Cooke.— Plumage Notes
by F. M. Chapman and color plate of Sharpe’s Seedeater and Lark Bunting
by Fuertes.

A Coéperative Study of Bird Migration. Compiled by C. H. Rogers.

Educational Leaflet— The Sora Rail. By E. H. Forbush with color
plate by Horsfall.

The Condor. Vol. XVI. No.4. July-August, 1914.

A plea for Comparative Odlogy. By T. W. Richards.— Good advice
on the broadening of this line of research.

On the Odlogy of the North American Pygopodes. By R. W. Shufeldt.—
With five plates.

The Wilson Bulletin. Vol. XXV I. No.2. June, 1914.

Ten Days’ Bird Study in a Nebraska Swamp. By I. N. Gabrielson.—
Annotated list of 46 species seen at Crystal Lake with detailed study of
nest life of the Yellow-headed and Red-winged Blackbird and American and
Least Bittern. In considering the identification of insects fed to the
nestlings, the reader should consult the criticism of similar papers on
p. 420-421 of ‘The Auk.’

Breeding Birds of a Clay County, Iowa, Farm. By I. N. Gabrielson.—
Annotated list of 50 species.

ol a Recent Literature. 557

Notes on the Spotted Sandpiper. By A. F. Smith.— Interesting study
of nest-life.

The Resident Bird Life of the Big Cypress Swamp Region [Lee Co., Fla.].
By F. M. Phelps.— Annotated list of 65 species.

The Odlogist. Vol. XXXI. No. 6. June 15, 1914.

A “warbler number’ with accounts of the breeding of numerous species.
Also lists of the warblers of Doddridge Co., W. Va., and Warren Co., Pa.
By R. B. Simpson, and Summer Residents of the Pensauken Creek, N. J.,
By R. F. Miller.

The Odlogist. Vol. ‘XXXII’ (= XXXI). No.7. July 15, 1914.

The Dusky Seaside Sparrow. By O. E. Baynard.— Contains account
of the discovery of the nest and eggs of this species.

[List of Birds observed in Milton Co., Ga.) By DD: Ne Hembree.— 89
species.

The Odlogist. Vol. ‘XXXII’ (= XXXI). No.8. August 15, 1914.

Glimpses of Bird Life in Utah. By Mrs. A. Treganza.

Notes from Bear River Marshes, Utah. By E. Treganza.

The Ibis. X Series. Vol. Il. No. 3. July, 1914.

Observations on the Bird-Life of the Anatolian Plateau during the
Summer of 1907. By L. N. G. Ramsay.— Description of this section of
Asia Minor with an annotated list of 60 species.

Notes from Mesopotamia. By R. Meinertzhagen.

A Note on the Common Ringed Plover of the British Isles and on Colora-
tion as a Factor in Generic Differentiation. By P. R. Lowe.— A large
pale race Charadrius hiaticula major Seebohm is separated from true
hiaticula and as Greenland examples are referred to it, it will replace C.
hiaticula in the A. O. U. Check-List. The consideration of color in generic
taxonomy is strongly urged, a contention which we heartily endorse.

Notes on Molina’s Pelican (Pelecanus thagus). By H. O. Forbes.—
With two color plates.

On a Peculiarity in the Nest of the Tasmanian Tit (Acanthiza diemen-
ensis). By H. 8. Dove.— Apparent intelligence in weaving nest materials.
The Surface Breeding Petrels of the Kermadec Group. By T. Iredale.

On Sterna fuscata Linn. By T. Iredale.— Endorses the use of this name
as accepted by the A. O. U. Committee.

The Distribution and Nidification of the Tubinares in the North Atlantic
Islands. By D. A. Bannerman.— 14 species are considered of which 9 are
regular breeders on one or more of the island groups under consideration —
i.e. the Azores, Madeira, Salvages, Canary and Cape Verde Archipelagos.
Each species is discussed in detail with abundant quotations and refer-
ences to the literature.

Some Facts bearing on the Affinities of Smithornis. By G. L. Bates.—
A presentation of important discoveries in the anatomy of Smithornis
which show it to be non-passerine in its affinities.

Notes on some Species of the Genus Thalassogeron. By T. Salvadori.—
T. carteri and T’. eximius.

558 Recent Literature. fans

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. No. CXCVIII.
May 28, 1914.

Capt. H. Lynes described a recent trip to the Sudan in company with
Messrs. Abel Chapman and W. P. Lowe, Mirafra sobatensis (p. 129) mouth
of Sobat River, and Calamocichla leptorhyncha merensis (p. 130). Upper
White Nile, are described as new.

Capt. Lynes also described (p. 131) Ortygospiza gabonensis a new Weaver-
Finch from Gaboon.

Mr. C. Chubb described Planesticus arthuri (p. 131), Abary River,
British Guiana, and Luscarthmus josephinae (p. 131), Supenaam, Essequebo
River, British Guiana.

Erythropygia ansorgti Ogilvie-Grant (p. 184) North Angola, and Camar-
optera superciliaris ugande Stephenson Clarke (p. 136), Uganda, were also
described as new.

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. CXCIX. June
29, 1914.

Hon. W. Rothschild discussed the three Algerian races of Garrulus glan-
darius.

Mr. Claude Grant described (p. 141) a New Guinea-fowl from the
Lake Baringo district, British East Africa, as Nuwmida ptilorhyncha barin-
goensis.

British Birds. Vol. VIII. No.1. June 1, 1914.

The Study of Bird-Notes. By Dr. Hans Stadler and Cornel Schmitt.

Notes on the Red-necked Phalarope in the Outer Hebrides. By Mary
G. 8S. Best and Maud D. Haviland.— Photographs of Phalaropus hyper-
boreus.

British Birds. Vol. VIII. No.2. July 1, 1914.

Ecological Relations of Bird Distribution. By 8. E. Brock.— An admi-
rable discussion of this subject interesting alike to the student of zodgeog-
raphy and of bird protection. A statement that the latter should consider
carefully is: ‘‘ Persecution has locally exterminated individual species;
environmental alteration has locally caused the disappearance of whole
groups of species. The felling of a forest or the draining of a marsh is
more effective than much slaughter.”

British Birds. Vol. VIII. No.3. August 1, 1914.

Notes on Breeding Habits of Avocets. By Mary G. 8. Best.— Admira-
ble photographs.

' Ringing Birds in Hungary. By H. F. Witherby.— Interesting descrip-
tion of a new method of snaring old birds at the nest, which rarely causes
them to desert and is likely to yield valuable results by showing where
birds banded as nestlings, go to breed.

The Avicultural Magazine. Vol. V. No.8. June 1914.

Crowned Cranes and Stanley Cranes. By Maurice Portal Excellent
photographs of both species.

Birds of N. 8. Wales I have caught and kept. By G. A. Heumann.

The Avicultural Magazine. Vol. V. No. 9. July, 1914.

she | Recent Literature. 559

The Yellow Wagtail. By J. H. Symonds.— Photographs of bird and
nest.

The Cinnamon Teal. By Major Boyd Horsbrugh.— Incidental notes
on Californian Waterbirds.

English Names for the Parrots. By Dr. E. Hopkinson.— A Synonymy
that will prove of value to inspectors of imported birds.

The Avicultural Magazine. Vol. V. No. 10. August, 1914.

Flamingos. By Hubert D. Astley — Republication of Sir Harry John-
ston’s plates and account of Pheniconais minor in B. E. Africa.

The South Australian Ornithologist. Vol. I. Part 3. July,1914.

A Sketch of the Life of Samuel White. By his son 8. A. White.

Field Notes on Virago castanea and Virago gibberifrons. By S.A. White.

Birds in a North Adelaide Garden. By A. M. Morgan.

The Emu. Vol. XIV. Partl. July, 1914.

Two New Genera of Parrots for Australia. By G. M. Mathews.—
Geoffragus geoffroyi macclennant and Eclectus pectoralis macgillivrayi, both
here figured.

The Myology of the Bell-Magpie (Strepera) and its Position in Classi-
fication. By J. A. Leach.— An exhaustive anatomical study resulting in
the decision that Strepera is not at all allied to the Crows but should form
a separate family along with Gymnorhina and Cracticus which have usually
been regarded as aberrant Shrikes.

North Territory Birds. By H. G. Barnard.— An annotated list of 170
species with a list of stomach contents of all birds collected and a table of
measurements of nests examined. The vexed question of nomenclature is
met by citing both the R. A. O. U. names and those of Mathews’ ‘ List.’

Three New Subspecies of Birds. By G. M. Mathews (p. 60) Eopsaltria
australis austina Cobbora, N. 8. W.; Acanthiza nana dorothee, Lithgow,
N.S. W.; Geobasileus reguloides tarana, Tarana, N.S. W.

The Journal of the South African Ornithologists’ Union. IX.
No. 2. December, 1913. .

Notes on Euplectes xanthomelas. By L. B. Mouritz.

On a pair of Tame Ground-Hornbills (Bucorax cafer). By C. F. M.
Swynnerton.

Some Rambling Notes on Birds, with the Description of a New Species.
By Austin Roberts.— Cisticola mystica sp. nov. (p. 106) Pretoria.

The Secretary Bird (Serpentarius serpentarius). By Alwin Haagner.

Bird Notes. Vol. V. No.5. May, 1914.

My Weavers and Whydaks. By Sidney Williams.— Photograph of
nests constructed in the aviary.

Bird Notes. Vol. V. No.6. June, 1914.

An April Morning in Northern India. By D. Dewar.

Birds of the Jhelum District (Punjab). By H. Whistler. Runs through
May-July.

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. Vol. VI. No. 62. June 7, 1914.
(In French).

560 Recent Literature. lace

List of Birds Obtained or Observed at Dahomey 1908-1912. By G.
Bouet (concluded).

Note on Houbara undulata and Some Points Relative to the Ornithology
of Tunis. By L. Lavauden.

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. Vol. VI. No. 63. July 7, 1914.

The Illumination of Ostrich Eggs. By A. Menegaux.— The practice,
known to dealers in hen’s eggs as ‘ candling’.

Notes on the Birds Observed and Secured in Algeria. By M. Spatz.
1912-1913. By Count Zedlitz (concluded).

Ornithologische Monatsschrift. Vol. XXXIX. No.5. May, 1914.
(In German).

Imitative Ability in our Native Birds. By W. Koch.

Journal fiir Ornithologie. Vol. 62. Part 3. July, 1914. (In
German. )

Birds of the Middle Kergisensteppe. By P. P. Suschkin.

Contribution to the Ornithology of Prussian Schlesia. By C. Kayser.

Annual Report (1913) of the Rossitten Bird Observation Station. By
By Dr. J. Thienemann.

In the Proceedings of the German Ornithological Society Prof. Reiche-
now (p. 488) proposes two new genera, Gymnomyza, type Leptornis aubrya-
nus and Dreptes, type Nectarina thomensis.

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 22. No.6. June,1914. (In
German. )

On the Biology of Cisticola schusteri Rehw. By Ludwig Schuster.

The Geographic Forms and Plumages of Ploceus fusco-castaneus Boc.
By Oscar Neumann.

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 22. No. 7-8. July-August, 1914.

Remarks on Some Birds of the East Sea Provinces. By N. Sarudny and
M. Harms — Acanthis hornemanni exilipes Coues among others.

Observations on Hybrid Canaries. By F. Braun.

Sparrow Hawks, Bird Intelligence and Alarm Notes. By R. Biedermann
Imhoof — Some astonishing syllabic representations of bird calls!

On the Phianologie of the Song of Alauda arvensis. By K. Radig.

On a Supposed New Species of Dicewm from Java. By Max Bartels.—

D. finschi (p. 125) Goenoeng Beser, W. Java.

Ornithologische Monatschrift. Vol. 39. No.6. June, 1914. (In
German.)

Bird Protection and the Feather Fashion.

Ornithologisches Jahrbuch. Vol. XXV. Parts1-2. January—April,
1914. (In German.)

Contribution to our Knowledge of the Ornithology of Croatia. By
Dr. M. Hirtz.

Birds of the Island of Arbe [N. Dalmatia]. By Dr. G. Schiebel.

Remarks on Hmberiza citrinella. By Dr. J. Gengler.— Four races recog-
nized.

The Flapping of Birds of Prey with and against the Wind. By R.
Biedermann-Imhoof.

ea | Recent Literature. 561

Passer hispaniolensis canariensis (p. 54) subsp. nov. Fuerteventura,
Canary Isls. By Viktor Ritter von Tschusi zu Schmidhoffen.

Proceedings of the Ornithological Society of Bavaria. Vol. XII.
Part 1. May 15, 1914. (In German.)

What is Collocalia fuciphaga (Thunb.)? By E. Stresemann.— C. f.
micans (p. 6), Savu; C. f. moluccarum (p. 7), Banda; C. f. hirundinacea
(p. 7), Snow Mts., New Guinea; and C. lowi palawanensis (p. 10), Palawan,
are described as new.

Materials for a Bavarian Ornithology VIII. Birds of Prey, Owls, Crows
and Woodpeckers. By Dr. J. Gengler.

On the Black and White Wheatears. By Dr. J. Gengler. °

On a Hybrid from the Pheasant and Blackcock. By L. von Besserer.—
With photograph.

Migration in the Environs of Freiburg and the South Vosges Mts. By
R. Schelcher.

New Birds from Tropical America. By C. E. Hellmayr and Josef Graf
von Seilern.

Hemispingus hanieli (p. 87) Galipan, Venezuela; Cyanerpes cyanea
tobagensis (p. 88), Tobago; Myiarchus tyrannulus tobagensis (p. 89),
Tobago; Lathria cryptolopha mindoensis (p. 89), Mindo, Ecuador; Perc-
nostola lophotes (p. 90), San Gaban, Peru; and Grallaria ruficapilla avile
(p. 92), Galipan, Venezuela.

Aquila. Vol. XX. 1913. (In Hungarian, German and _ English.)

Numerous articles on Migration of Birds ete. in Hungary.

Histological Investigation of the Mandibular Gland of Birds. By Dr.
E. Greschik.

Extinct Ostrich Birds of the United States. By Dr. R. W. Shufeldt.

Additions to the Fossil Bird Fauna of Hungary. By Dr. K. Lambrecht.

Messager Ornithologique. Vol. V, No. 2. 1914. (In Russian).

On the Cuckoos of Turkestan. By N. A. Sarudny.— Cuculus canorus
sublelephonus (p. 108) subsp. nov.

Ornithological Observations in northwestern Transcaucasia. By N.S.
Dorowatowsky.

Notes on Some Caucasian Birds. By E. W. Scharleman.

Ardea. Vol. III. Part 2. June, 1914. (In Dutch.)

Report on the Ornithological Observations of Correspondents of the
‘Central Committee for the Promotion of Bird-study and Bird Protection’
in 1913. By Dr. L. F. de Beaufort.

What Sort of Birds can one see on a Sea Voyage to the East Indies. By
W. C. Van Heurn.

Revista Italiana di Ornitologia. Vol.III. No.1-2. January—June,
1914. (In Italian.)

Notes on the Great Auk. By E. Arrigoni degli Oddi.

First Capture of Ardea melanocephala in Italy. By G. Vallon.

Hapalopteron familiare. By T. Salvadori.— The writer apparently
overlooked the note in ‘ The Auk,’ 1912, p. 250.

562 Recent Literature. lane

Agricultural Ornithology. By A. Ghigi.

The Species of the Genus Pipile. By T. Salvadori A key with syn-
onymy and remarks for the six recognized species.

Journals of Bird Protection. Besides ‘ Bird-Lore’ the organ of the
Audubon Societies and ‘ Ornithologische Monatsschrift ’ the well-known
German periodical, we have a constantly increasing number of journals
devoted to the protection of birds and the advancement of popular bird
study.. ‘ Bird Notes and News’ the organ of the Royal Society for the
Protection of Birds in England is now in its sixth year, the current numbers
being devoted mainly to the plumage bill now before Parliament, and to the
attempts to provide resting places for migrant birds on the lighthouses.

‘ Blue-bird’ published by Mr. Eugene Swope at Cincinnati, Ohio, in
the interest of the Junior Audubon classes and nature study work contains
pleasing chats about various phases of nature with excellent photographic
studies of birds, wild flowers and scenery. With the August issue Mr.
Oscar Baynard of Clearwater, Florida becomes associate editor.

‘The Oriole’ published by the Somerset Hills Bird Club and edited by
Mr. John Dryden Kuser, Bernardsville, N. J. is a credit both to the editor
and printer. The June number contains a pleasing account of experiences
with British Birds, and of the breeding of the American Merganser in a
hollow tree, while the August issue describes the Orioles of Costa Rica and
the nesting of the Blue-winged Warbler, also articles on bird study and pro-
tection.

‘The Oregon Sportsman’ edited by warden Wm. L. Finlay for the
State Fish and Game Commission, contains the record of an active
conservator of wild life in enforcing the laws against illegal hunting. In-
cidentally the ‘cat question’ is considered and the breeding of imported
pheasants.

Ornithological Articles in Other Journals.!

Young, C. J. The Cardinal Grosbeak in Winter in Northumberland
County, Ontario. (Ottawa Naturalist, June-July, 1914.)

Cash, C. G. History of the Loch an Eilein Ospreys. (The Scottish
Naturalist, July, 1914.) — Data from 1804 to 1902.

Duchess of Bedford. Spring Bird-notes from Various Scottish Islands.
(do., August, 1914).

Selous, E. Ornithological Observations in Iceland, continued, (The
Zodlogist, June, 1914.)

Gurney, Robert. The Egyptian Desert and its Birds. (do., July,
1914.)

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
obligations to Mr. J. A. G. Rehn for a list of ornithological articles contained in the
accessions to the library from week to week.

S| Recent Literature. 563

Baynes, E. H. What one Village is doing for the Birds. (Amer. Mus.
Journal, April, 1914.)— Work at Meriden, N. H.

Harrison, Launcelot. The Mallophaga as a Possible Clue to Bird
Phylogeny. (The* Australian Zoologist, June, 1914.) — A suggestive
article in which Kellogg’s theory that resemblances in the parasitic Mallo-
phaga of various birds may indicate ancestral relationships between the
groups, is endorsed. Differentiation it is claimed has been far more rapid
in the birds than in their parasites. ‘

Grinnell, J. A New Red-winged Blackbird from the Great Basin.
(Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. May 11, 1914.) Agelaius pheniceus nevadensis
(p. 107, Vol. XXVII.), Quinn River Crossing, Humboldt Co., Nevada.

Rothschild, L. Walter. Bird Life on Oceanic Islands and Insular
Variations. President’s address (Trans. Hertfordshire Nat. Hist. Soc.
xAVE pts. 1

Ticehurst, N. F. On the Recent Incursion of Waxwings. (Hastings
and E. Sussex Naturalist II, No. 3.) — Reached the Baltic, Oct. 13, Belgium
and France middle of Nov., Switzerland end of Nov., Scotland Nov. 10 and
remained in England until April 3.

Noch, James J. List of Birds found at and around Hakgala Gardens
[Ceylon] (Spoilia Zeylanica [X.)— List of 55 species.

Anon. Hungarian Ringed Storks in 8. Africa. (S. Afr. Agr. Journal
VII.) — Thirty-two Storks ringed in Hungary and recovered in 8. Africa!

Butler, A. L. The Eggs of the Sudan Crowned Crane, Balearica pavon-
ina cecilie. (The Cairo Sci. Journal, VIII, No. 90.)

Chubb, E. C. A Description of the Millar Collection of 8. African
Birds’ Eggs. (Ann. Durban Mus. I, pt. 1.)— 2500 eggs representing 308
species, showing the lack of necessity in a really scientific collection for
large series.

Simon, M. E. Note on some Tochelide from Matto-Grosso, Brazil.
(Bull. Nat. Hist. Nat. Paris, 1912, No. 8.) —8 species. (In French.)

Magnan, M.A. Several articles on flight muscles and relation of wing
expanse to weight of bird, ete. (In French). (do. Nos. 1, 2, 8.)

Menegaux, A. A new form of Ammodramus from Colombia and Ecua-
dor. (InFrench.) (do. No. 3.) — Refers to A. savanarum cauce Chapm.

Haagner, Alwin. A Descriptive List of South African Birds, Part Me
Struthionide — Scolopacide (Bull. Ser. No. 3. 8. Afr. Ornith. Union).—
A valuable compilation, with ranges and full descriptions.

Dubois, A. Several articles on Belgian birds. (In French.) (Bull.
Soe. Zool. France, XX XVIII.)

Menegaux, A. and Dedier, R. A Study of a Collection of Birds made
at Yunnan by M. and Mme. P. Comby. (In French.) (Bull. Mus. Nat.
Hist. Nat. 1913, No. 6.) — List of 52 species.

A Study of a Collection of Birds from Dahomey (do.).— List of 66 species.

Madarasz, Julius von. Ornithological Results of the Expedition of
Rudolf Kmunke in Uganda. (In German.) (‘‘Quer durch Uganda a2
Berlin, 1913, pp. 183-186.) — 109 species listed.

564 Recent Literature. lee

Piitter, A. The Actionsof Birdsin Flight. (In German). (Die Natur-
wissenchaften I and II, 1914.) — An extended discussion of the subject.

Suomalainen, E. W. Ornithological Observations during an Expe-
dition to Western Lapland. (In German.) (Acta Soc. pro Fauna et Flora
Fennica, XX XVII, No. 1.) — Annotated list of 102 species with map.

Palmgren, Rolf. Bird fauna of Helsingfors. (In Swedish). (do.
XXXVIII, No. 2.)

Finnila, Carl. Ornithological Observations on a Trip through Lapp-
land. (In Swedish.) (do. No. 3.) — List of 97 species.

Shufeldt, R. W. The Extermination of America’s Bird Fauna. (Nyt
Mag. for Naturvid. LII, No. 1.)

Dabbene, R. and Lillo, M. Description of Two New Species of Birds
from the Republic of Argentina. (InSpanish.) (An. Mus. Nac. Hist. Nat.
Buenos Aires, XXIV, 1913.) — Cyanolyseus andinus (p. 188) Tucuman,
Calopezus intermedius (p. 192), Tucuman.

Stone, W. Types of Bird Genera, Limnothlypis, New Genus (Science,
No. 1018, July 3, 1914) — Proposed for Sylvia swainsonit Aud., in place of
Helinaia which is a synomym of Helmitheros.

Publications Received.— Aiken, Charles E. H. and Warren, Edward
R. The Birds of El Paso County, Colorado. Iand II. 8vo. (Colorado
College Publ., Sci. Series XII, No. 13, pp. 455-603, index.)

Attwater, H. P. Use and Value of Wild Birds to Texas Farmers and
Stockmen and Fruit and Truck Growers. Bull. 37. Texas Dept. of Agr.
1914.

California Academy of Sciences. Report of the President for the year
1913. (Proc. Cal. Acad. Sci., IV, pp. 1-13, Apr. 9, 1914.)

Carnegie Institute. The Eighteenth Celebration of Founder’s Day.
Pittsburgh, 1914.

Carnegie Museum. Seventeenth Annual Report of the Director.
Pittsburgh, 1914.

Cole, Leon J. Studies on Inheritance in Pigeons. Hereditary Relations.
of the Principal Colors. (Bull. 158, Agr. Exper. Sta. Rhode Island State
College, May, 1914, pp. 311-380.)

Eaton, Elon Howard. Birds of New York. Vol. II. 4to. Memoir
12, New York State Museum, Albany, N. Y., 1914. Price $3.

Field Museum of Natural History. Annual Report of the Director
for the Year 1913.

Gabrielson, Ira N. (1) Ten Days’ Bird Study in a Nebraska Swamp.
(Wilson Bull., June, 1914, pp. 51-68.) (2) Breeding Birds of a Clay
County, Iowa, Farm. (Wilson Bull., June, 1914, pp. 69-80.)

Grinnell, Joseph. A New Red-winged Blackbird from the Great Basin.
(Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., X XVII, pp. 107-108, May 11, 1914.)

Hartford [Conn.] Bird Study Club. Year Book, 1914-1915.

Kalmbach, E. R. Birds in Relation to the Alfalfa Weevil. (Bull.
107, U.S. Dept. Agr., July 27, 1914.)

vet a | Recent Literature. 565

McAtee, W. L. Five Important Wild-Duck Foods. (Bull. 58, U.S.
Dept. Agr., February 7, 1914.)

Mathews, Gregory M. The Birds of Australia. Vol. III, Part 6.
4°. London. June 25, 1914.

Nature Library. The New thin paper edition. Vols. I-VIII. Dou-
bleday, Page & Co. New York. 1914.

Pennsylvania Game Commissioners for 1913.

Palmer, T. S. Directory of Officials and Organizations Concerned
with the Protection of Birds and Game, 1914. (Bicl. Survey U.S. Dept.
Agr. Aug. 22, 1914.)

Shiras, George, 3rd. Necessity for and Constitutionality of the Act
of Congress Protecting Migratory Birds. No date. 8vo. pp. 1-99.

Shufeldt, R. W. (1) The Extermination of America’s Bird Fauna.
(Nyt Mag. f. Naturvidsk, 1914, pp. 1-9.) (2) On the Oology of the North
American Pygopodes. (Condor, July, 1914, pp. 169-180.) (8) American
Bob-whites and Quails. (Outer’s Book, Sept. 1914, pp. 248-252.)

Stresemann, Erwin. Was ist Collocalia fuciphaga (Thunb.)? (Verh.
der Ornith Gesell. in Bayern XII, No. 1.)

Swarth, Harry 8. A Distributional List of the Birds of Arizona.—
Pacific Coast Avifauna, No. 10. Cooper Ornith. Club, Hollywood, Calli-
fornia. May 25, 1914.

Zoological Society of London. Reports for the year 1913.

Abstract Proc. Zool. Soc. London, Nos. 134, 135, May 19, 1914, June
9, 1914.

American Museum Journal, The, XIV, No. 5, May, 1914.

Ardea, Tijdschrift der Ned. Ornith. Vereen., III, Nos. 2. June, 1914.

Australian Zoologist, The, Vol. I, part 1, June 13, 1914.

Avicultural Magazine, (3) V, 9-10, July, August, 1914.

Bird-Lore, XVI, No. 4. July—August, 1914.

Bird Notes and News, Vol. VI, Nos. 1-2. Spring and Summer, 1914. *

Blue-Bird, Vol. VI, Nos. 3-11, December, 1913—August, 1914.

British Birds, VIII, Nos. 1-3. July and August, 1914.

Bulletin British Ornith. Club, Nos. CXCIX, June 29, 1914.

Cincinnati, Jour. Soc. of Nat. Hist. Vol. XXI, No. 4, May, 1914.

Condor, The, XVI, No. 4, July-August, 1914.

Emu, The, XIV, Part 1, July, 1914.

Forest and Stream, LX XXII, Nos. 25-26. LXXXIII, Nos. 1-12.

Ibis, The, (10) II, No. 3, July, 1914.

Messager Ornithologique, 1914, No. 2.

National Geographic Magazine, X XV, Nos. 3 and 5, March and May,
1914.

New Jersey Audubon Bulletin, Nos. 6and 7, July and September, 1914.

Odlogist, The, “XXXII” [=XXXI], Nos.7, “5” [=8] July and August,
1914.

Oregon Sportsman, The, II, Nos. 6-8, June, July and August, 1914.

Oriole, The, II, Nos. 1-2, June and August, 1914.

Ornithologische Monatsschrift, 39, Nos. 5-6, May and June, 1914.

566 Notes and News. Laue

Ornithologisches Jahrbuch, XXV, Heft 1-2, January—April, 1914.

Ottawa Naturalist, The, XXVIII, Nos. 1-6, April, May, June, July,
Aug. and Sept., 1914.

Philippine Journal of Science, VIII, No. 6, IX, No. 1, December, 1913,
and February, 1914.

Revue Frangaise d’Ornithologie, VI, Nos. 62-63, June and July, 1914.

Rivista Italiana di Ornitologia, Vols. I, 11 and III, No. 1-2, January—
June, 1914.

Royal Australasian Ornithologists’ Union, Bull. 4, April 16, 1914.

Science, N. S. XX XIX, Nos. 1017, XL, Nos. 1018-1028.

Scottish Naturalist, The, Nos. 30-32, June, July and August, 1914.

South Australian Ornithologist, I, Part 3, July, 1914.

Verhandlungen der Ornith. Gesellschaft, in Bayern, XII, Heft. 1,
May 15, 1914.

Wilson Bulletin, The, X XVI, No. 2, June, 1914.

Zoologist, The, (4), XVIII, Nos. 210-212, June, July and August, 1914.

|

NOTES AND NEWS.

EcTOPISTES MIGRATORIUS, Once one of the most notable species in the
North American avifauna became extinct on:September 1, by the death
of the last surviving specimen, a female, which had lived for twenty-nine
years in the aviary of the Cincinnati ZoGlogical Garden. It is rarely pos-
sible to state the exact date of the extinction of a species as the process
is usually a gradual one, but in view of the fruitless efforts extending over
the past ten years to find evidence of the existence of wild Passenger Pigeons
we may safely consider the passing of this last captive specimen as the
extinction of the species.

The reduction of this once abundant bird to absolute extermination by
man’s greed should be a lesson to us all and should stifle all opposition to
the efforts now being made by national and state governments in behalf of
the conservation of other birds threatened with a like fate. What is a little
loss of sport to us compared with the extinction of a wild bird species —
something that the hand of man can never replace?

As we glance over the pages of ‘The Nuttall Bulletin’ and ‘The Auk’ we
fail to find a satisfactory chronological record of the extermination of this
splendid bird. That it had decreased materially was recognized and also
that the great flights that darkened the sky were a thing of the past in
most parts of the country. Writers were busy explaining why the birds
had left their immediate vicinity and speculating as to where they had gone,

~

ae | Notes and News. 567

little dreaming that the disappearance was general and that the supposed
‘migration’ was really extermination. In many a local list the Passenger
Pigeon is mentioned and dates given which constituted the last record of
the bird for that state or county, although the writers little thought when
they penned the lines of their import in years to come.

The pigeon trappers year after year plied their nefarious trade, and with
the assistance of game dealers warded off legislation that might have
checked the slaughter, although there was really little effort made in behalf
of the birds as the public failed to appreciate what was going on, and the
sentiment for the conservation of wild life was not yet aroused.

Prof. H. B. Roney and others associated with him stand out as the few
who did realize the approaching catastrophe but his account of the butchery
of the last great nesting at Petosky, Michigan, in 1878, came too late.

The bird was not exterminated at this time and Mr. William Brewster
who went to Michigan in 1888 in the hope of seeing another nesting wrote:
“that the Pigeon is not, as has been asserted so often recently, on the verge
of extinction, is shown by the flight which passed through Michigan in the
spring of 1888.... and the birds must have formed a nesting of consider-
able extent in some region so remote that no news of its presence reached
the ears of the vigilant netters.”’ (Auk, 1889, p. 290.)

Nevertheless it seems as if the slaughter of 1878 and years immediately
following had done its work; apparently the birds had been so reduced that
another great nesting was impossible. The pigeon like the buffalo was a
species whose existence seems to have depended upon association in large
numbers and once separated and scattered into small flocks and pairs its
doom was sealed.

Later mention in ‘The Auk’ consists of early records hitherto unpublished,
because their significance was not appreciated until the imminence of ex-
termination was forced upon our attention. Finally we have the numer-
ous recent records of “birds seen”? mainly by people who never saw live
Passenger Pigeons in the time of their abundance and then the rewards
for the detection of live birds under the direction of Prof. Hodge lasting
over three years which were productive of negative evidence only.

The Cincinnati bird was sent to the United States National Museum to
be mounted and placed on exhibition and we learn from Dr. Charles W.
Richmond, acting curator of birds, that it was photographed and then en-
trusted to Mr. William Palmer and Dr. R. W. Shufeldt, the former of whom
was to skin it while the latter was to make a study of its anatomy and
preserve such of the soft parts as possible. We hope to publish the results
of Dr. Shufeldt’s investigations in the January number of ‘The Auk.’

In an interesting article in the July-August number of .‘Bird-Lore’
Mr. Leo E. Miller, a member of the Roosevelt Brazilian expedition, presents
some facts regarding the exportation of feathers frorn Argentina to the
United States.

568 Notes and News. lane

In one place he saw piles of burlap-covered bales filled with Rhea feathers
aggregating sixty tons in weight, all the feathers having been taken from
wild killed birds.

These are the feathers used so extensively for feather dusters and lately
for millinery purposes also. Further inquiry elicited the fact that thirty-
four tons of these same feathers had been exported during the first six
months of the last fiscal year.

The provision of the new tariff prohibiting the importation of wild bird
plumage will fortunately deal a death blow to this traffic.

INDEX TO VOLUME XXXII.

[New generic, specific, and subspecific names are printed in heavy-face type.]

ACANTHIS cannabina harterti, 128.
linaria linaria, 322.
Acanthiza nana dorotheae, 559.
Accipiter velox, 221, 247, 315, 479.
cooperi, 221, 480.
Acridotheres tristis, 268.
Actinodura ramsayi yunnanensis,
412.
Actitis macularia, 76, 219, 314, 478.
Aichmophorus occidentalis, 243.
Adgialitis semipalmata 77.
Aigintha temporalis macgillivrayi,
428.
/Egotheles bennetti wiedenfeldi, 279.
Aéronautes melanoleucus, 318.
A®strelata arminjoniana, 455, 457.
chionophara, 13.
incerta, 443, 447, 451, 4538-457.
macroptera, 454, 455, 457.
mollis, 444, 453-457.
Africa, 115, 263, 265, 408.
South, 120.
Agelaius phoeniceus fortis, 321.
p. nevadensis, 563.
p. pheeniceus, 79, 226, 483, 414,

537.
p. predatorius, 226.
p. subsp., 483.
gubernator californicus, 169,
eflle
Aidemosyne cantans meridionalis,
116.

inornata, 116.

Aiken, Chas. E. H. and Warren,
Edw. R., review of their ‘The
Birds of El Paso County, Colo-
rado,’ 552.

Ailurcedus buccoides oorti, 133.

Aix galericulata brunnescens, 431.
sponsa, 216, 495.

Alabama, 115, 212-235.

Albatross, Sooty, 448, 451-453.
Wandering, 441, 449.

Alcippe fratercula yunnanensis, 275.

Allen, Arthur A., review of his
“The Red-winged Blackbird,’ 414.
see also Wright, A. H.

Allen, Francis H., another Massa-
chusetts record for the Turkey
Vulture (Cathartes aura septen-
trionalis), 536.

Alseonax cinereus, 255, 279.

Aluco pratincola, 222.

Amazona ochrocephala xantholema,

131.

American Museum of Natural His-
tory, Roosevelt Brazilian Expedi-
tion, 438.

American Ornithologists’ Union,
thirty-first stated meeting, 92-99;
thirty-second stated meeting, 291,
390-394; committee on Classifi-
cation and Nomenclature, 148;
San Francisco meeting, 148.

Ammodramus savannarum austra-

lis, 228.
s. bimaculatus, 80, 323, 486.

Anas cristata, 431.

platyrhynchos, 216, 476, 544,
547.
rubripes, 105, 216.

Andropadus fricki, 408.

f. kitungensis, 408.

Androphilus disturbans musculus,

409.
Anhinga anhinga, 216.

569

570

Antarctic Regions, 116.
Anthus rubescens, 233, 329.
spraguei, 404, 491.

Apalis griseiceps uluguru, 279.

Aphelocoma woodhousei, 320.

Aplonis atronitens minor, 268.

Apteryx, 282.

Aquila, review of, 561.

Archibuteo ferrugineus, 159-167.

Archilochus colubris, 78, 223, 481,

496, 536.
Ardea, review of, 131, 280, 429, 561.
Ardea egretta, 410.
garzetta, 410.
herodias herodias, 75, 217, 477.
h. treganzai, 403.
melanocephala, 154.
Arenaria interpres moriella, 105,
399.

Argusianus, 415.

Arizona, birds of, 403, 411, 551.

Asio flammeus, 77, 222, 496.

wilsonianus, 77, 222, 316.

Astragalinus psaltria psaltria, 322.

tristis pallidus, 322.
t. tristis, 79, 227, 322, 485.

Astur atricapillus, 548.

cirrhocephalus papuanus, 133.
melanochlamys schistacinus,
eos

Asyndesmus lewisi, 317.

Athene noctua lilith, 119.

Atherton, Edward H., Evening
Grosbeak (Hesperiphona vesper-
tina vespertina) at Boston, Mass.,
Boils

Atlantic, South, birds of, 439-457.

Atlapetes pallidinucha papallactae,

280.

Attwater, H. P., notice of his ‘ Use
and Value of Wild Birds to Texas
Farmers and Stockmen and Fruit
and Truck Growers’, 553.

Audubon, reminiscence of, 105.

Auriparus flaviceps lamprocepha-

lus, 543.
f. flaviceps, 543.

Index.

loce:

Austral Avian Record, The, review
of, 129, 278.
Australia, birds of, 116, 267, 410,
552.
‘Avicultural Magazine,’ review of,
1A PAT, AR Brats
Avocet, 314.

Baoutopuus bicolor, 234, 402, 492.

Bagg, Egbert, the Willet in central
New York, 100.

Bailey, Vernon, review of his ‘Life
Zones and Crop Zones of New
Mexico,’ 113.

Baker, E. C. Stuart, review of his
‘Indian Pigeons and Doves,’ 265.

Baleniceps rex, 282.

Balanosphyra, 407.

Bangs, Outram, the Bahama Swal-
low in Cuba, 401; review of his
recent papers on new birds, 413;
see also Thayer, John E.

Bangs, Outram and Phillips, John
C., review of their ‘Notes on a
Collection of Birds from Yunan,’
412.

Bannerman, David, review of his
‘An Ornithological Expedition to
the Canary Islands,’ 552.

Barbour, Robert, Herring Gulls at
sea, 397.

Barrett, Harold L., Evening Gros-
beaks at Jamaica Plain, Mass.,
541.

Barrett-Hamilton, G. E. H., obitu-
ary notice of, 4385.

Bartramia longicauda, 76, 219, 404.

Bartsch, Paul, Mourning Warbler
(Oporornis philadelphia) in Flor-
ida, 103. ]

Beebe, C. William, review of his
‘Preliminary Pheasant Studies’
and other papers, 415.

Behr, Herman, some breeding birds
of Garrett Co., Maryland, 548.

Berajah, review of, 281.

Bergtold, W.H. Franklin’s Grouse

Vol. a
1914

in Colorado, 246; Magnolia War-
bler in Colorado, 253; Canadian
Warbler in Colorado, 253; Yel-
low-crowned Night Heron in
Colorado, 535; Chestnut-col-
lared Longspur in Colorado, 541;
Nevada Savannah Sparrow in
New Mexico, 542.

Betts, Norman deW., Bell’s Vireo
in Wisconsin, 542; review of his
‘Birds of Boulder Co., Colorado,’
416.

Bigglestone, Harry C., review of his
‘A Study of the nesting behavior
of the Yellow Warbler,’ 420.

Bird-Lore, review of, 124, 273, 424,
556.

Bird Notes, review of, 128, 277, 559.

Bird Notes and News, review of,
562.

Bird of Paradise, 417.

Bird plumage traffic, 289, 568.

Bird protection, progress of, 437.

Bishop, L. B., see Sage, J. H.

Bittern, 75, 217.

Least, 75, 217, 544.
Blackbird, Brewer’s, 169, 171, 203,
321, 484, 538.
Red-winged, 79, 226, 414, 483,
537.
Rusty, 227, 250.
Yellow-headed, 79, 320, 402.
Bleda syndactyla ogowensis, 279.
Bluebird, 81, 235, 333, 493.
Chestnut-backed, 333.
Mountain, 333, 493.

Bluebird, review of, 562.

Bobolink, 79, 202, 226, 250, 400.

Bob-white, 77, 219, 314, 478.

Bombycilla cedrorum, 230, 490.

garrula, 328, 402.

Bonasa umbellus umbellus, 544.

Botaurus lentiginosus, 75, 217.

Bradyornis infuscatus seimundi,

PA fe
ansorgli, 127.

Index.

571

Bradyornis pallidus sharpei, 275.
Bradypterus alfredi albicrissalis
279.
baboeculus fraterculus, 265.
cinnamomeus pallidior, 279.
sj6stedti, 279.
Branta canadensis, 425.
canadensis canadensis, 217, 264,
477.
hutchinsi, 264.
minima, 264.
occidentalis, 464.

Bridge, Lidian E., American Egret
(Herodias egretta) at Naushon
Island, Mass., 535; Red Phala-
rope (Phalaropus fulicarius) off
Boston Harbor in Summer, 536.

British Birds, review of, 128, 276—
Dill; 42 OOS:

British Ornithologists’ Club, review
of Bulletin, 127, 275-276, 426,
558.

Brooks, Earl A., West Virginia
notes, 544; review of his ‘List
of the Birds of West Virginia,’
112:

Bryant, Harold C., birds as de-
stroyers of grasshoppers in Cali-
fornia, 168-177; review of his
‘A Determination of the Eco-
nomic status of the Western
Meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta)
in California,’ 417-419.

Bubier, George M., Hooded War-
bler at Nahant, Mass., 104.

Bubo bubo swinhoei, 119.

virginianus lagophonus, 316.
Vv. virginianus, 222, 316.
Buchanga leucogenys cerussata,
412.

Budytes flavus plexus, 409.

Buffle-head, 398.

Bunker, C. D., review of his ‘ Birds
of Kansas,’ 263.

Bunting, Indigo, 229, 327.

Lark, 327.

572

Bunting, Lazuli, 327.
Painted, 489.
Snow, 80, 541.
Burtch, Verdi, does a Grebe spread
its wings just before diving?, 211—
D2
Bush-shrike, Red-breasted, 152.
Buteo borealis borealis, 221, 480.
b. calurus, 315.
lineatus alleni, 221.
1. lineatus, 221, 255.
platypterus, 221.

Butorides virescens, anthonyi, 171.
v. virescens, 75, 217.

Capuc, E. E., Starlings (Sturnus
vulgaris) at Providence, R. L.,
249.

Calamocichla leptorhyncha mueren-

sis, 558.

Calamospiza melanocorys, 327.

Calandra, 91.

Calandrella sclateri capensis, 282.

Calearius lapponicus lapponicus,

485.
ornatus, 485, 541.
pictus, 485.

California, birds of, 109, 110, 168-
177, 264, 411, 499-525, 543.

Callichelidon cyaneoviridis, 401.

Callipepla squamata pallida, 413.

Calocitta formosa pompata, 413.

Calopezus intermedius, 564.

Camaroptera superciliaris ugande,

558.
Cameron, E. §., the Ferruginous
Rough-leg, Archibuteo ferrugi-

neus) in Montana, 159-167.
Campephaga thelici, 432.
Campephilus principalis, 480.
Canachites franklini, 246.
Canada, birds of, 402.

Canary Islands, birds of, 552.
Canvas-back, 216, 264.
Cape Hen, 441.

Cape Pigeon, 442, 445, 446.

Index.

[oce:

Capito tucinke, 280.
Caprimulgus eleanore, 156, 413.
monticola, 156.
vociferus, 413.
Cardinal, 229, 489.
Cardinalis cardinalis cardinalis, 229,
489.
Carduelis
IPA
Carpodacus cassini, 321.
mexicanus frontalis, 321.
purpureus purpureus, 227, 484,
496.
Casuarius fcersteri, 275.
Catbird, 81, 233, 330.
Catharacta sp., 445, 446, 452, 453.
antarctica falklandica, 440, 456,
457.
Catharista urubu, 220, 403, 479.
Cathartes aura septentrionalis, 101,
220, 255, 315, 479, 536, 544.
Catherpes mexicanus conspersus,
330.
Catoptrophorus semipalmatus semi-
palmatus, 101, 105.
Cats as bird enemies, 145.
Cecropsis rufula ferghanensis, 430.
Centurus carolinus, 224, 403, 481.
Certhia familiaris americana, 50, 62,
86, 234, 492.
f. montana, 331.
f. pyrenaica, 126.
Ceryle, 407.
aleyon, 407.
aleyon aleyon, 547, 78, 228,
480.
americana, 407.
torquata, 407.
Ceyx dispar, 426.
Chemepelia passerina terrestris,
220.
Cheetura pelagica, 78, 224, 545.
Chalcurus, 415.
Chamberlain, E. B., another species
added to the avifauna of South
Carolina, 248.

carduelis bermudiana,

Vol. |
1914

Chandler, Asa C., review of his
‘Modifications and Adaptations
to Function in the Feathers of
Circus hudsonius,’ 415.

Chapman, Frank M., review of his
papers on new birds from Colom-
bia, Venezuela and Ecuador, 407.

Charadrius dominicus dominicus,

255, 478.
hiaticula major, 557.
Charitonetta albeola, 495.
Chat, Long-tailed, 329.
Yellow-breasted, 233.

Chaulelasmus streperus, 477.

Chelidon griseopyga, 156.

Chen hyperboreus hyperboreus, 477.

rossi, 403.

Chicago Ornithological
147.

Chickadee, Acadian, 236-242, 254.

Carolina, 234.
Long-tailed, 81, 331, 548.
Mountain, 331.
Plumbeous, 492.

Chicken, Prairie, 77-85, 478.

Chloroceryle, 407.

Chlorocichla flaviventris meruensis,

408.
Chlorophoneus melaniprosopus itu-
riensis, 432.
multicolor theliei, 482.
Chondestes grammacus grammacus,
454.
g. strigatus, 323, 486.

Chordeiles, 413.

acutipennis muromeris, 413.
a. inferior, 413.
rupestris, 413.

r. xyostictus, 413.

r. zaleucus, 413.
virginianus, 413, 481.
v. chapmani, 224.

v. henryi, 317.

v. howelli, 413.

v. sennetti, 256.

Vv. virginianus, 78.

Society,

Index.

573

Choucaleyon, 399.

Cinclus mexicanus unicolor, 547.

Circus cyaneus cernuus, 409.

hudsonius, 77, 203, 221, 415,
479.
Cisticola cisticola jordansi, 278.
mystica, 559.
robusta abaya, 115.
r. tana, 115.
subruficapilla bodessa, 115.
s. fricki, 115.
natalensis nilotica, 116.

Cistothorus stellaris, 81, 234, 253.

Clangula clangula americana, 495.

Clark, Clarence H., an unusual ob-
servation on the Crow (Corvus
brachyrhynchos), 248.

Clark, Hubert Lyman, anatomical
notes on Trochalopteron and Si-
calis, 461-463.

Coale, Henry K., Richardson’s Owl
(Cryptoglaux funerea richardsoni)
in N. E. Illinois, 536; Florida
Meadow-lark (Sturnella magna
argutula) m northern Illinois, 540;
San Lucas Verdin (Auriparus fla-
viceps lamprocephalus) in Cali-
fornia, 543.

Coceyzus americanus, 77, 223.

erythrophthalmus, 77, 223.

Colaptes auratus auratus, 224,

481.
a. borealis, 406.
a. luteus, 78.
eafer collaris, 317, 481.
chrysoides, 412.
Colinus virginianus virginianus, 77,
219, 314, 478.

Collinge, W. E., review of his ob-
servations on dispersal of weed
seeds by birds, 554.

Collocalia fuciphaga hirundinacea,

561.
f. micans, 561.
f. moluccarum, 561.
lowi palawanensis, 561.

574

Colorado, birds of, 102, 246, 253,
256, 309-333, 407, 416, 541, 55 Dr
Columba hypzenochroa uveznsis,
268.
Colymbus auritus, 494.
holbcelli, 211.
Compsocoma somptuosa venezue-
lana, 280.
Compsothlypis americana
eana, 231, 498.
a. usnez, 86, 491.
Condor, The, review of, 124, 273-
274, 425, 556.
Connecticut, birds of, 108, 250, 402.
Conopias trivirgata berlepschi, 428.
Conopophaga snethlage pallida,
28.

Conuropsis carolinensis,
c. interior, 413.
Cooke, Wells W., new bird records

from Arizona, 403; some winter
birds of Oklahoma, 473-494.
Coot, 76; 218, 398.
Corvus brachyrhynchos brachy-
rhynchos, 79, 284, 482.
b. hesperus, 206.
b. paulus, 115, 226.
corax principalis, 545.
c. sinuatus, 547.
ossifragus, 544.
Cossypha natalensis garguensis, 265.
intensa, 265.
Coturnicops noveboracensis,
256.
Courser, Egyptian, 154.
Cowbird, 79, 203, 206, 226, 250, 320,
483.
Crane, African Crowned, 150.
Demoiselle, 150.
Grey, 150.
Little Brown, 548.
Sandhill, 477, 548.
Whooping, 218.
Crax alector, 343.
Creeper, Brown,
492.

ameri-

125, 480.

218,

50-62, 86, 234,

Index.

rh ee ee,

[oce:

Creeper, Rocky Mountain, 331.
Crete, birds of, 118.
Criniger lénnbergi, 283.
swainsoni, 279.
Crocodile-bird, 155.
Crocodile Watcher, 155.
Crossbill, 227
Bendire’s, 322
White-winged, 251.
Crow, 79, 248, 483.
Fish, 544.
Southern, 226.
Western, 206.
Cryptoglaux acadicus scotaeus, 407.
a. acadicus, 403, 407.
funerea richardsoni, 536.
Cryptolopha trivirgatus eiuncidus,
AND:
Cuba, birds of, 248, 253, 401.
Cuckoo, Black-billed, 77, 223.
Yellow-billed, 77, 223.
Cuculus canorus subtelephonus, 561.
Culver, Delos E., concealing pos-
tures of Grebes, 395.
Cyanerpes cyanea tobagensis, 561.
Cyanocitta cristata cristata, 79, 482.
c. florimeola, 225.
stelleri diademata, 319.
Cyanolyseus andinus, 564.

DAcELO gigas, 399.

Dafila acuta, 216.

Dasylophus, 281.

Deane Ruthven, serious loss of
bird-life during spring migration,
549.

Delaware Valley Ornithological
Club, annual meeting, 291.

Dendragapus obscurus flemingi,

385.
0. obscurus, 314.

Dendrobiastes hyperythra negroi-

des, 409.
Dendroica estiva estiva, 81, 231,
329.
auduboni auduboni, 329.

Vol. ae |
1914

Dendroica czerulescens cairnsi, 546.
castanea, 81.
coronata, 86, 231, 329, 491.
cerulea, 231.
discolor, 232.
dominica dominica, 232.
fusea, 232.
magnolia, 231, 253, 498.
palmarum palmarum, 232.
pensilvanica, 232.
striata, 232, 498.
tigrina, 546.
vigorsi, 232.
virens, 232.
Diaphoropterus nevius simillimus,
268.
Diatryma, 269.
Diczeum finschi, 560.
hirundinaceum, 460.
Dickcissel, 80, 229, 489.
Dicrurus hottentottus manumeten,
409.
Die Schwalbe, review of, 410.
Diomedia exulans, 441-443, 446,
448, 451-457.
melanophrys, 448, 445-448,
450-451, 453, 456, 457.
nigripes, 136.
Dipper, 547.
District of Columbia, birds of,
Zo
Dolichonyx oryzivorus, 79, 250.
Doryfera, 101.
Dove, Cape, 150.
Ground, 220.
Mourning, 77, 220.
Western Mourning, 315, 479.
Dreptes, 560.
Dryobates borealis, 223.
pubescens cactophilus, 406.
p. eremicus, 406.
p. glacialis, 406.
p. homorus, 316.
p. medianus, 78.
p. pubescens, 223, 480.
sealaris bairdi, 407.

Index.

575

Dryobates s. symplectus, 407.
villosus auduboni, 223.
v. icastus, 406.
v. leucomelas, 406.
v. leucothorectes, 406.
vy. monticola, 316.
v. orius, 406.
v. septentrionalis, 406.
v. sitkensis, 406.
v. villosus, 480, 545.
Dryocopus eburneirostris, 280.
Duck, Black, 216, 398.
Buffle-head, 495.
Comb, 154.
Golden-eye, 495.
Harlequin, 535.
Lesser Scaup, 244, 398.
Red-legged Black, 105.
Ring-necked, 216.
Ruddy, 398, 403.
Seaup, 398.
Wood, 216, 495.
Dumetella carolinensis, 81, 233, 330.
Dwight, Jonathan, Jr., the moults
and plumages of the Scoters —
genus Oidemia, 293-308.

=|

Eacte, Bald, 71, 221, 480.

Eaton, Elon Howard, review of his
‘Birds of New York, part IL,’
550.

Economic Ornithology, 420, 421,
553.

Ectopistes migratorius, 219, 358-

362, 566.
Ecuador, birds of, 407.
Edoliisoma amboinense admiralita-
tis, 426.
a. rooki, 426.

Egret, 398.

American, 100, 245, 535.

Egretta, 410.

Hider, common, 16.

American, 14.
Northern, 14.
Elanoides forficatus, 220, 479.

576

Elliot, D. G., in memoriam, Philip
Lutley Sclater, 1-12.

Elms, E. F. M., notice of his ‘A
Pocket-Book of British Birds,’
269.

Empidonax minimus, 78, 545.
trailli aorum, 78, 545.
virescens, 225.
wrighti, 319.

Emu, The, review of, 129, 278, 427,

559.

Enicurus guttatus bacatus, 412.

Entomophila borealis, 278.

Eopsaltria australis austina, 559.
cinerea, 255.

Eremomela hypoxantha, 279.

Ereunetes pusillus, 219.

Erismatura jamaicensis, 403.

Erythropygia ansorgi, 558.

Erythrura trichroa pinaiz, 409.

Estrilda astrilda, 268.

Euphagus carolinus, 227, 250.
cyanocephalus, 169, 171, 321,

484, 538.

Euphonia, development of stomach,
in, 458-460.

Euphonia elegantissima

276.
fulvicrissa omissa, 276.
Euscarthmus Josephine, 558.

vincens,

Fauco, review of, 281.
Falco peregrinus anatum, 495.
sparverius subsp., 222.
s. phaleena, 315.
s. sparverius, 480.
tinnunculus dacotize, 119.
Figgins, J. D., the fallacy of the
tendency towards ultra-minute
distinctions, 62-69.
Finch, Cassin’s Purple, 321.
House, 321.
Purple, 227, 484, 496.
Finley, W. L., notice of his ‘Oregon
Sportsman’ and ‘Report of State
Game Warden of Oregon,’ 270.

Index.

[Set.

Fisher, A. K., recovery of a banded
Pintail Duck, 100.

Fleming, J. H., an abnormal Rose-
breasted Grosbeak, 102.

Flicker, 224, 481.

Northern, 78.

Red-shafted, 206, 317, 481.
Florida, birds of, 103, 494-498.
Florida ezrulea, 217, 544.
Flycatcher, Acadian, 225.

Alder, 78, 545.

Crested, 85, 225, 248.

Least, 78, 206, 545.

Olive-sided, 545, 548.

Scissor-tailed, 225, 481.

Wright’s, 319.

Forbush, E. H., notice of his ‘Re-
port of the State Ornithologist
of Mass., 1912,’ 270.

Fordyce, George L., the Western
Grebe in Ohio, 243.

Francolinus clappertoni, 153.

Fregata aquila, 216.

Fregetta grailaria, 440, 442-447,

449, 452-457.

Fringilla celebs ombriosa, 276.

ec. solomkoi, 278.

Fulica americana, 76, 218.

stenoleuca.

GABRIELSON, Ira N.,some Marshall-
town, Iowa, notes, 255; review of
his studies of the food of nest
birds, 420.

Gadwall, 477.

Gain, L., review of his ‘ Penguins
of the Antarctic Regions,’ 116.
Galapagos Islands, birds of, 112, 385.

Galbula albirostris, 406.

Gallinago delicata, 218, 478.

Gallinula galeata, 75.

Gallinule, Florida, 75.

Purple, 218.

Gallirallus townsoni, 426.

Gannet, 287.

Garrulus glaudarius iphigenia, 278.

Vol. cp onaal|
1914

Gavia immer, 216.
pacifica, 403.

Geobasileus reguloides tarana, 559.

Geothlypis trichas arizela, 412.

t. ignota, 232.
t. occidentalis, 329.
t. trichas, 81, 491.

Geotrygon pari, 408.

Gifford, Edward W., review of his
‘Birds of the Galapagos Islands,’
take»

Glareola ocularis, 267.

Glaucidium gnoma grinnelli, 406.
siju vittatum, 406.
phalznoides, 403.

Glaucis hirsuta insularum, 280.

Gnateatcher, Blue-gray, 235, 493.

Goldfinch, 79, 206, 227, 322, 485.
Arkansas, 322.

Golson, Lewis 8. and Holt, Ernest
G., birds of Autanga and Mont-
gomery counties, Alabama, 212-
Deo.

Goose, Canada, 217, 477.

Egyptian, 154.
Ross’s, 403.
Snow, 477.

Goshawk, 548.

Grackle, Bronzed, 79, 210, 227, 484.
Purple, 227.

Grallaria ruficapilla avile, 561.

Graucalus papuensis ingens, 426.

Great Britain, birds of, 416.

Grebe, Holbcell’s, 211, 395.
Horned, 494.

Pied-billed, 74, 215, 395, 476.
Western, 243.

Grinnell, Joseph, review of his ‘An
account of the Mammals and
Birds of the Lower Colorado
Valley,’ 411; notice of his ‘A
New Red-winged Blackbird from
the Great Basin,’ 563.

Grinnell, Joseph, and Swarth, H.S8.,
review of their ‘An Account of
the Birds and Mammals of the

Index.

577

San Jacinto Area of Southern
California,’ 110.

Griscom, Ludlow, the Fox Sparrow
in Central Park, New York City,
in August, 102; the Arkansas
Kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis) in
Rhode Island, 248; the Short-
billed Marsh Wren (Cistothorus
stellaris) on Long Island in win-
ter, 253; the Acadian Chickadee
(Penthestes hudsonicus littoralis) at
Watch Hill, R. I., 254.

Grosbeak, Black-headed, 206, 327.

Blue, 229.

Evening, 105, 251, 256, 406
541.

Rocky Mountain Pine, 321
548.

Rose-breasted, 80, 102, 229.

Grouse, Dusky, 314.

Fleming’s, 385.
Franklin’s, 246.
Ruffed, 544.
Sharp-tailed, 85.

Grus americana, 218.

canadensis, 548.
mexicana, 477.

Guinea-fowl, Helmeted, 153.

Guiraca cerulea cerulea, 229.

Gull, Bonaparte’s 495.

Franklin’s, 85.

Glaucous, 397.

Herring, 22-49, 85, 178-199
397, 398, 494.

Laughing, 41.

Sabine’s, 105.

Gunning, J. W. B., obituary of,
143.

Giinther, Albert C. L. G., obituary
of, 435.

Gurney, J. H., the Gannets of Bona-
venture, 287; review of his ‘The
Gannet,’ 107.

Gymnomyza, 560.

Gyps fulvus, 126.

fulvescens, 126.

578

Haucyon macleayii cerulens, 267.

Halizxetus leucocephalus leucoce-
phalus, 77, 221, 480.

Halobeena ceerulea, 443, 446, 449,
456.
Harelda hyemalis, 244.
Hartert, E., review of his ‘Die
Vogel der palaarktischen Fauna,’
119.
Hawk, Broad-winged, 221.
Cooper’s, 210, 221, 480.
Duck, 495.
Florida Red-shouldered, 221.
Marsh, 77, 221, 415, 479.
Red-shouldered, 221, 255.
Red-tailed, 221, 480.
Sharp-shinned, 221, 247, 315,
479.
Sparrow, 222, 480.
Western Red-tailed, 315.
Western Sparrow, 315.
Hebe schucherti, 116.
Helinaia, 564.
swainsoni, 231, 253.
Hellmayr, C. E., review of his ‘ Avi-
fauna of Timor,’ 268.
Helmitheros vermivorus, 231.
Helodromas solitarius solitarius. 76,
219.

Hemigarzetta, 552.

Hemiprocne mystacea, confirmata,
409.

Hemispingus hanieli, 561.

Hemistephania, 101.

Henshaw, H. W., review of his
‘Birds of Town and Country,’ 423.

_ Heredity, 290.

Herman, Otto, review of his ‘ Birds
Useful and Birds Harmful,’ 554.

Herodias, 410.
egretta, 100, 245, 535.
eulophotes, 552.

Heron, Anthony’s Green, 171.
Black-crowned Night, 75, 217.
Goliath, 153.

Great Blue, 75, 217, 477.

Index.

[see:

Heron, Green, 75, 217.
Little Blue, 217, 544.
Louisiana, Dilive
Treganza’s, 403.
Yellow-crowned Night,

535.

Hersey, F. Seymour, two unre-
corded specimens of the European
Widgeon from Massachusetts,
243; notes on an unusual flight
of Stilt Sandpiper (Micropalama
himantopus), 246.

Ale,

Hesperiphona vespertina vesper-
tina, 105, 251, 256, 400,
541.

Hess, Isaac E., three new birds for
Champaign County, Illinois, 402.

Hewitt, C. G., review of his ‘The
protection of birds in and around
Ottawa,’ 422.

Hirundo erythrogastra, 80, 280, 328,

490.
pucheti, 156.

Histrionicus histrionicus, 535.

Holt, Ernest G., see Golson, Lewis,
Ss.

Honywill, Albert W., additions to
‘Notes on Some Summer and Fall
Birds of the Crooked Lake Re-
gion, Cass and Crow-Wing Coun-
ties, Minn.’, 82-86.

Hornbill, Brown, 152.

Abyssinian Ground, 152.

Howe, R. Heber, Jr., American
Egret (Herodias egretta) in Rhode
Island, 245.

Howell, A. Brazier, Cowbird note,
250; unusual nesting site of the
English Sparrow, 252.

Howell, A. H., review of his ‘De-
scription of two New Birds from
Alabama,’ 115.

Hull, Edwin D., notes on the habits
of an Old-squaw (Harelda hyema-
lis) and two Lesser Scaup Ducks
(Aythya affinis), 244-245; a feed-

Vol. |
1914
ing habit of the Ruddy Turnstone
(Arenaria interpres morinella),
399; the Snow Bunting again in
the Chicago area, 541.
Hummingbird, Broad-tailed, 318.
Ruby-throated, 78, 223, 481,
496, 536.
Hybrids, 281, 277.
Hydranassa tricolor ruficollis, 217.
Hydrochelidon nigra surinamensis,
7A.
Hylocichla guttata pallasi, 235, 493.
g. sequoiensis, 404.
mustelina, 235, 498.
ustulata swainsoni, 125, 235,
332, 546, 548.
Hypargos niveoguttatus
spilotus, 116.
Hypnelus ruficollis coloratus, 406.
Hypocnemis poecelonota nigrigula,
428.
Hypodes cinerea, 255, 279.

macro-

IANTHIA practica, 412.
Tanthocincla lustrabila, 412.
Ibis, The, review of, 126, 275, 426,
557.
Ibis, White, 415.
Icteria virens longicauda, 329.
v. virens, 233.
Icterus bullocki, 169, 171, 321.
galbula, 79, 544.
spurius, 79, 227.
xanthornus trinitatis, 276.
Ictinia mississippiensis, 221.
Illinois, birds of, 402, 536, 540, 541.
India, birds of, 265.
Jonornis martinicus, 218.
lowa, birds of, 70, 255.
Tridoprocne bicolor, 80, 85, 230, 490.
Ithaginis, 415.
Ixobrychus exilis, 75, 217, 544.
Ixulus flavicollis harterti, 275.

Jay, Blue, 79, 405, 482.
Florida Blue, 225.

Index.

(ob) |
=
ive)

Jay, Long-crested, 319.
Pifion, 320.
Woodhouse’s, 320.
Jenkins, Ida G., Hooded Warbler at
Boston, Mass., 104.
Jentink, Dr. F. A.,
143.

Job, Herbert K., review of his ‘In
Quest of the Canvasback,’ 264.
Journal of the South African Orni-

thologists’ Union, review of, 130,
559.
Journal fiir Ornithologie, review of,
130, 279, 429, 560.
Juneco aikeni, 325, 488.
hyemalis subsp., 497.
h. connectens, 325.
h. hyemalis, 228, 325, 488.
h. mearnsi, 325.
h. montanus, 325.
phzeonotus caniceps, 325.
Junco, Gray-headed, 325.
Montana, 325.
Pink-sided, 325.
Shufeldt’s, 325.
Slate-colored, 228, 325, 488.
White-winged, 325, 488.

obituary of,

KatmBacu, E. R., a misinterpreta-
tion, 394; notice of his ‘Birds in
Relation to the Alfalfa Weevil,’
553.

Kansas, birds of, 104, 263.

Keezel, Clara, notice of her ‘Bird
Study Note Book,’ 269.

Kennard, F. H., a quaint reminis-
cence of Audubon, 105.

Kulldeer, 76, 101, 171, 208, 219, 314,

478.
Kingbird, 78, 208, 225, 482.
Arkansas, 78, 169, 171, 248,

318.
Kingfisher, Belted, 78, 208, 223,
480, 547.
Kinglet, Golden-crowned, 106, 235,
- 492, 548.

580

Kinglet, Ruby-crowned, 106, 235,
332, 492.
Western Golden-crowned, 404.
Kirkham, Stanton D., review of his
‘North and South,’ 114.

Kite, Mississippi, 221.
Swallow-tailed, 220, 479.
Knight, Ora Willis, obituary of, 141.

Knot, 105.

Laconosticta rubricata fricki, 116.
senegala, 157.

Lagopus lagopus koreni, 409.

1. lagopus, 399.

Lanius borealis, 328.
ludovicianus excubitorides, 490.
]. gambeli, 169, 171.

1. ludovicianus, 230.
]. migrans, 80.
yemenensis, 276.

Lanivireo flavifrons, 230.
solitarius subsp., 231.

Lark, Desert Horned, 319, 547.
California Horned, 171.
Prairie Horned, 78, 482.

Larus argentatus, 22-49, 85, 178-

199, 494.
atricilla, 41.
franklini, 85.
hyperboreus, 397.
philadelphia, 495.

Lathria cryptolopha

561.

Laurocealis, 413.

Lechner, A. A. Van Pelt, review of
his ‘Oologia Neerlandica,’ 262.

- Leptotila ochraceiventris, 408.

Leucophoyx, 410.

Lewis, Harrison F., breeding of the
Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius
pheniceus pheniceus) in Nova
Scotia, 537.

Limnothlypis, 564.

Linaria, 90.

Lincoln, F. C., two species new to
Colorado, 256.

mindoensis,

Index.

[oce:

Linnean Society of New York,
annual dinner of, 291.
Linota brevirostris korejevi, 428.

b. pamerensis, 428.
Lobivanellus senegallus nvajor, 279.
Longspur, Chestnut-collared, 485,

541.
Lapland, 485.
McCown’s, 485.

Smith’s, 485.
Loon, 216.
Pacific, 403.

Lophocercus hemprichi, 152.
Lophodytes cucullatus, 216.
Lophonetta, 431:
Lophortyx californica californica,
63.
gambeli, 63.
Loriculus aurantiifrons batavorum,
130.
Lowe, Willoughby P., Phoebe.(Say-
ornis phebe) mm Colorado, 102.
Loxia curvirostra bendirei, 322.
c. minor, 227.
leucoptera, 251.
Luear, 91.
Luscinia, 91.

MACcGILLVRAYORNIS, 428.
claudi, 428.
Macherirhynchus nigripectus sa-
turatis, 133.

Mackay, George H., American
Merganser (Mergus americanus)
at Boston, Mass., in midwinter,
243.

Mackie, D. B., review of his report
on ‘Bird Enemies of the Philip-
pine Locust, 270.

Macronectes giganteus, 442-444,

447, 451-452, 456-457.

Magpie, 206, 319, 402, 547.

Maine, 247, 248.

Mallard, 216, 398, 476, 544, 547.

Man-o’-war-bird, 216.

Mareca americana, 477.

Vol. |
1914

Mareca penelope, 248, 397, 427.
Marila affinis, 244.

collaris, 216.

marila, 398.

valisineria, 216.

Martin, Purple, 230, 490, 497.

Maryland, birds of, 548.

Massachusetts, birds of, 100, 101,
103, 104, 236-242, 243, 246, 249,
251, 397, 535, 536, 541, 544.

Mathews, Gregory M., some binary
generic names, 86-91; review of
his ‘The Birds of Australia,’ 116,
267, 410, 552.

McAtee, W. L., birds transporting
food supplies, 404; notice of his
‘Five Important Wild Duck
Foods,’ 553.

McDermid, C. C., the Woodcock
carrying its young, 398.

Meadowlark, 226, 483.

Southern, 226, 540.
Western, 79, 169, 171, 202, 321,
417-419, 484.

Mearns, Edgar A., review of his
papers on new African birds, 115,
265; review of his ‘ Descriptions of
eight New African Bulbuls,’ 408.

Megalornis grus grus, 150.

Megapodius duperreyii buruensis,

409.

Megarhynchus sp., 442.

Melamparus afer fricki, 265.

Melanerpes erythrocephalus, 224,

317, 481.
formicivora, 407.
aculeata, 407.
Meleagris gallopavo intermedia, 343.
g. merriami, 343.
g. osceola, 343.
g. silvestris, 219, 348, 478.
ocellata, 342.
Melierax metabates, 151.
Melospiza georgiana, 80, 228.
melodia montana, 326.
melodia melodia, 80, 228, 488.

Index.

581

Melospiza lincolni lincolni, 326, 489,
542.

Menegaux, A., review of his reprint
of Lesson’s ‘Articles d’Ornitho-
logie,’ 266; notice of his ‘Birds
as Enemies of Mice,’ 423.

Merganetta, 415.

Merganser, 243, 398.

Hooded, 216.
Red-breasted, 105.
Mergus americanus, 243.
serrator, 105.
Merops nubicus, 156.
Merula, 90.
mareensis larochensis, 268.
Messager Ornithologique, review of ,-
430, 561.

Meyer, G. Ralph, Sharp-shinned
Hawk in Maine in winter, 247.

Michigan, birds of, 115.

Micropalama himantopus, 76, 105,

246.
Micropallas whitneyi sanfordi, 406.
w. idoneus, 406.

Micropsitta meeki, 426.

Microstilbon, 114.

Microxenops milleri, 408.

Millais, J. G., review of his ‘Brit-
ish Diving Ducks,’ 259.

Miller, Richard F., the Red-bellied
Nuthatch (Sitta canadensis) feed-
ing among weeds, 253.

Miller, W. DeW., Doryfera vs. Hemi-
stephania, 101; Choucaleyon vs.
Sauromarptis, 399.

Milvus milvus fasciicauda, 276.

Mimus polyglottos polyglottos, 233,

491.

Minnesota, birds of, 82, 538.

Mirafra peecilosterna jacksoni, 127.

sobatensis, 558.

Mniotilta varia, 81, 231.

Mockingbird, 233, 491.

Mollymoke, 445, 446, 448.

Molothrus ater ater, 79, 320, 483.

bonanensis, 283.

582

Montana, birds of, 159, 200-210,
257, 399, 535.
Morinella, 91.

Morris, Robert O., notes from
Springfield, Mass., 544.
Mullens, W. H., review of his

Guide to Selborne,’ 268.
Murphy, Robert C., prelimimary
description of a new petrel, 12-13;
observations on birds of the south
Atlantic, 489-457; see also
Nichols, J. T.
Muscicapa ecassini, 229, 255.
lugens, 255.
Muscivora forficata, 225, 481.
Museum Expeditions, 436.
Mutton-birds, 448, 444.
Myadestes townsendi, 332, 548.
Myiagra calidonica uveaensis, 268.
mareensis, 268.
galeata seranensis, 409.
Myiarchus crinitus, 85, 225, 248.
tyrannulus tobagensis, 561,
Myiochanes richardsoni richardsoni,
318.
virens, 78, 225.
Myrmotherula iheringi, 428.

NANNOCHORDEILES, 413.

Nannopterum harrisi, 112.

Nannus hiemalis hiemalis, 234, 492,

548.

Nature Library, review of, 553.

Nectarinia platura, 279.

Neochmia pheton albiventer, 428.

Neomorphus nigrogularis, 408.

- Nettion carolinense, 216, 477.

New Caledonia, birds of, 268.

New Mexico, birds of, 113, 542.

New York, birds of, 100, 102, 253,
398, 550.

Nichols, John Treadwell, Brown
Pelican regular off North Caro-
lina, 100; an undescribed Gala-
pagos race of Oceanodroma cas-
tro, 388-390; an Egret on Long
Island, 398.

Index. Gee

Nichols, John ‘Treadwell and
Murphy, Robert Cushman; a
review of the genus Pheoebetria,
526-533.

Nighthawk, 78, 481.

Sennett’s, 256.
Western, 206, 317.

Nightjar, Egyptian, 155.

Niltava sundara denotata, 412.

Ninox meeki, 426.

Noble, G. Kingsley, American Egret
(Herodias egretta) at Martha’s
Vineyard, Mass., 100; Jilldeer
Plover at Cambridge, Mass., 101;
Turkey Vulture (Cathartes aura
septentrionalis) at Martha’s Vine-
yard, 101.

Nomenclature, 146.

Nonnula duide, 408.

North Carolina, birds of, 100, 542.

Nothocercus salvadoru, 276. ~

Nova Scotia, birds of, 537.

Nucifraga cariocatactes, 133.

columbiana, 320, 547.

Numenius borealis, 426.

Numida ptilorhyncha baringoensis,

558.
Nutcracker, Clarke’s, 320, 547.
Nuthatch, Brown-headed, 234.
Florida White-breasted, 234.
Pygmy, 331.
Red-breasted, 253, 331.
Rocky Mountain, 331.
White-breasted, 492, 498.

Nuttallornis borealis, 318, 545, 548.

Nyctea nyctea, 77, 247.

Nycticorax nycticorax nevius, 75,

OAWhe
Nyctinassa violacea, 217, 535.
Nyctiprogne, 413.

OBERHOLSER, Harry C., review of
his ‘A Monograph of the Genus
Chordeiles Swains. Type of a
New Family of Goatsuckers,’ 413.

Oceanites oceanicus, 439-448, 452-

457.

Vol. et]
1914

Oceanodroma castro bangsi, 389.
ce. castro, 390.

c. eryptoleucura, 389-390.
leucorrhoa, 388.

Ohio, birds of, 248.

Oidemia, 293-308.
americana, 298-301.
carbo, 306.
deglandi, 304-306.
fusca, 307-308.
nigra, 307-308.
perspicillata, 302-304.

Oklahoma, winter birds of, 473-494.

Old-squaw, 244.

Odlogist, The, review of, 126, 275,

AD Nie

Oporornis formosus, 232.
philadelphia, 103, 546.
tolmiei, 329.

Oregon Sportsman, notice of, 562.

Oreoscoptes montanus, 330.

Oreospiza chlorura, 327.

Oreosterops pinaiz, 409.

Oriole, Baltimore, 79, 544.
Bullock’s, 169, 171, 321.
Orchard, 79, 227.

Oriole, The, review of, 123, 562.

Ornithological Articles in other

journals, 132, 281, 430, 562.

Ornithological Journals, review of,

124, 273, 424, 556.
Ornithologische Monatsschrift, re-
view of, 131, 279, 429, 560.
Ornithologisches Jahrbuch, review
of, 280, 560.
Ornithologisches Monatsberichte,
review of, 130, 278, 428, 560.

Ortygometra gabonensis, 558.

Osprey, 222, 256, 403.

Othyphantes fricki, 116.

Otocoris alpestris actia, 171.

a. euroa, 409.

a. leucoleama, 319, 547.

a. praticola, 78, 482.
Otus asio, 407. ;

a. asio, 77, 480.

Index.

583

Otus a. brewster1, 406.
a. floridanus, 222.
a. hasbroucki, 406.
a. maxwellix, 316.
a. neevius, 407.
flammeolus flammeolus,
f. idahoensis, 407.
xantusi, 407.

Ousel, Water, 547.

Ovenbird, 232.

Owl, Barn, 222.
Barred, 480.
Burrowing, 171, 480.
Ferruginous Pygmy, 403.
Florida Sereech, 222.
Great Horned, 222, 316.
Richardson’s, 536.
Saw-whet, 403.
Sereech, 77, 480.
Short-eared, 77, 2038, 222, 496.
Long-eared, 77, 222, 316.
Florida Barred, 222.
Rocky Mountain Screech, 316.
Snowy, 77, 247.

Oxyechus vociferus, 76, 101, 171,

219, 314, 478.

407.

/

PacHysyiv1a rubrifrons lutescens,

428.
]. inornata, 428.
pectoralis alfurorum, 409.
Pagodroma nivea, 451, 456.
Palmer, T. 8., review of bird pro-
tection, 143.
Pandion haliaétus carolinensis, 222,
256, 403.

Paradiszea duivenbodei, 131.
raggiana sororia, 131.
intermedia, 131.

Parisoma olivascens, 255, 279.

Paroquet, Carolina, 480.

Parrot, Meyer’s, 153.

Partridge, European, 555.

Parus bokharensis, 280.

b. panderi, 130.
czruleus harterti, 428.

584

Parus cristatus weigoldi, 428.
Passer domesticus, 80, 169, 171,
252, 268, 323.
domesticus chephreni, 263.
d. domesticus, 227.
hispaniolensis cananensis, 561.
Passerculus sandwichensis alaudi-
nus, 323, 485.
s. nevadensis, 542.
s. savanna, 227, 497.
Passerella iliaca iliaca, 102, 228,
489.
Passerherbulus
talis, 80.
lecontei, 256, 486.
Passerina amoena, 327.
ciris, 489.
cyanea, 229, 327.
Pavo, 415.
Pedicecetes phasianellus phasianel-
lus, 85.
Pelecanoides urinatrix,
456, 457.
Pelecanus: erythrorhynchos, 255.
occidentalis, 100.
Pelican, Brown, 100.
White, 255.
Pelidna alpina pacifica, 108.
Pellorneum ruficeps granti, 276.
Penguin, 446.
Pennsylvania, birds of, 400.
Penthestes carolinensis agilis, 492.
c. carolinensis, 234.
atricapillus septentrionalis, 81,
548.
gambeli gambeli, 331.
hudsonicus littoralis, 236-242,
254.
Percnostola lophotes, 561.
Perdix perdix, 555.
Pericrocotus brevirostris
gus, 412.
b. flavillaceus, 412.
Peters, James L., Tennessee Warb-
ler (Vermivora peregrina) in Mas-
sachusetts in autumn, 103.

henslowi occiden-

450, 452,

etholo-

Index.

[oee.

Petrel, Blue, 445.

Diving, 450.

Giant, 442, 444.

Petrella, 91.

capensis, 442-446, 448, 452,

456, 457.

Petrochelidon fulva pallida, 401.

lunifrons tachina, 401.

1. lunifrons, 80, 171, 328, 490.
Peucsea estivalis bachmani, 228,

546.

Pewee, Wood, 78, 225.

Western Wood, 206, 318.
Phalacrocorax auritus subsp., 216.
Phalenoptelus, 412.

nuttalli,

nitidus, 407.

Phalarope, Red, 536.

Phalaropus fulicarius, 536.

Phasianus torquatus, 314.

Pheasant, 271.

Ring-necked, 314.

Philemon noveeguinez brevipennis,

133.

Phillips, John C., among the birds
of the eastern Soudan, 149-
158; effect .of cold on Moult,
257; review of his ‘Notes on
a Collection of Birds from the
Sudan,’ 263; see also Bangs,

Outram.
Philohela minor, 218.
Phleeotomus pileatus floridanus,
406.

p. picinus, 407.
p. pileatus, 223, 481.
Phoebe, 102, 225, 482.
Black, 171.
Say’s, 318.
Pheebetria, 526-534.
palpebrata, 443, 444, 448, 450—
452, 456, 457.
. palpebrata, 527.
. huttoni, 528.
. antarctica, 529.
. auduboni, 531.

ye} lis} seh tre)

ere | Index. 585
Pheebetria fusca, 452, 453, 454, Plover, Upland, 76, 219, 404.

457.
f. campbelli, 533.
f. fusca, 532.
fuliginosa, 532.

Phrenopicus, 407.

Phyllastrephus strepitans fricki, 408.
cerviniventris lonnbergi, 408.
placidus keniensis, 408.
chlorigula schusteri, 278.

Phylloscopus collybita subsindia-

nus, 480.

Pica pica hudsonia, 319, 402, 547.

Picumnus buffoni amazonicus, 428.

Pigeon, Passenger, 219, 358-362.

Pinicola enucleator montana, 321.

Pintail, 100, 216.

Pipilo erythrophthalmus cansater,

15, 228:
e. erythrophthalmus, 228, 489.
maculatus montanus, 326.
m. clement, 125.
m. curtatus, 125.
m. faleinellus, 125.
m. faleifer, 124.
m. megalonyx, 124.
m. oregonus, 124.

Pipit, 233, 329.

Sprague’s, 404, 491.

Piranga erythromelas, 229.
ludoviciana, 328.
rubra rubra, 229.

Pisobia maculata, 76, 219, 495.
minutilla, 76, 219.

Pitohui meeki, 133.

Pitta superba, 426.

Pitylus nigriceps, 408.

Planesticus arthuri, 558.
migratorius achrusterus, 235.
m. migratorius, 81, 235, 493.
m. propinquus, 332.

Plectrophenax nivalis nivalis, SO.

Plegadis autumnalis, 125.

Ploceus interscapularis, 282.

Plover, Black-bellied, 105.

Golden, 255, 478.

Semipalmated, 77.
Spur-winged, 155.
Stone, 155.

Pluvianus xegyptius, 154.

Podager, 413.

Podilymbus podiceps, 74, 215, 395,

476.

Poecilodryas albonotata griseiven-

trHistelao:

Pogonocichla cucullata helleri, 265.

Polioptila czrulea crulea, 235,

402, 493.
Polyplectron, 415.
Pomatorhinus haringtoni, 426.
macclellandi odicus, 412.
ruficollis reconditus, 412.
Pocecetes gramineus confinis, 323.
g@. gramineus, 227, 485.
Porzana carolina, 15, 218, 256.
Priocella glacialoides, 448, 451, 453,
456, 457.

Priofinus cinereus. 443, 444, 446,
452, 453, 456, 457.

Prion banksi, 445-447, 449, 451-
453, 456, 457.

Proceedings of the Bavarian Orni-
thological Society, review of, 280,
561.

Procellaria eequinoctialis, 441, 443,

445-447, 450, 452, 456, 457.

Progne subis subis, 230, 490, 497.

Proparus ripponi. 275.

Protonotaria citrea, 103, 231.

Prunella modularis obscura, 428.

Psaltriparus, 499-525.
minimus ¢californicus, 507, 509,

516, 525.
m. minimus,
2p:
plumbeus, 507, 520, 525.
melanotis Hoydi, 522.
Pseudogerygone flavilateralis lifuen-
sis, 268.
rouxi, 268.
Psilopornis, 406.

506, 509, 510,

586

Pterocnemia tarapacensis, 276.
t. garleppi, 276.
Pterythius xanthochloris occiden-
talis, 276.
pallidus hybrida, 276.
Publications Received, 134, 284-
287, 432, 564.

Puftinus gravis, 453-455, 457.
puffinus, 440, 443, 456.
leucops nigroorbitalis, 133.

Pygoscelis papua, 446, 456.

Pyromelana flammiceps changam-

wensis, 116.

Pyrrhura albipectus, 408.

QuatL, California, 63.
Gambel’s, 63.
Querquedula discors, 75, 216.
Quiscalus quiscula seneus, 79, 227,
484.
q. quiscula, 227.

Ratt, King, 75, 218, 478.

Louisiana Clapper, 363-384.
Virginia, 75.
Yellow, 218, 256..

Rallus crepitans saturatus, 363-384.
elegans, 75, 218, 478.
longirostris caribzeus, 364, 366,

384.
virginianus, 75.

Ramsden, Charles T., capture of
Myiarchus crinitus (Linn.) in
eastern Cuba, 248; the Bobolink
(Dolichonyx oryzivorus) as a con-
veyor of mollusca, 250; Swain-
son’s Warbler in Cuba, 253.

Raven, Northern, 545.

Western, 547.

Recurvirostra americana, 314.

Redpoll, 322.

Redstart, 233.

Red-wing, 79, 226, 414, 483, 537.
Bicolored, 169, 171.
Thick-billed, 209 321.

Regulus, 90.

Index.

Auk
Oct.

Regulus calendula calendula, 235,
332, 492.
satrapa olivaceus, 404, 548.
s. satrapa, 235, 492.

Reichenow, A., review of his ‘Die
Vogel,’ 261.

Remiza macronyx loudoni, 429.

Revista Italiana di Ornitologia,
review of, 280, 561.

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie,
review of, 131, 280, 429, 559.

Reynolds, Theo. E. W., Nuttall’s
Sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys
nuttalli) wintering in King Co.,
Wash., 400.

Rheinardius, 415.

Rhipidura setosa niveiventris, 426.

tricolor, 267.
Rhode Island, birds of, 245, 248,
249, 254.

Rhodophoneus, 281.

Rhynchophanes mecowni, 485.

Rhyticeros plicatus, 409.

Ridgway, Robert, review of his
‘The Birds of North and Middle
America. Part VI,’ 406.

Rinker, G. C., some rare birds at
Hamilton, Kansas, 104.

Riparia riparia, 80, 85.

Roberts, Thomas S., Brewer’s
Blackbird (Huphagus cyanoce-
phalus) breeding in southeastern
Minnesota, 538.

Robin, 81, 235, 493.

Southern, 235.
Western, 206, 332.

Rockwell, R. B. and Wetmore,
Alexander; a list of birds from
the vicinity of Golden, Colorado,
309-333.

Rook, 118.

Rubecula, 90.

Rubigula johnsoni, 283.

Ruticilla, 91.

Sacz, John H., thirty-first stated

Vol. cr aaa |
1914

meeting of the American Orni-
thologists’ Union, 92-99; thir-
ty-second stated meeting of the
American Ornithologists’ Union,
390-394.

Sage, J. H. and Bishop, L. B., re-
view of their ‘The Birds of Con-
necticut,’ 108.

Salpinctes obsoletus obsoletus, 330.

Salpornis salvadorii abyssinica, 127.
s. occidentalis, 276.

Sandpiper, Least, 76, 219.
Pectoral, 76, 219, 495.
Red-backed, 105.
Semipalmated, 219.

Solitary, 76, 219.
Spotted, 76, 208, 219, 314, 478.

Sapsucker, Williamson’s, 316.
Yellow-bellied, 223, 480.

Sarasin, Fritz, review of his ‘Birds
of New Caledonia,’ 268.

Saunders, Aretas A., an ecological
study of the breeding birds of an
area near Choteau, Mont., 200-
210; the Rusty Blackbird (Lu-
phagus carolinus)-m Connecticut
in winter, 250; Blue-Gray Gnat-
catcher (Polioptila caerulea) at
West Haven, Conn., 402.

Saunders, W. E., the Tufted Tit —
a new record for Canada, 402.

Sauromarptis, 399.

Sayornis nigricans, 171.
phoebe, 102, 225, 482.
sayus, 318.

Saxicola dacotiz murielz, 128.

Schorger, A. William, unusual oc-
currences at Madison, Wis., 256.

Sclater, Philip lLutley, in me-
moriam, 1-12.

Seiurus aurocapillus, 232.

Seiurus motacilla, 232.

noveboracensis noveboracensis,
546.
n. subsp., 232.
Sericornis arfakiana oorti, 133.

Index.

587

Sericornis insularis, 129.
meeki, 133.

Setochalcis, 413.

Setophaga ruticilla, 233.

Shelford, V. E., review of his ‘ Ani-
mal Communities in Temperate
America,’ 120.

Shiras, George, 3rd, notice of his
‘Necessity for and Constitu-
tionality of the Act of Congress
Protecting Migratory Birds,’ 554.

Shoe-bill, 153.

Shoveller, 75, 314.

Shrike, California, 169, 171.
Loggerhead, 230.

Migrant, 80.
Northern, 328.
White-rumped, 490.

Shufeldt, R. W., extreme emacia-
tion in a specimen of the Snowy
Owl (Nyctea nyctea), 247; re-
searches of Gerhard Heilmann
on the origin of birds, 287; os-
teology of the Passenger Pigeon
(Ectopistes migratorius), 358-362;
unusual behavior of a Ruby-
throated Hummingbird (Archi-
lochus colubris), 536; review of
his ‘Fossil Feathers and some
heretofore undescribed Fossil
Birds,’ 116; notice of his ‘Ex-
tinct Ostrich Birds of the United
States,’ 269.

Sialia sialis sialis, 81, 235, 333, 493.
mexicanus bairdi, 333.
currucoides, 333, 493.

Siberia, birds of, 408.

Sicalis flaveola, 461.

Simmons, George Finlay, notes on
the Louisiana Clapper Rail (Ral-
lus crepitans saturatus) in Texas,
363-384.

Siskin Pine, 322.

Sitta carolinensis atkinsi, 234, 498.

ce. carolinensis, 492.
ce. nelsoni, 331.

588

Sitta canadensis, 253, 331.
pusilla, 234.
pygmzea pygmea, 331.
Siva cyanuroptera oatsi, 275.
Skua, Antarctic, 440.
Smithornis, 557.
Snipe, Wilson’s, 218, 478.
Solitaire, Townsend’s, 332, 548.
Somateria dresseri, 14.
mollissima, 16.
m. borealis, 14.
m. brittanica, 259.
Sora, 75, 218, 256.
Soudan, 149.
South Australian Ornithologist, re-
view of, 267, 428, 559.
South Carolina, birds of, 114, 248.
Sparrow, Bachman’s, 228, 546.
Brewer’s, 324.
Chipping, 228, 488.
Clay-colored, 203.
English, 80, 169, 171, 227, 252,
323.
Field, 228, 488.
Fox, 102, 228, 489.
Gambel’s, 323.
Grasshopper, 228.
Harris’s, 403, 486.
Lark, 545.
LeConte’s, 256, 486.
Lincoln’s, 326, 489, 542.
Mountain Song, 326.
Nevada Savannah, 542.
Nuttall’s, 400.
Savannah, 227, 497.
Song, 80, 228, 488.
Swamp, 80, 228.
Tree, 487.
Vesper, 227, 485.
Western Chipping, 206, 324.
Western Grasshopper, 80, 323,
486.
Western Henslow’s, 80.
Western Lark, 323, 486.
Western Savannah, 202, 323,
485.

Index.

lees
Oct.

Sparrow, Western Tree, 324.
Western Vesper, 203, 323.
White-crowned, 323, 487.
White-throated, 228, 487.

Spatula clypeata, 75, 314.

Spaulding, Fred. B., obituary of,

142.
Speotyto cunicularia hypogzea, 171,
480.

c. punensis, 408.

Sphyrapicus thyroideus, 316.
varius varius, 223, 480.

Spinus pinus, 322.

Spiza americana, 80, 229, 489.

Spizella breweri, 324.
monticola monticola, 487.

m. ochracea, 324.

passerina arizone, 324.

p. passerina, 228, 488.

pusilla pusilla, 228, 488. |
Spizixus canifrons ingrami, 412.
Squatarola squatarola, 105.

Ss. cynosure, 409.

Stachyris nigriceps coltarti, 275.

Stanford, Harry P., Willow Ptar-

migan in Montana, 399.
Starling, 249.
Stelgidocichla
408.

]. saturata, 408.
Stelgidopteryx serripennis, 230.
Stercorarius parasiticus, 440, 456.
Sterna antillarum, 216.

bergii thalassina, 409.

dougalli, 41.

hirundo, 41.

paradiszea, 444, 451, 456.

sumatrana mathewsi, 409.
Stigmatops monticola, 409.
Stone, Witmer, the identity of

Hypodes cinerea Cassin, 255.

Stone-chat, 151.

Stork, Hammer-head, 154.
Whale-headed, 153.

Streptoceryle, 407.

Stresemann, Erwin, review of his

latirostris pallida,.

Vol. |
1914

‘Birds of Ceram,’ 409; notice of
his paper on early accounts of
Birds of Paradise, 417.

Strix varia alleni, 222.

v. varia, 480.

Strong, R. M., on the habits and
behavior of the Herring Gull,
Larus argentatus Pont. 22-49,
178-199; Albatross specimens,
136; teaching a bird course, 137.

Sturnella magna argutula, 226, 540.
m. magna, 226, 483, 540.
neglecta, 79, 169, 171, 321,

417-419, 484.

Sturnus vulgaris, 249.

Subglareola, 267.

Swallow, Bahama, 401.

Bank, 80, 85.

Barn, 80, 230, 328, 490.
Cliff, 80, 171, 328, 490.
Coahuila Cliff, 401.
Northern Violet-green, 328.
Rough-winged, 230.

Tree, 80, 85, 230, 490.

Swarth, Harry S., the California
forms of the genus Psaltriparus,
499-525; review of his ‘A Study
of a Collection of Geese of the
Branta canadensis group from the
San Joaquin Valley,’ 264; re-
view of his ‘Distributional List
of Arizona Birds,’ 551; see also,
Grinnell, Joseph.

Swift, Black, 425.

Chimney, 78, 545.
White-throated, 318.

Sylvietta leucophrys keniensis, 265.
brachyura tavetensis, 265.
whytii abayensis, 265.

TaAcHYCINETA thalassina
328.

Tanager, Scarlet, 229.
Silver-billed, 442.
Summer, 229.
Western, 328.

lepida,

Index.

589

Tanagra sclateri, 458.

Tangara aurulenta goodsoni, 276.

Taverner, P. A., a new subspecies of
Dendragapus (Dendragapus ob-
scurus flemingi) from southern
Yukon Territory, 385-388.

Teal, Blue-winged, 75, 216.

Green-winged, 216, 477.

Telmatodytes palustris iliacus, 81,

234.
Tern, Black, 74.
Least, 216.
Roseate, 41.
Wilson’s, 41.
Texas, 363-384, 401.
Thalassocca antarctica, 448, 452,
456, 457.
Thalassogeron chlororhynchus, 443,
456, 457.
culminatus, 445-447, 450-453,
456, 457.
Thamnolxa cinnamomeiventris us-
ambare, 279.
Thamnomanes perusianus, 428.
Thamnophilus ethiops kapouni,
280.

Thayer, John E., the Coahuila Cliff
Swallow (Petrochelidon fulva pal-
lida) in Texas, 401.

Thayer, John E. and Bangs, Ou-
tram, review of their ‘Notes on
the Birds and Mammals of the
Arctic Coast of East Siberia,’ 408.

Thick-knee, African, 155.

Thrasher, Brown, 81, 233, 256, 491.

Sage, 330.
Thrush, Hermit, 235, 493.
Olive-backed, 235; 332, 546,
548.
Sierra Hermit, 404.
Wood, 235, 498.
Thryomanes bewicki bewicki, 234.
b. cryptus, 491.
Thryothorus ludovicianus ludovi-
cianus, 234, 491.
Thurston, Henry, a correction, 106.

590

Timor, 268.

Tinamus, 283.
tao septentrionalis, 284.
robustus inexpectatus, 284.

Tinker, A. D., notes on the orni-
thology of Clay and Palo Alto
counties, Iowa, 70-81.

Titmouse, Tufted, 234, 402, 492.

Tityra semifasciata esmeralde, 408.

Todd, W. E. Clyde, review of his
‘Preliminary Diagnoses of Appar-
ently New Birds from Tropical
America,’ 113.

Totanus flavipes, 76, 85.

melanoleucus, 76, 219, 478.

Towhee, 228, 489.

Alabama, 228.
Spurred, 326.
Green-tailed, 327.

Townsend, Charles W., a plea for
the conservation of the Eider,
14-21.

Toxostoma rufum, 81, 233, 256, 491.

Tragopan, 415.

Trevor-Battye, Aubyn, review of
his ‘Camping in Crete,’ 118.

Tringa canutus, 105.

Trochalopteron erythrocephalum.

goodwini, 276.
canorum, 461, 462.
Troglodytes aédon parkmani, 81,
330.

Trotter, Spencer, the Bobolink
breeding in southeastern Penn-
sylvania, 400.

Turdinulus brevicaudus venningi,

128.
epilepidotus bakeri, 128.
Turkey, Wild, 219, 334-358, 463-
473, 478.

Turnstone, Ruddy, 105, 399.

Turtur isabellinus, 150.

Tyler, John G., review of his ‘Some
Birds of the Fresno District,
California,’ 109.

Tyler, Winsor M., notes on nest life

Index.

lone
Oct.

of the Brown Creeper in Massa-
chusetts, 50-62; two Prothono-
tary Warblers in Massachusetts,
103.
Tympanuchus americanus ameri-
canus, 77, 85, 478.
Tyrannus tyrannus, 78, 225, 482.
verticalis, 78, 169, 171, 248,
318.
Tyto galei, 428.

VENEZUELA, 407.
Verdin, San Lueas, 543.
Vermivora bachmani, 231.
celata celata, 329.
c. lutescens, 329.
peregrina, 103.
pinus, 231.
virginie, 328.
Vireo griseus griseus, 231, 490.
belli belli, 491, 542.
chivi vividior, 280.
Vireo, Bell’s, 491, 542.
Blue-headed, 231.
Red-eyed, 210, 230.
Warbling, 80, 210.
Western Warbling, 328.
White-eyed 231, 490.
Yellow-throated, 230.
Vireosylva gilva gilva, 80.
g. swainsoni, 328.
olivacea, 230.
Vulture Black, 220, 403, 479.
Turkey, 101, 220; 255; silo;
479, 536, 544.

Waerain, White, 151.
Wallace, Alfred Russell, obituary of,
138.

Walpole-Bond, John, review of his
‘Field Studies of Some Rarer
British Birds,’ 416.

Warbler, Audubon’s, 329.

Bachman’s, 231.
Bay-breasted, 81.
Black and White, 81, 231.

Vol. al
1914

Warbler, Blackpoll, 232, 498.
Black-throated Green, 232.
Blackburnian, 232.
Blue-winged, 231.

Cairns’, 546.

Canada, 253.

Cape May, 546.

Cerulean, 231.
Chestnut-sided, 232.
Hooded, 104, 233.
Kentucky, 232.
Lutescent, 329.
Macgillivray’s, 329.
Magnolia, 231, 253, 498.
Mourning, 103, 546.
Myrtle, 86, 231, 329, 491.
Northern Parula, 86, 491.
Orange-crowned, 329, 498.
Palm, 232.

Parula, 231, 498.

Pine, 232.

Prairie, 232.
Prothonotary, 103, 231.
Swainson’s, 231, 253.
Tennessee, 103.
Virginia’s, 328.

Wilson’s, 81.
Worm-eating, 231.
Yellow, 81, 206, 231, 329.
Yellow-throated, 232.

Warbler, The, review of, 125.

Warren, B. H., Evening Grosbeaks
in Pennsylvania, 400.

Warren, Edward R., Harlequin
Duck in Glacier National Park,
Montana, 535; some winter
notes from the Yellowstone Na-
tional Park, 546; see also Aiken,
Chas. E. H.

Warren, H. E., review of his paper
on the economic value of South
African birds, 120.

Washington, birds of, 400.

Water-Thrush, 232, 546.

Louisiana, 232.

Water-Turkey, 216.

Index. 591

Waxwing, Bohemian, 328, 402.
Cedar, 206, 230, 490.

Wayne, Arthur T., a second North
Carolina record for Lincoln’s
Sparrow (Melospiza lincolni lin-
colni), 542.

Weaver, Small Red, 157.

Webster, F. M., notice of his paper
on bird enemies of Diabrotica,
120.

West Virginia, birds of, 112, 544.

Wetmore, Alexander, the develop-
ment of the stomach in the EKu-
phonias, 458-460.

Whale-bird, 445.

Wheatear, Isabelline, 151.

Whydah, Paradise, 157.

Widgeon, 477.

European, 243, 397.

Willet, 100, 105.

Williams, R. W., the White-winged
Crossbill (Loxia leucoptera) in
the District of Columbia, 251;
notes on the birds of Leon
County, Florida — third supple-
ment, 494-498.

Wilson Bulletin, The, review of,
125, 274, 426, 556.

Wilson Ornithological Club, annual
meeting of, 290.

Wilsonia canadensis, 253.

citrina, 104, 233.
pusilla pusilla, 81.

Wisconsin, birds of, 256, 542.

Witherby, H. F., review of his ‘Se-
quence of Plumages of the Rook,’
118.

Wood, N. A., review of his ‘Breed-
ing Birds of the Charity Islands,”
Lis.

Woodcock, 218, 398.

Woodpecker, Batchelder’s, 316.

Downy, 78.
Hairy, 480, 545.
Ivory-billed, 480.
Lewis’s, 317.

992

Woodpecker, Pileated, 223, 481.
Red-cockaded, 223.
Red-headed, 224, 317, 481.
Rocky Mountain Hairy, 316.
Red-bellied, 224, 403, 481.
Southern Downy, 223, 480.
Southern Hairy, 223.

Wren, Bewick’s, 234.

Cafion, 330.

Carolina, 234, 491.

Long-billed Marsh, 234.

Prairie Marsh, 81.

Rock, 330. :

Short-billed Marsh, 81, 234,
253.

Texas Bewick’s, 491.

Western House, 81, 330.

Winter, 234, 492, 548.

Wren-Tit, 125.

Wright, Albert Hazen, early records
of the Wild Turkey, 334-358,
463-473.

Wright, A. H., and Allen, A. A.,
notice of their ‘Field Note Book
of Birds, 417.

Wright, Horace W., Acadian Chick-
adees (Penthestes hudsonicus lit-
toralis) in Boston and vicinity in
the fall of 1913, 236-242; Star-
lings (Sturnus vulgaris) in Cam-
bridge, Mass., 249; Glaucous
Gull (Larus hyperboreus) on Fresh
Pond, Cambridge, Mass., 397;
European Widgeon (Mareca pene-
lope) at Boston, Mass., 397.

Index.

[oct

XANTHOCEPHALUS xanthocephalus,
79, 320, 402.
Xema sabini, 105.
Xenocichla flavicollis soror, 279.
Xenopicus albolarvatus, 406.
a. gravirostris, 406.
Xenops, 408.
Xenos, 409.
Xenus, 409.

YALAVIS tenuipes, 116.
Yellow-legs, 76, 85.

Greater, 76, 219, 478.
Yellow-throat, Florida, 232.
Maryland, 81, 491.
Western, 329.
Yukon Territory, 385.
Yunnan, birds, of, 412.

ZAMELODIA ludoviciana, 80, 102,
229.
melanocephala, 327.
Zenaida jessicee marajoensis, 131.
Zenaidura macroura marginella,
315, 479.
m. carolinensis, 77, 220.

Zonotrichia albicollis, 228.
leucophrys gambeli, 323.

]. leucophrys, 323, 487.
]. nuttalli, 400.

Zosterops admiralitatis, 426.
lateralis nigrescens, 268.
obstinatus seranensis, 409.

o. ternatanus, 409.
senegalensis fricki, 265.
virens garguensis, 265.

a | Errata. 593

ERRATA.

Page 105, line 8, for Arenaria morinella read A. interpres morinella.

“ce

105, “ 35, for pacifica read sakhalina.

140, ‘ 32, for Osborne read Osborn.

248, “ 48, for Corvus brachyrhynchos read Corvus brachyrhynchos
brachyrhynchos.

279, ‘* 35, for Hremonula read Eremomela.

314, line 25, for Oxyechus vociferus vociferus read O. vociferus.

322, ‘ 40, for Spinus pinus pinus read S. pinus.

402, ‘ 20, for Polioptila cerulea read P.. cerulea cerulea.

407, “ 18, for scularis read scalaris.

408, ‘ 13, for emeralde read esmeralde.

412, ‘“ 35, for Lowkouchat read Loukouchai.

426, “ 36, for Hdolisoma read Edoltisoma.

428, ‘ 21, for Magillivrayornis read Macgillivrayornis.

Xe *¢ 29, omit Prof. Theodore N. Gill.

xl, lines 3, 4,9, for 1914 read 1913.

Rive SDA Ph Sm O1as i. LOIS

xv, “ 41, after Arthur T. Wayne for 1909 read 1906.

RV ee Oars =o MONA Ses ONS:

Xvdily an U4. ol ONAL er LO ilies

xxxv, “ 43, George Willet should be transferred to list of Members.

DATES OF ISSUE.

Vol. XXX, No. 4— October 16, 1913.
« XXXI, No. 1 — December 31, 1913.
“« XXXI, No. 2— March 30, 1914.
« XXXI, No. 3 — June 29, 1914.

PUBLICATIONS OF THE

AMERIGAN ORNITHOLOGISTS UNION

FOR SALE AT THE FOLLOWING PRICES:

The Auk. Complete set, Volumes I-XXIX, (1884-1912) in origi-
nal covers, $99.00. Volumes I-VI are sold only with complete
sets, other volumes, $3.00 each; 75 cents for single numbers.

Index to The Auk (Vols. I-XVII, 1884-1900) and Bulletin of the
Nuttall Ornithological Club (Vols. I-VI, 1876-1883), 8vo, PP-
vii + 426, 1908 Cloth, $3.75; papert, $3.25.

Aheck-List of North American Birds. Third edition, revised,
1910. Cloth, 8vo., pp- 426, and 2 maps. $2.50, net, postage
25 cents. Second edition, revised, 1895. Cloth, Svo, pp. xi +
372. $1.15. Original edition 1886. Out of print.

Abridged Check-List of North American Birds. 1889. ( Abridged
and revised from the original edition). Paper, 8vo, pp- 71, printed
on one side of the page. 20 cents.

Pocket Check-List of North American Birds. (Abridged from
the third edition). Flexible cover, 3x X 5: inches. 25 cents.
10 copies for $2.00.

Code of Nomenclature. Revised edition, 1908. Paper, 8vo, pP-

Ixxxv. 50 cents.
Original edition, 1892. Paper, 8vo, pp. iv + 72. 25 cents.

We would be pleased to furnish The Auk, Index and Check-List

to your library at 15% discount.

Address JONATHAN DWIGHT, Jr.

134 W. 7Ist St., New York, N. Y.

America Ornithologists Union

Check-List of North American
Birds |
Last Edition, 1910

Cloth, 8vo, pp. 480 and two maps of North America,
one a colored, faunal zone map, and one a locality map.

The first authoritative and complete list of North
American Birds published since the second edition of
the Check-List in 1895. The ranges of species and
geographical races have been carefully revised and
greatly extended, and the names conform to the latest
rulings of the A.O. U. Committee on Nomenclature.
The numbering of the species is the same as in the
second edition. Price, including postage, $2.75.

POCKET EDITION
_A pocket Check-List (3% by 5% inches) of North
American Birds with only the numbers and the scientific
and popular names. Alternate pages blank for the
insertion of notes. Flexible covers. Price, including
postage, 25 cents; or 10 copies for $2.00.

Address JONATHAN DWIGHT, Jr.

134 W. 7Ist St. New York City.

Pie |

Foes ie Se. ne fae Me
le dn in Ge th pe « . / |
wy yyy ty fret Rat Anen! m ig Te Ey

a3
Ay ages Ay aAAR, paprnran dan sy Adasen ka, :
: Arai! ; seeaeebie eR) AR i
nN a ihe iltteteAl ba untig
perenne LO LPONT HT TLE AH A al-ananei THT er | TTY
‘toa batitgaaaa™ eAna yal TYTTT Ty TI DPA ptt
pani” Nia! | abl <i ALC ey Raa. P Peet ell fof a8 Beatty -oiR
BN 1) Ron ‘wn out Aaigia this TO Wee |) att leeafie
a Am ae malAAR, Ne a- nq “AAR Aag De 2 as
TT DAass a: THe ~ ahi t . = bemoltt itt an tt
Py) et eet AT ana amg BPA g NAR AR Ae \paastane
a aaa an BARA RNa ® ' aera wah an: mr aa
ail APS al es | eg \ al Tl a ; i | ; mie) ae
ne an ae’ ao * Aya Bila nalal fed ee | | a THALEL oA AeA arr nt
~ i | ~ Onn \ mide tot f EE
oer y Ans ave Maae as BAR, & As my "ee La LLL UL | a
& ge APA
aan vy, age, 8,
. aA AANA mil’, -
Bana. WA pAb! Nee
Ranehhh eeerhyy PTT LalaAiniad ama om i
an LiMAnn ona.

| @ ire bre > | :
Arnaud

Ty aman

eg
Minna. ssabhayAi bab phobia Nase ig
Ny AUT UOY ™ ee Srd By VAuwa,.. ) BIN’, nO ea iy a

' h | +4 Bee 3 4 ey
y Dp Mae fe, vc © PAW ne yu ve esa yginaenena, PAs gt err erry “ IN!

oe Sota, A a BNR Senet . a -78an% x hit pp) J- Let tals

Se ~*~, Ne ; & : hay ; Pal
LINN fe ‘ ent | RARAe if BV eae yagtarss eee HEEL aan ie aid ios a

Li ma ah = } ~ : - »

2 yan aga p= nae, pA Penis sea od aes esas Ae eN SN iN gs : »

ad , oe “"y i ‘ D i

Vv na aa sae 5*

ae
Ameeresnna aipltlag apa

nae is) , arent q\ 1 Ga ia, A da BAAR WRARAS Rane Am

; ‘ shaede TS
Sot AL ‘ BRE ‘oat a “angaats aden \ abies:
m Tor sa? uit pllnnant? sandal bee Bee eta A Qkee
Me a i el ae Rens aR RRO AD §
Tt af ; \ al "fy Pe ay > >= sai YY abo’ »
a tae asa) TdT) eetet hed t PA Le
Wit Ne ea alt a teekatt TAHT} Ps EP AR Weeens
14} THO ‘ ya Aide, \ , + 4aaph Bal Wane |e bh cen
im wa Seat yes i : nN. ©
1a aby | RD he a | APRS eels ae aye
|e » . n : a = ; 7
BA Godan, lien AAR, a POO Aen aa a ashe ane eae nf
ayy ~ab ae siomdegaanen tall alata | aeeN. yrs
sn ene a‘ mY ae gunn yer NN,
prAna Ain Abs Perry tt | | it tet : 1" [
oy yy as ir TY a Fy oy ae = Eamets . -"

ay el) rin A 252.8 anweNt ‘ oma NSL,
Xa, 008 ae 2 Anau ea wee
Pasay ong 7 a NB Maj Aton Dans af haa Cnet Poa

a
‘= s 3S

pis? oom a) 1. bE
‘igd ‘ pare hye “5 aon
al PO ee tita ripen Rit |
AA pea dads LBC MED) yur Ly Ed
anil = eee ».? ‘is _