Skip to main content

Full text of "The Auk"

See other formats 


iM 


Dt? Shade yy, 
hey Mt 
Wry ct 
a 


* 
iy 


0 Nae 
Ryat 
cngaaidie 


hr iteke 


ah 
i 


ny 
44 
we 


sigtets3s 


+ 


1 Le ete ge 
2 at aie are 
VeVs De Moar ge) 


: 


a 


mui 
saath id a aah fn Seas ert 


A re lala 


=-4 


es ae 


; “us 2 iy 


} ' ' 4 5 " wk: 
wd | a) HH Jus anne notes. A Wy Petit . ay) mn 
3! nr Fe F F Wey uj > on a +." 4: 4 
“¥ ( ; | eat bh An pbs watt toy By be menecll : Shoes, tN pe \ 
a 2. ™ ra Steet Pee eer , “4 4 
Wow pe penser Roca re! figeeeee 
| Nahe LL eat errerer in) |i}. 
wane UEAD ert TL SULTS 
eee ue Pyoivanmtle 
RR Teele) ONAL (bl 
i Pwap Es eens kl filed | et Ways hd ati 
Tl) f age Thi tit bs kg 
’ Dyfi, B. g RAT | 3 WO None 1 
eye |. f eae 
ata aT Typ, Cellar eters ie! 
ae - re | x S. 3S, 
gst, Ta lik Wee wth 
aN ebhy 1 abe iw sv oy \ e pyrvsre 


TUTTLE + TULL Qeatthonaan 


Wy 147 feb tt VAIS hehe Pohok Dedel tet techs gun 
go He ne, 


™“ } eece |e Suw- w* 
an _— ih ae is™ oa ft 
~tty cme iy att 
ar Saint A bas Sart cure ens 
™, pais ws See acest 
Bhd “9 
s ‘ten echoes as 
sis our o "Ue a ewe? 
rT 


fy wey Prawn 


fe 
sat 


a 


a” ee 


(| 
TCs" 


oe nT 
ney iy! 

NX] Se ote oe 

3 Sh : AAS IVA, aude, 


B..| NY 


"Nae Gun A 


MAMA and 


[AFUE avian 


he swoarrenttt) eel veveyeyy : | 3 
wees ewe bd ade et | - eine ae 
ES en ae | we er ~ y i, . 
ee Pres "o& : vs < a wi sel 
SIV eit Ria gd g pie) | ail 
9 ; 
anaes vw ue Mey s satel ROL sei 


@ oP * 
Nag eeetye LIAAL Neeyyttte” a% Ca cal aed tet ba ca wie 4 b lain phd TL wa 
ere Wesereumieres wee HAM LLL Pe 
at Nee 3 Wikies wy See j Vey 
“s hh bet wig We, 2 | Seeieee 
Ane PO, & aD bach Lee bat Ted HA eed Py oy oS ee bad HL | re me U_ ae é a > ad | | = 
ne MURINE ye 4 be at ys aera w Py Mert AAS) NS Aa} 
ee EE wel JO La bb . Pw hy By CU ENOTES 
&e 5 sr e if i & 4 5 n a * sd 4 - 
} Pay ee DAT LILA iT Titi Sa | | rte PRS he pe YY faye yin : 
Ve Nei TT tee ere he id Pesci v dd Aled reer, 5 bl 
Me ee ; VPorw dtoet aoe q Vy Pe Atte,” y 
ro Re eer TT th AA co é ws . gpuwrere Mae 
gww 


ye “ee ty anpladdieai r at ' ert v 


fe geba | 
poe ie BEES Ss 3 : ry LL Lil [| Moab lt | 


aha 


A 7) Ve Toe 
i «0 

" 
J OL pay | CONTINUATION OF THE 2 EW SERIES, 


Vou. XLV. BuLLETIN oF THE Nurraty ORNITHOLOGICAL CLtuB / VoL. XXXVII. 


‘The Auk 


Q Quarterly Journal of Ornithology 


EDITOR 
WITMER STONE 


VOLUME XXXVII pos 


° 9 610 84 


PUBLISHED BY 


The American Ornithologists’ Union 


LANCASTER, PA. 
1920 


Entered as second-class mail matter in the Post Office at Lancaster, Pa. 


nll ened 


STEINMAN AND Foutz 
LANCASTER, PENNSYLVANIA. 


| 
| 
| 


OFFICERS OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ 
UNION PAST AND PRESENT 


PRESIDENTS. 


J. A. ALLEN, 1883-1890 
*D. G. Exiot, 1890-1892. 
*ELLIotT Couns, 1892-1895. 
*WILLIAM BREWSTER, 1895-1898. 
Rosert Ripeway, 1898-1900. 
C. Hart Merriam, 1900-1903. 


Cuas. B. Cory, 1903-1905. 
Cuas. F. BatcHELDER, 1905-1908. 
E. W. Netson, 1908-1911. 
Frank M. Cuapman, 1911-1914. 
A. K. Fisurr, 1914-1917. 

JouNn H. Saas, 1917- 


VICE-PRESIDENTS. 


*ELLIOTT Cougs, 1883-1890. 
1883-1891; 
Rosert Riweway, 1895-1898. 


*WILLIAM BREWSTER, 1890-1895. 


1891-1894; 
H. W. HensHaw, 1911-1918. 


C. Hart Merriam, 1894-1900. 


Cuas. B. Cory, 1898-1903. 

Cuas. F. BatcHELDER, 1900-1905. 
E. W. Netson, 1903-1905. 
FRANK M. CHapman, 1905-1911. 
A. K. Fisner, 1908-1914. 
WiTMER STONE, 1914— 

GEORGE BirD GRINNELL, 1918— 


SECRETARIES. 


C. Hart Merriam, 1883-1889. 


Joun H. Saas, 1889-1917. 


T. S. Patmer, 1917- 


TREASURERS. 


C. Hart Merriam, 1883-1885. 
Cuas. B. Cory, 1885-1887. 


*WiLL1AM DutcHER, 1887-1903. 


JONATHAN DwiautT, 1903- 


* Deceased. 


MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. 


J. A. ALLEN, 1883- 
*S. F. Barrp, 1883-1887. 
*WILLIAM BREWSTER, 1883-1919. 


MontTAGUE CHAMBERLAIN, 1883-1888. 


*ELiiIotr Cougs, 1883-1899. 
1883-1894; 

H. W. HENsHAW, 1 1911-1918. 
*Grorce N. LAWRENCE, 1883-1890. 

C. Hart Merriam, 1883- 

Rosert Ripeway, 1883-— 

Cuas. B. Cory, ee 
*WituiaAM DutcuHER, 1887-1920. 
*D—D. G. Exxiot, 1887-1915. 
1887-1895; 
1896-1899. 
*Toomas McItwraita, 1888-1889. 


LEONHARD STEJNEGER, 1 


Joun H. Saaz, 1889- 
*N.S. Goss, 1890-1891. 

Cuas. F. BaTcHELDER, 1891-— 
FRANK M. CHapMan, 1894- 
*CHaRLEs KH. BenprireE, 1895-1897 
A. K. FisHer, 1895- 
JONATHAN Dwiaut, 1896-— 
RutTHVEN Diane, 1897- 
WITMER STONE, 1898— 
Tuomas S. Rosperts, 1899- 

E. W. Ngtson, 1900— 

C. W. Ricumonp, 1903- 

F. A. Lucas, 1905- 

W. H. Oscoop, 1911-1918. 
JOSEPH GRINNELL, 1914— 

T. S. Parmer, 1917- 

Harry C. OBERHOLSER, 1918- 


Officers are ex-officio members of the Council during their terms of | 


office and ex-presidents for life. 
the above. 


* Deceased. 


Ex-officio members are included in 


Elections have been in November except in 1883 and 1884 (September), 
1887 (October), 1907 and 1909 (December), 1914 (April) and 1915 (May). 


CONTENTS OF VOLUME XXXVII 


NUMBER I. 

Pace 

In Memoriam: WiLLIAM BREWSTER. pe Henry W. Henshaw. 
(PlatesI and II) . . . ‘ 1 
WILL1AM BREWSTER—AN APPRECIATION. By John G. Gehring . 24 

Wituam BrewsteR—RESOLUTION or THE NurraLL ORNITHO- 
LOGICAL CLUB : 27 
THe WILLIAM BREWSTER Memoria : Ao a hee 29 
In Memoriam: Lyman Betpine. By A. K. Fisher. ’ (Plate IIT) 3 

MipsuMMER BirpDs IN THE CaTSKILL MOovuNTAINS. ue Stanley 
Cobb; Mie Ds. ren pa. wA6 

NOTES ON THE WINTER Birps or SAN ANTONIO, “TEXas. ByL Ludlow 
Griscom .. ‘ 49 
Tar Occuur SENsEs IN Birps. “By Herbert H. Beck . . 55 


BirDs OF THE CLEAR CREEK District, Cotorapo. By F.C. Lincoln 60 
SANDPIPERS WINTERING AT PLyYMovTH, MassacuusetTts. By J. A. 


Farley . . By et ee ee 
SEQUESTRATION Nores. By J oseph Grinnell . ee es USA: 
On Procellaria alba GMrvin. By Leverett Mills Loomis . . 88 


Notes ON SEVEN Brirps TAKEN NEAR CHARLESTON, SOUTH Caro- 


LINA. By Arthur T. Wayne . . 92 


Tur STATUS OF THE SUBSPECIFIC Races OF Branta canadensis. 


By Dekiggins . . 94 


BACHMAN’S WARBLER BREEDING IN ALABAMA. By Ernest G. Holi. 


(elatevIVoi a2 = 103 


DESCRIPTION OF A PROPOSED New RAcE OF THE KILLDEER FROM 


THE Coast oF Peru. By Frank M.Chapman . . 105 


DESCRIPTIONS OF A NEW SPECIES AND SUBSPECIES OF Ty RANNIDAE. 


By Charles B. Cory . . 108 


Tue THIRTY -SEVENTH STATED Mertinc OF THE " AMERIC AN ‘ORNI- 


THOLOGISTS: WNION, By YoiS: Palmer”. 2. : « ; . . 210 


GENERAL NOTES. 


The Black Skimmer on Long Island, N. Y., 126; Another Record of the 


White Pelican in New York, 126; A Note on the Southern Teal, 126; 
Trumpeter Swan (Olor buccinator) in Western Minnesota. A Cor- 
rection, 127; Wild Swan on Long Island, N. Y., 127; Notes on Some 
Shore Birds of the Alabama River, Montgomery County, Ala., 127; 
The Black Rail at St. Marks, Florida, 128; Purple Gallinule in North 
Carolina, 130; Breeding of the Mourning Dove in Maine, 130; The 
Status of Harlan’s Hawk in Colorado, 130; White Gyrfalcon (Falco 
islandus) in Montana, 132; The Hawk Owl in North Dakota, 132; 
Pileated Woodpecker in Morris County, N. J., 132; Unusual Habits 
of Chimney Swift, 132; Empidonax griseus in Nevada, 133; The 
Crow in Colorado, 134; Appearance of the Canada Jay at Moore- 
head, Minn., 134; Note on the Food of the Starling (Sturnus vulgaris), 
135; Harris’ Sparrow in Michigan, 135; American Golden-eye and 
White-crowned Sparrow in Northern Michigan in Summer, 135; 
Lanius ludovicianus migrans in North Dakota, 136; Bohemian Wax- 


il 


Contents of Volume XX XVII. 


wings in Chicago, Ill., 136; The Bohemian Waxwing (Bombycilla 
garrula) at Chicago, Ill., 137; Orange-crowned Warbler (Vermivora 
celata celata) in Massachusetts, 137; Fall Records of Mourning War- 
bler in Western Missouri, 1387; Breeding of the Canadian Warbler 
and Northern Water-Thrush in New Jersey, 187; Hermit Thrush’s 
Nest in Unusual Location, 188; Peculiar Nesting of Hermit Thrushes, 
138; The Bluebird in Cuba, 140; Rare or Uncommon Birds at Roch- 
ester, N. Y., 140; Notes from St. Marks, Fla., 142; Bird Notes on 
the Wisconsin River, 143; Abundance of Periodical Cicadas Divert- 
ing Attacks of Birds from Cultivated Fruits, 144; Nomenclatural 
Casuistry, 145; Supplementary Note on J. P. Giraud, 146. 


RECENT LITERATURE. 


Van Oort’s ‘Birds of Holland,’ 147; Taverner’s ‘Birds of East Canada, 


147; ‘The Birds of North Carolina,’ 149; Hine on Birds of the Katmai 
Region, Alaska, 150; Witherby’s ‘Handbook of British Birds,’ 151; 
A Geographical Bibliography of British Ornithology, 152; Birds of 
the Expedition to Korinchi Peak, Sumatra, 153; Swann’s ‘Synop- 
tical List of the Accipitres,’ 154; Burns’ ‘Ornithology of Chester 
County, Pennsylvania,’ 155; Mailliard’s ‘Notes on the Avifauna of 
the Inner Coast Range of California,’ 156; Bailey’s ‘Raptorial Birds 
of Iowa,’ 156; Mrs. Farwell’s ‘Bird Observations near Chicago,’ 157; 
Hudson’s ‘Book of a Naturalist,’ 158; Dixon on Wild Ducks in a 
City Park, 158; Recent Circulars by Forbush, 159; The Birds of the 
Albatross Expedition of 1899-1900, 159; Coker on the Guano Birds 
of Peru, 160; Scoville’s ‘The Out-of-Doors Club,’ 162; Gifford’s 
‘Field Notes on the Land Birds of the Galapagos Islands,’ 162; Hall 
and Grinnell on Life Zone Indicators in California, 163; Dabbene 
on Argentine Forms of the Genera Geositta and Cinclodes, 164; 
Cory’s ‘Review of the Genera Siptornis and Cranioleuca,’ 164; Chap- 
man on New South American Birds, 165; Oberholser on Larus hyper- 
boreus barrovianus, 166; Contributions to the Zoogeography of the 
Palaearctic Region, 166; Annual Report of the Chief of the Biological 
Survey, 167; Shufeldt on the Birds of Brazil, 167; The Food of Aus- 
tralian Birds, 168; The Ornithological Journals, 168; Ornithological 
Articles in Other Journals, 173; Additional Publications Received, 
178. 


CORRESPONDENCE. 


International Ornithological Congress, 179; Name of the Red-footed 


Booby, 180; Ornithological Pronunciation, 181. 
NOTES AND NEWS. 


Editorial Note, 182; Obituary: Dr. Charles Conrad Abbott, 183; Obitu- 


ary: Edward Everett Brewster, 184; Obituary: Barron Brainerd, 
184; Recording Migration, 185; Election of Officers of the Nuttall 
Club, 185; A. O. U. Committee on Nomenclature and Classification 
of N. A. Birds, 186; Bird Collection of the Ottawa Museum, 186; 
Oldest Members of the A. O. U., 186; Publications of the Canadian 
Arctic Expedition, 187; The South African Biological Society, 187; 
Dinner of the D. V. O. C., 187; Vogel der palaarktischen Fauna, 
187; Educational Work of the California Fish and Game Commis- 
sion, 188; Endowment of the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology of the 
University of California, 188. 


Contents of Volume XX XVII. 


NUMBER II. 


ill 


Pace 
A REVISION OF THE GENUS EupsycHortTyx. By W. E. Clyde Todd. 
(BlstteseVe Ville Meta e Shs each aeRoase dy ce gene oy ap! S89 
OBSERVATIONS ON THE Habits oF Birps at LAKE Burrorp, New 
Mexico. By AlexanderWetmore. (Plates VII-IX) . .. . 221 
ADDITIONS TO THE AVIFAUNA OF THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS, ALASKA, 
IncLupine Four Spectres New to Nortu America. By G. 
Dallas Hanna MUR USS beaut ve Meats Woald te ni) Salbser ea ay 248 
Extracts rrom Notes Mapr WHILE IN Nava Service. By 
W.T. Helmuth BMT he MOR Vier pik PEN Rihae gly be 
THe PLUMAGE OF GULLS IN RELATION TO AGE AS ILLUSTRATED 
BY THE HERRING GULL (LARUS ARGENTATUS) AND OTHER 
Species. By Jonathan Dwight, M.D. (Plates X-XIV) . 262 
THE SUBSPECIES OF BRANTA CANADENSIS (Linn.). By H.S.Swarth 268 
DescripTioN oF A New Nortu American Ducx. By Wharton 
EL ULDC Tae Mee Ahh eRe NIM foe Pep ulicns see) (5 ' ta ds ae as HO 
Firta ANNUAL List oF PROPOSED CHANGES IN THE A. O. U. CuEcK- 
List or NortH AMERICAN Birps. By Harry C. Oberholser 274 


GENERAL NOTES. 


A Loon (Gavia immer) Caught on a Fishing Line, 286; Intestinal Caeca 
in the Anhinga, 286; On the Nesting of the Black Duck in Ohio, 287; 
The American and European Widgeon in Massachusetts, 288; Whist- 
ling Swan (Olor columbianus) in Massachusetts, 289; Habits of the 
Two Black Ducks (Anas rubripes and Anas rubripes tristis), 289; 
Flight of Water Fowl at Washington, D. C., 291; Nesting of the 


Greater Yellow-Legs in Newfoundland, 292; Nesting of the Li 


ttle 


Black Rail in Atlantic County, N. J., 292; Maggots in the Ears of 
Nestling Cooper’s Hawks (Accipiter cooperi), 293; Age attained by 
the Hyacinth Macaw, 293; Curious Habits of the Whip-poor-will, 


293; Aeronautes melanoleucus (Baird) versus Aeronautes saxat 


alis 


(Woodhouse), 294; A New Name for Phaeochroa Gould, 295; Great 
Crested Flycatcher in Massachusetts in Winter, 295; The Song of 
the Boat-tailed Grackle, 295; Clark’s Crow in Denver, 297; Another 
Occurrence of the Starling Near Montgomery, Alabama, 298; A 
Flight of Newfoundland Crossbills, 298; Evening Grosbeaks at Valley 
Falls, N. Y., 298; Evening Grosbeak at Brantingham, Lewis Co., 
N. Y., 299; The Evening Grosbeak in Monte Vista, Colo., 299; Some 
Sparrow Notes from Madison, Wisconsin, 299; Zonotrichia albicollis 
again in Colorado, 300; The Proper Name of the West African Serin, 
300; The Louisiana Tanager in Massachusetts, 301; Bohemian Wax- 
wing in Illinois, 301; The Yellow-throated Warbler in Central New 
York—A Correction, 302; The Louisiana Water-Thrush Breeding at 
Graniteville, Aiken County, South Carolina, 302; Hlminia Bonaparte 
Preoccupied, 302; Toxostoma crissalis versus Toxostoma dorsalis, 303; 
The Wheatear (Oenanthe oenanthe lencorhoa) in Eastern Pennsyl- 
vania, 303; Additional Notes on the Birds of Red Deer, Alberta, 304; 
Birds of Irregular Occurrence on Long Island, 306; Rare and Un- 
common Birds at Branchport, Yates Co., N. Y., 307; Unusual Winter 
Bird Records for Iowa City, Iowa, 308; Notes on Winter Birds of 
the Missouri Ozarks, 309; Mesa County, Colo., Notes, 310; Some 
North American Birds Obtained in Japan, 311; The Color of Natal 


Down in Passerine Birds, 312; Birds and Tent Caterpillars, 312. 


lv Contents of Volume XXXVII. 


RECENT LITERATURE. 


Baldwin’s ‘Bird Banding by Means of Systematic Trapping,’ 314; Chap- 
man on New South American Birds, 315; Cory’s ‘Catalogue of Birds 
of the Americas,’ 315; Witherby’s ‘Handbook of British Birds,’ 316; 
A Geographical Bibliography of British Ornithology, 317; Annual 
Report of the National Association of Audubon Societies, 317; Bulle- 
tin of the Essex County Ornithological Club, 318; Hollister’s Account 
of the National Zoo, 319; Cory’s Review of the Genus Rhynchocy- 
clus, 319; Recent Papers by Bangs and Penard, 320; Van Oort’s 
‘Birds of Holland,’ 320; Kirk Swann’s ‘Synoptical List of the Acci- 
pitres,’ 321; Dr. Shufeldt’s Bibliography, 321; Stuart Baker on Egg 
Collecting and its Objects, 321; Economic Ornithology in Recent 
Entomological Publications, 322; Pine-seed Eaters in British Gar- 
hwal, 325; The Ornithological Journals, 325; Ornithological Articles 
in Other Journals, 334; Additional Publications Received, 338. 


CORRESPONDENCE. 


An “Occult Food Sense’”’ in Birds, 339; The Search for Food by Birds, 
341; Ridgway’s ‘Birds of North and Middle America, Vol. VIII,’ 344. 


NOTES AND NEWS. 


Obituary: James Mellville Macoun, 346; A. O. U. Committee on Classi- 
fication and Nomenclature, 346; Migratory Bird Treaty, 347; Bird 
Reservations, 347; Modification in Federal Regulations, 347; Pacific 
Northwest Bird and Mammal Club, 347; Complete Sets of ‘The 
Auk,’ 348; The Wilson Ornithological Club, 352; Correction, 352; 
Errata, 352. 


NUMBER III. 


PaGE 
Notes on Some American Ducxs. By Allan Brooks. (Plates 
XV-XVI) 4 ae haley ate ae Wed: eat races aor 
RELATIVE ABUNDANCE oF WILD Ducks at DELAVAN, WISCONSIN. 
By N. Hollister 5 Wie e dt ahaa COU Se ren) AGN ee, ee Oo 
RecoLtuections or AupuBon Park. By George Bird Grinnell 
(Plates X VIE X VIEL) gine ee eo ee ee 
Courtsuire In Birps. By Charles W. Townsend, M.D. . . 380 


OBSERVATIONS ON THE Hasits oF Brrps at LAkE Burrorp, NEw 
Mexico. By Alexander Wetmore . .... .. =. . - 398 

Notes oN THE Breepinc Hasits oF THE Rusty BLACKBIRD IN 
NortHerN New Enauanp. By Fred H. Kennard. (Plates 


bb. CSO. 0 I, Pee reo sc ee GN 
Tur GENERA OF CERYLINE KINGFISHERS. By Waldron DeWitt 

ji OP PA rir in 5 5 fe a Ae 
Onvrario Brrp Notrs. By J. H. Fleming and Hoyes Lloyd . . . 429 


SEVENTEENTH SUPPLEMENT TO THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ 
Union Cueck-List of NortH AMERICAN Brrps ... . . 439 


Contents of Volume XX XVII. v 


GENERAL NOTES. 


Notes on the Black-crowned Night Heron in Western New York, 449; 
Bittern Displaying its White Nuptial Plumage, 450; The Knot in 
Montana, 451; Tringa Auct. versus Calidris Anon., 451; Early Vir- 
ginia Rail in New York, 452; Least Flycatcher in Michigan in April, 
453; A New Name for Anairetes Reichenbach, 453; A Raven Pellet 
453; The Purple Grackle at Albany, Georgia, 454; Note on the Gen- 
eric Names Schiffornis Bonaparte and Scotothorus Oberholser, 454; 
Evening Grosbeak (Hesperiphona vespertina) in Minnesota in Mid- 
summer, 455; Evening Grosbeaks Common at Lakewood, N. J., 
456; Evening Grosbeaks at Princeton, N. J., 456; The Newfoundland 
Crossbill in the Washington Region, 456; White-winged Crossbill 
(Loxia leucoptera) in West Virginia, 457; An Erroneous Kansas 
Record for Baird’s Sparrow, 457; A Scarlet Tanager at Thirty-fourth 
Street, New York, 458; Bohemian Waxwing at Seattle, Washington, 
During the Winter of 1919-1920, 458; Bohemian Waxwing at Salem, 
Mo., 460; Bohemian Waxwing (Bombycilla garrula) at Rochester, 
N. Y., 461; Bohemian Waxwing at Rochester, N. Y., 462; Autumnal 
Stay of the Parula Warbler in Maine, 462; The Blue-winged Warbler 
(Vermivora pinus) on the Coast of South Carolina, 462; Hooded 
Warbler (Wilsonia citrina) at Detroit, Michigan, 463; Penthestes 
hudsonicus hudsonicus in North Dakota, 463; Labrador Brown- 
capped Chickadee (Penthestes hudsonicus nigricans) at Rochester, 
Monroe County, N. Y., 463; Blue-gray Gnatecatcher in the Boston 
Public Garden, 464; The Blue-gray Gnateatcher (Polioptilla caerulea 
caerulea) at Quebec, P. Q., 464; The Russet-backed Thrush (Hylo- 
cichla ustulata ustulata) Taken near Charleston, 8. C., 465; Remark- 
able Migration of Robins, 466; Some Rare Birds for Yates County, 
N. Y., 466; Notes from Springfield, Mass., 467; Notes from St. Louis, 
Mo., 467; Merrem’s Beytrage, 468; Erratum, 468. 


RECENT LITERATURE. 


Mathews’ ‘Check-List of the Birds of Australia. Part 1,’ 469; Mathews’ 
‘Birds of Australia,’ 470; MacGregor’s ‘ Index to the Genera of Birds,’ 
471; Witherby’s ‘Handbook of British Birds,’ 472; Hartert’s ‘Die 
Vogel der Palaarktishen Fauna,’ 472; Chapman’s ‘What Bird is 
That?,’ 473; Horsfall on the Habits of the Sage Grouse, 474; Kirk 
Swann’s ‘Synoptical List of the Accipitres,’ 475; Bibliography of 
British Ornithology, 475; Brook’s ‘The Buzzard at Home,’ 475; 
The Nebraska Waterfowl and their Food, 476; Bartsch on the Bird 
Rookeries of the Tortugas, 476; Bangs and Penard on Two New 
American Hawks, 477; Kuroda on New Japanese Pheasants, 477; 
Freeman’s ‘Bird Calendar for the Fargo Region,’ 478; Grinnell on 
the English Sparrow in Death Valley, 478; Rowan and Others on 
the Nest and Eggs of the Common Tern, 479; Report of the National 
Zoological Park, 480; Ornithology of the Princeton Patagonian 
Expedition, 480; Nicoll’s Handlist of the Birds of Egypt, 481; Sacht- 
leben on Goldfinches, 481; Carter’s ‘Shooting in Early Days,’ 482; 
Recent Publications on Conservation and Education, 482; A Fascicle 
of Papers on British Economic Ornithology, 483; The Ornithological 
Journals, 485; Ornithological Articles in other Journals, 494; Addi- 
tional Publications Received, 497. 


CORRESPONDENCE. 


A. O. U. Luncheons, 498; Popular Nomenclature, 499; Precellaria vittata 
Forster is not Halobaena caerulea Gmelin, 505. 


vi 


Contents of Volume XXXVII. 


NOTES AND NEWS. 


Obituary Notices: Frank Slater Daggett, 508; Horace Winslow Wright, 


509; Thomas McAdory Owen, 510; Charles Gordon Hewitt, 511; 
Johan Axel Palmen, 511; Bird Banding, 512; The Permanent Funds 
of the A. O. U., 513; Annual Meeting of the B. O. U., 514; Annual 
Meeting of the R. A. O. U., 515; Annual Meeting of the Swiss Society 
for the Study and Protection of Birds, 516; American Fossil Birds, 
516; Handwriting of Ornithologists, 516; Distribution of Ornitholo- 
gists, 517; Personal Mention, W. H. Osgood, 517; Alexander Wet- 
Heke 517; James L. Peters, 517; Washington Meeting of the A. O. U., 


NUMBER IV. 
Limicouine Voices. By John Tweadwell Nichols . . . . . . 519 
SumMer Birp Recorps rrom Lake County Minnesota. By 
Charles Eugene Johnson sono 


In THE Haunts or Carrns’ WARBLER. “By C. W. G. Eifrig eye sail 
PaTTERN DEVELOPMENT IN TEAL. By Glover M. Allen . . . . 558 
Nores ON THE Birps or SouTHEASTERN NortH Carouina. By 


Edward Fleisher... 565 


MIGRATION AND PuystcaL Proportions. A PRELIMINARY STUDY. 


By Cs Kv Averill: 20% 0 4% ae oe a a 


GENERAL NOTES. 


Roseate Tern (Sterna dougalli) Breeding in Virginia, 579; Egret in South 


Orleans, Mass., 579; The Louisiana Heron (Hydranassa_ tricolor 
ruficollis) at Cape May, N. J., 580; The Marbled Godwit (Limosa 
fedoa) on the New Jersey Coast, 580; Marbled Godwit on Long 
Island, N. Y., 581; The Willet (Catoplrophorus semipalmatus semi- 
palmatus) in Nova Scotia, 581; The Willet in Nova Scotia, 582; 
Breeding of the Semipalmated Plover (Aegialitis semipalmata) in 
Yarmouth County, Nova Scotia, 583; The Cowbird’s Whistle, 584; 
Dance of the Purple Finch, 584; Breeding of the Evening Grosbeak 
in Manitoba, 585; A Change in the Nesting Habits of the Common 
House Sparrow (Passer domesticus), 586; Notes on the Acadian Sharp- 
tailed Sparrow (Passerherbulus nelsoni subvirgatus), 587; Notable 
Warblers Breeding Near Aiken, 8. C., 589; The Yellow-throated 
Warbler (Dendroica dominica dominica) at Cape May, N. J., 591; 
The Black-poll Warbler and Bicknell’s Thrush at Yarmouth, Nova 
Scotia, 591; The Summer Resident Warblers (Mniotiltidae) of North- 
ern New Jersey, 592; A Peculiarly Marked Example of Dumetella 
carolinensis, 593; The Hudsonian Chickadee in New Jersey, 593; 
The Plain Titmouse, a New Bird for Oregon, 594; The Singing of 
the Ruby-crowned Kinglet (Regulus c. calendula), 594; Notes from 
Seal Island, Nova Scotia, 596; Some Summer Residents of Dutchess 
County, N. Y., 597; Bird Notes from Collins, N. Y., 598; Additions 
to the ‘Birds of Allegany and Garrett Counties, Maryland,’ 598 
Rare and Unusual Birds in the Chicago Area During the Spring of 
1920, 600; Items Relative to Some Costa Rican Birds, 601; Obser- 
vations of a Remarkable Night Migration, 604. 


Contents of Volume XX XVII. vii 


RECENT LITERATURE. 


Townsend’s ‘Supplement to Birds of Essex County,’ 606; Bannerman’s 


‘Birds of the Canary Islands,’ 607; Mathews’ ‘The Birds of Aus- 
tralia,’ 609; Leavitt’s ‘Bird Study in Elementary Schools,’ 609; 
Hudson’s Recent Bird Books, 610; ‘Aves’ in the Zoological Record 
for 1917, 611; Stresemann’s ‘Avifauna Macedonica,’ 611; Wood on 
the Eyes of the Burrowing Owl, 612; Murphy on the Seacoast and 
Islands of Peru, 613; Dr. Shufeldt’s Bibliography, 613; Birds of the 
National Parks, 614; Game Laws for 1920, 614; Peters on a New 
Jay, 615; Chapman on Ostinops decumanus, 615; Lonnberg on ‘The 
Birds of the Juan Fernandez and Easter Island,’ 615; Geographical 
Bibliography of British Ornithology, 616; Spring Migration Notes 
of the Chicago Area, 616; Nomenclature of the Birds of Bavaria, 
617; Van Cleve’s ‘Acanthocephala of the Canadian Arctic Expedi- 
tion,’ 618; Economic Ornithology in Recent Entomological Publi- 
cations, 619; The Bird Interest in Iowa Lakes, 620; Bird Liming in 
Lower Egypt, 621; The Ornithological Journals, 622; Ornithological 
meee in Other Journals, 631; Additional Publications Received, 
33. 
CORRESPONDENCE. 


Popular Bird Names, 634; Baker on the Birds of the Pleistocene, 634. 


NOTES AND NEWS. 


Obituary Notices: William Dutcher, 636; Herbert H. Smith, 637; Nicholas 


Alexievich Sarudny, 638; Frederick W. Headley, 638; Henry_K. 
Oliver, 639; John H. Flanagan, 639; Robert L. Maitland, 640; Note 
on Biography of Ludwig Kumlein, 640; Government Publications 
on Birds, 640; Ornithology of the Twentieth Century, 640; Meeting 
of the Swiss Society for Bird Study, 641; Meeting of the Royal Aus- 
tralasian Ornithologists’ Union, 641; Gilbert White bicentenary, 641; 
Rollo H. Beck, personal mention, 641; The Washington Meeting of 
the A. O. U., 641. 


ine <n eerie fsa pe ee i ih fea dt of Page: 643 
[RR ACAI ei Ea ne ee en ok Bee Ran As ain. ute SSS HAL 
DATE SFORIISS UE AM ae ee re ke \iesues. “eke i ts ce Oats 
OFFICERS OF THE A. O. U. Past AND PRESENT .... . oe 1 
CounciIt oF THE A. O. U. Past anD PRESENT .... . es li 
(ONTENTS Ree ed sal eee rem tos, Maer Glsle zB (het a et Ge ee lll 
OFFICERS AND MEMBERS ab ix 
ILLUSTRATIONS. 
PLATES. 
Plate I. William Brewster. 


II. The Brewster Museum and Cabin. 
III. Lyman Belding. 
IV. Nest and Eggs of Bachman’s Warbler. 
V. Genus Eupsychortyx. 
VI. Distribution of Eupsychortyx in Colombia. 
VII. Lake Burford, New Mexico. Two views. 
VIII. Lake Burford, New Mexico. Two views. 


vill 


ie IX. 
“ee Xe, 


ge a E>. aA 


. XV. 
i XVI. 


Contents of Volume XXXVII. 


Vicinity of Lake Burford, N. Mex. Two views. 

Wing and tail pattern of Larus philadelphia. Two 
views. 

Wing ane tail pattern of Larus argentatus. Two views 
each. 

Males of Barrow’s Goldeneye chasing. 

Barrow’s Golden-eye preening and going through mating 
actions. 


‘¢ . XVII. Mrs. Lucy Bakewell Audubon. 

s XVIII. John Woodhouse Audubon. 

- XIX. Nesting sites of Rusty Blackbirds. Two views. 

i XX. Nest of Rusty Blackbird. 

Text-Corts. 

Distribution of Eupsychortyx . Sa oh: Page 192 
Bills of Barrow’s and American Golden-eyes 4. Pele dee 360 
Skulls of Barrow’s and American Golden-eyes . . . . . «362 
Trachea of Barrow’s and American Golden-eyes_ . aay 8 (1364 | 
Letter from Mrs. Audubon to George Bird Grinnell . . SG 
Diagram showing pigment areas of a bird’s body . . . . «560 


Heads of Teal showing color patterns . . . . ... . “561 


OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES OF THE AMERICAN 
ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION, 1920. 


Expiration of Term 
SVAGIR, U@isixy lal, JP alas oclanbocebanacneeenonede acs November, 1920. 


one Was Vace=Presidents acacia ce 1920. 
GRINNELL, GEORGE BirpD 

IP ATuMaDiT. 10S tS SERA none oo 6 oan Ob Oe Homes cms Coe 1920. 
DD WAGHT JONATHAN, “TTeGSiUren cia 5 sicies visio dks o'er les oe i 1920 


ADDITIONAL MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. 


DANTE EU UIDELVIEINAS atare,- cic cc ae amen Seieicrias tes cae ciien November, 1920. 
DGGE R AVNET UAM: Outen. siseaee ies eels tree alee ena: ‘ 1920. 
(CRINNMIET ed OSHPH neputes cas sian Sete oie le a ne ae easy Y 1920. 
WUCAS MHREDRRIC HAG 5 4 icc slacnant lorie oanhs clara a sate « ie 1920. 
OBPRHORSER EAR Ys Ooi ety. reer erecta A tre a ee 1920. 
PMICHMOND GHARDMS, We. ccieie » cs cide cee ele itis eu shade a 1920. 
INOBERTS WUHOMAS 9)... eeeees: « Re gee cree ne 1920. 
JNIUAADIN 9 A]6, WA a dela ee ON eee eA RT Be arr } 


BATCHMEDER  CHARTES Min. seca aceetea vcs dene 
CCAP MAN ORANG IMs thtcits ovcsno tee sis) ¢ sietee «bese neds 
WOR @HARTHSE ES sare a.c ea licie acces dl iedaees Aina ese 
AGEs ENE pe AVEC VEY TUNG. 2 cnsi cpa scare weieiaio via eiaiesc (ss wie: sears 
RVR TAMER.) FEAR! sooner eevee eae te | 


INEILSONG LUDWARD Wh. its o wiclobyas wee sate naaidab a-cteis vod | 
ESUIIGIWIAY PECOB ERT toss Ankit vain aharcts Saiso oRdenarel cr Miko s+ J 
EpItoriaL Starr or ‘THE AUK.’ 
STONE VITOR, HAO oe ac. hak casas Oe chose acleness November, 1920. 
COMMITTEES. 


Committee on Biography and Bibliography. 


Patmer, T.S., Chairman DEANE, RUTHVEN 
ALLEN, GLOVER M. RIcHMOND, CHARLES W. 
STonr, WITMER 
Committee on Bird Protection. 

Fisuer, A. K., Chairman NELson, E. W. 
RICHMOND, CHARLES W. 


Committee on Classification and Nomenclature. of North American Birds. 


Stone, Witmer, Chairman RicHMoND, C. W. 
OBERHOLSER, H. C., Secretary Dwicut, JONATHAN 
Pater, T. S. 

Committee on Publications. 
SaGcs, JoHn H. STongE, WITMER 


PatmeER, T. S. DwiGcuHT, JONATHAN 


x Fellows. 


FELLOWS, MEMBERS, AND ASSOCIATES OF THE 
AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION. 
APRIL, 1920.1 


FELLOWS. 
Date of 
Election. 
AuLEN, Dr. J. A., Amer. Mus, Nat. Hist., New York, N. Y...... Founder 
INNDHONYs As) Wis lnonsidet@re sn cle tice aeraete tare oieinte ie ener (1885) 1895? 
Banos, OurrAM, Museum Comp. Zoology, Cambridge, Mass. . (1884) 1901 
Barrows, Prof. W. B., Box 1047, East Lansing, Mich.............. 1883 


BaTcHELDER, CHARLES F., 7 Kirkland St., Cambridge, Mass... . Founder 
Brzse, C. Wiiuiam, New York Zool. Park, New York, N. Y.. (1897)1912 


Bent, ARTHUR CLEVELAND, Taunton, Mass................. (1889) 1909 
*BICKNELL, EUGENE P., 30 Pine St., New York, N. Y..........: Founder 
Bisuop, Dr. Louis B., 356 Orange St., New Haven, Conn..... (1885) 1901 
Brown, NaTHAN CLIFFORD, 218 Middle St., Portland, Me....... Founder 


CHADBOURNE, Dr. ARTHUR P., The Copley-Plaza, Boston, Mass (1883) 1889 
CuapmaNn, Dr. Frank M., Amer Mus. Nat. Hist., New York, N. Y. 


(1885) 1888 
*Cory, CHARLES B., Field Museum Nat. Hist., Chicago, IIl...... Founder 
DEANE, RuTHVEN, 112 W. Adams St., Chicago, Ill................. 1883 
DurcHer, WILLIAM, 949 Park Ave., Plainfield, N. J........... (1883) 1886 


Dwicut, Dr. JoNATHAN, 43 W. 70th St., New York, N. Y.... . (1883) 1886 
Fisuer, Dr. ALBERT K., Biological Survey, Washington, D. C.... Founder 
Fisuer, Prof. Watter K., Hopkins Marine Sta., Pacific Grove, Calif. 


(1899) 1905 
FiLeminG, JAmMes H., 267 Rusholme Road, Toronto, Ontario. . . (1893) 1916 
ForsusH, Epwarp H., State House, Boston, Mass........... (1887) 1912 
Furrtss, Louis A., Cornell Heights, Ithaca, N. Y............(1891)1912 


GRINNELL, Dr. GrorceE Birp, 238 E. 15th St., New York, N. Y..... 1883 
GRINNELL, Dr. JosepH, Mus. Vert. Zool., Univ. Calif., Berkeley, Calif. 
(1894) 1901 
Jongs, Lynps, Spear Laboratory, Oberlin, Ohio.............. (1888) 1905 
Loomis, Leverett M., Cal. Acad. Sci., San Francisco, Calif... (1883) 1892 
Lucas, Dr. Freperic A., Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York, N. Y. 
(1888) 1892 


1 Members of the Union, and subscribers to Tue Aux are requested to promptly 
notify Dr. JonatHan Dwicut, Treasurer, 43 W. 70th St., New York City, of 
any change of address. 

2 Dates in parentheses indicate dates of joining the Union. 

* Life Fellow. 


Honorary Fellows. x1 


MaILuiarD, JosePH, 1815 Vallejo St., San Francisco, Calif... (1895)1914 
McAtesx, Watpo Les, Biological Survey, Washington, D. C...(1903)1914 
*McGrecor. RicwarpD C., Bureau of Science, Manila, P. I... . (1889)1907 
Merriam, Dr. C. Hart, 1919 16th St., N. W. Washington, D. C.. Founder 
Miniter, WALDRON DeWitt, Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York, N. Y. 

(1896) 1914 
INFRINGE es Gotha itil actwirustte kis mesh ants cites A <lela siclele seArcie G?avalats 1883 
Netson, E. W., Biological Survey, Washington, D.C.............. 1883 
OBERHOLSER, Dr. Harry C., Biological Survey, Washington, D. C. 

(1888) 1902 
Oscoop, Dr. Witrrep H., Field Museum Nat. Hist., Chicago, II. 

(1893) 1905 
*Partmmr, Dr.T.S., 1939 Biltmore St., N. W., Washington, D.C.(1888) 1901 
Patmer, WILLIAM, U.S. National Museum, Washington, D. C.(1888)1898 
Ricamonp, Dr. CHarues W., U.S. National Museum, Washington, 


SDS (Cis tere cee eel or ae ee ee ee (1888) 1897 
Ripeway, Dr. Ropert, U.S. Nat. Mus., Washington, D.C..... Founder 
Ritey, JoserH H., U.S. Nat. Mus., Washington, D.C....... (1897) 1919 
RopeErts, Dr. THomas §., Univ. of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn... 1883 
“SAGs, d@unyp lal; leterlleniol (Chorin, saaceeseadoe a oomBe ad Aaa oeon so eee 1883 
SAUNDERS, WILLIAM E., 240 Central Ave., London, Ontario........ 1883 
SHUFELDT, Dr. Ropert W., 3356 18th St., N. W., Washington, D. C. 

Founder 


Stone, Dr. Witmer, Acad. Nat. Sciences, Philadelphia, Pa... .(1885)1892 
SwartH, Harry 8., Mus. Vert. Zoology, Univ. of California, Berke- 


Tey, (CORTE * Tek AE Mien a) 5 er VE I eee MRS oa Se Sree (1900) 1916 
Taverner, Percy A., Victoria Memorial Museum, Ottawa, Canada 

(1902) 1917 

Topp, W. E. Ciypr, Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, Pa....... (1890) 1916 

Wetmore, Dr. ALEXANDER, Biol. Survey, Washington, D. C..(1908)1919 

Wipmann, Orro, 5105 Enright Ave., St. Louis, Mo................ 1884 


RETIRED FELLOWS. 


Hensuaw, Henry W., The Ontario, Washington, D. C.......(1883)1918 
LawrReENcE, NEWBOLD T., Lawrence, N. Y...................(1883)19138 
STreJNEGER, Dr. LEonHARD, U.S. Nat. Mus., Washington, D. C.(1883)1911 


HONORARY FELLOWS. 


ButTur.in, Serarus ALEXANDROVICH, Wesenberg, Esthonia, Russia 
(1907)1916 

Dassene, Dr. Roperto, Museo Nacional, Buenos Aires, Argentina 
(1916) 1918 


* Life Fellow. 


xii Corresponding Fellows. 


Dusots, Dr. ALPHONSE, Villa Rayon de Soleil, Coxyde sur Mer, Bel- 


PIT sis gest noe Gi ee OL eee (1884)1911 

Evans, ArtHuR HuMBLg, 9 Harvey Road, Cambridge, England 
(1899) 1917 

FURBRINGER, Prof. Dr. Max, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, 

(Germ aniyree hae nic.j hic oe oat SOR te cc oR Eee (1891)1916 
Gapow, Dr. Hans Friepricu, Cleramendi, Great Shelford, near 

Cambridge; England) yeaseei scot ae eee eee ee (1884) 1916 
Haaaner, Atwyn Karu, Zodlogical Gardens, Box 754, Pretoria, 

{Ugunehieeile Stoudar DACs anu we oad oe otideeues coe (1916)1918 
Hartert, Dr. Ernst J. O., Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts, 

ine] and te cca nom cit eee ie cus: SERS ie a ee CLS Oa OZ 
Hewtimayr, Dr. Caru E., Neuhauserstrasse 51.1], Munich, Germany 

(1903)1911 

InpRING, Dr. HERMANN Von, Caixa Postal No. 9, Florianopolis, 

Hstadocde sta.» Catarina, brazil... 1.esereemee ence (1902)1911 
Lonnsera, Dr. A. J. Ernar, Naturhistoriska Riksmuseum, Veten- 

skapsakademien, Stockholm, Sweden................. (1916)1918 
Ménéaaux, Dr. Henrt Aucustr, Museum d’Histoire Naturelle, 55 

Ruerdec buttons Paris, ehirancesss 45 eet ieee ee (1916)1918 
Pycrart, WILLIAM PLANE, British Museum (Nat Hist.) Cromwell 

Road. Londons: We, 4 Einglandijnas secre ae eee (1902)1911 
REICHENOW, Dr. ANTON, Ko6nigl. Mus. fiir Naturkunde, Invaliden- 

strasse 43. Berlina aa a eee on ieee eee (1884)1891 
Rotuscuitp, Lord Lionrt Waursr, Zoological Museum, Tring, 

Elents, Englands... cer wim ioe: ke se ented ta eee ore re (1898) 1913 
SALVADORI, Count Tommaso, Royal Zoédl. Museum, Turin, Italy... ..1883 
Scuatow, Prof. Herman, Hohenzollerndamm 50, Berlin-Griinewald, 

Germany. Seh boat. ashen ee One ee (1884)1911 


Sctater, Wm. Luttey, 10 Sloane Court, Chelsea, London, 8. W., 1. 
England (1906)1917 

SuscHkKIN, Dr. Peter, University, Kharkov, Russia.......... (1903) 1918 

Van Ort, Dr. E. D., Mus. Nat. Hist., Leyden, Holland. (1913)1919 


CORRESPONDING FELLOWS. 


Axsgott, Dr. WitutAM L., 400 S. 15th St., Philadelphia, Pa.......... 1916 
ALFARO, Don Anastasio, San José, Costa Rica...................- 1888 
ALPHERAKY, SERGIUS N., Imperial Acad. Sci., Petrograd, Russia... ..1918 
ARRIBALZAGA, ENRIQUE LyNncH, Resistencia, Chaco, Argentina...... 1918 


ARRIGONI Decut Opp, Count Errore, Univ. of Padua, Padua, Italy 1900 
Asupy, Epwin, Wittunga, Blackwood, Adelaide, South Australia... .1918 
Baker, E. C. Stuart, Chief Police Office, West India Docks, London, 
Wed 4, Wnelandiiss ices cee es steht on eee eee 1918 
BANNERMAN, Davip ARMITAGE, 6 Palace Gardens Terrace, Kensing- 
ton.ondon, Wi. S, nglandt.e c+. ose ease eer 1916 


Corresponding Fellows. xill 


Bates, Gro. Latimer, Bitye, via Yaunde, Cameroon, W. Africa.....1919 
Baxter, Miss Evetyn Viva, The Grove, Kirkton of Largo, Fifeshire, 
Soon | Abe oe chore LS eine Oot SDI eer aein ecr oe ener e 1919 


BepparD, FraNK Evers, Zool Society of London, London, England. 1917 
Bertoni, Dr. ARNoLD de WINKELREID, Puerto Bertoni, Paraguay. 1919 
Brancut, Dr. VALENTINE, Imperial Zodl. Museum, Petrograd, Russia 1916 
Bonuotr, JoHn Lewis, Gade Spring Lodge, Hemel Hempstead, 
erste chime land tn.d vrs hepsmicens fot cot Sevens coe eialetas Wo plaraietira crs 1911 
Bureau, Dr. Louts, Ecole de Médicine, Nantes, France............1884 
Birrixorer, Dr. Jonannes, Zodlogical Garden, Rotterdam, Holland 1886 
CAMPBELL, ARCHIBALD JAMEs, “Bulgaroo,’””? Broughton R’d, Surrey 
EIS VlCtORIA AVSLrAli ay yseiey. ote pysed in She heisca elehee' a eeaser tale ehero 1902 
CarrikeER, M. A., Jr., Apartado 51, Santa Marta, Colombia... (1907) 1912 
CHAMBERLAIN, MontaGue, Cambridge, Mass............. (Founder) 1901 
Cuuss, Cuar.es, British Museum (Nat. Hist.) Cromwell Road, Lon- 
OTIS ae PS LANG aes) ee ef olorars aie 6) yisvetede, ctovereld a0 alate leh 1911 
CuARKE, WILLIAM EaGuLe, Royal Scottish Museum, Edinburgh...... 1889 
Counce, Dr. WALTER E., 3 Queen’s Terrace, St. Andrews, Scotland1918 
Data.eisH, Joun J., Brankston Grange, Bogside Station, Alloa, 


SCO Ulam epg cee ae ester telson Mytareley sea A euededey A dick suatein © fs 1883 
Dore SANFORD B., Honolulu, Wawait.) 2... .5.5...0048. Jee weve 1883 
Ecut, ApotpH BAcHOFEN von, Nussdorf, near Vienna, Austria..... .1883 
Frerwpen, Col. Henry Wemyss, Burwash, Sussex, England..........1884 
FerRARI-PEREZ, Prof. FERNANDO, Tacubaya, D. F., Mexico........ 1885 
FRrekrE, Percy Evans, South Point, Limes Road, Folkstone, England1883 
Grr, NATHANIEL Gist, Soochow Univ., Soochow, China............ 1919 
Gopwin-AuvsTEN, Lieut.-Col. HENry HaviersHam, Nore, Hascombe, 

Godalming Surrey, Mngland. 2. i. 2.2.26 eos ese nee. se eae 1884 
GRANDIDIER, ALFRED, 6 Rond-Point des Champs Elysées, Paris... .. 1883 
GuRNEY, JoHn Henry, Keswick Hall, Norwich, England........... 1883 
GYLDENSTOLPE, Count Nits, Naturhistoriska Riksmuseum, Veten- 

skapsakademien, Stockholm, Sweden..................... 1918 
Hau, Rosert, Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania.......... 1916 
Hartinc, JAMES EpmunpD, Portmore Lodge, Weybridge, Surrey, 

irl ai leewvaetee cra eae ae eerie oie aca stain icisgera caine cvr gator eaedeteie] 1883 
HENNICKE, Dr. Cart R., Gera, Reuss, Germany................... 1907 
EUENSON, HIARRY Vii,0¥ OKOhams, JApPaNs 2: ices g ends oa das ese vy os 1888 
Hupson, WitL1AM Henry, Tower House, St. Luke’s Road, West- 

bournevRarky Wwondon Wis Pmglamdes ac. «eects siancecsc aa. 1895 
Hutu, Artuur Francis Bassett, Box 704, Sydney, N.S. W........1919 


IrREDALE, Tom, 39 Northcote Ave., Ealing, London, W. 5, England... 1918 
Jackson, Miss ANNIB C., Swordale, Evanton, Ross-shire, Scotland. . .1919 
JOURDAIN, Rev. Francis C. R., Appleton Rectory, Abingdon, Berks, 


Koss, Cecrt Bopgen, Kuala Lumpur, Federated Malay States...... 1918 


X1V Corresponding Fellows. 


Krieger, Dr. THEOBALD J., University Museum, Athens, Greece.....1884 
Kuropa, Nacamicui, Fukuyoshi Cho, Akasaka, Tokyo, Japan...... 1918 
Leacu, Dr. Joun ALBERT, Eyrecourt, Canterbury, Victoria, Australia 1°19 
Lz Sovikr, Dupiey, Zoological Gardens, Melbourne, Australia...... 1911 
Lows, Dr. Percy R., British Mus. (Nat. Hist.), Cromwell Road, Lon- 
donsiS. Wisin England?) eee oben sence ani ceeer 1916 
MacFar.taNnek, Roperick, 251 Colony St., Winnipeg, Manitoba...... 1886 


Maparisz, Dr. Jutius von, National Museum, Budapest, Hungary. 1884 
MartueEws, Grecory M., Foulis Court, Fair Oak, Hants, England. ..1911 
Menzptisr, Prof. Dr. Micuart, University for Women, Devitchje, 
Pola. Moscow, JRUSSIas «cere acincecters thence okie rae reneete 1884 
Miuais, JouNn GuittE, Compton’s Brow, Horsham, Sussex, England 1911 
MircuHe.t, Dr. P. Cuatmers, Zoological Society Regents Park, London, 


Nee WieiS,Bmgland 254 2800: 28 ences + or eons nies cane 1919 
Morrett, Lacy I., Kiangyin, via Shanghai, China................. 1919 
NICHOLSON, FRANCIS, Ravenscroft, Windermere, Westmoreland, Eng- 

Ech ale Ren DAIS PM AME MROPE LATS MEL Mer me CRN choca Sao 1884 
Nicouzt, Micuaret Joun, Valhalla House, Zoél. Gardens, Giza, Egypt 

1919 
Oaitvie-GRANT, WiLu1AM Rosert, British Museum (Nat. Hist.), 

Cromwell Road, London, 8. W. 7, England................: 1899 
Pataen. Dri. J. Ts Helsingfors,Finlandso2022 e255 e hee eee 1883 
Puruuies, Montracu Austin, Devonshire House, Reigate, Surrey, 

Hirigl an d's osacrseoe ated oe le Oy ets ik ec hapa ee eee 1919 
RamspvEn, Dr. Cuarzes T., Box 146, Guantanamo, Cuba..... (1912)1918 
RinGur, PREDERIC, Nagasaki, Japan. 25. .42e0 scsi een sienne 1888 
Rintout, Miss Leonore Jerrrey, Lahill Largo, Fifeshire, Scotland 

1919 
Rosrnson, Hersert C., Selangor State Museum, Kuala Lumpur, 

Federated Malay Statesac:...5 22 cetienie ws op eslle here sce eee 1918 
SneTHuAaGE, Dr. Emit1a, Museu Goeldi, Parad, Brazil............... 1915 
Swann, H. Kirke, 38 Great Queen St., Kingsway, London, W. C. 2, 

LD cyed thet eee eee a arts lito ame re Gane croinoerctn do Oc a'co oc 1919 
SwyNNERTON, CHARLES FRANCIS Massy, Gungunyana, Melsetter, 

South UMOMeSt ais aisss Stocesc cio satieath.cr teeterte me eeateeeren crak one) Aceh eee 1918 


Tuere., Dr. Jonan Hsatmar, University of Upsala, Upsala, Sweden.. 1884 
TiceHurst, NorMAN FREDERIC, 24 Pevensey Road, St. Leonards-on- 


Sea; Sussex, (Hngland 32.0 sol te ety x doe weenie eae 1918 
TscHus! zU SCHMIDHOFFEN, Vicror, Rirrer von, Villa Tannenhof, 

bet Hallein, Salzburg; “Austria ne sees oles ns eee 1884 
Ucuipa, Srrnosuke, No. 1, 1-chome Kitamachi, Aoyama, Tokyo, 

APH oe tet eRe en uedicmd cod Sond ood Comodo Gul ac.0- oc 1919 
Warterruouss, F. H., Zodl. Soc. of London, Regents’ Park, London, 

ON AA del Dhctea bc hele een wr ey Sc, ARR eR MR RANE chao oi oO 1889 


Wuirr, Capt. Samuet ALBERT, Wetunga, Fulham, South Australia...1919 


Members. XV 


WIncE, Dr. Heruur, Univ. Zodl. Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark... 1903 
WirHersy, Harry Forsss, 12 Chesterford Gardens, Hampstead, 


Ibori. IN, Wo &. indie oh bcbapnebodccusneod os5annnbee 1916 
WORCHSTER eror DHANT ©aeMantlaaPa lnne acts cho ste cao 1903 
ZELEDON: Don Josh ©., oan Jose; Costa Ricaesss.....050.-.5.--5- 1884 

MEMBERS 
ALLEN, ArTHUR A., McGraw Hall, Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N. Y.(1909)1914 
ALLEN: HRANGCIS H., 4 Park St., Boston, Mass............... (1888) 1901 
ALLEN, Dr. GLover M., 234 Berkeley St., Boston, Mass......(1896)1904 
ANDERSON, Dr. RupoupH M., Mus. Geol. Survey, Ottawa, Canada. 
(1907)1914 
ATTWATER, H. P., 2120 Genesee St., Houston, Texas......... (1891)1901 


BaliLey, VERNON, 1834 Kalorama Ave., Washington, D. C... ..(1887)1901 
BarLey, Mrs. Vernon. 1834 Kalorama Ave., Washington, D.C. (1885)1901 


Batty, WiuttAM L., 220 E. Lancaster Ave., Ardmore, Pa..... .(1886)1901 
Barsour, Dr. THomas, Mus, Comp. Zodlogy, Cambridge, Mass. 
(1903) 1914 
Bartscu, Prof. Paunt, U.S. Nat. Museum, Washington, D. C.. (1896)1902 
Bscx, Rotto Howarp, R. D. 288, San José, Calif........... (1894)1917 
Brreroip, Dr. W. H., 1159 Race St., Denver, Colo..........(1889)1914 
Bonp, FRANK, 3127 Newark St., N. W., Washington, D. C....(1887)1901 
Bow tss, JoHN Hoopgmr, The Woodstock, Tacoma, Wash...... (1891)1910 
Bratsuin, Dr. Witi1aM C., 425 Clinton Ave., Brooklyn, N. Y.(1894)1902 
Brooks, ALLAN, Okanagan Landing, B. C................... (1902)1909 
Brooks, WM. SprAGcus, 234 Berkeley St., Boston, Mass....... (1907) 1917 
Bryan, WILLIAM ALANSON, College of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaiian 
JES ONG FSIS, ey cheese eeu ee Pe Re gn i a (1898) 1901 
Bryant, Dr. Harotp Cup, Mus. Vert. Zodl., Berkeley, Calif. (1913)1918 
BURNS] RANI sy Berwiyils ean secs oalen ee sence 6 (1891)1901 
Butter, Amos W., 52 Downey Ave., Irvington, Indianapolis, Ind. 
(1885)1901 
CHAMBERS, W. Les, Box 4, Eagle Rock, Calif................(1907)1913 
Cuapin, JAMES P., Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York, N. Y.. (19061917 
CHERRIE, GEORGE K., Newfane, Vt. (1891-1912)............ (1917)1918 
Crark, Dr. Hupert Lyman, Mus. Comparative Zool. Cambridge, 
IMIR SSoey eee tenis rene cee wk een re, Ste (1886) 1902 
Daaeett, Frank S., Museum, Exposition Park, Los Angeles, Calif. 
(1889)1901 
Dawson, Wo. L., R. D. 3, Box 110, Santa Barbara, Calif... ..(1895)1905 
DeEANE, WALTER, 29 Brewster St., Cambridge, Mass.......... (1897)1901 


Eaton, Prof. Eton Howarp, 678 Main St., Geneva, N. Y... . . (1895)1907 


Xvl Members. 


EverMANN, Prof. Barton W., Calif. Acad. Sci., San Francisco, Calif. 
(1883) 1901 
Far ey, JOHN A., 52 Cedar St., Malden, Mass............... (1904)1919 
Finuey, WiuuiaM L., 651 East Madison St., Portland, Ore... . (1904)1907 
GaAuLt, BENJAMIN TRUE, 2313 Washington Blv’d., Chicago, Ill. (1885)1903 
GoLpMAN, Epwarp A., Biological Survey, Washington, D. C. (1897)1902 


Griscom, Luptow, 37 5th Ave., New York, N. Y.............(1908)1918 
Harper, Francis, 3101 24th St., N. E., Washington, D. C.. . . (1907)1917 
PEARRISy hVARRY. Wansasc@itye Vion mea. coun oneee creeee (1911)1919 
Herrick, Prof. Francis H., Adelbert College, Cleveland, O...(1913)1919 
Hersey, F. Seymour, 6 Maple Ave., Taunton, Mass......... (1911)1916 


HorrMan, Rawpu, Siamasia, Montecito, Santa Barbara, Calif.(1893)1901 
Ho.utster, Neb, Nat. Zodlogical Park, Washington, D. C....(1894)1910 
Howe tu, A. Brazipr, 268 8. Orange Grove Ave., Pasadena, Calif. 
(1909)1916 
Howe tt, Artuur H., 2919 8S. Dakota Ave., Washington, D. C.(1889) 1902 
Jacoss, J. WARREN, 4048. Washington St., Waynesburg, Pa.. (1889)1904 
JEFFRIES, WILLIAM A., 11 Pemberton Squere, Boston, Mass.. . (1883)1901 


Jos, HerBrerT K., 291 Main St., West Haven, Conn..........(1896)1901 
KatmBacu, Epwin R., Biological Survey, Washington, D. C. . (1910)1915 
*IKBNNARD, F. H., Dudley Road, Newton Centre, Mass....... (1892) 1912 
KNow.ton, F. H., U.S. Nat. Mus., Washington, D. C...... (1883) 1902 
Law, J. Eucens, Mus. Vert. Zodl., Berkeley, Calif........... (1907) 1916 


Mackay, GrorceE H., 304 Bay State Road, Boston, Mass..... (1890) 1901 
MAILurarD, JoHN W., 230 California St., San Francisco, Calif. (1895) 1901 


Moorn, Ropert Pnomas; Onawa, Me......2.....2. e260 ee (1898) 1914 
Morris, GEORGE SPENCER, Olney, Philadelphia, Pa.......... (1887)1903 
Morris, Rospert O., 82 Temple St., Springfield, Mass....... (1888) 1904 
Mourpocu, Joun, 16 High Rock Way, Allston, Mass.......... (1883) 1901 
Murpuy, Rospert C., Museum Brooklyn Institute, Eastern Parkway, 
Brookiby ay INNS faa) 6 2. Say eas ye, a een ee ca eee eee (1905) 1914 


NicHo.s, JoHNn T., Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York, N. Y....(1901)1914 
Norton, ArtHur H., Mus. Nat. Hist., 22 Elm St., Portland, Me.(1890) 1902 


Prarson, T. GILBERT, 1974 Broadway, New York, N. Y......(1891)1902 
PENARD, THomAS E., 12 Norfolk R’d, Arlington, Mass........ (1912)1919 
PETERS, JAMES Linn Elarvard sl Viassen sr icccad.css)t0n sll neonate (1904)1918 
PHITETeS, Ord OHN ©. Wenham Viasscems ses Goce caieieecie (1904) 1912 
PREBLE, Epwarp A., Biological Survey, Washington, D. C... .(1892)1901 
RATHBURN, SAMUEL F., 304 Marion Bldg., Seattle, Wash... . . . (1893) 1902 


RuHoADS, SAMUEL N., 81 Haddon Ave., Haddonfield, N. J.....(1885)1901 
Rives, Dr. WituiaM C., 1702 Rhode Island Ave., Washington, D. C 


(1885) 1901 
RoBInson, Col. Wirt, U.S. A., West Point, N. Y............ (1897) 1901 
Seton, ERNEST THompson, Greenwich, Conn................ (1883) 1901 


*SHERMAN, Miss ALTHEA R., National via McGregor, Iowa... .(1907)1912 


Associates. XVI 


*Surras, Hon. Groras, 3d, Stoneleigh Court, Washington, D.C(1907)1915 
STEPHENS, FRANK, Nat. Hist. Museum, Balboa Park, San Diego, Calif. 
(1883)1901 
Strone, Dr. ReuBEN M., 706 S. Lincoln St., Chicago, Ill..... (1889) 1903 
*SwaLes, BrapsHaw Hatt, U.S. Nat. Mus., Washington, D.C.(1902) 1909 


irvR JOHN HrEroT. lancaster, Mass). 2.1.5.5 .. «nee (1898) 1905 
TOWNSEND, Dr. CHARLES H., Aquarium, Battery Park, New York, 
DUNG PER ye ee ere Pena rarest te Bie enst nee SAA ble (1883)1901 
TowNsenpD, Dr. CHARLES WENDELL, 98 Pinckney St., Boston, Mass. 
(1901)1905 


Trotter, Dr. SPENcER, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Pa.(1888)1901 
Tyuer, Dr. Winsor M., 522 Mass. Ave., Lexington, Mass... . . (1912)1917 
WarRREN, Epwarp Royat, 1511 Wood Ave., Colorado Springs, Colo. 


(1902) 1910 
Wayne, ArTHuR T., Mt. Pleasant, S. C.. eget 6 (1905) 1906 
WILLETT, GEORGE, 2123 Court St., Los Angeles, Calif a patie Ne (1912)1913 


WituraMs, Rosert Wuite, Dept. Agric., Washington, D. C.. . (1900)1918 
Wotcort, Dr. Roprert H., State University, Lincoln, Neb... . (1901)1903 
Woop, Norman A., Museum Univ. of Mich. Ann Arbor, Mich.(1904) 1912 


Wricut, Dr. ALBERT H., Upland R’d, Ithaca, N. Y..........(1906)1919 
Wricut, Mrs. Maset Oscoon, Fairfield, Conn............ 1895(1901) 
ASSOCIATES 
ABBOTT, CLINTON GILBERT, Orchard Hill, Rhinebeck, N. Y......... 1898 
ApBott, Miss FLORENCE I., Upland Road, Andover, Mass..........1917 
ABBOT MissiHEARRIET: Hryeburg, Mes..7...........-..+.6..2-0% 1918 
ADAMS, BENsAMIN, Wetherstield) Conn. 22. ...0....0.500 02.0000 1911 
Apams, Dr. Z. B., 43 Cottage Farm Rd., Longwood, Mass..........1908 
ADELMANN, Howarp BERNHARDT, 221 Spring St., Buffalo, N. Y..... 1919 
AIKEN, Hon. JoHn, Superior Court, Court House, Boston, Mass.....1905 
AimMAR, Dr. CHARLES Pons, 4 Vanderhorst St., Charleston, 5. C.....1916 
ALBRIGHT, Horace MarpgEn, Yellowstone Park, Wyo.............. 1919 
*ALEXANDER, Miss ANNIE M., Suisun City, Calif.................. 1911 
ALEXANDER, EDWARD GORDON, 1693 South St., Lexington, Mo...... 1919 
ALLAMAN, Ransom Pmrry, R. D. 4, Bedford, Ean 3 ..1918 
ALLEN, Mrs. AMELIA SANBORN, 37 Mosswood Rd. mperketee Cale, . 1919 
TE NeAR THUR Ds SO1OUx ©itys LOW ass vots ss anesiscucde cee cele ass- 1919 
ALLEN, Mary P., 206 Moore St., Hackettstown, N. J.............. 1913 
Aumy, Mrs. CHARLES, 147 Brattle St., Cambridge, Mass............1919 


* Life Member. 


Xvi Associates. 


ANDERSON, EEDwini C.,, Dell's Rapids, SD ares see sees eee eee 1919 
ANDERSON, ERNEST M., Provincial Museum, Victoria, B. C......... 1915 
ANDERSON, Mrs. J. C., Great Barrington, Mass...................- 1903 
ANDREWS, Wiu.1aMm, Courtney, Jackson Co., Mo.................. 1919 
ANGELL, WALTER A., 185 Mathewson St., Providence, R.I......... 1901 
Antuony, H. E., Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York, N. Y..........1911 
ApPEL, W. D., 4119 Houston Ave., Norwood, Ohio................. 1917 
ARMITAGE, Luctus, 282. E. 162'St., New York, N..Y..........: 52.6 1918 
ARMSTRONG, Epwarp E., 2249 Calumet Ave., Chicago, Ill.......... 1904 
ARNOLD, Epwarp, Grand Trunk R’y., Montreal, Quebec........... 1894 
ARNOLD, Dr. W. W., 504 N. Nevada Ave., Colorado Springs, Colo...1910 
ARTHUR, LIDMUND, WAITE, @heswicksPar 2k aac. cae ciclo ieee 1919 


ARTHUR, STANLEY CriisBy, 1109 Henry Clay Ave., New Orleans, La..1916 
ASPINWALL, Mrs. CLARENCE A., 1839 Wyoming Ave., Washington, 


| Dan OA eee ete eM Ate ME ni ae led. 9 bid aid.0 0c 1916 
ATHERTON, Epwarp H., 82 Ruthven St., Grove Hall, Mass.........1917 
AVERILL, CHARLES Kretcuum, 406 Stratford Ave., Bridgeport, Conn. 1919 
Ayres, Miss Mary ADELINE, 119 High St., Medford, Mass......... 1915 
BABCOCK, DnAN; Thong sibeak.(Colosa1o:, cscs eae tele ee 1911 
Bascock, Haroutp Lester, Woodleigh Road, Dedham, Mass....... 1916 
Bacuracu, Mrs. BenJAMIN, 1437 West Main St., Decatur, Ill.......1918 
Bacon, Francis L., 236 Winona Ave., Germantown, Pa............1917 
Bap&, Dr. Wo. FREeDERIC, 2616 College Ave., Berkeley, Calif........ 1916 
Bapaer, ARTHUR C., 167 Dudley Road, Newton Centre, Mass...... 1917 
Baaa, Aaron C., 70 Fairfield Ave., Holyoke, Mass................ 1916 
BAGG, EGpErt, JR., 27 Sunset Llace, Utica; N. Viaten.s ie eee 1916 
Baae, JoHN Leonarp, 89 Lexington Ave., Holyoke, Mass.......... 1918 
Battey, ALFRED M., La. State Mus., New Orleans, Louisiana.......1918 
BAtLmy, Prof: Guy A.,Genesso, «Na <3 2. <ciselds Secs ce ee eee ee 1910 
Baruey, SAMUEL WALpo, 64 8. Mountain Rd., Pittsfield, Mass... ... 1969 
Batrp, Miss KATHERINE Bruce, 815 Webster St., N. W., Washington, 

dD ae @ ie ereee es ee MeN SEE Sn Se Oe nO ECS ioc 1918 
Baker, JoHN H., 1007 Riverside Drive, Dayton, Ohio.............. 1911 
BaLpWIN, S. Prentiss, 2930 Prospect Ave., Cleveland, Ohio........1917 
Bass, Dr. BLENN R., 149 W. Main St., Circleville, Ohio...........1907 
Barn, Mrs. BENNETAN., Oakville; Connie... cee ie ieco a eee 1905 
Bani, EpwaARD M., Hast: Falls Church), Vaiiost.ccieee oe eee 1918 
Bau, Dr. Jas. P., 5001 Frankford Ave:, Philadelphia, Pa.::-.22. 5.5 1911 
Bargour, Rev. Ropert, Y. M. C. A., Montclair, N. J............. 1902 
Barker, Miss HELEN, 421 E. Adams St., Sandusky, O............ 1918 
BARNARD, Judge Jos, 1401 Fairmont St., Washington, D. C.........1886 
BaRNES, CLAUDE T., 359 Tenth Ave., Salt Lake City, Utah.........1908 
BARNES, Hon. i. MAGOON, hacony Ill ece oe cers teres ree eee 1889 


Barrett, Cuas. H. M., 1339 Valley Place, 8. E., Washington, D. C.1912 
Barrett, HARoLD LAWRENCE, 172 Huntington Ave., Boston, Mass.. 1909 
Barry, Miss Anna K., 5 Bowdoin Ave., Dorchester, Mass..........1907 


Associates. X1x 


Bartiert, Miss Mary F., 227 Commonwealth Ave., Boston, Mass. . 1912 


BartraM, Epwin B., 200 N. 3rd St., Philadelphia, Pa.............. 1913 
Bassett, FRANK NEewTon, 1338 8th St., Alameda, Calif............ 1919 
BatcHELor, Marion C., 27 Janssen Pl., Kansas City, Mo.......... 1916 
IRATE}, IRENE dio AVI, Jeverel (Clots INelo 5 ang cela coo on epee abe soon ec 1918 
Batren, Georce, Elm Meadow Farm, Caldwell, N. J.............. 1914 
BAxNes, HRNEST HARonp, Meriden, N. Ee vi. co.0.. os lee as 1918 
BreckKrorD, ARTHUR W., 10 Park St., Danvers, Mass............... 1919 
Bet, Dr. W. B., Biological Survey, Washington, D. C............. 1912 
BuNNED?, Rey. Groner, TowarCity, lowa. <0 26.45 ac sie soe cs oe 1913 
BENNETTS, WILLIAM J., 1941 Ist St., N. W., Washington, D. C..... 1901 
Berman, Danizu, 70 Morningside Drive, New York, N. Y.......... 1919 


BicKNELL, Mrs. F. T., 319 S. Normandie Ave., Los Angeles, Calif. ..1913 
Bipp.e, Miss Eminy WruutaMs, 2201 Sansom St., Philadelphia, Pa... 1898 


BIGHEOWHEVirsw Acs Ogden iHballerr arena wierd crete: -h<tehons elena: 1919 
BigEetow, Dr. Lyman F., 80 Winter St., Norwood, Mass............ 1914 
BisHorp, SHERMAN C., N. Y. State Museum, Albany, N. Y.......... 1919 
Brack, AnpRew A., Margaret, Man., Canada.............0.- 0004: 1919 
BLACKWELDER, EioT, 317 Railway Exch. Bldg., Denver, Colo.......1895 
BLOoMFIELD, Mrs. C. C., 723 Main St., W. Jackson, Mich.......... 1901 
BoarpMAN, Miss E. D., 416 Marlborough St., Boston, Mass........ 1906 
Bovine, Mrs. Donaupson, 4 Mills Place, Crawfordsville, Ind....... 1916 
BorHuNER, REGINALD STEPHEN, Syracuse Univ., Syracuse, N. Y..... 1919 
Bogarpus, Miss Cuartotte, Elm St., Coxsackie; N. Y............. 1909 
Bottss, Mrs. FRANK, 6 Berkeley St., Ghinbndee! Mass.. i cee ONS 
Bout, BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, 1421 Bronnees Ave., Kansas Gy, Mo...1909 
BOND MLVARRY, la WakefieldswVlmmnis samcceesias sacs oeeetes <-> - ie 1908 
BonFits, FREDERICK G., The Denver Post, Denver, Colo...........1918 
BOREANDS Wie (Ge, @ Wall St: New York; ING Y.c..2 -ooe. 2.2. +. 1911 
Bosson, CAMPBELL, 30 State St., Boston, Mass. . = oe 906 
*Boutton, Wm. B., Morristown Trust Co., Moncatowt n, x ie See 1919 
BOURNE Aw EHOMAGS Dyess aaly Un omIN iy Vo eeeerett sa a iorepedaraie ms cielerey-i=) ext olen 1913 
BOWDISH PED soe eIMareSbs Nitros acdsee cet etels Seas Gra ciel ordi evereds 1891 
BOWDISH Virss bao eMemanresty Nels as osclecmid socciase 5 noes 1902 
Bowpritcu, Dr. Haron, 44 Harvard Ave., Brookline, Mass.........1900 
Bownircu, James H., 903 Tremont Bldg., Boston, Mass............1918 
Boyp, Mrs. Harriet T., 17 Marsh St., Dedham, Mass............. 1917 
Boye, Howarts S., Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York, N. Y...... 1916 
Bracken, Mrs. Henry M., 1010 Fourth St., S.E., Minneapolis, Minn.1897 
BRADBURY. WiC. 1440) Raceist., Denver, Coloy.. 22. 8s4.2..0.+- =~ 1915 
BRADLEE, THOMAS STEVENSON, South Sudbury, Mass..............1902 
BRANDRETH; @COURTNEY, Ossining, Ne Y..;.......:-.-c2+---05--- 1905 
SBRANDRETH. MRANKDING OssinineeN. Yoee.s. 52-6 coesse cee ese s- 1889 


* Life Associate. 


XX Associates. 


BRANDT, HERBERT W., 2025 East 88th St., Cleveland, Ohio......... 1915 
BRANNON, PETER A., Box 358, Montgomery, Ala.................. 1919 
Breper, Cuas. M., Jr., Inquiry Div., Bureau Fisheries, Washington, 

I BAM © Aaa are earn eee re ee I le? trois atoms piolodig ao. Se 1919 
Brewster, Mrs. WILurAM, 145 Brattle St., Cambridge, Mass........1912 
Bripgcs, EpMunp, 52 Wyman St., West Medford, Mass............. 1910 
*Bripag, Mrs. EpmMunp, 52 Wyman St., West Medford, Mass.......1902 
Briaas, Harry T., 5 Hoffman Ave., Poughkeepsie, N. Y........... 1919 
BRIMLEY, H. H., State Museum, Raleigh, N. C.................... 1904 
Britten, Capt. G. S., 807 Walnut Ave., Syracuse, N. Y............ 1913 
BROCKWAY; ARTHUR. W.,.cladlyme,G@onn.©. - jo s.4.68 peer oer 1912 
Brooks, Rev. Earnie Amos, 10 Beacon St., Everett, Mass............ 1892 
Brooks, Goruam, 60 State St., Boston, Mass....................- 1919 
Brown, Miss ANNIE H., 31 Maple St., Stoneham, Mass............ 1909 
Brown, Miss Bertua L., 53 Court St., Bangor, Me................ 1918 
Brown, Epwarp J., 1609 S. Van Ness Ave., Los Angeles, Calif...... 1891 
Brown, G. FRANKLIN, ‘‘Stonebridge,’’ Needham, Mass............ 1917 
Brown, Harry A., 40 Talbot St., Lowell, Mass................... 1912 
Brown, Mrs. Henry Tempe, Lancaster, Mass....................1912 
Brown, Puiuip G., 85 Vaughan St., Portland, Me................. 1911 
BRowN Ox Vee (Boones Nei Cibran cece’ s 4g eee ene a eee 1919 
BROWN, STEWARDSON, 20 E. Penn St., Germantown, Philadelphia, Pa.1895 
Brown, Wo. Jamas, 250.Oliver Ave., Westmount, Quebec..........1908 
Brownina, Wn. Hatt, 16 Cooper Square, New York, N. Y.........1911 
BRUEN; DRANK, 69. Prospect. St., Bristol, Conn)... aocine ene 1908 
BruMBAUGH, CHALMERS 8., 1020 Cathedral St., Baltimore, Md......1916 
*Bruun, Cuas. A., 314 Reliance Bldg., Kansas City, Mo........... 1919 
BUCHANAN. sROLLING He Excelsior =slViimm' 7c niet hla sde eee eee 1918 
BuNKER, CHARLES D., Kansas University Museum, Lawrence, Kan..1916 
Buraess, JoHN Kinessury, ‘Broad Oak,’’ Dedham, Mass........ 1898 
Burasss, THORNTON WALDO, 61 Washington R’d., Springfield, Mass.1919 
Burweieu, Tuos. D., 825 N. Negley Ave., Pittsburg, Pa............ 1913 
Burnett, Wiuuiam L., State Agric. College, Fcrt Collins, Colo... .1895 
BuRNHAM, STEWART Henry, Hudson Falls, N. Y.................. 1919 
BURTCH, VERDI, BranchportcN oY oversee ae it store ne 1903 
BusHINGER, Miss Mary G., Monte Vista, Colo.................... 1919 
BUTLER: Muss VIRGINIA, ptockbridge.Wiassseemeis iid aici ee eters 1919 
BuTTBRWORTH, FRANK SEILER, Choate School, Wallingford, Conn... 1918 
Buzznn, Mrs. JAs.C., Vi ibudson'St-) Bangor, Mem .....- 4... .scen 1918 
Byrp Mrs: Himaw. Oxfords Miss: crane oeicien eee eee 1918 
Capuc, Eucrenet E., 512 Massachusetts Ave., Boston, Mass......... 1910 
Capy, Prof. WaLTER Guyton, 49 High St., Middletown, Conn...... 1916 
Caun, ALVIN R., 4720 Greenwood Ave., Chicago, Ill............... 1917 


* Life Associate. 


Associates. Xxl 


CALLENDER, JAMES PHI.ips, 32 Broadway, New York, N. Y........ 1903 
Cautvert, Ear W., c/o. J. W. Noble, Harrow, Ont., Canada...... 1919 
CaMPBELL, Mrs. Evita S., 263 W. 7th St., Erie, Pa..............1917 
CAmPINT, CHaAs A. 154 E 33rd°St., New Yorke N. Y....:.t.0....:. 1919 
CANTWELL, Geo. G., 901 W. Main Ave., Puyallup, Wash........... 1916 
CAPTING piss -HTHni wos Waseton) Sask. -a4sces 0 a4se 4-420 45. 1918 
CARPENTER, Rev. CHARLES Knapp, 1724 Sunnyside Ave., Chicago, 

WU 5d Peace Sve ORR AN Orns os Coen eRDA CR Ah 3 CU en ahd aah Sin TERA SF Re aR 1894 
CARPENTER, GEORGE I., 129 Dean St., Brooklyn, N. Y............ 1907 
Carricer, H. W., 5185 Trask St., Fruitvale Station, Oakland, Calif.1913 
CarRo.Lu, Mrs. Ottvia GarNnsEy, Rutland, Mass.................. 1918 
CarryL, FRANK M., 20 Burnett St., Maplewood, N. J..............1919 
CARTER JOHN s luansdowiewmlanarnite omicienaa ies clelsiel< cra ers aicls =: 1907 
@AsH HARRY A, 420 Hope St., Providence, R.T.....5.4..0. o2662 00% 1898 
CaswELL, Mrs. ARTHUR E., 241 Union St., Athol, Mass............ 1918 
CHAMBERLAIN, CHauncy W., 36 Lincoln St., Boston, Mass......... 1885 
CHAPNIAN ES Mirsssha Mie inglewOods IN edis src ania t ae semi sc secass > 1908 
Cuasg, RicHarp Morton, 164 Westminster R’d., Rochester, N. Y..1919 
CHASE. SIDNEY, 2o Ames Blde Boston, Massas.c..0----.--+ +2000: 1904 
CHEESMAN, Morton R., 2703 Ocean Front, Ocean Park, Calif....... 1911 
Curbs, Henry Everett, 864 Broadway, E. Providence, R. I....... 1919 
CiaGcet, Cuas W., Washington College, Chestertown, Md.......... 1918 
Criark, AusTIN Hopart, 1818 Wyoming Ave., Washington, D. C....1919 
@rARK, CrARENCE H., Lubec, Me.....:......: BER tah Seon te a 1913 
CLARK, Jostan H., 238 Broadway, Paterson, N. J........25........:1895 
CLARKE, CHARLES E., 51 Summit R’d, Medford, Mass............. 1907 
Cuarkk, Miss Harrint E., 9 Chesnut St., Worcester, Mass.........1896 
CLARKE, Miss Mary S., Silver Springs, Md...............-+......: 1916 
C@rarke, Miss Rowmna Au, Karkwood, Mots.....2.0.¢0.01--++ ese: 1919 
Cieaves, Howarp H., Conservation Comm., Albany, N. Y.........1907 
CLEMENTS, Miss JENNIE, 508 8S. Main St., Independence, Mo....... 1919 
CLEVELAND, Dr. CLEMENT, 925 Park Ave., New York, N. Y........ 19038 
CLEVELAND, Miss Litian, Woods Edge R’d., West Medford, Mass...1906 
(COA, JsboNge 16G, 1B bed eyael 1efndie UNL Ge ons oe bie dds los ogeemoe ce Gc 1883 
Coss, Miss ANNIE W., 72 Oxford St., Arlington, Mass............. 1909 
Coss, Paitiep Hacker, Loomis Inst., Windsor, Conn...............1917 
COBEy Dra nANnnnYe bonkanogeViassssmiaceie tierce ce erin oe ee 1909 
Corrin, Mrs. Perctvau B., 3232 Ellis Ave., Chicago, IIl............1905 
Corrin, Ropert L., Mass. Agric’] Exp. Sta., Amherst, Mass........1917 
Coaetns, HERBERT L., 2929 Piedmont Ave., Berkeley, Calif.........1913 
CoLBurRN, ALBERT E., 806 S. Broadway, Los Angeles, Calif......... 1891 


Cote, Dr. Leon J., College of Agric., Univ. of Wis., Madison, Wis...1908 
Commons, Mrs. F. W., 608 Chamber of Commerce, Minneapolis, Minn.1902 
Cones, Mrs. Henry F., 4 Trinity St., Hartford, Conn...............1917 
CONGHR AGLEN © box.oOl Be lansing, Mich. .20.:.5.0.---050-- 1919 
ConGcERy PAu SIDNEY Wie, erainlel@U Sac WiSas....cs61654 045 - ae 1918 


Xxil Associates. 


Cook, Freperick W., 1604 East Harrison St., Seattle, Wash........ 1915 
Cook, Miss Lintan Grutetrtre, Long Lea Farm, Amherst, Mass...... 1899 
Cooker, Miss May THacuer, 1328 Twelfth St., Washington, D. C...1915 
Cooper, Pamir T.,.31 Central St., Bangor, Me. ......2 222... 26. 1919 
Corr, PRANCIS. RajoR, Dimock; Paves. hor ee eee 1892 


CoprLanpD, Miss Apa B., 1103 White Ave., Grand Junction, Colo... .1917 


CopELAND, Manton, 88 Federal St., Brunswick, Me............... 1900 
Coursun, Buster, Univ of (Chicago, Chicago, UU .4 acerca eee 1918 
Court, Epwarp J., 1723 Newton St., N. W.; Washington, D. C...1919 
Covet, Dr. Henry H., 1600 East Ave., Rochester, N. Y.......... 1918 
Cox, RopMan Daytion, Y. M. C. A., Rochester, N.Y...'...22.07.. 1919 
CRAIG. WALLACE, Univ: of MameOrono, Meisaa.cccne se eee 1912 
Cram, R. J., 26 Hancock Ave:, W.,.Detroit,; Mich. >. ...:.0.. .s2.cG6e 1893 
CRANDALL, Lzur’S., N. Y. Zool. Park, New York, N. Ys: ..220 see 1909 
CRANE Miss'Cuarnavlon, Dalton: Masson seraec.csi-feci oe creer ene 1904 
GrRANE, Mirs. ZEwas; Dalton, Miass..a./. cei. «+ ocistecle scien ee 1904 
Craven, ALLAN B., 3 Spruce: St, Boston; Mass-< 5.c..-6 4. seers 1919 
CrIpDLE; NORMAN» Trusbank, Mane? 6220.0 6,-1.0) cre) s cients 1918 
Crocknrr Reva.Gro. Re, Dixon os Des sess ace eee Eee 1919 
Crospy, MAaunspeni'S:, Rhinebeck, N. Yos2 000 22. os apse en 1904 
Cross, ArpertT AsHnny, Huntington, Mass:.........00.-..-.ce5 oo" 1918 
Crowrnn, Mass J Onivia Dennis Mass. ss. nt. es cese aah ater ase 1918 
CuDWORTH, WARREN H., Assonet, Mass.......00.5.0...05.6:0256% 1919 
Cummincs, Miss Emma G:, 16 Kennard Road, Brookline, Mass... . . . 1903 


CunnincHaM, J. WALTER, 3009 Dunham Ave., Kansas City, Mo....1919 


Currier, EpMONDE SAMUEL, 416 E. Chicago St., Portland, Ore... .. 1894 
Currin, Romo P.,'632 Keefer Pl, Washington, D.Cs>.2.2.2- ee 1895 
Curry, Hasketu Brooks, 60 Bay State Road, Boston, Mass....... 1916 
Curtis, CHARLES P., 244 Beacon St., Boston, Mass................1915 
Curtis, Roy Q:,,.Jr, 12. W:...76th:st., NewYork, IN. Y...075.40-ee6 1919 
CusHMAN, Miss Auice, 919 Pine St., Philadelphia, Pa.............. 1910 
Dann, Mrs. Ernest B., Ches‘nut Hull, Mass............0...0.02 5 1912 
Danrortu, Stuart T., 115 N. 6th Ave., New Brunswick, N. J...... 1916 
DANIELS, Epwarp §., 3869 A Conn. Ave., St. Louis, Mo........... 1919 
Davenport, Mrs. EvizaBets B., Brattleboro, Vt.................. 1898 
Day, CHESTER Sessions, 15 Custom House St., Boston, Mass....... 1897 
Dean, F. Roy, 3465 8. Spring. Ave:; St. Louis; Mio: 2.302250. tees 1919 
Dran, R.H:, 720 'Quintard, Ave. Anniston; ‘Ala? (cee eee cme 1913 
DEANE, GEORGE CLEMENT, 80 Sparks St., Cambridge, Mass........ 1899 
DEARBORN, SAMUEL S., 9 Massachusetts Ave., Boston, Mass........ 1919 
Decker, Harotp K., 1848 Washington Ave., New York, N. Y...... 1916 
DeLoacu, R. J. H., 10154 Longwood Drive, Chicago, IIl........... 1910 
Densmore, Miss MaBEt, 910 4th St., Red Wing, Minn............ 1910 
Dent, Pau, 3714 West Pine B’lv’d, St. Louis, Mo................ 1919 
Derrpy, RicHarp, 116 E.. 79th St., New York, N: Yes 5.2.0). er era: 1898 


Dewey, Dr. Carus A., 78 Plymouth Ave., Rochester, N. Y.......1900 


Associates. 


Dexter, Prof. Joun Suita, Univ. Sask., Saskatoon, Sask........... 
Dexter, Lewis, 1889 Elm St., Manchester, N. H................ 
Dice, Lez Raymonp, Mus. Zool., Ann Arbor, Mich............... 
Dickey, Donap R., San Rafael Heights, Pasadena, Calif......... 
Ditie, Freperick M., Niobrara Reservation, Valentine, Neb...... 
Dines, McCue.uanp, 5715 Enright Ave., St. Louis Mo........... 
Dionne, C. E., Laval University, Quebec, Canada................ 
Drxon, FREDERICK J., 111 Elm Ave., Hackensack, N. J........... 
DIXON, JOSHPHS., Univ. of Call, Berkeley, Calif....00. si) cces. ss. 
Doane, GILBERT Harry, 113 Second St., Newport, R. I........... 
Donarun, RALPH) J., Bonner Springs, Kami... oe... ss ee 2 ats 
Damr, THEODORE; 35 Remsen St., Brooklyn, N. Y............... 
Drummonp, Miss Mary, 510 Spring Lane, Lake Forest, Ill........ 
DuBors, ALEXANDER D 560 W. Monroe St., Chicago, Ill......... 


Dutt, Mrs. A. P. L., 211 N. Front St., Harrisburg, Pa 
Dunsar, Miss Teen 18, JD ik, Elkhorn, Wis.. 


DuRAND, Miss Laura B., 11 Oriole Gardens, ‘Toronto: Ont PERL SD Mi 


DurRFEE, OWEN, Box 125, Fall River, Mass 


Eaton, Scott Harrison, Box 653, Lawrenceville, Ill 
Epson, Joun M., Marietta Road, Bellingham, Wash 


EimsBeck, Dr. Aucust F., New Haven, Mo 
EKBLAW, SIDNEY E., R. F. D. 23, Rantoul, Ill 


EvprinGg, ARTHUR 8., South Lincoln, Mass 
Exrot, Wituarp Ayres, 1011 Thurman St., Portland, Ore 


Ets, Georce P., Norwalk, Conn 


Emerson, W. Orro, Hayward, Calif 


Eno, Henry LANs, Princeton, N. J 
Ericusen, W. J., 2311 Barnard St., Savannah, Ga 


Duryea, Miss ANNIE B., 62 Washington St., Newark, N. J......... 
Dyxe, ARTHUR Curtis, 205 Summer St., Bridgewater, Mass........ 
Hart, D. Ospourne, 17 Bates St., Cambridge, Mass.............. 
Hastmuan, Major Francis B., Camp Grant, Ill.................... 
*Haton, Howarp, Wolf, Sheridan Co., Wyo............02+-2505: 
Eaton, Miss Mary S., 8 Monument St., Concord, Mass............ 


Epson, Wm. L. G., 54 Fairview Ave., Rochester, N. Y............ 
Epwarps, KATHERINE M., Wellesley College, Wellesley, Mass...... 
Exnincsr, Dr. CiypE E., 100 W. Rosedale Ave., West Chester, Pa... 
Eirric, Prof. C. W. Gustave, 504 Monroe Ave., Oak Park, Ill..... 


Exsiaw, WALTER Eimer, 713 W. Washington Blv’d., Urbana, Ill... 
EvLiot, Mrs. J. W., 124 Beacon St., Boston, Mass................ 


EMMERICH, ROBERT D., 322 W. 100th St., New York, N. Y........ 
EneutsH, Mrs. T. F., 3631 Campbell St., Kansas City, Mo......... 


Evans, Dr. Evan M., 550 Park Ave., New York, N. Y............. 


XX 


* Life Associate. 


XXIV Associates. 


EVANS, Wilaran B:; Moorestown, Nid. ceeises ive eel eee 1897 
IDwanph (GO ne tay sl oan abllbeIN dip os amadahocand dheeenn aaomeoabe bc 1918 
Faucer, Mrs. Wo., c/o. California Nat’! Bank, Modesto, Calif..... 1918 
Faust, CLARENCE, New Middletown, Ohio.....................-0% 1919 
Faxon, ALLAN Hart, 7 Edwards St., Southbridge, Mass........... 1916 
*Fay, Duprey B., 287 Beacon St., Boston, Mass.................. 1916 
HAY 5.-ERESCOTT Vos State it., OSbOMss VlasSnascy | .sasteee teri ete 1907 
Fereicrer, Atva Howarp, North Side High School, Denver, Colo... .. 1898 
Fruit, Miss EmMa Trego, 1534 N. Broad St., Philadelphia, Pa...... 1903 


Fietp, Dr. GrorGcE W., 2807 18th St., N. W., Washington, D.C... ..1910 
FisHer, Miss Ev1zABETH WILSON, 2222 Spruce St., Philadelphia, Pa. 1896 
Fisuer, Dr. G. Ctypr, American Mus. Nat. Hist., New York, N. Y.1908 


FLANAGAN, JOHN H., 89 Power St., Providence, R. I............... 1898 
FLEISHER, EDWARD, 539 4th St., Brooklyn, N. Y.................. 1916 
KEETCHER: Joyte, Norton, WKWan.y.. .cictackes +c oi.ccseees eres eee 1919 
ELEercuurR, Mrs: MARY E:, ProctorsvilleVit... 5... 40...) aeee eee 1898 
FiLoyp, CHARLES BEenTON, 382 Wolcott St., Auburndale, Mass....... 1916 
Foot, Dr. NATHAN CHANDLER, Readville, Mass................... 1916 
Foote, Miss F. Huserta, 260 Valentine Lane, Yonkers, N. Y...... 1897 
ForBes, Raupy E., 328 Adams St., Milton, Mass.................. 1917 
HoRD; bmn Mi: Box.s; Great Halls sont. s.c5 soe cet eee eee 1919 
Forp, Miss Lourse Pretiaru, “The Heights,’’ Aiken, 8. C.......... 1919 
Forpyce, Gro. L., 40 Lincoln Ave., Youngstown, Ohio.............1901 
HOSTER: HRANCIS A, Hidgartowmn, Wiassa.c- sc: oss <0 0 ocitee ene 1918 
HostpRryHRANK 1; Havertord Panc. 2. sain pete ete ee ee 1916 
Fow.er, FREDERICK HALL, 221 Kingsley Ave., Palo Alto, Calif....... 1892 
Fow er, Henry W., Acad. Nat. Sciences, Philadelphia, Pa.........1898 
Fox, Dr. Witu1AMm H., 1826 Jefferson Place, Washington, D. C......1883 
FrRANcIS, NATHANIEL A., 35 Davis Ave., Brookline, Mass...........1914 
FRASER DONALD Johnstown. wNiYtrseies sciences sistance see een 1902 
FREEMAN, Miss Harriet E., 37 Union Park, Boston, Mass......... 1903 
HRENCH, CHARLES dd: Canton). Wiasst .mcyacm vee credence ieee eens 1904 
WRENCH, Virss CHAS EH. “Cantons: WIASS: 5 a cise et nuemertie east aces nee 1908 
Frost, ALLEN, c. 0. Trussell Mfg. Co., Poughkeepsie, N. Y......... 1919 
FROTHINGHAM, Mrs. RANDOLPH, 113 Commonwealth Ave., Boston, 
IMRS'SS 5 35. i126 Bi tea SPRL al ec eee GRRL eee ae ae 1913 
Fry, Rev. Henry J., 66 Eagle Rock Way, Montclair, N. J.......... 1916 
*Fucuret, Howarpn, 312 Bullitt Bldg., Philadelphia, Pa.............1919 
Futuer, Henry C., 1348 Euclid St., Washington, D. C............. 1916 
PunvEr, Mrs: P2@1rs, Needham, Masstnnccserre ict tee eee 1909 
GABRIELSON, Ira N., 220 P. O. Bldg., Portland; Ore....-....:...2: 1912 
GaANIER, ALBERT F., 2507 Ashwood Ave., Nashville, Tenn.......... 1917 


* Life Associate. 


Associates. XXV 


GARDINER, CHARLES BarNnss, 175 W. Main St., Norwalk, Ohio... . ..1903 
GARDNER, ASTON CoLEBROOK, 1805 Market St., Wilmington, Del... .1919 
GARDNER, JAMES H., 626 Kennedy Bldg., Tulsa, Okla.............. 1919 
Garst, Dr. Juuius, 29 Oread St., Worcester, Mass................. 1916 
(GASTON Oras Kee ratte WAM qo hae cued eiciareteritersls. a Sielclinncleteveia « 1919 
GertH, WALTER G., 3929 Greenview Ave., Chicago, Ill.............1918 
GERTKEN, Prof. SEVERIN, St. John’s University, Collegeville, Minn..1912 
(CUANTINGSE @ HAS PAvew Olam clIN wars -ciraeee ria esesaia. siseasrentusteueye.s ers 1911 
Gipson, LanpGon, 5 Union St., Schenectady, N. Y................ 1887 
CireB mR ip Virss Hie les Wiel pOlew Newel meiiee ccratsierac ene geile) elec a: 1919 
CiEMAN Vie RENCH banning |@alae saascere aaecines: ceases « 1907 
GLADDING, Mrs. JoHN R., 30 Stimson Ave., Providence, R. I........1912 
Gueason, Mrs. C. H., 700 Madison Ave., 8. E., Grand Rapids, Mich.1917 
GoELITz, WALTER A., 376 Flower City Park, Rochester, N. Y.......1916 
Consanlunwis oe bo0x.97, erattvalles Alas ase oc. «ese sens oe sot 1912 
Cooney irs shes sharons WMiasssercerese jeter. sects stereo) 1918 
Goopricu, Miss Juniet T., 1210 Astor St., Chicago, Ill............. 1904 
Gorpon, Harry E., 307 Laburnum Cres., Rochester, N. Y......... 1911 
Gormuny, A. Liegnort, Box 345, Arnprior, Ont.................--- 1918 
Gorst, CHARLES C., 28 Beauford R’d., Jamaica Plain, Boston, Mass.1916 
COURD OSHEPHE He eAT Camas tl aan neice cee cick cle a etevere sicase scare oyioere 1889 
(Ch AETAN MELON Wiad. Aled ow: DIT syeinr fate sien cre) ee arctegen arcs tesa, «lene 1909 
GRANGER, WALTER, Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York, N. Y.......1891 
Grant, Mrs. ADELE Lewis, Mo. Bot. Garden, St. Louis, Mo.........1919 
(CRANTS WM..W., 600: Castle St., Geneva, N. Yo... 0205543... --: 1910 
Graves, Mrs. Cuaruss B., 4 Mercer St., New London, Conn....... 1905 
Gray, GHorce M., Box 89, Woods Hole, Mass..........05 22.0... - 4: 1916 
GREANOFF, Rey. ALBERT Epwarp, 220 Montgomery Ave., 
Wksertistonmmebateryrsiat cry ric crarsioeaeyataie cick spalae cies eo sessed ae 1919 
GREEN, Horacr Oakes, 114 North Ave., Wakefield, Mass.......... 1917 
GREENOUGH, Henry Voss, 1134 Beacon St., Brookline, Mass.......1901 
CRHGORY RAYMOND Je erincetons Massi oanye sees cesses a ees a 1917 
GREGORY, STEPHEN S., Jr., 2609 Hampden St., Chicago, Ill.........1916 
GRIFFEE, WILLET E., Route 3, Corvallis, Ore......:..............- 1919 
GRIFFIN, BERTRAM §8., 22 Currie Ave., Haverhill, Mass............. 1917 
Crows VirssHuGHNE de. WebanonmwNy Ele se aaeae cls es a2 seis sla 1916 
GurinoTte, Judge Jutes E., 1215 Manheim R’d., Kansas City, Mo. .1919 
GuntHorpP, Prof. Horace, Washburn College, Topeka, Kan......... 1919 
Haas, Rospert C., 504 Swetland Bldg., Cleveland, Ohio......... 1919 
ERAD TH Yoe AED ENG Ee Monrovia lade ae.) eters aitit tale 4.2 Sh ostele laa © 1906 
UNGAR ee A \larshirel disidall sealVisissiys cyiisi. © seis acetals clsrems lores, © 1914 
FUAGHIR GS GC: HOMN Veen) stds IeeLerOOLOs ING telat a2) oes 2 cfeie cl evereis ee 1917 
Haitz, H. PENNINGTON, 28 Edwards St., Springfield, Mass......... 1919 
FAT Eee eg GREGORY VUlltOMa WiaSesscce saseiee meisian «oats scie «es 1917 
Haut, WM. WEBSTER, JR., 15 E. 75th St., New York, N. Y.........1917 


HA.Luinan, THomas, 212 Madison Ave., Paterson, N. J.............1919 


XXV1 Associates. 


HALLINGN, JOSEPH H., Coopertown, Okla asec on sce cies 1919 
HANnpipy, Cas O- Lewisburgy Wo Vain see eee tics eee 1916 
Hankinson, Tuos. LeRoy, N. Y. College of Forestry, Syracuse, 

1 epe Gn A et A OR i Re eee tee Ae RA LT PAR hgh 5, “oi6-< 1897 
Hanna, G. Datuuas, California Acad. Sci., San Francisco, Calif...... 1919 


Hanna, WILSON CrEAL, 1000 Pennsylvania Ave., Colton, Calif..... 1919 
Haroisty, ArTHuR H., 2326 First St., N. W., Washington, D. C....1918 


HARDON, Mrs Hunry Wis Walton, \Conmi,. |r s.ceiee eee 1905 
HARRINGTON, Mrs. 1); JH. Eincoln, Mass... 2.1 teen ee 1919 
HaRRINGTON, Raupu M., 595 Ashland Ave., Buffalo, N. Y.......... 1915 
*HarRIson, Guo. L., Jr., 400 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa........1919 
Harrison, Harry Moraan, 503 Linden St., Camden, N. J......... 1919 
Hartwey, Gro. Innuss, 344 W. 87th St., New York, N. Y.......... 1919 
HartsHorRN, Haroup Ira, 53 8. 12th St., Newark, N. J........... 1918 
Harvey, Mrs Cs: Vernon Hall skinstony NaC... ...2- ac eee 1918 
Harvey, Joun L., 3 Moody St.. Waltham, Mass..............:-«. 1916 
HASKELL, Miss Santa, 1236 11th St., N. W., Washington, D.C..... 1916 
Hataaway, Harry §., Box 1466, Providence, R. I.................1897 
HAVEMBEYER, Ele -@5, Mahwallt Ne dhe nts oss. « sosictass Ueno ache eee 1893 
HAVEMBYER, E..O. dr. Miahwah, Nedic sc sancsa. eee eet eee 1919 
HmAacock, Miss HistHmrs WyNCOte bas ccc). «24s 8.5 0c) <io.sns nce eee 1918 
Huauey, ALDEN P., 2006 Northampton St., Holyoke, Mass.......... 1919 
Hpens, Caas. H., 221 N. 9thist., Miles City, Mont.” 3.22... -eemee 1919 
Heim, ARTHUR H:,, Muller Place .N Yi. tae oe ces cei eee ee eee 1888 
HEMPEL, Miss KatTHUmEN, Hikader, Towa...2.6...-% 2.02 1: eee 1919 
HempuILL, ASHTON Erastus, Holyoke, Mass...................--- 1919 
*HENDERSON, JOHN Brooks, 16th St., & Florida Ave., N. W., Wash- 

INetONn, DO ged erik ele care oe oe Eee 1918 
HENDERSON, Judge Junius, 627 Pine St., Boulder, Colo............ 1903 
HENDERSON, WALTER C., 4727 13th St., N. W., Washington, D. C...1917 
HeEnpRIcKSON, W. F., 276 Hillside Ave., Jamaica, N. Y............ 1885 
HENNESSEY, FRANK C., 457 Albert St., Ottawa, Ont............... 1914 
HERMANN, THEODORE L., 273 Neal Dow Ave., New Brighton, N. Y..1916 
*HeRRICK, HAROLD, 123 William St., New York, N. Y............. 1905 
Herrick, NEwsBo. L., 60 Wall St., New York, N. Y.............. 1913 
HERRICK, N. AwWRENGE; Cedarhurst, IN. Yi... 22.2 ts er ee eee 1917 
Hrgeins; A... W.,, Sandwich, Mass)... 2) ac- cc cee elsieie eee een 1918 
Hi, James Hayness, Box 485, New London, Conn................1897 
Hitt, Mrs. THomas R., Box 491, Chautauqua, Chautauqua Co., 

i ae Gee Pe Pern Serer ee MAe rer en mn rab SeS-Ghe b!o 6 o:c 1903 
Hincxiey, Gro. Lyman, Redwood Library, Newport, R. I.......... 1912 
Hing, Prof. JAMES Stewart, Ohio State Univ., Columbus, Ohio....... 1899 
Hix, GHORGE.E.; 100, Wa GIst.st.. New Ork, NEQYen se eee 1904 


* Life Associate. 


Associates. XXVIi 


HOLLAND, HAROLD May, Galesburg, Dl. v.20 ccc dono de vee ob eles 1910 
Howuanp, Dr. Witu1aM J., Carnegie Museum, Pittsburg, Pa........1899 
Honnstan, (|G, B../4 Hh. 5th St., New York,N. Y¥..i...c2..0050 4.65 1919 
Ho.uisteR, WARREN D., 821 Humboldt St., Denver, Colo.......... 1901 
Houtman, Raupu H., 481 Main St., Stoneham, Mass................ 1907 


Hott, Ernust G., c/o. St’d Oil Co. of Brazil, Sao Paulo, Brazil... ..1911 
Honywitu, AtBrert W., Jr., 211 Ridgefield St., Hartford, Conn... ...1907 


HorsFatu, Ropert Bruce, 1457 E. 18th St., Portland, Ore......... 1905 
Horssny, Ricnarp E., Highland P’k Greenhouses, Reservoir Ave., 
ROCHESLCTAMIN GR YG! nose psmaeg.. s mrcetemr nt a re ae eae eeker aes ae hei 1919 
OMCHKISS Nisin Vlarcellss Nig Yay wees ees lee eels fare ines 1919 
Howtanp, R. H., 164 Wildwood Ave., Upper Montclair, N. J.......1903 
OT, WILLIAM Hi, Box 425, Stamford, @onm..3.9.........5....-.- 1907 
Hussarp, C. ANDRESEN, 1249 E. Harrison St., Portland, Ore....... 1916 
HussBarp, Prof. Marian E., 15 Appleby Road, Wellesley, Mass..... 1916 
Hussarp, Raupu, 1038 University Ave., Boulder, Colo............. 1916 
Huser, WHARTON, 225 St. Marks Sq., Philadelphia, Pa............. 1915 
EU Grn Sa CEOs dle sWiatChunermNGid tees aces cis cidegrat ee idee oe 1919 
Hunn, Joun T. SHARPLESS, 1218 Prospect Ave., Plainfield, N. J... ..1895 
Hunt, CHRESWELL JOHN, 5847 W. Superior St., Chicago, Ill........ 1919 
Hunt, Miss Lucy O., 185 Beacon St., Hartford, Conn.............. 1919 
Hunt, Ricwarp M., Mus. Vert. Zooél., Berkeley, Calif.............. 1918 
Hurp, Miss Frances A., 43 West Ave., S. Norwalk, Conn.......... 1919 
Husumr, Mrs. Gertrupe H., 821 8. Hope St., Los Angeles, Calif... .1918 
Hussey, Rouanp F., Univ. of Minn., Minneapolis, Minn............ 1915 
Finny \Virss Sb. Regina: Idahow.s snes. se aeees oo ossseete sass. 1918 
Hystop, SAMUEL, 42 Bellevue St., Newton, Mass.................. 1919 
INGERSOLL, ALBERT M., 908 F St., San Diego, Calif................ 1885 
ISHAM CHASTD = OOMWEG7thast.. New York Ne Yo.i5...0.65..0 6 0 1891 
Jackson, Dr. Hartiny H. T., Biological Survey, Washington, D. C.1910 
PACKSON, FUALPH Wi, D> 1 Cambridge, Md.i............-..... 1918 
Jackson, THomas H., 304 N. Franklin St., West Chester, Pa........1888 
JAMES NORMAN. Catonsville; NMiGh cic) oc sree 6 Cacewinrs pads watleoas 1913 
JAN VARIN DriHe i: Pe. 515 Park Ave. New York, N. Yo.....4..-.: 1919 
JENKSs OHASY Wis Bedtord, Masset 0.2. cic ne ldebicpsie ocrotave 6) owed nie o.e 0 1912 
JENNEY, Hon. Cuarzes F., 100 Gordon Ave., Hyde Park, Mass... ..1905 
JENNINGS, DriGno; H., Jewett City, Conn. <.... 0566 je.cee. cons 1918 
JENNINGS, RicHarp D., 129 Harrison St., East Orange, N. J........1913 
JENSEN, J. K., U.S. Indian School, Santa Fe, N. Mex..............1912 
Juwarr STaNtmy G.; Pendleton, Ores... os s/c. s o4 00 bee tens oe 1906 
Jounson, Prof. Cuas. Euaene, Dept. Zoédl., Kan. Univ., Lawrence, 
USGS sealed ey CRUE OER ORE CARD en 1919 
JOHNSON, FRANK E., 16 Amackassin Terrace, Yonkers, N. Y........ 1888 
JoHNSsON, Mrs.Grace Perris, Museum of Nat. Hist., Springfield, Mass.1908 
‘Jones, Dr. LomBarp Carter, Falmouth, Mass.................... 1917 


Jionmss Wirmnrann He Norway, MiGs. o 5.6 sac aclu veces ecadeves cas 1918 


XXVI1 Associates. 


JORDAN; A. HB: Everett, Wash’. 4. ccs ee secite nese eee 1888 
Jump, Mrs. aca R., 97 Oakleigh Road, Newton, Mass........... 1910 
JUNKIN, Francis T. A., ‘Twin Oaks,’? Woodley Lane, Washington, 

| BS Gee an a, ete) Ae eA CAO Re 1917 
KAEDING ;Gnoy i, Battle Mountains Nevan. cere oe eee 1918 
Kang, Mrs. Susan Mary, Mich. Club Bldg., Seattle, Wash.........1919 
Keays, JAMES Epwarp, 328 St. George St., London, Ontario........1899 
Ketioaa, Rapa T., Silver City, N. M.. ve iF el ONS 
Kauso, Dr. JoHNn E. te Edgewood, ewe er Nitea iiealee B. e eee 1915 
KENISTON, ALLAN, Vineyard Haven, Mass...............2..2.000- 1917 
KeEnnepy, Dr. Humare: Readwvalle,Viass:.<: nee ae Ze ae eee 1916 
Koni Duann Ht47 Westist-. Rutland eVituas: so. 46 serene 1913 
Kent, Epwarp G., 2595 Boulevard, Jersey City, N. J.............. 1919 
Kent, Epwin C., 156 Broadway, New York, N. Y.................1907 
*KiIppER, NATHANIEL [., Milton, Mass...............2.2 +086 see 1906 
Kiuecors, Wiuu1aM, Jr., 132 Orlin Ave., S. E., Minneapolis, Minn... .1906 
KINGSBURY, FREDERICK S., 97 Oliver St., Boston, Mass............ 1916 
King, LeRoy; 20°; 84th St., New York, N.V2.2.22. ce ee 1901 
KINGMAN, Rospert H., 11 S. Cedar Ave., Arverne, N. Y............ 1919 
KirkHaM, Mrs. eens W., 275 Maple St., Springfield, Mass........ 1904 
*KIRKHAM, STANTON D., 152 Howell St. UGunandaivde, N: Yio ee eel Ole 
KiIRKWOoD, FRANK C., R. F. D., 3, Monkton! Mids cab ston. to ae eno 1892 
KORN, ALBERT! J.B. He DS4, Solomons Manse)... ane 1918 
KITTREDGE, JosEPH, Jr., Forest Service, Washington, D.C......... 1910 
KLOSEMAN, Miss Jessip E., Beal Hall, 20 Charlesgate W., Boston, 

IMSSSE ig vis actaowae to Manda dace Saln ike. COCe eae eee 1909 
Ktots, ALEXANDER, 125 W. 78th St., New York, N. Y............. 1919 
KNAEBEL, ERNEST, 3707 Morrison St., Chevy Chase, D. C.......... 1906 
KNOLHOFF, FERDINAND WILLIAM, Amityville, N. Y...............- 1890 
Kretzman, Prof. P. E., 38337 A Oregon Ave., St. Louis, Mo......... 1913 
KusicuHeEk, D. P., Biological Survey, Washington, D. C.............1919 
Kusnr, AnTHonNy &., “Bernardsville, Nv... 2.222.555 see eee 1908 
Kusnr,. Mrs..Antaony R., Bernardsville; N.<J. 222. o-.:2s sneer 1910 
KuUSER, JOHN DRYDEN; Bernardsville, IN... 3.4.5.2 -500ee eee 1910 
LaBrig, JosepH D., 1717 E. 78th St., Kansas City, Mo............ 1919 
LAcsy, Howarp Grorcs, R..F. D1, Kerrville, Texase.. 5) eee 1899 
Lapp, Harry STEPHEN, 4354 McPherson Ave., St. Louis, Mo.......1917 
LaDow, STANLEY V., 622 W. 118th St., New York, N. Y........... 1913 
Laine, Hamitton -M., 1277 E. 32nd St., Portland, Ore............. 1917 
Lams, Cuas R., 8 Highland St., Cambridge, Mass................. 1912 
LANCASHIRE, Mrs. JAMES HENRY, 7 East 75th St., New York, N. Y..1909 
Lane, Hersert, Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York, N. Y.......... 1907 
Lanepon, Roy M., 958 N. Parkside Ave., Chicago, Ill............. 1918 


* Life Associate. 


Associates. XX1X 


AN O PAT BURT MH ayettevalley AT Kea yah on elas auyeis ails sheer ch slanuchatens 1919 
LarRABEB, Prof. Austin P., Yankton College, Yankton, S. Dak... ..1918 
LastreETO, C. B., 260 California St., San Francisco, Calif........... 1919 
HAA Oven Oniemiber Nee Yeerrec pars etcnerse craic: acc: ape (oveysrousies seks ohn one 1916 
AAU GHUEING hele Varsha eNom te iets cede. torte cad asiett=het eke © eteigie 1919 
LAURENT, Puiuip, 31 E. Mt. Airy Ave., Philadelphia, Pa........... 1902 
Lawson, Rawrpu, 88 Washington Sq. East, Salem, Mass............ 1917 
Leavitt, Mrs. FLorENcE R., 42 Forest St., Lexington, Mass........ 1919 
ium. Wwonn ©; Grove St:,. Wellesley; Mass... ..2.. 45300 663208: 1917 
LHR GWE LT ye) AINACles “AUITOT Aw IN qi Yicuisemian si acteieie eiebala lech dsis ae. 1919 
LEISTER, CuhauDE W., McGraw Hall, Ithaca, N. Y.................1916 
Leman, J. Howarp, 48 Beacon St., Boston, Mass................. 1919 
LENGERKE, JUSTUS VON, 211 Highland Ave., Orange, N. J.......... 1907 
LENssEN, Miss Rusy, 53 Maple St., Englewood, N. J.............. 1919 
Leopoup, ALDO, 135 S. 14th St., Albuquerque, N. Mex............. 1916 
LEopoLp, NATHAN, Jr., 4754 Greenwood Ave., Chicago, Ill.......... 1916 
ayn. Vrs. Winitan, Alton Bay: Ne His cc 5 2. os sir nrg tet we ais 1915 
Lewis, Harrison F., P. O. Box 6, Quebec, Canada................ 1912 
Lewis, Mrs. Herman E., 120 Grove St., Haverhill, Mass........... 1912 
Lresop, Ernest G., 94 Rhode I. Ave., Highland Park, Mich.......1918 
Ligon, J. StoKLEy, Box 131, Albuquerque, Mew Mexico........... 1912 


Lincoin, FrepeRIcK Cuartes, Biological Survey, Washington, D. C.1910 
Linpsay, Dr. D. Moore, 808 Boston Block, Salt Lake City, Utah. ..1919 


Lines, Gro. H., Richmond Hill, Cheadle, Cheshire, England........ 1913 
Littie, Lurver, 2nd, Cal. Acad. Sci., San Francisco, Calif......... 19138 
LbEoyD, Horss, 406 Queen 'St., Ottawa, Canada.................... 1916 
iHoONG CAs: IRVING, 130)oth Ave. Roselle; NaWwa..4-- ace. 2 -l- - nc 1918 
orp, J. ANDERSON, 13! Ash St., Danvers, Miass.................-.. 1919 
ORD, -LHOMAS ENR Y, INewimeton, Ne Hest. o256 4252.52 - locas. 1916 
WORING ATED EN Owegeoy Ne Narig-reria ra stars oeie stele lS tieuaie/ 9270 sare 1917 
Low, ETHELBERT I., 120 Broadway, New York, N. Y.............. 1907 
Luce, Mrs. Francis P., Box 216, Vineyard Haven, Mass...........1912 
UMD WAR Deke ©hatharnydNis dieses ee cce sac co aeie ook ese: 1904 
Lunn, Miss Marearet A., 1724 T St., N. W., Washington, D. C..1919 
IM UsrsnsojnaD, TBO Wing dat, 1D)5 2A) LUhrouiie, NIG bn para piouinloin Gite bondoc 6 1919 
MackintosH, Ricuarps B., 5 Howard Ave., Peabody, Mass....... 1919 
Macray, Mark W., Jr., 106 E. 85th St., New York, N. Y.......... 1905 
MacReyno.ips, GrorGe, 76 E. State St., Doylestown, Pa.......... 1917 
Mappock, Miss EMeuing, Monte Vista, Philadelphia, Pa...........1897 
Mapison, Haroutp Lestrr, Park Museum, Providence, R.I........ 1912 
Mace, M. J., 603 South St., Sault Ste. Marie, Mich...............1919 
Mauer, J. E., 351 Communipaw Ave., Jersey City, N.J........... 1902 
Mam, FRANK He,.227 N. 18th St., Philadelphia, Pa....1........... 1913 
MEP Tn See AMIR SH © sort ©hestermeNe Yer eerecn oe «ct cls micie ae ae 1913 


IMARBIGE MR ICHARDE Vea WWOOUStOCKs Viteiemce cee sae te aici cle es clelel« 1907 


XXX Associates. 


MArckREs, .GrowMe SharonConnive sae pee rp stieeee 1918 
Marks, Epwarp Sipney, 655 Kearney Ave., Arlington, N. J........ 1915 
Marrs, Mrs. Kinasmiuu, 9 Commonwealth Ave., Boston, Mass..... 1903 
MARSHALL, ALFRED, 17 S. Jefferson St., Chicago, Ill............... 1916 
*MIARSHALL, Mors, Hiba M.'O., New Salem, Miasss....2..6..... 2008 1912 
MarTENET, Mark 8., 4001 Bonner R’d, Forest P’k, Baltimore, Md..1919 
Matuews, F. Scouyuer, 17 Frost St., Cambridge, Mass............ 1917 
Mattern, Epwin S8., 1042 Walnut St., Allentown, Pa.............. 1912 
MatTreRN, WALTER I., 1042 Walnut St., Allentown, Pa............. 1916 
MayrieLp, Dr. GrorceE R., Kissam Hall, Nashville, Tenn.......... 1917 
McCurntocx, Norman, 504 Amberson Ave., Pittsburg, Pa.......... 1900 
McCuoskey, Miss Kate A., Sup’t. Nat. Study in Schools, Saratoga 
Syorimeg s INE We liad oe a iy Sa aes ea cate ae omer ie Bc ee 1919 
McConneELu, THomas L., 1813 Huey St., McKeesport, Pa.......... 1915 
MicCoox, Pointe J, 5 William 'St., New sYork, Ni: Yo... s.. 0.5 1895 
McGerever, MyYues STANDISH, 60 Keene St., Lowell, Mass.......... 1918 
McGraw, Harry A., 1805 15th Ave., Altoona, Pa................. 1917 
McGrew, ALBERT D., 5611 Stanton Ave., Pittsburg, Pa............ 1917 
MceHarron, T°. H:, 163) Mell St. Athens\\Ga..e.s. 42. eee eee 1917 
MclItHEenny, Epwarp AvzERY, Avery Island, La................... 1894 
McIntire, Mrs. HerBert Bruce, 4 Garden St., Cambridge, Mass. .1908 
McLain, Ropert Barrp, Market and 12th St., Wheeling, W. Va... .1893 
McLean, Hon. Geo. P., 1520 New Hampshire Ave., Washington, D. C.1913 
MiccMinvan, Mrs: (Ginpnet N.,'Gorham, NoHo. ae. e eee 1902 
MocNmin- Dr. Coas:vA., Sedalia; Moin... iv555 5.0 een ee ane 1919 
Meap, Mrs. E. M., 303 W. 84th St., New York, N. Y..............1904 
Means, Cuas. J., 29 Marlborough St., Boston, Mass............... 1912 
MeEpsGER, OLIVER P., 9 Columbia Ave., Arlington, N. J............ 1919 
MENGEL, G. Henry, 739 Madison Ave., Reading, Pa.............. 1913 
MENNINGER, Wo. C., 709 W. 169th St., New York, N. Y...........1919 
Merriam, Henry F., 37 Clinton Ave., Maplewood, N. J........... 1905 
Marrinn. ALBERT R.. elamuoltons ass cee oie eae 1912 
MERRILL, B. G., Einerile. INE Siete LOA 
Merri, D. E., c.o. Curtis Pub: Co Sede Beneht ‘Calif SR Pe ¢ 1913 
MERRILL, Hey 316 State St., Baceor IMESINCH, io ahonenshion eae 1883 
+\VIERSHON:, Wb. .sacimaw, Woche . 22 e).cie iis hick ne eee eee 1905 
Metcatr, F. P., Biological Survey, Washington, D. C.............. 1917 
Metcatr, Z. P., N. C. State College, West Raleigh, N. C........... 1913 
Meyer, Major G. RaupH, 126 South, Ft. Monroe, Va.............. 1913 
Miyor, Miss Hmroism lenox, Mass... camacnciemte ote crete erie 1913 
MicHaE.s, Wo. C., 645 W. 56th St., Kansas City, Mo............. 1919 
Mituer, Miss Bertua Stuart, 48 Reid Ave., Port Washington, N. Y.1915 
Mier, Miss Carrig Exiua, 36 Cottage St., Lewiston, Me......... 1918 


* Life Associate. 


Associates. XXX1 


Miter, Cuas. W., Jaffna College, Jaffna, Ceylon................. 1909 
Miter, Mrs. EvtsaBets C. T., 1010 Euclid Ave., Cleveland, O.....1916 
Miter, Dr. Love Hotmss, Southern Branch Univ. of Calif., Los 


AMP CICS EC Mile Ae enh ns yeas ate he Sa ewe eclokiain ra ckereee de seal e 1918 
Minis nhNOSeAewstestearken©Glonime cede deiccccion oh setae + 1916 
Miner, Leo D., 1836 Vernon St., N. W., Washington, D.C........ 1913 
MITCHELL, CATHERINE ADAMS, Riverside, IIl....................4: 1911 
MircHe.L, Horack HEapDtey, Provincial Mus. Regina, Sask........ 1918 
Marcamnn, MAson; U.S: Consul, Apia, Sdmoa......5..:.........- 1916 
MircHe.u, Dr. Watton I., 3210 E. 1st St., Wichita, Kan............1893 
Moony,.A. J., ¢/o. Atna Life Ins. Co., Hartford, Conn........:-:. 1918 
MOODY Dr Wii lADD, Newportwh. [evaoegss cscs s fees ss ce see oe 1918 
Moore, EvizaBetH Putnam, North Anson, Me................... 1905 
Morcom, G. FREAN, 2906 Pine Ave., Berkeley, Calif. ............. 1886 
Morgan, Brent M., 224 11th St., S. W., Washington, D.C........ 1919 
Mor .ey, 8. Griswop, 2535 Etna St., Berkeley, Calif. ............ 1911 
INIORTOCK ours HeaCrevex©ouer) Mons cece estos esse tee ee 1919 
Morrison, Auva, Brier Neck, Gloucester, Mass....................1915 
NIORSHM GOs Te rover Hall IViaSsiumadcqe cee cease ec coos e 1919 
NMORSHEARKY: GIIMmAN.eEuTons OhiO-csossesccde sages oes cee 1912 
Morss, Miss MarGarette E., 3513 Bloomington Ave., Minneapolis, 

IN [inva raters yer tet se ire Ce ore are Na oelesenrontotsusie a ateke are ce wee 1919 
Mokrss, Cuas. B., 35 Greenleaf St., Bradford, Mass................ 1918 
Mose ey, Prof. Epwin Lincotn, Bowling Green, Ohio............. 1918 
Mosss, Mrs. EpMuND QuINcEy, 303 W. 84th St., New York, N. Y..1919 
MosueEr, FRANKLIN H., 17 Highland Ave., Melrose Highlands, Mass.1905 
Movustey, WM. Henry, Hatley, Quebec, Canada.................. 1915 
Muuunn, JAMES L., 614 E. 6th South, Salt Lake City, Utah........ 1919 
Munro, J. A., Okanagan Landing, British Columbia...............1913 
Nuri. ©. J.,.219) 7th Ave:, 5, Moorhead, Minn.....5....2......-..- 1913 
Mourpuy, Dr. EuGENE Epmunp, 432 Telfair St., Augusta, Ga....... 1919 
Morpeny, Mrs. Grace E. B., 272 Hicks St., Brooklyn, N. Y........ 1919 
Murray, Epecar H., 489 Guoin St., Detroit, Mich................. 1919 
Myers, Mrs. Harriet W., 311 N. Ave. 66, Los Angeles, Calif....... 1906 
Myers, Miss Lucy F., 127 Academy St., Poughkeepsie, N. Y.......1898 
INVAUIMAINS Hie Dr Box G06) slgouTney, Lowalsa.qs 5 acc cee tess. 1918 
Ninny, JAMms ©. 1135, Hach St. Brookline, Mass:: 5.22: 62.222... 1919 
NPE A JOHNSONS Miarionivalles iNMlOnnse erro ae de csccen sdeei ci oe 1919 
Nicuots, L. Netson, N. Y. Public Library, New York, N. Y....... 1917 
NicHois, RopMan A., 38 Warren St., Salem, Mass................. 1919 
Nims, Mrs. Luctus, 17 Union St., Greenfield, Mass................ 1913 
Nose, ELEANOR G., 66 Sparks St., Cambridge, Mass.............. 1916 
Nose, G. Kinestey, Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York, N. Y....... 1916 
Nokes, Dro. D., 184; W. 55th st., os Angeles, Calif:............. 1915 
Nourse, Rev. Fretrx, St. Benedict’s College, Atchison, Kan..........1903 


Norris, Epwarp, 301 W. Springfield Ave., Philadelphia, Pa........ 1916 


XXXil Associates. 


Norris, J. PARKER, Jr., 2122 Pine St., Philadelphia, Pa............ 1904 
Norton, Mrs. Carrie Morse, Faulkton, 8. Dak.................. 1918 
OagpENn, Dr. Henry VINING, 141 Wisconsin St., Milwaukee, Wis... .. 1897 
Orpys JHENRygioilver springs Micite ries iene te ne eee 1896 
O’Roark, Mrs. L. 8., 29 Rutherford Ave., Rutherford, N. J........ 1919 


Outver, Mrs. Evita Ho.uick, 48 St. Nicholas Pl., New York, N. Y.1918 
Osporn, Prof. Henry Fatrrreip, Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York, 


IN ee rege ho clad che ay pants cd eens ar aa es 1919 
OsBorNE, ARTHUR A., 58 Washington St., Peabody, Mass.......... 1912 
OSGoopE, HARRY Wi. 16 Him St:.-Pibtsield) Nis He pee a ere 1918 
OTTEMILLER, FREE, 7O2'5. George Stssey Ork, bani. aes acer 1914 
OVERTON, DreHRAnk sPatchoouewNemy..c2 sce oe aeeiie ie eee eee 1909 
*OweEn, Miss JULIETTE AMELIA, 306 N. 9th St., St. Joseph, Mo..... 1897 
PackarRD, WINTHROP, 1442 Washington St., Canton, Mass.......... 1917 
Paine, Aucustus G., Jr., 31 E. 69th St., New York, N. Y.......... 1886 
PAINE, CHARLES JACKSON, 705 Sears Bldg., Boston, Mass........... 1917 
*Patmmr, Miss EvizABeTH Day, 17418. Harvard Blv’d, Los Angeles, 

allie se pe eaa rh cwas smear eee b sc'| Satna) oe ote be caller eee eae 1918 
PALMER; Re. He, 222sDietrich Blk. Rocatello, Ida... 2risccte ees eee 1917 
PauMeEr, Dr. SAMUEL C., 712 Ogden Ave., Swarthmore, Pa......... 1899 
Pautmer, Mrs. T. S., 1939 Biltmore St., N. W., Washington, D. C...1918 
PANGBURN, CLIFFORD H., 731 Elm St., New Haven, Conn.......... 1907 
*ParkKER, Epwarp LupLow, Nashawtuc Rd., Concord, Mass........1916 
Parks, Mrs. F. R., 128 Crafts Rd., Chesnut Hill, Mass............ 1918 
PAu, ucts H.,.J485 Northist., Rochester, Nie Ys. ac): ceteae ee 1908 
Paxton, Mrs. Recina A., “The Cairo,’ Que St., Washington, D. C.1917 
PEABODY. Rev. PB.) Blue Rapids, .Wanasanac.2e cee tee eee 1903 
Pruitew, Miss Marion J., 1637 Massachusetts Ave., N. W., Wash- 

Ine tONs D.C sa cy arouse toeners ea oo eee Cee 1919 
PEMBERTON, JOHN Roy, 729 Kennedy Bldg., Tulsa, Okla........... 1918 
PENNELL, Miss EvizaBetu A. 8., 252 Maine St., Brunswick, Me.....1918 
PENNINGTON, WM. Dana, 1722 4th St., Washington, D.C.......... 1919 
PaNNOcK,-CHas)J., Kennettisg:, Panes cao sie tench «cee eee eee 1919 
*PmNnRosE, Dr. Cuas. BincHam, 1720 Spruce St., Philadelphia, Pa. ..1919 
Prprer, Dr. Wu., 1811 Spruce St., Philadelphia, Pa............... 1911 
PeRINE, IGCEBLE, 26) DrulliSt:..-Boston. MWassi..254..- eee Gene 1917 
Perkins, Dr. ANNE E., Gowanda Hospital, Collins, N. Y...........1917 
PreRkins, ARTHUR W., 21 High St., Farmington, Me............... 1915 
PrRKiIns, Dr) GrorGe H., Univ. of Vt., Burlington, Vt..7......c8- 1912 
Perry, Dr. Henry Josepu, 45 Bay State Road, Boston, Mass...... 1909 
PErers, ALBERTS. luake Wilson, Minne. eee eae 1908 
Perry, Orvitie A., Chapel St. & Sherman Ave., New Haven, Conn.1919 
Purtes, Frank M., 212 1. 4th St:, Elyriag Ohio. 42552... cia eee 1912 


* Life Associate. 


Associates, XXX 


Puxtes, Mrs. J. W., Box 36, Northfield, Mass...................- 1899 
Puiuier, Pup B., 220 Broadway, New York, N. Y.............-- 1907 
Puituirs, ALEXANDER H., 54 Hodge Road, Princeton, N. J......... 1891 
Puttures, Cuas. Lincoun, 5 West Weir St., Taunton, Mass......... 1912 
Puiures, Cuas. P., Univ. Minn., Minneapolis, Minn...............1919 
Prerce, Wricut McEwen, Box 343, Claremont, Calif.............. 1918 
Piuspury, Franx O., 1088 Main St., Walpole, Mass..............- 1917 
Prncuot, Girrorp, Real Estate Trust Bldg., Philadelphia, Pa... ..1910 
Pinxus, Aubert S., 10 Fairfield Ave., Hartford, Conn..............1919 
Pini. Minms D:, 428 N. Tioga St., Ithaca, N.Y......0.5.0-.5-5+-- 1919 
Puattr, Hon. Epmunp, Poughkeepsie, N. Y...............++0+--05> 1917 
Por, Miss Marcaretra, 1204 N. Charles St., Baltimore, Md....... 1899 
Pootz, Eart L., School Admin. Bldg., Reading, Pa..............-- 1916 
Port, ALEXANDER, 1013 Beacon St., Brookline, Mass.............- 1919 
BORER eUOuISiHe. StamtOrd, COnMe.cen ecm sscieel-t os cine ce sees ome 1893 
Post, Wintram §., Bernardsville, N. Ji... 0.005.05 002 e2 eens oe 1911 
Potter, Jutian K., 563 Bailey St., Camden, N. J...........------ 1912 
Potter, LAWRENCE B., Eastend, Sask..............6.0.022+-02 008: 1919 
Prancer, WituraM E., 421 Douglas Ave., Kalamazoo, Mich........ 1892 
Pratt, Hon. Gro. D., Telephone Bldg., Albany, N. Y.............. 1917 
Pricr, JouN Henry, Crown W Ranch, Knowlton, Mont........... 1906 
Puree, LiGon, KR. fF. D:, Dunmore, W.Va... 2.005.052... 086s se 1913 
PritcHarD, Mrs. F. A., 203 N. Court St., Medina, Ohio............1918 
Proctor, GreorGE N., 35 Congress St., Boston, Mass............-- 1919 
Purpy, Jamss B., R. F. D. 4, Ele mouth, Mich.. as ...- 1893 
QUARLES, HMM Avuaustus, Southfield Point, eeniards Conn Sider 1918 
Q@urcerm, Jaums C., Mcblhattan, Pat. ... 2205. 006-2+ 5 see ee ene 1915 
Raker, Miss Mav E., 1484 E. Sherman St., Portland, Ore......... 1918 
Rarturr, Hon. Watter §., R. R. B., Box 276, Richmond, Ind... ... 1918 
RAVEN, LinNRy CUSHIER, Bayshore, IN. Yo-s.2..sp---2->esse e+ on: 1918 
Rea, Pau M., Charleston Museum, Charleston, 8. C.. .. 1912 
Reaau, Dr. | Ag Lincoun, 39 Maple St., West Roni, Mass. .1896 
Reear, H. Severn, 1400 De Kalb St., Nonriatowi: Paes 1916 
Reep, Miss Ciara EVERETT, Brcorreld, Nasser an ere oat 1919 
Rean, James A. G., 6033 B Catherine St., Philadelphia, Pa......... 1901 
REICHENBERGER, Mrs. Victor M., Hotel Essex, New York, N. Y... .1916 
Rew, Mrs. Bruce, Gulf Refinery, Port Arthur, Tex...............1918 
RED eR USSHLE, 22 Oth ot. bismarck, IN. Dak. oc... 00 sees ee 1919 
Rett, Eqmont Z., 3902 Pecos St., Denver, Colo...............---+ 1917 
Ruoaps, Cuarues J., National Reserve Bank, Philadelphia, Pa... .. 1895 
Rics, JAMES Henry, Brick House Plantation, Wiggins, S: Cos... 1910 
ITCH VAR DWP EVO aC MG alle milan Gliey preter aie eis ehereicfsici cys sheicssiled- 21> = 1913 
RICHARDS, Miss Harriet E., 36 Longwood Ave., Brookline, Mass. . . 1900 
RicHarpson, W. D., 4215 Penta AvernGnicago plllitin teens: <2 os 1917 
Rweway, Joun L., Geological Survey, Washington, D. C........... 1890 


RIKER, CLARENCE B., 43 Scotland Road, South Orange, N. J........1885 


XXXIV Associates. 


ROBBINS, ‘CHARLES A.. Onset, Mass 00 5 eee sais | eee 1914 
Ropssins, Royau E., 104 Pleasant St., Brookline, Mass............. 1917 
ROBERTS; /EREWITT, Conway, Mousses cy eerie ead eee oe ae 1919 
Roserts, WILLIAM Ey, 207 McKinley Ave., Lansdowne, Pa....... 1902 
Rosertson, Howarp, 157 8. Wilton Drive, Los Angeles, Calif...... 1911 
ROBINSON, ANTHONY W.., Elaverlord,: Paes. 26 sca oe cee ee 1903 
Rosinson, Mrs. L. K., 1130 8. Franklin St., Denver, Colo.......... 1919 


Ropinson, Miss Mary L., Lathrop Trade School, Kansas City, Mo..1919 
Ropo.pue, Brother, Christian Bro. Normal School, Laval Rapids, Que.1919 


*Rocers, Cuas H., Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York, N. Y......... 1904 
Rouanp, Conrad K., 1208 DeKalb St., Norristown, Pa............ 1917 
ROOSEVELT, FRANKLIN DELANO, Hyde Park, N. Y................. 1896 
Ross iGHo: H.,.2ecWest ot., Rutland; Vt.coa. . cle eee 1904 
Ross, Dr. Lucretius H., 507 Main St., Bennington, Vt............ 1912 
Rovsu, Gro. HAroxp, 343 Prospect St., Morgantown, W. Va....... 1919 
Row ey, Joun, 42 Plaza Drive, Berkeley, Calif. .................. 1889 
Ruae, Harotp Gopparp, Dartmouth College, Hanover, N. H...... 1919 
Rust Henry Je Coeur dAlenes.dahow...) 26 cae ee Cee 1918 
Ryver, Mrs. Ropgert O., 1041 Franklin Ave., Columbus, Ohio...... 1919 
DACKETP: \CLARBNCE: Hye, IN. Yissdtcb cosas siicls accent Nanette eee 1910 
Sace, Henry M., Menands Road, Albany, N. Y.................. 1885 
Sacre, Mrs. Mary Sart, 1974 Broadway, New York, N. Y......... 1919 
SALYDR, J. Cuark, 2412 Main St., Lexington, Mo.........2...eees 1919 
Sampson, Miss Myra M., 30 Green St., Northampton, Mass........ 1918 
SANBORN, Corin C,, P:-©,. Box 97, Rutherford, Ni. J:<.se..9. see 1911 
*SANFORD, Dr. LuonarD C., 216 Crown St., New Haven, Conn......1919 
SANTENS, Remi H., Carnegie Mus., Pittsburgh, Pa................. 1918 
SaunpeErs, ArgevAS A., 21 Edlie Ave., South Norwalk, Conn........ 1907 
SavaGcn, Manton L., 1338 Orthodox St., Frankford, Philadelphia, Pa. 
1919 
ScHaEFER, Oscar FREDERICK, 669 Genesee St., Rochester, N. Y.....1916 
SCHATER, day POrb aryOn,, Mllcrcs: crete onsale en cml hit eens te aut ee een 1918 
ScHantTz, OrpHEuS M., 10S. LaSalle St., Chicago, Ill.............. 1919 
SCHANCK,. HRHDERIC, uenox, Wass: «21.5. ..socceers ofc resus ace ee 1912 
SCHLEICHERT, ERnest K., Mathias Point, Va.................... 1919 
SCHONNEGEL, JULIAN Exiot, 92 Morningside Ave., New York, N. Y.1918 
Scuorcer, A. W., 2021 Kendall Ave., Madison, Wis............... 1913 
ScHRENCK, Dr. HERMANN von, 4139 McPherson Ave., St. Louis, Mo. 1919 
ScoviLLE, SAMUEL, Jr., 415 Lancaster Ave., Haverford, Pa.......... 1916 
Scupper, Braprorp A., 146 W. 105th St., New York, N. Y........ 1917 
Sears, WILLIAM R., 73 Tremont St., Boston, Mass...............- 1916 
SHERRILL, WILLEAM Jy Javertords.Pa), tara. eee mee eee 1916 
SEWELL, JAMES W., Jr., 2218 Patterson St., Nashville, Tenn........ 1918 


* Life Associate. 


Associates. XXXV 


Suaw, Henry S., 78 Cypress St., Newton Center, Mass............ 1916 
Suaw, Dr. J. E. Norton, Mattapoisett, Mass....................- 1919 
Saw, Witu1am T., 1000 Thatuna St., Pullman, Wash.............. 1908 
Sura, DanreL W., Catholic Univ. of Amer., Washington, D.C...... 1917 
SHEARER, Dr. AMon R., Mont Belvieu, Tex...................-25- 1905 
SHELDON, CHARLES, 3102 Q St., N. W., Washington, D.C.......... 1911 
Siemans, JB Miss ID taaeKNey ISIN SG aoe cinco. dak ou euumod otcaccnie ae 1918 
SuHEeLtTon, ALFRED C., c/o. Johnson, Shelton Co., Dayton, Ohio...... 1911 
Suerwoop, Mrs. THEropore C., 3520 Cherry St., Kansas City, Mo. .1919 
Surrey, Lester L., 604 S. 10th St., Vincennes, Ind............... 1917 
SHIRLING, ALBERT E., 3849 E. 62nd St., Kansas City, Mo.......... 1919 
SHOEMAKER, CLARENCE R., 3116 P St., Washington, D.C.......... 1910 
SHOMMAKER ELMNIRY Wie, VicHilhattam (Passes. ao. ae- cess neds. s- 1912 
SHOFFNER, CHARLES P., 2011 Wallace St., Philadelphia, Pa......... 1915 
SHROSBEE, GEO., Pub. Mus., Milwaukee, Wis! PE bite el OOD, 
SILLIMAN, O. P., Con Alisal ‘& Riker St., Srlinas: Chis RAL eth Seaton 1915 
SILVER, JOHN A. Abend cenmplV cl separa a aeraae hoadieeie st aesnasietsistendl se 1918 
Simmons, Gro. Finuay, Univ. Texas, Austin, Texas................ 1910 
SIMONDS4 VMassisusmenlae, Hantlands Wish ices ach 2: see esc ee cts oe 1919 
SKINNER Mecben Yellowstone Park, Wiyo. sinscesssces65s ees ook 1916 
Smitu, AusTIN Pau, 2043 E. 71st St., Cleveland, Ohio.............1911 
Smitu, Rev. Francis Curtis, 22 Jewett Pl., Utica, N. Y........... 1903 
Situ, Prof. Franx, 1005 West California Ave., Urbana, Ill........ 1909 
Smitu, Horace G., 2918 Lafayette St., Denver, Colo............... 1888 
Smitu, Dr. Huew M., 1209 M St., N. W., Washington, D.C........ 1886 
Smiru, Lester W., 60 Cottage St., Meriden, Conn................. 1916 
Smirnu, Narrer, 46 Cotés des Neiges Road, Montreal, Canada.......1915 
Smitru, Mrs. Wauuis C., 525 N. Michigan Ave., Saginaw, W.S., Mich.1916 
Sumi WENDELE Parris), WellsiRiver, Vt......:...se25.--++- 1919 
Smytu, Prof. Etuison A., Jr., Polytechnic Inst., Blacksburg, Va..... 1892 
Snyper, Exias LeRoy, 1244 N. Emporia Ave., Wichita, Kan....... 1919 
SNYDER, LesTeER L., Royal Ont. Mus., Toronto, Ont................ 1919 
SnyDER, WILL Epwin, 309 DeClark St., Beaver Dam, Wis.......... 1895 
Soper, JosePH Dewey, R. D. 2, Preston, Ont., Canada.............1918 
SovuLe, CAROLINE Gray, 187 Walnut St., Brookline, Mass.......... 1917 
SrPELMAN, Henry M., 48 Brewster St., Cambridge, Mass........... 1911 
Spencer, Miss CLEMENTINA 8., Dept. of Zodlogy, Coe College, Cedar 

RA DICS BLOW e ene ha PN ake een te tire elaine abate mists 1917 
Stanwoop, Miss CorDELIA JoHNSON, Ellsworth, Me................ 1909 
STAPLETON, RicHaRD, 219 High St., Holyoke, Mass................ 1916 
STEELE, Henry B., 4530 Drexel Boulevard, Chicago, Ill............ 1917 
SrepPuens, Prof. T. C., Morningside College, Sioux City, Iowa....... 1909 
STEPHENSON, Mrs. Jesse, Monte Vista, Colo..................---- 1918 
Stevens, Prof. G. W., Normal College, Warrensburg, Mo...........1919 
STEVENS SD rapebio boxglo4G.sbincolms News sem s-)anee ae oe sea - 1908 


Stewart, Mrs. Crectu, 451 Beacon St., Boston, Mass............... 1917 


XXXV1 Associates. 


Stites, Epaar C., 345 Main St., West Haven, Conn............... 1907 
Stimson, Dr. ArtHuR M., 414 Raymond St., Chevy Chase, Md......1917 
STODDARD, HERBERT Lez, Field Museum Nat. Hist., Chicago, Ill... .1912 


STONE, HARRY HERBERT, Jr, Sturbridge, Mass:.....+.....0- sere 1919 
Storer, Tracy Irwin, Mus. Vert. Zoology, Berkeley, Calif......... 1916 
STREET. J. HLA TCHHR  beverl yan Nasa cin eee nn ae 1908 
STRUTHERS, Rev. ALFRED L., Townsend, Mass...................- 1918 
STuART, Frank A., 118 Green St., Marshall, Mich................. 1915 
Stuart, Guo. H., 3rd, e-o Girard Trust Co., Philadelphia, Pa........1913 
STURGIS) 97 WARREN. Grotona Viasseeei .) - anion ieee eet eee 1910 
STURTEVANT, Epwarp, St. George’s School, Newport, R. I..........1896 
SuapENn, ArtHuR W., 35 Concord St., Hartford, Conn..............1913 
Surron, Gro. Mixscu, Carnegie Mus., Pittsburgh, Pa............. 1919 
Swain, JoHN Merton 113 Main St., Farmington, Me.............. 1899 
SwEEney, J. A., Forest Service, Nenzel, Neb...................05- 1916 
SWEET, Miss Ora D., 34 Elizabeth St., Auburn, N. Y.............. 1919 
SwEnNK, Myron H., 1410 N. 37th St., Lincoln, Neb................ 1904 
TATNALL, SAMUEL A., 503 Hansberry St., Philadelphia, Pa.......... 1916 
Taytor, ALEXANDER R., 1410 Washington St., Columbia, 8. C...... 1907 
Taytor, Horace, 3 Netherlands Rd., Brookline, Mass..............1917 
TAYLOR, LIONEL H., Bankhead, Kelowna, B.'@......25....- ss see 1913 
Taytor, Dr. WALTER P., 1428 Perry Place, N. W., Washington, D. C.1916 
TAYLOR, WARNER, 219 Clifford Court, Madison, Wis...............1916 
TEACHENOR, Drx, 3237 Garfield Ave., Kansas City, Mo............ 1919 
TERRILL, Lewis Mcl., 44 Stanley Ave., St. Lambert, Quebec....... 1907 
Tuomas, Miss Emity Hrnps, Bryn Mawr, Pa............2.2..+++ 1901 
THOMAS, GERALD B., 229 Burlington Ave., Billings, Mont...........1919 
Tuompson, J. Waucott, 527 East First South St., Salt Lake City, 
Witalaytd eit aes oes wheats clas, santas pists Ue ee ee 1916 
Tuorns, Miss Jutia A., c/o Dr. D. H. Hill, Raleigh, N. C......... 1916 
THOWLEsS, HERBERT L., 765 Broad St., Newark, N. J.............. 1919 
Tritton, Miss Mase, THurstTon, Vineyard Haven, Mass............1918 
TINDALL, CuHas. W., 912 N. Noland St., Independence, Mo......... 1919 
TiInKER, ALMERIN D., 1019 Church St., Ann Arbor, Mich...........1907 
Tower, Mrs. Kate D., Hotel Bristol, Copley Sq., Boston, Mass.....1908 
Townes, Miss ANNIE FLORENCE, Topsfield, Mass.................-- 1918 
Towne, Dr. Soton Ropney, Sta. D., Route 2, Omaha, Neb........ 1919 
TOWNSHEND, Henry Horcuxiss, 35 Hellbourne Ave., New Haven, 
COnmnnede aria cats sah hate t Rasa oe oe tea ene & SAE Rac eee 1915 
TREAT, WILLARD HLUERY, sliver, Wane, Conn: ..3. s=.84eeces meee 1919 
Trecanza, A. O., 522 8. 13th St., E., Salt Lake City, Utah......... 1906 
Trotter, WILLIAM Henry, 36 N. Front St., Philadelphia, Pa.......1899 
TRUESDELL, JOHN F., 230 Post Office Bldg., Denver, Colo.......... 1918 
Truin, Harry S.; 317 Hast 196thi St: New York) Ne Your. ieee 1917 
(TRUMBELL, J: HH.,/Plainville-;@onnt jase sect eine chee 1907 


TupBury, WARREN C., 1939 Marin Ave., Berkeley, Calif........... 1903 


Associates. XXXVI 


hoes, WOBLE W., Wolfville, Nova Scotia. . i... 6065 cas sees eee 1919 
Tutuock, Mrs. GitBERT, 379 Edgewood Ave., New Haven, Conn....1919 
TurtLr, Henry Emerson, Lake Forest, Ill............5......60.- 1909 
ECC mE Ace Heel at ALAS Kec ota diatsrsls t'.(cige ex stare da k.see Rela cts i LOL 
hyn OHN Gepuinlocks @alifat secs ss que decree Aes jee a tae 1912 
Urrorp, Dr. EUGENE U., 221 Central St., Auburndale, Mass........ 1918 
Unperwoop, Wm. Lyman, Mass. Inst. of Tech., Cambridge, Mass.. . 1900 
VACHNTING, MissvAINNAJ:, ellefonte, Payio...0-4.-.--cnss-+.6-- 1905 
VALLANDINGHAM, Miss Katir, 811 Highland Ave., Carrollton, Ky...1918 
*V ANDERGRIFT, S. H., 311 Riggs Bldg., Washington, D. C.......... 1918 
VAN FLEET, CuarK C., 446 10th St., Santa Rosa, Calif............. 1919 


Van Name, WILLARD G., Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York, N. Y....1900 
Van Neman, Miss Louta, Westport High School, Kansas City, Mo..1919 


VeTTerR, Dr. CHARLES, 67 West 12th St., New York, N. Y..........1898 
Viereck, Henry L., Biological Survey, Washington, D. C..........1916 
Worms, Dr. Caras. 2, Univ. of Ariz; Tuscon, Ariz.............+- 1918 


WapsworTH, CLARENCE S., 27 Washington St., Middletown, Conn... 1906 
WALKER, EcBpert Hamiuton, 411 Camden Court, Ann Arbor, Mich.1919 


WAD KER HERNHS Tle mn OenixwATIZtereee rciitia selec ates oases 1918 
WA KRG HOm Reh ve Deon Vina yas Wua lsc less els. ie ele sis ee 1909 
Wa uace, Cuas. R., 69 Columbus Ave., Delaware, Ohio............1913 
WALLACE, JAMES S., 12 Wellington St., E., Toronto, Ontario........1907 
Watter, Dr. HERBERT E., 67 Oriole Ave., Providence, R. I.........1901 
WAUINRS RANK, ol 2o2ordust., gilmhurst, No Ye sh.c.cs2-eee ss a 4- 1902 
WARD, FRANK H., 18 Grove Place. Rochester, N. Y................ 1908 
Warp, Henry L., 520 Lake Drive, Milwaukee, Wis................ 1906 
WARNER, Epwarp P., Langley Field, Hampton, Va................ 1910 
WARTEON? ©.1G., .20F Ridout.st., 6. London, Onts2... 2.5.2 ..... 0.1919 
Weser, J. A., Moore and Grand Aves., Leonia, N. J...............1906 
\yviieistnons3, J Dany (Canranexei0} Aly, Javopd ay IMCS o-oo ggeneaacd ous aopenor 1916 
WEBSTER, Mrs. JENNIE E. B., 44 E. 23rd St., New York, N. Y......1917 
WEEKS, Rev. LeRoy Titus, Emmetsburg, Iowa..................-. 1917 
WEISEMAN, T. WALTER, 226 Beaver Road, Emsworth, Pa............1919 
WEISER, CHARLES S., 105 W. Springettsbury Ave., York, Pa....,...1916 
*WELLMAN, GorDON B., 46 Dover R’d., Wellesley, Mass............ 1908 
Wrst CrAsnObADn mV lariamnds cBLase ecco se auierts ci cis a 2 helo ea. 1919 
Wrrvorn, Mrs) EpmunbiHe, Babylon, No Y.5-.....--:--.-+-+:s-+s 1902 
Weyaanpt, Dr. CorneEttius, 6635 Wissahickon Ave., Philadelphia, Pa.1907 
SVHAR TON pV Villa ioe GrOboms IWasSt sc icte tus acta cs\tomccee « 1907 
WHEELER, Rev. Harry Epaear, Fayetteville, Ark................. 1919 
WHEELER, JOSEPH RANDALL, Grand Lake, Newfoundland........... 1919 
Wuitaker, J. R., Grand Lake, Newfoundland..................... 1919 
Waite, Francis Bracu, St. Paul’s School, Concord, N. H.......... 1891 


* Life Associate. 


XXXVIIL Associates. 


Wuiter, GreorcE R., Dead Letter Office, Ottawa, Canada............ 1903 
Wuirte, W. A., 158 Columbia Heights, Brooklyn, N. Y............. 1902 
Wuitina, ADRIAN P., 163 Sandwich St., Plymouth, Mass........... 1919 
Wuirman, F. N., McGraw Hall, Ithaca, N: Y.......:........... 1919 
WHITTLE, CHARLES L., 50 Congress St., Boston, Mass..............1916 


Waeirrun, Mrs i. Gs Peterboro, NvHiee-e + c.ce eee eee 
WIEGMANN, Dr. W1LL1AM Henry, 436 E. 5th St., New York, N. Y..1916 


WitzurR, AppIson P., 60 Gibson St., Canandaigua, N. Y........... 1895 
Witcox, T. FERDINAND, 118 E. 54th St., New York, N. Y.......... 1895 
Witey, Miss Lena CatHertne, Buckland, Mass................... 1918 
WiLuArD, Bertet G., 1619 Massachusetts Ave., Cambridge, Mass.. .1906 
WiILTARD PRANK ©.) HarminodalesN). Yoon seuss eee eee eee 1909 
WILLARD, Oscar T., 1444 E. 54th St., Chicago, Ill................. 1919 
Wiucox, Prof. M. A., 63 Oakwood Road, Newtonville, Mass....... 1913 
Wiuuiams, Miss Betz, Colonia Hotel, Columbia, 8. C............. 1915 
WiuuiAms, Enricur Ruiz, Reporto Almendarez, Marianao, Cuba....1918 
WinuiaMs, Lamiaw, 152 W. 57th St., New York, N. Y.....-:..-2: 1919 


Witurams, Rosert §., N. Y. Botanical Gardens, New York, N. Y...1888 
Wiuuiamson, E. B., Bluffton, Ind 
Wiuuis, Miss Ciara L., 72 Main St., Framingham Center, Mass. ...1915 


Witmot, Netson E., Marshall St., West Haven, Conn............. 1916 
Witson, Mrs. Erta S., 2 Clarendon Ave., Detroit, Mich............1917 
WILSON, Gorpon, 1424 Chestnut St., Bowling Green, Ky.......... 1919 
Wine, DeWitt C., 5344 Dorchester Ave., Chicago, Ill............. 1913 
WINGARD, Topp ALBERT, 1929 Park Rd., Washington, D. C........ 1918 
Wise, Miss Heten D., 1930 18th St., N. W., Washington, D. C.....1919 
*Woop, Dr. Casry A., 7 W. Madison St., Chicago, ll... .....-...52 1917 
Woop, Georce B., 1830 Spruce St., Philadelphia, Pa.............. 1916 
Woop, Netson R., Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C...... 1895 
Wooprurr, FranKk M., Acad. of Sciences, Lincoln Park, Chicago, Ill.1894 
Wooprvurr, Lewis B., 14 E. 68th St., New York, N. Y............. 1886 
Woopwarp, FraNK Ernsst, 48 Abbott Rd., Wellesley Hills, Mass. .1919 
Woopwarb, Dr. LEMvEL, 52 Pearl St., Worcester, Mass............1917 
WoopwortH, Roy C., 204 E. 35th St., Kansas City, Mo............. 1908 
Worcester, Mrs. ALFRED J., 314 Bacon St., Waltham, Mass....... 1908 
Wricat, Fran« 8., 14'Cayuga St., Auburn, N. Y....0. -.. 2. scene 
Wraicut, Miss Harriet H., 1637 Gratiot Ave., Saginaw. W.S., Mich.1907 
Wricut, Horace WINsLow, 107 Pinckney St., Boston, Mass........ . . 1902 
Wyman, Lutuer E., 3927 Wisconsin St., Los Angeles, Calif......... 1907 
Youn, Rev. Cuas. JoHn, Brighton, Ont., Canada................. 1918 
Youna, Joun P., 1730 Massachusetts Ave., Washington, D. C...... 1911 
ZimMeER, J. T., Dept. of Agriculture, Port Moresby, British Papua. . .1908 
ZUCKERMAN, JosEPH, Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York, N. Y........1919 


* Life Associate. 


Deceased Members. 


DECEASED MEMBERS. 


XXXIX 


FELLOWS 
ATED RICH HART S 5! ta 8 A Satire des AA ck ara! eens tis syne en March 8, 1908 
BATRDSORENCHR MULEERTONGE sts te eeteeie s scle sacle ie a « Aug. 19, 1887 
BEAL, Foster ELLENBOROUGH LASCELLES................-- Oct. 1, 1916 
BENDER ES CHART SULIMILe aya ammmiar ae se ce dale aye. ciis ate ele renate- Feb. 4, 1897 
IESG WISILENR yo WVIAC © fut Sie SCR, 2 Sa) s Ae RE RR Te Sagas July 11, 1919 
CooKE,) WELLS WOODBRIDGH.....0..-+sseres+a+60- March 30, 1916 
COURS MU ETOUES Were one er eisicis tier Leite Scie aieesiois oe ar sionns Dec. 25, 1899 
VETO VANTIN: CrTRAUD ia rel cie sie aciiaee satis terse ss aio Dec. 22, 1915 
(ClOSS ee NIATHTAINTER EP OTT CKNIEV: Srteiaina alejore ieieietolata er) <1 March 10, 1891 
FOUDER WO OSHPH SASS ETDs as-yet ilecisrsieialsaietercreieteie ciel ee) eens Feb. 28, 1888 
JHRERIES WOHN ARMORY: seie alta cicltick. saci renee cia March 26, 1892 
INCI WAPATED Ee STONDAS) ect ye eds are Se eared eile micveudievcns oie ioe 8 exe Jan. 31, 1903 
NMERARINS HD GAREAT MAND ER eit teas ct cpeiee siciae siecle es Nov. 1, 1916 
MmR Rin VANES CUSHINGoererbiies selec sirens el cha sicuels 6 seus © Oct. 27, 1902 
RURDEE SP EIENRYSAUGUSTUShemeas 4 ac cients a2 acres « March 29, 1911 
SENNET? GmORGH BURRITE..........250.5-++-00+0- March 18, 1900 
SMR GINNE OAH CURD ON yates lsc tet ore cuctere ose «scare chedeievexcre @eeeus. Dec. 28, 1903 
NVAEDEYATONSOHING VASYNINRD) =< sh)a)siase sels oe ache eve eerie ara Jan. 28, 1887 
RETIRED FELLOWS 
ETEDIN Gerla viNA Nereis ere rete satis oracle eens cr Nov. 22; 1917 
Cinta hHnODORHENICHOMASs cata eee «eee fe dae. cerns Sept. 25, 1914 
Honorary FELLOWS 
BEANFORDs WaiulUANt MUROMAS is sna. see aeie ocleie ase ee June 23, 1905 
BaRBOZA DU BocaGE, José VICENTE.....................-July —, 1908 
BHREEPSOHE# EUAN SEVON eis eer ca raecsstots cisin Gael «ve leis eis emir Feb. 27, 1915 
BuURMEISTER. KARL HERMANN KONRAD...............----- May 1, 1891 
(OABAINTS ro IAIN ITO UT Stnerern idan delevstn eins ci sateie acre ffs.cuels Gc) sess Feb .20, 1906 
DRESSER MEIN Yanna emanates sri eis sae ee: Nov. 28, 1915 
FINSCH, FRIEDRICH HERMANN OTTO.....................- Jan. 31, 1917 
(CeAcTe Kar PEER Hie re ee eens SES aye hen ais, ey spcatey eeiway is Jan. 1, 1897 
CTGHIOMIM HM NRICOMEAMIYHR cc tactic ae cists oe ciclsiea Sias os Dec. 16, 1909 
COD MANE EH REDERICKs lu ANH aah ii sta siem crete sie s/c stale = Feb. 19, 1919 


* Presidents of A. O. U. 


xl Deceased Members. 


GURNEYSJOHN HENRY: 5.2 eee en ee ee April 20, 1890 
HARTLAUB, [KARL JOHANN] GUSTAV...............-2-2-+ Novy. 20, 1900 
HARVIE-BROWN, JOHN ALEXANDER.............0220-00c0: July 26, 1916 
UME, SATIEAN:@ CTA VAIN: «cet s neces ce ee eerie erate July 31, 1912 
EuUxiny, (MHOMASTHENRY.., case e sae eee en eae June 29, 1895 
KRAUS PH ERDINANDeectr sc... fn cts one soe nate Sept. 15, 1890 
LAWRENCE: GHORGH NEWBOLD... 260 ge - sia or leeo ee eee Jan. 17, 1895 
Miynr ADOLE BERNHARD! 05541 sti oes dae beech oe Feb. 5, 1911 
Miainn-EpwARDS; ATPHONSE: «c.cs.oeheee «2s ee eee ee oe April 21, 1900 
NEWTON: AT PRED. ean, de cerac asic ae. cities Ae CET Or June 7, 1907 
RARKBR A WiLGLEAM ATCT CHENG se ayer 15 crete emesis July 3, 1890 
REGZEUN, AUGUSTRAVONeeh ce Goes 2 aise oe eee Sept. 2, 1891 
DAUAVENA OSB ERT: 00s © rcys ey accayne 1 coici a) Sve eT ae ee ea June 1, 1898 
SAUNDERS; SEO WARD ates A ae ee oe cick se, eres ere eee Oct. 20, 1907 
CHIE GHD WEE RNEAININ; Ge aes rises ee a crecesleet tte ote el el eee Jan. 17, 1884 
NCLATER Ue BECP GTR Y vo sacts ce latlatactaeh: + cere eee June 27, 1913 
DSERBOHM, EMONR Yen.) unc wad ter site een site a ee ee eee Nov. 26, 1895 
SHARPE, RICHARD BOWDLER: Asc. e toes & «saws aoe ee Dec. 25, 1909 
TaczANowskI, Lapisias [CASIMIROVICH]...............4.- Jan. 17, 1890 
WALTACE SATERED RUSSEL sia. e eet occ ete etter Nov. 7, 1913 


CORRESPONDING FELLOWS. 


ALTUM, JOHANN BERNARD THEODOR..............-..0-00085 Feb. 1, 1900 
ANDERSON, GUOHN: 2 stack Mone sake ue oe eee Le Ee: Aug. 15, 1900 
BaLDAMUS, AUGUSTE KARL EDUARD..............00000 000s Oct. 30, 1893 
BUAKISTON a UHOMASVVIRIGH Tis a0) es 1c ree ean oe ae Oct. 15, 1891 
Buastus, [PAuL HeInricu] RUDOLPH..............+.6+.- Sept. 21, 1907 
Buastus, WILHELM AUGUST HEINRICH...........02.++-00- May 31, 1912 
Boapanow, Mopest NIKOLAEVICH................2000: March 16, 1888 
BROOKS) WiIRETANE TOD WIN sce ii ete ee eee eee Jan. 18, 1899 
BRYANT) WADTER ie TE RG] Hie etirectrn ie aoe ee eee teere eee May 21, 1905 
BULLER A WALTER LAWRY..c oie con pre eee eo here July 19, 1906 
BULLER SO DWARD ARTHUR on aaice cain ae ee April 16, 1916 
CoOlLDETT IROBBRT o.0e <srelisyomie Glee eed Ao ele hc ee eee Jan. 20 Os 
Coopur: JAMES GRAHAM, 25.04.00 detach ne cose eie oe July 19, 1902 
CORD BAUX?AOHNjsesabes doce oe sien Rie cee eae eee Aug. 1, 1899 
DAVID) ARMAND 82.8 lac bee nacteek as ee eee Nov. 10, 1900 
DUGESAATBRED .iiichceie nach aero Cone ee eee Jan. 7, 1910 
HATIO A VICTOR 4itak ou 2 AMene SP tad peasant a eae te March 19, 1906 
GIRTANNER + GEORG -ADBERT 2. ue. fee one June 4, 1907 
Gopupr, EMI AUGUST. }..cheaee oa encase eee se eietee July 5, 1917 
HAAST, JOHANN PRANZ JULIUS VON. 206i. crete se emer Aug. 16, 1887 


LTARGIPT sHiDWARD< |.26 s citoesees oe eee ere March 19, 1895 


Deceased Members. xli 

Hawaxe(GiustTay PIDERR VON... .2+2<.5ccs-- noses ee sess oc dan. 9 1911 
TB hapunitiy Oua ve odietow Clad corr conn tits Gnd Dien ni tien praia Dec. 27, 1914 
ea UES ME NGIT Tey eS tera hro ists ony oie, ais Se ake eles seas ops Gwe o beelwcal Feb. 21, 1902 
HoMEYER, EHUGEN FERDINAND VON.......................-May 31, 1889 
SN UDSENG A WATDEMAIR stsirlsice ccs alesse 2 oie ce wa nsiere er abel Jan. 8, 1898 
KRUKENBERG, CARL FRIEDRICH WILHELM................. Feb. 18, 1889 
AVARD SLU DGAR) IGHOPOLDE ca eoc a cusioicie ieee Ge oa Jan. 1, 1900 
IGEGG Hag VVETAT AMT VIEN CHIN ID Sc etee fara, aie ecules. soe ehe ie tieuete orcs March 25, 1918 
ER VORKSUEUN EYAL Sore asd 2s ayo cyclone, sf eevee ciel oace eg ale ce tiles rote Dec. 5, 1905 
LitrorD, Lorp (THomas LYTTLETON Powys)..............June 17, 1896 
NAM GRENGEANDE RSJ OHAIN, oye cieice- 4 2 cisco ears eusiesisiie see April 12, 1897 
NUARSCHAUE VAUGUST FRIEDRICH a0 ssc sei eeciee eee secs <- Oct. 11, 1887 
MippENpDoRFF, ALEXANDER THEODOROVICH................Jan. 28, 1894 
Mosygisovics voN MoJjsvar, FELIX GEORG HERMANN Avcust. Aug. 27, 1897 
NPA MInYaE MEO POVOSHIT, © c.cioie cists acters sles so thous we 8 Rice oelsie' os May 24, 1918 
INO RH MPAU REID LOHING dec oes iho oar sie esol eevelere ise er oieieie ahegs® May 6, 1917 
Wane NUGHNE WVULdTAM (22). 55 sce ois)se de eeuc ae cae fees Nov. 16, 1911 
Oustast, [Jean Frépéric] Emine......................- Oct. 23, 1905 
HEIR IR UDOUEVAMANDUS i: 26-45 Groicsi-2 sowie se)s 52 2 tee July 23, 1904 
Pryevausky, Nicotas MICHAELOVICH.....................Nov. 1, 1888 
RENCISS | DANTED WEBSTER selec sce cle oclde ses cs cece cis sss Nov. 19, 1899 
BRM HARRY PAMESISTOVIN..o...csc0 02s ase scedsesosee: Feb. 17, 1888 
RapbDe, Gustav FERDINAND RICHARD VON.............- March 15, 1903 
IRVAMS Ae ODI WARD MEME RSOND an erect siseaioe feces ee ose ee Dec. 16, 1916 
SCHRENCKsMEOPROLDWVONea sofa a isteccsys crete Fas Sie ece sc tie cers elas Jan. 20, 1894 
Séiys-LONGCHAMPS, MicHEL EDMOND DE................. Dec. 11, 1900 
SEVERTZOW, NicoLAS ALEKSYEVICH.....................:: Feb. 8, 1885 
SH n EEA GCHORGHIDIRNEST sc sfc 5 <citaeicls clo leis tose Nov. 29, 1910 
SPE MENS ONAMELE NE Very. We nisiao..) accord svacieie craves aie sats Sapeered Aug. 18, 1888 
SPRISTRAM TEENY sD AKER «so sce cic. 5 oa ssie o's arora 9 ou sta eee March 8, 1906 
MWIHAR TON shinNizvarlUHORNTONG sca cies on anes eee es 5 one Sept. —, 1895 
WoopHOUSE, SAMUEL WASHINGTON......................--Oct. 23, 1904 

MEMBERS 

VAG GamLG GBR Titer eons Sere) 7h ek ne en tS dae oe AM Jy tee July 12, 1915 
SROWINeE EN RB WRT so) Arete oe keke dec od Sidin 5, cuslieetoniteckee May 12, 1913 
CAMERON EWEN SOMBREND S504 05cie cs uis see ores oie slo os May 25, 1915 
TELUS SG ES fy cl ICG) SE fe ne a ar June 20, 1904 
EAD VIVANT Ame meet sh car horain es hte. nds Baten olen eh aoe Gone Dec. 9, 1910: 
jemi, Shanvaostaos ID aielsue peep ene oem eee meee Boel oe ome e Oct. 22, 1905 
SGNTG HATO) UACAVVADEATSTS oe aensg Sete cared None ck> cuateeshe coe chs uae Nov. 11, 1913 
Miier, OttvE THORNE (Mrs. Harriet Mann MILuER)... Dec. 25, 1918 
UATE Hea VVIbGTANE LnGRANGE: coe 5 occ. secs re cele ae cous ne July 8, 1907 
MoORRMWEORADEORDS Me ert] fe hice a ane ob ee Se tekae Oct. 7, 1912 
VV PTERPANG | CARTES: OTIS S56 Nein seco 2s ss scceutees ecu « Dec. 6, 1910 


xhi Deceased Members. 


ASSOCIATES 

ACKERMAN OSEPH: MOODYeems ae eee Ciencia 
ADAMS) CHARTESUHRAN CIS tern ti sears ana ieee May 20, 
ARLEN CHARLES SLOWER a5 5es.o6 ei acer aero eine Oct. 15, 

PMG, IDWS IUCHANNI bos gon ooadopepopecsopcugnosoduaue Feb. 6, 
ATKINS ELARMONPALBROs Gs. \scaeiee etenieine actinic May 19, 
Nn, WABI NU Id OnofsisiOUNon oe gd hooocomeagoondodo ua. March 11, 
BATE Yar DBRT: EUW AT Dives snc emis cl sneecnerciel «ones terete ork iees June 22, 
BATE Ye CHARLES HH aa ss7nb aes donne Sorbie ore roe 5 
BAIRD UC Ye ELUNTER een eer ote tenet June 19, 
BANKS) Miss ViIARTHAIB URES 425 0.200 anes citeseeesiee creer Dec. 13 

BARLOW CHESTER Rie seein cman. cescieie cue tems cent erro Nov. 6 

BAT HIN; 4 CoE OR GEN eee Ae opr a ee aaron ae ae Ae Feb. 16, 
Baur, Grore [HERMANN Cart Lupwie]..................Jdune 25, 
[BUONO EN Poalhy krona sb) by GH (Set tn hy ss Kince Ge ogee aio 60-4 5 Ar Dec. 26, 
BECKHAM, CHARLES WICKLIFFE:............0...0505020008 June 8, 
BERTIER DELAGNEL ace ee he ee ee eee Feb. 11, 
IBEDTSss NI ORALAING 1) VViUTEDee pacts tkeee ste ie oe eke eee eee May 21, 
BIBT s\C MARTENS eran ir vege: Men eens es as ae STE ne ere ae ee April 14, 
PIR DWinbie uRANCIS#) OSB PHt eeipiy eat iene er ee eran eee June 28, 
BOARDMAN: GHORGHE AUGUSTUS: a1 mice eae eile teie oe Jan. 11, 
BODINE SD ONALDSONS ase er sa RA erica ny ome te aecacnen eee Aug. 26, 
BOLLES SHRANK 4.4 serceots e eae i hae lcs romero meron aaicates ge eae ree Jan. 10, 
BRACKETD HOSTER RELODGHS ric aacis ee se ese eee ore tee Jan. 5, 
BRATNARD. GS ARRONS sia siccuclorsm chance nace case todo ber on meee May 15, 
BRANTLEY WILLIAM HORBACREAaeascinine oe soe ree eee Sept. 9, 
BREESE, WILLIAM LAWRENCE......0...5 420.2. - 242052 eo DeCE 
BRENINGER AGEORGH HWRANK. |» s2 5 seas so ss sie oes eee Dec. 3, 
BRE NINANAI CHAR IL Sales chemietar per mn Prensit ests one ene ee March 21, 
BREWSTER EDWARD) HVEREDTDA se 28 ser cece aac July 1, 
BRIGGS! JOSEREYSTOCKDAT Hr 40 frac eerie niece eee 
BROKAW aZOUIS) WESTHNe see aoe ie pee ee acter Sept. 3, 
BROWN] JOKING CLIRRORD acetic cine ene ee eee Jan. 16, 
BROWNE SMRANCIS]CHARTES ia tele tie oe ee cette eee ene Jan. 9, 
BROWNSONS WiNLTTANS EU NIR Yao er es eins cients ores ere eienertten Sept. 6, 
BURKE? WiLniAMsD ARD WHI avy aie ehieloehe cena ee eens April 15, 
BuRNETT, LEONARD ELMER..........................--March 16, 

Butter, |THOMAS] JEFFERSON...................+-2: oO) Chez 
IBiep-asy gies Bb Ore IN Ip Ree Kadam oo en olo a iogecoboo oc March 23, 
CAIRNS. JOHN SIMPSONMs tae dae ace oon eee June 10, 
CAuEeAUERE Ya BRENDON SUR oe oe Nov. 20, 
CAMPRELI “OBERT ARGYE Dien) pine aria eens eee April —, 


CANFIEED? JOSEPH U BUCKINGHAM... aos cee heen Feb. 18, 


1895 
1893 
1907 
1885 
1894 
1917 
1905 
1915 
1917 
1902 
1918 
1898 
1918 
1888 
1916 
1917 
1897 
1901 
1901 
1915 
1894 
1900 
1919 
1914 
1888 
1905 


1919 
1918 
1897 
1901 


1909 
1914 
1904 
1913 
1914 
1895 
1901 
1897 
1904 


Deceased Members. xh 


(CANE TATE RONG OC YIRUS tee raieyocy salle teenie eve a Savion toile ie, 'o ete as sual oesilee Nov. 15, 1907 
OVATIONS DI WHTIN tones oe raictacot oy nex helet stole shen snck ct shee cP ain sketeae.e tages Feb. 3, 1900 
Carter, IsaseEL MontietH Pappock (Mrs. Epcar N. Carter) 

Sept. 15, 1907 
CHADBOURNE, ETHEL RicHARDSON (Mrs. ARTHUR PATTERSON 


(CEPA E OURINE) Scie cick ona ateiay eve ccds eroehel ssi rciens = ete mati oye Oct. 4, 1908 
CHART ES MR EDOUIMATAT ar ysinicsaletciars) sectonshaiousira sale simi eitea sees ars May 6, 1911 
GUAR KH OHINGNATHANTDDG © ye ciel cicc.cicteaets sateroe caltin= 9 onoiene Jan. 138, 1903 
(Cor, \Wanrianeat WWipoiiWin(EbWOIig aoc gecosdcos ooboooo cone ooT April 26, 1885 
@orBUORNY WILLIAM WALLACE. 2.02.00 200008 oo coe eis selene oc Oct. 17, 1899 
Comet, [CoLuzTte]) ALonzo McGue..................- Aug. 22, 1902 
Conant, Martua Witson (Mrs. THomas Oakes Conant). Dec. 28, 1907 
CONKiEIN | CHARTESVEDGAR'. 5. 6 oa- Gale oc dem ce soet a6 sorte niet Sept. 8, 1916 
CORNING PHIRASTUS Dongs sce ccna o ce aan eee ices April 8, 1893 
C@REHORES HREDERIC MORTON... 22.2. cle cere ss cee os = se Oct. 16, 1919 
DATING | WATEEDANG (ics odo ss » Atue ede sens de dicia se see o crsciact April 21, 1902 
ITDAUKGTIN A OHUING cAI Nietares cescroreiore erence eG orereyetayre eile oentotousiers or ere Feb. 21, 1900 
DAIS CHARMS IMMNRY cio csc ie ste foecie als nuns oye Scistns as) ces Oct. 5, 1918 
Davis, Susan Louise (Mrs. WALTER Rockwoop Davis)... Feb. 13, 1913 
DAVIS SAT TER ROCK WOOD snare ae es face setie se oie. April 3, 1907 
DPM Re OHMON | NEWTON a cieiciieee cicitie ce erie = cles isi) July 27, 1901 
DODGE UL UANSVLONTGOMMRY. 24 deel disie ees seieerers os ts Nov. 23, 1909 
DORN TOR MU OUWESis 6c edsraroleiedshorerchel isos ercherens aiausio's = aisy Sycusts ,1918 
DIGINTOP, ERIC BROOKMS so. 2/20 ors rin oo kaos eae alee le ...May 19, 1917 
IDKacizan, bine) lke eons pon odobobed a oun oer occ. Jan. 20, 1915 
[RTT OMS AIM Wiki Tp ON EUa tee els ayers eee elec eceierel ra miets <a! = Feb. 11, 1889 
EPRI AINIKS ae LOR ANIRIUIN) fie saat cia ersiaya ol ay om ea techie cuss ooraemned April 24, 1895 
AIR QUEDA ACR THUR KOOTKs ai. ceiec © © = serssieie & she oue ts) lets) = Feb. 21, 1920 
FARWELL, Mrs. ELLEN SHELDON DRUMMOND............--- Aug. 6, 1912 
BRR YAR OLIN LPAR Wall bLiaivers sicistciervo. eke siclsl ley cictaee 4 otceue steer o Feb. 11, 1910 
MRR eM VUAR Ye DISSHT Ti seys a cisi 5 oad cust = sosvene# ob ile) s. su'e's! eulet oh March 18, 1915 
IPSS, \Winsiniune Jehoninl sonnsoos ae oudade Som aa de ocdo ose Oct. 6, 1909 
HoOwiER JOSHUA WOUNSBURY: «sls sae cle ie 4 olaeie cas ss sle06 a> July 11, 1899 
UR CHARTS SAN THON Ys se eerrsrers aciensreie) ale) cliais sycitd on « March 16, 1906 
UGE Rs EMO DEY OTT a eyerauesutsiscete ote rene te tetelenaraialetave: shnisiala @.s Aug. 17, 1916 
CusNER PABRAHAN IMIGRBER Tyr see ciel iaaeieleryeleioiee esto April 30, 1895 
(OSs) SHNIAMIN, HRANKLING 2 erjoh sc 63.c.s[¢ sais 5 ayeie te «ate a July 6, 1893 
GRONBERGER GS OVENE MIAGNUS ici: delevsta saterelabalepatel ssc ee aneh April 24, 1916 
lalAiiosy, BLO: DIAG PT ads patio na 8 Gea dmlouoas coe tod ao mir Nov. 6, 1913 
HATCH ESSE MUAURICB Hs 5 seis 4 cls ese teycustat ehekst te ielei se) ofsie May 1, 1898 
AZAR DPaOWIUA NDN GIBSON Mee ratieneta ait sieaicrsia sted a7 ateha Jan. 23, 1918 
Hinwitry ©mARrbnS GORDON cciacccido a6 siete ocicrs tel oer March 1, 1920 
ELTA VW ALIGN’ R Yar ioe @ xvenctorelepstetotels es el cle, crsctele otasonxs - Oct. 14, 1913 
INGE VIPS eA IGOUISAM an teicie asia) cictaiel ol ae ot ation et ol ctian vet cle Feb. 11, 1916 
Hircucocx, Mrs. ELEANOR BECKWITH..................-March 3, 1917 
LOADER Yay RAD ERICK FODGHS.eecees aes ees sci ce = Feb. 26, 1895 


IBM, ION Rona GHEaNKe ito Gnododganen: so Gece nO Osea our May 10, 1906 


xliv Deceased Members. 


HI@OPES, A OSTAHE ac. crrcese Gra siconien eure rere eae rarer iene eae Jan. 16, 
HowE, HLORENCEVAURELLAL ae acer erie rien e a aioe July 9, 
HO wWas SMOUISES sneer Rica fees a eT eee Sept. 13, 
HOWLAND: JOHNISNOWDENE Geo selene mines can ence eee Sept. 19, 
EUBBARD  SARAPANDERSONG eerie iene einen te enn ose July 31, 
INGAES) CHARTESTEDWARD a-0 ca ier cee ee cee eee tet May 31, 
INGERSOLL, J OSEPHACARTETON.ceeeeer eo merece ona eer Oct. 1, 
JENKS JOHN: WHIPPER PLOTTER scant. sc oe ence Sept. 26, 
EWE TA SICTINDS Fivall OULNNG Horeca teibeetttsrs icie eee eer Sept. 5, 
JOUNEIE RR EPO UIS: west cr iok coterie ole Pere ee March 22, 
JUSTICH MEH NR Yann Mere ice beaeaete is cas lariat March 1, 
IGeEKpRY WHAM. ANTHONY angie acini aise ot ere Feb. 15, 
FEN APP Virshs Ein Nin, Acer sceersicin, oe... suateasiene aera reece eterna Spring, 
KSNIGHT. WILBER ChINTONs sci) 0 ceiiae Lech neice ecient July 28, 
KEINOXA J OHNIC OWING roca tue cee eitaiens ale clatter a cote erent nee June 10, 
ISO CH AUGUSTE etc ee cathe, anak eee oe ee Feb. 15, 
ISUMETEN ACG UD WIGS Ss cis cise raters cntbereustaeraiets hernia cae ier armen Dee. 4, 
KumMiIEn; TaurRE Wupwic) THEODOR... 2.6.06 6. eee oe) sa eB eo, 
TAKE SIG RSEEE WeATID O)44 ters Someeeiste eee cio che eee ene Feb. 7, 
ANDZs DAVIDSE RNEST: cares oot terete eee fal te ceo eee ee Oct. 7, 
IDG oN Gone Qu NieRoyo aaa Bets eee A REA Se nee OTS do otduo.c April 19, 
IGAW.RENCE VOB HR DME ORs me repens crete cic el er iieme ete cree April 27, 
BEE WUESLIBZATDXANDERS: 6, - cleus ole cect erate here tenet dare May 20, 
LEVEY, VWiIbnTAM, CHARLESWORTH ce - rae steve sien cea tee July 5, 
HINDENS CHARTERS? 200. cs cimavsh echo Wind diets nureun eer eee Feb. 3, 
EOYD CANDREW: JAMES toni crac pac ce oie eee ee eae June 14, 
LORD; Wiliam ROGHRS: 2.20.0 ees fee Natok eee neo eee Lebmeas 
MABBETE GIDE ONEisoacim sora cice cts eae cite enamine Aug. 15, 
MABBOLIN DOUGHAS CLIRFORD: sant cca eee Sept. 15, 
MEAT TAIN s AUGESXcAINID Bite see centgees acess cares mice vse cist ker enenie Oct. 25, 
NALTUAND @ OB T MUBNOM a Ginette fae eee March 11, 
MARBIN. CHARTS: CHUIRCHDLIsaiisctiae see eietke ciel mencne ce Sept. 10, 
Mitancy: OlIVER ig case cee cient chee ieee March 19, 
MARIS; "WILLARD ILORRAINES. cj. cee eerie oleic tered Dee. 11, 
MARSDEN; (HIENR Ya WARDEINiael tinge. cis ote ote che serene Feb. 26, 
Mob wan; DANTET CHURCH. «tei cae eee eee eee Nov. 1, 
MGHATTON,; EURNR Yi eisec isis cette aleurone oe eer asee Pen aiere eeene April 22, 
IVE GIKGINTOAS SULA INS r-less cirarna Gites elton che casei oiman eater Cea one meter Nov. 30, 
McMAHON, WALTBR WREBMAN.. 2.0 c- oer iene cere renee Aug. 28, 
Minan “GEORGE SMITH? scce wigs a net mie tecieetane cient rene June 18, 
Minot HENRY DAVIS]. isc occinee ctl beta cicero N OMe 
MORRELL, CLARENCE LEUBINR Witenes sie ce receieeueie cio: Cicer see July 15, 
NicHots, HowArp GARDNER}. .-1. scenes cic on seein June 23, 
AS bo (stan Dh oe Ae Gh Geese aa tata tes aba mmo did oo bo 5 March 12, 
INORTHROP, JOHN ISATAH i> ea peel ciiccsiericia: @ eich eee: June 26, 


Oxiver, HENRY IOMMBUR 4c ele eo once ore toe: Oct. 25, 


1904 
1913 
1912 
1885 
1918 
1917 
1897 
1894 
1915 
1894 
1918 
1908 
1918 
1903 
1904 
1907 
1902 
1888 
1916 
1918 
1916 
1897 
1908 
1914 
1888 
1906 
1916 
1890 
1918 
1907 
1920 
1900 
1899 
1895 
1914 
1909 
Loe 
1899 
1918 
1901 
1890 
1902 
1896 
1903 
1891 
1919 


Deceased Members. xlv 


BAR KAP ATISTIN: MORD severe is sie cise Wiad aes, eieysnele aie 6 1eseerene ove Sept. 22, 1893 
AUEMIER RADERICK ©LARK a. © ois «sco crscse® eaiense ste. March 4, 1906 
ROMERO YA GRACHEVIRGINTA ac. ae cece cies ee sielels cacus te Sila oi May 14, 1906 
IRGMER OYA PEUARR Yon KVAIND)s)5 ys, 21016) -ser+sovcleueus) sseresayeuenssoneiayter< Jan. 27, 1915 
IRON, INGE {Shs Min Gees San ee Dao Cm ors ce a aia erica sinc 1918 
RUINAMEVEREDERIC WARD. a. 26 sees «sa e+ sess ae dione eas Aug. 14, 1915 
IRVAGS D Ati nes GcHORGE ELENIRY’. 5) c1e)eleicis «ea oc oaa ates caers aucnele March 25, 1895 
EWAN WATE HMO RUAIN OTS) VWALME DAUM © epee) steeicia a eve aie eloyarevtenaliel © soto: eyreleae June 12, 1911 
ERA eg GMORG EH tbln NR Wat. popes vices cise yciere ave oloce erence March 20, 1903 
HED CHESTPARUAT BERT sists cc -elepe stcscne eared aigenisy ave e ovctsvaiei aioe Dec. 16, 1912 
RICHARDSON AW UENINESS: cieiicict) cnet scien si oeiele cieieciann sols a) slee June 24, 1893 
VOB BEINA BV IISS pINVAIN Crys ab ra El pepe ts. sy etevecsss cre Sieearn ee cue sve ehe .hareueecneie 1919 
Rosins, JuLIA Stockton (Mrs. EpwarpD RosINs).......... July 2, 1906 
SIND eIGIAUS WISE AW ICO Wiser scope cicia such ceoinicns cvehc) onesie: wreueiieneio ke April 20, 1906 
SANA OVA ITED GDL) fev y-ieichcrore ile) «aide wid force aiaie nie ai ais. orei Aug. —, 1917 
SELOUSMEBR GY SHERBORNs dee seis seieiaciiee sac se an April 7, 1900 
SHANNON LLETAMGURD Yap eraets oie cin sirsectereioe oc eee ace Oct. 29, 1916 
STS IE He DEO MPA Serene a it ie Scheele coin cp rewersvone or al aventts April —, 1919 
SACL EW PATNI Sibel O WHEN Sasrh, usta ai shetsesy ese ie ahars use bio ye ene aie le cere sus) Sts Feb. 22, 1895 
SUM VIN HOMASHE:DWARDSaa ribet: seiisist ceicle <ineiaedee Dec. 23, 1902 
SMA BED GAR AMBER Tescrs oe jencie eieteict-ns ei ota a cts ache tialer ake April 23, 1884 
SMA WEAR OMDAVWIESIM Yaa tee isiasisieleieicicls cies icine ears March 12, 1912 
SMURHG ©TARENGCM PAT BERT. c.f cccisieic sete 010 60 seins ious eleneush oo: May 6, 1896 
SmitH, Ruta Coox (Mrs. H. A. HAMMOND SMITH).......... Jan. 2, 1912 
SNOWANMRAN CIS EIGINTENGTON: cacmiee sales oc ce se ces se ce cee Sept. 20, 1908 
SOUMHWiICKer JAMES INIORTINVUGR .c.celee cs gece sc cise «rie June 3, 1904 
SPAULDING, HREDERICK BENJAMIN.........-000++- 00-500: Oct. 22, 1913 
SDANTON  ONATEAN IY (OWING? aeisic cin. o uiets clas eaieieise cusemneie: Feb. 17, 1918 
STONE MW i ARDEELARRISONM= soe sola aireieieioiien tales March 15, 1895 
Styer, KaTHariIne Resecca (Mrs. J. J. STYER)........... Jan. 20, 1917 
SwercErR, HELEN Bronson (Mrs. Jacos L. SwWHIGER)..... March 24, 1907 
PAVnOR PATE XCAN DER © MD RISCOM[: sire sisis scree ciessieies cts oes April 10, 1910 
sHOMESON ) MitiiH PD MIVAYTORs eae cieececiesicie ssa ae elee es Aug. 7, 1907 
SFTORNE ae lo AT VICAR VaTNi ters eie jicia ete e cls es sicisiocicle eleeie oe March 16, 1897 
“INTEROIRIN TO}, SVAN MOR DEBE o ciate & cen cle CIC Rbin Ie ICROE TD Oe cunt on or July 4, 1915 
LLHURBHR Sw UGHNE) CARLNTONG. secs as ec «is seieies ee sie cece Sept. 6, 1896 
AWARE Dvew Lo DGAR Eee riers cine Siege oS Alege er avarsiassiainierac 4 eusketons Nov. 17, 1918 
Upuam, Mary Cornewia (Mrs. WILLIAM HENry UpnHam).. Nov. 29, 1912 
MHNINOR SEinNR Ys G-HORGH mei icis eerecs crs eier cle gielenne aes custo June 8, 1884 
WATERS DMARD OTA NT HYgereralaeisiec clersi. sins ace cla siesie eleiere Dec. 27, 1902 
NVAKMR OBER TMGATSHIAW «05 cle sieieis icles cies blele slse aver o cays Nov. 16, 1916 
WikEnHse CHARTS OAT TTR yen eeaitarecieeis ci cise pamelor oa Feb. 24, 1914 
AVEEDTSE Ey ewe ATVI Sol Co TSAURIKT IN, site oa) chayeylateds venous: « ofore, ond.) syeyewaice Gvalleids 9 aus Jan. 5, 1916 
NV PLIES Yow Gis OMIM renee See METI A spe sates Nedra vei amie raievelace poets Oct. 31, 1918 
WVHA Ds SANTI TMV VAUETGeisrycretsieteicie ci acic ain ie cliche vars ciel sicisvei May 24, 1887 


MULESON GOLDIN OTM WARD c sac goles «eile anf Gos wus wlayerescieie «Pel Nov. 22, 1911 


xlvi Deceased Members 


WINDER HRANCIScaepekien clerr rrr ie eee ce ae Feb. 24, 
WASTER wVILETAM OR OT CH te ae mice cera iit ee Aug. 21, 
Woop JOHNICTATIREM cen norton ener reer re June 16, 
WOOD; “WAMELTAME Sis peace scas seco Rie Riera Cae era erence Aug. 9, 
WoOoDRUER EDWARD) SEYMOUR. sata ceh en eeereote ei oc Jan. 15, 
WORTHEN, | CHARTESHMIMBALI: cr ayer acids one sek cneieacior May 27, 
WIRIGH TS AMUB ne otic tentrert ier tok Pein ok nore eter cisions Jan. 18, 
MOUNG, CURTIS*OURY.....cic conn» coemetins (eee en eee July 30, 


TAPPBY WALTER I RBAVES vans. odio a serine s ssiee aiente ke one ee OseZO} 


1917 
1911 
1916 
1885 
1909 
1909 
1917 
1902 
1914 


ae 


Old CONTINUATION OF THE New 


Var eriy§ BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB Seen 
H Quarterly Journal of Ornithology 
Vol. XXXVII JANUARY, 1920 No. 1 


PUBLISHED BY 


The American Ornithologists’ Union 


CAMBRIDGE, MASS. 


Entered as second-class mail matter in the Post Office at Boston, Mass. 
“ Acceptance for mailing at special rate of postage provided for in Section 
1103, Act of October 3, 1917, authorized on September 23, 1918.” 


CONTENTS 


In Memoriam: WILuiAM Brewster. By Henry W. Henshaw. (Plates I and II.) 
Witi1am BrewstTer.— An APPRECIATION. By John G. Gehring i ‘ 
WitiiamM BrewstTeR.— RESOLUTION oF THE NuTtTTaLL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB 
Tue WILLIAM BREwstTER MEMORIAL . < : : HN inne : 

In Memoriam: Lyman Bextpine. By A. K. Fisher. (Plate III.) . i A 
MipsummMer Birps In THE CatTsxILtL Mountains. By Stanley Cobb, M. D. 
Novres ON THE WINTER Birps or San Antonio, Texas. By Ludlow Griscom 
Tur Occutt SENSES IN Birps. By Herbert H. Beck F ; : 

Birps oF THE Ciear Crvex District, CoLrorapo. By F. C. Lincoln 
SANDPIPERS WINTERING aT PuymMouTH, MassacHuseEeTts. By J. A. Farley 
SrqurstTRATION Notes. By Joseph Grinnell ; > 

On Procellaria alba GMELIN. By Leverett Mills Loomis 


Notes on Seven Birps TAKEN NBAR CHARLESTON, SoutH Carouina. By 
Arthur T. Wayne 


Tue STatTus OF THE SuBsPEciFIc Races OF Branta canadensis. By J. D. Figgins 
BacHMAN’S WARBLER BREBDING IN ALABAMA. By Ernest G. Holt. (Plate IV.) 
DEsScRIPTION OF A PROPOSED New Race OF THE KILLDEER FROM THE COAST OF 
Perv. By Frank M. Chapman & : H és ; : é é : 
DescriPTiONs OF A NEW SPECIES AND SUBSPECIES OF TYRANNIDAE. By Charles B. 
Cory . “ S 4 7 é b kK b ‘ “ f 
Tur THIRTY-SEVENTH STATED MEETING OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ 
Union. By TZ. S. Palmer ‘ . : i A b : 


PAGE 
1 
24 
27 
29 
33 
46 
49 
55 
60 
78 
84 
88 


92 
94 
103 


105 
108 
‘110 


GENERAL Notes.— The Black Skimmer on Long Island, N. Y., 126; Another Record of 
the White Pelicanin New York, 126; A Note on the Southern Teal, 126; Trumpeter 
Swan (Olor buccinator) in Western Minnesota. A Correction, 127; Wild Swan on 
Long Island, N. Y., 127; Notes on Some Shore Birds of the Alabama River, Mont- 
gomery County, Ala., 127; The Black Rail at St. Marks, Florida, 128; Purple Galli- 
nule in North Carolina, 130; Breeding of the Mourning Dove in Maine, 130; The 

‘Status of Harlan’s Hawk in Colorado, 130; White Gyrfalcon (Falco islandus) in 
Montana, 132; The Hawk Owl in North Dakota, 132; Pileated Woodpecker in 
Morris County, N. J., 132; Unusual Habits of Chimney Swift, 132; Hmpidonaz 
griseus in Nevada, 133; The Crow in Colorado, 134; Appearance of the Canada Jay 
at Moorehead, Minn., 134; Note on the Food of the Starling (Sturnus vulgaris), 
135; Harris’ Sparrow in Michigan, 135; American Golden-eye and White-crowned 
Sparrow in Northern Michigan in Summer, 135; Lanius ludovicianus migrans in 
North Dakota, 136; Bohemian Waxwings in Chicago, Ill., 136; The Bohemian 
Waxwing (Bombycilla garrula) at Chicago, Ill., 137; Orange-crowned Warbler (Ver- 
mivora celata celata) in Massachusetts, 137; Fall Records of Mourning Warbler in 
Western Missouri, 137; Breeding of the Canadian Warbler and Northern Water- 
Thrush in New Jersey, 137; 'Hermit Thrush’s Nest in Unusual Location, 138; 
Peculiar Nesting of Hermit Thrushes, 138; The Bluebird in Cuba, 140; Rare or 


Uncommon Birds at Rochester, N. Y., 140; Notes from St. Marks, Fla., 142; 


Bird 


Notes on the Wisconsin River, 143; Abundance of Periodical Cicadas Diverting 
Attacks of Birds from Cultivated Fruits, 144; Nomenclatural Casuistry, 145; 


Supplementary Note on J. P. Giraud, 146. 


Recent LiteratuRE.— Van Oort’s ‘Birds of Holland,’ 147; Taverner’s ‘Birds of East 
Canada’ 147; ‘The Birds of North Carolina,’ 149; Hine on Birds of the Katmai 
Region, Alaska, 150; Witherby’s ‘Handbook of British Birds,’ 151; A Geographical Bib- 
liography, of British Ornithology, 152; Birds of the Expedition to Korinchi Peak, 
Sumatra, 153; Swann’s ‘Synoptical List of the Accipitres,’ 154; Burns’ ‘Ornithol- 
ogy of Chester County, Pennsylvania,’ 155; Mailliard’s ‘Notes on the Avifauna of 
the Inner Coast Range of California,’ 156; Bailey’s ‘Raptorial Birds of Iowa,’ 156; Mrs. 
Farwell’s ‘Bird Observations near Chicago,’ 157; Hudson’s*‘ Book of a Naturalist,’ 
158; Dixon on Wild Ducks in a City Park, 158; Recent Circulars by Forbush, 159; 
The Birds of the Albatross Expedition of 1899-1900, 159; Coker on the Guano Birds 
of Peru, 160; Scoville’s ‘The Out-of-Doors Club,’ 162; Gifford’s ‘Field Notes on the 
Land Birds of the Galapagos Islands,’ 162; Halland Grinnell on Life Zone Indicators 
in California, 163; Dabbene on Argentine Forms of the Genera Geositta and Cin- 
clodes, 164; Cory’s ‘ Review of the Genera Siptornis and Cranioleuca,’ 164; Chapman 
on New South American Birds, 165; Oberholser on Larus hyperboreus barrovianus, 
166; Contributions to the Zoogeography of the Palaearctic Region, 166; Annual 
Report of the Chief of the Biological Survey, 167; Shufeldt on the Birds of Brazil, 
167; The Food of Australian Birds, 168; The Ornithological Journals, 168; Orni- 
thological Articles in Other Journals, 173; Additional Publications Received, 178. 


CorRESPONDENCE.— International Ornithological Congress, 179; Name of the Red- 


footed Booby, 180; Ornithological Pronunciation, 181. 


Nores anv News.— Editorial Note, 182; Obituary: Dr. Charles Conrad Abbott, 183; 
Obituary: Edward Everett Brewster, 184; Obituary: Barron Brainerd, 184; 
Recording Migration, 185; Election of Officers of the Nuttall Club, 185; A. O. U. 
Committee on Nomenclature and Classification of N. A. Birds, 186; Bird Collection 
of the Ottawa Museum, 186; Oldest Members of the A. O. U., 186; Publications of 
the Canadian Arctic Expedition, 187; The South African Biological Society, 187; 
Dinner of the D. V. O. C., 187; Vogel der palaarktischen Fauna, 187; Educationa 
Work of the California Fish and Game Commission, 188; Endowment of the Museum 


of Vertebrate Zoology of the University of California, 188. 


PLADE WI: 


THE AUK, VOL. XXXVII. 


VALE CAUK: 


A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF 


ORNITHOLOGY. 


VrOl XXX VIL. JANUARY, 1920. No: 1. 


IN MEMORIAM: WILLIAM BREWSTER. 
Born July 5, 1851 — Died July 11, 1919. 
BY HENRY WETHERBEE HENSHAW. 
Plates I and II. 


Ir has become the time honored custom of the Union, when one 
of its fellows has passed on to that undiscovered country from whose 
bourn no traveller returns, to briefly commemorate his life and 
services to the Union and to Science. It is peculiarly fitting that 
this should be done in the case of William Brewster, to whom more 
than to any other man is due the origin of the American Ornitholo- 
gist’s Union, and whose services to it began with its birth and 
terminated only with his death. 

William Brewster was born in Wakefield, Massachusetts, July 5, 
1851. He died in Cambridge July 11, 1919. His father, John 
Brewster, was born and brought up in Wolfboro, New Hampshire, 
and subsequently became well known as a successful Boston banker. 
His mother was Mrs. Rebecca Parker (Noyes), who was born in 
East Bradford (now Groveland) Massachusetts. 

It was William’s belief that the origin of the Brewster family was 
traceable to Elder Brewster of the Mayflower, but he was not much 
interested in such genealogical matters, and apparently never 
took the trouble to verify his belief. 

On February 9, 1878, William was married to Caroline F. 
Kettell, of Boston, who survives him. 

1 


2 Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. [ee 


William was the youngest of four children. His sister and two 
brothers died in early childhood. They were old enough, how- 
ever, to attract the notice of the poet, Longfellow, a near-by 
Cambridge neighbor, and who, no doubt, frequently saw them at 
play as he passed and repassed the old colonial mansion, shaded 
by venerable English lindens. It was the early death of the 
children that inspired the poem entitled ‘The Open Window,’ 
which begins: 

“The old house under the lindens 
Stands silent in the shade.” 

In 1845 John Brewster bought the Riedesel mansion on the 
corner of Brattle and Sparks Streets, Cambridge. It was so 
called because the Baron Riedesel, with his wife, was quartered 
there after the surrender of Burgoyne. Brewster’s father took 
pleasure in showing to his guests a window pane, not now in place, 
on which is scratched with a diamond the family name, Riedesel, 
presumably the work of the Baroness during her enforced residence. 
The history of the old house, supposed to date back to about 1750, 
would make interesting reading, but we may pause here only to 
note that Sewall, a Royalist, at one time occupied it, and was 
mobbed there during the stirring events of 1774, when loyalty to 
King George was treason to the States. 

Brewster spent his boyhood in the historic mansion, the lower 
story of which was later replaced by his father with one containing 
the modern improvements. Later still, about 1887, an entirely 
new house was built on the site of the old one by Wilham himself. 

He was educated in the public schools of Cambridge. From the 
Washington Grammar School he went to the Cambridge High 
School, taking there the usual preparatory course for Harvard, which, 
however, he was destined not to enter. Never robust, he suffered 
much during youth and early manhood from impaired sight, which, 
sometimes for considerable periods, precluded all reading and study. 
In consequence, during his last and most important year in school, 
he was able to read very little, and his devoted mother read aloud 
to him many of his lessons, which he committed to memory as best 
he could. Small wonder was it that, under these circumstances, 
he finally decided to relinquish all idea of a college education. 
Though he did not underrate the advantages of a scholastic train- 


Vel eon HensHaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. 3 


ing it may be doubted if the lack of it hampered his career to any 
appreciable extent. Little of the knowledge he himself prized and 
sought was to be gained in college or gleaned from books. 

As a boy Brewster appears to have been much like the average 
lad of his time but of gentler mold than most. Though in no 
respect effeminate he never cared for rude or boisterous sports, 
and although occasionally he was a contestant on the football field 
his was usually the part of the onlooker rather than of the partici- 
pant. In fact, even in later years, his interest in and know- 
ledge of games of any sort, as cards, billiards and the like was of 
the slightest, though he had no objection to them on moral grounds. 

His-life long friend, Ruthven Deane, informs me that in his boy- 
hood William was very fond of horseback riding, and that they 
frequently rode together before breakfast. He must have relin- 
quished this form of exercise early, since I never saw him on horse- 
back or heard of his riding after I knew him. Ruthven also recalls 
the fact that in the early seventies Brewster joined the Cambridge 
Rifle Club, became fond of target shooting, and for a time was a 
regular attendant at the contests among the members and with the 
Harvard Rifle Club. 

He never greatly cared for the theater, although, on the rare 
occasions when he went, he showed that he could enjoy a well-acted 
play, or good concert, as well as most. He attended dancing school 
as a youth, but apparently cared little for this social accomplish- 
ment, and after a time entirely gave up dancing. 

It is always of interest to trace the influences that have induced 
a man to follow a given career or to take up a certain line of study. 
Brewster seems to have given no signs of any special bent towards 
the study of Nature until he was about ten years old, when he 
made the acquaintance of Daniel C. French who was about the 
same age. During the next four years he and Dan came to be 
close comrades, and in that period was laid the foundation of a life 
time intimacy and friendship. 

Mr. French has kindly communicated to me some interesting 
facts in regard to this period of Brewster’s life when they were 
inseparable chums. William’s father, it appears, in his younger 
days had been something of a sportsman. When William was about 
ten his father gave him a single barreled gun, and taught him 


Auk 


4 Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. [ vant 


how to use it without undue peril to himself and other people. 
It happened that Daniel’s father, also somewhat of a sportsman, 
had learned to stuff and mount birds, and in his house were two 
cases of specimens of his taxidermic skill. These at once attracted 
Brewster’s attention, and here we have the very beginning of 
his interest in birds and the genesis of his ornithological career. 
How natural it was that a little later he and his chums should be 
keen to utilize the opportunity presented to learn how to stuff 
birds, particularly since they had the means of obtaining specimens. 

In his ‘Birds of the Cambridge Region’ Brewster gives us the 
exact date of his first lesson, and says: “On January 1, 1862, my 
friend Mr. Daniel C. French called at our house to give me my 
first lesson in taxidermy, an art known in those days to but very 
few persons save the professional bird stuffers.” Mr. French no 
doubt proved a willing teacher and presently we find a number of 
lads, Will Brewster, Dan French, Ruth Deane, and Dick Dana, 
all neighbors and of about the same age, on the alert to collect eggs 
and stuff such birds as their skill enabled them to bring to bag. 

The other boys soon gave up active ornithological pursuits, one 
to attain fame in the exacting career of a sculptor, another to suc- 
cessfully pursue the no less exacting career of a lawyer, the third 
to devote himself to business pursuits. Other tastes and duties led 
them to different fields, but Brewster unknowingly had found his 
life’s work, which he was to follow to the end. He must have set to 
work to study and collect birds with great ardor, for when I first 
met him in 1865 he had several cases of birds mounted on stands, 
the work of his own hands, with many nests and eggs, while his 
knowledge of local Massachusetts birds was accurate and extensive. 

It was not until several years later that he learned how to make 
skins. These were so quickly fashioned and so easily stored that 
Brewster soon abandoned the mounting of birds when his collec- 
tion must have numbered several hundred. 

Brewster’s esthetic sense would not permit him to be content 
with the unsightly, shapeless bird skins which too often found their 
way into the museum cabinets of that day. He was a careful col- 
lector, and the newly shot bird was lifted from the ground tenderly 
and its ruffled plumage cleaned and gently smoothed as of some 
precious thing, which indeed it was in his eyes. He soon became 


Nel a a Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. 5) 


a cunning craftsman in the art of making skins, and he never 
begrudged the time and labor necessary to shape the specimen 
into a thing of beauty. In his eyes it thus served two purposes, 
as a scientific specimen to be labelled and laid away for study, and 
as an object of beauty to satisfy the esthetic sense. 

There were few books on American birds in those days, and the 
student of the present time with his command of almost limitless 
literature can hardly realize how difficult to travel were the orni- 
thological paths of that period. Fortunately in Mr. French’s 
library was a copy of Nuttall, and Brewster, as soon as his tastes 
were declared, received from his father a copy of the octavo edition 
of Audubon. There was little within the covers of these two 
treatises that he had not soon made his own, so far, at least, as the 
accounts related to New England birds. 

Brewster and I became acquainted in 1865, in the Cambridge 
High School, where we took the same preparatory course for college. 
Our tastes proved to be very similar, and the acquaintance soon 
ripened into a firm and enduring friendship, which was interrupted 
only by his death. 

The several years that followed 1865 were very happy years for 
both William and myself. Our studies were not very exacting, 
and all our spare time was given up to scouring field and forest for 
birds and eggs. The health of neither of us was on a firm basis, 
and this fact, which we perhaps made the most of, reconciled our 
parents to our outdoor life, especially after a college career was 
closed to us. 

It was our custom to start for the woods soon after daybreak, 
often afoot, sometimes in a buggy, for the Fresh Pond swamps (a 
favorite haunt), or for Belmont, Waverley, Lexington, or Concord. 
Occasionally we were joined on these trips by Ruthven Deane or 
Henry Purdie, when they could get away from business. As the 
result of this activity Brewster’s collection grew apace until it con- 
tained all but a few of the local species. It ultimately became one 
of the largest private collections ever made in this country, and in 
some respects it is by far the most valuable. It is a pleasure to 
state that in accordance with long cherished plans Brewster left it 


in its entirety to the Museum of Comparative Zoélogy of Harvard 
University. 


ees 


6 Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. Jar 


As in his life time it was always within the reach of the earnest 
bird student for purposes of study, so he desired it to be after his 
death. 

Brewster’s father was, as stated, a keen business man and a very 
successful banker, and it was natural that he should desire to pass 
on to his only child a highly lucrative and successful business, the 
fruits largely of his own energy and sagacity. William was a 
dutiful son and loved his father who, though no naturalist, sympa- 
thized with his son’s tastes and was always ready to grant his every 
reasonable desire. In response to his father’s earnest wish that he 
should at least give business a trial he entered his father’s office in 
1869, when he was about 19, with the understanding that if, after 
a year’s trial, he found himself unfitted for a business life, he was to 
have his liberty and follow the bent of his own mind. Otherwise, 
after he was duly qualified, he was to enter the firm as a partner 
and ultimately to succeed his father on his retirement. With an 
aim of mastering the business from top to bottom he started in as 
messenger, and after a short time was promoted to a more respon- 
sible position. But it isnot necessary to follow his short business 
experience further than to say, that in something less than a year 
he had convinced himself, and incidentally his father, that he had 
no interest in a business life and was not fitted for it. The experi- 
ment therefore terminated. Nevertheless I am persuaded that 

3rewster possessed the making of a successful business man had 
necessity compelled him to adopt business as a means of livelihood. 
In after years he proved himself in his own affairs to be keen and of 
sound judgment, and to be an excellent judge of character, while 
his prudence and sagacity enabled him, not only to keep what 
his father and mother left to him, but to somewhat augment his 
inheritance. If Brewster’s father was disappointed by the failure 
of his hopes he showed no signs of it, but ever treated his son with 
the same invariable kindness and sympathy. 

This would seem to be a fitting place in which to speak of Brew- 
ster’s connection with the Brewster Free Academy of Wolfboro, 
New Hampshire. After due provision for his son and others of his 
relatives, his father left the balance of his large estate to found and 
perpetuate this school. He seems to have had a strong affection 
for the place of his nativity, and to have believed that a well 


ee YT Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. 7 


endowed academy in a rather remote rural district would be pro- 
ductive of great and lasting good. 

The plan was not a hasty one but had been in his mind for many 
years, and had been considered from many points of view. William 
had long been aware of the disposition his father intended to make 
of the greater part of his wealth and, while in nowise opposed to 
his plans, was by no means sure of the wisdom of the act. As time 
went on, however, he wholly changed his mind, and came to the 
conviction that his father had shown sound judgment and that, 
on the whole, his wealth could not have been better bestowed. He 
served faithfully till his death as a trustee of the Academy, to which 
his father had appointed him, and always took great interest in the 
welfare of the school and in carrying out his father’s plans so far 
as he was able. 

In the minds of many Brewster is almost as inseparably connected 
with Concord as Thoreau, but the inception of what may be termed 
the Concord experiment was largely accidental. Brewster was 
always fond of the place, and for years its woods, meadows, and its 
picturesque winding river were familiar haunts to him. He made 
frequent hunting trips there, often in company with one or the 
other of his two friends, Dan French and Jim Melvin, both of 
whom lived in the town. Indeed William and his wife spent two 
consecutive summers, 1886 and 1887, in the old Manse, redolent 
with memories of Hawthorne, and which has become immortalized 
in his ‘Mosses from an old Manse.’ It is of interest to know 
that this book was written, or at least prepared for the press, in the 
same apartment in which Emerson had penned his ‘Nature’ six 
years before, surely enough honor for the little cramped room 
known as the “Manse study.” 

About 1890, learning that Davis’ Hill, on the Concord, which 
was covered with large and venerable pines, was to be sold, he 
purchased it for the sole purpose of preserving its timber from 
certain destruction. Charmed with the locality he afterwards 
acquired the adjoining Ball’s Hill, which is one of Concord’s 
landmarks and was mentioned by Thoreau, if, indeed, it was not 
one of his haunts. Subsequently Brewster built several log cabins 
on the river bank in which he and his friends could camp. Later 
still he enlarged his holdings by the purchase of the John Barrett 


8 Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. ao 


farm and still later the ‘ Ritchie Place,’ so that finally he possessed 
some three hundred acres, mostly woodland, which he called col- 
lectively “October Farm.” 

Its timber consisted chiefly of pines, oaks and birches, and it 
was a sore trial to him when, despite a large yearly expenditure in 
their behalf, the brown tails and ‘gypsies’ killed practically all 
the oaks. They were his joy and pride, and the place was never 
quite the same to him after their glory had departed and their 
bare branches were raised to him as if in mute appeal for aid. 

Not the least valued of his farm possessions was the old but still 
well preserved Barrett farm house, which dated back at least two 
centuries, and between the old house, shaded by venerable elms, 
and the river camp, on the banks of the classic Concord, no lover 
of Nature could ask to be more favorably placed. 

At one time he found much pleasure in canoeing, in which he 
. became expert, and he made himself familiar with every muskrat 
house for miles above and below his camp and with the haunts of 
the rails, bitterns and ducks in the marshes. He was very fond 
of sojourning for weeks at a time in his log cabin until the river 
was invaded by power boats, the incessant throb of whose motors 
proved torture to his sensitive ears. As time went on, too, the 
water of the Concord became polluted by the refuse of the mills 
along its banks, which resulted in the practical extermination of 
its water plants and fish, and he ceased to care for his old river 
haunts. 

Later, when in Concord, he lived in the farm house often in 
company with Henry Purdie, of whom he was very fond. Here, 
as elsewhere, the comfort of himself and his guests were looked after 
by “Gilbert,” his factotum and friend, and he came to be very 
fond of the faithful, zealous, and efficient colored man who for years 
did his bidding and ministered to his needs. 

Brewster had furnished the farm house with old fashioned 
belongings befitting its age. These he collected with great taste 
and judgment, so that everything looked in keeping and as though 
a part of its surroundings. 

The times on the farm which I recall with the greatest pleasure 
were our daily strolls in the near-by woods, and the evenings, which 
we spent, each in an arm chair, before the open fire of gray birch 


THE AUK, VOL. XXXVIL. ILA JU. 


QD) 
“ 


1. THE BrrewsteER Museum at CAMBRIDGE. 
2. Tue Casin at Concorp. 


poe on wit HensHaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. 9 


logs. He devoted his evening hours to his always voluminous 
correspondence, and to writing up his bird notes for the day. But 
he was never too much engrossed to pause long enough to discuss 
a paragraph in one of Thoreau’s books, of which naturally Walden 
was his favorite, or to listen to anything of moment out of the 
book I was reading. For the writings of Thoreau he had high 
regard, and was very familiar with them, as he was also with his 
old haunts by pond and river. ; 

Being untrained in farming and having no zest for manual labor, 
Brewster always employed a practical farmer and his wife to care 
for his poultry, of which he had a fine flock, to look after the cows, 
and to raise vegetables sufficient for the needs of his own family 
and for distribution among his many friends. The surplus, never 
very great, was sold; but he never tried to make the farm pay, or 
even to make it self supporting. When the birds and squirrels 
raided his beans, corn and strawberries, his reply to the complaint 
of his farmer always was; “all right; remember to next year plant 
more; plant enough for all of us.” For he reckoned his bird and 
mammal tenants as partners in the concern and, as such, entitled 
to whatever they chose to appropriate. To meet a gray squirrel 
homeward bound a half mile or more from Brewster’s corn patch, 
with a big ear of corn in his mouth, was a frequent occurrence; 
and the vituperative remarks addressed to the rightful owner by 
the enraged squirrel at being interrupted in his attempt to make an 
honest living were, as Brewster used to say, “worth niore than a 
dozen ears of corn.” 

The little interest he took in farming chiefly centered in the 
restoration and care of a small apple orchard, many of the trees 
when they came into his possession being superannuated and de- 
cayed. These he doctored and grafted to superior kinds of fruit 
and sprayed carefully until he brought them into vigorous bearing. 
He was very proud of his apples. He was also much interested in 
the construction of roads through the woods, which he laughingly 
explained were for use when he and his friends became so decrepit 
as to be unable to walk. 

Though never a professed botanist Brewster had an excellent 
speaking acquaintance with the bulk of New England trees and 
shrubs, and, to a lesser extent, with its flowering plants. He 


10 Hensnaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. ant 


greatly admired shapely oaks and stately pines, and cut many 
vistas through his woods so as to bring into prominent view trees 
whose glories otherwise would have been hidden. He also took 
great pleasure in transplanting to his woods rare shrubs and flower- 
ing plants from contiguous localities, or from remote parts of the 
State, and they rooted and grew into his very fiber and became a 
part of him. He visited them often, and always as shrines before 
which he gave praise and offered worship. 

He also cultivated about the house garden-flowers of the old 
fashioned type, of which he was very fond. Naturally he was very 
successful with them, so that most of the summer the old home 
borrowed the freshness of youth from the blaze of floral color around 
it. It was down the old cow lane back of the house, resplendent on 
either side with asters, golden rods, and various flowering shrubs, 
that William most delighted to walk. The lane opened into a 
winding woodland path which led to the “birch pasture,” a favor- 
ite resort of the migrating warblers, and he said that, though he 
followed this path daily, and sometimes several times a day, he 
never tired of it, and that it was always as fresh in his eyes as if 
newly discovered. 

But none of the things mentioned appealed to Brewster’s inter- 
est as strongly as the birds, and the chief value of the place to 
naturalists rests upon the bird notes he made here. Nowhere else 
was the same experiment with bird life ever tried, at least for an 
equal length of time. For twenty years no gun was ever fired on 
October Farm, nor a bird or mammal ever molested by man. 
Hawks, crows, bluejays, skunks, foxes and other birds and beasties, 
if not equally welcome in Brewster’s eyes, were never molested. 
Each lived its own life according to its instincts, and Nature was 
allowed to work out her own problem in her own way. Beyond 
providing boxes for the hole-building species to nest in and planting 
seed plants for their sustenance, Brewster interfered with them not 
at all. 

The results will surprise many. They certainly surprised Brew- 
ster. For, at the expiration of some twenty years, there were 
apparently as many birds on the place as there were at the begin- 
ning of the experiment, but no more. True, there had been changes 
in the distribution of the species, since the brushy haunts of the 


ar Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. il 


warblers and vireos had grown up, and the shrubbery loving species 
had shifted their quarters elsewhere. But the number of par- 
tridges, for instance, had not increased over the original eight or 
ten, although each year they nested and reared most, if not all, 
their young. Formany years also a pair of great crested flycatchers 
nested in the cavity of a certain apple tree and every year brought 
out a brood of young. Nevertheless only one pair came back each 
spring, and he was unable to find any in the surrounding territory. 
So it was with other species. Brewster’s explanation in the case 
of the partridges was that the old birds, with the authority of 
vested rights, drove away the younger ones which, had they been 
allowed to remain, would have overstocked the place according to 
their own formula. But he found it difficult to thus explain the 
failure of increase in bird life generally on the farm. He was 
decidedly of the opinion, however, that his experiment proved that 
to increase the number of small birds in a given area one must at 
least do police duty and destroy the predacious birds and mammals, 
large and small. And this he pointed out had been the experience 
on the large game estates of England and Scotland, where no small 
part of the keeper’s business is to keep down the vermin. 

Brewster greatly regretted that all interest in his Concord place 
was destined to lapse when he was through with it, and he fre- 
quently debated some possible use it might be put to. At one time 
he thought of offering it to the town of Concord, but deemed that 
its remoteness from the town center would militate against its 
usefulness as a local park. He also discussed its availability for a 
duck and game breeding place, or for a bird refuge. But its avail- 
ability for any of these uses, for one reason or another, seemed 
questionable, and finally in despair of finding a promising scheme, 
he dropped consideration of it. 

Throughout the earlier years of his life Brewster was a keen and 
enthusiastic sportsman. When a boy in the high school, dawn 
often found him sculling his skiff over the placid surface of the 
near-by Fresh Pond in quest of waterfowl. He was a good shot 
and cherished his gun and dog with an abiding love. He was rarely 
without a serviceable pointer or setter, which, more often than not, 
he himself had trained. Hé never wholly outgrew his love for sport 
and one of the last pictures of him that lingers in my memory was as 


Auk 


12 Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. [ Jan 


he stood in the old farmhouse one evening after we had been recall- 
ing past hunting experiences, and, taking from the rack his favorite 
double-barrel, he threw it to his shoulder and wondered if, as in 
former days, he could still cut down an old cock partridge as it flew 
through the brush. He not only loved sport but he loved sports- 
men, and delighted to exchange experiences with the old hunters he 
used to meet in Maine or with the “marsh gunners” of the Atlantic 
coast. As he advanced in years, like many other sportsmen, he 
ceased to shoot simply because shooting necessarily involved the 
taking of life, and this finally became impossible for him. 

When the Cambridge place became his own, on the death of his 
father in 1886, one of his first improvements was a cat proof fence, 
upon the construction of which he spent much time and thought. 
This proved an effective barrier against the tabbies of the neighbor- 
hood, and insured the safety of all birds that visited the spacious 
garden, which included something like two acres. Soon there were 
hosts of birds to whom were born the glad tidings of food and 
safety awaiting them when they stopped there on their passage 
north and south, and many of the rarer small birds of the region 
sooner or later were noted from the windows of his study. A 
serviceable supply of water for drinking and bathing was provided, 
as well as berry-bearing shrubs and seed-bearing plants for food, 
and the “Brewster Tavern” exclusively for the accommodation 
of birds became very popular among his avian friends. 

Another important improvement was the museum, which he 
built in 1886-1887, a small brick and fire-proof structure in the 
rear of his house for the safe accommodation of his books and of 
his growing collection of birds, and to serve as a study where he 
afterwards did his writing. This was the home of the Nuttall Club 
and here it held its semi-monthly meetings for many years, or until 
his death. 

As his library increased in size and his collection of birds grew 
the routine work demanded more and more of his time, and in 1897 
he was so fortunate as to secure the services of Walter Deane, an old 
and tried friend of whom he was very fond. As Assistant in Charge, 
he was able not only to relieve Brewster of much of the museum 
work but to materially aid him with his correspondence. He con- 
tinued to assist him until 1907. 


Veh: crea Me Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. 13 


It will surprise many who are familiar with Brewster’s writings 
and have admired his smoothly flowing periods and felicitous 
methods of expression, to know that he wrote only with great diffi- 
culty and labor. Whatever success he achieved as an author, 
and much may be said of the excellence of his literary work, was 
done with much pain and travail. The standard he set for himself 
was very high, and frequently, in order to attain it, he had to 
reshape or rewrite an article several times before he was willing to 
commit it to print, and then usually not without doubts and pain- 
ful misgivings. At times, too, he had to contend with ill health 
which, often for considerable periods, made writing, never easy, 
doubly difficult or impossible. Thus was prevented the preparation 
of many papers he had planned to write and publish. Under the 
circumstances the wonder is not that he published so little but 
that he published somuch. His wife rendered important aid in his 
literary efforts, not only by timely encouragement and wise criticism, 
but by typewriting much of his manuscript. This codperation he 
greatly prized and it was a direct and an important stimulus to 
production. 

Though he never wrote many reviews Brewster, nevertheless, 
was a model reviewer, being careful, fair and conscientious, always 
weighing the merits and demerits of a book with scrupulous impar- 
tiality. That he had the capacity of a successful editor is not open 
to doubt as was shown when he was chosen to edit Minot’s ‘ Land 
and Game Birds of New England.’ In dealing with the book he 
showed wise restraint in the use of the editorial pen, and left the 
author, so far as possible, to tell his story in his own way. On 
almost every page, however, he made important annotations in the 
form of foot notes, which, it is not too much to say, added greatly 
to the value of the work. His total scientific output amounted to 
upwards of three hundred papers of all kinds, some of them, as his 
‘Birds of Lower California’ and ‘ Birds of the Cambridge Region,’ 
being volumes of considerable size and forming notable contribu- 
tions to faunal literature. 

His productivity was greatest in the period from 1876 to 1900, 
after which he produced much less, though some of his most import- 
ant publications appeared after 1900. He published practically 
everything he wrote in scientific journals, and apparently was never 


14 Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. bans ’ 


tempted to increase the number of his readers by publishing in 
popular magazines and, indeed, with characteristic modesty, 
thought he was unequal to this form of writing. As a consequence 
he is less widely known as a writer than he deserves to be, few 
indeed outside of the ranks of ornithologists being aware of the 
literary treasures hidden away over his name in the journals and 
proceedings of scientific societies. 

And here a subject may be touched upon that the young orni- 
thologists of the present day may well take to heart. Brewster 
began to keep a diary at an early age, and he made it a rule to take 
as much pains in writing of the day’s happenings as though he were 
writing for the printer. It is quite possible that this habit resulted 
from his knowledge of Thoreau’s methods. In any event his day’s 
tasks were never deemed ended until a page in his diary had been 
written. And we may be very sure that to his habit of keeping a 
diary and carefully committing his notes on birds every day to 
paper were largely due his felicitous style, discrimination in the 
nice choice of words, and general success as a writer. 

There is no need here to tell in detail of the Nuttall Ornithological 
Club, of which he was the president for so many years, or the 
prominent part he played in its origin and career. It came into 
being in 1873 as a natural consequence of the enthusiastic interest 
in birds on the part of a small coterie of young fellows in and 
around Cambridge, and the interest has grown rather than lessened 
as the years have gone by. 

Inspired by the example and success of the Nuttall Club, in due 
course the American Ornithologists’ Union was established on a 
national basis, and rapidly grew into a strong organization. 
Though his interest in and love for the Nuttall Club was in nowise 
weakened, from the very first Brewster took great interest in the 
Union, and was one of the three to issue the call for the convention 
which met in New York, September 26, 1883. After the organiza- 
tion was effected he was appointed one of the committee of five 
to assist in a revision of the classification and nomenclature of 
North American birds. He served until his death upon this 
important committee, and his extensive knowledge of the birds of 
New England and of other regions enabled him to perform invalu- 
able service in connection with it. In 1895 he was elected President 


Vol. Gt] Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. 15 
of the Union and served till 1898. For several years, 1880-1889, 
Brewster was connected with the Boston Society of Natural 
History, and had charge of its bird and mammal collections. Later, 
in 1885-1900, he took charge of the same departments in the 
Cambridge Museum of Comparative Zoélogy, and, after 1900 until 
his death, was in charge of the Museum’s collection of birds. 

His connection with Harvard University throughits museum wasa 
source of great satisfaction to him, not only because of his congenial 
duties, but because through them he was brought into personal 
relations with Alexander Agassiz, for whom he had great admira- 
tion and regard. Upon his death in 1910, Agassiz was succeeded 
as Curator of the Museum by Samuel Henshaw, with whom 
Brewster had long been on terms of intimacy and for whom he had 
the most cordial regard. 

Brewster was always greatly interested in the movement for 
the protection and increase of North American birds, and rendered 
very important service in connection therewith. In 1886 he was 
appointed a member of the Committee on Bird Protection of the 
American Ornithologist’s Union, and as such was one of the organ- 
izers of the first Audubon Society. He was a member of this Com- 
mittee for many years, and later became one of the Directors of the 
National Association of Audubon Societies. Later he served for a 
number of years as President of the Massachusetts Audubon 
Society. 

After serving on the Board of Directors of the Massachusetts 
Fish and Game Protective Association a number of years, in 1906 he 
was elected its President, retaining the office for two years. 

He was much interested in the movement which led to the forma- 
tion of the American Game Protective and Propagation Association. 
When this was organized in 1911 he was appointed a member of the 
Advisory Committee on which he served till his death. 

Far too modest and doubtful of his merits to push himself into 
the limelight as a seeker of honors, he was greatly pleased with 
those which were bestowed on him, and the more so that they came 
entirely unsought. Ambherst conferred on him the honor of A. M. 
in 1880, and Harvard that of A. M. in 1889. 

Brewster had comparatively little of the spirit of the pioneer 
and explorer. With all the world open to him he liked best to 


lees 


16 Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. Tank 


follow well beaten paths and to revisit year after year the scenes and 
localities already endeared to him by familiarity and association. 
This explains in part why he spent so much time in Concord and 
why he revisited Umbagog for so many successive years. Because 
of this habit he was enabled to gather an unparalleled amount of 
data on the birds of these respective regions, and it is doubtful if 
the birds of any single locality elsewhere have been so intensively 
studied as those of Concord and of Umbagog Lake by Brewster. 
His plans included the publication of several volumes based on 
these notes. Fortunately his notes and manuscripts were be- 
queathed to Harvard University, for this justifies the belief that, 
not only will his ‘Birds of Umbagog Lake’ be published, the first 
volume of which was left by him practically completed, but that 
all his voluminous notes made in Cambridge, Concord and else- 
where will also be printed, so far as this can be done. And what 
more acceptable and fitting monument than this could be erected to 
commemorate his life’s long and fruitful activity in the field of 
ornithology that he loved so well? 

While thus by preference Brewster cultivated near-by fields, 
nor cared greatly to penetrate remote districts or the untrodden 
wilderness, he was by no means content to stay wholly within the 
limits of New England, much as he loved his native soil. On the 
contrary he made several journeys far afield and usually in com- 
pany with one or more friends. Thus he made three trips to 
England: in 1891, 1909 and 1911, and one to the continent in 1897. 
He visited Scotland more than once, and spent some time there 
with Harvie-Brown, to whom he was much attached. Most of 
the time abroad, however, was spent in England, where he devoted 
much attention to outdoor observations and to getting acquainted 
with English birds, which he had hitherto met only in books, and 
in listening to their songs and studying their habits. 

He was greatly pleased with England, and his visits there, as he 
said, were much like going home after a long absence. Apparently 
in England he never felt like a stranger in a strange land. He 
specially admired its broad estates, its well kept roads and hedges, 
and its general air of thrift and tidiness. He was enthusiastic also 
over the English character and found the men cordial, hospitable 
and lovable. 


Vol. ST] Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. 1k 


In illustration of Brewster’s charm of manner and his ability to 
enlist the attention and interest of strangers, an incident may be 
related that occurred when he was at Lyndhurst in the New Forest 
in the midsummer of 1909. Visiting the smoking room of the Inn 
the evening after his arrival, he found there several men smoking 
and reading their papers, each at a separate table. Singling out 
the one who seemed to him to have the most interesting face, he » 
made his way to his table and, as the gentleman glanced up to see 
who the intruder was, he introduced himself, as an American who 
wanted to ask a few questions about the New Forest. The ques- 
tions duly answered, a long conversation of a humorous and dis- 
cursive character followed in which, among other things, the 
respective characteristics of Englishmen and Americans were 
discussed, apparently to the great interest and amusement of the 
other guests. It was not until the stranger had left the room that 
Brewster learned he had been conversing with the famous author, 
Kipling. During the following days he met Kipling frequently, 
found him a most genial companion as well as a most interesting 
conversationalist, was introduced to his wife, and finally received 
an invitation to visit them in their English home. 

It was very fortunate that early in his career Brewster became 
acquainted with the Umbagog Lake region. He first visited it in 
June 1870, when C. J. Maynard, Ruthven Deane and Henry Purdie 
also were there. The region was little known in those. days, save 
to disciples of good old Isaac Walton, and possessed manifold 
attractions in its deep forests, its beautiful lake and waterways, 
abounding in fish and an ample supply of large and small game. In 
the eyes of a Massachusetts ornithologist it possessed an added 
attraction in a long list of warblers and other birds which here found 
a summer home, but elsewhere to the south were known chiefly or 
only as migrants. Brewster at once became strongly attached to 
the place, which not only satisfied his longings as an ornithologist 
but strongly appealed to the artistic and aesthetic side of his nature. 
For many years he rarely missed sojourning at the Lake during 
the summer or fall, and here he gathered an unparalleled harvest of 
notes and data, especially on the water birds, which found in these 
comparative solitudes ideal opportunities to nest. 

For several years he maintained a most attractive camp on Pine 


eee 


18 Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. Jann: 


Point, near the foot of the Lake, where numbers of his ornithological 
friends visited him. He also had built for service on the Lake a 
houseboat designed with reference to comfort and his special needs 
as a student of bird life. He cultivated a wide acquaintance with 
the guides and lumbermen of the district, and not the least of its 
many attractions was the opportunity afforded of meeting these 
men annually on their own ground and hearing from their lips the 
story of their experiences and of still earlher days in the wilderness. 
He was particularly fond of canoeing on the Lake and made much 
use of the canoe in his daily trips. Indeed some of the accounts of 
birds which he wrote for his ‘ Birds of Umbagog Lake’ were penned 
as he floated here and there on the Lake’s placid bosom, with the 
setting of the bird biographies he was engaged upon spread out 
before his very eyes. 

With the lapse of time, however, Brewster’s interest in that 
region lessened, chiefly because of the influx of visitors and campers, 
who were attracted in ever increasing numbers by the growing 
fame of the region. Aloofness and solitude had been its chiefest 
charms, and when these departed little was left to a man of Brew- 
ster’s temperament, so that during the later years of his life, after 
1900, he never revisited it. 

Brewster made a trip to Ritchie County, West Virginia, in 1874, 
in company with Ruthven Deane and Ernest Ingersoll. They 
were there from April 25 to May 9, and the party secured many 
nests, eggs and bird skins. Brewster published a paper in the 
Annals of the Lyceum of Natural History of New York on the 
results obtained in this, then little known, region. As was the case 
with most of his faunal papers, this article contained copious notes 
on the habits and songs of many of the species included. 

In April 1878, he visited his friend Robert Ridgway, at Mount 
Carmel, Illinois, and spent a month or more with him in collecting 
birds and gathering notes on a number of species until then 
unknown to him. Notable among the strangers was the beautiful 
Prothonotary Warbler, which inspired the greatest enthusiasm. 
For an interesting account of this bird, written in his best vein, the 
reader is referred to his article in the Bulletin of the Nuttall Club 
for October 1878. He always dwelt with great pleasure on the 
incidents of this trip, and spoke fondly of the delightful comradeship 
of Ridgway. 


vol ae el Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. 19 


In the spring of 1881, Brewster was invited to make one of a 
party organizing for a trip to the Gulf of St. Lawrence. The 
expedition, as stated by him, was “undertaken partly for pleasure, 
but chiefly for scientific exploration and the collection of fossil 
birds, insects and plants.’’ 'The party consisted of the following 
persons: Professor Alpheus Hyatt, Mr. Samuel Henshaw, Messrs. 
E. G. Gardiner, W. H. Kerr, N. R. Warren and himself, and 
sailed from Annisquam, Massachusetts, in the Arethusa, a 
schooner-rigged yacht of seventeen tons. 

He published an account of the trip in the Proceedings of the 
Boston Society of Natural History, Vol. 12, 1882-83, from which 
the following is quoted: 


“The trip, as a whole, was attended by about the usual mixture of 
pleasure and hardship, success and disappointment. Its drawbacks and 
failure were mainly unavoidable, for our plans had been made with care 
and forethought, and the vessel equipped to a fault; while the social com- 
position of our party proved exceptionally pleasant and harmonious. 
But we started too late in the season and the weather during most of the 
summer was simply abominable.” 


Most of the ornithological specimens accruing from this trip were 
given to the Boston Society. 

In the spring of 1882 Brewster joined J. A. Allen in Colorado, who 
was there on a collecting trip undertaken out of considerations of 
health. He spent six weeks with him, collecting the birds of the 
region, studying their habits and making notes of the spring migra- 
tion in this interesting region of plains, foothill and canyon. This 
is as far west as he ever travelled, and he always looked back with 
great satisfaction to this journey, rich as it was in new experiences, 
and to the first hand knowledge he therby gained of the plains 
region and of its wild life, so unlike that with which he had hitherto 
been familiar. 

In May 1883 Brewster visited South Carolina, making his head- 
quarters at Charleston. His special errand was to look for the 
Swainson’s Warbler, a species discovered in 1832, but lost sight of for 
over half a century. In his search he was assisted by Arthur T. 
Wayne, of whom he became very fond. Although unsuccessful the 
first season they were entirely successful the two following years, and 
Brewster was enabled to secure a large number of specimens and to 


lees 


20 Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. cane 


obtain a very full knowledge of the bird’s song and habits. He also 
secured its nest and eggs. 

He was much interested in bird migration, and was an earnest 
student of its varied phenomena. In 1885 he made a trip to Point 
Le Preaux in the Bay of Fundy for the express purpose of studying 
the behavior of birds during the migration as seen from a light 
house. He remained there from August 138 to September 26, 
living with the light house keeper, and making notes on migration. 
It was doubtless largely the interesting data obtained on this trip 
that stimulated him to produce his only formal paper on bird 
migration, which was published as the first ‘Memoir’ of the Nuttall 
Ornithological Club in 1888. This has been well termed a classic. 

On his return north from Charleston in 1885 he visited Asheville, 
North Carolina, May 23. From there he made a wagon trip into 
the mountains, during which were recorded many interesting obser- 
vations on the habits of the birds. His account of the birds seen on 
this trip is to be found in the Auk, Vol. 3, 1886. 

In 1890 (March 19—April 1), he joined Frank Chapman in a trip 
down the Suwanee River, Florida, in a houseboat. A satisfactory 
collection of birds was made and many interesting notes obtained 
of the local and migrating species. The results of the trip appear 
in a joint paper in ‘ The Auk’ for 1892. 

Two years later, in 1893, we find Brewster and Chapman in the 
island of Trinidad, where Brewster was not only introduced to a 
new fauna but harvested an entirely new crop of experiences. 
This was his first and only visit to the Tropics. He treasured his 
experiences there as among the most interesting of his life, and in 
after years never tired of recalling the varied scenes and incidents 
of his stay there. 

Besides the trips mentioned, made for the double purpose of col- 
lecting specimens and of acquainting himself with the habits of 
rare or little known birds in their native haunts, Brewster, from time 
to time sent out, at his own expense, collectors whose chief errand 
was the exploration of comparatively unknown territory and the 
acquisition of birds to fill gaps in his collection. Some of these 
were remarkably successful, and by this means he not only secured 
priceless cabinet material but added greatly to ornithological knowl- 
edge. The collections thus made, with the notes made by the col- 
lectors, furnished the basis of a number of important papers. 


Vol YN] Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. 2h 


Thus he sent the well known collector, Frank Stephens, to 
California and Arizona in 1881 and 1884. In May and June of 
1883 George Ower Welsh made a collecting trip for him to New- 
foundland. 

In 1883, 1884 and 1885, R. R. McCleod collected for him in 
Chihuahua, Mexico. 

In 1887 he sent Mr. Abbott Frazer to the peninsula of Lower 
California. 

In January and June of. the same year Mr. John C. Cahoon 
visited Arizona and Sonora, Mexico, and made extensive collections. 

In many respects Brewster was unusually well equipped as a 
naturalist and a student of birds. 

He did some excellent systematic work. He possessed a keen 
eye for distinctive differences and described many new species of 
American birds. So sound and conservative was his judgment in 
proposing new forms that practically all the birds named by him 
have proved valid. 

Nevertheless by preference he was not a closet student but was 
an outdoor man, to whom the dried skin was merely a symbol and 
the living creature of infinitely more interest and importance. 
Naturally deliberate and slow of movement, he was a good and 
untiring walker in his youth, and possessed excellent eyesight for 
outdoor work. Indeed his eyesight improved as he grew older, 
and he was never compelled to have recourse to distance glasses, 
even during the last years of his life. His hearing was extraordi- 
narily acute, and his ability to recognize the notes of birds at a 
distance and amid other and confusing sounds was little less than 
marvelous, and far exceeded that of any one I ever knew. Along 
with his phenomenal hearing went a good memory for bird notes 
and songs, the study and analysis of which always greatly interested 
him. Indeed he was attracted by the notes and calls of all living 
creatures, and deemed no time wasted that was spent in tracing 
them to their sources. 

Here I cannot refrain from a short quotation from his ‘ Voices 
from a New England Marsh,’ one of many similar paragraphs in 
his happiest vein, which illustrates his interest in the voices of his 
humble friends and the emotions they awakened in his soul. After 
speaking of the songs of the Rusties and of those of the Song and 
Tree Sparrows he adds: 


ees 


22 Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. Jan 


“These voices with, perhaps, the tender, plaintive warble of some 
passing bluebird or at evening, towards the close of the month, the merry 
peeping of Pickering’s hylas are the characteristic March sounds of the 
Fresh Pond marshes as well as of many similar places in eastern Massa- 
chusetts. How they smooth and refresh the senses after the long silence 
of winter, breathing to every one of refined sensibilities the very essence of 
early spring! To those who have long known and loved them they are 
inexpressibly grateful and precious, touching the chords of memory more 
subtly than do any other sounds, recalling past associations, albeit often 
saddened ones, and filling the heart with renewed courage and hope for 
the future.” 


He was a patient and untiring observer, and his intense interest 
in bird and other outdoor life never knew abatement. Summer 
and winter, in sickness and in health, from youth to old age his 
interest continued undiminished, and only death itself sealed to 
him the Book of Nature. Indeed in his last moments, when the 
voices of the friends about him awakened no response, he roused 
himself sufficiently to listen to the song of a robin which came to his 
ears from the linden tree outside his window, fitting requiem to the 
passing soul of the ornithologist. 

William Brewster was tall and well proportioned, and when he 
developed into full manhood was a strikingly dignified and hand- 
some man. His habitual expression was kindly and engaging, and 
few people met him who were not at once drawn toward him by 
his kindly bearing and courteous manners. He did not mature 
early, but when he came into his own, and his mind expanded, and 
his experience widened he became a charming and very interesting 
talker. 

While Brewster possessed none of the gifts of the orator and 
made no effort to cultivate public speaking, he was entirely self 
possessed when he rose to address an audience and spoke inter- 
estingly and to the point, chiefly perhaps, because he always had 
something definite and illuminating to say. 

He had a genius for friendships, and made many friends whom 
he grappled to his soul with hooks of steel. He had a peculiar 
reverence for womankind, always treated them with the utmost 
deference, and always spoke of them with respect. 

He had a well developed sense of humor and liked to exchange 
repartee with his friends, and always enjoyed a witty story. But 


wer eex a Hensuaw, In Memoriam: William Brewster. 23 


stories of the grosser sort had no interest for him and were, indeed, 
abhorrent, and his friendship included none who were given to 
them, or to gross practices. 

He was charitably disposed to all, and inclined to judge the 
delinquent leniently and with forbearance. He never spoke ill of 
any man. He was generously inclined, and, within his means, 
gave freely to those less fortunate than himself, though of his 
beneficence he said nothing, preferring that it should remain un- 
known. 

He was calm of manner and temperate of speech, and kept his 
temper under excellent control. He found his everyday vocabu- 
lary sufficient for all his needs, and never indulged in oaths or 
expletives of any sort. 

He was singularly abstemious, drank neither tea nor coffee, and 
scarcely knew the taste of wine or other alcoholic liquor. Yet he 
never inveighed against their moderate use by others. 

Brewster was sociably inclined and greatly loved the companion- 
ship of true and tried friends. His sympathies were broad and 
included an appreciation of and interest in the work and affairs 
of others, especially of young men, who never sought him for aid 
and counsel in vain. 

He possessed the judicial temperament and in his anxiety to be 
just and make no mistake was sometimes long in making up his 
mind. Once convinced, however, of the righteousness of a cause, 
he never after wavered but upheld it with heart and soul and with- 
out fear of consequences. 

He was absolutely truthful, habitually refrained from all ex- 
aggeration, and falsehood and evasion were foreign to his nature. 
As he was sincere and truthful, so was he honorable and pure 
minded, and his conversation reflected the thoughts and imaginings 
of a pure soul. Of him, if of any man, may we say, “blessed are 
the pure of heart for they shall see God.” 


The Ontario, Washington, D. C. 


24 GEHRING, William Brewster: An Appreciation. Aue 


WILLIAM BREWSTER — AN APPRECIATION. 


BY JOHN GEORGE GEHRING. 


q 


To appear before this body of Nature Lovers in an attempt to 
pay loving tribute to the memory of such a man as William Brewster, 
many of you having had your own relations of intimate friendship 
with him for years and some from boyhood, might seem like an 
intrusion under ordinary circumstances; but the circumstances 
are not ordinary when it is William Brewster of whom I speak! 
We all knew him to be a man of a wonderfully rich and many-sided 
character,— and we all know that to merely say how we loved him 
and shall always revere him, does not lift the weight of an irrepar- 
able calamity that has befallen us. Nevertheless it seems impera- 
tive as well as a precious privilege that I, at his own request, may be 
permitted, through your Journal, to give expression to what lies in 
my own heart. 

On the eleventh day of last July William Brewster breathed out 
his last earthly hour in his tree-embowered chamber in his home 
in Cambridge. During the last weeks of his final illness it was my 
great privilege to be many hours by his side, to listen to his words, 
to return the glances of his friendly and trusting eyes, and to min- 
ister to him with such little attentions as one who loves his dearest 
friend, whom he is about to lose out of his earthly life, eagerly 
desires to bestow. 

Through all those swiftly passing days the voices of his beloved 
birds came through the open windows of his chamber, and spoke to 
him through the ever-receptive senses of his bird-loving soul. 
Almost to the last conscious hour the notes of the robins never failed 
to elicit a recognition or some sign of pleasure. Indeed, to the 
sympathetic few who hovered around him, even after he had ceased 
to be perceptive of the environment of the room and his friends, 
it seemed that there still remained open the door that led to his 
love for the birds, for he ever appeared to be conscious of their 
movements and their notes, and often his countenance would faintly 
lighten with the recognition of their calls after he had become too 
feeble to utter words. 


Vol. Ot] Guurine, William Brewster: An Appreciation. 29 


Lover of birds and animals and flowers,— and equally lover of his 
kind,— a rare and singularly beautiful soul was William Brewster, 
and a priceless privilege it was to be permitted to count him as a 
friend. A man wonderfully modest for one endowed with so great 
a store of Nature’s lore, and unusually shy and timid in the impart- 
ing of the seemingly inexhaustible knowledge he so richly pos- 
sessed. A man who won all hearts that came under the spell of 
his voice and presence or upon whom his eyes rested with their 

-message of friendly understanding. “Who is your friend with the 
kind eyes?” asked of me not infrequently by friends who saw us 
together, was no unworthy tribute to this man who had the power 
to make friends by virtue of some subtle innate quality that directly 
appealed to those fortunate enough to meet him. 

William Brewster did not need to commune with his friends in 
words. His was the rare gift of intuitive communion, and to be in 
his presence was to those who knew him best the privilege of inter- 
preting a common thought by means of that rarer sense which is 
far more subtle than anything the clumsy medium of words could 
convey. What was this potent charm possessed in such marvelous 
degree by this dead friend of ours? Why were we compelled to love 
him,— what drew us to him with a feeling of tenderness akin the 
love of woman,— why did we give our implicit trust as though it - 

- were a matter beyond question that we should uncover our hearts 
to this unassuming man? Was it not that William Brewster was 
one of those men whose innate honesty and sincerity of soul spoke 
for itself in every act, in every thought he uttered,— that his 
relations with his fellow men were of the simplest and most direct,— 
that he had no guile and no distrust,— but interpreted all others 
by the light of his own transparent soul and heart and imputed to 
others only that which was mirrored in his own nature? 

His was a character beautifully free from every taint of coarse- 
ness. His heart and soul shone through eyes as pure as those of a 
child. His conversation dealt with things that were beautiful and 
his soul loved the beauty that is portrayed in Nature with a life-long 
and all-embracing passion. To be in his companionship was to be 
at once lifted away from all that had little worth and to dwell upon 
the beauty and wonder of things that endure. Whoever of his 
friends had the opportunity of seeing and hearing William Brewster 


aS 


26 GeHRING, William Brewster: An Appreciation. Fan 


deal and talk with a woodsman, guide or any of the simpler folk in 
the humbler walks of life with whom he came in contact during the 
many years wherein he studied birds in their haunts, but felt the » 
charm with which he made that man feel at ease and upon a level 
of common manhood. And indeed, this was not manner in the 
least,— it was but simple sincerity. 

From all men did he feel that he could learn, all men did he 
respect, and with all men did he feel as man to man. It was 
instantly apparent that he was one who took for granted the com- 
mon manhood between them and who therefor brought out from 
them only that which was fine and true. The mere mention that 
one was a friend of his was to open the way to their hearts, and the 
claim of his friendship anywhere was a title to respectful recogni- 
tion. What could we more earnestly desire for ourselves than that 
our own names might be as touchingly inscribed upon the hearts of 
our fellows as this of our dead friend, who without knowing it, 
simply because of inherent human kindliness, enveloped himself 
in an atmosphere of graciousness and good will! 

As his old-time physician as well as friend, I had watched with 
growing solicitude a condition of gradual but increasing disability 
for a period of over two years. The insidious disease, as yet uncon- 
quered by Science, which brought his earthly life to a close, made 
the outlook increasingly hopeless. As he sought help from various 
sources he bore with wonderful docility and patience the failure to 
He clung to every alleviation as to a buoy by which 


receive relief. 
his courage might be upheld, until there came a day and an hour 
which can never be forgotten, when from lips that loved him came 
the answer to those gravely questioning eyes! He bore the message 
bravely, though he longed to live. Then to the one for so many 
years nearest his life, he tenderly spoke of happy years, leaving 
messages with her for dear and intimate friends, and affectionately 
thanked the faithful attendant who had ministered to his comfort. 
It will suffice to say that with a calm and simple resignation, with 
the dignity of soul that was his when in the midst of strength and 
the abundance of life, William Brewster accepted the inevitable, 
and his last days were mercifully veiled by unconsciousness as he 
drew near to the portal of the Great Unknown. 

William Brewster had the Listening Soul! Of all things did he 


VO ee add NurraLL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB MEMORIAL. 27 


receive testimony and to all things did he accord a hearing that was 
fair and just. He hastened to no conclusions and he was ever ready 
to modify his opinions in the light of farther evidence. His was a 
nature innately fair and truthful and whilst ever fearlessly uncom- 
promising wherever principle was involved, personally he judged 
not at all! To be as broadly tolerant as this our loved and honored 
friend, to be as considerate and fair, as intrinsically friendly towards 
the opinion of all men, regardless of station, has been an ideal to us 
all since first we knew him. 

O thou lover of all things true and good, upon what far heights 
today thy soul doth stand, we rest assured that one so fitted to be 
immortal,— has found his immortality! 


Bethel, Me. 


WILLIAM BREWSTER. 


At a regular meeting of the Nuttall Ornithological Club held 
November 3, 1919, the following memorial of Mr. William Brewster 
was adopted by the Club for entrance in the Records, and the 
Secretary was instructed to communicate it to “The Auk’ for 
publication, It was prepared by Mr. E. B. White. 

William Brewster was one of the founders of the Nuttall Orni- 
thological Club and its President for over forty years, and when 
not absent from Cambridge, was found faithfully in the Chair 
at its meetings. His scientific attainments have made their own 
permanent record, but the Club wishes to record here the sense of 
the heavy loss it has sustained and of the intimate personal be- 
reavement which the members suffer in the death of one who was 
held by them in such affectionate regard. 

He presided with an easy control, with no trace of self-assertive- 
ness, his poise rendering that unnecessary: perfect balance marked 
his character; he possessed vigor without asperity and sensibility 
without softness. Tolerant and just, he infused into the meetings 


ES 


28 NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB MEMORIAL. Tae 


a feeling of mutual consideration, and that without any sacrifice of 
effectiveness, and at the same time his kindliness and his urbanity 
created a feeling of fellowship that rendered the gatherings pecu- 
liarly pleasant. Debatable matters he directed with a notable 
sense of fair play that assured full hearing for all sides; ornithologi- 
cal discussion he conducted with patience and acumen. He gave 
consideration to any observations, desirous that all who were 
present should participate in proceedings; and he listened to a 
contributor of even the most trivial notes with an absorbed, respect- 
ful interest. His sympathetic responsiveness and enthusiasm 
were sources of inspiration to many a younger ornithologist. We, 
who have for many years enjoyed his conduct of the meetings, 
carry ineffaceable in our mind his handsome, mobile countenance, 
which would light up some remark with an engaging smile of appre- 
ciative humor, or enforce some searching question with a piercing 
glance. 

The fact that Mr. Brewster was never ruffled sprang from good- 
ness of heart and lack of self-consciousness. He seemed gratified 
by opportunities to be helpful, and generously gave counsel and 
information to friends and strangers alike. Wide knowledge he 
seemed to hold in trust; and personal detachment made his de- 
cisions worthy of confidence. Very naturally, then, he was con- 
stantly consulted. 

Great was the importance to the Club of the ready information 
which extensive experience and tenacious memory enabled him to 
supply off-hand. Even greater, because rarer, was the importance 
to it of the spirit with which he imbued it. The meetings have 
been held for many years in his private museum and are remem- 
bered with delight which is measurably due to his gracious bearing; 
and no occasions are remembered as more significant than those — 
all too few — when he contributed the formal paper of the evening 
from the day-to-day entries in his journal. Even then was strikingly 
felt his gift of felicitous expression, for his style was not only a 
sound scientific medium but was elegant and vivacious, vibrant 
with the joy of his chosen pursuits. 

William Brewster grew upon his friends by intimacy, for even 
the most intimate discovered no traits save such as increased their 
love and esteem. 


po can | Tue WILLIAM BREWSTER MEMORIAL. 29 


THE WILLIAM BREWSTER MEMORIAL. 


- At the regular stated meeting of the American Ornithologists’ 
Union, held in New York City, November 10, 1919, the following 
communication from friends and co-workers of William Brewster 
was received and the trust therein described was formally ac- 
cepted by the Union. [Ed.] 

The undersigned co-workers and friends of William Brewster, 
in recognition of the great service which for nearly half a century 
he rendered American ornithology, present to the American 
Ornithologists’ Union, as Trustees, the sum of five thousand 
dollars to establish the “ William Brewster Memorial.” 

The income of the Fund shall be used to defray the cost of a 
gold medal, to be known as the Brewster Memorial Medal, to be 
awarded every two years to the author of what, in the judgment 
of the Council of the Union, is the most important work relating, 
in whole or in part, to the birds of the Western Hemisphere, during 
the period in question. The remainder of the accrued income of 
the Fund, after defraying the cost of the medal, shall be given to 
the recipient of the medal as an honorarium. 

In case the award is made for the joint work of two or more 
persons, to each of whom credit is due in equal share, a medal shall 
be given to each of them and the honorarium shall be divided 
equally between them. 

In case the Council decide that no work has been produced that 
is of sufficiently high scientific quality to be worthy of award of 
the medal, the income accrued during the period shall be added to 
the principal of the Fund. 

In case at any future time it becomes the opinion of two-thirds 
of the members of the Council of the Union, that an amendment 
of the terms of this deed of gift would result in the better attain- 
ment of the fundamental purposes of the Memorial — which are 
the perpetual honoring of the memory of William Brewster, and 
the encouragement of study of American birds by the bestowal 
at intervals of a medal and honorarium as recognition of ornitho- 
logical research of high scientific quality — such amendment may 


eae 


30 Tue Witu1AM Brewster Memoria. ree 


be made by the same methods then in force for the amendment 
of the By-Laws of the Union, but in no other way. 

All details of the administration of this fund shall be wholly 
under the control of the Council of the Union, any provision of the 
By-laws of the Union to the contrary notwithstanding. 

A sketch for the proposed William Brewster Medal has been 
designed and contributed by Daniel Chester French, which is 
acceptable to Mrs. Brewster and to us, and we trust will meet 
with the approval of the Council. 

It is recommended that the award be made at the meeting of the 
A. O. U., at intervals of two years, the two-year period to end 
June 30 preceding the A. O. U. meeting of that year, the first 
award being made at the meeting of 1921. 

It is recommended that the President of the Union shall appoint 
a committee, of three persons, to recommend the award of the 
medal and honorarium. This appointment to be made during the 
first week in July preceding the A. O. U. meeting at which the 
award is to be made. The report of this committee will be pre- 
sented to the Council at its Stated Meeting for acceptance or 
rejection. In the event of its rejection the Council shall have 
power to make the award. 

Having stated the general understanding under which the fund 
for the Willia 1 Brewster Memorial was raised, we feel confident 
that we may leave the formulation of the additional details under 
which it may be administered to the good judgment of the Council 
of the Union. 

[The names of the donors follow.] 


Allen, Francis H. 
Allen, G. M. 

Allen, J. A. 

Allyn, Alice C. 
Almy, Charles 
Ames, Oakes 
Audubon, Florence 
Audubon, Maria R. 


Bacon, Francis L. 
Bailey, Mrs. Vernon 
Bailey, Vernon 


Baily, Wm. L. 
Baird, David G. 
Baker, John H. 
Balch, Agnes G. 
Bangs, Outram 
Barbour, Thomas 
Barrows, Walter B. 
Bartlett, Alice M. 
Bartsch, Paul 
Batchelder, C. F. 
Beck, H. H. 
Bent, A. C. 


Bergtold, W. H. 
Bicknell, E. P. 
Bigelow, A. F. 
Bigelow, Henry B. 
Bigelow, Homer L. 
Bishop, Louis B. 
Bolles, Elizabeth Q. 
Borneman, Henry 8. 
Bosson, Campbell 
Bowditch, H. 
Bowditch, Sylvia C. 
Bradlee, Thomas 8. 


Vol. sal 
1920 


Brainerd, Barron, in 
memory of 
Brainerd, John B. 
Braislin, William C. 
Bridge, Mrs. Edmund 
Brooks, E. A. 
Brooks, W.S. 
Brown, Howard K. 
Brown, Stewardson 
Burdsall, Richard L. 
Buttrick, 8. 


Cabot, Mrs. Arthur T. 
Carruth, Charles T. 
Carter, C . M. 
Carter, John D. 
Chadbourne, A. P. 
Chapman, Emily D. 
Chapman, Frank M. - 
Chapman, Jane E. C. 
Churchill, J. R. 
Clark, A. H. 

Clark, B. Preston 
Cobb, Mary F. 
Cooke, M. T. 
Copeland, Manton 
Crosby, Maunsell 
Culver, Delos E. 
Curry, H. B. 


Dana, Richard H. 
Day, Catherine Hosmer 
Deane, George C. 
Deane, Mary H. 
Deane, Ruthven 
Deane, Walter 
Dearborn, Sarah 
Denton, S. W. 
Dexter, Mrs. Geo. 
Dexter, Lewis 
Dexter, Mary D. 
Dexter, Smith O. 
Dewis, John W. 
Durfee Owen 
Dwight, Jonathan 


Eaton, Harriet L. 
Eaton, Mary S. 
Eaton, Warren F. 
Ehinger, C. E. 
Elliot, Mrs. John 


Emerson, Edward M. 


Emlen, Arthur C. 
Eustis, Richard 8. 
Evans, Joseph 8. 

Evans, William B. 


Faxon, Walter 

Fay, 8. Prescott 
Fisher, A, K. 
Fleming, J. H. 
Floyd, Charles B. 
Floyd, F. G. 

Forbes, W. Cameron 
Forbush, E. H. 
Foster, Frank B. 
Fowler, Henry W. 


Francis, Nathaniel A. 


Fuertes, Louis A. 
Fuller, Eliza W. 


Gardner, A. C. 
Gilbert, R. A. . 
Goldman, E. A. 
Goodale, Joseph L. 
Graves, Mrs. F. M. 
Grinnell, Geo. Bird 
Griscom, Ludlow 
Gross, A. O. 


Hagar, Arthur F. 
Hager, J. A. 
Hannum, William E. 
Harper, Francis 
Harris, Percy G. F. 
Harrower, D. E. 
Hathaway, Alton H. 
Hemenway, Mrs. A. 
Henderson, W. C. 
Henshaw, Henry W. 
Henshaw, 8. 


Tue WILLIAM BREwsTER MEMORIAL. 31 


Herrick, Harold 
Hersey, F. Seymour 
Hill, Alfred C. 

Hill, Thomas R. 
Hinckley, George L. 
Hoffman, Ralph 
Hollister, N. 
Hoppin, Eliza M. 
Horsford, Katharine 
Hottle, Edward P. 
Howard, Emily W. 
Howard, Philip E. 
Howell, A. H. 
Hunnewell, F. W. 
Hurd, Frances. A. 


Ireland, Catharine I. 


Jackson He Hei: 
Jackson, Robert T. 
Jeffries, William A. 
Jenney, Charles F. 
Jones, Lynds 
Justice, William W. 


Kennard, F. H. 
Kidder, Nathaniel T. 
Knowlton, F. H. 


Lamb, Charles R. 
Lawson, Ralph 
Levey, Mrs. Wm. M. 
Lewis, Shippen 
Linton, M. Albert 
Lothrop, Oliver A. 
Lucas, Frederic A. 


Maillard, Joseph 
Marble, Richard M. 
Marshall, Ella M. O. 
Matthews, F. Schuyler 
May, J. B. 

Maynard, C. J. 
MeCall, William W. 
Merriam, C. Hart 
MeMiilan, Mrs. Gilbert 


o2 


Miller, Isaac P. 
Miller, W. DeW. 
Moore, R. T. 
Morgan, John Sage 
Morris, Geo. Spencer 
Morse, Albert P. 
Murdoch, John 
Murphy, Robert C. 


Natl. Asso. of Aud. Soe. 
Nelson, E. W. 

Nelson, George W. 
Nichols, John Treadwell 
Nichols, John W. T. 
Noble, Eleanor G. 
Noble, G. K. 

Noyes, James A. 


Oberholser, Harry C. 
Osgood, W. H. 
Osterhout, W. J. V. 


Paine, C. J. 

Palmer, T.S. 
Palmer, 8.C. 
Palmer, William 
Parker, Edmund M. 
Parkers'G> Ee 
Pearson, T. Gilbert 
Pepper, William 
Perrine, K. 

Peters, James Lee 
Philipp, P. B. 
Phillips, J. C. 
Pickman, Dudley L. 
Potter, Julian K. 
Preble, Edward A. 


THe WILLIAM BREwsTeER MEMORIAL. 


Pumyea, Nelson D. W. 
Purdie, Evelyn. 


Rand, Edward L. 
Rehn, James A. G. 
Rhoads, Sam’]. N. 
Richards, Harriet E. 
Richardson, Henry P. 
Richmond, Charles W. 
Riddle, Robert 
Riddle, 8. Earle 

Riley, J. H. 

Rives, William C. 
Roberts, Thomas 8. 
Roberts, William E. 
Robinson, Anthony W. 
Rogers, Charles H. 
Russell, Joseph B. 


Sage, John H. 
Sanford, Leonard C. 
Sangree, Carl M. 
Saunders, W. E. 
Schell, John W. 
Scudder, Grace O. 
Selliez, Edward A. 
Serrill, William J. 
Seton, Ernest Thompson 
Shaw, Henry S., Jr. 
Sheffield, Gertrude P. 
Smith, Louis Irvin 
Spelman,Henry M. 
Stejneger, L. 

Stone, Witmer 
Street, J. Fletcher 
Styer, Franklin J. 
Stuart, Geo. H., 3d. 
Swales, B. H. 


law 


Swasey, Harriet M. 


Tatnall, Samuel A. 
Taverner, P. A. 
Thaxter, Roland 
Thayer, J. E. 
Thompson, Lovell 
Townsend, C. W. 
Trotter, Spencer 
Trotter, William H. 
Tufts, R. W. 
Turner, Howard M. 
Tyler, Winsor M. 


Underdown, Henry T. 
Underwood, W. Lyman 


Vosburg, Paul 


Walcott, Charles F. 
Walcott, Frederic C. 
Waleott, Robert — 
Ware, Robert A. 
White, F. B. 
Widmann, Otto 
Wildman, Edward L. 
Willard, B. G. 
Willard, Susanna 
Willard Theodora 
Williams, Robert W. 
Williston, Constance B. 
Winfield, A. M. 
Wood, N. R. 
Woodman, -Walter 
Woolman, Edward W. 
Wright, Horace W. 
Wyman, Margaret C. 


THE AUK, VOL. XXXVII. PLATE III. 


pol axe | FisHer, In Memoriam: Lyman Belding. 33 


IN MEMORIAM: LYMAN BELDING. 
BY A. K. FISHER. 
Plate ITT. 


Lyman Bexpine, the Nestor of California ornithologists, died 
at his home in Stockton, California, at an early hour on the morning 
of November 22, 1917, at the age of eighty-eight years and five 
months. Death came as the result of general weakening of the 
system, the failing of strength and vitality due to the inroads of 
advanced age. The yellowing of the leaf, as he would say, ad- 
vanced to a point wherein the stem no longer kept its hold on the 
tree of life. At the time of his death he was the oldest ornithologist 
in America and, with a few exceptions, in the world. 

It was shortly after Mr. Belding took charge of collecting data 
on bird migration in the district comprising the Pacific coast 
States for the committee of the American Ornithologists’ Union, in 
1883, that the writer, also a member of the committee, first corre- 
sponded with him. Eight years later, in September, 1891, after 
the Death Valley Expedition, sent out by the Biological Survey 
to study life in the deserts of Nevada and California, had disbanded, 
the two met in San Francisco, and there started a long and endear- 
ing friendship. 

The first impression of Mr. Belding was that of a man of reserve 
tinged with diffidence; but with the mellowing effect of congenial 
companionship, this quiet, unassuming gentleman without effort 
entertained his hearers on widely varied subjects of travel, natural 
history, adventure, music, sports with rod and gun, and the general 
affairs of State and current events. With this well rounded equip- 
ment, coupled with his genial and lovable nature, there is little 
wonder that he was so popular and so eagerly sought after by old 
and young, especially when found in the outing season in his 
favorite haunts in the Sierras. It always has been a source of 
much regret to the writer that circumstances prevented him from 
joming Mr. Belding in his mountain rambling during the period 
when he was still active with rod and gun. 


34 FisHer, In Memoriam: Lyman Belding. ese 

In the past decade we have met almost yearly for a friendly visit 
and an interchange of ideas and opinions. Formerly, while still 
able to travel with comparative comfort, he would come to some 
mutually convenient point, but during the last five years of his life, 
owing to increasing infirmities, all meetings were held at his Stockton 
home. On various occasions he talked of his early travels and 
adventures, and told of many interesting things which had occurred 
in his experiences from whaling in the Arctic to trout fishing in the 
Sierras. Realizing that much of this necessarily disconnected 
narrative was of permanent value, he was induced after some 
effort to prepare an autobiographical sketch for the entertainment 
of the writer. 

Fortunately this sketch, comprising nearly fifty typewritten 
pages of legal cap, was completed a couple of years before his 
death and before eye weakness forbade any literary effort. Notes 
from this sketch are the basis of this paper and of one prepared 
by Dr. Walter K. Fisher and published in ‘The Condor’ for March, 
1918. There is little doubt that the stimulative effect of preparing 
this autobiography, with the necessary delving into the past, was 
a pleasing diversion for, with the exception of a daily game of 
whist with a coterie of old friends and an occasional visit to a 
moving picture theater, there was little to break the monotony of 
his daily routine, which was of the simplest kind. 

Lyman Belding, son of Joshua Belding and Rosetta (Cooley) 
Belding, was born June 12, 1829, at West Farms, Massachusetts, 
on the west bank of the Connecticut River, not far from Northamp- 
ton. From the windows of his home he had a plain view of Amherst 
College, Mount Tom, Mount Holyoke, and other interesting points. 
The hemely charms of the New England landscape made a deep 
and lasting impression upon his youthful mind, as shown in later 
years by comparisons which he liked to draw between them and 
those of distant lands. 

When he was about seven years old, his family moved to Kings- 
ton, Wyoming Valley, Pennsylvania. Here, amid mountains and 
valleys well timbered with deciduous trees, he developed his fond- 
ness for hunting, which with him as with many of us, proved to 
be the forerunner of his ornithological career. The following are 
his words: “My happiest days were in autumn. The Passenger 


Vol. all : 


1920 FisHer, In Memoriam: Lyman Belding. 30 


Pigeon was very common and its ete-tete-tete, as it rattled down 
the acorns upon which it was feeding was delicious music to me. 
I have seen many millions of pigeons in a single day in spring, 
when, after their usual northern migration, they were driven back 
by a cold storm. One morning early I was on Ross Hill near 
Kingston looking for a deer, the tracks of which I had seen in the 
snow the previous day. Soon after the sun appeared, millions and 
millions of pigeons flew south over the valley. The flight con- 
tinued into the afternoon when patches of bare ground began to 
appear, affording feeding places for the birds. When driven south 
by cold spring storms the north branch of the Susquehanna River 
was a favorite route of travel. 

“Before I got a gun I often wandered in the woods, sometimes 
getting home late in the evening, and on one occasion my parents 
thinking me lost had looked in an open well and other places for me. 
When I obtained a gun I was out early and late with it, and ne- 
glected school, though I worked faithfully on our farm when the 
crops needed me, except in the autumn when I would occasionally 
steal away and go to the hills for chestnuts.” This love of shooting 
and of life in the woods and fields endured to the end. 

He went to Stockton in March, 1856, and of game seen here and 
in other parts of California he says: “Game was abundant, in- 
cluding elk, antelope, deer, bear, otter, quail, and waterfowl. Elk 
have disappeared from the interior valleys of the State excepting a 
drove on the Miller and Lux Ranch of forty thousand acres in the 
San Joaquin Valley, and these animals are being captured and 
distributed to various parks. The elk of this State inhabited 
the tule marshes mainly, though I have seen many elk horns in the 
Marysville Buttes, probably left there by elk which came from the 
marshes of Butte Creek, and I have seen hundreds, if not thousands, 
of elk horns on the border of the tule swamps north of Stockton. 
Antelope have entirely disappeared from the Sacramento and San 
Joaquin Valleys. I saw three in the latter valley a few miles west 
of Princeton in the summer of 1870 and a single one in Lower 
California about twenty-five miles south of Tia Juana in the spring 
of 1887. Deer were mostly in the mountains, with a few along 
the rivers where there were extensive thickets on bottom lands. 
They will continue to be common with proper protection. Very 


Auk 
Jan. 


36 Fisner, In Memoriam: Lyman Belding. [ 


little of their range will ever be cultivated owing to great altitude 
and soil that is not suited to cereals — I refer mostly to the Sierra 
Nevadas. I have seen only a few bears in the forest, probably 
about twenty, and only one undoubted grizzly bear. This I saw 
in the summer of 1875 when I was fishing on San Antonio Creek 
near the Calaveras Grove of sequoias. It crossed the stream 
below and near me and I had a good view of it. The owner of a 
drove of sheep that ranged in the vicinity told me that he had also 
seen it. I have been very near many bears but they would slip 
away unseen. Several of those I saw was when I was in the saddle. 
The only one I ever shot at was between the middle fork of the 
Stanislaus River and Beaver Creek, when I had two wire cartridges 
in my shotgun. My horse wheeled when I shot and the bear ran 
in the opposite direction to a dense thicket which I did not enter. 

“While I was collecting specimens at Crockers, I tried to get a 
shot at a large bear feeding in a meadow on a plant growing on the 
border of a rivulet. He had not seen me, and I went to the edge of 
the meadow, put buck shot in my gun and waited for him to turn 
to givemeashot. He wasa very large bear and the nearer he came 
to me, the more I realized his size. I had much time to think as he 
came slowly toward me, and I remembered the only two buck-shot 
shells I had were not to be relied on as they were old, and I con- 
cluded not to shoot at him. When he was about fifty yards from 
me, he must have smelled me as he turned broadside, sank back on 
his haunches, held one paw out, cocked his ears forward and sniffed 
several times. I was greatly relieved when he leisurely walked off 
toward the river. 

“Beaver and otter were plentiful in the sloughs and tule marsh 
about Stockton. Beaver built houses on the marshes as the musk- 
rats do on the marshes in the prairies of the Middle West. There 
were several of these beaver houses within three miles of Stockton. 
They were on land that floated, as much of the peat land does in 
the tule swamps about Stockton. I shot seven beaver in one day 
in the flood of 1861 and 1862. I would jar the houses and watch 
for the cautious appearance of the occupants as they came out to 
ascertain the cause of the disturbance. They would approach 
under water to within a few feet of me, just as J had often seen 
muskrats do when I was a boy, and the only evidence of their 
presence would be a little circular wave caused by their breathing, 


Vol. XXNVIT] = Fisuer, In Memoriam: Lyman Belding. 37 


with only the tip of their noses even with the surface of the water. 
The beaver about Marysville burrowed in the banks of the rivers. 
Beaver and otter became scarce long ago. 

“T went to Marysville to reside early in October, 1862. Small 
game was abundant. Myriads of ducks and geese came from the 
north and east of the Sierras in October and November. Butte 
Creek attracted most of them. The Wood Duck.was very com- 
mon on Feather River and was a constant resident. It is now, 
as in the country generally, quite rare. The Mountain Plover 
appeared abundantly on the plains in October. At present it is 
apparently on the verge of extinction. There were a few deer 
along Feather River below Marysville and a few in the Marysville 
Buttes. Mountain Quail came down from the mountains near 
Oroville and other localities on the eastern border of the valley to 
spend the winter.” 

In the autumn of 1849, Mr. Belding nearly succumbed to an 
attack of typhoid fever, and during a tedious convalescence was 
still further weakened by malarial fever. On account of his de- 
bilitated condition due to these complications his doctor advised 
a sea voyage to hasten recovery. 

After spending nine months with a sister, at Baltimore, Mary- 
land, to partially regain his strength, he sailed for Boston and 
arrived about July, 1851. He then went to New Bedford and 
after a few days shipped on the ‘Uncas,’ which was going to the 
Arctic for bowhead whales. This voyage lasted three and a half 
years. The ‘Uncas’ arrived at the Azores (about three weeks’ 
voyage from New Bedford), and visited Flores and St. Michael 
for the purpose of completing the crew. The vessel touched at 
Cape of Good Hope, St. Paul, Amsterdam Island, New Zealand 
and Guam, and reached Bering Straits in July, 1852. During the 
cruise in the Arctic the vessel went north to the 73rd parallel and 
was successful in securing a full cargo of oil from bowhead whales. 
When the sun went below the horizon the ship turned south on 
her homeward journey. A stop was made at Petropavlovsk, a 
Russian penal colony, for water and the purchase of furs. On 
arrival at Honolulu, 150 whaling vessels were found anchored there, 
the greater number of which had been in the Arctic at the same time 
as the ‘Uncas.’ 

On account of unbearable treatment at the hands of the Captain 


[Tan, 


38 Fisoer, In Memoriam: Lyman Belding. 


of the ‘Uncas,’ Mr. Belding deserted from the vessel and, after 
many unpleasant experiences, shipped in the ‘Julian,’ of Martha’s 
Vineyard, which visited the Cocos Islands, and the Galopagos 
group for sperm whales. The ship returned to Honolulu in-four 
months with a cargo of oil. In the spring of 1853 he shipped on 
the bark ‘Philomela,’ of Portland, which he designated as an old 
tub, and finally reached home January, 1854. 

There is no question that from the time he was a small boy, Mr. 
Belding took a great interest in birds, especially in their native 
haunts. In confirmation of this he says: “ My love of adventure 
as well as my admiration of birds was responsible for most of my 
wanderings. . Bird songs always had a great attraction for me and 
I copied many songs that had regular intervals and could be ex- 
pressed by our musical system.” 

It was not until 1876, when he received a volume of Cooper’s 
‘Ornithology of California,’ that his slumbering interest burst forth 
and his activity as an ornithologist began. This stimulus, coupled 
with the kindly interest and patient assistance of Prof. Baird and 
Mr. Ridgway, two men who have helped many a bewildered and 
discouraged beginner over the rough places in ornithology, started 
him on his collecting career. He often expressed his gratitude for 
their kind attention and avowed that his zeal for his work was 
greatly increased by their combined encouragement. Prof. Baird 
sent him many valuable books and Mr. Ridgway was most patient 
and prompt in writing him long, interesting letters concerning 
specimens he had sent to the Smithsonian Institution for identifi- 
cation. 

His success in identifying specimens was due partly to his already 
good knowledge of birds, partly to the excellence of Prof. Baird’s 
descriptions in the ‘Ornithology of California,’ and in Volume IX 
of the ‘Pacific Railway Reports,’ and partly because “north-light 
subspecies”’ as yet were not in vogue. He found more pleasure in 
identifying strange birds than anything else, except, perhaps, in 
collecting material in the Sierra Nevada. He never went out on a 
collecting trip, especially on a long one, without taking some of his 
most needed books, and “ volume IX” was always one of them. 

In the spring of 1881, Prof. Baird and Mr. Ridgway requested 
him to visit Guadalupe Island. Accordingly he went to San Diego 


ee | FisHer, In Memoriam: Lyman Belding. 39 


to prepare for the trip, but reluctantly gave up the voyage after 
meeting several sealers back from the island who told him of the 
withdrawal of the Mexican garrison and of the general unsatis- 
factory condition there. 

He then went to the Cerros Island, the second objective, but it 
was found quite destitute of birds. After a stay of twelve days he 
went to Secammons Lagoon for the purpose of collecting on the main- 
land, but the surf was so dangerous he did not try toland. It was 
here that A. W. Anthony’s schooner was wrecked in 1898. 

From this point Mr. Belding followed the coast northward, stop- 
ping at Santa Rosalia and San Quentin Bays. It was a long dis- 
tance from anchorage at the mouth of the Bay to the collecting 
grounds, so that the results were disappointing to Mr. Belding. 
On this trip he collected specimens of a cormorant which later was 
named the lesser white crested cormorant (Phalacrocorax a. albo- 
ciliatus) besides a new lizard or two on Cerros Island, and during 
the latter part of the voyage secured a specimen of the then unde- 
scribed Frazer’s Oystercatcher (Haematopus frazert). At San 
Quentin Bay he first secured a specimen of the bird that Mr. 
Ridgway later named Passerculus beldingi, in his honor. 

The winters of 1881—82 and 1882-83 found him in the Cape region 
ot Lower California where he collected from La Paz to Cape San 
Lucas, excepting December, 1882, and a part of April, 1883, when 
he was at Guaymas. He enjoyed collecting in the Cape region, 
though he endured severe hardships due to the scarcity of water in 
that semi-desert area. 

He considered that he had made the mistake on the first trip, of 
collecting too great a variety of things of which he knew little or 
nothing, instead of confining his energies entirely to birds, thus 
making a second trip unnecessary. In 1881, he took two nests and 
eggs of Costa’s Hummingbird at La Paz, the first eggs of the species 
ever taken. He found San Jose del Cabo the best field in the low 
country, and the Victoria Mountains the best in the higher parts. 
He wondered why the sharp-eyed Xantus had not discovered (co- 
thlyprs beldingi along the San Jose River where he spent much time, 
and he doubted whether he was ever in the Victoria Mountains, or 
he would have found Junco bairdi and other common birds of the 
region. 


Eee 


Jan. 


40 FisHer, In Memoriam: Lyman Belding. 


On his second trip, Mr. Belding took only about eighty bird skins 
for he did not wish many. He consumed nearly a week of time in 
securing two specimens of Rallus beldingt. He only heard of one 
man at La Paz who had ever seen one, and several hunters were 
surprised when he showed them one of the birds. These birds 
inhabit the mangrove thickets, and both specimens were obtained 
at low tide while in search of food. 

Mr. Belding travelled considerably in the northern part of Lower 
California, and on one of the trips, in May, 1885, collected a speci- 
men of Sitta pygmea leuconucha which he presented to the National 
Museum several years before it was described elsewhere. 

His keen perception caused him. to realize at about this time 
that it would be almost hopeless to continue the study of orni- 
thology with the idea of mastering the subject, unless there were 
available in California a very complete collection of birds for use in 
comparison. With the idea of building up such a collection he 
wrote to many of his California correspondents and advised them 
to send skins to the California Academy, which he believed to be 
the proper place for such a collection. The lack of enthusiasm on 
their part to contribute toward the enterprise and the increasing 
tendency toward the multiplication of poorly defined subspecies 
undoubtedly were important factors in discouraging further col- 
lecting. He was very quick to notice differences in plumage and 
proportions but was little interested in specimens that could only 
be identified when compared with large series and when the locality 
and date of capture of the specimen had to be known. 

It was most unfortunate that he did not come in personal contact 
with many of the young ornithologists who now are doing such 
creditable work in the State. Being fond of the companionship of 
young people it is certain that mutual profit and pleasure would 
have come from association between this noble gentleman and the 
young and enthusiastic ornithologists of California. 

The forests, streams, and meadows of the Sierras were his special 
delight and after advancing age made it more and more difficult to 
travel as each year rolled by, he dreamed of the by-gone days and 
was resigned. 

Of these mountain playgrounds of his, we may quote from an 
article of his in ‘The Condor’; (Vol. II, p. 4, 1900) as follows: 


Ree | Fisuer, In Memoriam: Lyman Belding. 4] 


“The pleasantest days I have spent since 1876 have been in the 
mountains of Central California. Since that time I have been in 
these mountains the most of each summer. I couple deer, grouse 
and quail hunting with bird study. At first I tried to connect 
botany with ornithology, but I could not look on the ground for 
plants and in the trees for birds at the same time. The ornitholo- 
gist should, however, know the prominent plants at least. During 
my rambles I have noticed the hardiness of some of our mountain 
annual plants. I have seen the mercury down to 22 degrees on two 
successive mornings and no trace of frost afterward, except that a 
few of the tenderest ferns were killed. I suppose this may be owing 
to dry air and cool nights, the latter preventing the rapid growth 
and consequent tenderness of kindred plants grown where both days 
and nights are warm. 

“The first eggs I collected were about on a par with my first 
bird skins. I picked a hole in each end with a pin, never having 
seen or heard of egg drills and blow-pipes. Eggs of Townsend’s 
Solitaire and others quite as choice were thus punctured. I believe 
I took the first eggs of the Solitaire, which were sent to the National 
Museum. The nest is composed almost wholly of pine needles 
and can readily be distinguished from any other nest of the Sierras. 
It is usually on the ground, but I have seen one in a hole in a stump 
about a foot from the ground. Perhaps there is no part of the world 
more interesting than the high Sierras of Central California. 
Neither Heermann, Gambel, or Xantus explored them. Mr. Bell 
got the Round-headed Woodpecker in Calaveras or Tuolumne 
county, but this he could have done at an altitude of 2500 feet or 
less in winter. Prior to 1876 these mountains had hardly been 
touched by the ornithologist, the route immediately along the 
Central Pacific Railroad and about Lake Tahoe being the only 
part that had been visited. Considerable work had been done 
south of Tehachapi; Newberry had followed the Sacramento 
River to the Klamath Lakes and northward, and Capt. Feilner 
had collected at Fort Crook and about Mount Shasta, but the 
mountains in the central part of the State had been neglected. 

“Tf any of the young ornithologists of this State have not visited 
these mountains in summer they should miss no opportunity to do 
so. My most interesting observations have been those of evenings 


42 Fisner, In Memoriam: Lyman Belding. ES 


Jan. 


and moonlight nights in some secluded part of the forest where 
large game was abundant. I have often heard the Pygmy Owl, 
which Mr. Ridgway correctly says is diurnal and crepuscular and 
have quite as often heard the Flammulated Owl, which is strictly 
nocturnal and hard to get. I have only taken one specimen. The 
Western Barred Owl has never ceased to interest me, for it is quite 
familiar and seems to have a fondness for talking back! By imi- 
tating its shrieks and dog-like barkings, I seldom fail to get a 
response.” 

Mr. Belding being preéminently a field ornithologist and _pri- 
marily interested in birds in their native haunts accounts in part 
for the disparity between the work he accomplished and the 
amount of material published. One of his earliest and longest 
papers appeared in the ‘Proceedings of the National Museum’ in 
1879, entitled ‘A Partial List of the Birds of Central California’ 
and included observations made in the Sacramento and San 
Joaquin Valleys from Marysville to Stockton and on the western 
slopes of the Sierras. It covered sixty one pages and included 
annotated notes on 220 species. 

‘The Birds of the Pacific District,’ appearing in 1890 as one of the 
series of “Occasional Papers’ of the California Academy of Science, 
was one of Mr. Belding’s best-known, and most important publica- 
tions. It was based on material from California, Oregon, Wash- 
ington, and Nevada furnished by migration observers of the 
American Ornithologists’ Union. Although many observers fur- 
nished data, a very important part of the work was contributed by 
Mr. Belding himself. His intimate knowledge of the region and 
his well-known accuracy make this volume one of the standard 
publications relating to the birds of the Pacific Coast. The 
manuscript, which contains much material not in the published 
volume and a similar report on the waterfowl which was never 
published, are deposited in the Bancroft Library of the University 
of California. 

It is only logical that a man who had collected so much zoélogical 
material, over wide and little-known regions, would have species 
dedicated to him, and we find five birds and four other vertebrates 
named after Belding. 

When the American Ornithologists’ Union was founded in 1883, 


NOE rhea FisHer, In Memoriam: Lyman Belding. 43 


Mr. Belding was elected an Active Member and remained as such 
until 1911, when at his own request he was made a Retired Fellow. 
He was elected a member of the California Academy of Sciences, 
March 4, 1889, life member March 4, 1914, and honorary member 
of the section of ornithology of that institution, February 7, 1898. 
He became an honorary member of the Cooper Ornithological Club 
in 1896. He took a keen interest in these three societies and gave 
them his warm and substantial support. 

About 1867 he married the widow of his brother, and a daughter. 
Josephine M., was born to them. She inherited the tastes of her 
father, being interested in music, birds, flowers, and all out-of-door 
life. Her fine nature made her a favorite among relatives and 
associates. She died January 24, 1917, ten months before her 
father passed away. 

To many of the younger ornithologists Lyman Belding, because 
of his early retirement from active ornithology, is a name and an 
inspiration only, but to the older men, especially those who have 
been favored by his friendship and close association with him, his 
death brings sorrow. This sadness and feeling of loss, however, 
will gradually fade away and be replaced by fond memories of a 
departed friend, a stalwart citizen, an ardent sportsman and a 
nature lover. . 

His remains rest peacefully in the Rural Cemetery at Stockton, 
his old home, where much of his active life was spent. 


Bibliography of Lyman Belding. 


1878. Nesting-Habits of Parus montanus. Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, III, 
April, 1878, pp. 102-103. 

1879. A partial list of the Birds of Central California. Proc. U. 8. Nat. 
Mus., I, March, 1879, pp. 388-449. 

1883. Catalogue of a Collection of Birds made at various points along the 
western Coast of Lower California, north of Cape St. Eugenio. 
Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., V, March 21, 1883, pp. 527-532. (Edited 
by R. Ridgway.) 

Catalogue of a Collection of Birds made near the Southern Ex- 

tremity of the Peninsula of Lower California. Proc. U. 8. Nat. 
Mus., V, March, 1883, pp. 5382-550. (Edited by R. Ridgway). 


tet 


1883. 


1887. 


1889. 


1890. 


1891. 
1892. 


1893. 


1896. 


1898. 


1899. 


1900. 


[sen 


Fisuer, In Memoriam: Lyman Belding. 

List of birds found at Guaymas, Sonora, in December, 1882, and 
April, 1883. Proc. U. 8S. Nat. Mus., VI, December, 1883, pp. 
343-344. 

Second Catalogue of a Collection of Birds made near the Southern 
Extremity of Lower California. Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus., VI, 
December, 1883, pp. 344-352. (Edited by R. Ridgway.) 

A Few Words to the Young Ornithologists of California. West 
Amer. Scientist, December, 1887, pp. 227-230. 

Description of a New Thrush from Calaveras County, California. 
Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., 2nd ser., II, June, 1889, pp. 18-19. 

The Hummingbirds of the Pacific Coast North of Cape St. Lucas. 
West Amer. Scientist, VI, September, 1889, pp. 109-110. 

The Small Thrushes of California. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., 2nd 
Ser., II, October, 1889, pp. 57-69. 

Migrations of the Deer of the Sierra Nevada. Zoe. I, June, 1890, 
pp. 121-122. 

Land Birds of the Pacific District. (= Occasional Papers of the 
California Academy of Sciences, II). San Francisco: September, 
1890, 8vo, pp. 1-274. 

Notices of Some California Birds. Zoe. II, July, 1891, pp. 97-100. 

Geese Which Occur in California. Zoe. III, July, 1892, pp. 96-101. 

Some of the Methods and Implements by which the Pacifie Coast 
Indians Obtain Game. Zoe. III, July, 1892, pp. 120-124. 

Zonotrichia Albicollis in California. Zoe. III, July, 1892, p. 117. 

Food of the Grouse and Mountain Quail of Central California. 
Zoe. III, October, 1892, pp. 232-234. 

Relics from an Indian Burying Ground. Zoe. III, October, 1892, 
pp. 200-201. 

On Numenius Borealis in California. Zoe. III, October, 1892, 
p.-25¢2 

The Effect of Climate upon Pacific Coast Birds. Zoe. III, January, 
1893, p. 331. 

Songs of the Western Meadowlark. Auk, XIII, January, 1896, 
pp. 29-30. 

The Song of the Western Meadow Lark. Auk, XV, January, 
1898, pp. 56-57. 

Nesting of Hylocichla aonalaschke auduboni in the Sierra Nevadas. 
Bull. Cooper Orn. Club, I, March, 1899, p. 21. 

Hylocichla Ustulata Gidica in the Sierra Nevadas. Bull. Cooper 
Orn. Club, I, March, 1899, p. 29. 

A Part of My Experience in Collecting. Condor, II, January, 
1900, pp. 1-5. 

Karly Migration at Stockton, California. Condor, II, July, 1900, 
p. 89. 

Tape Worm in Young Mountain Quail. Condor, II, July, 1900, 
p. 91. 

The White-crowned Sparrow. Condor, II, November, 1900, p. 134. 


Vol. oo | 
1920 


1900. 


1901. 


1903. 


1904. 
1905. 


FisHer, In Memoriam: Lyman Belding. 45 


Are Blackbirds Injurious or Beneficial? Condor, II, November, 
1900, pp. 139-140. 

Chipmunks. Condor, III, January, 1901, p. 3. 

May in the High Sierras. Condor, III, March, 1901, pp. 31-32. 

April and May Bird-life at Stockton, California. Bird-Lore, III, 
April, 1901, p. 67. 

Summer Birds of Stockton, California. Bird-Lore, III, June, 
1901, pp. 104-105. 

Parasites in Birds. Condor, III, July, 1901, pp. 104-105. 

Birds of Stockton and Vicinity. Bird-Lore, III, August, 1901, 
pp. 137-188. 

An Additional Specimen of Nyctale from Lake Tahoe. Condor, 
III, November, 1901, pp. 144-145. 

Voracity of Albatrosses. Condor, V, January, 1903, p. 17. 

The Fall Migration of Oreortyx pictus plumiferus. Condor, V, 

January, 1903, p. 18. 

The Snowflake and Other Unusual Birds of Marysville. Condor, 
V, January, 1903, p. 19. 

Curious Trait of Thick-billed Sparrow. Condor, V, May, 1903, 
p. 79. 

Explanatory. Condor, VI, May, 1904, pp. 74-76. 

Snow-bound. Condor, VII, May, 1905, p. 82. 

The Irrepressible Oregon Chickadee. Condor, VII, May, 1905, 
pp. 82-83. 

Corrections (in regard to Lanius borealis in California). Condor, 
VII, May, 1905, p. 83. 

Plegadis guarana at Stockton, California. Condor, VII, July, 
1905, p. 112. 

Date of Arrival of Purple Martin at Stockton, California. Condor, 
VII, July, 1905, p. 118. 


U. S. Biological Survey, Washington, D. C. 


46 Coss, Birds of the Catskills. PS 


MIDSUMMER BIRDS IN THE CATSKILL MOUNTAINS. 
BY STANLEY COBB, M.D. 


One hundred miles north of New York City the Catskill Moun- 
tains rise from the west shore of the Hudson River making a circu- 
lar uplift some 100 square miles in area. Near the little hamlet 
of Hardenburg on the Beaverkill stream I have spent the first part 
of July for several years. The altitude in this locality is from 
2000 feet in the valleys to 3,800 feet at the summits of the round 
topped, but steep mountains which are covered with a dense 
second growth of hardwood succeeding the hemlock forest of sixty 
years ago. Remnants of these magnificent hemlocks can still be 
seen all through the woods, for when they were cut their bark was 
stripped off for the tanneries and the great trunks still lie rotting 
and moss covered in the damp shade, while the stumps — many 
of them three or four feet across — stand in the twilight of the 
forest among the slender second growth like mossy tombstones 
commemorating man’s wastefulness. Add to this forest land a 
quantity of lively mountain brooks, many old clearings with ruined 
houses and decaying orchards, and occasional rough farms with 
sunny hillside pastures, and you have an ideal place for birds, 
especially warblers, finches, and thrushes. 

The most abundant bird in this locality, and the one which always 
seems to me typical of the old wood roads is the Slate-colored Junco. 
Here is his summer home, and along the “dug-ways” where the 
roads are cut into the hillsides, making steep fern covered and 
mossy banks, their nests are easily found. In one stretch of a half 
mile of road I have found as many as four, all in similar positions — 
under some root or fern clump in hollows dug into the little per- 
pendicular banks. In the first week of July most of the nests con- 
tained 4 eggs each, but by the twelfth they were nearly all hatched 
and offered excellent subjects for photography. It was not neces- 
sary to hide the camera for in less than an hour the mother bird 
would become so accustomed to it that she would feed her young 
within 24 inches of the shining lens without apparent fear. The 


ae 1520" al Coss, Birds of the Catskilts. 47 


darkness of the wood roads and the quick actions of the birds, 
however, made it hard to get good results without the best of lenses, 
so my efforts with an ordinary stock camera were not very satis- 
factory. 

The other finches of the mountains were more conspicuous if 
less confiding, for the beautiful members of the family, such as the 
Indigo Bunting, Rose-breasted Grosbeak and Purple Finch, were 
abundant. At home in Massachusetts I have always thought of 
the Rose-breast as a comparatively uncommon and shy bird, but 
in these beech woods it was one of the commonest birds. Every 
morning and evening their liquid song was a delight, and through- 
out the day the males flashed from tree to tree eating the canker 
worms which had nearly defoliated parts of the forest. 

Indigo Buntings frequented the clearings and old farm lands, 
nesting plentifully in the underbrush just where the stumpy fields 
merge into the deep woods. In one such place I found three of 
their nests within fifty yards of each other. At this season they 
seemed to be raising their second brood for one of the nests con- 
tained new laid eggs, while there were many young around just 
able to fly with ease. 

While speaking of brilliant birds mention must be made of the 
Scarlet Tanagers which were even more abundant than the Gros- 
beaks in the worm infested patches of beech woods. In these bare 
trees their plumage showed off marvelously, and their throaty 
“chuck-whee”’ and pleasing song might be heard at all hours of the 
day. 

Flyeatchers, too, were abundant; Kingbirds made the pastures 
lively with their quick sallies and noisy chatter; along the streams 
the Phoebes silently watched for insects; and from the swampy 
woods at noon came the drowsy call of the Wood Pewee or the 
incessant “chebec!”’ of the Least Flycatcher. 

But the brightest charm of the Catskills for an ornithologist is 
in the number and variety of warblers. My first morning in the 
woods I saw eleven species, some of them the handsomest of the 
tribe. Among the few remaining hemlocks the Black and White, 
Myrtle, and Parula Warblers explored the lower branches, twitter- 
ing and singing, while from the higher trees came the soft song of 
the Black-throated Green, or the insect-like call of the Black- 


[ser 


48 Coss, Birds of the Catskills. 


throated Blue, both very common. In the thickets along the 
streams or near the pastures, the Chestnut-sided Warblers nested, 
associated with the Redstarts and Maryland Yellow-throats. 
Where tall woods bordered the Beaverkill and the rocks were 
smooth from many freshets, the Blackburnian Warblers used to 
amuse us by trying to catch our flies as we fished for trout. They 
showed little fear and their flame colored throats were a constant 
pleasure. 

Beside these abundant species there were two others of which I 
occasionally caught glimpses: the Mourning and Canadian War- 
blers. Both of these were rather shy and retiring, seldom singing, 
though I once heard the Canadian’s song—a loud but sweet 
medley. 

Yet when I have not mentioned the thrushes how can I give 
space to the many other birds which seem so typical of the Cats- 
kills? To the Winter Wren overflowing with song among the dark 
fallen hemlock trunks; the Black-billed Cuckoos gliding stealthily 
through the woods; the Chimney Swifts splashing onto the smooth 
surface of the lake at dusk; or the Red-tailed, and Red-shouldered 
Hawks drifting high over the mountains against the deep blue sky 
and sunny clouds. 

And now the thrushes! During the day they seem like sedate 
quiet birds, flying shyly about the shady woods attending to their 
nests and young. The Wood Thrush is common on the high 
ground in tall open forest, and the Wilson Thrush or Veery is 
abundant in the fern floored swamps, while the Hermit prefers the 
vicinity of brooks and ponds, sometimes singing even at noon — 
softly, from some cool shade, as if he could not wait till evening. 

But evening near Balsam Lake is the time for thrushes. As the 
shadows grow long and stretch down the mountain sides the 
thrushes begin to tune up, softly at first and at intervals, but as 
evening draws on the woods resound with most exquisite music, 
the true music of nature; not like the pleasant jingling songs of 
finches, or the soft trills of warblers, but strong, rich and mellow 
notes such as are heard from the sweetest of flutes. From the 
beech woods comes the slow chime-like song of the Wood Thrush, 
answered by others in different keys. In the swamps the Veeries 
join a rolling chorus, sending forth their liquid spirals of sound 


pee a ar Griscom, Winter Birds of San Antonio, Texas. 49 


in quick succession until the woods resound. And then the Hermits 
— from all sides their songs come, pure and bubbling, not slow and 
bell-like as the Wood Thrush nor fast and rolling like the Veery, 
but a perfect blending of bell tones and flute-like trills, soft or loud 
with the bird’s varying mood. The dusk deepens, and the chorus 
increases till all the shadowy forest is echoing with deliciously clear 
music. Then, as darkness falls, they hush one by one; the sky 
fades over the western mountain; a Great Blue Heron flaps heavily 
up the lake and over the now silent forest, and far up the valley the 
“Whoo-hoo-hoo-ah!”’ of the Barred Owl floats down to us, mellowed 
by distance, telling that night has come. 


3840 Adams St., Milton, Mass. 


NOTES ON THE WINTER BIRDS OF SAN ANTONIO, 
TEXAS. 


BY LUDLOW GRISCOM. 


From December 15, 1917, to March 7, 1918, the writer was 
stationed at Camp Stanley, Leon Springs, Bexar Co., Texas. As 
much spare time as possible was devoted to observing birds, particu- 
larly week-ends of course, but incidental work was possible through- 
out the week. The life was an absolutely outdoor one in unsettled 
country. Field glasses were always a proper part of an officer’s 
uniform, and perhaps I received much more credit for zeal in exam- 
ining the country for tactical problems than I deserved! 

The vicinity of Camp Stanley itself was very poor for birds, the 
barren rocky hillsides with but scant growth upon them, satisfying 
the requirements of a very limited number of species. The San 
Antonio River south of the city was a much better place. Several 
trips were made to the Medina Dam about twenty-five miles to the 
west. The dam has made a lake over ten miles long by one-half 
mile wide, where waterfowl were abundant. The hills here were 
covered with juniper and bayberry, and the bird-life as a result 
differed markedly. 


50 Griscom, Winter Birds of San Antonio, Texas. eae 


In ‘The Auk,’ for 1892, Attwater gave a list of the birds from the 
vicinity of San Antonio with mostly very brief and general annota- 
tions. A list of the breeding birds for all of Bexar Co. is given by 
Messrs. Quillin and Holleman in ‘The Condor’ for 1918. Lacey 
published a very complete list for the vicinity of Kerrville, about 
fifty miles northwest of San Antonio (Auk, 1911, p. 200), and Austin 
Paul Smith wrote ‘Additions to the Avifauna of Kerr Co., Texas’ in 
‘The Auk,’ 1916. A few other short notes have been published, 
but those are not given as they do not bear on the birds in this 
article.! 

The chief excuse for publishing these notes is the discrepancy in 
the accounts of Attwater and Lacey as to the status of various spe- 
cies, where the difference in the kind of country and the fifty miles 
ought not to count. As this is usually due to the lack of adequate 
observation by a sufficient number of people at nearby contigu- 
ous stations, my notes are given as supplementary information. 
It is also, perhaps, worth while to record the effect upon the bird- 
life of the extreme severity of the winter of 1917-18, which a good 
many people both in and out of the military service, will remember 
for years to come. The number of military camps too must have 
interfered with bird-life, and undoubtedly aeroplanes were respon- 
sible for the scarcity of many species such as vultures and hawks. 
In the list which follows all actual or apparent discrepancies are 
pointed out, as well as new records. Even the commonest birds 
have been included, so as to give the future observer a definite idea 
of what he may expect to find. 


1. Podilymbus podiceps. Pirp-BitLeEpD GREBE.— Two seen at 
Medina Dam, December 30, 1917. Not mentioned by Attwater as a 
winter resident. Called an occasional winter visitor on the Guadeloupe 
River by Lacey. 

2. Mergus serrator. Rep-BREASTED MerrGANSER.— A _ flock of 
five noted at the Medina Dam, December 30. Another species not men- 
tioned by Attwater, but called an occasional winter visitant by Lacey. 

3. Anas platyrhynchos. Matriarp.— Rather uncommon on the 


1 The first paper dealing with the birds of this region is by H. E. Dresser and appeared in 
“The Ibis’ for August and October, 1865 and January, 1866. It is especially interesting 
historically as Mr. Dresser stopped with Dr. A. L. Heermann who was living at San An- 
tonio at the time and who contributed a number of notes to the paper. [Ed.] 


Mba ae Ne Griscom, Winter Birds of San Antonio, Texas. 51 


Medina Lake. Attwater calls all the ducks migrants, and Lacey calls 
them all winter residents, either occasional or not uncommon. 

4. Mareca americana. Batppatr.— A drake on Medina Lake with 
Mallards December 30. According to Attwater a migrant, according to 
Lacey not uncommon in winter. 

5. Nettion carolinense. GrrEN-wiNGEeD TrAu.— The scarcest of the 
Anatinz on Medina Lake. 

6. Spatula clypeata. Suovetter. Flock of six December 30 on 
Medina Lake. 

7. Dafila acuta. Prnrar.— The commonest of the Anatinee and the 
tamest. A stray bird seen January 13 on the San Antonio River south of 
the city at Hot Wells 

8. Marila americana. RepHEAD.— Common on Medina Lake. It 
is not recorded by Lacey, and Attwater calls it a migrant. 

9. Marila valisineria. Canvasspacx.— In slightly greater numbers 
than the Redhead. Not recorded by Lacey. Attwater gives it as less 
common as a migrant than the last. 

10. Marila affinis. Lesser Scaup.—One drake seen January 6. 
A rare migrant (Attwater); not uncommon in winter (Lacey). 

11. Marila collaris. Rinc-Neckep Ducx.— The commonest and 
tamest duck on Medina Lake. Not recorded by Lacey; a tolerably 
common migrant (Attwater). 

12. Clangula clangula americana. Wuuistiter.— This is one of the 
species the occurrence of which is probably due to the severe cold weather. 
Three drakes seen on January 6, at the extreme upper end of Medina Lake. 
Previously unrecorded. 

13. Ardea herodias subsp.? Great BLuz Heron. One or two seen 
on each visit to the Dam. Not previously recorded in winter. 

14. Fulica americana. Coor. Very abundant on Medina Lake. 
Not mentioned previously as occurring in winter. 

15. Oxyechus vociferus. Kituprrr. A few birds in all types of 
country, their numbers apparently unaffected by the severe weather. 

16. Zenaidura macroura carolinensis. Mourninc Dove.— A few 
birds all winter. 

17. Scardafellainca. Inca Dove.— Not uncommon on the outskirts 
of San Antonio right through the winter. Attwater regarded it as very 
rare, giving only one record. All later writers agree in its being a common 
resident, so it must have extended its range northward. As it is extra- 
ordinarily tame and confiding, and a dooryard bird, it seems improbable 
that Attwater could have overlooked it. 

18. Cathartes aura septentrionalis. Turkey Vuirure.— De- 
cidedly rare. A few birds seen in the city of San Antonio, and none after 
the cold wave of January 10. 

19. Catharista urubu. Brack VuLtTure.— Decidedly uncommon, 
except at Medina Lake, where it was quite plentiful. 


o2 Griscom, Winter Birds of San Antonio, Texas. Eee 


20. Circus hudsonius. Marsuy Hawx.— A few birds seen in the 
flat country near San Antonio. 

21. Accipiter velox. SHarp-sHINNED HawK.— Only one bird seen. 

22. Buteo borealis subsp.? Rep-raitep Hawx.— A pair at Leon 
Springs, and another at Medina Dam. ; 

23. Falco sparverius subsp.? A few birds in all types of country. 

24. Polyborus cheriway. Aupupon’s Caracara.— Attwater gives 
this species as a resident. In spite of this it was a shock to see one in 
nippy weather on December 29, looking very miserable and fluffed out. 
None seen later. 

25. Geococcyx californianus. RoapruNNER.— Given as a common 
resident by everybody, but I saw only one. Non-ornithological natives 
informed me that it had greatly decreased in the more settled country. 

26. Ceryle a. alcyon. Brtrep KinarisHer.— Seen on each trip to 
the dam, and along the San Antonio River south of the city. Not given 
by Attwater as occurring in winter, but recorded by Lacey as a resident. 

27. Dryobates scalaris bairdi. Texas Woopprecker.— Fairly com- 
mon. 

28. Sphyrapicus v. varius. YrEILOW-BELLIED SapsuckER.— The 
commonest woodpecker. 

29. Melanerpes f. formicivorus. ANT-bATING WoopPECKER.— Ac- 
cording to Lacey common in winter and breeds near Kerrville, the most 
eastern record. One bird seen December 15 at Camp Stanley, consider- 
ably to the southeast. 

30. Centurus aurifrons. GoLDEN-FRONTED WooprrckER.— Com- 
mon along the San Antonio River south of the city. Almost indisting- 
uishable in color, habits and notes from its eastern relative. 

31. Colaptes auratus subsp.? Fricker.— One positively identified 
at Camp Stanley December 27, and another at Hot Wells, January 1. 
According to Attwater regular in winter. Unrecorded by Lacey. 

32. Colaptes cafer collaris. Rrp-sHAFrreD FLICKER.— Common. 

33. Sayornis pheebe. Pxrase.— Common, and apparently unaf- 
fected by the cold weather. Present even at Camp Stanley, nowhere near 
any water. 

34. Molothrus ater subsp.? Cowsrrp.— A large flock of several 
hundred birds around the stables at Camp Stanley. Considered common 
in winter by Attwater and rare by Lacey. 

35. Agelaius phoeniceus subsp.? RED-wiNcED Buacksirp. In spite 
of previous writers only one bird seen with Cowbirds around the cavalry 
stables at Camp Stanley December 27. It could not be found later. 

36. Sturnella neglecta. Western MrapowLarK.— Abundant, 
singing on warm days. In spite of careful effort I could not find the eastern 
bird. There is no difficulty in telling them apart, the notes are so diagnostic. 

37. Euphagus cyanocephalus. Brewer’s Biacksrrp.— Common. 
It seems curious that it is unrecorded from the vicinity of Kerrville, when 


pol. a vet Griscom, Winter Birds of San Antonio, Texas. 53 


it is so common at Leon Springs, even farther east and in the same type 
of hilly country. 

38. Megaquiscalus major macrourus. GREAT-TAILED GRACKLE.— 
A few in the city of San Antonio. Another species which violated previous 
experience in a warmer climate. 

39. Calcarius ornatus. CHEsTNUT-coLLARED Lonaspur.— A flock 
of these birds appeared on the parade ground at Camp Stanley just after 
the severe cold wave of January 10. They were so tame that I could walk 
straight up to them within six feet before they would bother to flit to one 
side. As soon as the weather moderated they disappeared. 

40. Pocecetes gramineus confiris. Western Vesper SPARROW.— 
A common roadside bird in the flat country near San Antonio. 

41. Passerculus sandwichensis alaudinus. Western SAVANNAH 
Sparrow.— Same as the last. 

42. Chondestes grammacus strigatus. Weresrern Lark Sparrow. 
— Very common. ‘The only species that increased after the cold weather, 
which does not agree with Lacey’s experience. 

43. Zonotrichia querula. Harris’ Sparrow.— A few of these dis- 
tinguished sparrows consorted with White-crowns at Camp Stanley, until 
the cold weather, when they disappeared. 

44, Zonotrichia 1. leucophrys. WuitTr-cRowNED Sparrow.— The 
most abundant species until cold weather at Camp Stanley, but a few re- 
mained all winter. Common around San Antonio. Many birds were in 
full song on warm days throughout the winter. 

45. Zonotrichia albicollis. Wuirn-THROATED SPARROW.—Two birds 
seen at Camp Stanley December 27. Lacey gives only one record for 
Kerrville, while Attwater calls it a common winter resident around San 
Antonio, though I could not find it there in ideal country. Smith also 
gives a winter record. 

46. Spizella passerina subsp.? Curiprrnc Sparrow.— A single bird 
seen with other sparrows on December 27 at Camp Stanley. Lacey calls 
the eastern bird common in winter, while Attwater only records the western 
form from San Antonio at the same season! The species did not winter 
at the Medina Dam, but was present March 6. They were found by 
following up a song which was quite unrecognizable, and I well recall my 
astonishment when the singers turned out to be Chipping Sparrows in 
spring plumage, so tame and confiding that it was impossible to make them 
any of the more desirable western species. 

47. Spizella pusilla (arenacea?) FimLtp SpAaRRow.— Common until 
the severe cold weather. 

48. Junco hyemalis subsp? Junco.— Fairly common. Most em- 
phatically not the eastern bird, although this form is the only one given. 
Judging by sight identification alone all birds seen were montanus. 
There was no difficulty in noticing the paler gray, the larger amount of 
white in the tail and the amount of pinkish on the sides. Even the notes 
seemed a little different. 


less 


54 Griscom, Winter Birds of San Antonio, Texas. 

49, Amphispiza bilineata. BLAcK-rHROATED SPARROW.— Scarce 
at Camp Stanley, disappearing with the first cold weather. Not noted 
anywhere else. 

50. Aimophila ruficeps eremoeca. Rock Sparrow.— Another 
species which apparently disappeared after the cold weather. 

51. Melospiza melodia subsp.? Sona Sparrow.— Rather uncom- 
mon, disappearing after the cold weather. According to Smith, the 
prevailing form is juddi. All I can say is that my birds looked a little 
“* off color.” 

52. Pipilo maculatus arcticus. Arctic TowHer.—Common. 

53. Cardinalis cardinalis canicaudus. Gray-TAILED CaRDINAL.— 
Common. The female is easily distinguishable in life from the eastern bird. 

54. Bombycilla cedrorum. Crpar Waxwinc.— Abundant at 
Medina Dam; an occasional flock elsewhere. 

55. Lanius ludovicianus excubitorides. Wuttrr-RUMPED SHRIKE.— 
Rather common. 

56. Vermivora c. celata. ORANGE-CROWNED WARBLER.— A single 
bird seen January 1, south of San Antonio. Considered rare in winter by 
previous writers. 

57. Dendroica coronata. Myrrie Warpsiter.— Common around 
San Antonio and the Medina Dam. Only one noted at Camp Stanley, 
where there is no suitable country. 

58. Anthus rubescens. Pirit.— Common until the cold weather, 
after which it was found at San Antonio only. 

59. Mimus polyglottos leucopterus. WrsTeERN MocKkINGBIRD.— 
Common. 

60. Toxostoma c. curvirostre. CuURVE-BILLED THRASHER.— Two 
very tame and miserable looking birds seen at Medina Dam January 5. 
Although unrecorded by Attwater, Quillin and Holleman give it as a com- 
mon summer resident. According to the A. O. U. ‘ Check-List,’ there 
is no particular reason why the species should be in this part of Texas at all. 

61. Salpinctes obsoletus. Rock Wren.— Noted only at Medina 
Dam. 

62. Thryothorus 1. ludovicianus. CaroLtina WreEN.— Common. 

63. Thryomanes bewicki (cryptus?). Texas Wren.— Common. 

64. Nannush.hyemalis. Winter Wren.—A single bird seen Janu- 
ary 1 along the San Antonio River, south of the city. Apparently the 
only record. 

65. Beolophus atricristatus sennetti. Sennett’s Titmouse.—Com- 
mon. 

66. Penthestes carolinensis agilis. PLumMBEOUS CHICKADEE.— 
This species did not appear until February 8. Early in March it was 
common along the San Antonio River. 

67. Regulus s.satrapa. GoLDEN-cROWNED KinGLEeT.— A single bird 
seen January 1 near San Antonio. Lacey calls it uncommon in winter, 


Wel: ee el Brcx, The Occult Senses in Birds. 55 


and Smith commoner than calendula in Kerr Co. Attwater calls it a 
common migrant at San Antonio. 

68. Regulus c.calendula. Ruspy-crowNep Krncter.— Common, ex- 
cept in the arid country around Camp Stanley where it was a surprise to 
see it at all. 

69. Polioptila c. caerulea. Buiun-cray GnarcatcHER.— One bird 
noted January 1 at Hot Wells, south of San Antonio. 

70. Hylocichla guttata subsp.? Hermit Turusa.— Rather com- 
mon, except at Camp Stanley where it was absent. 

71. Planesticus m. migratorius. Rosin. Rather uncommon, 
except at Medina Dam, where it was abundant in the juniper and 
bayberry. 

72. Sialia s. sialis. Buursrrp.— Not common except at Medina 
Dam. 

73. Sialia currucoides. Mounrain Biursrrp.— A species whose 
appearance in this region was probably due to cold weather. Three birds 
seen December 17, and a male with sialis December 27, both at Camp 
Stanley. Lacey recorded it in only three winters in twenty-nine years 
around Kerrville considerably farther north and west. It is apparently 
previously unrecorded near San Antonio. 


Amer. Museum Nat. Hist., N.Y. 


THE OCCULT SENSES IN BIRDS.! 
BY HERBERT H. BECK. 


TuHaT animals below man, in the accepted biological line, have 
retained in efficient form much that has been greatly reduced or 
nearly lost in the process of developing Nature’s master product — 
is a fact of common knowledge. The senses 


the human mind 
of sight, smell and hearing in man are almost rudimentary when 
compared with the same senses as developed in the hawk, the setter 
dog, and the fox. 

It is not so generally recognized, though none the less perhaps a 
fact, that certain senses widely or selectively a part of animal life, 
are absolutely gone in man. So thoroughly are these senses atro- 
phied or lacking in the human mind that man with all his highly 


1 Presented before the Delaware Valley Ornithological Club. 


56 Breck, The Occult Senses in Birds. ee 
developed imagination cannot even vaguely visualize the subtle 
processes by which they operate. 

In bird life one of these occult senses, the homing sense, exists to 
a remarkable degree. The complex phenomena of migration, often 
over trackless regions, the homing acts of pigeons, and the speedy 
returns over unfamiliar sea courses of Sooty Terns taken a thousand 
miles from their nests, cannot adequately be explained on the basis 
of acuteness of vision or persistence of memory in the birds that 
make these wonderful flights. There apparently is something 
entirely apart from human consciousness or subconsciousness that 
holds the bird to a true course between widely separated points. 

The homing sense is broadly, though somewhat selectively, dis- 
tributed among animals. It is exhibited by many insects and by 
some mammals. It only finds its greatest development in birds. 

Nor is there anything supernatural about this seemingly occult 
faculty. It probably is only a common trait of animal life strongly 
carried through in certain groups. <A highly efficient homing sense 
is but an example — like the keeled sternum in birds or the mind in 
man — of a well established principle of progressive evolution. The 
inordinate development in selected species of organ or sense com- 
mon to many is a course so regular in nature that it cannot be con- 
sidered an irregularity. 

Akin to this homing sense and operating In a way equally intangi- 
ble to man there exists, in all probability, a food finding sense. 
Widely distributed and occasionally highly specialized within 
several lower groups, notably the insecta, the food finding sense has 
persisted in only a limited way among vertebrates. There is little 
evidence that it exists among mammals. It is somewhat broadly a 
part of bird life; and among birds it seems to be most highly devel- 
oped in the carrion feeders. 

In many species of birds doubtless only an adjunct to activity 
in ranging or acuteness of vision, the food finding sense — at least on 
the basis of strong presumptive evidence — is so highly developed 
in certain individuals among these carrion feeders that it can act 
independently of the known senses. 

Many of the writer’s observations on food finding in Turkey 
Vultures have been insufficiently explained by the common theory 
that these birds are directed to their food by the senses of sight or 


Bee ae ea Brcx, The Occult Senses in Birds. Yi 


smell. But the most striking observation — and the one which 
most strongly leads him toward a belief in a definite food finding 
sense — is an incident the facts of which are as follows: 

At daybreak, January Ist, two hunters, one of them the writer, 
were out with their pack of foxhounds in the farming valley of the 
Little Conestoga south of Lititz, Lancaster County, Pa. The bot- 
tom was bare of snow though it was gray white with a heavy frost. 
The morning was quiet, practically windless, and the temperature 
was about 28 degrees — just cold enough to keep the ground firm. 
The scene had in it all the charm that attends starting a fox at 
winter sunrise. The voices of the hounds on the twisted night 
track were rapidly going up toward the happy burst that would tell 
of jumping the fox — when something went wrong. The music 
changed its tone and the younger hounds began to straggle in 
toward the horses; and then with the rest of the pack, and striking 
right and left among the hounds, came the cause of the breakup — 
a mad dog. 

To borrow a gun, kill the dog, and throw his carcass into a lime- 
stone sinkhole was the work of about half an hour. It was then 
nine o'clock. Three hours later, at the request of a local veteri- 
narian who wished to examine the dog, I returned to get the carcass. 
As I neared the hole two vultures climbed out and flapped away. 
They had been at the dog evidently some time for the flesh about 
the hams was much eaten away. 

There were two unusual features in the situation which, as the 
mind dwelt upon them, made the presence of those vultures in the 
sinkhole most impressive if not uncanny. 

The first of these was that there was no winter camp of the vul- 
tures nearer than the southern slope of the South Mountan— 
eight miles north of the spot. This roost, above the Speedwell- 
farms, always had fifty to a hundred birds about it and the vultures 
apparently stayed near the South Mountain. -I have rarely, if 
ever, seen vultures ranging in the Little Conestoga valley during 
the winter, before or since the incident. 

The second was that the dog was invisible from any part of the 
sky. The sinkhole was six or seven feet deep with an opening of 
about three feet. The shaft, inclined toward the south, went down 
at an angle of about 45 degrees and the walls were so irregular with 


58 Brcx, The Occult Senses in Birds. Fae 


projecting rocks and soil that the carcass at the bottom was com- 
pletely hidden from view. 

Under the existing conditions it is difficult to account for the 
finding of the carrion by either eye or nose sense in the vultures. 
The dog being invisible and there being no vultures in the neighbor- 
hood when it was thrown into the hole, sight could scarcely have 
been involved; and the possibility of a freshly killed dog at the 
bottom of a six foot hole giving off enough scent in midwinter to 
attract birds miles away is out of the question, even after eliminat- 
ing the fact that the sense of smell is but poorly developed generally 
among birds. 

Assuming the correctness of the theory of a food finding sense as it 
exists to-day in certain species, the imagination naturally runs back 
to the earlier stages in the evolution of these species. Given by 
Nature the right to life —if life can be maintained, and the first 
essential of continued existence — food, it is perhaps logical and it 


is certainly well supported by analogies, that chance superiority in 
food finding would develop into something of permanent value in 
the species, and that the sense thus evolved would be the determin- 
ing factor of survival among a host of related forms many of which 
succumbed in the struggle for existence. And it is reasonable too 
that this food finding sense should have been most highly evolved, 
during centuries of wide spread forest areas, and that it should have 
persisted up to the present times, in those species which were high 
soaring and carrion feeding; for logically, among the raptores where 
hunting and killing powers were lacking, subsistence depended upon 
food that must have been, almost invariably, concealed as well as 
fortuitous. 

Again assuming that two leading essentials for the maintenance 
of the species — finding food and finding the home — had been 
assisted by specialized senses, it should follow that the third promi- 
nent factor — mating — had been similarly safeguarded. 

While there is no convincing evidence at hand in support of a 
definite mate finding sense among vertebrates, there are many 
baffling incidents of field observations which would find explana- 
tion in such a theory. 

In insect life however there is evidence which if not conclusive 
is strongly contributive. Thus a common wasp — Pelecinus — 


Vol. ee | 
1920 


Brcx, The Occult Senses in Birds. 59 
has been known and collected almost invariably in the female form. 
Specimens taken are always fertilized. Apparently rare to a 
mysterious degree the male wasp has seldom been collected or 
observed. A well known entomologist conceived the plan of rear- 
ing a female Pelecinus from the pupa. Properly caged the virgin 
wasp was placed out of doors. Within a few hours the screens 
of her cell were swarming with the mysterious male of her species. 
These wasps may have been guided by some highly refined phase 
of a well known sense, but it seems unlikely. 

Unfortunately research on these occult senses is difficult — often 
impossible. Theories have to be based upon analogies and chance 
observations. Under these conditions chance observation must 
assume a somewhat greater significance than ordinarily is placed 
upon it. 

On the basis of some impressive though fragmentary evidence 
then we are justified in assuming — at least as an attractive and 
perhaps stimulating working hypothesis — that intimately inter- 
woven with the life histories of thousands of animal species of past 
ages and many species of the present day there is an active sense 
which may be called occult simply because it is hidden from the 
experience and understanding of man. This occult sense, involv- 
ing direction, has taken three phases as developed by the prime 
necessities of life — food, mate and home in their relations to space. 
The purely defensive or offensive elements that have determined 
survival have evolved chiefly along physical and chemical lines in 
animals and finally along mental lines in man. All phases of the 
occult sense have long since been lost in the channels of life that 
progressed toward civilized man; they exist only selectively in 
animals below man to-day; but they are still an important factor 
of existence in many life forms, as they have been a potent determi- 
nant in past ages. 


Franklin and Marshall College, Lancaster, Pa. 


60 Lincoin, Birds of the Clear Creek District, Colo. sae 


BIRDS OF THE CLEAR CREEK DISTRICT, COLORADO. 
BY F. C. LINCOLN. 


WHILE it is probably true that local lists are more or less tire- 
some to those entirely unacquainted with the region treated, it is 
nevertheless, quite as obvious that to the workers of any given 
territory, an accurate résumé of any portion of it, is of a distinct 
value. Particularly is this the case when the time comes for the 
_ ultimate comprehensive work which will sum up and combine the 
efforts of many individuals in many districts. 

Recent years have seen several of these lists from Colorado, some 
of them containing much valuable data relative to the State’s 
ornithology, and graphically contradicting the statement that 
Colorado has been “ well-worked,” although to those intimately 
associated with Colorado and her birds the fallacy was perfectly 
apparent. To fully appreciate this condition one had only to 
cor sider the extent of the State, the greatly varied topography and 
environment, coupled with the numerous life zones; all of which 
combine to produce an area where conclusive results are obtainable 
only after long and arduous activities. 

Accordingly, with the feeling that he is adding to the knowledge 
of Colorado’s ornithology, the author submits the following an- 
' notated list of the birds of the Clear Creek District. 

Clear Creek valley proper extends from its junction with the 
South Platte River in Adams County, near Denver, to the mouth 
of its canyon in the foothills at Golden, Jefferson County. At the 
union of the creek with the Platte River the valley is approximately 
a mile and a half in width, narrowing gradually westward to about 
a quarter of a mile before passing between the North and South 
“Table Mountains,’ immediately east of Golden, the old terri- 
torial capital. West of the Table Mountains and separating them 
from the foothills, lies a narrow, steadily ascending lateral, or 
“paradox ’”’ valley, known as “ Hogback Valley,’ in which the town 
of Golden is located, and of which about four miles to the north 
and the same to the south is tributary to Clear Creek. Beyond 
this are the foothills of the Front Range, marking the dividing line 


pol ve "| Lincoun, Birds of the Clear Creek District, Colo. 61 


between the Transition and Upper Sonoran life zones, in which 
latter the entire valley is located. Here agricultural activity with 
much irrigation has long been carried on effectively, but until 
recently considerable areas were in their natural wild state, with 
masses of impenetrable bushes, extensive swamps and groups of 
large trees, usually immediately adjoining the cultivated fields, 
thus offering ideal environments for many varieties of birds. 

On the north and south bluffs overlooking the valley, are num- 


County 2 
WE ATRE Coma 


TUTLASOn 


CAVY and COUNTY 
4 
DUNRYER, 


erous thickets of Wild Plum (Prunus americanus), Choke-cherry 
(Prunus melanocarpa), and Hawthorn or Thorn-apple (Crataegus), 
where small streams fed by springs and seepage from the irrigated 
tracts, find their source. These streams form sloughs, heavily 
fringed with Willow (Salix amygdaloides), and Birch (Betula fonti- 
nalis), and supporting masses of Watercress (Roripa). In places 
they widen out into swampy ponds containing dense growths of 
cattails and tules with small areas of open water. Small groves of 
Broad-leaved Cottonwood (Populus occidentalis), and Box Elder, 
(Rulac texanum), are also of regular occurrence throughout the 
length and breadth of the valley. 


62 Lincoun, Birds of the Clear Creek District, Colo. Fea 
The western edge of the district is marked by the Yellow Pine 

covered foothills, supporting many forms that wander into the 

valley after nesting time or follow it as a migrational highway! 

North of the mouth of Clear Creek Canyon about eight miles, 
Ralston Creek, a left-hand tributary, leaves the foothills. This 
stream is small but deep and sluggish, and scantily wooded. After 
flowing past the Leyden mines it enters Clear Creek valley but 
nevertheless, maintains some semblance of an individual valley 
for several miles. Passing through the town of Arvada, it empties 
into Clear Creek a few miles above the junction of the latter with 
the South Platte River. 

At irregular intervals, on both the north and south slopes of the 
valley, are numerous natural lakes, many of which are now put to 
practical uses, principally irrigation. Two, on the south slope, at 
the suburban town of Berkeley, are passed regularly in going to and 
from the lower valley on the interurban electric railway, and 
although the interval when they may be scanned for birds is brief, 
they have nevertheless, been the means of adding a few species to 
the list. Such records will be noted as “ the lakes at Berkeley.” 

Another lake, on the north slope of the valley, known locally as 
Mud Lake, has also been visited spasmodically, and has yielded 
an additional portion. 

Systematic work by the writer was begun in the spring of 1908. 
One day trips were made regularly, the average for 1910, 1911, 
and 1912 being thirty-five to the year, or of greater frequency than 
one each two weeks. During migrations they were made at least 
weekly, and occasionally semi-weekly, the longer intervals falling 
in the mid-summer and winter periods. An endeavor was made 
to render a complete record of breeding activities, by establishing 
permanent camps during June 1909, and June 1910, with an addi- 
tional camp in the fall of the latter year. The total result of these 
operations is a number and variety of forms hardly to be expected 
in such a limited area. 


1 This country to the west has been ably treated by Messrs. R. B. Rockwell and Alex- 
ander Wetmore. (Auk, Vol. XX XI, No. 3, ° A List of Birds from the Vicinity of Golden 
Colorado.’ The present writer periodically visited this country (together with the Hog- 
back ridge to the south) and secured species not recorded in the above mentioned paper. 
They willaccordingly be incorporated in this list with due reference to the locality. F.C. L. 


pole xe ual Lincoun, Birds of the Clear Creek District, Colo. 63 


In almost every case the actual specimens have been secured and 
preserved, my collections from the district numbering about five 
hundred specimens, and in no case have species, based upon purely 
visual observations, been included which would in any sense con- 
stitute “records” for the State avifaunal list. Compilations have 
in this instance also been generally avoided, for, while the pioneer 
literature on the State’s birds gives many interesting notes from 
this region (visual or specimens unpreserved) the absence of sub- 
sequent confirmation as well as their general indefinite nature, makes 
their authenticity a matter of grave doubt. I have accordingly 
confined myself to my own observations and collections with a few 
notes on certain species from the collections of the Colorado Mu- 
seum of Natural History and the private collection of Mr. Egmont 
Rett, now of the same institution. 

Mr. Rett’s work in the valley began at approximately the time 
that my own ended, and has continued without interruption up to 
the present time. In addition to securing specimens which serve 
to confirm several of the writer’s observations, he has obtained 
others that add species to the list. So with a view toward com- 
pleteness, I proposed that he permit me to incorporate his notes 
and records in the present paper, to which he has graciously con- 
sented. I accordingly desire to take this opportunity to express 
to him my appreciation of bis hearty co-operation. 


#Echmophorus occidentalis. Wersrern Grepe.— Accidental. One 
record; a specimen taken on Mud Lake, October 29, 1916, is preserved 
in the Museum collections. 

Colymbus n. californicus. Earep Gresn.— Mr. Rett reports 
Eared Grebes as fairly common of late years on Mud Lake during mi- 
grations. A few killed there every year by hunters who know them 
(together with the next) as “ hell-divers.’’ 

Podilymbus podiceps. Pirp-BILLED GrREBE.— Not common, but 
still noted regularly throughout the summers on the lakes, where they no 
doubt breed. 

Larus delawarensis. RincG-BILLED GuLu.— Rare. Four examples of 
this bird observed on the lakes at Berkeley, September 22, 1912. 

Sterna forsteri. Forster’s Tern.— Rare. Mr. Rett reports two 
birds on the Berkeley lakes during September, 1916. These lakes offer 
an abundant food supply and the species should be more common, at least 
during migrations. 


[san. 


64 Lincoutn, Birds of the Clear Creek District, Colo. 

Hydrochelidon n. surinamensis. Buiack Trern.— Rare. A single 
bird of this species was seen over a small pond close to the Creek, August 
19, 1910. 

Anas platyrhynchos. Matitarp.— Not common. A few seen regu- 
larly throughout the winters. 

Chaulelasmus streperus. Gapwatu.— Not common. Feeds in the 
water-cress ponds in small numbers during the winters. 

Nettion carolinense. GrerEN-winceD TrEAL.— Common at times 
during the fall migration. Occasionally found in irrigation ditches or even 
on the swiftly moving creek. 

Querquedula discors. Briur-wincep Trau.— Although this little 
duck nests commonly within twenty miles of Clear Creek, they are never 
common here, a few pair usually making up the complement for the season. 

Spatula clypeata. SHovetter.— Mr. Rett noted a flock of about 30 
individuals feeding in a field, flooded by an overflow, April 7, 1918. 

Charitonetta albeola. Burrienrap.— Accidental. On November 
3, 1912, I saw three females and one male at the edge of one of the lakes 
at Berkeley. This was within thirty feet of the rails of the electric road 
but they paid but scant attention to the passing cars. This duck is rarely 
more then common anywhere in Colorado. 

Botaurus lentiginosus. Birrern.— Rare. One secured from a 
willow patch bordering one of the seepage streams, August 29, 1910. 

Ardea h. herodias. Great Buuzr Hrron.— Summer resident; nests 
near the Creek and the solitary figure of this bird is a regular feature of the 
Clear Creek landscape. From two to four would be noted daily. 

Nycticorax n. nevius. Buiack-crowNep Nicur Heron.— Common 
summer resident although I have never found their nests in this vicinity. 

Rallus virginianus. Vrircinra Rar.— Resident and fairly plentiful. 
More specimens have been taken in the winter than summer months. 
Adult and three downy young seen July 30, 1910. 

Porzana carolina. Sora.— Rare. But two records are available; 
one by myself on August 27, 1911, and another from the same section 
taken May 29, 1912, in the Museum collections. 

Fulica americana. Coor.— A plentiful summer resident on the small 
akes in the valley. 

Gallinago delicata. Wrson’s Snipr.— Resident, but very erratic 
in its time of greatest abundance. Generally, however, it is more numer- 
ous in the fall or in mild winters. One secured March 26, 1913, from an 
irrigation ditch not two feet wide running through a sandy country. 

Totanus melanoleucus. GREATER YELLOWLEGS.— Rare. An occa- 
sional example noted with flocks of 7. flavipes. 

Totanus flavipes. YELLOWwLEGS.— Fairly common during fall migra- 
tions; rarely seen in the spring. 

Helodromas s. cinnamomeus. WestTerRN SoLirary SANDPIPER.— 
On August 23, 1910, I secured one specimen of this bird from a flock of 


pel: en Lincotn, Birds of the Clear Creek District, Colo. 65 


about a dozen. A few scattered pair were subsequently noted during 
September. The next year another was secured on August 27, and their 
presence noted for about a month. Mr. Rett reports a specimen in his 
collection taken October 13, 1918, which is a couple of weeks later than 
my records. 

Catoptrophorus s. inornatus. WrsterN WILLET.—Rare; two noted 
August 27, 1911, with a small flock of 7. flavipes. 

Bartramia longicauda. Upianp Piover.— Accidental; a solitary 
bird was observed August 29, 1910, and Mr. Rett secured another August 
15, 1915, but so badly shot as to be unfit for preservation. 

Actitis macularia. Sporrep SanpprprrR.— Common summer resi- 
dent; remains until October 1. Have found downy young on July 25. 

Oxyechus vociferus. KitupreR.— Resident; plentiful. The incessant 
calling of one of these birds loses much of its ‘ wild charm’ when by its 
noise it succeeds in frightening a desired specimen. They are usually in 
flocks by the middle of August. 

Colinus v. virginianus. Boswuire.— At present it is necessary to 
refer the Bobwhites of this District tentatively to the eastern variety, as 
they are the descendents of stock introduced from the east, and are quite 
distinct from the native birds of the eastern section of the State, C. v. 
taylori.1_ Nevertheless, environmental and climatic changes have done 
their work and the birds of the Creek velley do not compare perfectly with 
typical virginianus from the east. 

Phasianus torquatus. RING-NECKED PHEASANT. — Introduced; 
plentiful, and steadily increasing although but little loved by the farmers ~ 
who accuse them of serious damage to crops. 

Dendragapus o. obscurus. Dusky Grousr.— In late summer the 
females lead their half-grown young to the lower slopes of the foothills 
where an abundance of insect life and berries is obtainable. On Septem- 
ber 4, 1911, I secured three birds near Golden within a quarter of a mile 
of the valley flats. The crops of all were crammed with the berries of 
kinnikinick. Not as common now as formerly. 

Zenaidura m. marginella. WrsterN Mournina Dovre.— Abundant 
summer resident. Have taken fresh eggs as late as August 30, and found 
fresh shells by May 7. In mild seasons some remain until the first of 
November and I have one record for the middle of January, but this may 
have been a crippled bird. 

Circus hudsonius. Marsa Hawx.— Not uncommon in the summer 
and may nest. 

Accipiter velox. SHARP-SHINNED Hawxk.— Fairly common in the 
winter months. Have seen them attack and cripple birds as large as the 
Flicker (Colaptes c. collaris). 


1 Pro. Bio. Soc. of Wash. Vol. XXX VIII, pp. 103-104, “ Description of a New Bobwhite 
from Colorado,” by F. C. Lincoln. 


66 Lincotn, Birds of the Clear Creek District, Colo. lex 


Jan. 


Accipiter cooperi. Cooprmr’s Hawk.— Rare. One seen a few times 
in the winter of 1908-1909, and another February 5 and 12, 1910. 

Astur a. atricapillus. GosHawx.— Rare or accidental. The only 
record is one found dead by Mr. Rett, February 25, 1917. Near it were 
the remains of a large Plymouth Rock hen. 

Buteo b. calurus. Western Rep-Tart.— The commonest large hawk. 
One taken October 5, 1907, had both feet, the mandible, and a quantity 
of flesh of a chicken apparently freshly killed, in its crop. This is the only 
instance of their attacking poultry that I have ever noted and it is of 
course possible that this may have been taken in the form of carrion. 

Archibuteo 1. sancti-johannis. RouGH-LEG.— Seen occasionally 
during the winter. On December 26, 1910, I surprised one feeding on a 
house cat that I had killed a week before. 

Aquila chrysaetos. GoLpEN EaGLEe.—Seen occasionally around the 
foothills. 

Falco mexicanus. Prairie FaLcon.— Summer visitant. Nests in 
the Garden of the Red Rocks, eight miles to the south, but only seen in 
this district when on foraging expeditions. 

Falco s. sparverius. Sparrow Hawx.— Rare. A _ pair, evidently 
preparing to nest, taken April 8, 1911, now mounted in the collection of 
Colorado birds at the Museum, are referable to true sparverius. 

Falco s. phalena. Drsert Sparrow Hawx.— All other specimens 
secured seem referable to this variety, which is a plentiful summer resident. 
A set of five eggs was taken from an old Magpie’s nest, May 22, 1909, 
although woodpecker holes are usually preferred. 

Asio wilsonianus. Lonc-rarED Owu.— Resident; common at times. 
On April 8, 1911, in a patch of timber and weeds about an acre in extent, 
one Rocky Mountain Screech, one Long-eared, one Short-eared and one 
Western Horned Owl, were seen. On December 31, 1909, six Long-eared 
Owls were noted, three of them being together in an old Magpie’s nest. 
This species is occasionally noted hunting in the daytime. 

Asio flammeus. SHorT-EARED Owi.— Not common. In addition 
to the one noted above, I have one taken February 19, 1910, but Mr. Rett 
reports 12 observed in a low swampy field, November 25, 1917. 

Otus a. maxwelliz. Rocky Mountain ScreecH Owxi.— Common. 
Nests by the first of April in old woodpecker holes. The usual operation 
of pounding smartly on the tree is not always efficacious in bringing them 
out, some having to be pulled bodily from the hole, an operation they are 
well fitted to resist. ‘Some holes seem to be especially favored and I have 
taken as many as five different birds from one Flicker hole in one season. 

Otus a. aikeni. AIKEN’s ScreecH Owx.— Rare. A few specimens 
have been taken that are nearly typical of this small form. 

Bubo v. lagophonus.! NortTHwrsTERN HorNED Owu.— The specimen 


1 Cf. Oberholser, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1904, p. 185. This form is not separated from 
B. v. saluratus in the A. O. U. Check-List. 


pel: Fer eel Lincoun, Birds of the Clear Creek District, Colo. 67 


of this race taken by Rockwell and Wetmore, now at the Colorado Museum, 
is from this district. 

Bubo v. pallescens. Western Hornep Own.— Rare. One taken 
April 8, 1911. 

Speotyto c. hypogea. Burrowrmnc Ow1i.— A few may generally be 
noted at a ‘dog-town’ near the mouth of the Creek. Mr. Rett tells me he 
secured a bird at this point by digging it out in May, 1915. 

Coccyzus a. americanus. YELLow-BILLED CucKkoo.— A few Yel- 
low-billed Cuckoos may be noted every spring and fall and of a series 
submitted to the Biological Survey for determination three were returned 
as americanus and one as occidentalis. C.a. americanus, however, is 
assumed to be the common form in eastern Colorado. 

Coccyzus a. occidentalis. Catirornia Cuckoo.— Rare. Noted 
with C. a. americanus. 

Coccyzus erythrophthalmus. Buack-piwtep CucKoo.— Black- 
billed Cuckoos are decidedly rare anywhere in Colorado and the two birds 
from this district form the fourth and fifth records for the State. Strangely 
enough, they were taken a year apart to the day, July 30, 1910 and July 
30, 1911, and within a half mile of each other. (Coll. F. C. L. 122 and 242). 
The first had been feeding on the larvee of the tent caterpillar, and its crop 
and stomach were furred with their spines. 

Ceryle a. alcyon. Brvrep KinerisHer.— A regular summer resident 
here as on almost every creek in the State, though rarely more than one 
pair noted during the season. 

Dryobates v. monticola. Rocky Mountain Hatry WoopPeckeEr. 
—Winter resident, common. Usually solitary, but occasionally two 
or three will be noted together. Observed as early as the first of 
September. 

Dryobates p. homorus. BatcHeLpER’s Woopprecker.— Winter 
resident, common. Seen in about the same numbers as D. v. monticola. 
Specimens rarely have the white pure, being soiled by contact with the bark 
of the cottonwoods. 

Dryobates p. medianus. Downy Wooprecker.— Mr. Rett’s record 
of this form (Auk XX XV, 1918, p. 223) from this district, is of exceptional 
interest as additional evidence of the westward movement of many birds 
generally considered as purely ‘ eastern.’ 

Sphyrapicus v. nuchalis. Rep-Napep Sapsucker.— Rare. Noted 
by me on two or three occasions and Mr. Rett’s collection contains a speci- 
men taken May 12, 1918. 

Sphyrapicus thyroideus. Wuturamson’s Sapsucker.— Rare, and 
only seen once or twice in the Yellow Pines at the western edge of the 
district. 

Melanerpes erythrocephalus. Rep-HEaADED WoopPrEcKER.— Com- 
mon summer resident. Arrives about May 25, and remains until the 
first of November. 


68 Lincoun, Birds of the Clear Creek District, Colo. [es 


Jan. 
° 

Asyndesmus lewisi. Lrwis’s WoopreckEer.— Fairly common winter 
resident and a few have been seen throughout the summer although I have 
never known them to nest below the Yellow Pine zone in this section of 
the State. 

Colaptes c. collaris. Rrep-sHarrep FLicker.— Abundant resident. 
Usually mated before the winter snows have melted. 

Phalenoptilus n. nuttalli. Poor-wiu.— Rare. One was repeat- 
edly flushed September 21, 1907, but was not secured. Mr. Rett, however, 
obtained a fine specimen May 20, 1917. 

Chordeiles v. henryi. Western NicuTHawk.— Summer resident, 
plentiful. Arrives about the first of June and frequently remains until the 
first of October unless driven out by early storms. 

Aeronautes melanoleucus. WHITE-THROATED Swirt.— Rare. Noted 
only during spring migrations, when a few will be observed flying toward 
the mountains. 

Selasphorus platycercus. Broap-TaiLep HumMincBirp.— Not com- 
mon. Most of the hummers of this region seem to prefer the environs of 
Denver where an abundance of flowers is assured throughout the summer. 

Tyrannus tyrannus. Kincpirp.— Summer resident, common. Ar- 
rives by the middle of May and is nesting by June first. 

Tyrannus verticalis. ARKANSAS KiNGBIRD.— Summer resident; 
rather more common than 7’. tyrannus. Arrives and nests about the same 
dates. 

Myiarchus c. cinerascens. AsH-THROATED FLycaTcHER.— Rare. 
A specimen taken from a willow thicket, September 17, 1911, and a report 
of one seen May 26, 1912, by the late E. P. Schuetze, are my only records. 

Sayornis phoebe. Puasr.— Rare. But one record; a specimen (the 
second record for Colorado) was taken by Mr. F. L. Kemmerling, Septem- 
ber 17, 1911, and is now in my collection (Coll. F. C. L. No. 454). 

Sayornis sayus. Say’s PHapr.— Summer resident, not uncommon. 
Arrives early in April and generally selects deserted out-buildings or 
bridges as nest sites. 

Nuttallornis borealis. Ontve-sipep FLycaTcuer.— Rare, migratory. 
Mr. Rett reports two observed September 9, 1917, associated with a number 
of Western Wood Pewees; and one other secured May 17, 1918. 

Myiochanes r. richardsoni. WrstrErN Woop PrEwEer.— Summer 
resident; perhaps the most common of the small flycatchers. More 
frequently heard than seen. 

Empidonax difficilis. WrsTerN FriycarcHer.— Rare; seen and 
taken only during August and September. 

Empidonax t. trailli. Trarmv’s FLycarcHErR.— Summer resident. 
From June 12 to 19, 1910, this flyeatcher was very common and was evi- 
dently nesting in the dense thickets of wild plum, although no nests were 
found. Several specimens were taken. 

Empidonax t. alnorum. Appr FrycarcHer.— Rare. A specimen 


BS.2 6 


pore a Lincoutn, Birds of the Clear Creek District, Colo. 69 


of this variety was secured on June 4, 1911, the second record for the State, 
and another on August 6, 1911. (Auk, Vol. XXX, p. 112). At the time 
Empidonaces were common and it is not improbable that persistent col- 
lecting of the genus would have revealed still other examples. 

Empidonax minimus. Least Fiycarcuer.— Rare. Only noted on 
migration. I secured a pair August 8, 1911, and Mr. Rett’s collection 
contains one taken August 30, 1914. 

Empidonax wrighti. Wericut’s Frycarcuer.— Rare or accidental. 
Mr. Rett’s collection includes a specimen of this species taken May 19, 
1918 (Coll. E. R. No. 291). This probably marks the eastern limits of the 
species. 

Otocoris a. leucolema. Drsert Hornep LArK.— Winter resident, 
abundant. 

Otocoris a. enthymia. SaskarcHewAN Hornep Larx.— About 
thirty per cent of the specimens secured in the winter are referable to this 
variety. Although not recognized by the A. O. U. Committee, my speci- 
mens seem to uphold its characters as their differences from lewcolema are 
quite pronounced and agree with the characters of no other race. 

Pica p. hudsonia. Macrre.— Plentiful resident. A feature of the 
landscape that would be missed were they exterminated as has been advo- 
cated. One cannot but admire them despite their rascality. Complete 
sets of eggs found March 31. 

Cyanocitta s. diademata. Lonc-crestep JaAy.— Common winter 
resident in the valley. Resident in the foothills. 

Aphelocoma woodhousei. Woopuousr’s Jay.— Winter resident; 
common some years, and entirely absent at others. Generally, they are 
more readily approached than C. s. diademata. 

Corvus b. brachyrhynchos. Crow.— Not common. One _ noted 
November 19, 1910. Dr. W. H. Bergtold has recently shown (Auk, 
XXXVI, pp. 198-204) that the Crows of the eastern portion of Colorado 
are principally of this subspecies. The occasional examples seen in the 
Clear Creek District are therefore, so referred. No specimens have been 
taken. 

Cyanocephalus cyanocephalus. Pinon Jay.—I am indebted to 
Mr. Rett for the opportunity to include this bird. He tells me that on 
October 24, 1915, a flock of about 50 individuals was seen, two being se- 
cured. They were subsequently noted weekly until November 25, when he 
again secured specimens. They had not been observed in the valley 
previously, nor since, to my knowledge. 

Dolichonyx oryzivorus. BosBo.ink.— Rare. The only record is a 
specimen in the moult, taken August 5, 1911 (Coll. F. C. L. No. 248). 

Molothrus a. ater. Cowsirp.— Summer resident, common. Red 
wings, Yellow-heads and Yellow-throats seem to be the species most 
generally imposed upon in this region. 

Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus. YrtLLow-HEADED BLACKBIRD.— 


[rane 


70 Lincotn, Birds of the Clear Creek District, Colo. 
Summer resident, plentiful. Almost every cattail swamp will contain a 
small colony. 

Agelaius p. fortis. Tuick-BILbLED Rep-wrnc.— Abundant resident. 
Females not common or rare in winter. Nests with equal readiness in the 
willow thickets and cattail swamps. 

Sturnella neglecta. WrsterN Mrapowrark.— Resident; plentiful. 
Only males noted during the winter. 

Icterus bullocki. BuLuock’s OrroLE.— Summer resident; common. 
A regular arrival on May 7 or 8. 

Euphagus carolinus. Rusty Buacksirp.— Rare. The only record 
is a female taken from a small flock of Red-wings, April 14, 1912 (Coll. 
Be Cs 1, No: 125): 

Euphagus cyanocephalus. Brewer’s Buiackprrp.— Occasionally, 
an abundant spring and fall migrant, while a pair or two will rarely remain 
and nest. <A flock, estimated at two thousand individuals noted August 
20, 1910. 

Quiscalus q. eneus. Bronzep Grackie.— Although a fairly com- 
mon breeder in the parks of Denver, but few have been observed in this 
District; all in June. 

Carpodacus cassini. Cassin’s PurpLE Fincu.— Winter resident; 
plentiful some years. During the winter of 1910-11 they were especially 
numerous. ; 

Carpodacus m. frontalis. House Fincn.— Resident; common; 
more so in winter than in summer when large flocks congregate to feed in the 
weed patches. 

Leucosticte t. tephrocotis. GraAy-cROWNED Rosy Frncu.— Winter 
visitant to plains and Hogbacks near Golden. A flock numbering several 
hundred was seen November 24, 1910. On January 1, 1912, one was 
secured from a ‘clay pit’ where a small flock had taken refuge from the 
wind. 

Leucosticte t. littoralis. Hrpspurn’s Rosy Fincu.— Two perfect 
examples of this variety were taken on Ralston Creek, near Leyden, 
January 11, 1913. They were with a flock of L. t. tephrocotis, as they 
generally are and it is not improbable that the large flocks noted near 
Golden also contained this form. 

Leucosticte atrata. Briack Rosy Finca.—On January 1, 1912, a 
fine male of this species was observed with a flock of Gray-crowns. I was 
within fifteen feet of him but as he was on the edge of a clay pit I did not 
dare shoot as his recovery from the snow filled pit would have been a 
doubtful if not hazardous matter. 

Acanthis 1. linaria. Reprotu.— Common visitant during certain 


1 Agelaius p. neutralis has also been taken east of the mountains in Colorado and intensive 
collecting among the Red-wings of Clear Creek would no doubt reveal its presence, although 
all in my series are referable to fortis. See Rockwell; (Condor, Vol. X, 1908, p. 93) “The 
Red-winged Black-birds of Colorado.’ 


vel. aa ves “|| Lincoitn, Birds of the Clear Creek District, Colo. €l 


winters when it feeds extensively on the seeds of the Russian Thistle 
(Salsola pestifer). 

Astragalinus t. tristis. GoLpFrINcH.— 

Astragalinus t. pallidus. Pate Goiprincu.— I am not at all satis- 
fied with the published status of these two forms in eastern Colorado, and 
in this particular District it is exceptionally confusing as one is either a 
resident, or one a summer and the other a winter resident. The tallest 
cottonwoods are selected for nest sites and large flocks are of daily note in 
winter. 

Astragalinus p. psaltria. ARKANSAS GoLprincH.— Not common. 
A few noted August 24, 1912, form my only record although it should be 
more numerous as it nests regularly in Denver, and I have taken it at Morri- 
son, eight miles south. 

Spinus pinus. Pine Sisxin.— Winter resident; plentiful. Usually 
associated with Astragalinus. Occasionally arrive by August 20 and I 
have heard them singing all winter. 

Calcarius 1. alascensis. AvLasKAN Lonaspur.— Winter resident, 
common some years. A good series was secured during the winter of 1912. 
Always associated with Otocoris but are readily discernible both by flight 
and note. 

Poccetes g. confinis. WrsteRN VersppR Sparrow.— Common 
migrant, especially in the fall, and a few no doubt nest on the bench lands 
of the valley slopes. 

Passerculus s. alaudinus. WestTerRN Savannand Sparrow.— Not 
common. Taken only on migrations; April 7 to 22, and in the latter part 
of September. 

Ammodramus s. bimaculatus. WrsTERN GRASSHOPPER SPARROW. 
— Rare; one secured and two others seen July 28, 1912, in Hogback Val- 
ley, north of Golden, and I have no doubt they had or were nesting there. 

Chondestes g. strigatus. WersrerN Lark Sparrow.— Summer 
resident; common. Arrives about the middle of May. 

Zonotrichia querula. Harris’s SpaARRow.— Winter resident; not 
common. I believe many of these birds are overlooked as I have found 
them extremely hard to raise from the dense thickets they frequent. Were 
repeatedly seen and a few taken during the winter of 1912. 

Zonotrichia 1. leucophrys. Wuire-crowNED Sparrow.— Common 
migrant, always found with Z. l. gambeli. Remain at times until the 
first of December. 

Zonotrichia 1. gambeli. Gamse.’s Sparrow.— Plentiful winter 
resident and present (rarely) to the twelfth of June. Usually a large 
percentage of each flock will be in the immature plumage. 

Spizella m. ochracea. WersTeRN TREE Sparrow.— An abundant 
winter resident. Comes in about the first of October and stays until the 
middle of March or later, depending upon the severity of the last storms 
of winter. 


hz Lincotn, Birds of the Clear Creck District, Colo. Fes 


Spizella p. arizonze. WrsTERN CHIPPING Sparrow.— Common 
summer resident. Very abundant in late summer just previous to migra- 
tion. The dates of arrival and departure of S. m. ochracea and S. p. 
arizone frequently meet or overlap slightly. 

Spizella pallida. Ciay-coLoRED Sparrow.— Not common or rare. 
Only seen during the fall migration. 

Spizella breweri. Brewrr’s Sparrow.— Not an uncommon fall 
migrant and I have one taken May 29, 1909. 

Junco aikeni. Wuirr-wiNcep Junco.— Winter resident; not un- 
common. More numerous in the lower gulches of the foothills. 

Junco h. hyemalis. SiLare-coLoreD Junco.— Not an uncommon 
visitor and perhaps a resident during the winter months. I secured one 
April 2, 1911, and found it common during April, 1912, near Golden. I 
think it probable that many examples of this form are mistaken for aikeni 
or connectens and so overlooked. 

Junco h. connectens. SuHuFELDT’s Junco.— Winter resident; plenti- 
ful. Generally associated with mearnsi or Spizella m. ochracea. 

Junco h. montanus. Montana Junco.— Winter resident. Always 
found in the same flocks and so closely resembling mearnsi or connectens, 
many examples of montanus escape detection, but I believe they may be 
ranked as common. Good, though small, series have been secured. 
Apparently more numerous from January to the middle of April. 

Junco h. mearnsi. Pinx-sipep Junco.— With Spizella m. ochracea, 
the most abundant winter resident. A few will frequently arrive by the 
middle of September and May is often advanced before the last has gone 
north. 

Junco p. caniceps. Gray-HEADED JuUNco.— Common migrant and 
rare winter resident. Nests in the foothills above Golden. (See Rockwell 
and Wetmore, ‘ Birds of Golden, ete.’) 

Melospiza m. montana. Mountain Sona Sparrow.— Resident; 
plentiful. 

Melospiza 1. lincolni. Lincoin’s Sparrow.— Migrant; not common. 
Hither a late fall and early spring migrant or else a few remain through the 
winter as I have taken it in October and March. 

Passerella i. iliaca. Fox Sparrow.— The only record for Colorado 
is the specimen from this district taken November 1, 1916 (Auk, Vol. 
XXXV, 1918, p. 236). The bird was secured from a willow thicket in a 
swamp below the south bluffs of the valley, and is an adult male in typical 
plumage. 

Pipilo m. arcticus. Arctic TowHER.— 

Pipilo m. montanus. SpurreED TowHEE.— Colorado is in the 
territory where these two geographic races overlap and their status is not 
very clearly defined. Except with examples absolutely typical, visual 
identification is impossible, but in a series submitted to the Biological 
Survey for determination both forms were found in numbers, a slight 


Mio ie a Lincotn, Birds of the Clear Creek District, Colo. to 


advantage resting with montanus. The species is resident and fairly 
common. Nests in June. 

_ Oreospiza chlorura. GREEN-TAILED TOWHEE.— Migrant; not com- 
mon. 

Zamelodia melanocephala. BLAck-HEADED GROsBEAK.— Summer 
resident; common. Nests in numbers and is one of our sweetest songsters, 
both sexes joining with no appreciable difference in song. 

Passerina cyanea. Inpico Buntrnc,— The occurrence mentioned by 
Rockwell and Wetmore (Birds of Golden) is from this immediate district 
and is the only record of recent date. | 

Passerina amcena. Lazunit Buntinac.— Summer resident; common 
some years. Arrives late in May and I have found nests with fresh eggs 
up to the last of July, their lateness suggesting a second set. 

Calamospiza melanocorys. Lark Buntrinc.—Summer resident; 
common in the adjoining hay and alfalfa fields. More numerous some 
years than others. 

Passer d. domesticus. ENnorisH Sparrow.— Plentiful. Practically 
every farm will support a colony and a few seem permanently attached to 
each bridge. I have noticed no ill effects on the native birds here, although 
such evidence is abundant enough in Denver where I have successfully 
used strychnine in combatting them. 

Piranga ludoviciana. WesterN TaNacer.— Migrant. Seen in 
greatest numbers in late July and August. 

Petrochelidon 1. lunifrons. Criirr Swattow.— Summer resident; 
abundant. Arrives about the middle of May and nests in large colonies. 
Their presence seems welcome around the farms. Migrates early in 
September. 

Hirundo erythrogastra. Barn SwaLttow.— Summer resident; com- 
mon. Usually arrives a few days earlier than lunifrons but in smaller 
numbers; leaves later in September. They start building very soon after 
their arrival as I have noted them carrying nest material on May 20. 

Tachycineata t. lepida. NorrHeRN VIOLET-GREEN SwaLLow.— 
Migrant. A large flock may generally be noted in the vicinity of Golden 
about May 20. 

Riparia riparia. Bank Swattow.— The rarest of the swallows in 
this district, although nest sites are plentiful and large colonies may be 
found within fifteen or twenty miles. A specimen secured August 29, 1910. 

Stelgidopteryx serripennis. Rovucu-wincepD SwaLLow.— Summer 
resident; common. Two colonies have nested in the creek bottom for 
several years. On July 23, 1911, I estimated one of these to contain a 
hundred and fifty individuals. 

Bombycilla garrula. Bonemian Waxwina.— Irregular but abundant 
winter visitant. During the early months of 1909, they were very abun- 
dant in Colorado and large flocks were of daily note on Clear Creek. The 
non-freezing swamps with their patches of water-cress were especially 


74 Lincoutn, birds of the Clear Creek District, Colo. [eae 


favored. A minute snail which is found on this plant, proved to be the 
attraction. They were noted weekly to April 3. 

A more recent visitation of this species occurred early in 1917, the birds 
appearing in even greater numbers in the Creek valley and surrounding 
country. A detailed account of this invasion was given by the writer in 
‘The Auk,’ Vol. XXXIV, 1917, p. 341. 

Lanius borealis. NortrHeRN Surike.— Winter resident; common. 
My own observations do not serve to verify the defense made of this bird 
by others, who credit it with the destruction of English Sparrows. This 
may be true to some extent where the bird frequents city parks, but I have 
yet to see this species fall as its prey, while I have seen it capture 
Tree Sparrows, Juncos, Chickadees, Horned Larks, and on one occasion 
a Hairy Woodpecker was seriously crippled, but saved by my intervention. 
A quart of wheat with half an ounce of strychnine, used judiciously, will 
do far more toward eliminating the Sparrows in any one neighborhood, and 
with less danger to the native birds. 

Lanius 1. excubitorides. WuHitTr-RUMPED SHRIKE.— Only noted in 
the spring migration although it should nest in this vicinity. The account 
of habits under borealis does not apply to this bird if my observations are 
correct, as I have never seen excubitorides kill a bird and believe their food 
is principally of an insect nature. 

Vireosylva olivacea. Rerp-rvep VireEo.— Rare. A male and female 
were secured August 18, 1911. They were feeding a young bird which 
escaped. Other specimens taken May 26, 1912, and August 8, 1912. 
Most of the Colorado records of this bird are of migrants and I believe the 
above note is the first actual occurrence of their breeding, reported. 

Vireosylva g. swainsoni. WrsTeRN WaARBLING VirEO.— Summer 
resident; not uncommon. More frequently heard than seen. Occa- 
sionally found in small groups (family parties, in all probability) in late July 
or August. 

Lanivireo s. plumbeus. PiumBrous VirEo.— Rare. Only record, 
a specimen secured June 2, 1912 (Coll. F. C. L. No. 386). 

Vermivora virginiz. Vircinra’s WARBLER.— Migrant; not common. 
First of spring usually noted about May 25, when the plum thickets are in 
bloom. Not often seen in the fall. 

Vermivora c. celata. ORANGE-CROWNED WarBLER.— Migratory; 
common during both spring and fall migrations; the majority of those 
taken being referable to this form, although a few of the next have also 
been taken. 

Vermivora c. lutescens. Lurescenr Warsier. — Migratory; rare. 
Only two or three specimens of this variety have actually been identified. 

Dendroica a. estiva. YELLOw WaARBLER.— Summer resident; com- 
mon. Arrives about May 15. 

Dendroica coronata. Myrrte Warsier.— Migrant; not common. 
Generally associated with flocks of D. a. auduboni with which it may be 
classed as the earliest of the Mniotiltide to arrive. Rarely seen in the fall. 


vel: re Me Lincoun, Birds of the Clear Creek District, Colo. 19 


Dendroica a. auduboni. Avupuson’s Warsier.— Abundant mi- 
grant. During the month of May this is one of the commonest birds. 
Have known them to arrive by April 20. 

Dendroica townsendi. TowNsEND’s WarBLER.— Rare; but two 
records. The first was taken near Golden, September 4, 1911, and the 
second, a male in full plumage, in the creek bottom, September 9, 1912. 
This last was feeding with a flock of Chipping Sparrows in the cotton- 
woods (Coll. F. C. L. Nos. 295 and 405). 

Seiurus n. notabilis. GriINNELL’s WATER-THRUSH.— Migrant; not 
common. Seen in both spring and fall migrations, as solitary birds or 
scattered pairs. Have taken several specimens in late May, late August 
and early September. The willow and birch thickets are their usual 
retreats. 

Oporornis tolmiei. Macaiiiivray’s Warsier.— Migrant; not 
common. Seen principally in the fall. 

Geothlypis t. occidentalis. WrsterN YELLOW-THROAT.— Summer 
resident; plentiful. Frequents the swamps and thickets and is heard 
continuously. Another early arrival, closely following D. a. auduboni, 
and nesting by the 1st of June. 

Icteria v. longicauda. LoNna-rarLep CHat.— Summer resident; com- 
mon. An inhabitant of the dense plum thickets where their nests are 
absolutely safe, even from the reach of an enthusiastic ornithologist. 
Have heard them sing repeatedly during the night while I have been in 
camp. 

Wilsonia p. pileolata. PimeoLaTep WAaRBLER.— Migrant; abundant. 
Spring arrivals rarely noted before May 10. Fall migration begins 
about the middle of August and the last is usually gone by the middle of 
September. 

Wilsonia canadensis. CaNnapa WarBLER.— This warbler is always 
rare in Colorado so that Mr. Rett’s specimen, taken in this region, May 26, 
1917, is of more than local interest. (Auk, XXXYV, 1918, p. 229). 

Setophaga ruticilla. Repsrart.— Rare. An adult female taken 
August 24, 1912, is the only record (Coll. F. C. L. No. 415). 

Anthus rubescens. Pirrr.— Rare migrant. A flock of four seen 
October 14, 1911. 

Cinclus m. unicolor. Water Ovuzeu.— Rare in the creek valley al- 
though generally seen in the cafion above Golden. I secured a male, 
however, several miles from the cafion, November 13, 1910. 

Oreoscoptes montanus. Sacre THrRasHeR.— Apparently a_ rare 
migrant in the valley. I secured an immature male near Leyden, July 28, 
1912, and Mr. Rett reports one taken September, 1, 1918. 

Mimus p. leucopterus. WrstTeERN Mocxkincpirp.— Probably a rare 
summer resident, but records of its occurrence are too few for a definite 
statement to this effect. I have only seen it in May but thisis well within 
the breeding range and nest-sites are plentiful. 

Dumetella carolinensis. CaTsirp.— Summer resident; plentiful. 


76 Lincotn, Birds of the Clear Creek District, Colo. leone 


Jan. 


Arrives before May 15, is nesting by June 10 and fledglings out of the nest 
are of note by July 15. 

Toxostoma rufum. Brown TuHrRAsHER.— Summer resident; com- 
mon. Arrives, nests and leaves about the same dates as D. carolinensis. 

Salpinctes o. obsoletus. Rock Wrrn.— Migrant; not common. 
The enormous piles of boulders thrown up in the days of placer mining 
here, are usually occupied by one or two Rock Wrens during the late sum- 
mer and early fall. Nests in the foothills. 

Catherpes m. conspersus. CaNon WreEn.— Resident, but not 
common on the Hogback. Their call is exceptionally ventriloquil,. 
and being an adept at dodging behind and beneath rocks and bushes, this 
handsome wren is hard to locate. Seven noted on this ridge, January 1, 
1912, four of which were secured. Their song and eall are unusually 
melodious, even for a wren, and could be confused with no other bird. 

Troglodytes a. parkmani. WesTerN House WreN.— Summer 
resident; plentiful. The familiar House Wren is found everywhere, where 
the underbrush is to his liking. On one occasion (June, 1909) a pair made 
their nest in a crack of a cottonwood, which was so situated, that in order 
to enter they had first to pass through my tent. Deserted Flicker holes 
are also used as nesting apartments. 

Telmatodytes p. plesius. WrsTeERN MarsH WreEN.— Migrant; not 
common. Only seen in April. The willows on the right of way of the 
interurban electric line, are periodically cut and piled, making retreats 
especially favored by marsh wrens. I have taken a few each year. 

Certhia f. montana. Rocky Mountain Creerer.— Rare. I find 
but three records of the occurrence of this bird in the creek valley, although 
they are not uncommon in the Yellow Pines of the adjoining foothills. I 
observed one October 30, 1909, and Mr. Rett has two others taken Novem- 
ber 14, 1916 and December 30, 1917. 

Sitta c. nelsoni. Rocky Mounratn Noursatcu.— Ordinarily, not 
common in the valley but during September and October, 1910, several 
were noted and a few secured. More numerous in the foothills. 

Sitta p. pygmea. Pycmy Nursarcu.— Pygmy Nuthatches are 
plentiful winter residents of the Yellow Pine zone, but I have never known 
them to enter the belt of cottonwoods and willows immediately below. 

Penthestes a. septentrionalis. LoNna-raibep CuickapEe.— Winter 
resident; plentiful. In the fall, both septentrionalis and gambeli are found 
in the same flocks, and in about equal numbers, but gambeli soon leaves its 
long-tailed cousins in complete possession for the winter. The Long-tails 
also reach the valley first, usually by the first of August. 

Penthestes g. gambeli. Mounrarn Cuickaprn.— Migrant; plenti- 
ful. Its absence in the winter is only from the first of November to the 
middle of March. 

Regulus c. calendula. Rusy-crowNep Kineiet.— Migrant; com- 
mon, more so some years than others. Generally more numerous in the 


fall. 


Vol. coal Lincoin, Birds of the Clear Creek District, Colo. Teri 


Regulus s. satrapa. GoLDEN-cROWNED KincLer.— Rare. One re- 
cord; an adult male taken on the MHogback, October 6, 1912 (Coll. 
F. C. L. No. 424). Another bird that may be found with considerable 
regularity in winter in the Yellow Pines. 

Myadestes townsendi. TowNnsenp’s Sonirarre.— Visitant; rare. 
One (probably the same individual) seen on three occasions, March 30 
and 31, and April 1, 1910. Two others noted March 17, 1912. They are 


common in the vicinity of Morrison, eight miles south. 


Hylocichla f. salicicola. Wittow Turusu.— Migrant; rare. I 
secured a single specimen from a willow thicket, May 14, 1910, and Mr. 
Rett has two others, taken May 19 and 27, 1917. No fall records. 

Hylocichla g. guttata. Avaska Hermit THrusu.— Rare migrant. 
Two specimens are all that are available; one taken May 14, 1910 and the 


other October 14, 1911. 


Hylocichla g. auduboni. Avupuson’s Hermit THrusH.— Migratory; 
not common. This is the Hermit Thrush that breeds in the mountains of 
Colorado, but rarely below 7500 or 8000 feet. 

Hylocichla u. swainsoni. OLivE-BackED THrusH. — Common mi- 
grant. Generally noted in spring about the 20 of May. 

Planesticus m. propinquus. WeEsTERN Rosin.— Resident; plenti- 
ful. Winters in numbers whenever the crop of Thorn-apples (Crategus) 
is good. A flock, I estimated at 200 individuals wintered in one of these 
thickets near Morrison, south of Clear Creek, during the winter of 1909- 
10. 

Sialia s. sialis. BuLursirp.— My only records of the eastern Bluebird 
in the valley come from Mr. Rett, who reports taking two October 8, 1916, 
at which date he saw three others. His collection contains still another 
example taken from a flock of about twenty Mountain Bluebirds, October 
138, 1918. 

Sialia m. bairdi. CurstNuT-BackED BLuEBrRp.— Personally, I have 
not taken this form in the valley proper, although I have specimens from 
the adjacent foothills. But Mr. Rett secured two from a flock of four on 
the Hogback, April 30, 1917. 

Sialia currucoides. Mountain Biursrrp.— Abundant migrant and 
uncommon summer resident. Large flocks generally pass through the 
valley in late March, the majority of them retiring to the mountains to 
nest, but an occasional pair or two remain in the valley throughout the 
summer. 


Colorado Museum Natl. Hist., Denver, Colo. 


fies 


78 Faruey, Sandpipers at Plymouth, Mass. 


SANDPIPERS WINTERING AT PLYMOUTH, MASSA- 
CHUSETTS. 


BY J. A. FARLEY. 


Tue wintering of the hardy Sanderling and the Red-backed 
Sandpiper was an interesting event in 1917 on Plymouth Beach. 
We fail to find in a hasty search through the literature other records 
of the wintering of these two species north of Cape Cod. The 
winter of 1916-17 was an average one. It was not an open winter; 
nor was it very severe like the following very bitter season of 1917— 
18. The weather conditions from week to week through this 
winter were noted with some care because of their intimate relation 
to the daily lives of the sandpipers during the same period. 

Through the fall of 1916 Sanderlings were on Plymouth Beach 
as usual and my last note (November 26) reads: “Saw a half- 
dozen Sanderlings — one poor little fellow was bobbing along less 
speedily on one leg — only the upper half (i. e., above the heel) 
of the other leg was left. It was hanging down. Saw one or two 
Sanderlings that sat down by a bunch of drift as if to rest. There 
were some Snow Buntings on the beach with the Sanderlings. The 
day was sunny but quite cold and blowy.” 

I was not on Plymouth Beach again until January 14, 1917. 
On the morning of the 12th the temperature ranged from just below 
zero to 2° above. By evening of the 12th it was 12° above. On the 
13th there was a rising temperature and by night it was above 
freezing and there was rain. It was warmer on the morning of the 
14th. “The southeast rain last night and this forenoon has taken 
especially at 


off most of the snow. The wind blew heavily, 
noon when it rained very hard. In the afternoon there was clearing 
weather.” 

I was on the beach between 1 and 2 P. M. and found, as I 
expected, some Sanderlings. There were at least three. They 
were at their favorite spot where the water shoals a good deal on 
the outside and sandspits make out which are exposed when the 
tide recedes. Other accompaniments to the mid-January scene 


were a lot of quite tame Black Ducks in the Inner Harbor ready to | 


per aa vi Faruey, Sandpipers at Plymouth, Mass. 719 


feed when the flats had become sufficiently exposed; and Gulls 
dropping mussels. Snow Buntings were on the beach and in the 
beach grass. 

The week of January 14 was a week of winter weather — cool or 
cold but no storm. A little snow fell on the night of the 20th so 
that I found it lying thinly on the sand of the beach on the follow- 
ing morning. “The tide was falling, leaving the shore with a thin 
veneer of ice. There was ice over everything in fact —from 
high-water mark down to the gently receding water. And back of 
the ice lay the fine snow on the sand of the upper beach. Every- 
where there were floating bits of ice in the water on the bay side 
(outer side) of the beach, and farther out there were floes — big 
and little — going fast out to sea on the swift current running from 
the Inner Harbor. Seals lay on this floating ice — ‘as cool as you 
please.’ It was altogether a wintry scene. Yet it was not a cold 
morning. In the same place as on the 14th where the beach broad- 
ens very much at low water saw the usual three Sanderlings, and 
with them a Red-backed Sandpiper. They seemed to mind not at 
all the snow on the sand. They were not shy, and to avoid me 
they would run (up to the last moment) rather than fly. They 
were thus more fearless than during the fall flight. The Red- 
backed Sandpiper was quite tame — or fearless. I could get within 
a few feet of him. At times he waded belly-deep in the ice-cold 
water, and was busily engaged in picking in the shallow water. I 
could not see what he was eating, although he may have been prob- 
ing. The tide finally fell so that there was fresh green eel grass on 
the beach, but earlier in the forenoon the icy sand seemed to have 
no food. 

“Other forms of life typical of the beach on this January morn- 
ing were the thousands of ducks in the Inner Harbor where there 
were practically no flats as yet exposed. Many of the fowl were 
Black Ducks floating in the water (which grew shallower every 
minute) over the flats which would finally be exposed. There were 
many Whistlers — outside among the ice floes and inside the beach 
and flying around the Spindle in and out of the Inner Harbor. 
Throughout the forenoon the air was full of their melodious whist- 
ling. Noted many handsome, showy, black and white old drakes. 
There were many, also, of the seal-brown-headed females. There 


los 


SO Fariey, Sandpipers at Plymouth, Mass. 


were also Red-breasted Mergansers. Snow Buntings were on and 
off the beach with the Horned Larks. There was a flock of Red- 
polls in the beach grass. Herring and Kittiwake Gulls were drop- 
ping mussels and Black-backed Gulls uttered their raucous notes.” 
On January 28 I was on the beach from 11 A. M. to 3.30 P. M. 
It was cloudy but not cold. Some fine snow fell. There were 
perhaps two inches in the beach grass and over the sand and pebbles 
of the upper beach. But from high-water mark down to the tide 
which had turned, the snow (or better, slush) was deeper — the 
result of the last high tide. It lay in patches everywhere, while in 
the water there were small pieces of floating ice. There were rela- 
tively few bare or semi-bare spots on the beach that seemed fit for 
shore birds. “As usual, I saw the three Sanderlings and the Red- 
backed Sandpiper. It was good winter weather last week. The 
23d was fair and colder than the 22d and the rest of the week was 
wintry, though not excessively cold. As I got along the beach to 
the sandspits where it broadens, there were the three Sanderlings. 
They were on a piece of bare sand where a little inlet following the 
falling tide ran into the sea. In this icy water they waded _belly- 
deep. After a few minutes they flew down the beach but soon lit. 
Presently the Red-backed Sandpiper, uttering his note, flew close 
by me and with a free flight-continued down the beach and lit with 
the Sanderlings. (The Sanderlings show a tendency to keep 
together, while the Red-back feeds in their neighborhood or not, 
as it happens.) The three Sanderlings soon flew again still farther 
down the beach, leaving the Red-back alone. Later he, too, flew 
in the same direction. But after two or three minutes he came 
back, flying freely and fairly high above the beach, and with a 
great circle lit close beside me, (within three or four yards) seeming 
curious of me. He was very nervous and full of little fitful starts. 
After two minutes he flew, and making a great sweeping curve 
high in air dashed off over the breakwater and across the neck, 
apparently down into the grassy flats on the Inner Harbor side.” 
(It may be said here that beach birds in Plymouth Harbor have a 
wide range of choice as to feeding loci for, as already remarked, a 
good deal of the outer beach is exposed between tides, particularly 
where the water shoals, while on the Inner Harbor side there is 
more or less grassy shore and out in the water are the very extensive 


rot vial Farry, Sandpipers at Plymouth, Mass. 81 
clam flats which remain bare longer than the outside beach. Butin 
very severe weather the Inner Harbor freezes over and the flats are 
covered as long as the extreme cold lasts.) 

“JT went to the place on the beach where I saw the Sanderlings 
and the Red-backed Sandpiper together and found their little foot- 
prints in the slush. The whole beach up to high-water mark was 
nearly all snow and slush. As I returned up the beach two hours 
later from the Spindle, the aspect of things had become decidedly 
wintry. The incoming tide dashed with a subdued crash against 
the shore the thousands of pieces of floating ice. There was now 
nothing but snow up from the advancing water’s edge. The bare 
sand had been covered by the rising water. But away up on the 
beach where the exposed sand and pebbles had withstood longest the 
encroaching tide, I naturally looked for the beach birds. Horned 
Larks were plentiful here and I soon found the Sanderlings. The 
three flew from the beach ridge —from the line of snow-covered 
pebbles above high-water mark. Found their tracks here — also 
those of Horned Larks. Apparently the birdshad been at the exposed 
dry brown seaweed, for the tracks of both species had almost 
trodden down the snow. I noticed also that empty fresh mussel 
shells recently dropped by the gulls had been visited by both 
Sanderlings and Horned Larks. <A very little of the “meat” re- 
mained in the shells — which may have made it worth the little 
birds’ while.” 

The week of January 28 was very cold at its end. The ther- 
mometer stood at 46° at noon on the 30th and 31st. A little snow 
fell during the night of the 31st, but melted the next day (Febru- 
ary 1) when an easterly fog came in from Cape Cod Bay. Late 
on February 1 the temperature was 32°. Friday, the 2d, was 
colder, and in the evening very cold. On the morning of the 3d it 
was 4° below zero down town in Plymouth, while at the Head of 
the Beach (our station) it was 2° above. It was the coldest weather 
of the winter to date. February 4 was the coldest Sunday of 
the winter so far, and practically all of the Inner Harbor was frozen 
over, making it hard for the Black Ducks to get food. 

“T went down the beach this Sunday morning under favorable 
conditions, for it was low water and much of the flats on the out- 
side were exposed, making a mixture of a good deal of bare sand 


fess 


82 Faruey, Sandpipers at Plymouth, Mass. 


and plenty of slush-snow, together with ice in patches mixed in 
with water in pools and little estuaries. Where the flats made 
the beach the broadest, there were many Gulls and also two Sand- 
erlings and farther on the third Sanderling, and still farther on the 
Red-backed Sandpiper.”’ 

On February 5 it snowed hard in the morning and the storm 
lasted practically all day. In the morning a Black Duck flew in 
through the driving snow and went up on the hill where later it 
was started out from under a pine where apparently it had taken 
shelter from the storm. Early on the 6th it was 16° above zero. 
The weather cleared beautifully and the day was sunny, with 
scarcely a cloud. On the morning of the 7th the weather was very 
raw changing torain. “February 11. Sharpest weather of winter. 
Glass showed zero in the morning, and 4° above at 8 A. M., and 
10° above at 3.30 P. M. It was 4° below zero at Sampson’s store 
and 10° below early at Bradford’s Corner. A bitter wind on the 
beach, although a sunny day. Ducks were in all day (up on the 
grassy shore) at the cove where Eel River enters the Inner Harbor. 
In the sunny lee of a shooting stand I found an Ipswich Sparrow, 
a Horned Lark and aSongSparrow. The beach flock of Redpolls 
were in the beach grass and a few Snow Buntings on the outer beach. 
There was no sign of Sanderlings or Red-back; but this does not 
prove anything, for I did not go down the beach as far as_ the 
flats—besides the tide was coming in and the beach proper was 
absolutely all snow and ice.” 

February 12, 13 and 14 were very rough days. The weather 
was cold. It was 6° below in Plymouth on the morning of the 13th 
and 10° below in North Carver near by. The last three days of 
the week were milder. February 18 was beautiful, sunny and mild. 
“Went to the beach which was broad at low water. On a little 
spit at the usual place were two Sanderlings and the Red-Back. 
The three were together and were very fearless and we got close 
to them. They seemed plump enough after the rough weather 
of last week. The Red-back picked into a fresh lump of green eel 
grass. ‘The Sanderlings ran nimbly about, heel-deep in the gentle 
water, and steadily picked into it, evidently getting food. The 
beach is practically clear of snow and ice again, but the whole 
expanse of the Inner Harbor except close down to the Spindle is 
frozen tight as a drum.” 


pel ek vn Faruey, Sandpipers at Plymouth, Mass. 83 

The week of February 18 was much milder than the week of 
February 11. There was a hard rain on the night of the 23d. 
Went to the beach on the 25th. The Inner Harbor was still frozen 
over for the most part, though there was a good deal of open water 
toward the mouth. “The tide was coming in and the outer beach 
was getting well covered. Up on the dry, pebbly crown of the 
beach, found two Sanderlings. I got quite close to them. They 
stood motionless in the sunlight, and their whole aspect seemed 
almost to indicate that, having been deprived for a time of their 
feeding ground by the tide, they were calmly (and quite at their 
ease) waiting for the water to fall again and give them another 
chance to go to feeding. By way of contrast: the cold wave and 
consequent tight condition of things has seemed to affect these little 
Sandpipers less than the Black Ducks which, having lost their 
feeding grounds by the freezing of the Inner Harbor, have become 
very lean and weak and are being fed by people. Two hours 
later on my way back up the beach I passed these two Sanderlings 
at the same spot on the beach ridge — still motionless and tame. 
I went very close to them and they watched me sharply but did 
not fly.” 

I did not see the Red-backed Sandpiper on February 25 and never 
saw him again. 

The week of February 25 was rather mild, but on Sunday, 
March 4, it began snowing in the morning and continued steadily 
all day and heavily by dark (the wind now being northeast,) and 
lasted through the night and practically all of the 5th, with a strong 
gale which made a big surf and drifts that stopped the street cars. 
But the temperature was not low. Under the hill where Eel River 
flows into the Inner Harbor the Black Ducks were massed — liter- 
ally packed —on the snowy surface of the field. This storm 
caused unusual, snowy conditions in Plymouth and on the Upper 
Cape. Higher drifts are rarely seen in Barnstable and Sandwich. 
It did not, however, “clear off cold.’ On March 10, Mr. T. W. 
Graves was on the beach in the afternoon at low water. He saw 
three beach birds — one Sanderling and two duller individuals 
(Red-backs?). 

On March 11, I was on the beach at high tide. It was completely, 
iced up and there were the beginnings of an ice wall. Saw no beach 
birds. The snowy conditions following the storm of March 4 and 


Auk 


84 GRINNELL, Sequestration Notes. [ Tank 


5 soon passed and the rest of the month was rather even weather, 
with not a low temperature. On March 25 I found that Piping 
Plovers had arrived on the beach, but I saw neither Sanderlings 
nor Red-backs. 

April 1 was warm, sunny and springlike. “Many Geese are 
going over the beach and I find that the numbers of Piping Plovers 
have increased since March 25. Saw two Sanderlings whch may 
or may not have been the birds of last winter.” 

52 Cedar St., Malden, Mass. 


SEQUESTRATION NOTES. 
BY JOSEPH GRINNELL.! 


THERE is every reason to believe that the voices of birds have 
been subject to a process of evolution which has led from the sim- 
plest beginnings to a condition which is rather complicated in the 
higher present-day species. The first sounds uttered by primitive 
birds were doubtless entirely of an incidental nature, due to expul- 
sion of air under stress of pain or fear, or simply of physical impact. 
According to one theory (Witchell, ‘The Evolution of Bird-Song,’ 
London, 1896) the first specialization accompanied combat and 
involved a meaning of defiance or intimidation; from this it was 
an easy step to notes conveying the idea of alarm to other indi- 
viduals of the same species. 

Whatever the course in the early development of bird voices, 
it is obvious to any field student that in the higher existing birds 
an often very elaborate system of cries or calls obtains, with an 
associated wide range of meaning; as witness the Titmouses and 
Ruby-crowned Kinglets. Some of the meanings, in certain species, 
have been demonstrated beyond all question of doubt. The less 
obvious meanings will have to be worked out by slow process, and 
exceeding care be taken to avoid mere guess-work. 


1 Contribution from the Museum of Vertebrate Zodlogy of the University of California. 


Bie: ne sa GRINNELL, Sequestration Notes. 85 


A seemingly adequate method of deciding upon the meaning 
of bird voices is to note as accurately as possible (1) the exact nature 
of the sounds produced in all particulars, and at the same time (2) 
the behavior of the bird when uttering each kind of note, and (3) 
the conditions obtaining with respect to all extraneous factors such 
as relate to activities of other individual birds in the vicinity, other 
animals, cover, and forage. The degree of reliance upon the infer- 
ences from such observations will increase with the number of 
times these observations are repeated. The final and _ satisfac- 
tory explanation will not be forthcoming at once, though it is 
well to hold whatever meaning presents itself even from the outset 
as a tentative hypothesis. 

Some years ago the attention of the present writer became 
directed to the behavior and notes of certain non-flocking passer- 
ine birds as exhibited during the winter season. Dearth of other 
ornithological features of interest at that season was probably the 
circumstance which favored the development of the following ideas. 
The particular class of notes here to be considered are those of the 
category commonly called “location” or simply “call” notes, and 
are uttered at irregular intervals by certain birds when foraging 
singly under normal conditions. 

To be more explicit, the birds in the writer’s experience especially 
concerned are the Ruby-crowned Kinglet (Regulus calendula) and 
Audubon’s Warbler (Dendroica auduboni). The common winter 
call-note of the former is the familiar rachety, tone-less noise, of 
three or more sections or syllables. The usual call-note of the 
latter is the rather sharp single syllable, tsip. The notable thing 
with both species is that their notes are uttered at rather frequent 
intervals, though irregular ones, by each individual as it forages 
alone. There are often to be heard in the distance, many trees 
away perhaps, other individuals of the same species; but a point 
of importance here is the essentially non-flocking habit in both the 
species under consideration. 

Iam aware that Ruby-crowned Kinglets do occasionally assemble 
to a limited extent in winter; for example when “mobbing” an owl. 
Or, late in the afternoon, as many as five or six individuals may be 
found in the same tree on a sunny upper hill-slope, especially if the 
trees be scattering. Also, Audubon’s Warblers sometimes collect 


(pees 


86 GRINNELL, Sequestration Notes. jan 


in numbers up to a dozen or more in one tree, such as a blossoming 
eucalyptus, or in a clump of fruiting Rhus laurina. But the indi- 
viduals in all such gatherings show themselves to be thoroughly 
independent of one another; each goes his own way; and there is, 
indeed, frequent evidence of friction or conflict of individual inter- 
ests. There is no indication of codrdination of movement, as with 
truly flocking birds: no individual advantage is gained by the 
gathering. 

Observation of any one Ruby-crowned Kinglet under the usual 
winter-day conditions in southern or west-central California, shows 
it to be almost continually intent upon its search for insects. Its 
mode of search, and the category of insects which its equipment 
fits it to make use of, direct its forage course as a rule through thick 
leafy terminal foliage of evergreen trees and shrubs, less generally, 
perhaps, among the stems of willows and alders, where, however, 
there are usually left-over, curled-up leaves, and plenty of crannies 
behind buds and in clefts of forking twigs, to harbor small insects. 
But insects are relatively scarce in winter, increasingly so as the 
season advances; and the Kinglet’s scrutiny must be rapid. Each 
individual Kinglet must cover much territory in limited time in order 
to gather the food in sufficient quantity. 

As it thus forages, each Kinglet every now and then utters its 
note, or series of notes. Another individual, or others, may be 
heard from time to time in the distance, but I have failed altogether 
to receive the impression that two or more birds “answer one 
another.” My experience is that they most certainly do not come 
towards one another as the result of such calls. And here the idea 
presents itself, logically, that these notes serve to keep the foraging 
birds apart: they are sequestration notes. 

The nature of the conditions which call forth this category of 
notes, which makes them of wse in the struggle for existence on the 
part of the species, would seem to me to be as follows. The King- 
let is a foliage forager and is most of the time within or in close reach 
of adequate cover; hence for the most part it is safe from both aerial 
and terrestrial predators. It relies for food upon small insects, 
mainly stationary, which in the winter season are not abundant, 
sometimes exceedingly scarce, as shown by occasional periods 
when some of the birds starve; the Kinglet cannot dig after its 


Vol. oe 


1920 GRINNELL, Sequestration Notes. 87 


insects or uncover them, but must look for them in plain sight; 
it must scrutinize a large area of leaf and twig to find enough, and 
it must avoid duplicating territory that its neighbor Kinglet has scruti- 
mized. In other words it is of critical need that the individuals of a 
species whose food is of this nature, and must be gotten in this way, 
be continually spaced out over the available food producing terri- 
tory. Two or more individuals must not follow each other’s paths 
or look over the same ground, at least until there has been time for 
insect life to move about again. 

With Audubon’s Warbler the conditions are very much the same 
as with the Ruby-crowned Kinglet, save that the forage beat of 
the former lies, as a rule, In more open trees and bushes, or on 
the outer surfaces of masses of foliage. The tsip-notes are uttered 
seemingly for the same general purpose, to keep neighboring indi- 
viduals from duplicating territory. With both the Warblers and 
the Kinglets, it is not uncommon in winter to see two individuals, 
which may happen to encounter one another in the same tree, 
assume a hostile manner of behavior and tone of voice. The latter 
consists in each case, of the same sort of expression as the seques- 
tration note, but uttered with more emphasis. In the case of male 
Kinglets, there are flashes from the unfurled coronal, and one of 
the birds quickly puts the other to flight; each is soon pursuing 
separate forage routes in different directions. 

In the case of the Audubon’s Warblers, again, it is quite true that 
two or more individuals often enter into loose membership in the 
roving aggregations of birds which travel about the open country 
in winter and include in their number, bluebirds, certain sparrows 
and even pipits. And also one often encounters a number of 
Audubon’s Warblers, not in company of other birds, trailing along 
in the same general direction, with indications that they are trying 
to keep in loose contact with one another. And here it is possible 
a shade of meaning in their voices invites collectivity. Indeed one 
can conceive of a note being both centrifugal and centripetal in 
meaning, the latter to a given radius, the former beyond. But now 
our discussion has departed into the realm of speculation. 

In thus assigning the function of sequestration to certain notes of 
certain birds, the writer has placed confidence in an accumulation 
of impressions received during a number of years of observation. 


aS 


88 Loomis, Procellaria alba Gmelin. hasnt 


The species concerned are among our commonest everyday winter 
birds. Verification of this explanation, or the refutation of it, 
should be easy to secure on the part of persons who are interested 
in the natural history of living birds; for there are many such 
nowadays, in excellent position to make accurate observations, and 
to make from these valid inductions. 

Museum Vert. Zool., Berkeley, Calif. 


ON PROCELLARIA ALBA GMELIN. 


BY LEVERETT MILLS LOOMIS. 


Tue technical name Procellaria alba has long been a stumbling- 
block in the way of nomenclators. It was proposed by Gmelin 
in 1789 in Volume I, Part II (p. 565) of his edition of Linnzeus’s 
‘Systema Nature.’ The following is Gmelin’s description: 


“Pr. ex fusco nigra, gule area, pectore, abdomine et crisso albis, rectrici- 
bus [tectricibus] caudee inferioribus ex cinereo et albo mistis. 

White-breasted Petrel. Lath. Syn. II. 2. p. 400. n. 6. 

Habitat in insulis Turturum ef nativitatis Christi, 16, pollices longa. 

Rostrum nigrum; cauda rotundata; pedes ex atro fusci; digiti anteriore 
dimidia sui parte cum membrana connectente nigri.” 


From the above, it is apparent that Gmelin based his Procellaria 
alba upon Latham’s White-breasted Petrel, the description of which 
reads as follows: 


“TLenotu sixteen inches. Bill an inch and a half long, hooked at the 
tip, and black: the head, neck, and upper parts of the body, dusky brown, 
nearly black: on the throat a whitish patch: breast, belly, and vent, white: 
under tail coverts cinereous and white mixed: tail rounded at the end: 
legs black brown: the fore part of the toes half way black; the outside of 
the exterior tce the same for the whole length: webs black: spur behind 
blunt. 

Inhabits T'urtle and Christmas Islands. In the collection of Sir Joseph 
Banks.’’! 


1 General Synopsis of Birds, Vol. I1i, Pt. 2, 1785, p. 400. 


Vol. | 
1920 


Loomis, Procellaria alba Gmelin. 89 

During his second voyage (1772-1775), Captain Cook discovered 
an island “situated in latitude 19° 48’ South, longitude 178° 2’ 
West,” which he called Turtle Island.!. The position given agrees 
well with that of Vatoa or Turtle Island of the Fiji group, lying in 
latitude 19° 49’ 11’’ S., longitude 178° 13’ 38” W.2 It is highly 
probable that this island is the Turtle Island mentioned by Latham. 

Christmas Island of the Fanning group in the Central Pacific 
was discovered by Captain Cook during his third voyage (1776- 
1780). In narrating the circumstances of its discovery, Cook 
remarks: “As we kept our Christmas here, I called this discovery 
Christmas Island. I judge it to be about fifteen or twenty leagues 
in circumference. It seemed to be of a semicircular form; or like 
the moon in the last quarter, the two horns being the North and 
South points; which bear from each other nearly North by East, 
and South by West, four or five leagues distant. This West side, 
or the little isle at the entrance into the lagoon, upon which we 
observed the eclipse, lies in the latitude of 1° 59’ North, and in the 
longitude of 202° 30’ East, determined by a considerable number of 
lunar observations, which differed only 7’ from the time-keeper; 
it being so much less.’’ 

In acknowledging the sources of his information, Latham says 
in the preface of his ‘General Synopsis of Birds:* ‘“ Among these 
[collections], the magnificent one at Leicester House, formed by Sir 
Ashton Lever, ought to be particularly mentioned; as likewise the 
favours received from the inspection of numerous subjects, the 
produce of the last and the former voyages to the South Seas, in 
the possession of Jos. Banks, Esq.; P. R. S. Soho Square.” This 
statement coupled with the statements in Latham’s description 
(“Inhabits Turtle and Christmas Islands. In the collection of Sir 
Joseph Banks.’’) makes it clear that at least one of the original speci- 
mens of Latham’s White-breasted Petrel was obtained during 
Cook’s sojourn at Christmas Island. 

Happily, I have before me two unworn specimens of a Gadfly 
Petrel (67317; 67331 U.S. Nat. Mus.) taken by Dr. Thomas Hale 


1A Voyage towards the South Pole, and Round the World, 4th ed., Vol. II, 1784, p. 24. 
2 Bowditch, American Practical Navigator, 1906, p. 257. 

3 A Voyage to the Pacific Ocean, Vol. II, 1784, p. 189. 

4 Vol. I, p. iv, footnote. 


ee 


90 Loomis, Procellaria alba Gmelin. eau 


Streets, U.S. N., on Christmas Island, Fanning group, in January, 
1873, and identified by Dr. Coues and Mr. Ridgway as ‘ #strelata’ 
‘parvirostris (Peale)! the type specimen of which was at hand for 
comparison. 

Below is an abridged description of the two Christmas Island 
specimens: 

Length of the skins about 14.4 inches; length of commissure 
fully 1.5 inches; head, neck, and upper parts of body brownish 
black, becoming browner on forehead and jugulum; wings and tail 
more decidedly black; throat with a white patch, more or less 
obscured by the superficial dark color prevailing elsewhere on the 
fore-neck; breast and abdomen white; lower tail-coverts white 
and cinereous mixed; tarsi yellowish brown; toes and webs chiefly 
yellowish brown basally, and black terminally; bill black. 

From the foregoing description, it is seen that the characters of 
Dr. Streets’s specimens agree well with those set forth in Latham’s 
description, quoted above. The coloration of the plumage coin- 
cides, and also the length of the commissure. That Latham 
measured the commissure, and not the culmen, is revealed by the 
length of bill given by him in species now well known; for example, 
‘pill is two inches long’ in the ‘Fulmar Petrel’ (Fulmarus glacialis) 
and ‘three quarters of an inch in length’ in the ‘Fork-tail Petrel’ 
(Oceanodroma furcata). The only disagreement between Dr. 
Streets’s specimens and Latham’s description occurs in the color 
of the tarsi, the light color in the specimens disagreeing with the 
‘black brown’ in the description. The color of the tarsi, however, 
is an unreliable character unless determined in life, or soon after 
death; for light tarsi sometimes become dark in drying, as in certain 
specimens of Pterodroma phaeopygia and Pterodroma inexpectata. 

It seems reasonable to conclude, from the evidence presented, 
that the White-breasted Petrel of Latham, Procellaria alba Gmelin, 
and Procellaria parvirostris Peale relate to one and the same spe- 
cies, which according to current rules of nomenclature should bear 
the name of Pterodroma alba (Gmelin) .? 


1 Cf. Streets, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus. No. 7, 1877, pp. 8, 30; Man. N. A. Birds, 1887, p. 65. 

2 Other authors have sought a solution of Procellaria alba Gmelin in Plerodroma incerta, 
P. neglecta, and P.* arminjoniana.’ Cf. Coues, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1866, pp. 143, 
144, 147, 194: Salvin, Rowley’s Orn. Misc., Vol. I, 1876, p. 234, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., 
Vol. XXV, 1896, p. 412; Godman, Monogr. Petrels, 1908, p. 226; Mathews & Iredale, 
Ibis, 1913, p. 231; Brabourne and Chubb, Birds S. Amer., Vol. I, 1912, p. 31. 


Vol. eee 


1920 Loomis, Procellaria alba Gmelin. 91 


To the specialist in the Tubinares, changes in specific names, as 
above, and in generic names, as 4strelata to Pterodroma and Dap- 
tion to Petrella, are intellectual stimuli rather than handicaps. 
But to the general student of ornithology instability of names has 
become a positive hindrance, from which our present nomenclatural 
rules afford no immediate relief, as is evidenced by the long lists of 
proposed changes that appear from time to time in ‘The Auk.’! 
The remote date of the starting-point of our present-day nomen- 
clature is the chief obstacle to the stabilization of bird names. The 
combined efforts of nomenclators since the adoption of the law 
of priority have failed to fathom the depths of the zodlogical litera- 
ture of the past one hundred sixty years. Obviously, if we could 
abandon this bottomless pit, our task would be lighter. An oppor- 
tunity is offered in the projected ‘Systema Avium.’ After the 
joint committee of the ornithologists’ unions has done its utmost 
under the existing rules, and published the results, a new starting- 
point could be set for ornithological names, namely, the date of 
publication of the ‘Systema Avium.’ Should other names be 
required thereafter, it would be the province of the joint committee 
to sanction the coining of new names, letting “the dead past bury 
its dead.” When the other departments of zodlogy have been set 
in order, it will be time enough to consider harmonizing zodlogical 
nomenclature as a whole. 

It should be emphasized, that the number of bird genera to be 
recognized is a matter of classification, and not of nomenclature. 
Monographers, according to temperament, will differ respecting the 
number to be accepted, but it is believed that in the end simplifica- 
tion will prevail over complication. Any classification that we may 
adopt must be largely arbitrary. A natural system is ‘a dream of 
Utopia.’ 


California Acad. Sci., San Francisco. 


1 Tt seems again necessary to call attention to the fact that the changes listed in the April 
issue of ‘The Auk’ are nof nomenclatural changes, but changes due entirely to questions 
of ornithology. [Ed.] 


92 Wayne, Birds Taken near Charleston, S. C. poe 


Jan. 


NOTES ON SEVEN BIRDS TAKEN NEAR CHARLESTON, 
SOUTH CAROLINA. 


BY ARTHUR T. WAYNE. 


Tue following observations were made for the most part near 
my home during the late summer and early autumn of 1918, and 
in a radius of about two square miles. Trips were made into this 
area almost daily regardless of heat. 


Empidonax flaviventris. YrLLOW-BELLIED FLycatTcHER.— Since I 
captured the first specimen of this bird on October 8, 1912 (Auk, XXX, 
1913, 273-274), I procured an additional specimen — a young female on 
September 3, 1918. This bird was shot in an almost impenetrable jungle 
of elders and viburnum bushes in very low land and was feeding upon the 
berries of the latter bushes in company with a few Alder. Flycatchers 
(Empidonax traillit alnorum). 

Among the hundreds, I may say thousands, of Green-crested Flycatchers 
(Empidonax virescens) that I have closely observed during the seasons of 
migration in South Carolina, Georgia and Florida, hoping to detect £. 
flaviventris among them, the two birds above mentioned are the only ones 
I have ever seen or taken during the past thirty-five years of almost un- 
interrupted collecting and close observations of birds. The’ Yellow-bellied 
Flycatcher is a very rare bird in the South Atlantic States. 

Progne subis subis. Purpre Martin.— During the early spring of 
1917 — the month of March, I think — an albinistic male bird of this species 
made its appearance at a martin house of my neighbor, about a mile away 
from my colony of martins, and raised its brood of young. The following 
year the same bird arrived sometime in the latter portion of February, 
and it could be noticed at a glance that there was very much more white 
in its plumage than during the previous year. This bird paid several 
visits to my martin house and I was in hopes it would mate with one of 
my birds and breed, but in this I was hoping against hope, because a 
bird goes back to its ancestral home and cannot be localized, except 
from the egg. This beautiful bird mated, and its mate was setting on a 
full complement of eggs, when on the morning of May 1, 1918, the male 
was picked up dead at the foot of the martin house and sent to me by Mrs. 
Isaac Auld. Upon preparing the specimen I could find no signs of disease 
nor were there any shot holes in the bird, the plumage being perfect and 
not a feather awry, besides it was exceedingly obese. 

Although Purple Martins almost invariably arrive in the vicinity of 
Charleston between February 16 and 22, nest building rarely begins 
before the end of April. 


pce Aa we Wayne, Birds Taken near Charleston, S. C. 93 


Dendroica czrulescens czrulescens. BuAck-TrHROATED BLuE 
Warsier.— On August 30, 1918, I saw a bird of this species and, as it 
was the earliest date on which I had ever seen one in the autumnal migra- 
tion, determined to obtain it, as the earliest previous records were Septem- 
ber 15, 1884, September 13, 1888, and September 13, 1912. Upon securing 
the specimen, which is a young male, I was surprised to find upon examina- 
tion a post ocular streak of pure white on each side of head as well as the 
same color in the loral regions. This discovery led me to procure a few 
more with the hope of finding others marked ina like manner. On Septem- 
ber 21, I shot two young males and on October 7, I again shot another 
young male. These two birds are similarly marked as in the August 30 
specimen although not as pronounced. 

The specimen taken October 7, has the white markings confined to the 
loral and post ocular areas, but there is a white patch on the lower eyelids, 
which is absent in the other specimens. Upon examining my series of 
these birds, many of which were taken before 1889, J could find no trace of 
the peculiarities mentioned above in either adult or young males. 

Dendroica czrulescens cairnsi. Carrns’s WarBLER.—I shot on 
October 2, 1918, a specimen of this race which has fourteen tail feathers. 
I have been counting the rectrices of passerine birds ever since 1887 and 
the number of tail feathers in the Warblers invariably numbered twelve, 
therefore this bird is a novelty. 

Seiurus noveboracensis notabilis. GrINNELL’s WaTeR-THRUSH.— 
On July 29, 1912, I shot an adult male of this form which has the three 
outer rectrices on each side narrowly margined terminally on the inner 
webs with white; I also have a male taken on May 6, 1915, marked in a 
similar manner, and on August 16, 1918, I took an adult male with two 
outer tail feathers on each side widely margined terminally, and on the 
inner webs, with white. Occasional specimens of the Louisiana Water- 
Thrush (Seiwrus motacilla) possess this peculiarity as I have already pointed 
out (Auk, XXVIII, 1911, 488). I have two specimens marked as above. 

Grinnell’s Water-Thrush is the prevailing form found here, typical 
noveboracensis being a rara avis during both migrations. On one occasion 
during a heavy rain storm one night in September — I think on September 
12, 1912 — I saw vast hosts of Water-Thrushes in a swamp"near my house 
on the morning of that day, there being in sight hundreds in the area of a 
hundred square feet, and I estimated that there must have been certainly 
twenty-five thousand or even more birds in the portion of the swamp I 
explored that day, being in water most of the time up to my waist. 

Oporornis formosus. Krnrucky WarBLER.— I shot on August 14, 
1918, a young male of this lovely bird which has thirteen rectrices. The 
day on which this bird was taken the thermometer registered in the shade 
101° which shows, as I pointed out in ‘ Birds of South Carolina,’ that it 
migrates during the hottest portion of the summer. 

Mimus polyglottos polyglottos. Mockinapirp.— Towards sunset 


hres 


94 Fiaains, Races of Branta canadensis. 
on September 19, 1918, my wife called my attention to an albino of this 
bird at our gate and upon my seeing it I went for my gun to procure it, 
as it was the first perfect albino, of a Mockingbird, I had ever seen alive 
in my life. Just as soon as the bird observed my intentions, it at once 
became exceedingly shy and although I followed it until long after sunset 
I could not even get within range of it at any time. I, however, saw it go 
to roost in a thick live oak tree in our yard among about eight or ten more 
birds of the same species; I then set the alarm clock to go off before sunrise 
hoping to secure it in the morning, which I did, shooting it from one of our 
fig trees. The specimen is a young male of the year which was undoubtedly 
raised in our yard, but escaped my notice. It is entirely white with an 
ashy tinge to all the feathers, and was in moult, the new feathers being pure 
white. 

I have invariably found albinos or albinistic specimens of birds exceed- 
ingly shy, this is not because the desire of possession is very keen with the 
collector, but because albinos are naturally shy. This is the first Mocking- 
bird I have shot since 1879 or 1880, when I collected several for my late 
friend Dr. Gabriel E. Manigault, to form a group representing Audubon’s 
plate for the Charleston College Museum. 


Mt. Pleasant, S. C. 


THE STATUS OF THE SUBSPECIFIC RACES OF 
BRANTA CANADENSIS. 


BY J. D. FIGGINS. 


THE need of specimens of Branta canadensis hutchinsi and Branta 
c. occidentalis recently prompted a critical examination of nearly 
forty specimens of this genus; and while it was not productive of 
an example that was not more obviously referable to true cana- 
densis, it was of interest because of its exciting a doubt concerning 
the validity of the above subspecific forms. Several of the speci- 
mens reveal one or more measurements that are credited to one or 
the other of the varieties, but the length of the wing or culmen 
invariably places them well above the limits of either. Besides, 
it was noted that the color and markings that are supposed to 
characterize occidentalis occur in unmistakable canadensis with 
disconcerting frequency. 


Vol. ae | 


1920 Fiaains, Races of Branta canadensis. 95 


Consultation of the several authorities appears to be of scant 
assistance, other than to reveal an apparent acceptance of the varie- 
ties as a means of escaping a troublesome question, or a seeming 
attempt to defend them upon purely geographical grounds; al- 
though this course necessitates a denial of the evidence at hand, 
questioning of the accounts of authorities of high degree and an 
appeal to “chances of error” and the “misunderstanding of data.” 

Although the various authorities disagree to some extent on the 
measurements of the several subspecific forms, they are unanimous 
in concluding that hutchinst is smaller than canadensis and that 
occidentalis is larger than hutchinsi. A critical examination of 
such statements might lead to the conclusion that occidentalis 
being larger than hutchinsz, its measurements would fall within 
the extremes of canadensis. Investigation proves this to be true, 
if the largest and smallest measurements of the various authors are 
employed for comparison. Continuing the experient further, one 
finds that only .07 of an inch separates the maximum length of the 
wing of occidentalis from hutchinsi, according to the early authori- 
ties. The statement that occidentalis is larger than hutchinsi, is, 
therefore, based on .07 of an inch in the maximum wing measure- 
ment — all other wing measurements being within the limits of the 
latter race. 

On page three of ‘A Study of a Collection of Geese of The Branta 
Canadensis Group From the San Joaquin Valley, California,’ 
Swarth states, in a discussion of thirty-six specimens considered 
as hutchinsi, “twenty-five are males.’”’ Without an explanation 
of his reasons, he employes but ten of that sex as representative 
of the differences he describes on page fourteen. It is, therefore, 
not unreasonable to conclude that the differences he finds in the 
minimum and maximum measurements of wing, culmen and tarsus, 
as compared with the findings of other writers, may be due to the 
elimination of the remaining fifteen males belonging to the series. 
It is the present writer’s experience that the measurements of the 
tarsus and middle toe obtained from dry skins are not always sat- 
isfactory and reliable and consequently some doubt may be en- 
tertained as to the importance of Mr. Swarth’s comparisons and 
conclusions. The same authority shows the number of rectrices 
in canadensis varies from 14 to 20. The variation is the same in 


96 Fiaatns, Races of Branta canadensis. 


[tan 


occidentalis, while hutchinsi is credited with 14 to 18, the type speci- 
men having but 14. The number of tail feathers is, therefore, of 
very doubtful significance as a diagnostic character. 

There remain then, only the color and markings by which 
hutchinsi and occidentalis are supposed to be determined. 

Referring to the former, Ridgway (Manual of North American 
Birds, 4th edition, p. 117) confines himself to the statement that it 
is “smaller” (when compared with canadensis). Grinnell, Bryant 
and Storer, (Game Birds of California, page 230) say: “ Practically 
the same as Canada Goose but size smaller. . .. The Hutchins Goose 
is simply a slightly smaller ‘edition’ of the Canada Goose... .”’ 

Quoting Baird, (U. S. P. R. R. Explorations and Surveys, Vol. 
IX, 1858, p. 766), “In the specimens of Hutchins’ Goose before me, 
I can detect no difference of form from the Canada Goose, excepting 
in the smaller size and less number of tail feathers.”’ 

Coues (Key to North American Birds, 5th edition, Vol. II, p. 
904), says “ Other individuals run down to wing, 14.75; bill, 1.20; 
tarsus 2.25; and such probably cannot be distinguished from 
minima, especially from an individual of the latter which happens 
to have 16 tail-feathers, unless by the color-marks which ordinarily 
distinguish both minima and occidentalis from both hutchinsi and 
canadensis proper. There is in fact, some question whether Dr. 
Richardson’s original hutchinsit type from Melville peninsula, was 
not what we are now calling minima, for it was described; length, 
25.00; wing, 14.00; tail, 14-feathered; Breast... .all white, ete.”; 
but it might make confusion worse confounded to insist upon the 
point now.” 

Again quoting Grinnell, Bryant and Storer, (page 224): “The 
three subspecies or varieties of ‘white-cheeked geese,’ (Canada, 
Hutchins’ and Cackling) intergrade with one another, and indi- 
viduals are occasionally found which cannot be satisfactorily 
referred to one or the other of these races.” 

On page 2, Swarth says: “The hutchinsi series at hand, (36 
specimens), forms a perfect connecting link between B. c. canadensis 
and B. c. minima, the gradation between hutchinsi and minima, in 
particular being so gradual that several specimens might with equal 
propriety be placed in either subspecies.” 

Taking up the color and markings of occidentalis, Ridgway 


Ea | Fiaeins, Races of Branta canadensis. 97 


says on page 117; “Lower parts deep grayish brown or brownish 
gray (often not conspicuously paler than upper parts), abruptly 
defined against white of anal region; white cheek-patches usually 
separated by a black throat-stripe, or black mottling on throat; 
white collar round lower neck usually very distinct.” 

Grinnell, Bryant and Storer say, (page 225), “The White-cheeked 
Goose is a large, dark-colored northwestern race....”’ Baird 
in describing it states, (page 766) “The name might be taken from 
the white collar, but for the possibility that this may or may not 
be always constant.” 

Coues’ description of occidentalis, (page 904), is as follows: 
“Similar to the last, (canadensis); of equal size or nearly so, and 
tail 18-20-feathered. Coloration averaging darker than in the 
last, on under parts especially, against which the white of anal 
and crissal region is very well defined. Black of neck bounded 
below in front by a white half-collar, and white cravat apt to be 
untied in front making a pair of white cheek-patches. Bill averag- 
ing shorter, perhaps never 2.00 along culmen, and tarsus relatively 
longer. The best samples are well marked; others shade into the 
common form inextricably.” 

Referring to Baird’s type of Bernicla occidentalis, Swarth (page 
6), says: “The differences are (1) that the type specimen has a 
faintly indicated trace of a white half collar at the base of the 
neck, which none of the Alaskan birds possesses; (2) it has a more 
nearly continuous line of black spots separating the white cheek 
patches; (3) it is ofsa more reddish brown color ventrally. These 
are all differences which, judging from more extensive series of 
other subspecies of canadensis, may well be due to individual varia- 
tion, and altogether the Alaskan birds appear to be sufficiently 
like the type of occidentalis to justify the application of that name 
to the breeding birds of the region where they were secured.” 
Farther on, the same author says: “Of the Alaskan specimens, not 
one shows even a single white feather at the base of the neck, and 
while the black throat bar is in three cases faintly indicated by a 
few black spots, in the remaining five there is not a mark to inter- 
rupt the continuity of the white cheek and throat patch. Thus 
these supposedly characteristic markings are shown to be no more 
constantly present in the race occidentalis than they are in true 


98 Ficatns, Races of Branta canadensis. (Gan 


canadensis, where a suggestion of such markings occasionally 
occurs.” 

This would appear to effectually dispose of occidentalis as a sub- 
specific variety. Swarth’s contention for a difference in size when 
compared with canadensis is not convincing when he and Baird 
himself, evidently entertained a doubt as to whether the type speci- 
men is really distinct. The present writer interprets Swarth’s 
description of occidentalis as an attempt to justify the continuance 
of this variation as a subspecies by crediting it as being a more or 
less resident form inhabiting the Pacific coast from Port Townsend 
to Prince William Sound, but admits the birds of “extremely dark 
coloration” are “closer to the range of minima and it is fair to 
believe that these specimens illustrate a step in the gradual transi- 
tion between the two forms, which probably occurs.” 

He has shown that the white collar and black stripe on the 
throat are not diagnostic characters,— being “no more consis- 
tently present in the race occidentalis than they are in true cana- 
densis.’ The statement that “Of the Alaskan series the Prince 
William Sound birds are smaller and darker than those of the Sitkan 
district....” points rather conclusively to gradation through 
hybridism. It is doubtful if a large number of ornithologists will 
agree that an unsupported proposal of an unusual migration move- 
ment warrants assigning such specimens to a subspecific form that 
makes a second description necessary as a means of coordinating 
it with a theory. 

The literature dealing with the distributiom of the genus Branta 
fails to take into account the region lying between Prince William 
Sound and Bering Sea. This comprises the Kenai Peninsula, 
Kachamak Bay, Cook Inlet and the great alluvial valley to the 
northeast, as well as the southern slope of the Alaskan mountains 
from Mt. McKinley to the Alaskan peninsula. A large part of 
this territory is ideal breeding ground and to the present writer’s 
personal knowledge, examples of Branta are found there in con- 
siderable numbers during July, August and September, although 
no specimens were taken. There are no land barriers that would 
prohibit these birds crossing from Prince William Sound to Cook 
Inlet and hence it is not unreasonable to expect that minima and 
canadensis and Baird’s so-called occidentalis interbreed and hence 
the “variations” and specimens that intergrade “inextricably.” 


Net: oon | Fiaarns, Races of Branta canadensis. 99 


It is now of interest to inquire if the frequently 1entioned char- 
acters, white collar, black throat-stripe and abrupt termina- 
tion of the color on the under parts occur in true canadensis and to 
what extent. 

Among the Nebraska, Colorado and Louisiana specimens exam- 
ined by the present writer, three birds, measuring, wing 19.12 in., 
culmen 2.16; wing 19.10, culmen 1.95; wing 18.55, culmen 2.02, 
show a sharp, clear-cut line of separation between the white and 
the color of the under parts. The first exhibits a very narrow 
half collar. Two specimens measuring, wing 18.75, culmen 2.10; 
wing 17.65, culmen 2.07, have broad, white collars. One specimen 
measuring, wing, 19.10, culmen 1.95, is unusually dark on the under 
parts and others are more or less mottled with grayish brown or 
brownish gray. In nearly all examples of this character there is 
a tendency towards abruptness of separation between the white and 
the color of under parts. 

Regarding the black line on the throat, in two specimens it is 
almost continuous. Others show a pronounced line of mottling. 
In such specimens the feathers comprising the cheek-patches are 
invariably tipped with black to a greater or less degree and there 
is a tendency in such examples towards small wing or culmen meas- 
urements, but never both; as for instance, wing 17.70, culmen 
2.31; wing 19.10, culmen 1.95, etc. 

Three females with wing and culmen measurements within the 
limits of hutchinsi have the under parts typically canadensis in 
color, blending very gradually into the white of the anal region, 
and are equally referable to the latter race. It therefore, seems 
probable the variations in color and markings are due to causes 
other than subspecific differences. 

Investigation of dates proves that birds taken in the early fall 
exhibited far more mottling on the throat, black tipping of the 
feathers o° the cheeks and darker under parts. Such. markings 
lessened in direct ratio to the progress of the season until late April 
specimens and breeding birds are typical of canadensis in every 
respect. Instead of a line or mottling on the throat, the dark area 
is reduced in late spring and summer specimens to a small dusky 
brown, or dusky and white “U” on the chin —in one instance 
the intermixture of white extends all the way to the bare area 
between the mandibles. An examination of the feathers compris- 


pene 


100 Fieerns, Races of Branta canadensis. vase 


ing the black throat stripe and those surrounding the white area 
of the cheeks proves that more than two-thirds of their basal 
length are white, and in summer specimens they are much shorter 
than in fall and winter birds. The gradual and finally complete 
elimination of such markings may, therefore, be assigned to wear 
and their absence or presence considered as an index to season, 
rather than to subspecifie variation. 

The majority of the specimens examined were received in the 
flesh, or merely roughed out. These prove that there is a con- 
tinuous body and upper chest molt during the fall and winter 
months. By early April the dark or mottled underparts have dis- 
appeared and the transition to the white of the anal region is very 
gradual. Of seven specimens in breeding plumage, none show a 
trace of the white collar. 

All of the specimens examined have a white spot below the eye, 
varying to some extent, but always present. Others have a few 
scattered white feathers above the eyes, being in two examples 
sufficiently numerous to suggest a band of mottling across the crown. 
One very large male exhibits an unbroken oval spot of white on 
either side of the crown, immediately over the eyes, not less than 
.25 by .50 in extent. 

While it would appear to be shown that the dark under parts, 
black throat-stripe and white half-collar credited to the other 
subspecific forms also occur in canadensis, they are probably never so 
pronounced as in minima, unless the latter happens to be a light 
hybrid, similar to the type of occidentalis. 

Finally, it is pertinent to inquire if the variations in markings 
and color noted above occur in other species of geese. In Chen 
cerulescens it is found that there are far greater differences in the 
markings about the neck and under parts than are shown by a com- 
parison of canadensis and minima; and as in Swarth’s comparison 
of the measurements of tarsi in Branta, it so happens that the 
tarsus of the smallest of five specimens exceeds by a full quarter 
of an inch that of the largest. One example shows the under parts, 
including the basal third of the neck and entire under tail-coverts 
to be a dark brownish gray or grayish brown, all the feathers being 
edged with tawny. The ordinary sooty color of the lower neck and 
chest is absent with the exception of a few scattered feathers at the 


Vee? era | Fiaains, Races of Branta canadensis. 101 


sides, but is present on the middle portion of the neck, mottled 
with white and extending to and over the crown, where it is replaced 
by the usual head markings. This bird is a female, taken in late 
March and moulting. 

In Anser albifrons gambeli, the breast of one specimen is fully 
half black. A second is devoid of the slightest trace of black, 
the entire under parts of this bird being an unbroken, pale creamy- 
buff from neck to tail. The usual white of the forehead and lores is 
restricted to a narrow band, in no place exceeding .25 in width and 
does not extend to the gape. This white area is heavily mottled 
with black and the chin is the uniform color of the throat. Two 
examples intergrade. Of the four specimens examined the light 
phase above described has the shortest wing (15.62) and culmen 
(1.97), and the longest tarsus, (2.75). 


CONCLUSIONS. 


That it is not possible to identify a specimen as hutchinsz without 
disregarding strong evidence of its being either true canadensis or 
minima. That such identification is largely a matter of personal 
preference — so-called hutchinsi being merely examples of cana- 
densis that present one or two measurements below the minimum 
or specimens that are the result of a cross between canadensis and 
minima. Hutchinsi is credited as occupying approximately the 
same range as canadensis but extending northward on the Pacific 
coast to Point Barrow and Flaxman Island. (See The Canning 
River Region, Northern Alaska, Leffingwell, page 65, 1919, U.S. 
Geological Survey Professional Paper 109).  Swarth shows 
that “hutchinsi” attains its greatest abundance on the Pacific coast 
and that his “series at hand forms a perfect connecting link between 
B. c. canadensis and B. c. minima, the gradation between hutchinsi 
and minima in particular being so gradual that several specimens 
might with equal propriety be placed in either subspecies.” 

It appears to be established by several authorities that the 
breeding range of the representatives of the genus Branta overlap 
and it is the present writer’s belief that hutchinsi is a hybrid inter- 
grade between canadensis and minima. Contrary to Swarth’s 
supposition that “we should expect to find at points farther east 


eS 


102 Ficarns, Races of Branta canadensis. vant 


but few intergrades and the majority of birds typical of hutchinsi,” 
of the nearly forty examples of Branta from Nebraska, Colorado and 
Louisiana, none were found that did not show at least one meas- 
urement that exceeded the maximum of hutchinst — all others being 
well within the limits of canadensis and hence referable to the latter. 
Swarth’s conclusion,....“ We should find here, as is actually the 
case, vast numbers of typical minima, a lesser number of inter- 
grades, and comparatively few typical hutchinsi,” must, therefore, 
be viewed in the light of strong evidence of hybridism, rather than 
subspecifie difference. 

Authorities agree that the measurements of occidentalis are within 
those of canadensis and the number of rectrices are the same. 
It is shown that the color and markings accredited to occidentalis also 
occur in canadensis. Coues evidently questioned the distinctness 
of Baird’s type specimen and shows that it was much smaller than 
the minimum measurements now assigned to occidentalis. Swarth’s 
description: “ (2), slightly smaller size, that is, the maximum of 
occidentalis is below the largest canadensis. (8) Proportionally 
longer tarsus,” will probably not be taken seriously by most orni- 
thologists and hence, occidentalis appears to be without the slightest 
grounds for subspecific recognition. 

It is, therefore, proposed that “hutchinsi” and “ occidentalis” 
be eliminated as subspecific forms, that minima be raised to specific 
rank and that the occasional “inextricable” examples be recognized 
as hybrids. 


Colorado Museum Nat. Hist., Denver, Colo. 


oo a Hout, Bachman’s Warbler in Alabama. 103 


BACHMAN’S WARBLER BREEDING IN ALABAMA. 
BY ERNEST G. HOLT. 
Plate IV. 


Tue history of Vermivora bachmani, as one of the “lost species,” 
of Audubon holds much of interest to the ornithologist. Dis- 
covered at Charleston, S. C., by Dr. Bachman in 1833, the bird 
was not taken again in the United States until 1886, when Charles 
S. Galbraith collected a specimen for millinery purposes near Lake 
Pontchartrain, Louisiana. In the spring of 1887, a specimen was 
picked up beneath the Sombrero Key lighthouse off the southern 
coast of Florida. Though these two captures stimulated the efforts 
of collectors, and the species proved to be common in Florida and 
Louisiana during migration, it was not discovered breeding until 
1897 when Otto Widmann found nests in southeastern Missouri. 
Subsequently the species has been found breeding near Charleston, 
S. C., by Wayne, and in Logan County, Ky., by Embody. 

As Widmann did not actually find nests in Arkansas, there are 
records of the breeding of Bachman’s Warbler in three states 
only — Missouri, South Carolina, and Kentucky and it is with 
considerable satisfaction therefore that I am enabled to add a 
fourth — Alabama. 

The species was not known to occur in Alabama until 1908 
(cf. Saunders, Auk, Vol. XXV, pp. 416 and 421, October, 1908), 
but since 1912 it has been frequently observed in spring by Lewis 
S. Golsan, in Bear Swamp, near Autaugaville, and on Pine Creek, 
near Prattville. The bird had never been seen by me until May 
25, 1919, when I was visiting “Laurel Pools” in Bear Swamp, 
southern Autauga County, with Mr. Golsan. An adult male was 
then observed singing, and a little later I almost ran over a nest 
in some low blackberry vines beside a path that Mr. Golsan had 
cut between two of the pools. 

The nest, a bulky structure of dead leaves of white or red bay 
(Magnolia or Persea), some of which were skeletonized by insects, 
and herbaceous plant stems, was supported one foot above the 


104 Hout, Bachman’s Warbler in Alabama. , (oo 


ground by the stems of five blackberry briers, three of which were 
dead. This loose outer nest, 6x 7.5 inches x 4 inches deep, was 
lined with a closely woven cup of fine rootlets and the black skele- 
tons of dead Spanish moss (Tillandsia usneoides), 1.75 inches deep 
by 2 inches in diameter. The nest was situated only 13 feet from 
the edge of the largest pool, in a small burned-over area covered 
with a thin, new growth of blackberry briers. The burn was 
surrounded by the virgin swamp growth of Pinus taeda, Magnolia 
virginiana, Pieris nitida, Ilex coriacea, Persea and other hydro- 
phytic vegetation. 

The nest contained four eggs, three of them pure, glossy white, the 
other with a dozen minute dots of light brown, mostly about the 
larger end; all were tinted faint salmon pink by the yolks. The 
measurements in millimeters are: 15 x 12, 16x 12.5, 16 x 12.5, and 
16x13. There were only a few blood vessels in the eggs showing 
that incubation had only fairly begun. 

The female warbler was sitting on the nest next morning (May 
26) when we came to collect it and allowed us to approach within 
6 feet, then it fluttered away among the low bushes. I collected 
the bird to make identification absolutely certain. The male was 
seen singing nearby but it was never observed to come lower than 
25 or 30 feet above the ground. I agree with Embody, Wayne 
and Widmann that the song bears a great resemblance to that of 
the Chipping Sparrow. 

This nest and set of eggs is now in Mr. Golsan’s collection and 
the female warbler has been presented to Dr. A. K. Fisher. 


Sao Paulo, Brazil. 


— 


THe AUK, VOL. XXXVII. 


PLATE 


Nest ANd Eacs or BAcHMAN’s WARBLER. 


pe at real Cuapman, Proposed New Race of the Killdeer. 105 


DESCRIPTION OF A PROPOSED NEW RACE OF THE 
KILLDEER FROM THE COAST OF PERU. 


BY FRANK M. CHAPMAN. 


CoLLEcTions received during 1919, by the American Museum 
from its Peruvian representative, Mr. Harry Watkins, contain 
fourteen specimens of a Killdeer which breeds on the coast of Peru, 
at least from Lima to near the Ecuadorian boundary. Killdeer 
have been before recorded from Peru from Colombia,’ Ecuador,’ 
Paraguay,’® and Chile,’ but it has been assumed that these birds 
were winter visitants from North America. It seems, however, 
not improbable that they were resident birds, as, beyond question, 
are our specimens from Peru. These represent adults at the 
beginning and the end of the post-nuptial molt, and young in fresh 
juvenal plumage and in the down. 

This discovery places the Killdeer, distributionally, in the group 
of Plover to which Octhodromus wilsonius and A/gialitis collaris 4 
belong and suggests that our northern Killdeer is derived from the 
South American form. Of gialitis collaris, Ridgway remarks 
that South American specimens “much more often (in fact usually) 
have the cinnamon on head and neck present and also more pro- 
nounced,’” and it is in the greater extent of the rusty margins of 
the upperparts that the Peruvian Killdeer may be distinguished 
from the North American and West Indian forms. This difference 
is sufficiently pronounced and, so far as our material goes, constant 
to warrant the recognition of the Peruvian bird as a well-marked 
race for which I propose the name 


1Scl. & Salv., P. Z. S., 1868, p. 176 (Tambo Valley, southwestern Peru); Taczanowski, 
Ibid., 1879, p. 244 (Pacasmayo). 

2Scl. & Salv., P. Z.S., 1879, p. 547 (Medellin). 

3 Sharpe, Cat. Bds. Brit. Mus., XXIV, pp. 247, 742. 

4In default of material to consider the conclusions in regard to genera reached by Ridg- 
way (Bull. U.S. N. M., 50, Pt. VIII), I follow here the nomenclature of the British Museum 
Catalogue. 

5 Bull. U.S. N. M., 50, Pt. VIII, p. 141. 


106 CuHapmMaNn, Proposed New Race of the Killdeer. ES 


Jan. 


Oxyechus vociferus peruvianus new subspecies. 


Subsp. Char.— Smaller than Oxyechus vociferus vociferus, agreeing in size 
with the West Indian Oxyechus vociferus rubidus, but in post-nuptial 
plumage differing from them both in the greater extent of the rusty margins 
of the plumage of the upperparts and, particularly, of the lesser and median 
wing-coverts. 

Type.— No. 163,083, Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., ad. (fresh post-nuptial 
plumage, the outer primary of the nuptial plumage still present), Paletillas, 
alt. 1550 ft., northeast of Payta, Prov. Piura, Peru, June 22, 1919; H. 
Watkins. 

Description of Type.— Similar in color to Oxyechus vociferus vociferus 
but all the brown feathers of the plumage, including crown, nape, back, 
scapulars, tertials, etc. margined with rusty or ochraceous; exposed por- 
tions of lesser and median wing-coverts rusty. Wing, 160; tail, 91; 
tarsus, 31.5; exposed culmen, 19 mm. 

Description of fresh Juvenal Plumage. —@ juv., Bequeta, near Lima, Peru, 
Jan. 22, 1919. Similar to corresponding plumage of Oxyechus vociferus 
vociferus. 

Description of Natal Down.— (Two specimens not more than four days 
old, Paletillas, Peru, June 22, 1919). Similar to corresponding plumage 
of Oxyechus vociferus vociferus. 

Specimens examined.— Oxyechus vociferus peruvianus. Peru: Paletillas, 
Piura, 1 @ ad., 2 pull. (June 22, 1919); Samate, Piura, 2 oo ads. (May 
30, 1919); Chilaco, Piura, 1 o ad., 1 9 ad. (May 27-25); Pilares, Piura, 
1 pi ad.,1 9 ad. (June 16, 1919); Bequeta, Prov. Lima, 2 oo ads.,2 9 9 
ads., 1 @ juv. (Jan. 22-24, 1919). 

Oxyechus vociferus rubidus. West Indies: (Cuba, Haiti, Jamaica, Porto 
Rico, Grenada), 18 adults representing both sexes and every month but 
August. 

Oxyechus vociferus vociferus. A large series from throughout the United 
States, taken in every month and representing all plumages. 


Remarks.— The seven adult specimens on which this proposed 
race is chiefly based, were taken in the Province of Piura from May 
25 to June 22. All are essentially in the same stage of plumage, 
having just completed, or nearly completed, the post-nuptial molt, 
all but one still having the outer one or two primaries of the nup- 
tial plumage. The series shows little variation in color all having 
the upperparts strongly margined with rusty, asin the type. These 
birds are comparable with August and September specimens from 
the eastern United States. The latter often have the upper parts 


Vi VE Cuapman, Proposed New Race of the Killdeer. 107 


margined with rusty, but never, so far as my observations go, to 
the extent shown by the Peruvian bird. Some comparable North 
American birds, on the other hand, show almost no trace of this 
rusty margining, and, representing the extreme of difference 
between peruvianus and vociferus vociferus, may perhaps indicate 
the type of coloration toward which the latter is diverging. That 
this divergence is of comparatively recent occurrencé in the life 
of the species, is suggested by the inconstance of the features which 
characterize it, and also by the fact that in juvenal plumage the 
Peruvian and North American forms are alike. 

The West Indian form appears to differ from true vociferus only 
in size, and consequently, is not intermediate in color between 
it and peruvianus. 

As stated above, two downy young but a few days from the egg, 
were taken at Paletillas, June 22, and we may accept these birds, 
in connection with the seven adults from the Paletillas region which 
are completing their post-nuptial molt, as conclusive evidence 
that the Peruvian Killdeer nests in May and June. But examina- 
tion of the Bequeta specimens shows that May and June by no 
means constitute the entire nesting season of the Killdeer in Peru. 

Four of the Bequeta specimens, taken January 23 and 24, are 
adults in the midst of the post-nuptial molt in which wings and 
tail as well as body feathers, are being renewed. The remaining 
feathers of the nuptial plumage are much worn and practically 
without rusty margins; the incoming new plumage is margined with 
rusty. 

The fifth Bequeta specimen, taken January 22, is in fresh juvenal 
plumage with portions of the natal down still adhering to the ends 
of the central rectrices and longer upper tail-coverts. Our col- 
lection contains specimens which show that in the Killdeer frag- 
ments of the natal down may remain at the end of the central 
retrices until the spring following the bird’s birth — a surprising 
fact — but the general condition of the plumage of this Bequeta 
bird with its fresh, narrowly margined dorsal plumage, shows that 
it is a comparatively young bird, exactly similar, indeed, to August 
specimens of vociferus vociferus from various parts of the United 
States. Consequently, just as the Piura birds prove that in north- 
western Peru the Killdeer breeds in May and June, so the Bequeta 


[san- 


108 Cory, New Species and Subspecies of Tyrannide. 


birds prove that in central western Peru the Killdeer breeds in 
December and January. 

The localities in question are only about 450 miles apart. I 
know of no marked seasonal difference between them, and am quite 
at loss to account satisfactorily for this variation in nesting dates. 
Possibly the uniform climate, both as regards temperature and rain- 
fall, prevailing on the coast of Peru, militates, among Killdeer, as it 
apparently does among the Cormorants and Pelicans of the Guano 
Islands off the coast,! against the establishment of a definite breeding 
season. Or we may have here a case similar to that of the Brown 
Pelicans in Florida which on the Gulf coast begin to nest in April 
and on the Atlantic coast in November. Further collections and 
field studies are required to settle this interesting question 


Amer. Museum Nat. Hist., N. Y. 


DESCRIPTIONS OF A NEW SPECIES AND SUBSPECIES 
OF TYRANNID:. 


BY CHARLES B. CORY. 


Todirostrum beckeri sp. nov. 


Type from Base of Serra da Lua, near Boa Vista, Rio Branco, N. Brazil . 
Male, No. 49,347, Field Museum of Natural History. Collected by R. H. 
Becker, March 24, 1913. 

Description.— Similar to 7. sylvia schistaceiceps (Sclater) and T. sylvia 
griseolum Todd, but differs from either in the shorter wing, in having the 
black loral stripe bordered below by a buffy streak, and above by a con- 
spicuous buffy stripe extending from the base of the upper mandible to 
above the eye. Base of crown and nape olivaceous; greater wing coverts 
edged with buffy yellow or pale orange yellow; middle wing coverts tipped 
with same; lesser wing coverts edged with olive green. 

Measurements.— Wing, 45; tail, 30; bill, 13 mm. 


1Habits and Economic Relations of the Guano Birds of Peru, by Robert E. Coker, 
U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, Proc. U. S. N. M., 56, 1919, pp. 449-511. 


oa | Cory, New Species and Subspecies of Tyrannide. 109 


Remarks.— I have dedicated this new form to Mr. Robert H. 
Becker who collected the type specimen. 


Euscarthmus impiger ceare subsp. nov. 


Type from Jua, near Iguatu, Ceara, N. E. Brazil. Adult female, No. 
50,834, Field Museum of Natural History. Collected by R. H. Becker, 
August 20, 1913. 

Description.— Allied to E. impiger impiger Sclater & Salvin and ZF. 7. 
inornatus (Pelzeln), but nearer the latter. This form agrees very well 
with the description of inornatus (a form which I have not seen) as given 
by Pelzeln, except that Pelzeln describes the abdomen as ‘“ flaviscente 
indutis,” whereas in cerare the abdomen is pure white. It is probable 
that on account of the very different environment of the two forms ceare 
will show other differences in coloration. From impiger impiger the present 
form differs in having the upper parts dark grayish olive (not brownish), 
crown slightly darker than back; wing bands white; under parts more 
whitish; abdomen and under tail coverts much purer white, and wing 
shorter. 

Measurements — Wing, 43; tail, 37; tarsus, 19; exposed culmen, 12 mm. 


Remarks.— It should be noted that all of the specimens I have 
seen from Venezuela (including two from Caracas) and which I 
assume are typical impiger impiger have the ends of the wing 
coverts (forming the wing bands) practically white, the yellowish 
tinge mentioned by Sclater being very faint and hardly noticeable. 
None of the specimens have the wing bands distinctly yellowish 
white and not at all tawny buff as shown in the original plate or 
in the plate given in the “Catalogue of Birds of the British Museum.’ 


Field Museum Nat. Hist., Chicago. 


110 PauLMER, Thirty-seventh Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. Ess 


THE THIRTY-SEVENTH STATED MEETING OF THE 
AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION. 


BY T. S. PALMER. 


Tue Thirty-seventh Stated Meeting of the American Orni- 
thologists’ Union was held at the American Museum of Natural 
History in New York, November 10-13, 1919. On account of 
the epidemic of influenza which prevailed in 1918, this meeting was 
the first public one held for two years and the first one since the 
war. Naturally the attendance was above the average and the 
program more extended than usual — in fact the meeting continued 
beyond the formal sessions and with the excursions occupied most 
of the week. 

Attendance. The total attendance of Fellows, Members, Asso- 
ciates and visitors was about 125. The Fellows present numbered 
28, as many as attended the New York meeting of 1913 and the 
largest number at any meeting in the history of the Union. Among 
those present were three of the nine surviving Founders, Dr. J. A. 
Allen, Chas. F. Batchelder, and Dr. A. K. Fisher and ten members 
elected at the first meeting in 1883: seven Fellows; Prof. W. B. 
Barrows, Ruthven Deane, Dr. Jonathan Dwight, Dr. Geo. Bird 
Grinnell, Dr. T. S. Roberts, John H. Sage, and W. E. Saunders; 
two Members, E. T. Seton and C. H. Townsend; and one Associate; 
H. K. Coale. The Union had the unusual pleasure of entertaining 
one of its Honorary Fellows, William Lutley Sclater, of London, 
well known as the editor of ‘The Ibis’ and the author of many 
important publications on ornithology. Thirty-five years ago the 
Union had the pleasure of greeting Mr. Sclater’s father, the late 
Dr. P. L. Sclater, who with the late Howard Saunders was visiting 
America and attended the second meeting in New York, in 1884. 
Among others who came from a distance were two representatives 
from the region west of the Mississippi River, Dr. T. S. Roberts 
of Minnesota and H. S. Swarth from California; four from Canada, 


Wor: irs Mal Patmer, Thirty-seventh Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. altel 


J. H. Fleming, W. E. Saunders, P. A. Taverner and Hoyes Lloyd; 
and several Members and Associates who had recently returned 
from service in France. 

Business Meetings. 'The first day was devoted to meetings of the 
Council, which lasted from 10.30 A. M. to nearly 4 P. M., and two 
evening meetings, one of the Fellows at 7.40 P. M. and the other 
of the Fellows and Members at 8.30 P. M. At the brief meeting 
at 7.40 P. M. the two vacancies in the list of Fellows were filled 
by the election of Joseph Harvey Riley of the U. S. National Mu- 
seum and Alexander Wetmore of the Biological Survey, and two 
amendments to the By-Laws were adopted. One of these amend- 
ments in Art. V, Sec. 4, provides for the restoration of delinquent 
members upon payment of dues without the delay and formality 
of reelection, and one in Art. VII, Sec. 3, provides more specifically 
for the acceptance and administration of trust funds. 

At the meeting of the Fellows and Members called to order by 
the President, 25 Fellows and 13 Members were present. Follow- 
ing the roll call and the reading of the minutes of the previous 
meeting, the report of the Secretary was presented. This report 
showed a net gain of 71 members during the year. In November, 
1918, the total number of members was 953 while the present 
membership was approximately 1024, distributed as_ follows: 
Fellows, 48; Retired Fellows, 3; Honorary Fellows, 19; Corre- 
sponding Fellows, 63; Members, 84; and Associates, 807. During 
the year the Union lost 16 members by death, 14 by resignation 
and 39 by delinquency. The deaths (counting six which occurred 
in the previous year, news of which was delayed) included those of 
one Fellow, one Honorary Fellow, two Corresponding Fellows, 
one Member and eleven Associates (see p. 125). Two of these 
members, Mrs. Olive Thorne Miller and Dr. Henry K. O/iver were 
the oldest members and the latter was the only American ever con- 
nected with the Union who had practically reached the age of 90. 

The Secretary reported that notices of the last annual meeting 
had been published in ‘Bird Lore,’ ‘The Condor,’ and ‘Science’ 
and brief summaries had been sent to several foreign journals 
including ‘The Emu,’ ‘The Ibis,’ and ‘Nature.’ A report of 
the meeting had also been sent to all the Corresponding Fellows, 
who could be reached under existing restrictions on foreign mails. 


[sen 


A? Parmer, Thirty-seventh Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. 


A revised list of the members in military and naval service had 
been published in the January ‘Auk’ and, with additions since 
received, the total number in active service was about 90. So far 
as known only four of these had lost their lives in military or naval 
service. During the year efforts to induce libraries to complete 
their sets of ‘The Auk’ had been continued and resulted in the 
sale of a number of back volumes and copies of the Indexes. A 
census of complete sets of ‘The Auk’ had been undertaken and 
the reports thus far received, indicate that the total number of 
complete sets now in existence in public and private libraries 
does not exceed 150. 

The report of the Treasurer showed that the finances of the 
Union were in a highly satisfactory condition with a substantial 
balance of $1018.08 in receipts over current expenses and a total 
surplus including income from life memberships and other invested 
funds of more than $7000. Through a provision in the will of the 
late William Brewster a bequest of $2000 has been made to the 
Union and this sum, left in trust, will be received in due time. 

As a result of the election of officers the present incumbents were 
reelected as follows: President, John H. Sage; Vice Presidents, 
Witmer Stone and George Bird Grinnell; Secretary, T. 5. Palmer; 
Treasurer, Jonathan Dwight; Members of the Council, Ruthven 
Deane, William Dutcher, Joseph Grinnell, Frederic A. Lucas, 
Harry C. Oberholser, Charles W. Richmond, and Thomas S. 
Roberts. 

On recommendation of the Council, one Honorary Fellow, 15 
Corresponding Fellows and 247 Associates were duly elected 
(see p. 118). In the election of 5 Members, Massachusetts was 
represented by two and New York, Ohio, and Missouri by one each, 
the successful candidates being John A. Farley, Thos. E. Penard, 
Dr. A. H. Wright, Prof. F. H. Herrick and Harry Harris. 

The Committee on Biography and Bibliography through its 
Chairman, Dr. Palmer, presented a brief verbal report showing 
progress in several lines of work. The ‘Index of Portraits of 
Ornithologists’ now contains entries of more than 800 individuals 
nearly half of which are those of present or past members of the 
Union. The list of published letters of Audubon in course of 
preparation by Mr. Deane is progressing and the author hopes 


Vol. XXXVIT) Daren, Thirty-seventh Stated Meeting of the A.O.U. 113 


to have it completed early in the year. Some of the results of the 
work of the Committee have appeared in the October ‘Auk’ in 
Richmond’s account of Forster’s Edition of Le Vaillant’s ‘Oiseaux 
d’ Afrique,’ Stone’s article on ‘Jacob Post Giraud, Jr., and his 
Works’, and the list of graves of prominent ornithologists. 

From the friends of William Brewster, the Union received a check 
for $5200 for a fund to be known as the William Brewster Memorial. 
This fund will be invested and beginning in 1921, the income will 
be awarded once in two years, “in the form of a medal and an 
honorarium to the author of the most important contribution to 
the ornithology of the Western Hemisphere, during the period 
named.” 

Resolutions were adopted expressing the thanks of the Union 
to the President and Trustees of the American Museum of Natural 
History, to the officers of the Linnaean Society, to the Explorers’ 
Club, and to the Director and Members of the Executive Committee 
of the New York Zodlogical Society for the various courtesies ex- 
tended during the 37th meeting of the Union. 

Public Meetings. The meetings devoted to the presentation 
and discussion of scientific papers occupied three full days, Novem- 
ber 11, 12 and 13, from 10.30 A. M. to 5.30 P. M., with an hour or 
more intermission for luncheon. The program, given in detail 
elsewhere, included 40 papers on a wide range of topics. Consider- 
able discussion developed on some of the subjects, but even with 
long sessions the time was insufficient and several papers were 
necessarily read by title. 

The opening papers each morning were reminiscent in character. 
On Tuesday and Wednesday were presented the memorial addresses 
on Lyman Belding and William Brewster and on Thursday a series 
of three very interesting accounts of the birds observed in France 
by Messrs. Griscom, Sanborn and Harper. Mr. S. P. Baldwin’s 
paper on ‘ Bird Banding by Means of Systematic Trapping’ was a 
most original and interesting contribution and elicited consider- 
able discussion. From experiments extending over several years 
at Cleveland, O., and Thomasville, Ga., he found that certain 
birds seemed to develop the ‘trap habit’ and the same bird would 
enter a trap so often in search of food that it spent much of its 
time inside the trap. At Thomasville, Ga., the same individual 


Auk 


114 Paumer, Thirty-seventh Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. vane 


migrants, as shown by their bands, were caught repeatedly in 
several successive years, thus showing that they followed identical 
routes. Mr. W. L. Sclater gave a brief account of the British 
Ornithologists’ Union and its work, outlined the plan of the ‘Sys- 
tema Avium’ or series of Check Lists of Birds of the principal 
regions of the world, and submitted a proposal for holding an 
International Congress of Ornithology in the United States in 1921. 
The illustrated papers by Dr. Stone on the birds of the Chiricahua 
Mts., Ariz., and by Dr. Chapman on South American Birds 
represent the best type of papers — interesting and instructive 
alike to the layman and the specialist. Technical papers such as 
those by Mr. Chapin on African Rails, Messrs. Nichols and Griseom 
on Seaside Sparrows, Mr. Swarth on Fox Sparrows, Dr. Matthew 
on Diatryma, and Dr. Stone on the Use and Abuse of the Genus 
were interspersed through the program, while habits of birds were 
discussed at length in the interesting papers by Miss Sherman, 
Dr. Chas. W. Townsend and Mr. C. W. Leister. Progress in 
Ornithology in 1919, brought out discussion by a dozen members 
who reviewed the various phases of activity during the year, and 
Dr. Grinnell’s ‘ Recollections of Audubon Park’ and Mr. Crandall’s 
‘Birds of the New York ZoGlogical Park’ prepared the members 
for the trips on Friday. 

Thursday afternoon was devoted to a series of six papers illustrated 
by ten reels of motion pictures. The audience thus had an opportun- 
ity of comparing some of the best recent motion pictures among 
which those of Sage Grouse by Mr. W. L. Finley and those of the 
Heath Hen by Mr. Norman McClintock were especially notable. 

Other Events. On the three days of the public meetings the 
members and visitors were guests of the Linnaean Society at 
luncheon which was served in the bird hall on the second floor of 
the Museum. On Wednesday evening, the annual dinner was held 
in the Mitla Cafe in the Museum, followed by a reception in the 
Bird Department where an opportunity was afforded of examining 
the wealth of material in the study series of birds, and especially 
some of the recent collections from South America and Africa. 
On Tuesday evening the Union was entertained at the Explorers’ 
Club, 345 Amsterdam Ave., when Dr. Chapman presented his 
illustrated paper on South American Birds followed by a conversa- 


vel. al Pautmer, Thirty-seventh Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. 115 


zione and an opportunity of examining the unique library of works 
on travel belonging to the Club. On Friday morning, after ad- 
journment of the regular meeting, a trip was made to Audubon Park 
at Broadway and 157th St., where under the guidance of Dr. 
George Bird Grinnell, a party of about 20 visited the home of John 
James Audubon and inspected the room that he used as a study 
and the one in which hedied. The points of interest associated with 
the adjoining homes of Victor Gifford and John Woodhouse Audu- 
bon were explained and a visit was paid to the Audubon Monument 
and the Geo. N. Lawrence tomb in Trinity Cemetery. At noon 
about 40 members assembled at the Administration Building in the 
New York ZoGlogical Park where they were entertained at luncheon. 
After an explanation by Dr. Hornaday of the Rungius’ series of 
paintings and the wonderful collection of heads and horns of big 
game, the party was conducted by Messrs. Beebe and Crandall 
through the bird houses where two hours were spent in examining 
in life many rare foreign birds, including the Argus Pheasant, Cock 
of the Rock, Kagu, three Birds of Paradise and many other inter- 
esting species. On Saturday some of the members visited the 
quaint old New York City Marble Cemetery, on Second St., near 
First Avenue, which contains the grave of J. P. Giraud, Jr., author 
of the ‘Birds of Long Island’ and ‘Sixteen New Birds of Texas.’ 
Later in the day Audubon’s original drawings, which are preserved 
in the library of the New York Historical Society, were examined. 

An attractive feature of the meeting was the special exhibits 
arranged for the occasion by the American Museum. In one of 
the alcoves in the Bird Hall were shown a number of paintings and 
sketches of birds by Louis Agassiz Fuertes and Miss Althea R. 
Sherman; in a case in the lecture room was an exhibit of mounted 
birds containing some of the characteristic species of the avifauna 
of the war zone; and a large case near the entrance of the Museum 
contained an exhibit commemorating the centennial of the Ex- 
pedition to the Rocky Mountains under the command of Major 
Stephen H. Long in 1819-20. This expedition which was accom- 
panied by the naturalists Thomas Say and Titian Ramsay Peale, 
was the first U. S. Government expedition on which naturalists 
were officially detailed. A map showing the route of the party, 
the official report, and specimens of the 13 new birds described by 


116 Paumer, Thirly-seventh Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. Ess 


Say, copies of portraits and publications of Long, Say and Peale, 
pictures of Say’s home and several unpublished manuscripts served 
to visualize the work of these early explorers. 

Results. In addition to the opportunities for personal conference 
and discussion, for comparison of specimens and consultation of 
books and records, several important results were accomplished 
during the sessions. Chief among these were the formal accept- 
ance of the William Brewster Memorial and the appointment of a 
special committee to administer the fund, the reorganization of the 
Committee on Nomenclature and Classification of North American 
Birds, authorization of the appointment of a committee to prepare 
a decennial index of ‘The Auk’ covering the years 1911 to 1920, 
consideration of the plan for the ‘Systema Avium’ undertaken by 
the B. O. U., and a proposal for an International Ornithological 
Congress in 1921. Those who attended the New York meeting 
will long remember the first reunion after the war as one combining 
the interests of the present with memories of the past and especially 
in affording unusual opportunities of visiting Audubon’s home and 
monument and examining the original drawings of his great work 
“The Birds of America.’ 

The next meeting will be held in Washington, D. C., in Novy- 
ember, 1920. 


PROGRAM 
(Papers marked with an asterisk were illustrated by lantern slides) 


TUESDAY 


1 In Memoriam — Lyman Belding. Dr. A. K. Fisher, Washington, 


Da: (30 min.) 
2 Greetings from the British Ornithologists’ Union. W. L. Sclater, 
London, England. (20 min.) 
3 Exhibition of a Sparrow-proof Bird-nesting Box. Ernest Thompson 
Seton, Greenwich, Conn. (5 min.) 

4 Recollections of Audubon Park. Dr. Geo. Bird Grimnell, New York. 
(20 min.) 
5 Winter Bird Life in Montana. Aretas A. Saunders, South Norwalk, 
Conn. (20 min.) 
6 A few Words for aSlighted Bird [the Coot]. Dr. Harry C. Oberholser, 
Washington, D. C. (10 min.) 


7 Nesting Habits of the Nighthawk at Tacoma, Wash. J. Hooper 
Bowles, Tacoma, Wash. (Read by title). 


— 


Vo 


28 


eo MAE Pautm_ER, Thirty-seventh Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. 117 


Bird Banding by Means of Systematic Trapping. S. Prentiss Baldwin, 
Cleveland, O. (25 min.) 

Further Notes on the Birds of Hatley, Quebec, 1919. Henry Mousley, 
Hatley, Quebec. (Read by title). 

Wm. L. Baily Sr., as an Ornithologist, with special reference to Unpub- 
lished Plates of Hummingbirds. Wm. L. Baily, Philadelphia, Pa. 


(30 min.) 

*The Heath Hen of Marthas Vineyard. Dr. George W. Field, Wash- 
ington, D. C. (15 min.) 
*Some Notes on the Plumage of the Ruffed Grouse. Dr. Arthur A. 
Allen, Ithaca, N. Y. (10 min.) 
*Anomalous Nesting of the Robin. Ernest Thompson Seton, Green- 
wich, Conn. (10 min.) 
*Nesting of the Bohemian Waxwing [in British Columbia]. Harry S. 
Swarth, Berkeley, Calif. (10 min.) 
*Observations on the Birds of the Chiricahua Mts., Arizona. Dr. 
Witmer Stone, Philadelphia, Pa. (45 min.) 
*Notes on South American Birds. Dr. Frank M. Chapman, New York. 
(60 min.) 


WEDNESDAY. 


In Memoriam — William Brewster. Henry W. Henshaw, Washing- 


ton, D.C. (Read by Dr. Frank M. Chapman). (30 min.) 
An Appreciation of William Brewster. Dr. J. G. Gehring, Bethel, Me. 
(Read by Dr. Thomas Barbour). (10 min.) 
Progress in Ornithology in 1919. Introduced by the Secretary. 
Discussion by 10 members, closed by W. L. Sclater. (90 min.) 
Questions Concerning Bird Life. Miss Althea R. Sherman, National, 
Ta. (30 min.) 
Courtship in Birds. Dr. Charles W. Townsend, Boston, Mass. 
(30 min.) 
*Little Intimacies in Bird Home Life. Claude W. Leister, Ithaca, 
NEY: (15 min.) 
Notes on the Voices of Shorebirds. John T. Nichols, New York. 
(30 min.) 
*The African Rails of the Genus Sarothrura. J. P. Chapin, New York. 
(25 min.) 


*Hawks in Migration. B.S. Bowdish, Demarest, N. J. (25 min.) 
Studies of the Races of Seaside Sparrows. John T. Nichols and Lud- 
iow Griscom. (20 min.) 


Tuurspay Mornina. 
Impressions of Winter Bird Life in the Rhone Delta, France. Ludlow 
Griscom, New York. (20 min.) 


Observations on Birds made during Active Service in France and Ger- 
many. Colin Campbell Sanborn, Chicago, Ill. (15 min.) 


118 PatMER, Thirty-seventh Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. lees 

29 Recent Ornithological Notes from France and England. Francis 

Harper, Washington, D. C. (30 min.) 

30 Distribution of the Fox Sparrows. Harry 8. Swarth, Berkeley, Calif. 

(80 min.) 

31 The Use and Abuse of the Genus. Dr. Witmer Stone, Philadelphia, 

Ras (15 min.) 

32 Diatryma steini — a Remarkable Bird from New Mexico. Dr. W. D. 

Matthew, New York. (5 min.) 

33 Some of the Rarer and More Interesting Birds in the New York Zo6- 

logical Park. Lee 8. Crandall, New York. (10 min.) 

34 Some Birds of Ontario. Rev. Chas. J. Young, Brighton, Ont. (Read 
by title). 

TuurspAy AFTERNOON — Motion PICTURES. 

35 Exhibition of Moving Picture Films by W. L. Finley. T. Gilbert 

Pearson, New York. (45 min.) 

36 Studies of Bird Life in Northern and Southern Refuges. Norman 

McClintock, Pittsburgh, Pa. (45 min.) 

37 John Burroughs, the Naturalist. Herbert K. Job, West Haven, Conn. 

(10 min.) 

38 The Present Status of Game Bird Propagation in America. Herbert 

Kk. Job, West Haven, Conn. (30 min.) 

39 <A Bird City. Hoyes Lloyd, Ottawa, Canada. (15 min.) 

40 The Conservation Commission and its Relation to New York State 

Bird Life. Clinton G. Abbott, Albany, N. Y. (30 min.) 


ELECTION OF FELLOWS, MEMBERS AND ASSOCIATES. 


FELLOWS: 


Joseph Harvey Riley, U. S. National Museum, Washington, D. C. 
Alexander Wetmore, Biological Survey, Washington, D. C. 


Honorary FELLOW: 


Dr. Edward Daniel Van Oort, Museum Natural History, Leyden, 
Holland. 


CORRESPONDING FELLOWS: 


George Latimer Bates, Bitye, via Yaunde, Cameroon, West Africa. 

Miss Evelyn Vida Baxter, The Grove, Kirkton of Largo, Fifeshire, 
Scotland. 

Dr. Arnold de Winkelried Bertoni, Puerto Bertoni, Paraguay. 

Nathaniel Gist Gee, Soochow University, Soochow, China. 

Arthur Francis Basset Hull, Prest, R. A. O. U., Box 704, G. P. O., 
Sydney, N.S. W. 

Miss Annie C. Jackson, Swordale, Evanton, Ross-shire, Scotland. 

Dr. John Albert Leach, Editor ‘The Emu,’ Eyrecourt, Canterbury, 
Victoria, Australia. 


Nel: erie al Patmer, Thirly-seventh Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. 119 


Dr. Peter Chalmers Mitchell, Secretary Zool. Society London, Regents 
Park, London, N. W. 8, England. 

Lacy I. Moffett, Kiangyin, via Shanghai, China. 

Michael John Nicoll, Valhalla House, Zool. Gardens, Giza, Egypt. 

Montagu Austin Phillips, Devonshire House, Reigate, Surrey, England. 

Miss Leonore Jeffrey Rintoul, Lahill, Largo, Fifeshire, Scotland. 

H. Kirk Swann, 38 Great Queen St., Kingsway, London, W. @y 25; 
England. 

Seinosuke Uchida, No. 31, Kogai Cho, Azabu, Tokyo, Japan. 

Capt. Samuel Albert White, Wetunga, Fulham, South Australia. 


MEMBERS: 


John Austin Farley, 52 Cedar St., Malden, Mass. 

Harry Harris, Post Office, Kansas City, Mo. 

Prof. Francis Hobart Herrick, Adelbert College, Cleveland, Ohio. 
Thomas Edward Penard, 12 Norfolk Road, Arlington, Mass. 

Dr. Albert Hazen Wright, Cayuga Heights, Ithaca, N. Y. 


ASSOCIATES: 


Howard Bernhardt Adelman, 221 Spring St., Buffalo, INGRYG 
Horace Marden Albright, Yellowstone Park, Wyo. 

Edward Gordon Alexander, 1603 South St., Lexington, Mo. 

Mrs. James Turney Allen, 37 Mosswood Road, Berkeley, Calif. 
Arthur Francis Allen, Editor Sioux City Journal, Sioux City, Ia. 
Mrs. Charles Almy, 147 Brattle St., Cambridge, Mass.. 

Edwin Conrad Anderson, R. R. No. 4, Dell Rapids, S. Dak. 

Miss Bernice Andrews, Flat 3, 2006 Park Ave., Minneapolis, Minn. 
William Andrews, Courtney, Jackson Co., Mo. 

Edmund Watts Arthur, Cheswick, Pa. 

Charles Ketchum Averill Jr., 406 Stratford Ave., Bridgeport, Conn. 
Edward C. Avery, 114 Mariner St., Buffalo, N. Y. 

Mrs. Ralph M. Bacon, Bryant Pond, Me. 

Frank Newton Bassett, 1338 8th St., Alameda, Calif. 

Arthur William Beckford, 23 Maple St., Danvers, Mass. 

Daniel Berman, 70 Morningside Drive, New York, N. 1G 

Mrs. Archibald Pierce Bigelow, Ogden, Utah. 

Sherman Clancey Bishop, State Museum, Albany, N. We 

Andrew Anderson Black, Margaret, Man. 

Dr. William Fremont Blackman, Jacksonville, Fla. 

Reginald Stephen Boehner, Syracuse University, Syracuse, N. Y. 
William Bowen Boulton, Morristown Trust Co., Morristown, INp die 
Mrs. Ward Taft Bower, 1440 Meridian Place, Washington, D. Cc: 
Peter Alexander Brannon, Box 358, Montgomery, Ala. 

Charles Marcus Breder, Jr., Bureau of Fisheries, Washington, IDE OF 
Harry Talmadge Briggs, 5 Hoffman Ave., Poughkeepsie, N.Y. 
Gorham Brooks, 93 Beacon St., Boston, Mass. 


120 


Palmer, Thirty-seventh Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. ES 


Jan. 


Miss M. Belle Brown, Buckland, Mass. 

Roy Melton Brown, Boone, N. C. 

Charles Anaultus Bruun, 314 Reliance B’ld’g., Kansas City, Mo. 

Thornton Waldo Burgess, 61 Washington Road, Springfield, Mass. 

Stewart Henry Burnham, R. D. No. 2, Hudson Falls, N. Y. 

Miss Mary Bushinger, Monte Vista, Colo. 

Miss Virginia Butler, Stockbridge, Berkshire Co., Mass. 

Earl Wellington Calvert, Reaboro, Victoria Co., Ont. 

Carlo Asprando Campini, 154 East 33d St., New York, N. Y. 

Frank Mallary Carryl, 20 Burnett St., Maplewood, N. J. 

Richard Morton Chase, 164 Westminster Road, Rochester, N. Y. 

Henry Everett Childs, East Providence High School, E. Providence, 
Reale 

Austin Hobart Clark, 1818 Wyoming Ave., Washington, D. C. 

Miss Rowena A. Clarke, Kirkword, Mo. 

Miss Jennie Clements, 508 South Main St., Independence, Mo. 

Allen C. Conger, East Lansing, Mich. 

Philip Tripp Coolidge, 77 Garfield St., Watertown, Mass. 

Edward Joseph Court, 1723 Newton St., N. W., Washington, D. C. 

Rodman Daytion Cox, Room 319, Y. M. C. A., Rochester, N. Y. 

Allan Burton Craven, ¢/o T. F. Welch Co., 18 Arlington St., Boston, 
Mass. 

Miss Viola E. Crittenden, 19 Center St., Beverly, Mass. 

Rev. George Roscoe Crockett, Dixon, 8. Dak. 

Warren Handel Cudworth, Assonet, Mass. 

James Walter Cunningham, 3009 Dunham Ave., Kansas City, Mo. 

Roy Quinn Curtis, Jr., 11 West 76th St., New York, N. Y. 

Edward 8. Daniels, 3869a Connecticut Ave., St. Louis, Mo. 

Francis Roy Dean, 3465 South Spring Ave., St. Louis, Mo. 

Samuel Stephen Dearborn, 9 Mass. Ave., Boston, Mass. 

Paul Dent, 3714 West Pine Boulevard, St. Louis, Mo. 

John Smith Dexter, Univ. Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Sask. 

McClelland Dings, 5715 Enright Ave., St. Louis, Mo. 

Gilbert Harry Doane, The Elms, Fairfield, Vt. 

Ralph James Donahue, Bonner Springs, Kans. 

Harold A. Dowler, Veteran, Alberta, Can. 

Theodore Drier, 35 Remsen St., Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Dr. William H. Dunham, Shaftsburg, Mich. 

Miss Laura Bradshaw Durand, 153 University Ave., Toronto, Ont. 

Osborne Earle, 17 Bates St., Cambridge, Mass. 

Robert D. Emmerich, 322 W. 100th St., New York, N. Y. 

Mrs. T. F. English, 3631 Campbell St., Kansas City, Mo. 

W. J. Erickson, 2311 Bernard St., Savannah, Ga. 

Frank C. Evans, Crawfordsville, Ind. 

Miss Harriet N. Farr, Bernardston, Mass. 

Clarence Faust, New Middletown, Ohio. 


piel foo | PALMER, Thirty-seventh Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. 


Lyle Fletcher, Norton, Kans. 

Lee M. Ford, Box 8, Great Falls, Mont. 

Miss Louise Petigru Ford, Aiken, S. C. 

Allen Frost, Poughkeepsie, N. Y. 

Howard Fuguet, 1623 Walnut St., Philadelphia, Pa. 

Aston Colebrook Gardner, 1805 Market St., Wilmington, Del. 
James Henry Gardner, 626 Kennedy Building, Tulsa, Okla. 

Dr. P. K. Gaston, Pratt, Kans. 

Mrs. F. M. Gilbert, Walpole, N. H. 

J. Nelson Gowanlock, Hull Zool. Lab., Univ. Chicago, Chicago, III. 
Cyrl Grace, 522 Fifth St., Bismarck, N. Dak. 

Mrs. Adele Lewis Grant, Mo. Botanical Garden, St. Louis, Mo. 
Albert Edward Greanoff, 220 Montgomery Ave., W. Pittston, Pa. 
Willet E. Griffee, Route 3, Box 68, Corvallis, Ore. 

Herbert Groh, Preston, Ont. 


121 


Judge Jules Edward Guinotte, 1215 Manheim Road, Kansas City, Mo. 


Prof. Horace Gunthorp, 1525 College Ave., Topeka, Kans. 
Robert C. Haas, 612 Hodges Bldg., Detroit, Mich. 

Henry Pennington Haile, 28 Edwards St., Springfield, Mass. 
Thomas Hallinan, 212 Madison Ave., Paterson, N. J. 

Joseph Edward Hallinen, Cooperton, Kiowa Co., Okla. 

Mrs. Rhea Hance, R. F. D., German Valley, N. J: 

G. Dallas Hanna, Calif. Acad. Sciences, San Francisco, Calif. 


Wilson Creal Hanna, 1000 Penn. Ave., Colton, San B’d’no. Co., Calif. 


Mrs. Alice B. Harrington, Lincoin, Mass. 

George Leib Harrison, Jr., 400 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
Harry Morgan Harrison, 503 Linden St., Camden, N. J. 
-George I. Hartley, 344 West 87th St., New York, N. Y. 
Henry Orborne Havemeyer, Jr., Mahwah, N. J. 

Alden Healey, 2006 Northampton St., Holyoke, Mass. 
Charles Foote Hedges, Box 24, Miles City, Mont. 

Ashton Erastus Hemphill, Phoenix Chambers, Holyoke, Mass. 
Miss Kathleen M. Hempel, Elkader, Ia. 

C. Brooks Hersey, 456 Potomac Ave., Buffalo, N. Y. 

James Daniel Hightower, P. O. Box 782, Greensboro, N. C. 
Miss Carmelita A. Hill, Menominee, Wis. 

Harry H. Hipple, Delaware, Ohio. 

Mrs. C. W. Hitchcock, Berlin, Wis. 


Richard E. Hoisey, Highland Park, Reservoir Ave., Rochester, N. Y. 


George Buell Hollister, Corning, N. Y. 

Neil Hotchkiss, 616 8. Crouse Ave., Syracuse, N. Y. 

George Thomas Hughes, Watchung, N. J. 

Chreswell John Hunt, 5847 W. Superior St., Chicago, IIL. 

Miss Lucy Olcott Hunt, 185 Beacon St., Hartford, Conn. 

Miss Frances Amelia Hurd, 43 West Ave., South Norwalk, Conn. 
Samuel Hyslop, 42 Bellevue St., Newton, Mass. 


122 Pater, Thirty-seventh Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. [eae 


Jan. 


Dr. Edmund Randolph Peaslee Janvrin, 515 Park Ave., New York, 
Noe 

Prof. Charles Eugene Johnson, Dept. Zoology, Univ. Kansas, Law- 
rence, Kans. 

Frank Tenney Johnson, 48 Charles St., New York, N. Y. 

Rev. Walter Robert Johnson, Ninette, Manitoba. 

James Dent Jokerst, 6034 Suburban Ave., St. Louis, Mo. 

Mrs. Susan Mary Kane, University Campus, Seattle, Wash. 

Edward Gruet Kent, 2595 Boulevard, Jersey City, N. J. 

Dr. Robert H. Kingman, 11 South Cedar Ave., Arverne, L. I., N. Y. 

Alexander Barrett Klots, 125 West 78th St., New York, N. Y. 

Wesley Frank Kubichek, Apt. 30, 2305 18th St., N. W., Washington, 
D.C: 

Joseph D. La Brie, 1717 East 78th St., Kansas City, Mo. 

Albert Lano, Fayetteville, Ark. 

C. B. Lastreto, 260 California St., San Francisco, Calif. 

J. A. Laughlin, 318 East Gordon St., Marshall, Mo. 

Mrs. Florence R. Leavitt, 42 Forest St., Lexington, Mass. 

Dana Leffingwell, Aurora, Cayuga Co., N. Y. 

John Howard Leman, 48 Beacon St., Boston, Mass. 

Miss Ruby Lenssen, Englewood, N. J. 

Dr. David Moore Lindsay, 808 Boston Bldg., Salt Lake City, Utah. 

Mrs. Lucina Haynes Lombard, Gorham, Maine. 

J. Anderson Lord, 13 Ash St., Danvers, Mass. 

Miss Margaret Allen Lunn, 301 The Sherman, Washington, D. C. 

Bernett Walter Mabbott, Unity, Wis. 

Richards Bryant Mackintosh, 5 Howard Ave., Peabody, Mass. 

W. A. Maepherson, Jr., Lamar, Colo. 

Michael Jarden Magee, 603 South St., Sault Ste. Marie, Mich. 

Miss Kate A. McCloskey, 154 Regent St., Saratoga Springs, N. Y. 

Dr. Charles A. McNeil, 1113 West 4th St., Sedalia, Mo. 

Mark S. Martenet, 3403 Fairview Ave., Forest Park, Baltimore, Md. 

Oliver Perry Medsger, 9 Columbia Ave., Arlington, N. J. 

William Claire Menninger, 709 W. 169th St., New York, N. Y. 

William Clopton Michaels, 645 W. 56th St., Kansas City, Mo. 

Brent MacFarland Morgan, 1310 B St. 8. W., Washington, D. C. 

Louis Fred Morlock, Creve Coeur, Mo. 

Mrs. Charles F. Moore, 35 Congress St., Greenfield, Mass. 

Miss Evelyn Moore, W. Sullivan St., Olean, N. Y. 

George Frederick Morse, Jr., Franklin Park, Grove Hall, Boston, 

Mass. 

Miss Margarette E. Morse, 3513 Bloomington Ave., Minneapolis, 

Minn. 

Mrs. Edmund Quincey Moses, care Mrs. E. M. Mead, 303 W. 84th St., 
New York, N. Y. 

James L. Mullen, 614 E. 6th South St., Salt Lake City, Utah. 


we | 


Nel: a | Patmer, Thirty-seventh Stated Meeting of the A. O. U. 12s 


Dr. Eugene Edmund Murphey, 482 Telfair St., Augusta, Ga. 

Mrs. Robert Cushman Murphy, 272 Hicks St., Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Edgar N. Murray, R. F. D. 2, Box 71, Northville, Mich. 

J. Robert Mutch, Mount Herbert, Prince Edward Id., 

James C. Neely, 135 High St., Brookline, Mass. 

Johnson Neff, Marionville, Mo. 

Rodman Armitage Nichols, 33 Warren St., Salem, Mass. 

Ignatius D. O’Donnell, Billings, Mont. 

Mrs. L. 8S. O’Roark, 29 Rutherford Ave., Rutherford, N. J. 

Prof. Henry Fairfield Osborn, Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York, N. Y. 

Mrs. J. M. Overfield, Jr., 255 Breckenridge St., Buffalo, N. Y. 

Miss Marion Jay Pellew, 1637 Mass. Ave., N. W., Washington, D. C. 

William Dana Pennington, 1722 4th St., Congress Heights, D. C. 

Prof. Horace G. Perry, Acadia Univ., Wolfville, Nova Scotia. 

Rev. Orville Anderson Petty, Chapel St. & Sherman Ave., New Haven, 
Conn. 

Charles Phillips, 2506 Plymouth Ave., Minneapolis, Minn. 

Dr. Charles Bingham Penrose, 1331 Spruce St., Philadelphia, Pa. 

Albert Pinkus, care Louis Pinkus, 549 Main St., Hartford, Conn. 

Miles David Pirnie, 428 N. Tioga St., Ithaca, N. Y. 

Alexander Pope, 1013 Beacon St., Brookline, Mass. 

Laurence Bedford Potter, Eastend, Sask. 

George Newton Proctor, 37 Cabot St., Winchester, Mass. 

Miss Clara Everett Reed, Brookfield, Mass. 

Russell Reid, 722 5th St., Bismarck, N. Dak. 

Harry C. Ridlon, Cuttingsville, Vt. 

Archibald Hamilton Ritchie, Half Way Tree P. O., Jamaica, B. W. I. 

Prewitt Roberts, Conway, Laclede Co., Mo. 

Mrs. L. K. Robinson, 1130 South Franklin St., Denver, Colo. 

Miss Mary L. Robinson, Lathrop Trade School, Kansas City, Mo. 

Miss Emily Rochester, 238 Elmwood Ave., Buffalo, N. Y. 

Rev. B. F. Root, 592 Kossuth St., Bridgeport, Conn. 

Brother Rodolphe, Laval des Rapides, Laval Co., P. Q., Canada. 

George Harold Roush, 301 Maple Ave., Fairmont, W. Va. 

Harold Goddard Rugg, Hanover, N. H. 

Mrs. Robert O. Ryder, 1041 Franklin Ave., Columbus, O. 

Mrs. Mary Searl Sage, 1974 Broadway, New York, N. Y. 

John Clark Salyer, 2412 Main St., Lexington, Mo. 

Dr. Leonard Cutler Sanford, 216 Crown St., New Haven, Conn. 

Mahlon Levis Savage, 1338 Orthodox St., Frankford, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Orpheus Moyer Schantz, 10 South La Salle St., Chicago, Ill. 

Ernest Karl Schleichert, Mathias Point, Va. 

Dr. Hermann von Schrenck, 4139 McPherson Ave., St. Louis, Mo. 

Dr. James Ebenezer Norton Shaw, Mattapoisett, Mass. 

Harry Hargrave Sheldon, ‘Serena,’ Carpinteria, Calif. 

Mrs. Theodore C. Sherwood, 3520 Cherry St., Kansas City, Mo. 


124 Pater, Thirty-seventh Stated Meeting of the A. O. U es 


Albert Elwood Shirling, 3849 East 62d St., Kansas City, Mo. © 

Miss Susie L. Simonds, Hartland, Wis. 

Mrs. H. DeForrest Smith, Chula Vista, San Diego Co., Calif. 

Wendell Phillips Smith, Wells River, Vt. 

Elias LeRoy Snyder, 1244 North Emporia Ave., Wichita, Kan. 

Lester Lynne Snyder, Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, Ont. 

Prof. George Walter Stevens, Normal College, Warrensburg, Mo. 

Harry Hebert Stone Jr., Sturbridge, Mass. 

George Miksch Sutton, Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Miss Ora D. Sweet, 34 Elizabeth St., Auburn, N. Y. 

Dix Teachenor, 3237 Garfield Ave., Kansas City, Mo. 

Dr. R. J. Terry, 5315 Delmar Ave., St. Louis, Mo. 

Gerald Bamber Thomas, 229 Burlington Ave., Billings, Mont. 

W.S. Thomas, Negley & Elgin Aves., Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Herbert L. Thowless, 765 Broad St., Newark, N. J. 

Charles Walter Tindall, 912 North Noland St., Independence, Mo. 

Dr. Solon Rodney Towne, Station D, Route 2, Omaha, Neb. 

Rev. Manley Bacon Townsend, 9 Mt. Pleasant St., Nashua, N. H. 

Willard Ellery Treat, Silver Lane, Conn. 

Robie Wilfrid Tufts, Wolfville, Nova Scotia. 

Mrs. Margaret Gilbert Tullock, 379 Edgewood Ave., New Haven, 
Conn. 

Clark C. Van Fleet, Box 468, Santa Rosa, Calif. 

Miss Loula Van Neman, Westport High School, Kansas City, Mo. 

Egbert Hamilton Walker, 1237 Olivia Ave., Ann Arbor, Mich. 

Mrs. Joseph 8. Ware, Durango, Colo. 

Charles Gray Watson, 201 Ridout St., London, Ont. 

H. W. Weisgerber, 3638 Loveland Road, R. D. 4, Youngstown, O. 

Charles Slade West, Marianna, Fla. 

Rev. Harry Edgar Wheeler, Fayetteville, Ark. 

Joseph Randall Whitaker, Grand Lake, Newfoundland. 

Adrian P. Whiting, 163 Sandwich St., Plymouth, Mass. 

Francis H. Whitman, 65 Duke St., Kitchener, Ont. 

F. N. Whitman, McGraw Hall, Ithaca, N. Y. 

Oscar Theodore Willard, Jr., 1444 East 54th St., Chicago, Il. 

Dr. Hugh Williams, 301 Beacon St., Boston, Mass. 

John Williams, St. Marks, Wakulla Co., Fla. 

Laidlaw Williams, 152 West 57th St., New York, N. Y. 

C. H. Wilson, 52 Warren St., Glens Falls, N. Y. 

Mrs. Charles M. Wilson, 503 Lafayette Ave., Buffalo, N. Y. 

Gordon Wilson, State Normal School, Bowling Green, Ky. 

Miss Helen Durand Wise, Apt. 30, 1930 18th St., N. W., Washington, 
Die: 

Walker Fred Woods, 1261 Broadway, Alameda, Calif. 

Roy Church Woodworth, 204 East 35th St., Kansas City, Mo. 

Frank Ernest Woodward, 48 Abbott Road, Wellesley Hills, Mass. 

Joseph Zuckerman, Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York, N. Y. 


a. 


\e ee Pater, Thirty-seventh Stated Meeting of the A.O.U. 125 


DECEASED MEMBERS, 1918-1919. 


William Brewster,! Founder and Fellow, aged 68, died at Cambridge, Mass. 
July 11, 1919 
Dr. Frederick DuCane Godman,? Honorary Fellow, aged 85, died in Lon- 


don, Eng. Feb. 19, 1919. 

Motoyoshi Namiye,? Corresponding Fellow, of Tokyo, Japan, died in his 

64th year May 24, 1918 

Dr. Louis Brasil,* elected a Corresponding Fellow in 1918, died at Caen, 

France, at the age of 53 Oct. 15, 1918 
Mrs. Olive Thorne Miller,> Member, age 873, died in Los Angeles, Calif. 

Dec. 25, 1918 

Prof. Louis W. Dorn of Fort Wayne, Ind., died 1918 

Mrs. Henry A. Knapp, Associate, of Scranton, Penn., died in the spring of 

1918 

Charles Henry Davis, aged 70, died at Saginaw, Mich. Oct. 5, 1918 

Leo Wiley,® aged 28, died at Shandon, Calif. Oct. 31, 1918 

Edgar Tweedy of Danbury, Conn., died Nov. 17, 1918 

Merrill Willis Blain,’ died at Los Angeles, Calif., in his 25th year 

Dec. 26, 1918 

Barron Brainerd, of Brookline, Mass., aged 26, died in May, 1919 

Edward Everett Brewster, died at Schenectady, N. Y. July 1, 1919 


Frederic Morton Crehore, aged 61, died at Boston, Mass. Oct. 16, 1919 
Dr. Henry Kemble Oliver, aged 90, died at Boston, Mass. Oct. 25, 1919 


Joseph Moody Ackerman of Newburyport, Mass., died 1919 
1¥or obituary notice, see Auk, XXXVI, p. 628. 
ZIRE a od see Auk, XXXVI, p. 319. 
Sa ss és see Auk, XXXVI, p. 628. 
iG S = see Auk, XXXVI. p. 449. 
Dg u y see Auk, XXXVI, p. 163. 
Soe a @ see Auk, XXXVI, p. 629. 
Toe . i see Auk, XXXVI, p. 629. 


126 General Notes. eS 


Jan. 


GENERAL NOTES. 


The Black Skimmer on Long Island, N. Y.— On May 25, 1919, at 
Long Beach, L. I., three Skimmers were seen flying west. Two were pretty 
far out, but one was well inshore, though apparently all three birds were 
together. We were immediately impressed by the sharp black and white 
colors, forked tail, the remarkably long and slender wings, and the char- 
acteristic flight. It is perhaps only proper to add that the senior author 
was well acquainted with the Skimmer in life, and knows of no other 
North American bird with which it could reasonably be confused. In late 
years a rare straggler to Long Island, it is possible that its recent reappear- 
ance on the Jersey coast may cause its visits to Long Island to become more 
frequent. Considering the date, our birds were probably ambitious 
migrants which had overshot the mark. At least they were seemingly bent 
on getting home as fast as possible— LupLow Griscom AND Dr. E. R. P. 
JANVRIN, Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City. 


Another Record of the White Pelican in New York.— Eaton, in his 
‘Birds of New York’ (1909) notes only eleven recorded instances of the 
occurrence of Pelecanus erythrorhynches from the entire State. Recently, 
in looking over some old personal journals, the writer ran across an entry 
to the effect that the late Leslie W. Lake of this village saw a White Pelican 
in Hamburg township during the summer of 1863. Mr. Lake was a keen 
observer and a very careful field worker; moreover, he was familiar with 
the species due to a former residence in portions of the West where it is of 
more common occurrence. 

The writer recalls questioning his informant very carefully relative to 
this identification, and is himself familiar with the bird, having met with 
it in some numbers in Yellowstone National Park. While it seems unusual 
that the bird should have been found here during the summer, certainly 
no error was made in its identification, as Mr. Lake noted at close range the 
large size, white plumage, long bill and pouch. Tuomas L. Bourne, 
Hamburg, N. Y. 


A Note on the “ Southern Teal.’’— The leading article in the October 
number of ‘The Auk,’ entitled ‘Notes on a New Subspecies of Blue- . 
winged Teal,’ by my friend, Frederic H. Kennard, held for me more than 
cursory interest for the reason that I have been studying this supposed 
form for some time, had corresponded with Mr. Kennard, regarding it, 
and had held, up to this spring, that it might form a valid subspecies. 

I have had in the flying cage in Audubon Park, New Orleans, for the past 
three years a collection of wild waterfowl obtained on the Louisiana 
marshes. Among the ducks thus held in captivity was a drake Blue-winged 
Teal that had the curious white line over the eye asa continuation of the 
characteristic crescent-shaped white spot, and had on the nape of the neck, 


Vol. 520° ara General Notes. 137 


where the line converged with a white line from the opposite side, a con- 
spicuous white patch. In the spring of 1918 I watched this drake emerge 
from its eclipse plumage and noted that while the white line and patch on 
the nape were on the new feathers they were not as definitely white as I 
had recollected the markings of the previous summer. When the drake 
made its moult during the fall of 1918 I again kept an interested watch on 
its plumage changes. It appeared in its new dress of feathers without 
either the white line over the eye or the patch on the nape of the neck, and 
up to the time of its death, the latter part of April, 1919, it was, when in 
full nuptial plumage not to be distinguished from any ordinary Blue-winged 
Teal in high feather. 

It might be stated that this ‘‘ necktie teal,” to use a term I had never 
heard until I saw it in Mr. Kennard’s paper, was the sole survivor of a flock 
of seven Blue-wings held in the cage, four females and three drakes. The 
two other drakes at no time exhibited any indication of the curious white 
markings and died while the ‘ necktie teal ”’ was still in its curious plumage 
—from which it afterwards molted— STantey Crispy ArtHur, Dept. 
Conservation, New Orleans, La. 


Trumpeter Swan (Olor buccinator) in Western Minnestoa. A Cor- 
rection.— I recorded the capture of a beautiful adult male of this species 
(see ‘ Auk,’ Vol. XIII, page 78), which I have discovered is only the more 
common species the Whistling Swan (Olor columbianus). This specimen 
together with an adult female secured at Aitkin, Minnesota, ten years later, 
are now in the Natural History Survey Collection, University of Minnesota, 
at Minneapolis.— ALBERT LaNno, Fayetteville, Arkansas. 


Wild Swan on Long Island, N. Y.— Mr. John L. Lawrence, while 
duck shooting off Doctor’s Point, on Narrow Bay, between Smith’s Point 
and Moriches, at Mastic, Long Island, saw, on November 5, 1919, one 
swan, a cygnet, about 150 yards away, flying east. The next day, Novem- 
ber 6, one adult swan and one cygnet, came into the duck decoys and 
stayed there some time, swimming slowly around, feeding, within thirty 
yards. 

On November 8, two swans, both adults, came within 100 yards, circled 
around the blind, and then settled in the water some distance away. 

It seems to me that the record is worth noting in ‘ The Auk,’ as wild swan 
on long Island are most unusual.— Newsoitp T. Lawrence, Lawrence, 
Long Island, N. Y. 


Notes on Some Shore Birds of the Alabama River, Montgomery 
County, Ala.— On Saturday, September 20, 1919, accompanied by a 
friend who is both a hunter and a naturalist, I made a trip of several miles 
down the Alabama River from the city of Montgomery for the purpose of 
collecting fall migrants then numerous in this region. The Alabama River 
is formed of the Coosa and the Tallapoosa and is a navigable stream from 
Montgomery to Mobile. It is a noble stream with high wooded banks. 


128 General Notes. ES 


Except in a few places, it has a good depth, and has a steady flow of about 
four miles an hour. Several large and small creeks flow into the river 
between Montgomery and Selma. All in all the scenery is exceedingly 
attractive. 

The Federal Government in its improvement of the river has constructed 
a number of jetties back of which numerous mud flats are formed. These 
flats at this and other migrating seasons, afford feeding grounds for all long 
billed migrants, as well as the residents. Among the latter are the Kill- 
deer, Spotted Sandpiper, and one or two others which are to be found prac- 
tically all the year and which mix very freely with the visitors. 

The notes below are contributed in the hope that they may add to the 
meagre available information concerning these birds in the interior. 

Pisobia minutilla. Least SanppipER.— Several small flocks and num- 
bers of singles and pairs of the Least Sandpiper, were seen, and two speci- 
mens, a male and a female, were taken. These two, with one of the 
Semipalmated and one of the Solitary, below, were all secured from the 
same flock. The Leasts were beginning to take on their winter plumage. 

Ereunetes pusillus. SrmMIpALMATED Sanppippr.— Two single speci- 
mens of the H. pusillus were collected, one of which was from the flock 
of P. minuitlla above referred to. An interesting incident happened in 
connection with the effort to get another one. Shooting from the moving 
boat in midstream at a single, on the water’s edge, his wing only was 
injured. The bird fell into the water, but managed to climb up the river 
bank, five or six feet, by the time the boat could be stopped and run into 
shore. It again fell into the water, and on making an effort to take it in 
my hand, it rose and flew along the surface about 400 feet directly across 
the river, alighting twenty yards up stream on a rocky ledge, covered with 
high grass. We noted the point, and on getting there could have easily 
killed it, but preferring to make a capture, landed for that purpose. Even 
though we stepped near enough to frighten the bird from under our feet 
more than once, it was effectually concealed by the surroundings, and 
finally lost. 

Helodromas s. solitarius. SoLirary SANDP!PER.— Only one specimen 
of the Solitary, a female, was noted. This bird was killed, while feeding, 
with five or six of P. minutilla and about the same number of Killdeer.— 
Prerer A. Brannon, Dept. of Archives, Montgomery, Ala. 


The Black Rail at St. Marks, Florida.— While our section of the 
country falls within the known winter habitat of this diminutive and most 
secretive member of the Rallide it was not until the fall of 1915 that I had 
positive knowledge of the occurrence of Creciscus jamaicensis. I had 
traversed the extensive tidal marshes at all seasons of the year and had 
seen here every other member of the family known to inhabit our part of 
the Gulf coast. 

One or two fleeting glimpses of a scurrying black form amongst the thick 
growth of grass and reeds in the vicinity of a pond had at times suggested 


pete sie General Notes. 129 


this species but nothing more definite had been noted. On September 4, 
1915, during a tide four or five feet above usual high water — the off-shoot 
of a gulf hurricane — an adult Black Rail was picked up at the edge of the 
incoming waters on the railroad embankment within the limits of our 
village and was water-soaked and almost lifeless. A small offer for other 
specimens soon brought another bird and reports of at least two or three 
others seen, all on the date above given. 

On October 6, 1916 two of these birds were observed near the lighthouse, 
at low tide, flying from or near the water’s edge and among some coarse 
and rather sparsely growing water plants inshore to the cover of the tidal 
marsh. 

On September 11, 1919, we again had high water — visible evidence of the 
Key West hurricane — about four feet above ordinary high tide. In a 
skiff-boat, over the river marsh, with a boy to row, six Black Rails were col- 
lected by hand in less than an hour and probably three or four others were 
seen. No wind or rain accompanied this high tide but seemingly the birds 
were exhausted by their efforts to cling to the bushes which were their only 
refuge above the water. Usually at the first feeble flight or effort to fly, 
the bird fell into the water and on closer approach of the boat would dive 
and make short-lived efforts to eseape. 

Of these six birds three were adult (?) females or were at least decidedly 
older than the other three. Of the three younger birds two were males and 
one a female. 

Juv. No. 1 had the primaries partly developed but not fully from the 
sheaths. A well marked shading of brown showed on the nape and traces © 
of down clung to the tips of some of the primaries. The wings, back, breast 
and flanks were decidedly darker than in the older birds. 

The other two young birds were seemingly of equal age and considerably 
younger than juv. No. 1. Their primaries were just showing the tips and 
there was a slight trace of the brown on the hind neck. The white spots 
of back, wings and flank while not so marked as in the adult are clearly indi- 
eated. There is a slight, light-colored spot not clearly defined on the 
bills of the two younger birds about one-third of the distance from the base, 
but present in both specimens. 

So far as can be ascertained this is fhe first record of C. jamaicensis 
nesting in the State where the young birds have been secured.! 

The undeveloped condition of the two younger specimens — Nos. 2 and 
3 — precludes a possibility of their having been reared elsewhere than on 
the marsh on which they were captured. This tidal marsh close by our 
village and not infrequently overflowed, is about seven miles up the river 
from the Gulf and but two miles above usual salt water. It is not unusual 
in times of strong east or south-east winds to have salt water a mile or more 
above where these birds were found. 


1 Baynard,— ‘Breeding Birds of Alachna County, Fla.’ (Auk, XXX, p. 243, 1913), 
records seeing an adult with three young but apparently collected no specimens. 


Jan. 


150 General Notes. lees 


The measurements of the specimens in inches were as follows: 


Length Wing Tarsus Bill 

Adult (?) @ 6+ Qe ue Ye 
aD 6s 3 5 1s 
ee 64 25 8 16 
Juv.No.I ¢& 53 24 + 2 
Juv. No. II ¢ 5+ = s 4 
Juv.No.III 2 i — 4 WG 


JoHN Wiuutams, St. Marks, Florida. 


Purple Gallinule in North Carolina.— A young Purple Gallinule 
(onornis martinicus) was shot by me at Currituck Sound, N. C., on 
November 12, 1919, sex undetermined. The record seems worthy of pub- 
lication since there are only two previous records for the State. 

The specimen was identified by Newbold T. Lawrence Esq. and Mr. 
Thomas Rowland and confirmed by my examination of skins in the col- 
lection of Dr. J. Dwight at the American Museum of Natural History. — 
H. F. Stone, 29 East 8rd. St., New York, N. Y. 


Breeding of the Mourning Dove in Maine.— On June 8, 1919, while 
in York County, Maine, not more than a mile from the New Hampshire 
border at East Rochester, four doves were seen and we were shown a nest 
in asmall white pine grove, from which the young were said to have already 
flown, though two of our birds flew from the grove as we approached. The 
Mourning Dove is considered a very rare breeder in southwestern Maine, 
and as there seem to be very few definite records, our observation seems 
worthy of note. 

Incidentally these birds had been reported as Passenger Pigeons by the 
local observers, one of whom was said to be an old pigeon-hunter. No 
reports we have ever seen were so plausible or circumstantial, nor could 
we have encountered greater certainty in our correspondents. The old 
pigeon-hunter, in fact, did not credit our identification of these birds as 
doves. In view of the numerous reports of Wild Pigeons, most of which 
are never followed up, we think that our experience is of interest.— W. DEW. 
Mutter anp Luptow Griscom, American Museum of Natural History, 
New York City. 


The Status of Harlan’s Hawk in Colorado.— Harlan’s Hawk (Buleo 
b. harlani) was first officially recorded for Colorado by Mr. Robert Ridgway 
in 1885 (Auk, IJ, 1885, p. 165) although he had previously referred to the 
specimen in 1882 on page 252 of Vol. I, of the same journal, when he called 
attention to the possible identity of Buteo cooperi and B. b. harlani. This 
specimen he recorded as taken by C. E. H. Aiken near Colorado Springs, 
Colorado, without exact date. 


a 


wale a “|| General Notes. 131 


1920 


In March, 1897, Prof. Wells W. Cooke published his ‘ Birds of Colorado ’ 
from the Colorado Agricultural College, quoting this record and adding the 
note that ‘“‘ one was probably taken by Capt. P. M. Thorne at Fort Lyon,” 
no date or other particulars of this reported capture being given. Through- 
out the three succeeding supplements to this work these records are per- 
mitted to stand without comment. 

The next important work on the state birds was W. L. Sclater’s ‘ History 
of the Birds of Colorado,’ and as the original material therein was taken 
mainly from the Aiken collection at Colorado College, additional data 
relative to this specimen might have been expected. His only comment, 
however, was that ‘‘ I have not been able to trace this specimen in the 
Aiken collection,’ indicating that the bird had probably been lost or 
destroyed. 

As it is obvious that the record credited to Capt. Thorne cannot stand 
scrutiny, the status of the species in the State thus depends upon the exist- 
ence of the Aiken specimen. The recent acquisition of a fine Colorado 
specimen by the Colorado Museum of Natural History aroused my interest 
in the matter and stimulated an investigation that adds considerably to the 
known history of the earlier record. 

A letter to Mr. Aiken enlisted his generous assistance and a few pas- 
sages from his reply will be of interest in this connection. He states, in 
part: ‘ In 1872 I went to Denver ....and while there called on Rudolph 
Borcherdt (taxidermist). I saw at his shop 3 or 4 Buteo skins and when 
I exhibited interest in them Mr. Borcherdt gave them to me. I did not 
inquire where they were from... One of these sent to Ridgway for iden- 
tification he pronounced Buteo cooperi. Years after, in 1883, I think, 
Ridgway wrote requesting me to send this specimen for reéxamination and it 
was then determined to be B. harlani. The specimen I believe was 
untagged and Ridgway quite naturally assumed that I had killed it and 
near Colorado Springs. The specimen may be lost... .”’ 

Accordingly, although the identity of the specimen may remain unques- 
tioned, it will be readily noted that while probable, there is no definite 
proof that the original record of Buteo b. harlani was a Colorado killed bird. 
In fact, evidence from other taxidermists of this early period indicate that 
a great many specimens were brought into the State from outside sources, 
mounted here and sold without any information being given as to their 
locality or collector, and the assumption that such material was of local 
take has been the cause of numerous errors which have crept into Colo- 
rado’s ornithology. So, whether lost or not, this record must be regarded 
as questionable and were it not for the recent capture it might be necessary 
to eliminate the species from the accurate list of Colorado birds. 

The Colorado Museum specimen, No. C. M. N. H. 7343, adult male, was 
killed near Littleton, Colorado, October 16, 1918. It is nearly typical in 
every respect, so much so in fact that were it before Dr. Coues when he 
wrote his ‘ Key ’ the description as there given would have been but slightly 
altered.— F. C. Lrncoun, Colo. Museum Nat. Hist., Denver, Colorado. 


132 General Notes. [}. ae 


White Gyrfalcon (Falco islandus) in Montana.— An adult White 
Gyrfalcon, the sex of which was unfortunately not determined, was taken 
by G. B. Daniels, November 18, 1917, on Shonkin Creek, just east of the 
Town of Shonkin, Montana. The elevation of Shonkin is 3163 feet, and 
its location about forty miles east of Great Falls. 

The specimen was in fine plumage and a very beautiful bird. It was 
sent to Seattle to a Mr. Oscar Gard, a fur dealer, by a party from whom 
he purchases furs, for the purpose of having it mounted, and the mounted 
bird later came into the possession of Mr. J. H. Bowles of Tacoma, who now 
has it in his collection. 

The foregoing note is of interest in view of the fact, that there are but 
few records of this species having been taken in the United States.— 8. F. 
Ratupun, 217, 14th Ave., Seattle, Wash. 


The Hawk Owl in North Dakota.— The only published intimation of 
the occurrence of the Hawk Owl (Surnia ulula caparoch) in North Dakota 
is a statement that it is found in “ Dakota ”’ (Baird, Brewer, and Ridgway, 
History North American Birds, III, 1874, p. 76). There is, however, in 
the collection of Mr. H. V. Williams a specimen taken by him at Grafton, 
North Dakota, on December 10, 1908. This forms, therefore, the first 
definite record of the species for the State-—— Harry C. OBERHOLSER, 
U.S. Biol. Survey, Washington, D.C. 


Pileated Woodpecker in Morris County, N. J.— Noting the record 
of the Pileated Woodpecker in Sussex County, N. J., in the April ‘ Auk,’ 
I thought that the following might be of interest. 

In October, 1913 I had a close view of one of these birds at Newfoundland, 
Morris County, N. J. While I did not have my field glasses with me at the 
time, I got close enough to the bird to distinguish it plainly as it was ham- 
mering away on a dead chestnut tree. 

A farmer at whose house I was staying described a bird to me which was 


evidently this species and told me that he had seen two or three of them | 


that week. 

Although I have spent much time since then in Morris County I have 
never seen another of these birds.— Epwarp G. Kent, 2595 Boulevard, 
Jersey City, N.J. 


Unusual Habits of Chimney Swift.— About one P. M. August 17, 
1919, while collecting insects near the eastern border of a broad brackish 
meadow, my attention was attracted to Chimney Swifts (Chetura pelagica) 
frequently flying slowly in from the west and disappearing in the fringe of 
vines and shrubs that separated me from the extreme east boundary of the 
marsh. In this heavy growth, from waist to head high, were elderberry 
bushes (Sambucus canadensis) heavily hung with ripe fruit. I selected a 
bird for special study. It advanced on descending, hovering flight. About 
four feet above the tangle, near the farther side, it paused and dropped 
abruptly into a clump of elderberries. Carefully marking the locality, 


Rn, ds 


Beto | General Notes. 133 


I worked my passage to a few feet of the spot. The swift was clinging 
to the cymoid head of the elder eating the fruit. ‘The ease with which the 
bird took flight from its slender perch, rising directly upward several feet 
above the cover and dropping rail-like back into it, was interesting and 
worthy of note. 

The cover harbored at the time not less than fifty swifts. Most of them 
were flushed with more or less difficulty, but some individuals took wing 
within arm-reach of the observer. No others were noted eating fruit. 
The day was dark and threatening with strong easterly wind. 

One week later the writer had an opportunity for a second study of the 
region near the same hour, differing, however, in the day being clear and 
warm. No swifts were observed in the air on my arrival in the vicinity, 
but beating about in the heavy cover startled several therefrom. No 
further record could be obtained of their eating fruit. It should be stated 
that on the east side of this shelter is a row of medium sized willows with 
low, wide-spreading branches on the west, affording a continuous shadow 
over the haunts. 

It is evident that the birds had established a roosting, or resting place 
out of the ordinary. It is not satisfactorily settled whether the birds 
sought the brush to feed on elder-berries or for shelter. The writer is of the 
opinion that the bird seen eating berries was only an exceptional case 
where the bird took a berry after alighting within reach of it. 

The swift is a very uncommon breeding species in the limits of Orient. 
Rarely more than three to six pairs nest; while sometimes it does not 
nest at all. It is, however, regular and fairly common in-August. There 
are no hollow trees at this station for their use, and they have never been 
seen to enter chimneys in the fall migration here. As the birds observed 
were practically all migrants, this habit of seeking shelter in deep shrub- 
bery on the marshes should be noted in other localities also. 

On the opposite side of the marsh is a great Tree Swallow roost, which is 
also occupied by grackles, martins, starlings and other species in their turn. 
Whether the two have any connection is a matter of conjecture.— Roy 
Latuam, Orient, Long Island, N. Y. 


Empidonax griseus in Nevada.— The Gray Flycatcher (Hmpidonax 
griseus) has been detected more or less frequently in Colorado, California, 
and Oregon, but there seems to be no published statement of its presence in 
the State of Nevada. There is, however, a very typical adult female in 
the Biological Survey collection (No. 158,354, U. S. Nat. Mus.) obtained 
by Mr. Vernon Bailey at Cloverdale, Nye County, Nevada, on May 30, 
1898. Still another typical example, an adult female also in the Biological 
Survey collection (No. 158,350, U.S. Nat. Mus.), was obtained by the same 
collector at an altitude of 8700 feet on Are Dome in the Toyabe Mountains 
in central Nevada, on May 25, 1898. The species will doubtless prove to 
be of more or less regular occurrence in this State—— Harry C. OBErR- 
HOLSER, U.S. Biol. Survey, Washington, D. C. 


134 General Notes. ES 


The Crow of Colorado.— In arecent publication (‘Auk,’ Vol. X X XVI, 
No. 2, April, 1919, p. 198) the undersigned expressed his belief that the 
crows known to occur in San Luis Valley, Colorado, would prove to be of 
the subspecies hesperis. Thanks to the energetic efforts of Mrs. Jesse 
Stephenson of Monte Vista, Colorado, I received on September 29, 1919, a 
crow in the flesh, which gave an opportunity to pass on this belief. It was 
unusually good fortune that this specimen was an adult male in bright 
plumage. The small size, and weak bill and tarsi attracted immediate 
attention, and were too obvious to be overlooked, and subsequent examina- 
tion of this bird confirmed the preliminary diagnosis of subspecies hesperis; 
the measurements while in the flesh, are as follows:— 

Length 480 mm., wing 322 mm., tail 172 mm., tarsus 55 mm., depth of bill 
at nostril 17 mm., exposed culmen 42 mm. 

All of these measurements are well within the limits given by Ridgway 
(Birds, North and Middle America, Vol. III, p. 270) as characteristic of 
hesperis, the single exception being that of length, and in this case the con- 
flicting lengths are not comparable, since one is of skins, and the other of a 
bird in the flesh. 

The specimen weighed sixteen ounces, forty-eight hours after death.— 
W. H. Berato.p, 1159 Race St., Denver, Colo. 


Appearance of the Canada Jay at Moorehead, Minn.— On October 
5, 1919, while paddling up the Red River in a canoe, I was surprised to hear 
the unmistakable call of a Canada Jay (Perisoreus c. canadensis). A moment 
later the bird flew across the river and I was able to confirm my identi- 
fication. October 12, I saw one again near Wild Rice, North Dakota, 
about ten miles south of here. A week later these birds had become com- 
mon in this locality, five being seen at one time on one occasion. At 
present they are common along the river, having apparently established 
themselves as winter residents. 

This is the first time I have seen the Canada Jay in this part of the 
State, and it is the more remarkable in that this isa comparatively thinly 
wooded region, not at all resembling the coniferous, Canadian zone, which 
is the natural home of this non-migratory bird. The woods here are con- 
fined to narrow strips bordering the Red River and other neighboring 
streams, with a few groves about yarious farm houses on the “ Prairie,” 
the trees being all deciduous. 

This season has been rich in bird records for this vicinity. November 3 
I saw a flock of eighteen White-winged Crossbills (Lovia leucoptera) feeding 
on the weeds along the roadside in the outskirts of Fargo, N. D. There 
was driving snow from the north at the time. November 17, I saw a 
Magpie (Pica p. hudsonia) south of Fargo. This is the first record I have 
for these species in this locality. 

In this connection it may be of interest to note that abnormal weather 
conditions have prevailed this fall. October was unusually cold, snow fell 
October 23, and the ground has been snow-covered ever since. The night 


4 
: 
i 
{ 


fio | General Notes. 135 


of October 25, the Red River froze over and in the early part of November 
there were several days of storm and cold, the thermometer falling eight 
below zero on several occasions. It is difficult to say in what way weather 
conditions may influence the movements of birds. The Canada Jays 
appeared before the real cold weather began, while on the other hand a 
number of Robins, Bluebirds, and Flickers are still here, having weathered 
the storms and zero temperature.— O. J. Murte, Mooreheal, Minn. 


Note on the Food of the Stariing (Sturnus vu!lsaris) — A wonderful 
Virginia Creeper (Psedera quinquefolia) covers the entire south wall of our 
home here in Washington, the house having three stories and being of con- 
siderable length. The vine isa splendid sight every autumn; and after 
its scarlet leaves have fallen, there are exposed to view many hundreds 
of its bunches of beautiful berries. On November 8, Mrs. Shufeldt called 
my attention to a fine male Starling that had lit on one of the sprays 
of the vine, and was greedily eating this fruit. He was timid and wild, and 
flew away when he found us watching him from a window. A day or so 
thereafter, eight more of these birds, chiefly females, were devouring these 
berries, and they, too, flew away as soon as we appeared at a window close 
to them. On the 12th of the same month, some ten females of this species 
and two males also visited the vine, all greedily feeding on the berries, but 
taking to flight, as had all the others, as soon as they perceived they were 
being watched.— Dr. R. W. SHurEtpT, 3356, 18th St., N. W., Washington, 
DEC: 


Harris’s Sparrow in Northern Michigan.— Definite records of the 
occurrence in Michigan of Harris’s Sparrow (Zonetrichia querula) seem to 
be scarce enough to justify my reporting observations on this species in 
Marquette County, Michigan, this fall (1919). Sight records were as fol- 
lows: September 26, six; September 27, one; October 2,four; October 3, 
one; October 6, one. Of these birds, two were collected, an immature female 
on September 26, and an immature male on October 3. 

All of these sparrows were found on land owned by the Huron Mountain 
Club, located at Huron Mountain, Michigan. They seemed to spend their 
time in a rather narrow strip of small trees and bushes between the fields 
of the club farm and an open marsh, with the exception of the one recorded 
on September 27, which was seen in open pine woods about two miles from 
this place and not far from a river. They were never observed mingling 
with the Juncos and other sparrows that were common in that locality. 
I heard one Harris’s Sparrow singing on the morning of October 2, a slow, 
drawling song, suggesting to me the song of the White-crowned Sparrow. 

The identification of the two specimens collected by me was verified at 
the Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, by Dr. W. H. Osgood.— 
STEPHEN S. Grecory, JR., 2609 Hampden St., Chicago, Ill. 


American Golden-eye and White-crowned Sparrow in Northern 
Michigan in Summer.— While about 130 species of birds have been 


136 General Notes. [ pe 
listed from the Douglas Lake region in northern Michigan for the summer 
months, the two following have not been recorded. These observations, 
which seem worthy of note, were made by the writer while a member of 
the staff at the University of Michigan Biological Station during the summer 
of 1919. 

Perhaps the more notable of these records is that of the American Golden- 
eye (Clangula c. americana). On July 15 while looking for birds along the 
edge of Douglas Lake, a dead male of this species was discovered. Al- 
though it apparently had been dead for days, being partly decomposed, 
sufficient of the plumage of the head, wings and back was intact to allow of 
positive identification. Possibly the bird had been shot or injured and had 
been washed up on the shore of the lake for the carcass was but a few feet 
from the water’s edge. Although the known breeding range includes 
northern Michigan, the writer is not aware of a definite published record 
for this region. 

Another bird for which a summer record for the region is apparently 
lacking is the White-crowned Sparrow (Zonotrichia 1. leucophrys). A 
single specimen was observed in the pines along the north shore of Douglas 
Lake on August 8. It is possible that this individual may have been an 
early fall migrant for others had not been seen previous to this time. In- 
deed, this was the only specimen of the species observed in the locality 
up to the time of departure on August 21, although field observations were 
being made almost daily.. Barrows says of this species: ‘‘ There is a pos- 
sibility that this sparrow nests in the northernmost parts of the state but 
we have no positive record.”’” (Michigan Bird Life, 1912, 503). Its near 
relative, the White-throated Sparrow (Z. albicollis), is a not uncommon 
summer resident of the region.— Dayton Stonmr, State University of Towa, 
Iowa City, Lowa. 


Lanius ludovicianus migrans in North Dakota.— A Shrike in the 
collection of Mr. H. V. Williams of Grafton, North Dakota, taken by him at 
that place on May 16, 1915, proves, on careful examination and comparison, 
to be an example of Lanius ludovicianus migrans. As there seems to be 
no previous record of this race from the State, we are, through the courtesy 
of Mr. Williams, now able to add this subspecies to the North Dakota list.— 
Harry C. Oprruortser, U.S. Biol. Survey, Washington, D.C. 


Bohemian Waxwings in Chicago, Ill.— On November 27, a friend 
and I had the good luck to find a large colony of Bohemian Waxwings 
(Bombycilla garrula) in Jackson Park, Chicago. All the birds were in 
exquisite plumage and were calmly enjoying some of the cedar-berries of 
which they are so fond. I estimated the colony to comprise about 300 
birds. They were very tame and fearless, allowing one to approach within 
a very few feet of them before taking to flight. They remained in the 
vicinity the entire day. In view of the fact that up to this time we have 
had but very little bitter weather, the appearance of these visitors from 


ew ao +5 


ae Soe xan General Notes. 137 


the north seems rather peculiar— NatrHan F. Lropotp, JrR., 4754 Green- 
wood Ave., Chicago, Ill. 


The Bohemian Waxwing (Bombycilla garrula) at Chicago, Ill.— 
This morning, December 2, 1919, I was greatly interested in observing 
two Bohemian Waxwings feeding upon berries on the shrubbery right 
beside the street in Austin, Chicago. They were so tame that one could 
almost touch them. It is possible that the prevailing cold wave has 
brought many visitors from the north.— CHresweLu J. Hunt, 5847 W. 
Superior St., Chicago, Ill. 


Orange-crowned Warbler (Vermivora celata celata) in Massachu- 
setts.— Occasionally the Orange-crowned Warbler is reported from 
Massachusetts, usually in November, and more than one is seldom seen. 
On November 20, in company with Mr. Charles Clark of Medford, I found 
a single bird near the shore of Jamaica Pond, where the species has been 
found irregularly during the past few years.— CHARLES B. FLoyp, A uburn- 
dale, Mass. 


Fall Records of Mourning Warbler in Western Missouri.— About 
September 10, 1918, I observed a pair of Mourning Warblers, (Oporornis 
philadelphia) in a tangle of vines and brush, near Lexington, Missouri. 
At the time, I did not think it unusual, so did not record the exact date. 
On September 14, 1918, I collected an adult male of this species and pre- 
pared the skin for my cabinet. As far as Iam aware, these constitute the 
only fall records for the Kansas City region. E. GorpoN ALEXANDER, 
Lexington, Mo. 


Breeding of the Canadian Warbler and Northern Water-Thrush 
in New Jersey.— On July 4, 1919, the writer spent most of the day explor- 
ing Bear Swamp at the foot of the Kittatinny Mts. near Crusoe Lake, 
Sussex Co. Earlier visits had impressed us with the strong Canadian 
element in the flora of this swamp, so a further visit was made in the hope 
of seeing some interesting birds. Nor were we disappointed. The 
Canadian Warbler was a common bird, especially in the almost impene- 
trable clumps of Rhododendron maximum, no less than ten males and six 
females being noted. The only other breeding record for New Jersey 
was made by the senior author at Budd’s Lake. (See ‘ Auk,’ 1917, p. 24). 

In the same swamp several singing male Northern Water-Thrushes had 
been seen on May 380, an ideal nesting place for thisspecies. Four birds were 
noted on July 4, two obviously a pair together, which by their nervous 
actions and constant chips of alarm plainly had young in the vicinity. One 
bird was seen carrying food in its bill, which however, it subsequently 
swallowed without giving us a clue as to the whereabouts of its brood. 

Late in May 1919, the senior author observed at least one pair of Water- 
Thrushes in a swamp near Moe, between Newfoundland and Greenwood 
Lake, which by their actions gave every reason to believe that they were 


138 General Notes. ees 


Jan. 


going to breed. There can be no reasonable doubt that this species breeds 
in northern New Jersey— W. ppW. Mititer anp LupLow Griscom, 
American Museum of Natural History, New York City. 


Hermit Thrush’s Nest in Unusual Location.— At Jefferson Highland 
N. H., the Hermit Thrush ( Hylocichla guttata pallast) is a common summer 
resident. In the season of 1919, six singing males have been within hearing 
of my home, outnumbering the Robin two to one. And their disposition 
to sing freely at all hours of the day from an hour before sunrise to a half- 
hour after sunset, far surpasses that of our local Robins. One pair of 
Hermits has been located at the wood border below our garden and has 
been frequently seen in the garden and nearby orchard. When the season 
of ripe blackberries had come and I was gathering berries on August 9 in 
the plot of considerable size within our garden, I came upon a nest lodged 
on several of the canes within about a foot of their tips and four feet or so 
above the ground. One fledgling about ready to fly was in the nest, and I 
surmised that two or three others had probably already flown. The 
mother bird came and perched on the top of a bean pole standing, perhaps, 
thirty feet from her nest and showed no excited anxiety over my presence, 
continuing to hold her perch for some time and quietly giving her hissing 
call only. The next day when the blackberry plot was visited, the fledgling 
left the nest upon my approach. This nest rested firmly on several canes 
and was concealed from casual view by the leaves thickly surrounding it; 
while clusters of berries hung all about it, so it had not been discovered 
until on the day named the branches were drawn aside a little in gathering 
the fruit. The location in the plot of blackberries was on the outer edge 
southward, the plot having a width of about twenty feet, and was one 
hundred and fifty feet from the border of the woods, thus well up therefrom 
in the garden. The male bird continued singing up to August 16 inclusive; 
on that day I heard him sing a few times at 6 A. M. and again at 12 M., as 
he had done the preceding day. But this was the last voicing of his 
beautiful song for the season. Subsequently, an occasional call only was 
heard, and like his brother Hermits in the neighborhood he was for the most 
part silent, without even expressing himself in either of his four distinctly 
different call-notes.— Horace W. Wricut, 107 Pinckney St., Boston, Mass. 


Peculiar Nesting of Hermit Thrushes.— How far the nesting of 
birds may be influenced by friendly contact with man is worthy of careful 
study and observation by all bird lovers. The peculiar nesting plan of a 
pair of Hermit Thrushes, near the shore of Asquam Lake, Holderness, N. H., 
is of especial interest and may lead to other observations of a like peculiar- 
ity. In all our previous observations of their nesting, the nests were found 
among low bushes on damp ground. Mr. F. Sehuyler Matthews writes 
that he has found them on low bushes near the ground. How far the fol- 
lowing facts may have been influenced by association with man, can only 
be’ conjectured. 


Rok ere Mae) General Notes. 139 } 


About the middle of June 1919, a pair of Hermit Thrushes took up their 
abode near a cottage on the shore of Asquam Lake, Holderness, N. H. The 
two ladies occupying the cottage are both musical and bird lovers. To the 
song of the thrush, when near the piazza, they responded by cheery word, 
song, or whistle in imitation of its song. Often times the piano and singing 
brought the bird near, and when the music ceased the male burst forth into 
song. The female was called “ Mother ” from the first, always in endear- 
ing tones, and, when addressed thus, would follow along beside the foot 
path, often within six feet of the ladies. In spite of the fact that near the 
cottage was a camp of over fifty boys and young men, some of whom were 
almost constantly passing along this path, the birds showed no fear. 

The Thrushes soon began to alight on the rail of the piazza, or on the 
backs of the chairs, always giving forth their call for that attention which 
they were sure to get. Late in July, while sitting on the piazza, the 
writer saw the mother bird come with a leaf, alight on a chair, then fly up 
into the place where the Phoebe usually nests, and deposit the leaf. Care- 
ful inspection showed that she was building two nests, about two feet apart, 
separated by a timber, and sometimes deposited her leaf in one nest, and 
then again in the other. Suddenly she ceased to build, and we were expect- 
ing her to deposit her eggs and raise her young, as she still kept up her social 
relations with the family. 

One day while the writer was watching for results, he saw her with a 
leaf pass up over the piazza, but she did not appear under it or near the 
nests partly or wholly built. This called for a change in the place of obser- 
vation, and she was discovered building another nest in the tin gutter under 
the eaves of the second story and under the tip of an overhanging oak 
branch. Here she completed her nest, laid her eggs and hatched her 
young, only one of which she raised as a deluge of water in a heavy shower 
drowned the others. 

This peculiar nesting seems worthy of note and may call out similar efforts 
by bird lovers to study the influence which kind treatment and attention 
may have on the habits of birds, and especially any change in the habits 
of their nesting. 

Another instance of that familiarity which kindly attention brings into 
bird life happened in August of the same summer and on the same piazza. 

A large bouquet of wild flowers was always kept in a jar on a table on 
the piazza. This attracted the attention of a Ruby-throated Humming- 
bird which at first made occasional visits, and later several visits a day to 
this bouquet, regardless of the number of people on the piazza. On its 
arrival all became quiet to watch its method of probing the flowers for 
food except for a light note, in imitation of its own, made by one of the 
ladies. When the false foxglove was in bloom and the jar was filled with 
them, the Hummingbird often visited them. 

One day, when more than a dozen people were on the piazza, the Hum- 
mingbird came. One of the boys picked one of the blossoms and held it 
out in his fingers and the bird buried head and beak in the flower. Then 


140 General Notes. FS 


Jan. 


he dropped the flower and straightened out his finger, holding it steady and 
the bird perched upon it. 

By similar treatment the Chipmunks in a few weeks eat from one’s hand 
and often perched on the knee or shoulder. By kindness one learns the 
value of his bird and animal neighbors and is able to study the habits 
and photograph birds while nesting and feeding their young. This com- 
radeship between man and bird friends should be more carefully practiced 
by all who live or camp in the woods in the summertime. 

This would be more often the case if people would realize that a bird 
killed or frightened away is a permanent loss, but the bird who trusts: 
brings to one a daily joy and gives a pleasant memory which cheers during 
the winter season and fills one with the joyous anticipation of meeting his 
bird friends the following summer.— Epwin DeMenrirte, 210 Drummond 
Place, Norfolk, Va. 


The Bluebird in Cuba.— On February 24, 1917, while riding by train 
through the suburbs of Havana, one of the first species we saw in Cuba was 
the familiar Bluebird (Sialia s. sialis), About seven birds, including several 
adult males, were perched on the telegraph wires near one of the local sta- 
tions, and were, of course, absolutely unmistakable. As the Bluebird has 
been considered accidental in Cuba, this observation seems worthy of 
record.— W. pEW. MILLER anp LupLow Griscom, American Museum of 
Natural History. 


Rare or Uncommon Birds at Rochester, N. Y.— At the request of 
Superintendent of Parks, C. C. Laney, the writers have for the past seven 
years kept careful record, both by chart showing daily records, and by ecard 
index of dates and other pertinent notes, of birds at Highland Park with 
frequent trips to Lake Ontario and nearby marshes. As the regular work 
of both takes us into the field from one to ten hours every day in the year 
an unusual opportunity is given for this study. 

The following notes from our records seem worthy of publication. 

Larus leucopterus. IcrLanp Gutu.— March 26, 1915, two birds 
flying low, near Virginia Ave., Rochester by Wm. L. G. Edson; December 
15, 1918, one bird, Port of Rochester, Wm. L. G. Edson; December 23, 
1918, one bird, Port of Rochester, on the Genesee River, near its mouth, 
in company with Herring and Ring-billed Gulls, in flight and at rest on the 
water within a minimum distance of twenty-five feet by Wm. L. G. Edson 
and R. E. Horsey. (This report was published in Bird-Lore’s Christmas. 
Census for 1918); January 26, 1919, one bird, Lake Ontario at Summerville, 
by R. E. Horsey. 

Bartramialongicauda. Upianp PLover.— Becomingrare. June 14, 
1914, eight birds, near Rochester, N. Y., by Wm. L. G. Edson; July 14, 
1915, three birds, near Rochester, N. Y., by Wm. L. G. Edson; June 14, 
1917, two birds, near Rochester, N. Y., by Wm. L. G. Edson; May 8, 
1918, one bird, near Rochester, N. Y., by Wm. L. G. Edson and R. E. 
Horsey. 


i ee. 


~ oo 


sl 


Coa | General Notes. 141 


Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina. Eventnc GrosBEAK.— 
March 7 to April 9, 1916, from three to twenty-five birds noted on eight 
days by both Wm. L. G. Edson and R. E. Horsey. 

Ammodramus savannarum australis. GrRassHOPPER SPARROW.— 
June 30 to August 17, 1914, eight reports, usually two birds, on a sandy 
hillside, east of Highland Park, Rechester, N. Y.; April 27 to August 19, 
1915, thirteen reports, at the 1914 station and also a couple of miles east 
on the same range of hills; May 2 to July 2, 1916, a pair and young birds, 
12 reports, same station as 1914 and also a mile to the west; May 10 to 
June 15, 1918, three reports, two birds, same station as 1914. 

As a pair of these birds were to be found at the same place during the 
summers from 1914 to 1917, and young birds were noted in 1916 there is no 
doubt of their nesting there. In 1918 they were noted only in early spring 
and in 1919 not at all, although conditions at their station have not changed 
as far as one can see. 

Cardinalis cardinalis cardinalis. Carprnau.— December 10, 1913 
to April 21, 1914, a male bird was noted almost daily in Highland Park and 
at the feeding stations; November 2, 1916 to March 25, 1917, same stations 
as above. Besides the writers, all Highland Park employees and many 
bird students saw these birds. The 1913-1914 bird was photographed 
and featured in one of the Rochester Sunday newspapers. 

Vermivora leucobronchialis. Brewster’s WarsLer.— May 2, 
1914, one bird, in “‘ Warners Woods” Highland Park, Rochester, N. Y. 
at about 9.30 A.M., by R. E. Horsey, and from 11.20 A.M. to 12 M. by 
Wm. L. G. Edson and R. E. Horsey. 

The identification points were; almost square patch of bright yellow on 
the wing, a black line through the eye, a black bill, tail grayish slate grading 
to grayish yellow-green on the back and slightly darker on the head, under- 
parts light gray tinged with yellow. The points were noted with field 
glasses in bright sunlight. This record was published in ‘ Bird-Lore’ 
for July-August, 1914. 

Below are our dates for the Blue-winged and Golden-winged Warblers 
of which the Brewster’s is a hybrid. 

Vermivora pinus. BuiurE-wINGeD WARBLER.— September 15 and 16, 
1914, one bird, Wm. L. G. Edson and R. E. Horsey; September 7 and 
10, 1915, one bird, Wm. L. G. Edson. 

Vermivora chrysoptera. GoLDEN-wINGED WaArRBLER.— May 24, 
1913, one bird, R. E. Horsey; September 9, 1914, one bird, Wm. L. G. 
Edson; September 4, 1915, one bird, R. E. Horsey. 

Dendroica discolor. Prarie WARBLER.— May 9 and 10, 1916, two 
birds; May 7, 1918, one bird, Highland Park, Rochester, N. Y., Wm. L. G. 
Edson and R. E. Horsey. 

On May 24, 1917, Wm. L. G. Edson, at the request of Assistant City 
Engineer, Mr. Skinner, visited the Rochester Sewage disposal plant at 
Brighton, where about 3000 warblers were feeding on the flies on the sludge 
beds. 


142 General Notes. pens 


Jan. 


It was quite cold for several days and on this day the thermometer regis- 
tered 41 degrees and the birds seemed too cold to fly far. 

Species identified were: 

Mniotilta varia. Biuack anp WuHiTe WarBLER.— Fifty individuals. 

Vermivora rubricapilla rubricapilla. NasHvi1teE WarBLER.— 
Twenty-five individuals. 

Compsothlypis americana usnee. NorTHERN PARULA WARBLER.— 
Four hundred individuals. 

Dendroica cerulescens cerulescens. BLACK-THROATED BLUE 
WaArBLER.— One hundred individuals. 

Dendroica magnolia. MacnouiA WarBLER.— Seventy-five  indi- 
viduals. 

Dendroica fusca. BLACKBURNIAN WARBLER.— Two hundred indi- 
viduals. 

Dendroica virens. BrLAcK-THROATED GREEN WaARBLER.— One hun- 
dred individuals. 

Wilsonia citrina. Hooprep WarsiEer.— Twenty-five individuals. 

Setophaga ruticilla Repstarr.—One hundred and- twenty-five 
individuals. 

Sitta canadensis. Rrp-BREAstED NuTHatcu.— Nested in Highland 
Park Pinetum, five young were raised in an Audubon Bird House No. 2, 
placed on an Electric-wire pole in the midst of thick hemlocks. Young 
birds in the nest on June 17, 1917. They left the nest on June 28, 1917 
and the parents and young often came to the food station for suet. 

This is the first record we have noticed of their breeding in Monroe 
County, N. Y. 

Penthestes hudsonicus littoralis. Acapian CoicKaDEE.— December 
11, 1913, 1 bird; January 2 to 16, 1914, two birds reported four times, 
Highland Park, Rochester, N. Y. The birds were watched at a distance of 
from six to eight feet, and also shown to local bird authorities (mentioned 
in‘ Birdsof New York,’ by E. H. Eaton).— Wm. L. G. Epson anp R. E. 
Horsry, The Herbariwm, Highland Park, Reservoir Ave., Rochester, N.Y. 


Notes from St. Marks, Fla.— Following are records of birds seen in 
this vicinity during the past few weeks: 

Limosa fedoa. Marsiep Gopwir.—A single bird, September 16, 
on a sand-bar near the lighthouse in company with Black-bellied Plovers, 
Turnstone, Least and Semipalmated Sandpipers and Red-backed Sand- 
pipers. 

Vermivora pinus. BrLun-wINGcep WaArBLER.— One taken October 9, 
in low pine and oak grove, bordering our village. But one bird seen. The 
first record for our county it is believed and an uncommon migrant in 
Florida. 

Tyrannus verticalis. Arkansas Kinapirp.— Two were observed 
October 11, in our village close by the railroad and near the river, invariably 
perched in topmost twigs of dead oaks that overlooked a grove of pine 


vol 020 | General Notes. 143 


saplings and a nearby tidal marsh. Both birds were taken and proved to be 
females of the year. One was in strong molt, very pale on head and but 
little yellow on under parts; the other had molt nearly completed and 
showed considerable yellow. 

Piranga erhthromelas. Scarier Tanacer.— An adult male was 
taken October 25, showing a few flecks of red on breast, neck and belly and 
with a well defined line of the same from lower neck along each side to the 
rump. I have no previous record for the bird here. 

Dendroica castanea. Bay-BREASTED WARBLER.— Several were noted 
October 25, in a mixed grove of oaks, pines and sweet gums; the birds seem- 
ingly affecting the deciduous trees. If the species occurs here regularly it 
has been overlooked heretofore. 

On July 30, 1919, the following species were noted as having arrived 
along shore: 

Macrorhamphus griseus griseus. Dowr1rcHer.— Four birds seen. 

Pisobia minutilla. Least SanppreerR.— About thirty birds. There 
may have been a few Semipalmated Sandpipers present but none identified 
positively. 

Arenaria interpres morinella. Ruppy Turnstonre.— A single bird 
seen. On August 11 these were seen in the same locality: Dowitcher, 10; 
Least and Semipalmated Sandpipers about 50 each; Ruddy Turnstone, 15. 

On August 15-16 further additions were the following: 

Pelidna alpina sakhalina. Rep-BpackrED SaNnpprppr.— Five or six 
birds. 

Totanus flavipes. YELLOW-LEGS, five. 

Squatarola squatarola. Buack-BELLIED PLovER.— Thirteen birds 
seen of which five were in adult summer plumage. 

figialitis semipalmata. SremrpatmMaTep PLoverR.— Four.— JoHN 
Wiuurams, St. Marks, Florida. 


Bird Notes on the Wisconsin River.— The following notes were made 
during a canoe trip down the Wisconsin River from Kilbourn to Prairie 
du Chien, May 30, to June 4, 1919. 

Centurus carolinus. Rep-BELLIED WoopPEecKER.— A fine male was 
seen about fourteen miles above Portage. Not noted again until the 
Spring Green bridge was passed; then fairly common along the remainder 
of the river. 

Petrochelidon lunifrons lunifrons. Cuiirr Swattow.— A colony 
of twenty nests was found on a cliff on the left bank about ten miles above 
Merrimac; all those examined contained eggs. The structure was inter- 
esting in that in every case advantage was taken of cavities existing in the 
rock for the body of the nest, only the characteristic tubular entrance 
being made of mud. 

Ardea herodias herodias. Great Buur Heron.— Above Merrimac 
a heronry of fourteen nests was found in a clump of trees that had been 
killed by the formation of Lake Wisconsin. 


144 General Notes. ees 


Jan. 


Protonotaria citrea. ProrHonorary WARBLER.— One was seen in 
some bushes in Lake Wisconsin above Merrimac. About five miles above 
the Spring Green bridge in a low heavily wooded spot. the characteristic 
sharp “ tchip ”’ of this species was heard. This bird was evidently looking 
for a nesting site as it flitted restlessly from tree to tree finally entering an 
old woodpecker’s hole ina stub. The nest wasempty. Another bird was 
seen feeding in a mass of driftwood at the river’s edge. 

Polioptila ceerulea cerulea. BiurGRay GNaTCATCHER.— Only two 
birds were met with; one about ten miles above Portage, and the other 
five miles above the Spring Green bridge. 

Cardinalis cardinalis cardinalis. Carprvau.—tThe first bird was heard 
singing about a mile below the Spring Green bridge. From this point on 
to the Mississippi it was fairly common. 

Myiarchus crinitus. Cresrep FrycatcHer.— One of the commonest 
birds along the river. 

Thryothorus ludovicianus ludovicianus. CaroLtina WreEN.— A 
single bird was heard singing about a mile from the Mississippi. 

Tyrannus tyrannus. Kinapirp.— On several occasions nests of this 
species were found on the lakes in northern Wisconsin, built in trees over- 
hanging the water. JI then thought that these open situations might have 
been selected to facilitate the hunting of insects. On the Wisconsin, three 
nests were found about three miles above Prairie du Sac in small trees 
standing in the water, one nest with two eggs being only eighteen inches 
above the water. At this place open fields came nearly to the water’s 
edge. It accordingly appeared to me that occasionally at least, the King- 
bird shows a decided preference for the vicinity of water. Only one refer- 
ence on this subject has been found, although it is true that I have not 
made a thorough search of the literature: Barrows, in his ‘ Birds of Michi- 
gan’, quotes Cheney on the Hamilton Lake region as follows: ‘This species 
might be considered almost aquatic in its nesting habits, as the nests were 
invariably placed in stumps projecting out of the water, often at a consid- 
erable distance from shore.’”? — A. W. ScuHoraEr, Madison, Wisconsin. 


Abundance of Periodical Cicadas, Diverting Attacks of Birds from 
Cultivated Fruits.— Before the ripening season of cherries this year, 
Mr. Hugh Wallis, restauranteur of Washington, D. C. reminded a colored 
employee that the time for screening the cherry trees was approaching. 
“No boss,” was the reply ” no need fo’ dat dis yeah. De locus is comin’.” 
Subsequent events proved the accuracy of this prophecy and suggested an 
inquiry into experience elsewhere in this regard. Only three replies were 
received from localities where the periodical cicada was really abundant, all 
of which testify to decreased bird damages. Mr. W. A. Taylor, Chief of the 
Bureau of Plant Industry, Washington, D. C. writes: ‘‘ [have been watch- 
ing with some interest a few raspberry bushes in my garden in the northern 
edge of the city not far from a piece of woodland in which the cicadas are 
abundant. It has seemed to me that the Catbirds and Robins which during 


a oe 


Vol. reed 
1920 


General Notes. 145 
the past two or three years have devoted much time to raspberries have 
hardly touched them this season.” J. L. Cowgill of West Falls Church, Va. 
states that he has noted ‘ very little damage from birds this year on small 
fruits in the neighborhood. Two years ago, the birds destroyed a great 
many early cherries; this year practically no damage could be seen.” 
Charles R. Posey of Baltimore writes: “ the only fruit which I had an op- 
portunity of observing during the visitation of the locusts was cherries, and 
I believe these to have practically entirely escaped damage by birds. The 
locusts were excessively abundant.” 

These observations give further support to a conclusion reached by most 
students of economic ornithology, that birds almost invariably specialize on 
the most abundant or most easily accessible food supply. This trait leads 
to destructiveness when the abundant food supply is a cultivated fruit or 
grain, as well as to usefulness when it is an injurious insect, or as in the 
present case, where the effect is diversion of attack from cultivated crops to 
an abundant insect of no decided economic significance one way or the 
other. — W. L. McAtesr, U.S. Biological Survey, Washington, D. C. 


Nomenclatural Casuistry.— Human laws in their origin and applica- 
tion rest upon a foundation of common sense, and what is true of jurispru- 
dence is equaily true of nomenclature. Its laws, canons or rules must meet 
the approval of the majority of the few who frame them and use them or 
they will fail in their purpose. Now and then they suffer through a strained 
interpretation and it is a case of this sort to which attention is here drawn 
because it threatens to open wide the door to all kinds of nomenclatural 
casuistry. 

Recently, a western race of the Red-headed Woodpecker has been 
described (Oberholser, Canadian Field-Nat. X X XIII, September 1919, 
pp. 48-50). Whether the race is worthy of recognition need not now con- 
cern us, but a name has been selected that was used purely inadvertently 
in a local list. Even the describer admits this for he begins by saying: 
“The name Melanerpes erythrophthalmus is apparently a lapsus calami for 
Melanerpes erythrocephalus and there is no other evidence that the author 
intended to describe a new species or subspecies. The name Melanerpes 
erythrophthalmus does not occur in the index but the species is duly entered 
there as Melanerpes erythrocephalus.” Farther quotation and farther com- 
ment would seem superfluous for Article 19 of the International Rules of 
Nomenclature is applicable both in the spirit and in the letter. Here is a 
very obvious lapsus calami according to contemporaneous evidence whether 
the slip be of the pen or of the brain that directed the pen. Weall have such 
slips and perhaps Art. 19 is designated to protect frail humanity. To put 
another construction upon this case is to make a plaything of nomenclature 
and set us wondering how far its rules may be twisted into producing fan- 
tastic results. Let it not be forgotten that we need a safe and sane nomen- 
clature.— JonatHan Dwieut, M. D., 34 E. 70th St., New York City. 


146 General Notes. eos 


Jan. 


Supplementary Note on J. P. Giraud.— Dr. C. W. Richmond has 
called my attention to another new species proposed in Giraud’s ‘ Birds of 
Long Island,’ nemely Picus bairdii on page 178. It is mentioned inci- 
dentally under the Downy Woodpecker from which it differs in having 
the upper part of the head red — undoubtedly the young of that species. 
Dr. Richmond further informs me that Baird refers to this species in the 
manuscript catalogue of his collection crediting it to Bell. The latter 
probably intended to publish it but never did so and Giraud in mentioning 
it merely referred to a name no doubt in circulation among contemporary 
ornithologists. Unwittingly, however, Giraud has added enough descrip- 
tion to remove the name from the class of nomina nuda and as it has 
seventeen years priority over Picus bairdi Malherbe which is current as 
the subspecific name of the Texas Woodpecker, Dryobates scalaris bairdi, 
it precludes the use of the latter. 

As Dr. Oberholser (Proc. U. 8S. Nat. Mus. 41, pp. 189-159, 1911) has 
separated the Texas Woodpecker into several races one of his names will 
be applicable to this bird if we follow the A. O. U. Check-List in regarding 
his several races as identical and as cactophilus comes first, the Texas 
Woodpecker will be known as Dryobates scalaris cactophilus. Should we 
regard all of Dr. Oberholser’s races as tenable as has been done by Mr. 
Ridgway in his ‘ Birds of North and Middle America,’ then the Mexican 
form to which he restricted bairdi is without a name and we should suggest 
that it be called Dryobates scalaris giraudi nom nov. in commemoration of 
his valuable contribution to Mexican ornithology, it being now satis- 
factorily proven that most if not all of his ‘““new birds” really came from 
that country. 

Dr. Richmond states in reference to the types of Giraud’s species that 
they are all in the U. S. National Museum. ‘Those that were supposed to 
be lost a few years ago had been twice catalogued and their identity tempo- 
rarily concealed.— Witmer Sronr, Academy of Natural Sciences, Phila- 
delphia. 


vo Ao | Recent Literature. 147 


RECENT LITERATURE. 


Van Oort’s ‘ Birds of Holland.’ '— A year ago we had the pleasure of 
noticing the appearance of parts 1 and 2 of this important work. We are 
now in receipt of parts 3 and 4 which, however, were issued in May last. 
These fully maintain the high standard set by the first parts and both 
plates and letter press are excellent. 

The plan of the work was fully set forth in our previous notice so that. it 
is not necessary to repeat it here. The present instalments complete the 
Cormorants, cover all of the Ardeiformes, the Flamingo and the Swans. 
The twenty plates, 10? by 14 inches are admirably colored and represent 
the principal variations in plumage to be found in each species. As might 
be expected the subjects lend themselves to more artistic treatment than 
those of parts 1 and 2 and many of them are a distinct improvement in this 
respect. The text runs from page 57 to 120 and is beautifully printed 
and typographical errors seem to be rare. An errata page is included in 
this fasciculus calling attention to the presence of parentheses about the 
names of authors in a number of cases where they should have been omitted 
— the result of an effort for uniformity on the part of the printer or proof- 
reader which is the despair of editors in America as well asin Holland! We 
trust that Dr. Van Oort may be enabled to proceed rapidly with the remain- 
ing parts of his great work.— W.S. 


Taverner’s ‘Birds of Eastern Canada.’?— This notable work has 
been prepared to meet a growing demand for a handbook that will present 
in concise form the more important information on the habits and distribu- 
tion of the birds of East Canada and keys and descriptions that will enable 
one to identify them. In providing for all these needs we think that the 
author has been remarkably successful. 

The key carries one as a rule only to the familus but the numerous figures 
with which it is supplied illustrate the heads of several of the most striking 
species in each. In large families like the Warblers and Finches, however, 
the reader must work from the several descriptions without any key to 
guide him. The descriptions are usually divided into two sections entitled 
“‘ Distinctions ”’ and “ Field marks ’’ and there are two others ‘‘ Nesting ”’ 
and “ Distribution.” There is also a paragraph headed “ Subspecies ”’ 
in which the geographic races are briefly mentioned after which comes a 


1 Ornithologia Neerlandica. De Vogels van Nederland door Dr. E. D. Van Oort. Direc- 
teur van’s Rijks Museum van Naturlijke Historie te Leiden. Met ongeveer vierhonderd 
gekleurd platen. Martinus Nijhoff. Lange Voorhout 9, The Hague, Holland. Aflever- 
ing 3 and 4. 

2 Birds of Eastern Canada. By P. A. Taverner. Memoir 104, No. 3, Biological Series. 
Canadian Geological Survey. Ottawa, 1919. pp. 1-297, figs. 1-68, colored plates I-L. 
Price 50 cts. 


[sax 


148 Recent Literature. 
general account of habits and “ economic status.’”’ The English name of 
the A. O. U. ‘ Check-List’ is given at the head of the section relating to 
each species followed by other vernacular names current in the region 
covered by the work including the French name, and finally the binomial 
Latin name of the ‘ Check-List. ’ 

The general information presented under the various species is as a rule 
well selected and eovers most of the questions that arise in the minds of 
bird students seeking information. In the case of the Purple Finch we 
notice a not unnatural criticism of the name purple as applied to this species 
which, as Mr. Taverner says, is more of a magenta. Dr. Spencer Trotter 
however, (‘ Auk,’ 1912, p. 255) has called attention to the fact that it was 
the famous Tyrian purple after which the bird was named not the violet 
purple of today. The colored plates by Mr. Frank C. Hennessey are very 
attractive and the postures of the birds usually good, some of them like the 
Kinglets rather daring in their originality. Mr. Hennessey evidently stud- 
ies his birds and his paintings are his own interpretation of what he sees 
rather than copies of conventional attitudes. We need just such effort 
in ornithological illustration. 

Having given our hearty approval of Mr. Taverner’s book so far as the 
general reader, is concerned which, after all, is the main point in its pro- 
duction, we must take exception to his attitude on some minor or more 
technical points. 

As is well known, he is opposed to the use of subspecies and his effort to 
dispense with them in his nomenclature and at the same time explain them 
in a sort of foot note has not been very happy. The non-technical reader, 
who may be interested in Pine Grosbeaks, for instance, is almost certain to 
regard the Pine Grosbeak, Pinicola enucleator, which heads the paragraph 
as a different bird from the Canadian Pine Grosbeak, P. e. leucura, men- 
tioned in small type at the end. This matter, however, has been thor- 
oughly discussed elsewhere (‘ Auk,’ 1918, pp. 446-449). In this connection 
Mr. Taverner constantly makes use of an unfortunate term “ type form ” 
when referring the first described race in a group of con-specific forms. 
This race is of exactly the same rank as any of the others, and this term, 
the use of which we hoped had died out, is distinctly misleading. The 
word type, it seems to us had better be restricted to the specimen which 
was originally described and it remains the same whether the form which it 
represents becomes a species or a subspecies. Some authors, as Mr. 
Gregory M. Mathews cite subspecies (i. e. trinomial names) as types of 
genera and these may or may not happen to be what Mr. Taverner calls 
the “ type form,” thus is the matter further complicated. 

Another unfortunate feature of this work is the practice of interpolating 
generic or group headings at various points throughout the book while 
adjacent genera or groups are not accorded such distinction. For instance, 
there is a heading on page 83, ‘“‘ White Herons ”’ and under it we find not 
only the Egret and the Little Blue Heron but the Green and Black-crowned 
Night Herons as well. We are supposed to include only the first two but 


ee 1990 vee Recent Literature. 149 


there is nothing to indicate this to the uninitiated. Whoever prepared the 
systematic index on pages 29 to 39 completely misunderstood this arrange- 
ment just as we supposed a general reader would do. The heading ‘‘ Genus 
Acanthis,”’ which was intended to include only the Redpolls but which is 
followed by all the other Fringillide without a break has been carried on to 
the following page of the index by whoever prepared it as “‘ Genus Acanthis 
concluded ” under which we find the Swamp Sparrow, Fox Sparrow, etc.! 

While the general text is apparently free from typographical errors the 
introduction gives evidence of very hasty preparation, first names and 
initials of writers are often omitted and the names of such well known 
ornithologists as Robert Ridgway and C. F. Batchelder are consistently 
misspelled. 

All these matters are however trivial faults in an attractive and well 
gotten-up volume.— W. 8. 


‘The Birds of North Carolina.’ !— One of the most notable contribu- 
tions to North American ornithology during the past year is the volume by 
the Messrs. Brimley and Mr. T. Gilbert Pearson on the birds of North 
Carolina. Adequate State bird books have heretofore been issued only 
by the more northern commonwealths but North Carolina now comes to 
the fore with one of the most satisfactory works of this kind that has yet 
appeared — a work that is a credit to the authors, the publishers and the 
State authorities and Audubon Society, who made its publication possible. 

The text consists of a historical sketch by Mr. Pearson followed by a _ 
consideration of Life Zones and Distribution by C. 8. Brimley. Then come 
keys for identification and a systematic consideration of the 342 species 
and subspecies of birds found in the State. The appendices comprise a 
bibliography, a set of migration tables covering thirty-one years’ observa- 
tions at Raleigh by the Messrs. Brimley and Mr. 8. C. Bruner, similar to 
those published by one of the authors in ‘The Auk’ for 1917. There is 
also a Glossary and no less than three indices. For some reason many 
editors fail to realize that a single index is twice as useful as two and that 
there is no possible advantage in the separation of the references which 
only makes it more easy for one to search in the wrong place for what he is 
seeking. 

The main text contains under each species, a description taken from 
Chapman’s ‘ Handbook,’ a brief statement of the general range and range 
in North Carolina, followed by an account of the bird in the State — its 
habits, abundance, records of captures of specimens of rare species, nests and 
eggs etc. The plan adopted seems admirable and the method of handling 
the data leaves little to be desired. One or two species seem to rest upon 
rather slender evidence as birds of North Carolina, as for instance, Pu,ffinus 


1 Birds of North Carolina. By T. Gilbert Pearson, C. S. Brimley and H. H. Brimley. 
Volume IV. North Carolina Geological and Economic Survey. Raleigh, 1919. Royal 
8 vo. pp. i-xxiii, + 1-380, pl. 24, figs. 275. 


150 Recent Literature. [ h a 


borealis, identified by Atkinson from the length of a wing which he saw but 
the dimensions of which are not given; and Clangula islandica entered on 
the basis of a specimen reported by Cairns although another specimen ob- 
tained and identified by the same collector proved to be C. c. americana. 
There are also a few statements that have evidently been made on very 
questionable authority and had better have been omitted, as that regarding 
the breeding of the Bobolink in Louisiana and Florida. 

Mr. Bruce Horsfall has contributed twenty-three of the color plates 
and some of them are among the best of his ornithological illustrations. 
Others are poor; the figure of the Yellow-throated Warbler being hopelessly 
out of proportion to its surroundings while the Fox and White-throated 
Sparrow are noticeably stiff. The other colored plate, that of the Swallow- 
tailed Kate, and 275 text figures mostly of the heads of the birds are by 
Brasher, although the fact is not mentioned anywhere in the volume. The 
text figures are very useful as a means of identification and are very well 
done with a few exceptions. In the Herring Gull the color is very mislead- 
ing the back being no lighter than the lower parts. 

The bibliography is introduced with a rather unfortunate statement to 
the effect that it includes ‘‘ all known papers containing records of birds 
or their eggs from North Carolina.”’ Most bibliographers would be chary 
of making such a claim and upon turning over a small collection of separata 
on the birds of the State which happens to be at hand we find one that has 
escaped the compiler. It is by C. J. Pennock, ‘ Bird Notes from Pinehurst, 
North Carolina’ published in the ‘ Wilson Bulletin,’ No. 74, and is an 
annotated list of 67 species containing some records that might well have 
been included in the State report. There is also an account of Swans on 
Currituck sound from ‘ Forest and Stream’ for April, 18, 1916, which has 
been overlooked and there are doubtless other North Carolina notes in the 
same journal. A note ona curious hybrid duck (Mallard and Green-winged 
Teal) from North Carolina in ‘The Auk’ for 1903 would seem worthy of 
mention but it has apparently also been overlooked by the authors. For 
the general purposes of such a work however, the bibliography is satis- 
factory. 

The names of the authors of this volume have so long been identified with 
North Carolina ornithology that it is a gratification to find the results 
of their labors preserved for future generations in such satisfactory form — 
a gratification that they no doubt share equally with the general public. 
Let us hope that this publication may prove the forerunner and model for 
State bird reports for some of the other southern commonwealths which 
have as yet issued no works of this kind.—W. 8. 


Hine on Birds of the Katmai Region, Alaska.'!— In this paper, No. X 
of the scientific results of the Katmai Expedition of the National Geographic 


1 Birds of the Katmai Region. By James S. Hine. The Ohio Journal of Science, June 
1919. pp. 475-486. 


Nek Eel Recent Literature. 151 


Society, Mr. Hine presents an annotated list of thirty-seven species of 
birds secured by the party with notes on a number of others which he 
observed. 

The notes are full and contain much of interest in regard to the habits 
and distribution of the species considered. Unfortunately there is no men- 
tion of the length of time that was spent in the district nor any sort of 
itinerary or even an indication of where Katmai might be. This is, of 
course, all contained in some of the other reports but as no reference to 
them is here given, the ornithologist who reads Mr. Hine’s paper must 
needs do without this information. We notice several departures from 
the nomenclature of the A. O. U. ‘ Check-List ’ but no reason for them is 
advanced by the author —as for instance why he regards the Short- 
billed Gull as a subspecies of the European Larus canus or why he prefers 
the generic name Glottis for the Greater Yellow-legs and Heteroscelis for 
the Tattler. When we have an authoritative and generally used list it 
seems desirable to follow its nomenclature in a paper of this sort or at least 
to state when and why we depart from it. 

The illustrations consist of three text figures from photographs and two 
full page half-tones of Cormorants and Puffins, Sparrows and Ptarmigan, 
from drawings. 

Mr. Hine’s paper is a welcome contribution to the ornithology of the 
great Alaskan region which still offers many opportunities for ornithological 
exploration.— W. 8. 


Witherby’s ‘Handbook of British Birds.’ '— Part 4 of this notable 
work completes the Wagtails and covers the Creepers, Nuthatches Titmice, 
Kinglets and Shrikes. There is a colored plate of the Tits and two half-tone 
plates illustrating the seasonal plumages of the White and Pied Wagtails 
and the heads and juvenal plumages of various species, as well as numerous 
text figures. 

The treatment follows the plan of the earlier parts and is quite up to the 
standard there established. Under the Creepers we notice one statement 
to which we would take exception, namely the disposition of the American 
Brown Creeper as a subspecies of Certhia brachydactyla. This on geographi- 
eal grounds alone would seem very unlikely, and Dr. H. C. Oberholser has 
recently shown (‘ Auk,’ October, 1918) that its relationship was, as we had 
always supposed, distinctly with C. familiaris. Mr. Witherby doubtless 
overlooked this paper as he states that this part is brought up to the date 
of July 31, 1919. 

Part 5 completes the Shrikes and covers the Waxwing, the Flycatchers 
and most of the Warblers. The two latter groups are regarded as forming 
part of one great family to which belong also the Thrushes and most of the 


1A Practical Handbook of British Birds. Edited by H. F. Witherby. Part 4 (pp. 209- 
272), September 26, 1919. Part 5 (pp. 273-336) November 5, 1919. Witherby & Co., 
326, High Holborn, W. C. 1, London. Price 4s. net per part. 


a2 Recent Literature. lee 
“Timaliide,” and for which the name Muscicapide is adopted. This 


will seem like lumping with a vengeance to most of our readers but let them 
try to define Thrushes and Flycatchers, when the species of the World are 
concerned or to separate the Warblers from the Timaliidz, or the latter 
from the Thrushes, and they may come to agree with the plan that Mr. 
Witherby and his associates have adopted. The other alternative would 
be to propose a lot of small families composed of the species that will not 
fit into the several groups above mentioned as strictly defined — a course 
which seems to us much more objectionable than combining them under 
one head. Nevertheless as the possibilities for increasing the number of 
genera which now seems to be such a fascinating pastime, begin to wane, 
we may expect activities in the discovery of new families! Two plates of 
Warblers, a name which still has a meaning even if the species are included 
in an all-embracing ‘‘Muscicapide,’’ one colored and one uncolored, 
illustrate this part. American bird students will of course understand 
that in the above remarks ‘‘ Warblers” and ‘‘flycatchers”’ refer to the old 
world groups so called, not to the entirely different families to which these 
names are applied here. The Kinglets and Gnatcatcher which we have 
usually regarded as belonging with — or close to — the Old World Warblers, 
are placed with the Titmice in Mr. Witherby’s work. 

The authors have now covered one fourth of the British species and we 
wish them all speed in completing their task.— W. 8. 


A Geographical Bibliography of British Ornithology .'— The present 
work is a continuation of Mullens and Swann’s ‘ Bibliography of British 
Ornithology ’ already noticed in these columns (Auk, 1916, p. 443, 1917, 
p. 227 and 1918, p. 98). That work has been styled the “ biographical 
volume ” since it consisted of biographical sketches of the authors with 
lists of their publications. The present undertaking on the other hand, is 
geographic, the titles of the articles being arranged chronologically under 
the various counties to which they refer, beginning with such as relate to 
the British Isles as a whole. 

American ornithologists will be interested in the statement made in the 
advertising circular to the effect that “ hitherto the only work dealing solely 
with the subject has been Elhott Coues’ Ornithological Bibliography 
(Fourth Instalment): being a list of Faunal Publications relating to British 
Birds, Washington, 1880,’’ and those who are not already acquainted with 
it will enjoy reading the memorial addressed to Dr. Coues by the leading 
zoologists of England upon the completion of the first instalment of his 


1A Geographical Bibliography of British Ornithology from the Earliest Times to the 
End of 1918. Arranged under Counties. Being a Record of Printed Books, Published 
Articles, Notes, and Records Relating to Local Avifauna. By W. H. Mullens, M. A., 
LL. M., F. L..S., M. B. O. U., H. Kirke Swann, F. Z.S., and Rev. F. R. C. Jourdain, M. A., 
M. B.O.U. Witherby & Co., 326 High Holborn, London. 1919. Svo. Part I, pp. 1-96. 
To be Completed in Six Bi-monthly Parts. Price 6 Shillings net per part. 


Be a00 all Recent Literature. 153 
‘Bibliography ’ — that relating to North America which appeared as an 


appendix to his ‘ Birds of the Colorado Valley ’ — (see Bull. Nuttall Ornith. 
Club, 1879, p. 176.) The receipt of this memorial doubtless had much to 
do with Dr. Coues’ preparation of the British bibliography above alluded to. 

British ornithologists are certainly to be congratulated upon the publica- 
tion of such an admirable series of bibliographies as Messrs. Mullens and 
Swann are compiling. We wish that such a publication were possible in 
America, where we have likewise had practically nothing in the way of a 
general bibliography since Dr. Coues ceased his labors in this field — W. 8. 


Birds of the Expedition to Korinchi Peak, Sumatra.— The report ! 
by Messrs. Robinson and Kloss on the birds collected by them in the Kor- 
inchi district of Sumatra, constitutes probably the most extensive account 
of the birds of the island that has yet appeared. They list 186 species 
with some additional ones secured on the coast at Pasir.Ganting, and under 
each one is given a detailed account of the specimens, synonymy and much 
critical discussion of relationship, plumage ete. 

The altitudinal distribution of the species is considered at length, both 
in the introductory portion and in tables at the end, and comparisons are 
made with the avifauna of Java and Borneo. The authors’ conclusions 
are that the highest elevations are inhabited by a fauna almost identical 
with that found on the high peaks of Java and that it is very much more 
distantly related to that of similar zones on Kinabalu, Borneo. There is 
also a small proportion of species found on the Himalayas and the moun- 
tains of Tenasserim and the Malay peninsula which does not spread to 
Java or Borneo. The very distinct nature of the Kinabalu fauna is especi- 
ally emphasized. 

There are four excellent colored plates and a bibliography of 22 titles of 
“the principal articles dealing with the avifauna of Sumatra,’ among 
which we fail to find the account of the collection made by Messrs. Harrison 
and Hiller published by the reviewer in the ‘ Proceedings’ of the Academy of 
Natural Sciences of Philadelphia for 1902, pp. 670-691. 

The new forms proposed by Messrs. Robinson and Kloss are as follows: 
Chotorhea chrysopogon letus (p. 141), Bukit Tangga, Negri Sembilan, Fed. 
Malay States; Pnoepyga pusilla harterti (p. 205), Gunong Ijau, Larut Range, 
Perak; Notodela diana sumatrana (p. 215), Korinchi; Tephrodornis pelvica 
annectens (p. 222), Lamra, Trang; Parus major malayorum (p. 226), 
Korinchi; Bhringa remifer attenuata (p. 235), Bukit Fraser, Selangor- 
Pahang boundary; and Zosterops difficilis (p. 250), Dempo. 

The paper closes with a nominal list of the species certainly known to 
occur in Sumatra which numbers no less than 526.— W. 8. 


1 Results of an Expedition to Korinchi Peak, Sumatra. Part II: Birds. Jour. Federated 
Malay States Museums. Vol. VIII. pp. 81-284. December, 1918. Singapore. Price 
$4.00. 


154 Recent Literature. ee 


Swann’s ‘ Synoptical List of the Accipitres.’— This work ! resembles 
Sharpe’s ‘ Hand-List’ in general style but has the distinct advantage of 
adopting the trinomial system so that we have a means of distinguishing 
mere geographical races from quite distinct species. Of course, there are 
always dilferences of opinion as to the rank of certain forms but in the 
majority of cases there will be uniformity of judgment upon this matter. 

The descriptions that are given are in the nature of keys, and as they 
are very brief, and based upon adult birds, they will we fear, be of very 
little value in a group which offers such a variety of plumages as do the 
Accipitres. 

The classification seems to follow Sharpe pretty closely but there are a 
number of nomenclatural changes in conformity with recent proposals 
though the author’s position in some cases we are at a loss to understand. 
For instance, he uses #gypius for Vultwr monachus of Linnzeus realizing the 
impossibility of employing | wltur for this species inasmuch as it was not 
among the original species quoted by Linnzeus under this generic name. 
This is quite correct but Mr. Swann proceeds to drop Vultur entirely which 
is, of course, impossible, while to add to the inconsistency, he retains the 
family name Vulturide. Again in several instances he ignores the Inter- 
national Code and the opinions of the Commission. Thus the type of 
Catharista is, by the Code, |} ultur aura Linn., and it thus becomes a 
synonym of Cathartes while the type of Morphnus is similarly Falco uru- 
bitinga Gmel., yet in both cases Mr. Swann uses these names in their 
former application. Either the author has carelessly overlooked these 
matters or he is cutting loose from the recognized rules of nomenclature, 
an unfortunate procedure in these days, and one which materially mars the 
value of his work. 

We wonder somewhat at his disposition of Urubitornis solitarius Tschudi,’ 
as a subspecies of Harpyhaliaetus coronatus. The name was regarded as a 
synonym of H. coronatus in the ‘ British Museum Catalogue’ and in 
Sharpe’s ‘ Hand-List’ but we always were in doubt as to whether Dr. 
Sharpe had examined any specimens, as the species seems to be a rare one. 
The two in the collection of the Philadelphia Academy seem to be quite 
distinct from H. coronatus both specifically and generically. 

In spite of our criticisms, Mr. Swann’s work is a distinct advance upon 
anything that we have yet had and will be of the greatest assistance to 
students of the Accipitres. It places the group upon such a basis that 
doubtful points both of taxonomy and nomenclature can easily be worked 
out and the results embodied in an appendix, bringing it fully up to date. 
It is toward this end that our remarks have been directed.— W. 8. 


1A Synoptical List of the Accipitres (Diurnal Birds of Prey) Comprising Described 
Species and Subspecies with their Characters and Distribution. By H. Kirke Swann, 
F. Z. S. London: John Whelden & Co. Price 4 shillings per part. Part I. July, 1919. 
pp. 1-38; Part II, pp. 39-74, with reprint of pp. 15-16 and a page of addenda et corri- 
enda for Part I. November 7, 1919. 


ai | Recent Literature. 155 


Burns’ ‘ Ornithology of Chester County, Pennsylvania.’! — Proba- 
bly no county in the United States can boast of as many bird-lists as Chester 
County, Pa., and in the little volume before us we now have another, more 
pretentious than any of its predecessors, and aiming to embody all the 
information which they contain as well as much original material. 

Mr. Burns has been engaged in preparing this work for some years past, 
and his personal experience, extending over a period of thirty-five years, 
combined with his extensive knowledge of the work of his predecessors 
and the local literature well fit him for the preparation of such a volume. 

The exceptional development of ornithological interest in Chester 
County seems to be due largely to the Quakers who settled much of the 
eastern and southern portions and who from the earliest times possessed a 
strong interest in nature study and a full appreciation of its importance. 
A glance at the list of former scholars of the famous Quaker boarding school 
at Westtown, will show the names of nearly all of the early ornithologists 
of the Philadelphia region, from Thomas Say down, and even today West- 
town graduates constitute one of the strongest elements in the makeup 
of the Delaware Valley Ornithological Club. 

Part I of Mr. Burn’s little work is entitled “‘ Physical Features, Habitats, 
Biographical Notes and Review of Faunal Lists.’’ All of these topics are 
briefly covered and illustrated by portraits of several of the more prominent 
ornithologists and a picture of the Westtown School in 1810. 

Part II consists of an annotated list of 247 species with a hypothetical 
list of 16 more. Then follows a bibliography of 19 of the most important 
county lists, published and manuscript, and a series of notes referred to by 
numbers in the main text. A number of excellent half-tone reproductions 
of photographs of nests, eggs and young birds of various species by Thomas 
H. Jackson and Alfred C. Redfield illustrate this part. There are no keys 
or descriptions whatever and there is no call for them in a work of this 
kind, but the publisher in his advertising notice states that it contains 
“complete descriptions of the 250°bird species’? of the County. With 
this flagrant misstatement the author of course had nothing to do. 

The text under each species consists of the A. O. U. name, additional local 
vernacular names, a careful statement of the character of its occurrence, 
distribution and abundance in the county, and any important quotations 
or references to the published literature. Also in the case of migrants 
extreme dates of occurrence and averages covering the long period of Mr. 
Burns’ observations, with the exact dates of capture or observation of 
rare species. The plan is excellent and but little published information 
seems to have escaped the author. We fail however, to find mention of 
the capture of the Brewster’s Warbler (‘ Auk,’ 1888, p. 115) or the observa- 
tion of the Lawrence’s Warbler (‘ Auk,’ 1912, p. 247) in the county, both 


1 The Ornithology of Chester County, Pennsylvania. By Franklin Lorenzo Burns, 
in co-operation with local ornithologists. Boston. Richard G. Badger, The Gorham 
Press. 1919, 8vo. pp. 1-122. 21 half-tone illustrations. Price $2.00 net. 


156 Recent Literature. ests 


Jan. 


of which seem worthy of mention, while the recent capture of the Red 
Phalarope (‘ Auk,’ 1919, p. 419) was of course, too late for inclusion. The 
omission of the Gray-cheeked Thrush from the main list is surprising as it 
is far more common in eastern Pennsylvania than the Bicknell’s and nearly 
or quite as abundant as the Olive-back. There are a number of Chester 
County specimens of the Gray-cheek in the collection of the Academy of 
Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. 

Mr. Burns’ summary of our knowledge of the ornithology of Chester 
County emphasizes the fact that it is still hmited to the southern and 
eastern portions and that we have no intimate or detailed information on 
the bird life of the nerthern townships. It is regrettable that this region 
could not have been carefully explored and the results of the investigation 
included in the present volume, thus making an important addition to the 
historic work of the earlier writers. 

The little book is well printed and attractively gotten up but we regret 
to say lacks the supervision of a competent editor, with the result that no 
less than 24 of the scientific names are misspelled, while those given for 
the Night Heron and Creeper are the names of the European races and not 
the American. The text also is often somewhat faulty in construction and 
occasionally ungrammatical. These faults however, do not detract from 
the ornithological value of the work but are regrettable as they could have 
been so easily eliminated and the literary character of the book been thus 
made fully equal to the scientifie.— W. 8. 


Mailliard’s ‘ Notes on the Avifauna of the Inner Coast Range of 
California.’'\— In this paper, Mr. Mailliard describes the results of field 
work carried on by himself and his assistant, Mr. Luther Little, from Mt. 
St. Helena, Napa County, to Mt. Sanhedrin, Mendocino County, Cali- 
fornia, during 1919. The physical features of the various localities are 
described and lists of the species observed are given, while the details of 
distribution are considered at length and much information is presented on 
the habits of several species. 

Many of the localities being nearly upon the dividing line between the 
humid coast environment and the dry interior, present peculiarly interest- 
ing conditions, and Mr. Mailliard has made a valuable contribution to the 
zoogeography of the region. <A table at the end of the paper shows at a 
glance the species seen and taken at each of the nine stations where stops 
were made.— W. 8. 


Bailey’s ‘ The Raptcrial Birds of Iowa.’ 2— At the time of his death 
the late Dr. Bert Heald Bailey had nearly completed a report on the birds 


1 Notes on the Avifauna of the Inner Coast Range of California. By Joseph Mailliard 
Proc. Calif. Acad. Sciences. Fourth Series, Vol. IX, No. 10, pp. 273-296. November 
25, 1919. 

2The Raptorial Birds of Iowa. Bulletin No. 6, Iowa Geological Survey. By Bert 
Heald Bailey, M.S., M. D. Des Moines, 1918. pp. 1-238, figs. 93. [Received Novem- 
ber, 1919.] 


+ 


Net Soe a Recent Literature. 157 


of prey of the State of lowa. His manuscripts have been edited and com- 
pleted by his student and co-worker, Miss Clementina 8. Spencer and have 
now been published by the Iowa Geological Survey in an attractive volume 
which is a credit to all concerned. 

The economic statements are taken largely from Fisher’s ‘ Hawks and 
Owls of the United States,’ but under each of the commoner species there 
is a table of stomach contents of a dozen or so specimens examined by the 
author. The consideration of the characters and distribution of the spe- 
cies occupies the bulk of the volume and as a rule seems to be very full 
and accurate. There is a brief summary of field characters and a fuller 
description of each species with measutments. Then follows a statement 
of its general range and a detailed account of its distribution and habits in 
Iowa, with a map showing county records and breeding localities, and a full 
bibliography. The illustrations consist of excellent half-tones of mounted 
birds in the museum of Coe College, some characteristic views of Iowa 
scenery and a portrait of Dr. Bailey. 

There is a lack of consistency in the treatment of some portions of the 
work, some of the distributions being taken direct from the A. O. U. ‘ Check- 
List’ while others unfortunately are too general, and consequently some- 
what inaccurate or misleading. The northern race of the Turkey Vulture 
is thus credited with ranging to South America and the Swallow-tailed 
Kite is stated to breed from the northern United States southward. In the 
bibliography the authority for the scientific name is quoted in one reference 
and not in the next without any uniformity, while Dr. Bailey’s proposed 
new race of the Broad-winged Hawk, which has been since regarded as 
merely a melanistic form, is given as a ‘“‘ new subspecies ”’ in this publica- 
tion whereas it was described and named in.‘ The Auk’ for January, 1917. 

These are, however, minor matters and do not detract from the useful- 
ness of the publication in providing a means for the recognition and proper 
appreciation of the birds of prey, which is a necessity on the part of farmers 
and others, before any progress can be made in the destruction of the 
noxious species and the protection of those which are beneficial_— W. 8. 


Mrs. Farwell’s ‘Bird Observations near Chicago.’ !— The late Mrs. 
Ellen Drummond Farwell, a director and vice-president of the Illinois Audu- 
bon Society, was an ardent bird lover and a student of wild bird life. Her 
note books kept in diary form were replete with observations relating 
mainly to birds of the Chicago district, although there were two short lists 
of species observed in Georgia as well as notes on birds seen in Europe. 

All of these have now been published in book form, with a foreword by 
John V. Farwell and an introduction by Mary Drummond. They show a 
keen power of observation and contain many facts of interest not only to 


1 Bird Observations near Chicago. By Ellen Drummond Farwell. Introduction by 
Mary Drummond. Withillustrations. Privately printed. [1919] pp. 1-192. 


158 Recent Literature. leo 


Jan. 


the local bird student but to others interested in the broader study of the 
habits and songs of the species to which they refer. 

The volume, which is privately printed, is a beautiful example of the 
bookmaker’s art, with perfect typography and excellent half-tones of many 
of the commoner birds or their nests, from photographs by Henry Emerson 
Tuttle. There is also afronticepiece portrait of Mrs. Farwell, to whom this 
little book is a most fitting memorial.— W. 58. 

Hudson’s ‘ The Book of a Naturalist ’ '— Mr. Hudson’s many readers 
will be glad to learn of the appearance of another of his delightful volumes. 
The sketches which it includes appeared originally in various of the English 
magazines and hence have probably been read by few on this side of the 
Atlantic. Almost all of them deal with English country life though 
there are occasional allusions to Patagonia, with which country the author’s 
name is so closely associated. There are in all twenty-nine chapters treat- 
ing of the whole range of out-door life — mammals, birds, reptiles, insects, 
wild flowers, earthworms and even the potato, while a good index guides 
one to the many interesting and important observations which lie hidden 
away in the pages. The volume is hardly on a par with its predecessors 
and while some of the sketches are full of the great out doors of which the 
author loves to write, they give one the impression of being a collection of 
odds and ends which had not yet been brought together in book form. 
Only three of the present sketches relate to birds, two of them dealing with 
herons and heronries.— W. 8. 


Dixon on Wild Ducks in a City Park.’°— Every visitor to the city of 
Oakland, California will be shown Lake Merritt, a beautiful body of water 
of about a square mile in extent, situated in the heart of the city and famous 
as the winter resort of thousands of wild fowl. In the present paper, Mr. 
Dixon describes the winter bird-life of the lake illustrating his account 
with a number of excellent photographs. 

Lake Merritt is the oldest State game reservation in California, having 
been established in 1869. No gunning whatever is allowed there and dogs 
not in leash are not permitted in the park, furthermore a large area of the 
lake is shut off by a log boom and boating there in the winter is forbidden. 
_ Last but not least about four tons of whole barley are fed to the ducks every 
winter at a cost to the city of about $400. 

As a result some 2500 wild ducks are to be found on the lake throughout 
the winter from October to the end of the shooting season, in February, 
when it is safe for them to scatter over the country for a few weeks before 
returning north. Large numbers of the birds come out on the lawns adjoin- 


1The Book of a Naturalist. By W. H. Hudson. George H. Doran Company, New 
York. Svo. (1919) pp. i-viii, 1-360. 

2 Wild Ducks as Winter Guests in a City Park. By Joseph Dixon. National Geographic 
Magazine, October, 1919. pp. 331-342. 


Vol. a | 
: 1920 


Recent Literature. 159 
ing the lake to rest in the sun and Mr. Dixon’s photographs show them close 
to the houses and driveways apparently entirely devoid of fear. 

The most abundant species is the Pintail, followed by the Canvas-back, 
Baldpate and Shoveller. Other species of ducks occur, however, as well 
as Grebes, Coots, Gulls and Killdeers. The pleasure derived by the 
thousands of persons who visit the lake to watch the ducks, and the protec- 
tion of the birds as a factor in the preservation of the species are well worth 
the comparatively small expense and trouble. Why do not other favorably 
located communities try the same experiment? — W. 8. 


Recent Circulars by Forbush.'— The Massachusetts Department 
of Agriculture has recently published two excellent educational pamphlets 
by the State ornithologist, Mr. Edward Howe Forbush. One of these 
deals with outdoor bird study and is full of practical hints as to where and 
how to study wild birds. The other describes the building of bird houses 
and nest boxes. It seems that the demand for such publications is never 
satisfied, every year sees the additions of thousands of persons to the army 
of bird students and it is fortunate that there are State governments able 
and willing to supply the literature that they desire. It would seem, how- 
ever, that some of the best of these pamphlets might be stereotyped so 
that an unlimited number of copies could be printed without the expense of 
resetting* the type—— W. S. 


The Birds of the Albatross Expedition of 1899-1900.2— The long 
delayed report on the birds obtained on the cruise of the ‘‘ Albatross ”’ to 
the southern Pacific in 1899 and 1900 has at last appeared, the systematic 
study of the collection being by Alexander Wetmore while the introduction 
and field notes are contributed by Charles H. Townsend one of the natural- 
ists who accompanied the expedition and made the collection. Specimens 
were obtained from thirty-three islands some of which were visited by nat- 
uralists for the first time. Representatives of ninety-three species or sub- 
species were collected and of these the following fourteen are described as 
new :— Ixobrychus sinensis moorei (p. 173) Middle Caroline Islands; Globi- 
cera oceanica townsendi (p. 191), Ponapé, Eastern Carolines, Sauropatis 
sacra rabulata (p. 197), Kua, Tonga Islands; S. c. celada (p. 198) Vavau, 
Tonga Group; Myiagra townsendi (p. 205), Kambara, Fijis; Conopodera 
atypha (p. 206), Fakarava; C. a. rava (p. 208), Whitsunday Isl.; C. a. 


1 Outdoor Bird Study. Hints for Beginners. By Edward Howe Forbush. Department 
Circular No. 12, Mass. Dept. Agr. pp. 1-51, numerous cuts. May, 1919. 

Bird Houses and Nesting Boxes. By Edward Howe Forbush. Circular No. 10, 
Mass. Dept. Agr. pp. 1-28, 7 plates and numerous cuts. April, 1919. 

2 Reports on the Scientific Results of the Expedition to the Tropical Pacific in charge of 
Alexander Agassiz, on the U. S. Fish Commission Steamer ‘“‘ Albatross,’’ from August, 1899, 
to March, 1900, Commander Jefferson F. Moser, U. S. N., commanding. XXI. The 
Birds. By Charles Haskins Townsend and Alexander Wetmore. Bull. Museum Comp. 
Zool., Vol. LXIIT, No. 4. August, 1919. pp. 151-225. 


160 Recent Literature. ees 


Jan. 


crypta (p. 209), Makemo; C. a. agassizi (p. 210), Apataki; C. a. nesiarcha 
(p. 210), Rangiroa; C. a. erema (p. 211), Makatea — all in the Paumotu 
Group; C. percernis (p. 218), Nukuhiva, Marquesas Isls.; Pinarolestes 
nesiotes (p. 216), Kambara, Fijis; and Myzomela rubrata dichromata (p. 
220), Ponape Isl., Eastern Carolines. There were also three new forms of 
Collocalia in the collection which were described by H. C. Oberholser in 
1906. On page 201, Mr. Wetmore proposes a new generic name Haplornis 
in place of Muscylvua Lesson. He gives an exhaustive history of the latter 
genus and its applications, and in order to eliminate it and avoid the com- 
plications which its use would involve he designates as its type Muscicapa 
cerulea Gmel., thus fixing it in the synonymy of Hypothymis Boie. This 
is very commendable but he fails to designate any type for his new genus 
and being admittedly a substitute for Muscylva it may be argued that it 
falls with it. In the hope that it may be saved from such a fate we would 
designate Rhipidura lessoni Gray as its type which seems to have been Mr. 
Wetmore’s intention. 

Incidentally the author shows that Mathews’ proposed genus Scao- 
phaethon is not deserving of recognition and that the correct name for the 
Red-faced Booby is as generally recognized Sula piscator, not S. sula as 
claimed by Mathews. (See however p. 189 of this ‘Auk ’.) 

This paper is a valuable contribution to Polynesian ornithology and in 
the constant recurrence of specific names accredited to Titian Peale we are 
forcibly reminded of the historic United States Exploring expedition which 
touched on many of these same islands in 1838-1842 — W.S. 


Coker on the Guano Birds of Peru.'— The study of bird communities 
constitutes one of the most fascinating branches of ornithology and as 
the community that Mr. Coker describes in the present paper is one of 
the largest known in the world a peculiar interest attaches to his account. 
Engaged by the Peruvian government to make an economic study of the 
guano and fishery industries he spent the period from December, 1906 to 
August, 1908, on the coastal islands enjoying unrivalled opportunities for 
the study of the life histories of the various species of birds which breed 
there, and the present report embodies the results of his observations. 

These Peruvian islands have long been noted for the remarkable deposits 
of guano left there by the nesting birds and its exportation for agricul- 
tural purposes has been going on for centuries. Some idea of the extent 
of the industry may be gathered when we learn that from 1851 to 1872 
no less than ten million tons of high grade guano were extracted from the 
Chincha Islands alone, valued at the time at about three-quarters of a 
billion dollars. At the present time the high grade deposits have be&n 
well nigh exhausted and inferior deposits are being exported. This, how- 


1 Habits and Economic Relations of the Guano Birds of Peru. By Robert E. Coker. 
In charge Scientific Inquiry, United States Bureau of Fisheries. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus. 
Vol. 56, pp. 449-511, plates 53-69. 1919. 


- 


oe le me * Ofer 


US con Mael Recent Literature. 161 


ever, refers only to the accumulation of former years while the annual 
production of the birds today amounts to no less than 20,000 tons. The 
conservation of such an asset is naturally a problem of the utmost import- 
ance to the government. Indeed this seems to have been recognized from 
the earliest times for older authors quoted by Mr. Coker tell us that the 
Inca kings forbade landing on the islands during the nesting season, under 
pain of death, and the killing of the birds on or off the islands at this time 
was prohibited. Those who object to the stringency of modern bird and 
game laws may well take note of this! 

Mr. Coker points out the interesting fact that the value of the guano 
depends largely upon the nature of the islands selected by the birds as 
nesting grounds. Those like the Chinchas are absolutely without rainfall, 
no vegetation is possible and the nitrogen cannot be converted into 
ammonia and lost by evaporation as would be the case were it subjected to 
rainfall, but is perfectly preserved in a form readily available for agricul- 
tural purposes. Some of the more northern islands where rain occasionally 
falls produce only inferior grades of guano. 

The most important of the guano birds is the White-breasted Cormorant 
or “ Guanay ” (Phalacrocorax bougainvillei) and in June 1907, Mr. Coker 
found their colony on the Chincha Islands covering an area of fifteen acres, 
while a careful estimate showed that there were some 180,000 nests, and 
three-quarters of a million birds including old and young. In the following 
year the colony on these islands was half as large again due in part to acces- 
sions from another island. The Pelican or “ Aleatraz,’”’ (Pelecanus thagus), 
comes second in importance and the Booby, ‘“ Piquero,” (Sula variegata) 
third. Von Tschudi placed the Booby first as a guano producer, and his 
statement has been generally followed ever since, but after careful investi- 
gation Mr. Coker can find no evidence of conditions having been materially 
different in Tschudi’s time from those prevailing today, and there is no 
question about the relative rank of the species at the present time. Other 
birds inhabiting the islands are the Penguin, (Spheniscus humboldtz), 
several Gulls and Terns, an Albatross (Diomedia irrorata), several Petrels 
and Shorebirds, an additional species of Booby and two of Cormorants and 
a Man-o’-war bird. The Condor, two Turkey Vultures and a Passerine 
bird, the “‘ Chirote,”’ (Cinclodes taczanowskii) complete the list. 

To the life histories of all of these Mr. Coker makes valuable contribu- 
tions while the economic aspect of the guano industry is exhaustively 
treated. Twenty-five half-tone reproductions of photographs give one an 
excellent idea of these remarkable barren islands and the masses of birds 
which literally cover their surface during the nesting season. Mr. Coker 
is to be congratulated upon doing an excellent piece of economic work and 
making at the same time a most important contribution to ornithological 
literature.— W. S. 


162 Recent Literature. les 


Jan. 


Scoville’s ‘ The Out-of-Doors Club.’ !— To readers of ‘ The Atlantic 
Monthly ’ Mr. Scoville is well known as one who is making the environs 
of Philadelphia as famous a region for the nature lover as those of Boston 
and Cambridge have long been, thanks to the larger numbers of writers on 
outdoor life who seem always to have lived there. The present little 
volume describes many trips afield in which the writer instructs his children 
in the wonders of the great out doors. It is impossible to imagine a child,— 
or a grown-up for that matter,— who will not be attracted by the experi- 
ences of the ‘‘ Band.’ Birds, mammals, reptiles, plants and ecamp-lore 
all come in for their share of attention and the wanderings lead across the 
Delaware to the author’s cabin in the New Jersey pines and even to the 
remote ‘ plains ”’ in the central part of that State where the famous dwarf 
forests of pine and oak cover many acres, a region which has probably never. 
before been described in popular writings. 

The suggestion that the unidentified peepings that one of the children 
heard here might have come from a brood of young Heath Hens is hardly 
to be taken seriously. It is an attractive way, perhaps, to introduce the 
fact that the birds did once occur here but the region has been too carefully 
explored by hunters and ornithologists to make such an occurrence at all 
likely, and if the author really considered it probable the fact is deserving 
of more serious record elsewhere. The more likely possibility of young 
Ruffed Grouse is not mentioned! In referring to the peculiar Conrad’s 
Crowberry which finds on the “ plains’ its southernmost limit we notice 
that the name of this early botanist is misspelled. 

Little books like Mr. Scoville’s add greatly to the interest in outdoor life 
and vastly increase the army of nature lovers who in turn become staunch 
protectors of the birds and wild flowers and out of whose ranks eventually 
come a smaller number of real ornithologists and botanists. He who, by 
his writings, starts such a process of evolution is deserving of all praise. 
Several of Mr. Scoville’s fellow members of the Delaware Valley Ornitho- 
logical Club have contributed photographs which add to the attractiveness 
of his little volume.— W.S. 


Gifford’s ‘Field Notes on the Land Birds of the Galapagos 
Islands.’ 2— In 1913, Mr. Gifford, one of the naturalists on the California 
Academy’s Galapagos expedition, published an account of the water- 
birds and the doves obtained by the party. Having been subsequently 
occupied with anthropological work he has been unable to complete his 
report and now presents his ornithological field notes in order that they 


1The Out-of-Doors Club. By Samuel Scoville, Jr. Philadelphia, 1919. The Sunday 
School Times Company. 12 mo. pp. 1-171. 

2 Expedition of the California Academy of Sciences to the Galapagos Islands, 1905-1906. 
XIII. Field Notes on the Land Birds of the Galapagos Islands and of Cocos Island, 
Costa Rica. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sciences. Fourth series. Vol. II, Pt. II, No. 13, pp. 
189-258. pp. 189-258. June 16, 1919. 


ne 1900 pall Recent Literature. 163 


may be available to students of the Galapagos avifauna, leaving the critical 
study of the 5,916 specimens of land birds and the collection of nests, eggs 
and stomach contents for future investigation. 

While it is regrettable that the entire collection could not have been 
worked up promptly by Mr. Gifford, who of course knows more about it 
than anyone else, we are nevertheless grateful for the large amount of 
interesting information relating to the life histories of the birds of these 
famous islands, which he has made available to the student. 

Of the thirty-six species referred to in the paper all but three are resident 
forms. The Barn Swallow, was found at Cocos Island on September 2 and 5 
and at Charles Island on October 11 and 12, anda Bobolink came on board 
the vessel in lat. 7° 23’ N. long., 97° 48’ W. on September 28 and again in 
lat. 14° 24’ N. long., 106° 42’ W. on October 3, these locations were between 
300 and 500 miles off the Central American coast. A Redstart also came 
on board near the last mentioned station. These records will prove of 
interest to students of migration.— W. 8. 


Hall and Grinnell on Life-Zone Indicators in California.!— This 
important and timely paper should be read by all students of geographical 
distribution. As the authors point out it is only the naturalist of wide 
experience and with a knowledge of both zodlogy and botany who can 
accurately judge of the zonal affinities of a given region, and as the attempt 
is too frequently made by those who are not so qualified, grievous errors are 
made and authors often, from lack of knowledge of the situation which 
confronts them, fall back upon the unfortunate and reprehensible practice 
of coining special terms of their own to fit the apparently anomalous condi- 
tions which they find. The present authors have presented a list of plants 
and vertebrate animals which are characteristic of the several life zones 
that occur in California, as a guide for those who are studying zonal distri- 
bution of life in that State. They also offer a list of influences which tend to 
interfere with the orderly succession of life zones as they would occur if 
dependent wholly upon temperature and altitude. Foremost among 
these is of course, slope exposure, followed by air currents, cold water 
streams, evaporation from moist soil, proximity to large bodies of water, 
influence of lingering snow banks, changes in vegetable covering, extent 
of mountain area, and rock surfaces. Many of these affect plant life only, 
though a knowledge of them may also explain many local anomalies in the 
distribution of animals. 

The trouble heretofore seems to have been that botanists rely too much 
upon soil composition and character to account for distribution, while 
zodlogists — some at least — have ignored everything but temperature 
and altitude. The happy combination of a botanist and zoSlogist in the 


1 Life-Zone Indicators in California. By Harvey Monroe Hall and Joseph Grinnell. 
Proc. Calif. Acad. Sciences. Fourth Series. Vol. IX, No. 2, pp. 37-67. June 16, 1919. 


164 Recent Literature. [3 = 


authorship of the present paper has apparently resulted in a more equable 
treatment of the problem than has yet been presented. 

The important facts are brought forcibly to our attention that we must 
not look for all or even a majority of ‘indicators’ in any one locality 
since other conditions limit the range of most species within their zone. 
Moreover, a thoroughly typical species may occur outside of its zone as a 
straggler without lessening its value as an “indicator” of the zone — 
in other words the abundance of the species must be taken into considera- 
tion as well as its mere presence. 

We trust that ere long we may have an authoritative list of zone “ indi- 


1 


cators ”’ for other regions besides the Pacific coast.— W.5. 


Dabbene on Argentine forms of the Genera Geositta and Cin- 
clodes.'— In this important systematic paper, Dr. Dabbene has carefully 
reviewed the Argentine species and subspecies of these two genera, giving 
full descriptions of the plumage of each, an apparently complete synonymy, 
tables of measurements of specimens examined, and keys for identification. 
There are also half-tone plates illustrating the habitats of some of these 
birds in the mountain regions of north-western Argentina and maps show- 
ing their geographic distribution. 

By the careful work of Dr. Dabbene and his associates we are obtaining 
a thorough knowledge of the Argentine avifauna such as can only be sup- 
plied by capable resident ornithologists. We congratulate them upon the 
admirable results of their studies and hope that their researches may con- 
tinue without interruption.— W. 8. 


Cory’s ‘ Review of the Genera Siptornis and Cranioleuca.’ >— After 
examining all of the species of the old genus Siptornis that were available 
Mr. Cory has presented a key to the genera into which he would divide the 
group and another key to the species and subspecies. As an aid to the 
identification of these difficult birds it will be of much assistance but from 
the tentative position to which he refers a number of species that he was 
unable to examine, it is evident that there is still much to be learned about 
the group. 

According to the author’s views the old name Siptornis must be restricted 
to the type species, and most of the others referred to Cranioleuca Reichb. 
S. ottonis however, he makes the type of a new genus Pseudosiptornis (p. 
150), while S. flammulata becomes the type of another new genus Sziptor- 
noides (p. 150) which includes ten other species. Some of these however, 
are separated again under the subgeneric name Kustptornoides (p. 150) 
type S. anthoides. 


1 Las Especies y Subespecies Argentinas de los Generos Geosilia Swainson y Cinclodes 
Gray. Por Roberto Dabbene. Ann. del Mus. Nac. de Hist. Nat. de Buenos Aires. Tom. 
XXX, pp. 113-196. July 11, 1919. 

2A Review of Reichenbach’s Genera Siptornis and Cranioleuca, with Descriptions of New 
Allied Genera and a Subgenus. By Charles B. Cory. Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, Vol. 
32, pp. 149-160. September 30, 1919. 


Net arr sl Recent Literature. 165 


While in no way reflecting upon the accuracy of Mr. Cory’s work we 
should have preferred rating all of these, no doubt perfectly natural divi- 
sions, as subgenera. : 

Our contention is that with the present rapid increase of generic names 
our nomenclature is being rendered more and more unintelligible. While 
the separation of any group into subdivisions indicating its phylogenetic 
development is most praiseworthy, why inject this into the names of the 
species involved, when it can be indicated just as well by the use of sub- 
genera, leaving the nomenclature undisturbed? Here we have fifty-seven 
species or subspecies which most ornithologists with some knowledge of 
neotropical birds would recognize under the name Siptornis, but fifty-six 
of them now appear under names that are unknown to the vast majority 
and unless some vernacular name or synonym is appended we should have 
trouble in finding out what an author, who used them, was writing about. 
Mr. Cory has adopted a praiseworthy plan of trying to preserve the name 
Siptornis in the new names which he has coined but this is not often at- 
tempted and too often names of similar etymology apply to entirely unre- 
lated groups. 

This comment as has already been said is not directed against Mr. Cory 
but against a general practice the merits of which should be very carefully 
considered by present day systematic ornithologists.— W.S. 


Chapman on New South American Birds.'— Students of the neo- 
tropical avifauna will be pleased to learn, from the appearance of this paper, 
that Dr. Chapman has completed his service in the American Red Cross 
and is back again at his studies of the rich South American material ob- 
tained by various expeditions sent out by the American Museum of Natu- 
ral History, in the years preceding America’s entry into the great war. 
The fifteen forms here described as new are as follows: Microsittace ferru- 
gineus minor (p. 323), Corral, Chile; Upucerthia dumetoria hallinani (p. 
324), Tofo, Chile; U. dabbeneti (p. 325) Tafi del Valle, Argentina; Cin- 
clodes fuscus tucumanus (p. 326), same locality; Leptasthenura punctigula 
(p. 327), Sarmiento, Argentina; L. andicola peruvians (p. 327), La Raya, 
Peru; Siptornis urubambensis (p. 328) Machu Picchu, Peru; S. punensis 
rufala (p. 328), Tafi del Valle, Argentina; Psewdochloris uropygialis con- 
nectens (p. 329), La Raya, Peru; P. olivascens sordida (p. 330), Ticara, 
Argentina; Atlapetes canigenis (p. 330), Torontoy, Peru; Diglossa mysta- 
calis albilinea (p. 331) Machu Picchu, Peru; Oreomanes binghami (p. 331), 
same locality; Tangara cyaneicollis gularis (p. 332) Candamo, 8. E. Peru; 
Amblycercus holosericeus australis (p. 333), Incachaca, Bolivia. 

They are described with the author’s characteristic care and detail with 
frequent comparison with related forms.— W.S. 


1 Descriptions of Proposed New Birds from Peru, Bolivia, Argentina, and Chile. By 
Frank M. Chapman. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., Vol. XLI, Art. V, pp. 323-333. Sep- 
tember 1, 1919. 


166 Recent Literature. ES: 

Oberhclser on Larus hyperboreus barrovianus.'— In this paper, 
Dr. Oberholser again comes to the support of the Pt. Barrow Gull, a form 
originally separated from the Glaucous Gull by Mr. Ridgway in 1886 as a 
full species and so recognized in the second edition of the A. O. U. ‘ Check- 
List.’ In 1906 after a study of a large series of these birds Dr. J. Dwight 
came to the conclusion that the alleged differences were not sufficiently 
marked to warrant recognition of Larus barrovianus and reduced the name 
to a synonym of L. glaucus [= hyperboreus] a view that was endorsed by 
the A. O. U. Committee and it was omitted from the third edition of the 
‘Cheek-List.’. In 1918, Dr. Oberholser in an elaborate paper published in 
‘The Auk’ proposed to resurrect it as a subspecies, a view which Mr. 
Ridgway, the original describer of the form had failed to take in his ‘ Birds 
of North and Middle America’ the eighth volume of which, containing the 
Gulls appeared the next year. Dr. Dwight promptly met Dr. Oberholser’s 
attempt at resurrection with an additional attack on the validity of the 
form and Dr. Oberholser now reappears in defence. All of this only 
demonstrates that with the same material available two or more authori- 
ties will have opposite opinions upon the recognition of subspecies based 
upon such finely drawn distinctions as are now so prevalent in systematic 
work. There is no ‘“ right” or “‘ wrong’ in such questions, it is simply a 
matter of personal opinion. The only fair way of treating such cases in 
our Check-Lists, 1t would seem, would be to state both views. Any other 
method obscures the facts in the case.— Dr. Oberholser’s final argument, 
that a number of ornithologists to whom he had pointed out the char- 
acters of L. barrovianus agreed with him, reminds one of the auctorum 


plurimorum principal once so popular in discussing problems of nomen- 
clature! — W. 8. 


Contributions to the Zoogeography of the Palearctic Region.?— 
This issue is the first part of a new publication and contains two papers by 
Erwin Stressemann on the forms of the group 4#githalos caudatus and their 
hybrids, of which 4. c. romanus (p. 10) from Rome is deseribed as new; 
and on the European Bullfinches with a chart of their evolution. 

Of the former group he recognizes fourteen pure-blooded forms, which 
he divides into three groups, and five hybrids. There is much discussion 
upon the nature of these forms. : 

Of the Bullfinches there are five races and one hybrid. Just where the 
recognition of so many natural hybrids in addition to subspecies is going to 
lead us it is hard to say. 

In America there seems to be but little necessity for such a hypothesis 


1The Status of Larus hyperboreus barrovianus Ridgway. By Harry C. Oberholser. 
Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington. Vol. 32, pp. 173-176. September 30, 1919. 

2 Beitrage zur Zoogeographie der palaarktischen Region. Herausgegeben von der 
Ornithologischen Gesellschaft in Bayern. Heft I, September 15, 1919. Munchen 1919: 
Gustay Fischer in Jena. Preis Mk. 5. 


Vol. taal 
1920 


Recent Literature. 167 
and it has only been advanced in the case of the Flickers, Meadowlarks 
and a few other rather anomalous cases.— W.S. 


Annual Report of the Chief of the Biological Survey.!— Mr. E. W. 
Nelson’s report as chief of the U. 8. Biological Survey for the year ending 
June 1919, contains much of interest. The amount of appropriations avail- 
able for the work of the Bureau was greater than ever before, including 
$592,000 from the Federal Government and over $800,000 appropriated 
by State Governments and other bodies for work in cooperation with the 
Survey. It is estimated that the destruction of noxious animals resulted 
in a saving of live stock valued at five millions and of forage and crops 
valued at fourteen millions. 

The bulk of the report deals with the destruction of noxious mammals. 
The ornithological work consisted largely of investigating charges against 
various species of birds. Among these was the destruction of fish by Mer- 
gansers and Pelicans, the case of the former being held open while the latter 
was proven harmless to species used as human food. The Night Herons 
in Louisiana were charged with being injurious to the frog industry but 
this was disproved as was the charge against the White-winged Dove of 
destroying grain in Arizona. In the case of the Bobolink, while charges 
of damage to crops in the lower Delaware Valley were found to be ground- 
less, there was found to be great damage to the rice crop in the southern 
states and an open season for shooting these birds was granted from Penn- 
sylvania and New Jersey southward. 

Much additional information of this nature is contained in the report 
which seems to show that several species regarded as beneficial when the 
effort toward bird protection was initiated must now be regarded as 
injurious at certain times and places and necessary steps taken for their 
control. 

It is welcome news to learn that in addition to various publications of the 
Survey noticed in these columns during the past year, we may look at an 
early date for the appearance of reports on the birds of New Mexico and 
Alabama. 

The supervision of the National Bird Reservations during 1918-1919 
has been in charge of Dr. G. W. Field while Mr. G. A. Lawyer has con- 
ducted the administration of the migratory bird treaty.— W.S. 


Shufeldt on the Birds of Brazil.2— In the August number of the 
‘Bulletin of the Pan American Union,’ Dr. Shufeldt has compiled a popular 
account of the birds of Brazil illustrated by a number of photographs, 
mainly from specimens in the U. 8. National Museum. The paper is 
arranged systematically beginning with the Rhea and reaching the Parrots 
on the ninth page, all the rest of the avifauna being disposed of in a couple 


1 Report of Chief of Bureau of Biological Survey. pp. 1-24. 
2 Birds of Brazil. By R. W. Shufeldt, M. D. Bull. Pan-American Union, August, 1919, 
pp. 159-176. 


168 Recent Literature. es 


Jan. 


of paragraphs. While the treatment is thus rather uneven a great variety 
of matter is presented in connection with the species that are considered 
in detail, covering general history, fossil birds and habits of specimens in the 
Washington “ Zoo.’? —W. 8S. 


The Food of Australian Birds.!— Dr. J. B. Cleland presents a sum- 
mary of investigations relating to the food of Australian Birds done by 
himself and Messrs. J. H. Maiden, W. W. Froggatt, E. W. Ferguson and 
C. T. Musson. The data is presented under the following headings: Broad 
Summary of Results, Detail Summaries and Verdicts on Individual Species, 
Food of Birds from the Botainceal Aspect, List of Birds Feeding on Particular 
Foods, and Tabulated Results of Examination of the Contents of Stomachs 
and Crops Examined. In the summaries one finds nothing conveying an 
idea of the volume of food items, in the absence of which it is difficult to 
conclude just what are the important foods. Now that Professor W. E. 
Collinge of St. Andrew’s University has adopted and championed the 
volumetric system of food analysis, it is to be hoped his colleagues in the 
British Dominions also will realize its advantages. In the discussion in 
the booklet reviewed the majority of the species are commended. The 
principal exceptions are: the Crow, Starling, and House Sparrows which 
for best results should be kept under strict control, the Silver-eyes, which 
must often be suppressed for the welfare of cultivated fruit, certain Parrots 
which destroy grain and the bee-eaters. Pigeons, Doves, Quails, most 
Waterbirds and the Honey-eaters are mentioned as having no marked 
economic significance. 

Points of interest may be noted in connection with the lists of birds feed- 
ing on particular foods. The longest list, 73 species, is of birds feeding on 
ants, a group of insects that a certain school of biologists defines as “ speci- 
ally protected,” the models for “‘ mimicking ”’ insects in all orders. Small 
comforts here for either the “‘ mimics ”’ or the biologists. Caterpillars and 
other stages of Lepidoptera are cited with 68 bird enemies, flies with 59 
and grasshoppers and their allies with 35. Thrips are recorded from the 
stomachs of four species, probably a better list of enemies of these minute 
insects than could be made with present knowledge for birds of the United 
States. However, all of the other lists of birds feeding on weed seeds and 
groups of destructive insects could easily be exceeded from American 
records.— W. L. M. 


The Ornithological Journals. 


Bird-Lore.2. X XI, No. 5. September-October, 1919. 

William Brewster. By Frank M. Chapman. A beautifully written and 
appreciative sketch of his life and works. 

The Spotted Sandpiper. By C. W. Leister.— An account of its home life 
with admirable photographs. 


1 Science Bul. No. 15, Dept. Agr. New South Wales, July, 1918, 112 pp. 
2 D. Appleton & Company, Harrisburg, Pa. 


ae ooTos mal Recent Literature. 169 


The Birds of Coblenz. By Perley M. Jenness. 

A Visit with Cedar Waxwings. By F. N. Whitman.— Several remark- 
ably good photographs of young and old. 

The Warbler in Stripes. By H. E. Tuttle— Good account of the 
feigning of injury by the parent Black and White Warbler. 

The educational leaflet treats of the Turkey Vulture and is by T. Gilbert 
Pearson with a colored plate by Horsfall. 

Bird-Lore. X XI, No. 6. November—December, 1919. 

Notes from a Traveler in the Tropics. By F. M. Chapman.— V. Chile. 

How Birds Can Take Their Own Pictures. By Dr. E. Bade.— Showing 
admirable results of his method. 

Our Family of Flickers. By Anna R. Roberts. 

A Winter Feeding Place for Birds. By Verdi Burteh.— With photo- 
graphs of Longspur, Snow Bunting, ete. 

Migration of N. A. Birds covers Jays and Nutcracker with plate by 
Fuertes and the bulk of the number is taken up with the Annual Report of the 
National Association of Audubon Societies which as usual is full of interest. 

The Condor.! X XI, No. 5. September-October, 1919. 

Autobiographical Notes. By Henry Wetherbee Henshaw.—Continua- 
tion of this interesting historical sketch which runs through the next 
number also. 

Differential Sex Migration of Mallards in New Mexico. By Aldo Leo- 
pold.— Evidence to show that the females migrate before the males. 

Description of a Twenty Year Series of Eggs of the Sierra Junco. By 
Milton S. Ray.— An exhaustive study of an extensive series of the eggs 
-of this species illustrated by photographs of sets to show variation, simi- 
larity in coloration of two sets from the same pair, etc. 

A Return to the Dakota Lake Region. By Florence Merriam Bailey, 
(continued in the next number). 

Bird Notes from Southeastern Oregon and Northeastern California. By 

‘George Willett.— An annotated list covering for the most part observations 
at Malheur Lake, Harney County, Oregon. 139 species are mentioned and 
there are several photographs of nests and young birds. 

The Wilson Snipe Nesting in Southern California. By Edward Wall. 

Description of a New Subspecies of Pipilo fuscus. By Harry C. Ober- 
holser.—Pipilo fuscus aripolius (p. 210) from the middle portion of the 
Lower California Peninsula, type from San Pablo. 

; The Condor. X XI, No. 6. November—December, 1919. 

Bird Notes from Saskatchewan. By H. H. Mitchell. 

Notes on the Elegant Tern as a Bird of California. By Joseph Grinnell.— 
An uncommon and probably irregular fall visitant on the coast as far north 
as San Francisco Bay. 

The Wilson Bulletin.2, X X XI, No.3. September, 1919. 

Purple Martins at St. Marks, Florida. By John Williams.— Detailed 


1W. Lee Chambers, Eagle Rock, Los Angeles Co., Calif. 
2 Geo. L. Fordyce, Youngstown, Ohio. 


1 70 Recent Literature. lees 


Jan. 


study of a colony giving dates of arrival, nesting, hatching of young, ete. 
for the past four years. 

Twenty-four Hours in a Black Skimmer Colony. By B. R. Bales. 
— Another account of the Cobb’s Island colony, for a nearby one] already 
well described in Chapman’s ‘ Camps and Cruises.’ 

Description of Another New Subspecies of Lanius ludovicianus. By 
Harry C. Oberholser.— L. 1. grinnelli (p. 87), north central portion of the 
peninsula of Lower California, type from San Fernando. 

Birds from a Sick Man’s Window. By W. Elmer Ekblaw.— An inter- 
esting account of familiar species seen on the grounds of some University, 
the locality of which is not mentioned. 

The Lure of the Godwit. By Gerald Alan Abbott.— Describes the habits 
of these interesting birds on the prairies of North Dakota and Minnesota. 

The Wilson Bulletin. X X XI, No. 4. December, 1919. 

Some Changes in the Summer Bird Life at Delavan, Wisconsin. By 
N. Hollister — A valuable comparison after a lapse of twenty years. 

Birds of Wakulla County, Florida. By John Williams. 

An Annotated List of the Land Birds of Sac County, Iowa. By J. A. 
Spurrell. 

The Oodlogist.. X X XVI, No.9. September 1, 1919. 

The Song of the Mockingbird. By Theodore R. Greer.— As heard in 
Aledo, Illinois. 

The Odlogist. XX XVI, No. 10. October 1, 1919. : 

Nesting of the Black-billed Cuckoo. By G. W. Vosburgh.— At Colum- 
bus, Ohio. 

The Odlogist. XXXVI, No. 11. November 1, 1919. 

Ruffed Grouse [in Massachusetts]. By H. H. Johnson. 

The Ibis.2. XI, Series, I, No.4. October, 1919. 

On Birds from South Annam and Cochin China. Part Il. Pyenono- 
tidee — Diceidee. By Herbert C. Robinson and C. Boden Kloss.— 129 
species are listed in this instalment of which the following are described as 
new, Hemixus tickelli griseiventer (p. 568); Langbian Peaks; Xanthiscus 
flavescens sordidus (p. 569), Arbre Broye, 8. Annam; Garrulax milleti (p. 
574), Dalat, S. Annam; Trochalopteron yersini (p. 575), Langbian Peaks; 
Stactocichla merulina anamensis (p. 577), Dran, 8. Annam; Pomatorhinus 
olivaceus annamensis (p. 577) Dran; P. tickelli brevirostris (p. 578), Trang 
Bom, Cochin China; Rimator danjoui (p. 578), Langbian Peaks; Turdi- 
nulus epilepidotus clarus (p. 582), Dalat; Alcippe nipalensis annamensis 
(p. 582), Dalat; Pseudominla atriceps (p. 583), Langbian Peaks; Stachyris 
nigriceps dilutus (p. 584), Dran; Siva sordida orientalis (p. 587), Langbian 
Peaks; Herpornis xantholeuca sordida (588), Daban; Cutia nipalensis 
legalleni (p. 588), Langbian Peaks; Pterythrus wralatus annamensis (p. 589), 
Langbian Peaks; Mesia argentauris cunhaci (p. 591), Dalat; Pnepyga 
pusilla annamensis (p. 591), Langbian Peaks; Cissa margarite (p. 604), 
Langbian Peaks; Mgithaliscus annamensis (p. 606), Dran; Certhia dis- 


1R. Magoon Barnes, Lacon, III. 
2 Wm. Wesley and Son, 28 Essex St., Strand, London, W. ©. 2. 


pct Fon adl Recent Literature. IAL 


color meridionalis (p. 609), Langbian Peaks; Loxia curvirostra meridionalis 
(p. 618), Dalat; Mhopyga sanguinipectus johnsi (p. 621), Dran; 4. gouldie 
annamensis (p. 621), Langbian Peaks. Many of them are figured in 
beautiful colored plates. 

Note on the Jays of Holland. By R. C. Snouckaert van Schauburg. 

A List of the Birds of the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan, based on the Collec- 
tions of Mr. A. I. Butler, Mr. A. Chapman and Capt. H. Lynes and Major 
Cuthbert Christy. Part III. Picida —Sagittariide. By W. L. Sclater 
and C. Mackworth-Praed. 

List of the Birds of the Canary Islands, with detailed references to the 
Migratory Species and the Accidental Visitors. Part IV. Anatidae — 
Laride. By David A. Bannerman. 

British Birds.. XIII, No. 4. September 1, 1919. 

Observations on the Cuckoo. By Edgar Chance.— This is an extremely 
interesting account of an intensive study of the Cuckoos of a common in 
Worcestershire. Assuming that the eggs of each Cuckoo are always 
remarkably similar and are laid in the nests of the same species of bird 
in which the Cuckoo was reared, which seems to be pretty well proven, 
the author found that the Cuckoo under observation laid eighteen eggs in 
as many nests of the Meadow Pipit, on this common in the season of 1919. 
It seems that the Cuckoo removes one of the Pipit’s eggs in ease a full 
clutch is deposited before its visit to the nest. Mr. Chance is of opinion 
that the bird carries its egg to the nest of the foster parent in its bill but 
he has not yet been able to see the egg deposited although he spent a 
night on the common in the hope of solving this problem. The evidence 
presented seems to show that the Cuckoo locates every nest of the species 
upon which it is parasitic, that has been built in the district which it covers, 
and lays an egg about every two days until each nest is supplied; the 
number of eggs being thus dependent upon the number of nests. 

British ornithologists have a most interesting problem before them 
in ascertaining the exact life history of this peculiar bird. Why do not 
some of our American bird students set about solving the same problem 
in the case of the Cow Bird? If the great army of egg collectors desire to 
demonstrate that there is really some science in their hobby here is their 
opportunity. 

The “ British Birds’ Marking Scheme. By H. F. Witherby.— In spite 
of the war no less than 5,937 birds were ringed during 1918, bringing the 
grand total of ten years up to 87,584. 

British Birds. XIII, No.5. October 1, 1919. 

Some Habits of the Sparrow Hawk. By J. H. Owen. (7) The effects of 
sunshine.— Excellent photographs. 

Numerous notes on the habits of the Cuckoo. 

British Birds. XIII, No. 6, November 1, 1919. 

The Black-necked Grebe. By Oliver G. Pike. Account of a nesting 
at Tring with a wonderful series of photographs of the nest and bird under 
various circumstances. 


1 Witherby & Co., 326 High Holborn, London. 


Wie; Recent Literature. (jon 


Jan. 


Some Points in the Sexual Habits of the Little Grebe, with a Note on 
the Occurrence of Vocal Duets in Birds. By. J. 8. Huxley. 

Avicultural Magazine. X,No.11. September, 1919. 

Further Notes on Birds in the War Area and Beyond. By Capt. B. 
Hamilton Scott. 

Bird-Life in 1918. By Allen Silver.— An interesting summary of the 
birds observed in England during the year. [Continued.] 

Avicultural Magazine. X,No.12. October, 1919. 

Eggs and Nestlings. By Graham Renshaw.— Importance of preserving 
such specimens in the aviary. 

Avicultural Magazine. X, No. 13. November, 1919. 

Regularity in Moulting. By E. M. Knobel.— Dates of shedding tail 
feathers by an Alexandrine Parrot, for a period of five years. 

The Emu.? XIX, Part 2. October, 1919. 

The Allied Buff-rumped Tit-Warbler (Geobasileus hedleyi rosine). By 
Capt. S. A. White.— With a colored plate of this recently discovered bird. 

The Eastern Paleearctica and Australia. By Robert Hall.— An account 
of birds seen in northern Siberia. 

A Trip to the National Park of Tasmania at Mount Field. By Clive E. 
Lord.— This park which is also a bird sanctuary has an area of 38,500 
square miles. The paper is illustrated by several views and there is an 
annotated list of the birds observed. 

Material for a study of the Megapodiide. By R. W. Shufeldt.— With 
a number of illustrations from photographs of eggs and skeletons. 

The Rosella Parrot (Platycercus eximius): a Sketch. By A. J. Campbell. 

Birds Observed about the Lighthouse, Puysegur Point, Invercargill, 
N. Z. By R. Stuart-Sutherland. 

Interesting photograph by H. A. Purnell of a Mound Builder’s nest 
with eggs in situ. 

The South Australian Ornithologist.* IV, Part 3. July, 1919. 

Notes from the Lake Frome District. By J. Neil McGilp. 

Regent Honey-eaters — A Visit to the Adelaide Plains. By J. W. Mellor. 

Revue Frangaise d’Ornithologie.t XI, No. 123. July, 1919. [In 
French. | 

An Inquiry on the Vision of Birds. By Dr. A. Rochon-Duvigneaud. 
[Continued in the next number]. 

The Common Bee-eater in Vendee. By E. Seguin-Jard. 

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. XI, No. 124-125. August- 
September, 1919. [In French.] 

How Does a Bird Recognize and Return to its Nest? By F. Cathelin. 

Der Ornithologische Beobachter.° XVI, Part 7. April, 1919. 

The Great Curlew. By H. Fischer-Sigwart.— Tables of migration dates, 
nesting etc. in Switzerland. [In German.] 


1 Stephen Austin & Sons, 5 Fore St., Hertford, England. 

2 Witherby & Co., 326 High Holborn, London. 

3F.M. Angel, % W. D. Wells, Grenfell St., Adelaide, Australia. 
44. Menegaux, 55 Rue de Buffon, Paris. 

5 A. Hess, Spitalgasse 28, Bern, Switzerland. 


vor one ea] Recent Literature. 173 


Der Ornithologische Beobachter. XVI, Part II. August, 1919. [In 
German]. 

Daines Barrington. An Apparently Forgotten Student of Bird Song. 
By Hans Stadler. 

The Migration of the Storks through Alsace and Loraine. By Walther 
Bachmeister. 

Der Ornithologische Beobachter. XVI, Part 12. September, 1919. 
{In German. ] 

Nauman’s Thrush. By Alb. Hess. 

On Our Knowledge of the Siberian Thrush. By H. Gengler. 

Ornithologisches Jahrbuch.! XXX, Heft 1-6. January—December, 
1918. [In German.] 

Ornithology of Syrmia [Hungary]. By J. Gengler. 

Ornithology of Kapnu in Pinsgau [Austria]. By E. P. Tratz. 

Bird Life of Tullu near Vienna. By K. Obermayer. 

The Life Histories of Our Grouse. By M. Merk-Buchberg — ‘‘ Tetrao 
urogallus, T. tetrix and T bonasia.”’ 

El Hornero.2 I, No.4. September, 1919. [In Spanish.] 

The Lariformes of the Republic of Argentina. By R. Dabbene. 

On the Stomach Contents of Some Birds. By C. A. Marelli. 

Glaucidium nanum. A Rare Case of Mimicry. By J. Koslowsky. Its 
attitude at rest makes its markings protective against its usual background. 

Notes on a Collection of Birds from the Island of Martin Garcia. By R. 
Dabbene. 

The Fantastic Ornithology of the Conquistadors. By Anibal Cardoso. 

Birds New to Paraguay. By A. Winkelreid Bertoni. Fifteen species 
mentioned. 

Birds of the Comune of Nuevas. By R. Dabbene. 

Brief Notes on the Nests and Eggs of Some Birds of the Cordillera de 
Mendoza. By C.S8. Reed. 

Notes on the Nests of the Ovenbirds. By M. Doello-Jurado.— With 
illustrations. 


Ornithological Articles in Other Journals.’ 


Notr.— The Editor would be very grateful to authors if they would 
send him copies of such of their papers as are published in Proceedings 
of Societies, or other journals not exclusively devoted to Ornithology, in 
order that they may be promptly noticed in these columns. Unless this 
is done many papers are sure to be overlooked and their notice very much 
delayed. He would also regard it as a favor if his attention were called to 
omissions of this sort, by the readers of ‘ The Auk.’ Only by such codpera- 
tion can the review of literature be made reasonably complete. 


1 Anton Pustet, Salzburg, Austria. 

2 Pedro Serie, Secty S. O. P., Museo Nac. de Hist. Nat. Buenos Aires. 

3 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 
ibrary from week to week. 


it 74 Recent Literature. [ sts 


Jan.- 


Clarke, John M. The New Gaspe Bird Sanctuaries. (Natural 
History, XIX, No. 4-5, April-May, 1919.) — An excellent account of the 
bird rock and Bonaventure Gannet colonies and the recent action of the 
Canadian government for their better protection. Illustrated by beautiful 
photographs by Chapman, Taverner, Cramp, ete. 

Bailey, Alfred M. Notes on Our Hawaiian Reservation. (/bid.) 
A splendidly illustrated article. 

Allen, James Lane. Alexander Wilson. (/bid.) This is a reprint of a 
chapter from Mr. Allen’s book ‘The Kentucky Warbler.’ It is written ina 
very attractive style that will hold the attention of the readers of the story, 
but unfortunately as is too often the case when a writer of fiction endeavors 
to incorporate history or biography into his work he is very careless of 
details and is likely to start misstatements which will be perpetuated by 
those who take his writing at face value. Wilson was not a school teacher 
when he visited Virginia but still a weaver; it was Lawson not Bartram 
who suggested that he try his hand at drawing, and several other statements 
of the author are pure assumptions. Furthermore Mr. Allen seems to have 
become rather confused in his geography if he thinks that upon landing at 
New Castle Delaware, Wilson could have disappeared in the ‘‘ forests of 
New Jersey.”’ The Delaware River, here over two miles wide would have 
to be crossed first. His account is so clearly based upon that of Ord, that it 
is a pity he did not follow it more closely in details. 

There is also an interesting reproduction of an original drawing of 
Wilson’s in the possession of the American Museum of Natural History 
depicting the head of an American Egret with an accompanying account 
of it by the editor of the journal. In this it is referred to as a White Crane, 
while Titian Peale is mentioned as a naturalist friend of Wilson, who as it 
happened died when Peale was but a lad of thirteen! 

Oberholser, Harry C. An Unrecognized Subspecies of Melanerpes 
erythrocephalus. (The Canadian Field Naturalist, September, 1919.) — 
In this paper, Dr. Oberholser may be correct in his ornithology but his 
nomenclature is decidedly open to question. (See antea p. 145). 

Saunders, W. E. Nesting of the Caspian Tern in the Georgian Bay. 
(Ibid.). 

Taverner, P. A. An Important Distinction Between our Two Golden- 
eyes. (/bid.).— Attention is called to the more vertical angle of the skull, 
in front, in the Barrow’s Goldeneye and to the much more moderate dila- 
tion in the windpipe. 

Griscom, Ludlow. War Impressions of French Bird Life.—— An inter- 
esting account of the familiar species and a comparison with the birds of 
the United States. 

Wintemberg, W. J. Archeology as an Aid to Zodlogy. (Ibid. No. 4, 
October, 1919.)—Includes a discussion of the past and present range of the 
Wilk Turkey and Great Auk. As an illustration of the failure of many 
persons to grasp the present idea of a binomial group name and its several 
trinomial elements (ef. Taverner and Stone, ‘ Auk,’ 1919, pp. 316-318) the 


ww es 


1920 Recent Literature. ED) 


Vol. eR ee 
author of this paper states that Meleagris gallopavo, “ the original Turkey 
of Linnzus ” is now divided into four varieties. These he enumerates but 
omits entirely the first described race of M. gallopavo gallopavo. 

Munro, J. A. Bird Study from a Duck-Blind. (/bid.)—We wish that 
some of our eastern gunners could find time to observe birds from their 
duck blinds and write them up as has been done here by Mr. Munro. 
Unfortunately the more that birds are shot for game the less we know of 
their life histories and habits. 

Oberholser, H. C. Revision of the Subspecies of Passerculws rostratus 
Cassin. (The Ohio Journal of Science, XIX, No. 6, June, 1919.) — Three 
races are recognized: P. r. rostratus, guttatus and halophilus, P. r. sanctorum 
is regarded as identical with guttatus. 

Oberholser, H. C. A Review of the Plover Genus Ochthodromus 
Reichenbach and its Nearest Allies. (Trans. Wisconsin Acad. Sci., Arts 
and Letters, XIX, Part I, 1918. Received November, 1919). 

This paper like several of Dr. Oberholser’s recent publications is a careful 
and detailed review of an arrangement recently proposed by some other 
author. In this case it is G. M. Mathews’ treatment of the smaller Plovers 
that he has investigated and he comes to practically the same conclusions 
as that author reached in his ‘ Birds of Australia.’ It is gratifying to find 
two investigators in agreement upon the systematic arrangement of a group . 
but the number of genera that are to be recognized in nomenclature may 
be a matter of opinion, when, as many claim, subgenera serve the purpose 
of the taxonomist just as well, without upsetting our whole system of names. 

Cahn, Alvin R. Notes on the Vertebrate Fauna of Houghton and Iron 
Counties, Michigan. (J/bid.).— This paper is to some extent a supplement 
to Blackwelder’s ‘ Birds of Iron County, Michigan’ and twenty-three new 
records for one or both counties are presented. 

Hess, H. Marguerite. Bluebird. (Nature Study Review, XV, No. 5, 
May 1919.)—A good account of habits ete. 

Allen, E.G. Adventures of Jimmy. (/bid.).— Habits of a tame crow. 

Shaver, Nelle E. A Nest Study of a Maryland Yellow-Throat. (Univ. 
of Iowa Studies. First Series No. 23, December, 1919.) — Record of a 
detailed study. Among other observations was the removal of an addled 
egg by one of the parent birds which took it in its bill. In a nest of a 
Meadowlark, however, an addled egg remained in the nest after the young 
had flown. 

Oberholser, H. C. Mutanda Ornithologica, VII. (Proc. Biol. Soe. 
Washington X X XII, June 27, 1919, pp. 127-128.) — Attila cinereus (Gm.) 
becomes A. rufus Lafr.; Knipolegus comatus (Licht.) becomes K. lophotes 
Boie; Euscarthmus gularis (Temm.) becomes EF. rufilatus (Hartl.) and 
Mimus lividus (Licht.) becomes M. antelius nom. nov. (p. 128) all on 
account of the old names being preoccupied. Cureus aterrimus (IXittl.) 
changes to C. cureus Molina, an earlier name. 

Oberholser, H.C. Spizella arborea the proper name for the Tree Spar- 
row. (J/bid., p. 139.)—Accepts the correctness of Mathews’ statement 


176 Recent Literature. es 


Jan. 


(‘ Auk,’ 1919, p. 114.) that monticola is not available as the name of the 
Tree Sparrow and accepts Fringilla arborea Wilson as the first name based 
clearly upon this bird, which therefore becomes Spizella arborea. 

Oberholser, H.C. The Proper Name for Limicola platyrhyncha (Tem- 
minck.) (Jbid., p. 140.)— Again concurs in a case explained by Mathews 
in 1912 and agrees with him that this bird should be called L. falcinella 
(Pontoppidan. ) 

Oberholser, H. C. The Taxonomic Position of the Genus Ramphal- 
cyon. (lbid., p. 140.) — W. D. Miller’s conclusions as to the relations of 
this genus are reviewed and endorsed and his suggestion that it may require 
to be established in a separate subfamily accepted to the extent of naming 
such a subfamily — Rhamphaleyonine. 

Oberholser, H.C. The Status of the Genus Centronyx Baird. (J/bid., 
p. 141.) — This is a concurrence in the opinion of Ridgway that Centronyx 
should rank as a genus and not as a subgenus, with comment on the con- 
stancy of some of the characters. 

Oberholser, H.C. The Generic Name of the Rook. (Jbid., p. 141.) — 
The writer here agrees with Hartert and others as to the generic distinctness 
of the Rook from the allied species of Corvus with which it used to be associ- 
ated and refers to the fact already published by Dr. C. W. Richmond that 
Frugilegus is the proper generic name for it to bear. We notice however, 
that Mr. Witherby and his associates, among them Dr. Hartert, still place 
the Rook in the genus Corvus in the latest technical work on British birds, 
the ‘ Practical Handbook,’ so that the recognition of this genus appears to 
be by no means universal. 

Todd, W. E. Clyde. Descriptions of Apparently New Colombian Birds. 
([bid., pp. 113-118.) — Twenty-three forms described all but one of which 
were collected by M. A. Carriker. 

Oberholser, H. C. The Status of the Subgenus Sieberocitta Coues. 
(Ibid., pp. 135-138.) — Here Dr. Oberholser agrees with Mr. Swarth’s 
recent action in recognizing this as a subgenus, the matter being discussed 
at length. 

“@.’ Taxonomy and Evolution. A Rejoinder. (The American Nat., 
LIT, May-June, 1919, pp. 282-288.) — An admirable endorsement of the 
importance and good character of taxonomic work against an attack by 
“ X” presumably a college “ biologist ”’ in the same journal for July, 1914. 

Welsh, F. R. The Passenger Pigeon (Science, April 25, 1919.) — This 
is a remarkable statement of a “‘ business man ”’ ridiculing the claim that 
the Passenger Pigeon has been exterminated and mentioning the fact that 
he saw an individual at his home in Devon, a few miles from Philadelphia 
in 1902, 1904 and 1905, and upon his return to the same place, 1907-1913, 
he saw the species four or five times, the last time while travelling along 
the road in his motor ear. And yet members of the Delaware Valley 
Ornithological Club, trained ornithologists, have scoured this region for 
thirty years, during which time not a single Wild Pigeon has been seen. 
Those who are not ornithologists see Wild Pigeons every once in a while 


iw | Recent Literature. ea 


but it is surprising that ‘Science’ publishes so many such “ records” 
without comment. 

Chubb, Charles. Descriptions of New Genera and a New Species of 
South American Birds. (Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist. (7) II, No. 7, July, 
1918.) — Pseudoconopophaga (p. 122), type Conopophaga melanogaster 
(Menetr.); Mackenziena (p. 123), type Thamnophilus leacht Such.; Freder- 
ckiena (p. 123), type Thamnophilus viridis Vieill.; Poliolema (p. 124), 
type Myrmotherula cinereiventris; and Dichropogon (p. 124) type Hypo- 
cnemis pecilonota. Picrotes (p. 123) is proposed as a substitute for Lochites 
Cab. & Heine, and Sakesphorus (p. 123) for Hypolophus. The new sub- 
species is Rhopias fulviventris salmoni (p. 124) Remedios, Colombia. 

Chubb, Charles. New Forms of South-American Birds. (lbid., (9) 
IV, No. 22, October, 1919) these are: Perissotriccus ecaudatus miserabilis 
(p. 801), Bonasika River, Brit. Guiana; Atalotriccus griseiceps whitelyanus 
(p. 301), Quenga, Brit. Guiana; Hlenia flavogaster macconnelli (p. 304), 
Supenaam River, Brit. Guiana; Hlenia cristata whitelyi (p. 304), Roraima, 
Brit. Guiana, and no less than six races of Pipromorpha oleaginea as follows: 
wallacet (p. 301) Para, Brazil; hauxwelli (p. 302), Pebas, Peru; chapmani 
(p. 302), Llanos of the Medina, Colombia; tobagensis (p. 302), Tobago; 
macconnelli (p. 303), Kamakabra River, Brit. Guiana; and roraime (p. 303), 
Roraima. 

Burkitt, J. P. The Wren. (Irish Naturalist, July-August, 1919.) — 
A most interesting study presenting some important data on the subject of 
the multiple nests of these birds. The male according to the author builds 
the nest but takes no part in feeding the young while in the nest. During 
this period he is building other nests, in one or more of which the brood of 
fledglings was found to roost later on. 

Burkitt, J. P. Relation of Song to the Nesting of Birds. (/bid.) — 
Mateless males are found to sing long after those with mates cease singing. 

Forbin, V. Diving Water Birds. (La Nature, No. 2357. May, 1919.)— 
Remarkable reproductions of photographs by Dr. Francis Ward of Cormo- 
rants diving and swimming under water. [In French.] 

Brasil, L. Notes on the Ornithology of Oceania. (Bull. Mus. Nat. 
d’Hist. Nat. Paris, 1917, pp. 429-441. Received June 25, 1919.) — The 
discovery of the type of Egretta brevipes Verr. & DesMurs, shows that this 
bird is a subspecies of Demiegretta greyi. The following new forms are 
described: Pterodroma rostrata Trouessarti (p. 432), Poliolimnas cinereus 
ingrami (p. 437); Porzana tabuensis caledonica (p. 440). All the birds men- 
tioned come from New Caledonia. [In French.] 

Raspail, Xavier. Nesting of the Red-tailed Redstart and Time of 
Incubation of its Egg. (Bull. Soe. Zool. France, XLII. 1917. Received, 
June 25, 1919.) [In French.] 

Petit, L. Arrival of the Swallows and Swifts in 1917. [In French.] 
Also their departure. 

Kuroda, Nagamichi. A Collection of Birds from Tonkin (Annot. Zool. 
Japon., IX, Part III, July, 1917.)—An annotated list of 130 species. [In 
English. ] 


178 Recent Literature. an 


Jan. 


Kuroda, Nagamichi. Notes on Formosan Birds, with Description of a 
New Bullfinch. (/bid.) — An annotated list of 120 species and descrip- 
tion of Pyrrhula uchidai (p. 295), Shiskaban, Ako District. [In English.] 

Kureda, Nagamichi. Notes on Corean and Manchurian Birds. (Jbid., 
Part IV, July, 1918.) — An annotated list of 204 species and a list of all the 
species known from these two countries. [In English.] 

Stuart-Baker, E.C. The Game Birds of India. (Jour. Bombay Nat. 
Hist. Soc. XXVI, No. 1, December, 1918.) Very full account of the 
species of the genera Catreus and Lophura. In the next number for May 
1919, the genus Lophophorus is considered. 

Ticehurst, C. B. The Mesopotamian Bulbul. (/bid.).— Pycnonotus 
leucotis mesopotamie (p. 279), Basra, Lower Mesopotamia, is described 
as new. 

Whistler, H. Notes on Birds of the Ambala District, Punjab. (/bid.). 
— Concluded from X XV, p. 681. 

Donald, C.H. The Birds of Prey of the Punjab. (/bid.) 

Ticehurst, C.B. On Asiatic Starlings. (bid., No. 2, May, 1919.) 

Whistler, H. Some Birds of the Ludhiana District. (/bid.) 

Jones, A.S. Birds found in the Simla Hills 1908-1918. (/bid.) 

Gabriel, Joseph. On the Distruction of Mutton-birds and Penguins 
at Phillip Island.— By barbed wire fences and the introduction of foxes. 
(The Victorian Naturalist, XX XV, April 1919, pp. 178-180.) 

Duerden, James EK. Some Results of Ostrich Investigations. (South 
African Jour. of Sci.. XV, No. 4, November—December, 1918.) — A most 
important contribution to the life history and development of the Ostrich; 
fully illustrated. 

Finch-Davies, C.G. On Birds Collected and Observed in the District 
of Okanjande and Outjo, 8S. W. African Protectorate. (South African 
Journal of Nat. Hist., 1, No. 1, May, 1918.)—An annotated list. of 147 species. 

Swynnerton, C.F. M. Stray Notes on Birds. (/bid.) — The habits 
and peculiarities of Nightjars. The occurrence of Pelicans in southern 
Rhodesia, 200 miles from the sea. The coloration of-Glaucidium perlatum 
causing a resemblance to a Syrnium. 

Godfrey, Robert. The Birds of the Buffalo Basin, Cape Province. 
(1bid.). 

Charbonnier, H. J. The Lustre of Some Feathers of Hummingbirds 
(Nature, 103, —p. 324, June 26, 1919) suggests that reflected light from crown 
and gorget illuminates the tube of the flower at which the: bird is feeding. 

Guthrie, Donald. Some Bird Notes from South Uist. (Scottish 
Naturalist, September—October, 1919.) 

Additional Publications Received.'— Bird Notes and News. Autumn 
Number, 1919. (Bird protection in England). 


1 Inasmuch as nearly all of the publications received are noticed in the issue of “The Auk ’ 
immediately following their receipt it seems unnecessary to list them all at end of ‘Recent 
Literature’ so hereafter only such as have not been reviewed, either because of lack of 
ornithological matter in their contents or because of lateness of receipt will be listed here. 


We hs a ie Cee i | eh i 


ac | Correspondence. 179 


Bluebird, Nos. 10, 11 and 12, September-November, 1919. (Many 
popular articles on birds.) 

Bulletin of the Charleston Museum, XV, Nos. 6 and 7, October and 
November, 1919. 

California Fish and Game, 5, No. 4, October, 1919. (Interesting 
account of game conditions 35 years ago.) 

Philippine Journal of Science, XIV, Nos. 2, 3, and 4, February. March 
and April, 1919. (Wild Duck sanctuaries and protection of winter birds.) 

Records of the Australian Museum. XII, No. 11. October 2, 1919. 


CORRESPONDENCE. 
International Ornithological Congress. 


To THE FELLOWS AND MEMBERS OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ 
UNION: 

The project of holding an international ornithological congress in Amer- 
ica in the year 1921, has been suggested in ‘The Ibis’ and was informally 
discussed at the last meeting of the A. O. U. in New York City. 

That such a plan would meet with the approval of all American orni- 
thologists is a forgone conclusion. Furthermore it would seem self- 
evident that it would be impossible to successfully hold a meeting of the 
A. O. U. and an international gathering in the same year unless they were 
held in conjunction. 

The usual sequence would bring the 1921 A. O. U. meeting to Phila- 
delphia and in order to facilitate arrangements for an international congress 
in that year the under-signed ornithologists of Philadelphia and vicinity 
desire to state that they stand ready to take entire charge of the local 
arrangements for such a congress in conjunction with the A. O. U. meeting 
in 1921, if held at Philadelphia, and they herewith extend a cordial invita- 
tion to the A. O. U. and to the foreign ornithologists to hold the congress 
in this city. The authorities of the Academy of Natural Sciences have 
been consulted and have offered the use of the museum building and 
lecture hall for the purposes of the congress. Philadelphia with its close 
association with the work of Bartram, Wilson, Audubon, Cassin and 
many others of the early American ornithologists offers a particularly 
suitable place for holding this congress and experience has shown that 
some of the most successful meetings of the A. O. U. have been held here, 
While the plans for the congress must of course be arranged by a committee 


180 Correspondence. Gee 


Jan. 


of the A. O. U., it was thought that an invitation from Philadelphia, where 
the A. O. U. meeting of 1921 would naturally be held, might facilitate the 
arrangements. 


Respectfully submitted: 


Witmer Stone J. Parker Norris 
William L. Baily William E. Roberts 
George Spencer Morris Conrad K. Roland 
Samuel N. Rhoads Francis L. Bacon 
Spencer Trotter John D. Carter 
Robert T. Moore Robert Riddle 

C. E. Ehinger S. Earl Riddle 

J. Fletcher Street Thomas H. Jackson 
Julian K. Potter Edward Norris 
George H. Stuart 3rd. Francis R. Cope, Jr. 
Samuel C. Palmer William H. Trotter 
William E. Hughes Edwin B. Bartram 
H. Severn Regar William B. Evans 
Stewardson Brown Wm. J. Serrill 
Henry W. Fowler Samuel A. Tatnall 
James A. G. Rehn Anthony W. Robinson 
Arthur C. Emlen Cornelius Weygandt 
Samuel Scoville, Jr. Robt. P. Sharples 


Name of the Red-footed Booby. 


Eprror or ‘THe Aux’: 


In the ‘Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool.,’ Vol. lxiii, August, 1919, a paper by 
Messrs. Townsend and Wetmore appears dealing with ‘Birds from the 
Tropical Pacific.’ On p. 167, under the name Sula pincator (Linné) a dis- 
cussion of the name to be used for the Red-footed Booby is given. There 


appear to be fundamental errors in the reasoning, and it is quite impossible’ 


to fix the name ‘‘piscator”’ to a species, because it is ‘‘believed” that the 
female described by Linné was that species. It is conceded that “‘there is 
little question that the male and female described above belong to separate 
species of which the female is the bird now known as Sula piscator.” In 
reaching this conclusion the authors eliminate the discrepancy in the colour 
of the quills, but lay stress on the number of tail feathers, though a couple 
could have been lost in the latter case, just as easily as a mistake could 
have been made in the former. 

They admit that only the type of Sula abbotti Ridgway from the Mas- 
carene group was available, but gloss over the fact that Adhelius’ descrip- 
tion was based on birds collected by Osbeck very close to Christmas 


al) & oe 


Ps 


ee eo oe | Correspondence. 181 


Island, where a species determined as Sula abbotti occurs. This seems an 
important factor. 

As there can be no difference of opinion as to the fact that Sula piscator 
(Linné) is an indeterminable mixture I maintain that it cannot be used by 
any ornithologist who desires accuracy. I have reconsidered the matter 
in every detail with Messrs. Iredale and Hartert who agree that the resumé 
given in my ‘Birds of Australia’ is correct and that Sula piscator Linné 
must be regarded as quite indeterminable. 


Yours ete., Gregory M. Marusews. 
Foulis Court, Fair Oak, Hants, England. 


Ornithological Pronunciation. 


Epriror or ‘THe AvK’: 


May I take a little space in The Auk, to call attention to a matter which 
is not in itself ornithological, but which it seems to me is of importance to 
ornithologists? While attending the recent meeting of the A. O. U. in 
New York I noticed that one word which is liable to be used frequently in 
ornithological discussions was almost invariably mispronounced. If this 
were a matter of mispronunciation by one or two individuals I should say 
nothing, for my own speech is often far from perfect, but it seems to be 
common to the ornithological profession. Not only humble associates, 
but members, fellows, some with most enviable reputations, were prone 
to talk of adult birds when they should have said adult. Only once did I 
hear the word pronounced correctly in the two days I attended the sessions, 
and then the speaker, not quite sure of himself said ‘the adult -er- adult, 
birds.” 

I have searched the dictionaries for any authority for the ‘‘ornithologi- 
cal” pronunciation of this word but cannot find it. Perhaps the fact that 
I am a school-teacher, and continually correcting mispronunciations 
among the coming generation has made me particular, but I have said 
what I have, not with the desire to find fault with any individual, but to 
assist the ornithological profession in efforts to perfect its use of English. 


ArETAS A. SAUNDERS. 
143 East Ave., Norwalk, Conn. 


182 Notes and News. [ a 


NOTES AND NEWS. 


Art the outset of a new year ‘The Auk’ finds itself with an abundance of 
material on hand; a most gratifying condition from the standpoint of 
the Editor but not perhaps from that of the contributors, since the appear- 
ance of some of the papers will of necessity be delayed. Under the cir- 
cumstances a word on the matter of precedence of papers may be in order. 
It has been the practice of ‘The Auk’ to keep an exact record of the date 
of acceptance of each paper and so far as practicable they are published 
in this order. As, however, ‘The Auk’ is a journal and not merely a work 
of reference, and as it appeals to a very wide range of readers, it is necessary 
to keep the matter in each issue as varied as possible. What might be 
called ‘“‘readable”’ articles are therefore arranged in one series and technical 
papers and geographic lists in another and the aim of the Editor is to mingle 
the two judiciously in every issue. If one predominates it is evidence that 
material of the other kind is lacking. Moreover in accepting papers a 
wide range of qualifications is considered, for it seems that everything that 
pertains to ornithology should have a place on the pages of ‘The Auk’ if 
it is to be, what we hope it may become, the leading ornithological journal 
in the world. Therefore papers are accepted for their historic, literary, 
biographic and economic value as well as for their intrinsic scientific worth. 
We have heard suggestions to the effect that at the present rate of increase 
in the production of ornithological literature there would soon be room 
for another journal of general ornithology in America. But two such 
journals would of necessity duplicate one another to a great extent and the 
cost to the subscriber, who would desire to have all the literature, would 
be doubled. If we could but secure an endowment sufficient to enable 
us to double the size of ‘The Auk’— and $25,000 would do it — then we 
should be able to disseminate twice as much literature at the same price 
and to publish all the papers submitted to us promptly while the permanent 
maintenance of ‘The Auk’ would be assured. The advancement of orni- 
thology would seem to be best attained by the widest distribution of 
ornithological literature at the least cost and the increase in size of an 
existing journal would accomplish this end better than a multiplication 
of journals. 

With the new year ‘The Auk’ responding to numerous requests publishes 
the address of each author at the end of his article in order to facilitate 
correspondence. 

The list of ‘Publications Received” will be omitted in future since 
almost all of the books and journals mentioned are reviewed in the same 
issue in which they are listed. Such as are not reviewed will still be listed 
as “Additional Publications Received.” 

To the many contributors and others who have so generously aided 


Bol: ak wt “| Notes and News. 183 


him during 1919 and in previous years, the Editor of ‘The Auk’ extends 
his thanks, with the hope that their support may continue during 1920, a 
year which gives promise of being most notable in the field of ornithological 
research.— W. S. 


Dr. CHarLes Conrap Assorr died at his home in Bristol, Pa., on July 
28, 1919, age 76 years. He was widely known as a popular writer on 
nature, as an archaeologist, and in his earlier years as an ichthyologist, 
while throughout his life he was an ardent out door student of the habits 
of animals. 

He was born on June 4, 1848, at Trenton, N. J., son of Timothy Abbott 
and Susan Conrad Abbott, while his maternal grandfather, from whom he 
apparently inherited his love for nature, was Solomon W. Conrad, some- 
time lecturer on botany and mineralogy in the University of Pennsylvania. 
From early youth he was deeply interested in natural history studies, and 
showing no interest in business he decided to study medicine, as being the 
profession most nearly akin to his hobbies. He graduated in 1865, but 
never engaged in practice and acquiring the old Abbott homestead, ‘Three 
Beeches,” on the Delaware below Trenton, in 1874, he devoted practically 
his whole life to the study of nature on its broad acres and in the surround- 
ing woods and marshes. 

In 1884 appeared his first popular nature work entitled ‘A Naturalist’s 
Rambles about Home’ followed two years later by ‘Upland and Meadow’ 
probably his best effort, which was pronounced by James Purves, an 
English writer, as the “most delightful book of its kind which America 
has given us” adding that it closely approached White’s Selborne. He 
published a number of other works of the same kind, and also some novels 
which were not very successful. He made some valuable contributions to 
archaeology and was connected with the Peabody Museum at Cambridge 
and for a time with the Museum of the University of Pennsylvania. At 
the former institution his collection of some 20,000 specimens from the 
Delaware Valley is deposited. He was also a voluminous contributor to 
“Popular Science Monthly’ and other similar journals. 

His most important ornithological contribution was the catalogue of 
New Jersey birds in Cooke’s ‘Geology of New Jersey,’ published in 1868. 
This contained some remarkable errors of identification as did some of his 
other ornithological papers of about the same time, which naturally brought 
forth criticism. This was something that Dr. Abbott seemed unable to 
tolerate and he stubbornly maintained the correctness of his assertions in 
spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. 

-He was of a very peculiar temperament and caustic in his comments so 
that he made enemies or rather drove away many who would have been 
fast friends. To those who understood him he was a most interesting 
companion and none could ask for a more entertaining host than he, when 
at his beautiful home on the Delaware, he took his guests to his familiar 
haunts and told them the traditions and happenings associated with them. 


184 Notes and News. eae 


Jan. 


It is a pity that his pecularities and his unfortunate early ornithological 


experiences kept him from associating intimately with ornithologists, or 


taking part in the activities of scientific societies. His books contain 
some beautiful sketches of nature about the Delaware Valley and he was 
the only writer of his class who did for the Carolinian birds such as the Chat, 


Tufted Tit, Cardinal etc., what the New England writers have done for 
the more northern species. Dr. Abbott was married in 1874 and is sur- 


vived by his widow and a son and daughter. The burning of his old home 
not very long before his death and the loss of many of his valued manu- 


scripts etc., was a severe blow, and cast a gloom over the remaining years: 
of his life.-— W. S. 


Epwarp Evererr Brewster, an Associate of the A. O. U. since 1893, 
died at Shenectady, N. Y. on July 1, 1919. He was born March 24, 1856, 
at West Cornwall, Connecticut, graduated at the Westfield, Mass., High 
School in 1875, and from Sheffield Scientifie School, Yale University, in 
1878, with the degree of Ph.B. in chemistry. In January, 1881, he accepted 
a position with the Menominee Mining Company of Norway, Michigan, 
and February 19, 1883, was transferred to their Chapin mine at Iron 
Mountain, in the same State. In 1891, he became chemist of the Pewabic 
Company of Iron Mountain, which position he held until his death. In 
1918 he removed to Iron River, Mich., to take the position of Supervising 
Chemist of the Osana Grading Association, which graded the ore from 
seven different mines, the ore shipped annually amounting to about a 
million and a quarter tons. 

He married Elizabeth Tayler Edwards in 1888, and they had four 
children. For twenty-one years Mr. Brewster was one of the trustees of 
the tron Mountain public schools, being president of the board for three 
years. 

Always interested in natural history, he was an enthusiastic bird-lover 
and made considerable collections of skins and eggs, which have been 
generously presented to the Michigan Agricultural College by his heirs. 
Among the birds is the Yellow-headed Blackbird taken at Iron Mountain 
May 17, 1890, which constituted the first record of that species for the 
State. The egg collection comprises upward of two hundred sets, mainly 
local, and all prepared with the most painstaking care. 

Mr. Brewster contributed many notes to Professor Cook’s ‘Birds of 
Michigan’ (1893), and was especially helpful to the writer in preparing 
‘Michigan Bird Life’ (1912). In spite of the exacting demands of his 
profession he kept ever in touch with the wild life about him and his in- 
frequent letters invariably contained facts of his own observation which 
testified to a keen insight and unflagging interest. 

He is buried at his birthplace, West Cornwall, Connecticut.— WALTER. 
B. Barrows. 


BarRON BRAINERD, an Associate of the Union since 1917, died in Brook- 
ine, Mass., May 15, 1919, following an illness of two months. Mr. 


are g 


Oko mal Notes and News. 185 


Brainerd was born in Boston, March 3, 1893. He attended the public 
schools of Brookline until 1910 when he entered the Hallock School at 
Great Barrington, Mass., preparatory for Williams College, which he 
entered the following year and graduated with his class in 1915. 

After graduating he taught for a year before taking up post-graduate 
work at Harvard University, where he spent two years specializing in 
economics and international law. 

At the outbreak of the war he at once volunteered, but was rejected. 
Not discouraged, he submitted to an operation, and in August 1918 was 
accepted for enlistment in the Navy, but on account of the influenza epi- 
demic raging at that time, he was not ordered to report for duty until 
after the first of October. He was promoted to the grade of Chief Boat- 
swains’ Mate U.S. N. R. F., and as such was attending the Candidates 
Material School at Cambridge when he developed the illness that resulted 
in his death. © 

His interest in birds dated back to the time that he was twelve years old, 
and continued unabated for the rest of his life. During his five years of 
attendance at school and college in Berkshire county he worked indefatig- 
ably during his spare moments and gathered much valuable data on the 
migration, distribution and abundance of birds in that section of Massa- 
chusetts. In January, 1916 he was elected to active membership in the 
Nuttall Ornithological Club, and served as its Secretary from December, 
1917 to the time of his death. During this period he was among the 
foremost in the ranks of the active field workers in the region about Boston. 

Mr. Brainerd possessed the rare faculty of doing well everything to which 
he set hand or mind. He was never satisfied to do anything except his 
very best in any of his numerous interests whether athletics, studies, or 
ornithology. His enthusiasm and good nature were contagious. 

To those who were privileged to have known him, his loss is a very real 
one, leaving a place that can never be filled.— J. L. Prermrs. 


Tue Biological Survey of the United States Department of Agriculture 
at Washington, D. C., desires during the coming year to greatly increase 
the number of its voluntary migration and bird count observers.. The 
satisfactory carrying out of the provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty 
Act involves careful study of bird migration and its attendant problems, 
and many additional data are desired. Any persons who are willing to 
assist by making reports on the migration of birds in their localities, will be 
very gladly furnished with the requisite blanks by the Biological Survey. 


Ar the annual meeting of the Nuttall Ornithological Club held on Decem- 
ber 1, 1919, Dr. Glover M. Allen was elected president to fill the vacancy 
caused by the death of Mr. William Brewster who had held the office ever 
since the Club was organized. The secretary, Mr. Campbell Bosson, 


declining reelection, this office was filled by the election of Mr. Warren F. 
Eaton. 


186 Notes and News. ees 


Tue president of the A. O. U. has appointed as a Committee on Classifi- 
cation and Nomenclature of North American Birds, Witmer Stone, Chair- 
man, Charles W. Richmond, Jonathan Dwight, T. 8. Palmer and Harry C. 
Oberholser. It was thought that the old committee had become too large 
for effective work as it was impossible to secure a quorum to attend a meet- 
ing, all the members of the new committee, however, were members of the 
old one. A meeting will be held in Washington soon after the first of the 
year when plans for a new edition of the A.O. U. ‘Check-List’ will be formu- 
lated and active work begun. It is planned to make this work the Nearctic 
volume of the proposed ‘Systema Avium’ to be gotten out jointly by the 
B. O. U. and the A. O. U. while the Neotropical volume will probably also 
be prepared by an A. O. U. Committee. Mr. W. L. Sclater has been con- 
ferring with the members of the A. O. U. Committee on plans for a uniform 
system of classification and nomenclature and for establishing uniform 
limits for such genera as occur on both sides of the Atlantic. 


Tue collection of birds at the Victoria Memorial Museum at Ottawa, 
according to information obtained from the curator Mr. P. A. Taverner, 
now contains some 14,000 skins and mounted birds and 1,600 sets of eggs 
and nests. These are practically all Canadian specimens and with a very 
few gaps include all the species mentioned in the Macoun Catalogue. 

The following localities are more or less fully represented: Cape Sable 
and King’s Co., N. S.; Miscou Island, Gloucester Co., N. B.; Perce, 
Gaspe Co., and Bonne Esperance, Saguenay Co., Que.; Ottawa, Point 
Pelee, Go-Home Bay, Georgian Bay, and Kapuskasing, Ont.; Lae Seul, 
N. Ont.; Douglas and Shoal Lake, Man.; Indian Head, Sask.; Medicine 
Hat, Red Deer River, Edmonton, Banff, and Jasper Park, Alta.; Fernie, 
Elko, Trail, Midway, Penticton, Revelstoke, Kamloops, Chilliwack, 
Agassiz, Vancouver, Victoria, Departure Bay, Comox, Barkley Sound, 
Hazelton, Vanderhoof, and Telkwa, B. C.; Teslin Lake, Y. T.; Arctic 
Coast, east to Coronation Gulf, and Franklin, Victoria, Banks, Melville 
and Southampton Islands. Many of the specimens of the older geological 
survey expeditions have been lost but the magnificent Spreadborough 
collection is in good state of preservation. In 1911, the collection numbered 
but 3000 specimens. 


A stupy of the A. O. U. list of members shows some interesting facts, 
There are still on the roll nine of the founders; Allen, Batchelder, Bicknell. 
Brown, Cory, Fisher, Merriam, Ridgway and Shufeldt. Of those elected in 
1883, are twelve Fellows: Barrows, Chadbourne, Deane, Dutcher, Dwight, 
arinnell (G. B.), Loomis, Nehrling, Nelson, Roberts, Sage and Saunders, 
and two Retired Fellows: Henshaw, Lawrence (N. T.), while seven are 
Members: Evermann, Jeffries, Knowlton, Murdoch, Seton, Stephens, 
and Townsend (C. H.), and two Associates; Harry Merrill and H. K. Coale. 

The 1884 series comprises only, Bangs, Widmann and Stejneger. In 1885 
there were the following additions: Anthony, Bishop, Chapman and Stone 


wall 


Sie | Notes and News. | 187 


all now Fellows; Mrs. Bailey, Butler, Gault, S. N. Rhoads, and Rives, 
Members and, W. F. Hendrickson, A. M. Ingersoll, W. H. Fox, C. B. Riker, 
H. M. Sage and C. W. Chamberlain, Associates. 

In 1886 there were elected: W. L. Baily and H. L. Clark, now  Menibert 
and J. M. Edson, G. F. Morcom, A. G. Paine, L. B. Woodruff, and J. 
Barnard. 

These constitute the fifty-seven members of the A. O. U. of longest stand- 
ing. There are several members on the list at present who were elected 
during the above period but who dropped out for a number of years and 
were later reelected. 


Tue results of the Canadian Arctic Expedition of 1913-1918 are being 
published rapidly by the Government at Ottawa. So far the only one 
relating at all to birds is that on the bird parasites (Mallophaga) of which 
twenty species were obtained. Dr. Anderson upon whom devolves the 
editing of the whole series, is hard at work upon his own reports on the 
Mammals and Birds and hopes to get them out during the coming year. 


We learn from the first number of ‘The South Africal Journal of Natural 
History,’ that the South African Ornithologists’ Union and the Transvaal 
Biological Society, have amalgamated to form the South African Biologi- 
cal Society, by which body the journal is published. An historical account 
of the former of the parent societies states that it was organized on April 8, 
1904, with Mr. W. L. Sclater, then resident in South Africa, as the first 
president. Twenty-two numbers of the ‘Journal of the South African 
Ornithologists’ Union’ and three numbers of the ‘Bulletin’ were published 
under the editorship, first of Mr. J. Bucknill and later of Mr.A. K. Haagner, 
to whose suggestion was originally due the organization of the Union. 

The present combination seems to promise greater strength and more 
regular publication and we look forward to many valuable ornithological 
papers in the new ‘Journal.’ 


Tue Delaware Valley Ornithological Club tendered a dinner to Mr. 
William Lutley Sclater at Philadelphia, on the evening of December 11, 
1919, in which forty-five members participated. Mr. Sclater gave an 
interesting account of a former visit to the city with his father in 1884. 
Dr. Spencer Trotter spoke of his early association with the Academy of 
Natural Sciences, and his meetings there with Mr. Henry Seebohm and 
Dr. Elliott Coues. Dr. Cornelius Weygandt spoke of the love of bird study 
as the common heritage of the English speaking people, and other addresses 
were made by Dr. Wm. E. Hughes and Mr. Samuel N. Rhoads, while Mr. 
W. L. Baily exhibited some excellent lantern slides of local bird life. 

The occasion was of further interest as it marked the thirtieth anni- 
versary of the founding of the Club. 


Tue publishers of Dr. Ernst Hartert’s work ‘Die Vogel der paliarkti- 
schen Fauna,’ Messrs. R. Friedlinder & Sohn, 11 Karlstrasse, Berlin 


188 . Notes and News. os 


Jan, 


N. W. 6, announce that part X, beginning with the [bidide, is now in press 
and will probably appear early in 1920. As the whole of the manuscript 
is finished, this monumental work will now be completed, and subsequent 
parts are expected to come out at reasonable intervals. The printing, 
however, is at present only possible with pecuniary sacrifice and the price 
of each part must be considerably increased. The extent of the work will 
be larger than originally estimated and will comprise three large volumes, 
including a supplement to volume I. 


BELIEVING that a better knowledge of wild life will bring about better 
conservation of it, and that when people are on their summer vacations 
they are most responsive to education on wild life resources, the California 
Fish and Game Commission backed by the Nature Study League instituted 
this past summer a series of lectures and nature study field trips designed 
to stimulate interest in the proper conservation of natural resources. Six 
different resorts in the Tahoe region were selected for the work, and here 
illustrated lectures on the game birds, song birds, mammals, and fish, 
given by Dr. Harold C. Bryant of the University of California, furnished 
evening entertainment while early morning trips afield gave vacationists 
an introduction to mountain wild life. 

Compact nature study libraries were placed at the resorts by the Cali- 
fornia Nature Study League and an exhibit of colored pictures and other 
illustrated material was on display. Thus vacationists were further able 
to increase their fund of information regarding wild life by a study of 
pictures, specimens and_ books. 

This experiment in making conservationists out of vacationists proved 
so successful that another year will doubtless see the work expanded and 
the opportunity to study under a nature guide offered to thousands of 
vacationists in all parts of the State. 


Tue Museum of Vertebrate Zodlogy of the University of California has 
received from Miss Annie M. Alexander an endowment of $200,000, the 
proceeds of which are to be used henceforth and exclusively for its main- 
tenance. The work of the Museum was formally inaugurated on March 
23, 1908, when Miss Alexander, upon her own initiative, entered into an 
agreement with the University by which she promised support for a period 
of seven years. Since that time she has continued her support in increasing 
measure, until, by her endowment, she has now insured the continuance 
of the Museum for all time. 

The work of the Museum, through its able staff headed by Dr. Joseph 
Grinnell, in preserving specimens of the higher vertebrates of western 
North America, and in publishing the results of their studies of the fauna, 
is well known both here and abroad, and it will be a matter of congratula- 
tion for zodlogists everywhere to know that this admirable work is to 
continue without interruption. Miss Alexander deserves all praise for 
the conception of the Museum and the line of work it was to pursue as well 
as for her liberality in providing for its maintenance. 


Continued from page 2 of cover. 


‘THE AUK,’ published quarterly as the Organ of the AMERICAN ORNITHOL- 
ogists’ Union, is edited, beginning with volume for 1912, by Dr. Witmer Stone. 
Terms :— $3.00 a year, including postage, strictly in advance. Single num- 
bers, 75 cents. Free to Honorary Fellows, and to Fellows, Members, and Asso- 
ciates of the A. O. U. not in arrears for dues. 
Mae OFFICE OF PUBLICATION Is aT 30 BoyzsTon St., CAmBpripcr, Boston, 

ASS. 

Subscriptions may also be addressed to Dr. JonatHan Dwicut, Business 
Manager, 43, W. 70TH St., New Yorx, N. Y. Foreign Subscribers may 
obtain ‘Tue Aux’ through Wituersy & Co., 326, High Hotgorn, Lonpon, W.C, 

All articles and communications intended for publication and all books 
and publications for notice, may be sent to DR. WITMER STONE, 
AcapEmy oF NaTurRAL Sciences, LoGan SQuARE, PHILADELPHIA, Pa. 

Manuscripts for general articles must await their turn for publication if others 
are already on file but they must be in the editor’s hands at least six weeks, before 
the date of issue of the number for which they are intended, and manuscripts 
for ‘ General Notes’, ‘ Recent Literature’, etc., not later than the first of the month 
preceding the date of the number in which it is desired they shall appear. 


oe , ae 
Americal ruil 
Check-List of North American 


Birds 
Last Edition, 1930 


Cloth, 8vo, pp. 430 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, $3.00. 

POCKET EDITION 

A pocket Check-List (3: by 52 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, 30 cents. 

Address JONATHAN DWIGHT ~ 

134 W. 7Ist St. New York City 


~ PUBLICATIONS OF THE 


AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION 


FOR SALE AT THE FOLLOWING PRICES: 


The Auk. Complete set, Volumes I-XXXVI, (1884-1919) in origi- 
nal covers, $125.00. 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-X 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. 


Index to The Auk (Vols. XXVIII-XXXVII, 1901-1910), 8vo, pp. 
xvili +250, 1915. Cloth, $3.00; paper, $2.00. 


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. 


r 


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. 


A. O. U. Official Badge. An attractive gold and blue enamel 
pin, with Auk design, for use at meetings or on other 
occasions. Post-paid 50 cents. 


‘\ 


Address JONATHAN DWIGHT 
43, W. 70th St., New York, N. Y. 


The Cosmos Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 


Old CONTINUATION OF THE ee 


Series, 


Vol. XXXVII 


Series, 


Vol. XLV 


BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB 


“The Auk 


A Quarterly Journal of Crnithology 


|| Vol. XXXVII APRIL, 1920 


PUBLISHED BY 
The American Ornithologists’ Union 


LANCASTER, PA. 


Entered as second-class mail matter in the Post Office at Lancaster, Pa. 


CONTENTS 


A REVISION OF THE GENUS EupsycHortyx. By W. E. Clyde Todd. 
(Plates V-VI.) : ; : : : : 3 ; 


OBSERVATIONS ON THE Hapsits or Birps aT Lake BurrorD, New Mexico. 2 
By Alexander Wetmore. (Plates VII-IX.) : : 5 : 221 


. ° 


ADDITIONS TO THE AVIFAUNA OF THE Prisitor ISLANDS, ALASKA, INCLUD- a 
ING FOUR SPECIES NEW TO NortH America. By G. Dallas Hanna 248 2 
3 


Extracts From Notes MADE WHILE IN Navau Servicr. By W. T. Hel- 


muth 5 : : : : : : : : . 205 

Tar PLUMAGE OF GULLS IN RELATION TO AGE AS ILLUSTRATED BY THE oh 
Herring Guit (LARUS ARGENTATUS) AND OTHER SPECIES. By be 
Jonathan Dwight, M.D. (Plates X-XIV.) : : 262-5 

Tur Suspsrecies OF BRANTA CANADENSIS (Linn.) By H.S. Swarth : 268 
“4 

Description or A New Norra American Duck. By Wharton Huber 273. 
Firta ANNUAL List oF ProposeD CHANGES IN THE A. O. U. Cuecx-List 
or NortH AMERICAN Birps. By Harry C. Oberholser : : 274 


GENERAL Notss.—A Loon (Gavia immer) Caught on a Fishing Line, 286; Intestinal va 
Caeca in the Anhinga, 286; On the Nesting of the Black Duck in Ohio, 287; t 
The American and European Widgeon in Massachusetts, 288; Whistling Swan 
(Olor columbianus) in Massachusetts, 289; Habits of the Two Black Ducks = 
(Anas rubripes and Anas ribripes tristis), 289; Flight of Water Fowl at Wash- 2 
ington, D. C., 291. Nesting of the Greater Yellow-Legs in Newfoundland, ; 
292; Nesting of the Little Black Rail in Atlantic County, N. J., 292; Maggots 
in the Ears of Nestling Cooper’s Hawks (Accipiter cooperi) 293; Age attained 
by the Hyacinth Macaw, 293; Curious Habits of the Whip-poor-will, 293; 
Aeronautes melanoleucus (Baird) versus Aeronautes saxatalis (Woodhouse), x] 
294; A New Name for Phaeochroa Gould, 295; Great Crested Flycatcher in $ 
Massachusetts in Winter, 295; The Song of the Boat-tailed Grackle, 295; a 
Clark’s Crow in Denver, 297; Another Occurrence of the Starling Near Mont- 
gomery, Alabama, 298; A Flight of Newfoundland Crossbills, 298; Evening < 
Grosbeaks at Valley Falls, N. Y., 298; Evening Grosbeak at Brantingham, < 
Lewis Co., N. Y., 299; The Evening Grosbeak in Monte Vista, Colo., 299; 
Some Sparrow Notes from Madison, Wisconsin, 299; Zonotrichia albicollis é 
again in Colorado, 300; The Proper Name_ of the West African Serin, 300; 3 
The Louisiana Tanager in Massachusetts, 301; Bohemian Waxwing in Illinois, * 
301; The Yellow-throated Warbler in Central New York—A Correction, 302; 

The Louisiana Water-Thrush Breeding at Graniteville, Aiken County, South 

Carolina, 302; Elminia Bonaparte Preoccupied, 302; Toxostoma crissalis 

versus Toxostoma dorsalis, 303; The Wheatear (Oenanthe oenanthe lencorhoa) in ‘ 
Eastern Pennsylvania, 303; Additional Notes on the Birds of Red Deer, Al- 
berta, 304; Birds of Irregular Occurrence on Long Island, 306; Rare and Un- 
common Birds at Branchport, Yates Co., N. Y., 307; Unusual Winter Bird 
Records for Iowa City, Iowa, 308; Notes on Winter Birds of the Missouri 
Ozarks, 309; Mesa County, Colo., Notes, 310; Some North American Birds 
Obtained in Japan, 311; The Color of Natal Down in Passerine Birds; 312; 
Birds and Tent Caterpillars, 312. } r 

Recent LITERATURE.—Baldwin’s ‘Bird Banding by Means of Systematic Trapping,’ 
314; Chapman on New South American Birds, 315; Cory’s‘Catalogue of Birds 
of the Americas’, 315; Witherby’s ‘Handbook of British Birds,’ 316; A Geo- x 
graphical Bibliography of British Ornithology, 317; Annual Report of the | 
National Association of Audubon Societies, 317; Bulletin of the Essex County 2 
Ornithological Club, 318; Hollister’s Account of the National Zoo, 319; Cory’s | 
Review of the Genus Rhynchocyclus, 319; Recent Papers by Bangs and Pen- 
ard, 320; Van Oort’s ‘Birds of Holland,’ 320; Kirk Swann’s ‘Synoptical List " 
of the Accopitres’, 321; Dr. Shufeldt’s Bibliography, 321; Stuart Baker on 
Egg Collecting and its Objects, 321; Economic Ornithology in Recent Ento- ti 
mological Publications, 322; Pine-seed Eaters in British Garhwal, 325; The 
Ornithological Journals, 325; Ornithological Articles in Other Journals, 334; 
Additional Publications Received, 338. 


CoRRESPONDENCE.—An ‘Occult Food Sense’’ in Birds, 339; The Search for Food by 
Birds, 341; Ridgway’s ‘Birds of North and Middle America, Vol. VIII,’ 344. — 


Notes AND NeEws.—Obituary: James Mellville Macoun, 346; A.O.U. Committee on 
Classification and Nomenclature, 346; Migratory Bird Treaty, 347; Bird 
Reservations, 347; Modification in Federal Regulations, 347; Pacific North- 
west Bird and Mammal Club, 347; Complete Sets of ‘The Auk,’ 348; The Wilson 
Ornithological Club, 352; Correction, 352; Errata, 352. 


THE AUK, VOL. XXXVII 


GENUS EUPSYCHORTYX 


THE AUK: 


A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF 


ORNITHOLOGY. 
VOL. XX <Vil, APRIL, 1920. No. 2 


A REVISION OF THE GENUS EUPSYCHORTYX. 
BY W. E. CLYDE TODD. 


Plates V-VI. 
INTRODUCTION. 


WHEN, some three years ago, the writer had occasion to take up 
for identification the gradually increasing series of South American 
Crested Quails in the collection of the Carnegie Museum, he 
experienced great difficulty in reaching definite conclusions. Dis- 
crepancies were evident between the specimens in hand and the 
published descriptions consulted, and it soon became apparent 
that the group was sadly in need of revision. Preliminary studies 
made at that time resulted in the publication of two forms believed 
to be new. More recently he has been led to take up the whole 
matter afresh in connection with a new faunal study of the birds 
of the Santa Marta region of Colombia. For various reasons it 
has seemed desirable to present the results of this particular 
investigation in a separate paper, and to go into the subject in 
more detail than would otherwise be permissible, the more so in 
view of the fact that the status of the newly described forms has 
recently been questioned, and that there still seems to be a great 
deal of uncertainty regarding the relationships and nomenclature 
of the older forms as well. Such a study has been made possible 
only through the courtesy of other institutions and individuals 
in the loan of material, and I have to thank the authorities of 

189 


[ Auk 
April 


190 Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyz. 
The American Museum of Natural History, the U. S. National 
Museum, the Museum of Comparative Zoology, the Museum of 
the Brooklyn Institute, the Academy of Natural Sciences of 
Philadelphia, and Mr. James H. Fleming, of Toronto, Ontario, 
for favors extended. No less than one hundred and ninety-two 
specimens have been examined, including considerable typical 
and topotypical material, and a representation of all the known 
forms. My acknowledgments are also due to Mr. George M. 
Sutton for the very excellent painting which forms the basis of 
the plate which accompanies this paper, and for plotting both of 
the maps illustrating the distribution of the various forms. None 
of the references appearing in the paper have been taken at second- 
hand, and I have to thank Mr. E. W. Nelson, Dr. Harry C. Ober- 
holser, and Dr. Charles W. Richmond for verifying a few of those 
here quoted. All measurements are in millimeters, and the length 
of the bill is that of the exposed culmen. Free use has been made 
of Mr. Ridgway’s ‘Color Standards and Color Nomenclature’ 
in preparing descriptions. 


Genus Eupsychortyx Gould. 


Eupsychortyx Goutp, Mon. Odontophorine, 1850, 15 (diag.; list of species; 
no type designated).—Gray, Cat. Genera and Subgenera Birds, 1855, 
107 (Tetrao cristatus Linnzeus designated as type).—Gray, Hand- 
List Birds, II, 1870, 273 (list of species)—GirBEL, Thes. Orn., II, 
1875, 141 (diag.; list of species) —WatTreRHoUsE, Index Genera Avium, 
1889, 78 (ref. orig. diag.)—OaiLvin-Grant, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., 
XXII, 1893, 99, 407 (diag.; H. leucopogon given as type).—SHARPE, 
Hand-List Birds, I, 1899, 45 (list of species)—Dusots, Syn. Avium, 
II, 1907, 819 (list of species)—Satvin and GopMan, Biol. Centr.-Am., 
Aves, III, 1903, 295 (diag.; references)—KNow.ton, Birds of the 
World, 1909, 296 (range)—CuHapmMaAN, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 
XXXVI, 1917, 173, in text (crit.). 

Eupsichortyx (emendation) Bonaparte, Compt. Rend., XLII, 1856, 883 
(list of species). 


The first species of this group to receive a binomial name was 
the Tetrao cristatus of Linneeus, 1766, based on Brisson. Curi- 
ously enough, the true habitat of this form remained unknown 


or sox ee) Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyx. 191 


up to 1892, when the late Count von Berlepsch received it from 
Curacao, one of the Dutch West Indies, and it has since been 
traced to the mainland. The Guiana bird was at first supposed 
to be the same, but in 1815 Temminck distinguished it under the 
name Perdix sonnini, although as late as 1892 we find von Ber- 
lepsch arguing the question. In 1830 Vigors described two sup- 
posed new quails as Ortyx affinis and Ortyx neoxenus, but it is 
practically certain that these names refer to the same species 
already named by Temminck and Linneeus respectively. In 1842 
Lesson described a bird from “San Carlos in Central America” 
as Ortyx leucopogon, and the following year Gould followed with 
the description of Ortyx parvicristatus and Ortyx leucotis from 
Colombia. Specimens were few and far between at this time, 
as Gould discovered when he undertook to bring together material 
for his work on the Odontophorine or American Partridges, which 
appeared in 1850. In this work Gould proposed to split up Ortyz, 
which had superseded Perdix as the generic designation of the 
American Quails, into several generic groups. He placed the five 
accepted forms above mentioned in his new genus Eupsychortyz, 
together with the Ortyx affinis of Vigors, which he considered 
doubtful. 

In 1855, J. E. Gray designated Tetrao cristatus Linnzeus as the 
type of Eupsychortyx. Later authors have, as a rule, accepted 
the genus without question, while Mr. Ogilvie-Grant, who was the 
next author to deal critically with the group, enlarged it to include 
. two Central American forms that had heretofore been referred 
to Ortyx, namely, O. leylandi Moore and O. nigrogularis Gould, 
including here also Eupsychortyx hypoleucus, described by Gould 
in 1860. Salvin and Godman also adopted the same limits in the 
“Biologia Centrali-Americana.’’ Very recently Dr. Chapman has 
sought to merge Eupsychortyx with Colinus (the equivalent of 
the old Ortyx), and there is certainly much to be said in favor of 
his views, so much, indeed, that the present writer finds himself 
in full accord with the principles there laid down. In practice, 
howe ver, so long as we recognize so many other generic groups 
with no better characters, we are justified in provisionally recog- 
nizing Eupsychortyx, at least until such time as a consistent scheme 
for evaluating generic groups can be devised. But even with this 


We a 
It PIN yn 


Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyx. been 


a 


WE SUN 


mis, sg 


we 
HW 


RY PA 


3) 
A) "ial a, e 
4 


or te “hl te 


WS 


SHORTT S vance 
FENN Serco en Ln ON a ile My 
J uy hs sig we TAM Meg nat get 
; i wets ae se ales yl tg ea Twn Hamil 
"i 
icy are Maley ge CR, ue 
eS ss No Kay wail, aaa tu Se Qi putin alesis Meme 
ie =e saaraneun we, ‘aay y ee x oa wang SEA 
19 » ™® ie Fi s 
Oe 4 fe “srs Rie BS 


x ees Sey 


9, sunt 
NG xs 
2S, ae, 


Mer: xx eal Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyz. 193 


understanding Eupsychortyx can only be recognized by restricting 
it to the forms occurring from Panama southward, in which the 
crest (when fully developed) is longer than the head and slightly 
recurved at the tip. The relative length of the first primary, 
upon which Mr. Ogilvie-Grant lays so much stress, unfortunately 
does not correspond with the character of the crest. As a matter 
of fact Ortyx leylandi Moore, Ortyx nigrogularis Gould, and Eup- 
sychortyx hypoleucus! Gould agree much better with the type of 
Colinus (C. virginianus) than with Eupsychortyx as here restricted, 
all three having the short, decumbent crest of the former. 

The close relationship existing among the various forms of this 
group is indicated by the general agreement in their style of colora- 
tion, and in particular by the close resemblance of the females, 
which are sometimes difficult to discriminate. Three specific 
types, depending for their characters on the color of the throat, 
and superciliary and malar stripes, and the spotted condition of 
the breast, can be discriminated. The distribution of these three 
types seems as a rule to be sharply defined by mountain ranges, 
which they appear unable to pass, being birds of the Tropical 
or Subtropical Zone. Thus, EF. sonnini enjoys an extensive range 
in Guiana and Venezuela, but is abruptly stopped by the Andean 
chain in Venezuela and Colombia. In the region around the Lake 
of Maracaibo, in the pocket between the Andes of Merida and 
the Eastern Andes of Colombia, we find the second type, E. cris- 
tatus. In the valleys of the Andean region, and extending into 
the low country as far even as western Panama, a third type, 
E. leucopogon, occurs. All three of these types are subject to 
more or less geographic variation, while individual variation is 
excessive. A most interesting problem is presented in the case 
of E. leucopogon and E. cristatus, the respective ranges of which 
appear to approximate each other very closely, possibly over- 
lapping. The possibility that FE. cristatus and E. sonnini may 
also meet and intergrade in some restricted area in Venezuela is 
likewise to be considered. The phylogeny of the group will be 
more fully discussed, we hope, by the eminent authority to whom 
we are looking for an exhaustive study of the genus Colinus. 


1The only doubt in this case is with regard to this form, of which I have been 
able to examine but one male specimen. 


194 Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyz. reel 


Suffice it to say here that I regard E. sonnini as the primitive 
form. 

Between the views of the latest writer, who would reduce all 
the described forms of this group to subspecies of EF. cristatus, 
and those of previous authors, who retain them as distinct species, 
there would seem to be room for a safe and sane arrangement 
which will better express their real affinities. The results of my 
study of the group may be expressed in tabular form in the fol- 
lowing: 

Key to the Species and Subspecies of Eupsychortyx. 


Based on Adult Males Only. 


A. Breast plain. 
a. Above darker, crest shorter. Eupsychortyx sonnini sonnini. 
a’. Above paler, crest longer. Eupsychortyx sonnini mocqueryst. 
A’. Breast spotted with white. 
a. Superciliary and malar stripes amber brown. 
b. Superciliary stripe without black spots or streaks intermixed. 
ce. White of head more extended, occupying anterior half of 
throat; breast less heavily spotted with white. 
Eupsychortyx leucopogon leucopogon. 
ce’. White of head more restricted, occupying chin, lores, and 
subloral region only; breast more heavily spotted with 
white. Ewpsychortyx leucopogon leucotis. 
b’. Superciliary stripe with spots or streaks of black. 
e. Coloration deeper and richer, the breast almost or quite as 
deeply colored as the throat. 
Eupsychortyx leucopogon decoratus. 
e’. Coloration duller and paler, the breast conspicuously paler 
than the throat. Eupsychortyx leucopogon littoralis. 
a’. Superciliary and malar stripes black. 
b. Upper parts darker, more rufescent. 
Eupsychortyx cristatus cristatus. 
b’. Upper parts paler, more grayish. 
Eupsychortyx cristatus horvathi. 


Eupsychortyx sonnini sonnini (Temminck). 


Plate V, figures 1-2. 


“Coturnix eleganter variegata, & cristata’? BARRERE, Essai sur l’histoire 
naturelle de la France equinoxiale,? 1741, 129 (French Guiana; descr., 
etc.). 


2This title, however, did not appear until the second edition came out in 1749. 


Vol: ari | Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyzx. 195 


“‘Coturnix fronte sordide albicante’’ Roztmr, Journ. de Physique, IJ, i, 
1772, 217, pl. 2 ({[French] Guiana; descr.). 

“Caille de Cayenne” Virry, in Burron, Hist. Nat. Ois., Sonnini ed., 
VII, 1802, 133 (French Guiana; descr.; habits). 

Perdix sonnini TemMMINcK, Hist. Nat. et Gén. Pigeons et Gallinaces, III, 
1815, 451 (French Guiana; orig. descr.; type in Paris Mus.; habits, 
etc.), 737 (diag.; references)—ViEILLoT, Nouv. Dict. d’Hist. Nat., 
XXV, 1817, 246 (descr.; habits) —ViE1LLotT, Tabl. Enc. et Méth., I, 
1820, 369 (descr.; habits)—Trmminck, Pl. Col., V, 1823, pl. 75 and 
text (deser.; habits). 

Ortyx sonninii STEPHENS, in Shaw’s Gen. Zool., XI, 1819, 383 (deser.; 
habits; references).—JARDINE and Sexsy, Ill. Orn., I, 1828, text to 
pl. 38 (diag.; range; references).—Lusson, Ill. Zool., I, 1831, text to 
pl. 52 (diag.; range).—Gray, List Spec. Birds Brit. Mus., 11], 1844, 
44 (British Guiana; references).—Gray, Gen. Birds, III, 1846, 514 
(in list of species; references).—REINHARDT, in NEwToN, Ibis, 1861, 114 
(crit.).—Gray, List Spec. Birds Brit. Mus., V, 1867, 77 (British Guiana; 
references).—VvoON PrLZELN, Orn. Brasiliens, iii, 1870, 290 (Forte 
do 8. Joaquim, Rio Branco, Brazil), lv. (faunal range).—Gray, Hand- 
List Birds, II, 1870, 273 (range). 

“Sonnini’s Quail’? Laraam, Gen. Hist. Birds, VIII, 1823, 328 (deser.; 
references). 

(?)Ortyx affinis Vicors, Proc. Com. Sci. and Cor. Zool. Soe. London, 
1830, 3 (“‘Mexico”’; orig. deser.; type in coll. ?).—-GRaY, 
Gen. Birds, III, 1846, 514 (in list of species; ref. orig. descr.).—REIN- 
HARDT, in NEwTON, Ibis, 1861, 115 (crit.). 

Colinus sonninii Lusson, Traité de Orn., 1831, 508 (in list of species; 
range). 

Ortyx parvicristatus Gout, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1843, 106 (‘‘ Bogota,” 
Colombia; orig. desecr.; type in coll. Brit. Mus.).—Gray, List Spec. 
Birds Brit. Mus., III, 1844, 44 (“S. Am.’’; ref. orig. descr.).—Gray, 
Gen. Birds, III, 1846, 514 (in list of species; references) —Gray, Hand- 
List Birds, II, 1870, 273 (‘‘Bogota,’’ Colombia, in range). 

Ortyx cristatus (not Tetrao cristatus Linneus) CABANIS, in SCHOMBURGK, 
Reisen in Britisch-Guiana, III, 1848, 747 (British Guiana; habits).— 
Brown, Canoe and Camp Life in British Guiana, 1876, 268 (Cotinga 
River and Rupununi Savannas, British Guiana). 

(?)Eupsychortyx affinis Goutp, Mon. Odontophorine, 1850, 16 (descr.; 
crit.; Vigors’ record). 

Eupsychortyx sonninii Goutp, Mon. Odontophorine, 1850, pl. 11 and 
text (deser.; syn.; range—‘‘Guiana, Caraccas, and the southern prov- 
inces of Mexico’”’).—NerwrTovn, Ibis, 1860, 308 (St. Thomas, West In- 
dies).—Cassin, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 1860, 378 (St. 
Thomas, West Indies).—ScriaTer and Satvin, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 
1869, 252 (Plain of Valencia, Venezuela).—ScuaTer and Satvin, Nom. 
Avium Neotrop., 1873, 138 (in list of species; range).—G1EBEL, Thes. 


196 Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyx. ape 
Orn., II, 1875, 142 (Gould’s reference)—Hrtne and ReicHENow. 
Nom. Mus. Heineani Orn., 1887, 294 (“South America’”’).—Cory, Auk, 
IV, 1887, 225 (St. Thomas, West Indies; references; crit.).—Cory, 
Birds W. Indies, 1889, 224 (St. Thomas, West Indies; descr.; refer- 
ences).—Cory, Cat. W. Indian Birds, 1892, 96 (St. Thomas, West 
Indies).—von Breruepscu, Journ. f. Orn., XL, 1892, 99, in text (French 
Guiana; Quonga, British Guiana; crit.) —Ogitvir-Grant, Cat. Birds 
Brit. Mus., XXII, 1893, 409 (Forte do Rio Branco, Brazil; Quonga, 
British Guiana; Caracas, Venezuela; Mustique I., Grenadines; syn.; 
descr.).—HartTeERrt, Ibis, 1893, 306, in text, 338, note (range; crit.).— 
Hartert, Bull. Brit. Orn. Club, III, 1894, 37, in text (Plain of Va- 
lencia, Venezuela).—Hartert, Ibis, 1894, 430, in text (Plain of Valencia, 
Venezuela).—Hartert, Nov. Zool., I, 1894, 675, in text (crit.).— 
Puetps, Auk, XIV, 1897, 367 (Cumanacoa and San Antonio, Vene- 
zuela).—OGILVIE-GRANT, Hand-Book Game-birds, II, 1897, 130 (syn.; 
descr.; range).—SuHarpr, Hand-List Birds, I, 1899, 45 (range).—OGIL- 
viE-GRANT, Ibis, 1902, 239 (Quonga, British Guiana; Mustique L., 
Grenadines; crit.)—Dusois, Syn. Avium, II, 1902, 820 (references; 
range).—voN BrruepscH and Hartert, Nov. Zool., IX, 1902, 121 
(Altagracia, Venezuela; range; crit.), 275 (St. Thomas, West Indies).— 
Haamann, Bol. Mus. Geeldi, IV, 1904, 302 (von Pelzeln’s reference).— 
Cuark, Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., XXXII, 1905, 246 (St. Vincent 
and Mustique I., West Indies)—von Inrrtna, Aves do Brazil, 1907, 
17 (range—‘‘Rio Branco e Rio Negro,” Brazil).—PrNarpD, Vogels van 
Guyana, I, 1908, 310 (deser.; range; habits)—von Brruepscu, Nov. 
Zool., XV, 1908, 296 (Cayenne, French Guiana, ex Sonnini; British 
Guiana, fide Whiteley)—Cory, Field Mus. Orn. Series, I, 1909, 239, 
in text (British Guiana and Caracas, Venezuela, crit.).—BRABOURNE 
and Cuuss, BirdsS. Am., I, 1912, 13 (ref. orig. deser.; range). —CHERRIE, 
Mus. Brooklyn Inst. Sci. Bull., II, 1916, 357 (lower Orinoco River, 
Venezuela).—Cuusp, Birds Brit. Guiana, I, 1916, 31 (Takutu Moun- 
tains, Abary River, and Great Savannas, British Guiana; descr.; range; 
habits). 

Eupsychortyx parvicristatus Goutp, Mon. Odontophorine, 1850, pl. 12 
and text (deser.; range; crit.)—ScuaTeR, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 
1855, 163 (‘‘Bogota,’’ Colombia).—SciaTer and Satvin, Nom. Avium 
Neotrop., 1873, 138 (in list of species; range).—von PELZELN, Ibis, 
1875, 331 (“Spanish Guiana’’).—GimsBet, Thes. Orn., II, 1875, 142 
(Gould’s reference).—HeINE and RetcHenow, Nom. Mus. Heineani 
Orn., 1887, 294, part (‘Bogotd,’’ Colombia).—Oaitvin-Grant, Cat. 
Birds Brit. Mus., XXII, 1893, 410 (“‘Bogota,’’ Colombia; syn.; descr. ; 
crit.) —OcILvin-GrANT, Hand-Book Game Birds, II, 1897, 131 (syn.; 
descr.; range).—SHARPE, Hand-List Birds, I, 1899, 45 (range).—Dv- 
BOIS, Syn. Avium, II, 1902, 820 (references; range).—VvoNn BERLEPSCH 
and Hartert, Nov. Zool., [X, 1902, 121, in text (crit.).—BrRABOURNE 
and Cuuss, Birds 8. Am., I, 1912, 13 (ref. orig. descr.; range). 


THe Avuxk, Vou. XXXVII PLATE, Vie 


Vd 
vat A 
‘id 


GULF OF 
VENEZUEL. 


GULF OF 
DARIEN, 


DISTRIBUTION OF EUPSYCHORTYX IN COLOMBIA 
@ LE. leucopogon leucotis, © E. 1. decoratus, O E. 1. littoralis. 


Vol. conan Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyz. SG 


Eupsichortyx sonninii Bonaparts, Compt. Rend., XLII, 1856, 883 (in 
list of species). 

Eupsichortyx parvicristata BONAPARTE, Compt. Rend., XLII, 1856, 883 
(in list of species). 

Ortyx parvirostris (lapsus) Gray, List Spec. Birds Brit. Mus., V, 1867, 
77 (“Bogota,”’ Colombia; references). 

Eupsychortyx cristatus (not Tetrao cristatus Linnzeus) SALvin, Ibis, 1886, 
175 (Cabanis’ British Guiana reference).—(?) HrInr and REICHENOW, 
Nom. Mus. Heineani Orn., 1887, 294, part (‘‘Guiana’’). 

Odontophorus sonnini Gator Aves do Brazil, ii, 1894, 489 (Rio Sy 
Brazil). 

Eupsychortyx [sonnini] Ferry, Condor, X, 1908, 226 (Caracas, Vene- 
zuela; habits). 

Colinus cristatus parvicristatus CHAPMAN, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 
XXXVI, 1917, 199 (Fomeque and Quetame, Colombia; range; crit.). 


Description.—Male: forehead, lores, and crown varying from soiled 
white to buffy or grayish brown, the crest similar but usually darker; 
broad superciliaries, beginning above the eye, amber brown, margined 
above by a narrow and irregular line of black; auriculars hair brown or 
drab; nape ochraceous tawny, varied with black bars on the feathers; 
throat amber brown; neck all around with a collar of black and white 
and chestnut spots, this collar broadest on the sides of the neck, where 
it is produced forward to the auriculars; upper parts varying from auburn 
to bister or sepia, tinged more or less with grayish, vermiculated with 
black and irregularly mottled with black and brown; tertiaries and scapu- 
lars similar but more boldly marked, the feathers with buffy margins, 
giving a streaked appearance; tail mouse gray or hair brown, or even 
dusky, indistinctly barred and mottled with whitish or buffy; wings hair 
brown, the secondaries mottled with buffy or grayish on the outer webs, 
the upper coverts colored like the back; under wing-coverts hair brown, 
margined and tipped with white; breast russet, tinged with grayish, nearly 
or quite immaculate, but showing faint and irregular dusky vermicula- 
tions, especially laterally; rest of under parts chestnut or amber brown, 
passing into buffy posteriorly, everywhere spotted with white, each spot 
surrounded (except on the outer margin) with black; under tail-coverts 
white or buffy white, sometimes tinged with ochraceous, with notched 
black shaft-streaks; ‘iris brown; bill black; feet pale horn color’ (Car- 
riker). 

Female similar in general to the male, but head and under parts dif- 
ferent; forehead, crown, and crest much darker, brown or nearly black, 
the nape similar, varied with ochraceous; superciliaries and throat raw 
sienna to ochraceous tawny, the throat spotted or streaked, more or less 
heavily, with black; neck-collar of black and white spots almost obsolete 
in front; spots on the under surface beginning close up to the throat on 


198 Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyz. (ae 


the breast, which is fawn color or wood brown at first; centers of the 
feathers of the sides and flanks tinged with Brussels brown or antique 
brown. 

Measurements.—Male (ten specimens) wing, 96-106 (average, 102); 
tail, 57-67 (62); bill, 12-13 (12.7); tarsus, 25-30 (27.5). Female (six 
specimens); wing, 95-99 (97); tail, 58-62 (60); bill, 12-13 (12.5); tarsus, 
25-28 (26). 

Range.—From Guiana and extreme northern Brazil to Venezuela (ex- 
cept the Cariaco Peninsula) and Colombia, east of the Andes. 


Remarks.—The earliest mention of this species which I can 
trace is that by Pierre Barrere, who refers to it in his work on 
the natural history of French Guiana, published in 1741. The 
Abbé Rozier gave a brief and rather unsatisfactory description of 
it in 1772, but in 1802 a signed article by Virey appeared in Son- 
nini’s edition of Buffon’s “ Histoire Naturelle de Oiseaux,” giving 
a much fuller account of the bird as observed in French Guiana. 
It was formally described by Temminck under a binomial name 
in 1815, from specimens said by him to have been given to the 
Paris Museum, where presumably they still are. Vieillot, Lat- 
ham, and the other authors of that time apparently knew the 
species only from these earlier sources, which they usually quote. 
Early in 1830 Vigors described a quail from an unknown locality 
under the name Ortyx affinis, and Gould another from Colombia 
in 1843 as Ortyx parvicristatus. This brings us down to 1850, the 
year when Gould’s “ Monograph of the Odontophorinz”’ appeared. 
In this work Gould figured and described both sonnini and parvi- 
cristatus, referring them to his new genus Eupsychortyx, but did 
not consider it necessary to figure affinis, regarding it as too close 
to sonnini. Subsequent authors have accepted both sonnini and 
parvicristatus mainly on- Gould’s authority, as one after another 
records began to come in from British Guiana, Venezuela, and 
even as far south as Brazil. All these were duly referred to son- 
nini (although sometimes with misgivings), except that Cabanis, 
possibly by inadvertence, confused the British Guiana bird with 
eristatus. 

It would appear that up to the time of Dr. Chapman’s recent 
explorations in Colombia no specimens from that country with 
authentic data were available, the alleged species parvicristatus 
being known only from so-called “Bogota” skins. Indeed, his 


Va ax eal Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyx. 199 


collectors failed to secure any specimens whatever, although they 
saw a flock at Quetame probably belonging to this species, and 
the two skins with a definite locality attached which he records 
were secured through another party. More recently Mr. M. A. 
Carriker, Jr., has sent in three fine specimens from Palmar, in 
the State of Boyaca. Equipped with this material, I must con- 
fess my inability to distinguish the Colombian bird from that of 
Venezuela and Guiana, all the characters mentioned by Gould, 
and relied on by Messrs. Ogilvie-Grant and Chapman to separate 
it therefrom reappearing again and again in the latter series. 
The comparative shortness and bluntness of the feathers of the 
crest 1s a very elusive character indeed, depending as it does 
considerably upon the state of wear, but I am able to match 
the Colombian specimens very closely by certain individuals from 
elsewhere, and under such circumstances cannot see my way 
clear toward recognizing parvicristatus even as a subspecies, as 
has been suggested by Messrs. von Berlepsch and Hartert. But 
while geographic variation seems thus to be nil, the amount of 
individual variation that obtains is astonishing, and makes it 
difficult to frame a description which will fit all specimens in 
every particular. The phase described above is what may from 
its frequency be considered the normal one. The general tone 
of the upper parts, however, varies greatly, perhaps to some 
extent according to season, some specimens being deeply rufescent, 
other more brownish by comparison, and others still paler, more 
grayish. The forehead and crest also vary considerably in exact 
shade of color, but it is in the color of the throat that the varia- 
tion is greatest. Normally the throat is plain amber brown, but 
in some specimens it is pure white, and in others white, shaded 
with ochraceous laterally, and spotted with black medially. In 
extreme cases it is amber brown, interrupted by a median band 
of black-tipped white feathers. It was obviously a bird of this 
sort which formed the basis of the description of Ortyx affinis 
Vigors. What the significance of these variations may be I 
cannot say; they occur in examples coming from the same locali- 
ties as normal individuals, with which they are connected by 
intermediates. In any case it is very doubtful if age has anything 
to do with the matter. 


200 Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyz. Wes 


Another variable feature is the extent and character of the 
spotting below. In some specimens the spots are well developed 
on the chest, while in others from the same locality the chest is 
almost as immaculate as the breast. In some examples the dark 
markings below assume the form of bars. In what appear to be 
younger birds the breast is much paler, more like that of the 
female, while the chest and abdomen are tinged with buffy. Mr. 
Ogilvie-Grant describes a “quite young bird” as having “the 
upper parts very similar to those of the female adult, but all the 
feathers of the mantle, wing-coverts, scapulars, and chest have 
pale buff shaft-stripes; chin and throat white, rest of the under- 
parts white irregularly barred with black.” The youngest bird 
examined by me shows traces of this plumage; it has broad black 
and brown shaft-streaks on the sides. The female of this species 
may be distinguished from that of the others of this group by 
the color of the under parts, there being a band of fawn color or 
wood brown, more or less decided, on the breast just below the 
neck-band, varied with a few small white spots or dark markings; 
the variation in exact shade and pattern is considerable, however. 
A female from Naguanagua (near La Cumbre de Valencia), Vene- 
zuela (No. 35,163, Collection Carnegie Museum), is so very pe- 
culiar that it can only be referred to sonnini provisionally, on 
geographical grounds mainly. It lacks the breast-band entirely, 
this part being barred irregularly with plain brownish black and 
white; the throat is squamate rather than streaked. 

The capture of several specimens of this quail in the Serra da 
Lua, near Boa Vista, on the Rio Branco, northern Brazil, by 
Messrs. M. P. Anderson and R. H. Becker, working in the interest 
of the Field Museum of Natural History, appears to constitute 
the most southerly record for the species. These specimens so 
far as I can see are not essentially different from those coming 
from other sections. The Carnegie Museum possesses a nice 
series of ten specimens from the region south of Lake Valencia 
in Venezuela, where the species is said to be common. It has 
been introduced into St. Thomas, St. Vincent, Mustique, and 
probably other islands of the Lesser Antilles. Its range to the 
west appears to be strictly limited by the Andes of Merida in 
Venezuela and by the Eastern Andes in Colombia. Schomburgk 


yok ao a Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyx. 201 


states that in British Guiana the species occurs in flocks of from 
twelve to eighteen individuals in the oases of the savannas, out- 
side of which it rarely ventures far, running or flying into the 
woods upon being disturbed. The late John F. Ferry, who met 
with the bird near Caracas, Venezuela, says that he flushed a 
covey among the forlorn, bushy hills of that section, where they 
darted off and sought safety in a patch of the densest shrubbery. 
Returning a few days later he again flushed them in the same 
spot and succeeded in securing a specimen. “All their habits 
that I observed were typically quail-like.”’ 

Specimens examined.—Colombia: “ Bogota,’ 2; Fémeque, 2; 
Palmar, Boyaca, 3. Venezuela: Caracas, 4; Naguanagua, 1; El 
Trompillo, Carabobo, 10; San Antonio, Bermudez, 1; Agua Salada 
de Ciudad Bolivar, 3; Altagracia, 2; San Mateo de Caicara, 1; 
Maripa, Rio Caura, 6; San German de Upata, 1. British Guiana: 
Courantyne River, 2. Dutch Guiana: “Surinam,” 1; Paramaribo, 
1; “Guiana,” 1. Brazil: Serra da Lua, near Boa Vista, 5. West 
Indies: St. Thomas, 3. Unspecified, 4. Total, 53. 


Eupsychortyx sonnini mocquerysi Hartert. 


Plate V, figure 3. 


Eupsychortyx sonnini (not Perdix sonnini Temminck) Cassin, Proc. 
Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 1860, 378, part (Cumand, Venezuela).—— 
Oaitvin-Grant, Ibis, 1902, 239, part (Margarita I., Venezuela, ex 
Richmond). 

Eupsychortyx mocqueryst Hartsert, Bull. British Orn. Club, III, 1894, 
37 (Cuman4, Venezuela; orig. deser.; type in coll. Tring Mus.)—Harrt- 
ERT, Ibis, 1894, 430 (reprint orig. descr.)—Harrert, Nov. Zool., I, 
1894, 675, pl. 15, fig. 2 (Cumand, Venezuela; crit.) —OGILviz-GRAN1, 
Hand-Book Game-Birds, II, 1897, 131 (syn.; deser.; range).—SHARPE, 
Hand-List Birds, I, 1899, 45 (ref. descr.; range).—Dusots, Syn. Avium, 
II, 1902, 820 (references; range).—BraBourRNE and Cuuss, Birds 
S. Am., I, 1912, 13 (ref. orig. descr.; range). 

Eupsychortyx pallidus RicHMonpD, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., XVIII, 1896, 
657 (Margarita I., Venezuela; orig. descr.; type in coll. U. S. Nat. 
Mus.; habits, ex Robinson).—SHarpn, Hand-List Birds, I, 1899, 45 
(ref. orig. deser.; range).—Cuark, Auk, XIX, 1902, 260 (Margarita I., 
Venezuela; habits)—Lows, Ibis, 1907, 551 (Margarita I., Venezuela; 
crit.).—Lowg, Ibis, 1909, 322 (Cariaco Peninsula, Venezuela) —KNowL- 


ese 


202 Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyx. April 


ton, Birds of the World, 1909, 296 (Margarita I., Venezuela; habits, 

ex Robinson).—Cory, Field Mus. Orn. Series, I, 1909, 238 (Mocanao 

and Boca del Rio, Margarita I., Venezuela; meas.; crit.).—BRABOURNE 
and Cuuss, Birds S. Am., I, 1912, 13 (ref. orig. descr.; range). 
Eupsychortyx sonnini var. pallida Dusots, Syn. Avium, II, 1902, 829 

(ref. orig. descr.; range). 

Subspecific characters.—Male: similar to that of Eupsychortyx sonnini 
sonnini, but upper parts paler, spotting of under parts purer white, and 
crest paler and longer. Female generally paler, more grayish, less brown- 
ish above than in sonnini, and rather whiter, less buffy below. 

Measurements.—Male (seven specimens): wing, 99-105 (average, 101); 
tail, 57-69 (60); bill, 12.5-13.5 (13); tarsus, 26-29 (28). Female (five 
specimens): wing, 101-104 (102.5); tail, 61-64 (62); bill, 12-13.5 (13); 
tarsus, 26-28 (27). 

Range.—Cariaco Peninsula, extreme northeastern Venezuela, and out- 
lying island of Margarita. 


Remarks.—When Dr. Richmond described the Margaritan bird 
as a distinct species in 1896 he had but three specimens for com- 
parison with two unsatisfactory examples of sonnini; neverthe- 
less, it was “considered desirable to separate the two forms on 
the evidence presented, and on the fact that at least two other 
species (Doleromya and Speotyto) characteristic of the cactus 
thickets are pale representatives of mainland birds.” Mr. Cory 
in 1909, with more and better material before him of the insular 
bird, but still with a very inadequate representation of true son- 
nini, was at some pains to point out the variations observable 
in his series, which, however, he says are distinctly the reverse 
of being paler than mainland specimens, and he is inclined to 
attribute the color of the type of pallidus to season. Dr. Percy R. 
Lowe, who visited Margarita in 1904, refers to the pale coloration 
of examples from that island, and on comparing the series col- 
lected there by Messrs. Robinson, Clark, and Ferry with another 
from the mainland of Venezuela it is obvious that the former are 
paler, although individual specimens might be hard to distinguish. 
The type of pallidus is merely an unusually pale individual. Small 
as it is, the series runs through precisely the same set of variations 
with regard to the color of the throat as does the typical form, 
some having the throat Sudan brown, others white, and still 
others mixed black and white or ochraceous. In the white- 
throated specimens (cf. Plate V, figure 3) the forehead and 


pel ria yah Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyx. 203 


sides of the head are mainly white or buffy white; they thus cor- 
respond to the description and figure of Ewpsychortyx mocquerysi 
Hartert, described from Cumana, on the mainland opposite Mar- 
garita Island. It is fair to presume that this is the same bird, 
and the name having two years’ priority will have to supersede 
pallidus of Richmond. Dr. Lowe, indeed, refers specimens from 
the Cariaco Peninsula to the latter without comment, and it is 
worthy of note that the faunal conditions here are precisely the 
same as on Margarita. Under these circumstances I fail to see 
how we can avoid accepting Dr. Hartert’s name, based on the 
white-throated phase, for the insular as well as the Cumana birds. 

In view of the extensive range of sonnini and the large amount 
of individual variation to which it is subject, it is somewhat sur- 
prising to find a geographical variant with such a restricted dis- 
tribution. Evidently the excessive aridity of its habitat has 
operated to produce pallor, as in the case of several other species 
similarly affected. Lieutenant Robinson writes as follows con- 
cerning its habits as observed by him: “These handsome birds 
were abundant in the thorny thickets near the coast, but none 
were seen in the interior of the island. They ran through the 
cactus undergrowth with incredible swiftness and it was a difficult 
matter to cause them to take wing. The call of the male is iden- 
tical with that of our common bob-white, and the call of the 
scattered members if a covey is also the same. The native name 
is ‘perdiz.’”? Mr. Clark found the bird “common along the 
bases of the hills, and in the scrub on their lower slopes.’’ The 
late Mr. Ferry found it “in abundance at Mocanao, the peninsula 
at the west end of the island, and in riding along the cactus-covered 
plains from Boca del Rio (south-central part of the island) we 
saw several flocks.” 

Specimens examined.—Venezuela: Margarita Island, 11; El 
Vallé, Margarita Island, 1. Total, 12. 


Eupsychortyx leucopogon leucopogon (Lesson). 


Plate V, figure 4. 


Ortyx leucopogon Lesson, Rev. Zool., 1842, 175 (‘San Carlos,” Central 
America; orig. descr.; type in coll. Paris Mus.[?])—Drs Murs, Icon. 
Orn., 1846, text to pl. 36 (descr.; range).—Gray, Gen. Birds, III, 1846, 


204 Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyz. res 
514 (in list of species; ref. orig. descr.)—Gray, Hand-List Birds, II, 
1870, 273 (in list of species; references; range). 

Eupsychortyx leuwcopogon Goutp, Mon. Odontophorine. 1850, text to 
pl. 13 (“San Carlos,” in range; deser.; references)—G1mBEL, Thes. 
Orn., II, 1875, 142 (Gould’s reference)—OgiLvie-GRANT, Cat. Birds 
Brit. Mus., XXII, 1893, 408, part, (Veragua; crit.) —OgILvie-GRANT, 
Hand-Book Game-Birds, II, 1897, 130, part (syn.; descr.; range).— 
Suarps, Hand-List Birds, I, 1899, 45, part (Panama, in range).— 
Dusots, Syn. Avium, II, 1902, 819 (references; range).—SaLvin and 
Gopman, Biol. Centr.-Am., Aves, III, 1903, 295, part (Calobre and 
“San Carlos,’ Panama; descr. male; references)—BRABOURNE and 
Cuuss, Birds 8. Am., I, 1912, 13, part (ref. orig. descr.; range). 

Eupsychortyx leucotis (not Ortyx leucotis Gould) Sayin, Ibis, 1876, 379 
(Calobre [?], Veragua; crit.). 


Description Adult male: forehead, crest, auriculars, and anterior 
half of throat and malar region soiled white; broad superciliary stripe, 
beginning above the eye, antique brown, bordered above by a narrow 
and irregular line of black which reaches the hindneck; nape medially 
dull cinnamon buff, obscurely mottled with dusky; sides of the neck 
marked with black and white, the feathers being white, with triangular 
black terminal spots, these spots tending to form a collar on the hind- 
neck; upper parts sepia brown, tinged with russet anteriorly, vermicu- 
lated with black and irregularly mottled with black and argus brown 
centers to the feathers; scapulars, tertials, and wing-coverts with some 
white spots and irregular white edgings; upper tail-coverts and tail hair 
brown, finely mottled with soiled white, the markings tending to irregu- 
lar bars; wings hair brown, the secondaries obscurely mottled externally 
with dull buffy; under wing-coverts hair brown, tipped with soiled white; 
posterior half of throat and malar region antique brown or chestnut, 
succeeded by a partly concealed collar of white spots; breast and sides 
hazel, everywhere marked with rounded twin terminal spots of white 
and subterminal bars of black, these spots becoming larger on the flanks, 
where they run several to each feather; chest and upper abdomen ochra- 
ceous buff medially, barred irregularly with black, each feather of these 
parts being barred with black and white and broadly tipped with ochra- 
ceous buff; lower abdomen plain buffy; under tail-coverts black, with 
white spots on each web. 

Female similar to the male above, but the dark markings in general 
coarser; forehead and crest deep brown; superciliaries indistinct, ochra- 
ceous buff streaked with black; throat and malar region ochraceous 
or buffy, streaked with black; under surface from the throat down spotted 
with white and barred with black as in the male, but with very little 
rufescent color in evidence; chest and abdomen strongly tinged with 
buffy medially; dark markings of the under parts all coarser posteriorly 
and laterally. 


Vol. fone | Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyz. 205 


Measurements.—Adult male (two specimens): wing, 95-101; tail, 
55-57; bill, 13; tarsus, 28.5-30. Female (two specimens): wing, 97-102 
tail, 50-58; bill, 12.5-18; tarsus, 28-31. 
~ Range.—Western Panama. 


Remarks.—Little appears to be known of this form, which is 
moreover involved in serious complications. It was described in 
1842 by Lesson from “San Carlos, Americe centralis Oceani 
Pacifici.” In the same paper he describes two other species, 
Crypticus apiaster and Pitylus lazulus, from the same place, as 
well as several additional new forms from Realejo, Nicaragua, 
and Acapulco, Mexico, all collected by his brother, Adolphe 
Lesson. Now, the type-locality of Pitylus lazulus stands in the 
American Ornithologists’ Union ‘ Check-List of North American 
Birds,” ed. 3, 1910, 285, as San Carlos, Salvador, while in the 
case of Crypticus apiaster Mr. Ridgway (Bulletin U. S. National 
Museum, No. 50, VI, 1914, 481, note) reaches provisionally the 
same conclusion. It follows, therefore, either that Lesson’s type 
did not actually come from San Carlos, or that this particular 
form ranges much farther north than has heretofore been sup- 
posed, overlapping the range of “ Hupsychortyx” leylandi. Judg- 
ing by analogy, the latter supposition seems most unlikely. Les- 
son’s description, brief as it is, seems perfectly applicable to the 
bird from Panama which we have described above, since he ex- 
pressly says “fronte gulaque albidis, * * * collari antici, 
rufo.” Turning now to Des Murs’ work for further light on the 
matter, we find a discrepancy between the two descriptions, all 
the more remarkable because Des Murs states that “our figure is 
taken from an individual sent by the Honorable M. Lesson to 
the Museum of Natural History of Paris, in the galleries of which 
it figures today” (translation). Here the bird is figured and 
described as having the forehead and the throat white, but no 
mention is made of any rufous collar on the lower throat. On 
the other hand, ‘‘a white eyebrow starts from the outer angle of 
the eye, separated from the white of the throat by the brownish 
red which colors the cheeks” (translation). This part of the 
description is of course entirely inapplicable to our bird, but on 
referring to Gould we find that he too figures a precisely similar 
specimen. So conspicuous is this discrepancy that Mr. Ogilvie- 


206 Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyz. ren 


Grant is led to remark that “the striking differences shown in 
Gould’s plate are probable improvements on nature, and the 
chestnut band which commences behind the eye and crosses the 
ear-coverts in his figure no doubt really represents the super- 
ciliary stripe.” He remarks also: “I have not the slightest 
doubt that the bird from ‘San Carlos in Central America’ which 
formed the type of Lesson’s O. leucopogon was merely a rather 
white-throated example of this species.” Gould says: “I am 
indebted to the Baron de la Fresnaye for the use of the specimen 
from which the above characters are taken; it is the only one 
that has come under my notice.” Now, there is a specimen in 
the Lafresnaye Collection (No. 7265), at present deposited in 
the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Cambridge, Massa- 
chusetts, which is an exact counterpart of Gould’s plate, and is 
almost certainly the original from which it was drawn. It is 
certainly a very peculiar bird, with its pure white throat, white 
front and superciliaries, and dull brownish red postocular stripe. 
The breast is much duller (snuff brown) than in the Panama 
specimens, and the white spots are fewer. The crest is darker 
(mummy brown), and the nape rusty rather than buffy, but 
otherwise the upper parts are the same. 

Whether this white-throated bird represents a color-phase of 
E. leucopogon, comparable to those of E. sonnini, or is a distinct 
species with a definite range, I am not prepared to say, preferring 
to await the receipt of further specimens and the re-examination 
of Lesson’s type. Meanwhile I accept the name leucopogon for 
the bird from western Panama on the basis of the original deserip- 
tion, waiving for the time being the question of the type-locality. 
The two males examined differ from the other forms of this group 
in having the throat distinctly and rather abruptly bicolor, the 
upper half white, the lower half antique brown; the forehead, 
crest, malar, and loral regions are also white. The upper parts 
are dark as compared with the allied races; this is not only because 
of the darker color of the ground-color itself, but also because 
of the prevalence of dark markings. Females, too, are very dark 
above, and heavily marked below. 

Arcé secured at least three specimens of this form in Veragua, 
presumably from the vicinity of Calobre. The Agua Dulce 


eee | Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyz. 207 


examples listed herewith are from the von Berlepsch collection; 
they are labeled as having been taken by R. Herrera in December, 
1877. Nothing whatever is on record concerning its habits. 

Specimens examined.—Panama: Agua Dulce, 3; unspecified, 1. 
Unspecified, 1. Total, 5. 


Eupsychortyx leucopogon leucotis (Gould). 


Plate V, figure 4. 


Ortyx leucotis GouLp, Proe. Zool. Soc. London, 1848, 1383 (“ Bogota,” 
Colombia; orig. descr.; type in coll. Brit. Mus. [?])—Gray, Gen. Birds, 
III, 1846, 514 (in list of species; ref. orig. descr.).—Gray, List Spec. 
Birds Brit. Mus., V, 1867, 77 (‘“‘Bogotd,’’ Colombia; references).— 
Gray, Hand-List Birds, II, 1870, 273 (ref. deser.; range). 

Eupsychortyx leucotis Goutp, Mon. Odontophorine, 1850, pl. 10 and 
text (descr.; crit.)—ScuiaTeR, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1855, 163 
(‘“‘Bogota,’’ Colombia).—ScuaTer and Satvin, Nom. Avium Neotrop., 
1873, 138, (in list of species; range).—GtEBEL, Thes. Orn., II, 1875, 142 
(Gould’s reference).—ScLaTeR and Savin, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 
1879, 544 (Medellin, Antioquia, Colombia; descr. eggs).—Rosrnson, 
A Flying Trip to the Tropics, 1895, 101, 153, part, pl. (Guaduas and 
Honda, Colombia; habits). 

Eupsichortyx leucotis BONAPARTE, Compt. Rend., XLII, 1856, 883 (in 
list of species). 

Eupsychortyx leucopogon (not Ortyx leucopogon Lesson) OGILviIn-GRANT, 
Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., X XII, 1893, 408, part (‘“‘Bogotaé’”’ and Medellin, 
Colombia; syn.; deser.; crit.).—Suarps, Hand-List Birds, I, 1899, 
45, part (Colombia, in range).—Oarrs, Cat. Birds’ Eggs Brit. Mus., 
I, 1901, 66 (Medellin, Colombia; descr. eggs).—SaLvin and GopMAN, 
Biol. Centr.-Am., Aves, III, 1903, 295, part (Antioquia, Colombia; 
descr. female; references).—BRABOURNE and CuuBB, Birds 8. Am., I, 
1912, 13, part (range). 

Colinus cristatus leucotis CHAPMAN, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., XXXVI, 
1917, 199 (Colombian localities [Caldas, Cali, La Sierra, El Eden, 
Chicoral, Honda, Purificacion, Fusugasuga, Anolaima, El Carmen, 
El Alto de la Paz]; range). 

Subspecific characters.—Similar to Eupsychortyx leucopogon leucopogon, 
but upper parts paler, more grayish vinaceous, less brownish; white area 
of head in male restricted to chin, lores, and sub-loral region; breast more 
thickly spotted with white, and ground color paler, more russet; female 
with the throat, superciliaries, etc., not so heavily streaked, and the under 
surface in general whiter, the dark markings more restricted. 


208 Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyx. ean 


Measurements.—Male (twelve specimens): wing, 94-104 (average, 99); 
tail, 56-67 (60); bill, 11-13.5 (12.6); tarsus, 24-31 (28). Female (ten 
specimens): wing, 93-107 (99); tail, 57-65 (61); bill, 12-13 (12.7); tarsus, 
24-30 (27.5). 

Range.—Andean region of Colombia, from Antioquia and Santander 
south at least to the headwaters of the Rio Patio. 


Remarks.—This form was described by Gould in 18438 as a 
distinct species, and figured a few years later. Naturally he 
considered it very distinct from E. leucopogon as he understood 
that species, and compared it only with E. cristatus. There can 
be no question, however, that lewcopogon (as described in the 
present paper) and leucotis are conspecific, the differences between 
them being only of racial value. Indeed, specimens from western 
Colombia (Caldas and El Eden) in their paler throats, with the 
white of the chin more extended, whiter crests, and browner 
upper parts suggest an approach to leucopogon, and further mate- 
rial from this region would be most desirable. Although Salvin, 
misled by Gould’s plate of E. leucopogon, referred his Veraguan 
specimens to EF. leucotis, and Mr. Ogilvie-Grant, while remarking 
the difference between these and specimens from Antioquia, 
nevertheless lists both series under the earlier name, the two are 
sufficiently distinct from the standpoint of a trinomialist. The 
Colombian bird agrees with lewcopogon in the color of the super- 
ciliary and malar stripes, which are amber brown, with practically 
no black in the former and very little in the latter, but the general 
coloration is paler, and the white of the head is more restricted. 
The flank-streaks in lewcotis are apt to be black, with more or less 
russet centers, instead of rich hazel, with black mottling. Indi- 
vidual variation is considerable, however, affecting the color of 
the forehead and chin (which in some specimens is decidedly 
grayish) and the spotting of the under parts. I have examined 
at least two males (Nos. 112,275, Collection American Museum 
of Natural History, Chicoral, Colombia, and 59,602, Collection 
Carnegie Museum, Pena Blanca, Colombia) in which the breast 
has little or no russet color; being merely spotted black and white. 
The Pefia Blanca bird has also a very pale throat, more like that 
of littoralis, and may indicate intergradation in the direction of 
cristatus, but as it is in the moult, and may be a young bird, I 


pol ax wa Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyx. 209 


cannot be sure. A female from this same locality has a pure 
white throat (except for a few irregularly scattered black feathers), 
and agrees with two females in the Lafresnaye Collection in this 
respect. 

Gould’s type of leucotis was a “ Bogota” skin, numerous examples 
of which he says came under his notice from time to time. Dr. 
Chapman has recently suggested Honda, on the Magdalena River 
northwest of Bogota, as a more precise type-locality. He goes 
on to say: “This is a species of the Tropical Zone which in open 
country ranges upward into the Subtropical and even to the lower 
border of the Temperate Zone. It occurs on the western slope 
of the Western Andes in the arid Caldas Basin, is not uncommon 
in the Cauca Valley and is found as far south as La Sierra south 
of Popayan, this marking the southern known limits of the genus. 
In the upper Magdalena Valley it is abundant. To the west it 
reaches up the Central Andes to at least 8300 feet, and to the east 
we have specimens from the Eastern Andes almost up to the bor- 
der of the Bogota Savanna. Quail are said to occur in the Savanna 
but we have not succeeded in securing specimens and cannot say 
whether the Savanna quail is lewcotis or parvicristatus or an inter- 
grade between the two.” 

Mr. Carriker sent in a small series of this form from Aguachica, 
on the Magdalena River, and from El Tambor and Pefia Blanca 
in Santander, while Lieutenant Robinson met with it at Guaduas 
and Honda, but secured only two specimens. “We found it 
impossible to flush them a second time; and it so happened that 
whenever we got shots, our guns were loaded with dust-shot, so 
we failed to stop the birds.’’ (It may be remarked in passing 
that the plate in Lieutenant Robinson’s book is a very poor rep- 
resentation, being much too red.) Salmon secured eggs at Medel- 
lin, in Antioquia; they are described as creamy buff, marked with 
pale rufous freckles and blotches. 

Specimens examined.—Colombia: Guaduas, 2; Aguachica, 7; 
El Tambor, 2; Pefia Blanca, 6; Caldas, 2; Yumbo, 2; Cali, 1; 
Chicoral, 4; El Eden, 1; Anolaima, 1; Fusugasuga, 1; Honda, 9; 
Mariquita, 2; El Alto de la Paz, 5; Purificacion, 1; “ Bogota,” 4; 
“Colombian Andes,” 1; “New Granada,” 1. Unspecified, 2. 
Total, 54. 


aoe 


210 Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyz. April 


Eupsychortyx leucopogon decoratus Todd. 


Plate V, figure 6. 


Eupsychortyx parvicristatus (not Ortyx parvicristatus Gould) Herne and 
ReicHENow, Nom. Mus. Heineani Orn., 1887, 294, part (Barran- 
quilla, Colombia). 

Eupsychortyx leucotis (not Ortyx leucotis Gould) Roprnson, A Flying 
Trip to the Tropies, 1895, 153, part (Barranquilla, Colombia). 

Eupsychortyx decoratus Topp, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, XXX, 1917, 
6 (Calamar, Colombia; orig. deser.; type in coll. Carnegie Mus.). 

Colinus cristatus decoratus CHAPMAN, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., XXXVI, 
1917, 198 (Calamar and Turbaco, Colombia; crit.). 

Subspecific characters—Similar to Ewpsychortyx leucopogon leucotis, but 
more richly and deeply colored throughout, the male with the throat 
rich chestnut, the breast almost or quite concolor, and the white spots 
smaller; sides and flanks very heavily marked with chestnut; superciliary 
and malar stripes much varied with black. Female more heavily marked 
below, the throat more decidedly tinged with buffy ochraceous, and more 
heavily streaked with black. 

Measurements.—Male (seven specimens): wing, 99-105 (average, 103); 
tail, 60-69 (66); bill, 12.5-13 (13); tarsus, 29-31 (30). Female (five 
specimens): wing, 101-106 (102); tail, 60-63 (61); bill, 12-13 (12.7); 
tarsus, 28-29 (28.5). 

Range.—Lower Magdalena Valley, Colombia, and westward along the 
coast at least to the Sinu River. 


Remarks.—A small series of quail collected by Mr. Carriker 
at Calamar, on the lower Magdalena River, and Punto Zapote, in 
the delta of the Sinu River, were at first referred to leucotis, until 
comparison with specimens from the interior of Colombia showed 
that they did not belong to that form. So strongly marked did 
their characters appear by comparison, and such was the uncer- 
tainty in the writer’s mind as to the inter-relations of this group, 
that he preferred to treat the new form provisionally as a full 
species. It is certainly a strongly marked subspecies, differing 
from lJeucotis in its much richer coloration throughout, and from 
leucopogon by its rather paler, more rufescent, less brownish 
upper parts, decidedly darker breast, and in particular by the 
restriction of the white area on the head, in which latter respect 
it resembles lewcotis. Unlike either of these forms, however, it 
has the superciliaries conspicuously streaked with black, and 


me ax yee Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyx. 211 


considerable black on the malar region also. Its relationships to 
littoralis will be discussed under the head of that form. 

Females of this form resemble those of lewcopogon very closely, 
having prominently marked under parts and heavily streaked 
throats; the upper parts, however, are not so decidedly brownish 
or so much mottled, especially anteriorly. Three young birds 
from Calamar (January 2 and 22) are like the adult female, but 
the spotting below is less distinct, and the flanks are marked with 
broad shaft-streaks of black centered with sayal brown; the crown 
and crest are brown like the rest of the upper parts. 

Since this form has been described several other specimens 
have turned up in the collections of various institutions, all of 
which are duly listed herewith. As said by Dr. Chapman, it is 
evidently restricted to the Caribbean Fauna, and is doubtless 
strictly littoral in its distribution. Considerably to my surprise 
I find that a specimen from Fundacion, on the southern confines 
of the Santa Marta region, belongs here rather than to littoralis, 
but otherwise all the specimens with authentic data come from 
the region of the lower Magdalena and Sinu Rivers. There are 
a pair of birds, perfectly typical of this form, in the collection of 
the Museum of Comparative Zoology which are said to have 
come from the line of the Panama Railway, but the assigned 
locality is almost certainly a mistake. Indeed, the Biological 
Survey party failed to secure a single specimen of Hupsychortyx 
in their exhaustive work in this region, and the chances are that 
if any form of the group occurs it would be lewcopogon. 

Specimens examined.—Colombia: Fundacion, 1; Calamar, 8; 
Turbaco, 1; Savanilla, 1; Punto Zapote, 1; unspecified, 3. “Line 
of Panama Railway” (?), 2. “Orinoco” (?), 1. Total, 18. 


Eupsychortyx leucopogon littoralis Todd. 


Plate V, figure 7. 


Eupsychortyx leucopogon (not Ortyx leucopogon Lesson) ALLEN, Bull. Am. 
Mus. Nat. Hist., XIII, 1900, 127 (Bonda, Colombia). 

Eupsychortyx cristatus littoralis Topp, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, XXX, 
1917, 6 (Mamatoco, Colombia; orig. descr.; type in coll. Carnegie 
Mus.). 


2AZ Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyz. best 


Colinus cristatus littoralis CHAPMAN, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., XXXVI, 

1917, 198, in text (Bonda, Colombia; crit.). 

Subspecific characters.—Similar in general to Eupsychortyx leucopogon 
decoratus, but the male paler throughout, the throat buffy, more or less 
deeply shaded with ochraceous tawny or amber brown, but not distinctly 
bicolor; the breast also decidedly paler, more russet; female also slightly 
paler, and not so heavily marked below, the throat nearly or quite im- 
maculate. 

Measurements.—Adult male (eight specimens): wing, 100-106 (average, 
103); tail, 57-63 (60); bill, 11.5-18 (12.5); tarsus, 27-32 (29). Female 
(eight specimens): wing, 97-105 (101); tail, 55-65 (61); bill, 12-18 (12.5); 
tarsus, 27-30 (29). 

Range.—Lower Tropical Zone of the Santa Marta region of Colombia. 


Remarks.—Santa Marta specimens received from Mr. Herbert H. 
Smith were referred by Dr. Allen to EF. leucopogon without com- 
ment, but, as we now know, the “Jlewcopogon’’ of the “ British 
Museum Catalogue” is composite, comprising two recognizably 
distinct races, leucopogon and leucotis, to neither of which the 
Santa Marta specimens can properly be referred. From the 
former they differ in much paler coloration throughout, the upper 
parts being washed with vinaceous anteriorly and with grayish 
and buffy posteriorly, the scapulars and tertials conspicuously 
margined with white or buffy and spotted and blotched irregu- 
larly, together with the lower back, with black and brown. In 
leucopogon the general tone of the upper parts is much deeper, 
so that the black and brown markings are not in such evident 
contrast; the white edgings are also far less conspicuous. The 
superciliaries are streaked with black in the present form, instead 
of being pure antique brown, as in both leucopogon and leucotis, 
and the throat is shaded with the same color, most heavily pos- 
teriorly, the color gradually fading out in front, while in lewcopogon 
the transition is more abrupt. Compared further with Jleucotzs, 
males have the breast more richly colored, the buffy patch on 
the chest and abdomen is deeper, antique brown in fact, and the 
under parts in general are more buffy. Females, like males, are 
not nearly so dark as females of lewcopogon; they are more buffy 
below than the same sex of leucotis, as well as paler above. 

With the series before me I have no difficulty whatever in 
separating littoralis from decoratus by its uniformly paler, duller 


Wok rats | Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyx. 213 


coloration in both sexes. There is, however, an unusual amount 
of individual variation in the present form, some specimens ap- 
proaching decoratus, while others, with their pale throats and 
under parts and more heavily black-streaked superciliaries, verge 
more toward cristatus. So far as the evidence afforded by the 
examination and comparison of specimens goes, therefore, we 
would be justified in concluding that lttoralis is not a subspecies 
or geographical race in the same sense as decoratus, for example, 
but rather stands for a set of individuals showing the respective 
characters of both decoratus and cristatus, combined in varying 
degree. In short, littoralis bears all the earmarks of being an 
intergrade between these two forms, occurring in the region where 
their respective ranges might naturally be supposed to meet 
and overlap. At Fundacion, south of Santa Marta, we find 
nearly typical decoratus, while at Rio Hacha, at the western edge 
of the Goajira Peninsula, we get a bird which is clearly cristatus, 
although slightly tending towards the other. It so happens, 
however, that west of Rio Hacha the heavy forest of the Tropical 
Zone comes right down to the coast, constituting a barrier to 
the spread of either form which may be quite as effective as the 
high mountain mass of the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta itself. 
Indeed, it is far more likely that actual intermingling of the two 
forms, if it occurs at all, would be found in the low, more open 
country to the southward of the Sierra Nevada, which is pre- 
sumably better adapted to the needs of such a bird as this. Un- 
fortunately no evidence bearing on this point is yet available; 
it is clear, however, that if cristatus is a derivative of the lewcopogon 
group, or vice versa, one or the other must have originally passed 
through this narrow gap to occupy its present range, assuming, 
of course, that topographical and other conditions were the same 
as at present. 

But even if intergradation between cristatus and the lewcopogon 
group could be fully proven it would not therefore necessarily 
follow (in the opinion of the writer) that the two should be re- 
garded as conspecific. Each has characters not possessed by the 
other, to belittle which by degrading the forms in question to 
subspecific rank would seem to be highly inadvisable. Subspecies 
are of course “representative forms,’ but “representative forms” 


214 Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyz. [os 


are not necessarily subspecies, as some ornithologists of note 
would have us believe. It has long been the opinion of the writer 
that the mere fact (known or assumed) of the intergradation of 
two given forms should not of itself militate against their being 
considered distinct specifically, provided that the degree and 
character of the differences between them are such as to other- 
wise justify such standing. All the circumstances bearing on 
each individual case must be taken into consideration in attempt- 
ing to reach a decision, and to be blindly governed by a single 
criterion is inevitably to go astray. The recent paper by Dr. 
Jonathan Dwight on the genus Junco (cf. Bulletin American 
Museum of Natural History, XX XVIII, pp. 269-309), considered 
as a protest against the current practice of reducing all inter- 
grading forms to subspecific rank, is interesting and suggestive. 

It remains to add that the present form was _ provisionally 
described as a subspecies of E. cristatus, beimg compared with 
mainland specimens of that form, which were incorrectly assumed 
to represent horvathi. 

Specimens examined.—Colombia: Bonda, 4; Cacagualito, 1; 
Mamatoco, 9; Gaira, 2; Santa Marta, 2. Total, 18. 


Eupsychortyx cristatus cristatus (Linnzus). 


Plate V, figure 8. 


“Caille Hupée du Mexique”’ Brisson, Orn., I, 1760, 260, pl. 25, fig. 2, 
excl. syn. (‘Guiana and Mexico’’; descr.).—D’AvBENTON, Pl. Enlum., 
1770-86, No. 126. 

Tetrao cristatus LINN&XUS, Syst. Nat., ed. 12, I, 1766, 277, excl. syn. part 
(ex Brisson; diag.).—GMELIN, Syst. Nat., II, ii, 1788, 765, excl. syn. 
part (diag.; references). 

“Crested Quail’? Laraam, Gen. Syn. Birds, II, ii, 1783, 784, excl. syn. 
part (‘‘Guiana and Mexico’’; descr.).—Latuam, Gen. Hist. Birds, VIII, 
1823, 329, excl. syn. part (deser.; references). 

Perdiz cristata LatHam, Index Orn., II, 1790, 652, excl. syn. part (diag.; 
range; references).—TEMMINCK, Hist. Nat. et Gén. Pigeons et Gal- 
linaces, III, 1815, 446 (descr.; habits), 736, excl. syn. part (diag.; refer- 
ences).—ViE1LLoT, Nouv. Dict. d’Hist. Nat., X XV, 1817, 247 (deser.; 
habits).—Kuut, Buffoni et Daubentoni figurarum avium Coloratarum 
Nomina Systematica, 1820, 3 (D’Aubenton’s plate).—Lesson, Traité 
d’Orn., 1831, 508 (in list of species; range). 


vot aonoe ve Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyx. 215 


Coturnix cristata BONNATERRE, Tabl. Enc. et Meth., I, 1791, 222, pl. 96, 
fig. 4 (descr.; range; references). 

Ortyx temminkii STEPHENS, in Shaw’s Gen. Zool., XI, 1819, 381 (‘‘ Mexico’’; 
descr.; references). 

Ortyx neoxenus Vicors, Proc. Com. Sci. and Cor. Zool. Soe. London, I, 
1830, 3 (orig. descr.; no locality specified).—(?) AupuBon, Syn. Birds 
N. Am., 1839, 200 (‘“‘California”’ [error]; deser.; references).—Bo.L.p, 
Journ. f. Orn., IV, 1856, 167 (‘‘Trinidad”’ [error]). 

Ortyx cristata Lesson, Ill. Zool., I, 1831, text to pl. 52 (‘‘Mexico’’; diag.). 
—JARDINE and Sexsy, Ill. Orn., 1828, I, text to pl. 38 (diag.; range; 
references). 

Ortyx cristatus Gray, List Spec. Birds Brit. Mus., III, 1844, 44 (“S. Am.”’; 
references).—Gray, Gen. Birds, III, 1846, 514 (in list of species; refer- 
ences).—Gray, List Spec. Birds Brit. Mus., V, 1867, 76 (‘South Amer- 
ica’’; references).—VON PELZELN, Ibis, 1873, 36 (Latham’s reference). 

(?)Perdix neoxenus AUDUBON, Birds Am., IV, 1838, pl. 423.—AupuBON, 
Orn. Biog., V, 1849, 228 (‘Northwest coast of America”’ [error]; descr.). 

Eupsychortyx cristatus Goutp, Mon. Odontophorine, 1850, pl. 9 and 
text, excl. syn. part (descr.; syn.; crit.)—Garrop, Proc. Zool. Soc. 
London, 1873, 468 (carotid artery); 1873, 640 (muscles).—GIEBEL, 
Thes. Orn., II, 1875, 142 (Gould’s reference).—Coorrr, Bull. Nuttall 
Orn. Club, I, 1877, 95 (syn.)—von Beruepscu, Journ. f. Orn., XL, 
1892, 68 et seq., 98-100, 102 (Savonet, Curacao; crit.) —OGILVIE- 
Grant, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., XXII, 1893, 407 (syn.; deser.; range).— 
Harteert, Ibis, 1893, 305 (Aruba; crit.), 325 (Curacao), 338 (range).— 
Rosinson, A Flying Trip to the Tropics, 1895, 164 (Curacao).—OaIL- 
viE-GRANT, Hand-Book Game-Birds, II, 1897, 128 (syn.; deser.; range; 
habits).—Suarpe, Hand-List Birds, I, 1899, 45 (Curacao and Aruba, 
in range).—Dvsots, Syn. Avium, II, 1902, 819 (references; range).— 
Hartert, Nov. Zool., EX, 1902, 306 (Aruba and Curacao).—F axon, 
Auk, XX, 1903, 239 (syn.)—Cory, Field Mus. Orn. Series, I, 1909, 
198 (Aruba), 204 (Curacao). 

Eupsichortyx cristata BONAPARTE, Compt. Rend., XLII, 1856, 883 (in 
list of species). 

Ortyx sp. PretTsrs, Journ. f. Orn., XL, 1892, 114 (Curacao). 

Eupsychortyx gouldi von Brerugprscu, Journ. f. Orn., XL, 1892, 100, in 
text (Curagao; provisional new name).—HartTsErt, Ibis, 1893, 305 
(crit.). 

Eupsychortyx cristatus continentis Cory, Field Mus. Orn. Series, I, 1913, 
283 (El Panorama, Rio Aurare, Venezuela; orig. descr.; type in coll. 
Field Mus. Nat. Hist.). 

Description.—Male: forehead, middle of crown, and crest buffy white, 
sometimes with a tinge of ochraceous; broad superciliaries, beginning 
above the eye, and malar stripe (sometimes obsolete) black, contrasting 
with the silky white auriculars, and terminating posteriorly in an area 


216 Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyx. Fees 
of black and white spots on the side of the neck, each feather being white, 
tipped with a triangular spot of black; upper back russet, more or less 
shaded with gray and finely but indistinctly vermiculated with black; 
lower back similar but more grayish or buffy, with irregular black and 
ochraceous blotches on each feather, these blotches becoming streaks on 
the upper tail-coverts; tail indistinctly barred and finely but obscurely 
vermiculated with neutral gray (or dusky) and soiled white; primaries 
plain hair brown, their outer webs slightly paler; secondaries similar 
but with the outer webs finely mottled with cinnamon or dull buffy in 
increasing amount, the inner secondaries and scapulars colored like the 
lower back, and with their inner (and often outer) webs broadly edged 
with dull white, giving a prominently streaked appearance to these parts; 
wing-coverts like the back, with more or less submarginal black spotting 
and white edging; under wing-coverts hair brown, margined more or 
less broadly with white; throat plain warm buff or buffy white, abruptly 
contrasted with the breast, which is covered with rounded white spots, 
two to each feather, separated from each other by a shaft-streak of russet 
and preceded by a black spot or bar; these white spots grow larger on the 
sides and increase in number on the feathers, finally coalescing into notched 
streaks on the feathers of the flanks; under tail-coverts buffy, with black 
shaft-streaks; chest and upper abdomen with a large patch of antique 
brown, formed by the ends of the feathers, which are basally white, barred 
with black; lower abdomen buffy; “iris brown; bill black; feet pale bluish 
horn.” 

Female similar in general to the male (except for the markings of the 
head), but duller, the markings above coarser, the under surface paler, 
with more white and less brown, the chest area ochraceous buff; middle 
of crown (including crest) dull buffy or brown, with more or less black 
intermixed; broad superciliaries and throat ochraceous, with faint darker 
margins to the feathers; auriculars hair brown; otherwise about as in the 
male. (The female is not known to assume the full male plumage, as 
has been intimated by certain authors). 

Young (juvenal dress) similar to the adult female, but duller, more 
brownish above, the markings coarser, the head-pattern merely indicated, 
and the throat dull buffy, clouded with dusky across the middle. 

Measurements —Male (thirteen specimens): wing, 97-109 (average, 
101); tail, 56-69 (64); bill, 11.5-14 (13); tarsus, 27-380 (29). Female 
(eleven specimens): wing, 93-107 (101); tail, 58-70 (63); bill, 12-13 
(12.5); tarsus, 26-30 (28). 

Range.—Western Venezuela (States of Falcon and Lara) and outlying 
islands of Aruba and Curacao, Dutch West Indies, west to the Goajira 
Peninsula, Colombia. 


Remarks.—This species was the first of the group to receive 
a binomial name, having been designated Tetrao cristatus by 


wel eae all Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyz. 21% 


Linneeus in 1766. His name was based primarily upon Brisson’s 
“Caille Hupée du Mexique,” the description and plate of which 
are not quite clear, but apparently indicate the species under 
consideration rather than FE. sonnini. Brisson, it is true, quotes 
“Guiana and Mexico” as the source of his specimens, which he 
says had been sent to the museum of the Abbé Aubry. He cites 
also several previous authors, including Barrere and Hernandez. 
We have already shown that the Barrere citation belongs to LE. 
sonnini, while it is practically certain that the “ Quauhtzonecolin”’ 
of the latter author refers to the bird now known as Philortyx 
fasciatus, as I am informed by Mr. E. W. Nelson. But, as sug- 
gested by Dr. Hartert, it is quite as likely that the Abbe Aubry’s 
Museum had got its specimens from Curacao as from Guiana, 
and in any case we are probably justified in accepting Brisson’s 
description as the sole basis of Linnzus’ name, leaving all earlier 
authors entirely out of consideration. 

Great uncertainty seems to have prevailed for many years with 
regard to the true habitat of this species. Some authors gave it 
“Mexico,” doubtless on the authority of Hernandez, who is wrong- 
fully quoted by Brisson and others to this effect, while others 
more vaguely gave it as “South America.” Even as late as 1850, 
when Gould brought out his great work on the Odontophorine, he 
was unable to assign any more definite locality than “ Mexico,” 
although it is evident that numerous specimens were then extant. 
Indeed, it was not until 1892 that von Berlepsch secured an authen- 
tic specimen from the island of Curacao, in the Dutch West Indies. 
While clearly distinguishing his specimen from the Guiana form, 
he suggested that the FE. cristatus of Linnzeus (ex Brisson) was 
probably the same as the latter, and he therefore proposed for 
the Curacao bird the provisional name of Ewpsychortyx gouldi. 
But I agree with Dr. Hartert, who found the bird on Curacao and 
Aruba in the summer of 1892, that Linnzeus’ name is better applied 
to the form under consideration. Aside from von Berlepsch’s 
proposed name, the species had already received two other syn- 
onyms, Ortyx temminkii, proposed by Stephens in 1819, and 
Ortyx neoxenus, applied by Vigors in 1830 to living examples in 
the collection of the Zoological Society of London, and which 
(according to Gould) turned out to be female individuals of the 


218 Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyz. een 


present form. It is doubtful, however, if the bird figured by 
Audubon from the “northwest coast of America” really belongs 
here, 

Up to 1911 the typical form was not certainly known to occur 
on the adjoining mainland, although in the meantime Dr. von 
Madarasz had described a race from the Andes of Merida. In 
that year, however, a small series was received by both the Field 
and the Carnegie Museums from sundry localities in northwestern 
Venezuela. Mr. Cory presently described his series from the 
Rio Aurare (opposite Maracaibo) as a new subspecies, but I must 
confess that with his type series and other specimens before me 
I am unable to separate them satisfactorily from Curacao birds, 
all the characters assigned proving too inconstant. In 1914 the 
receipt of specimens from Rio Hacha, Colombia, by the Carnegie 
Museum extended the range of the species to include the Goajira 
Peninsula. The Rio Hacha birds, however, show apparent signs 
of an influx of lewcopogon blood. The males have rather more 
amber brown feathers in the superciliaries than is usual with 
cristatus, while the females have the buffy color of the under parts 
paler, and the markings of the throat tending to streaks rather 
than squamations. 

In all probability the continental range of this form includes 
all the low region (Tropical Zone) in the vicinity of Maracaibo 
Lake and Gulf, in the pocket formed by the Andes of Venezuela 
and the Eastern Andes of Colombia. As already shown, it ex- 
tends westward along the coast to approximate the range of E. 
leucopogon, and there is a possibility that it may also meet the 
range of E. sonnini to the eastward. Concerning its habits, as 
observed by him in the Dutch West Indies, Dr. Hartert writes 
as follows: 

“This pretty bird is not rare in Aruba and Curacao, but is 
not found everywhere. The natives call it ‘Socklé,’ a name de- 
rived from its note, which is uttered very frequently. It is much 
esteemed as food, and sometimes sold in the market alive. 

“This bird is not easy to obtain in any great numbers without 
a dog, as it does not care to fly and is difficult to be seen in grassy 
places. It is not found on Bonaire.” 


Hol: ax | Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyxz. 219 


Specimens examined.—Venezuela: Tocuyo, 5; Guarico, 1; Rio 
Aurare, 4. Colombia: Rio Hacha, 6. Dutch West Indies: 
Savonet, Curacgao, 6; Curacao, 7. Total, 29. 


Eupsychortyx cristatus horvathi von Madarasz. 


Eupsychortyx horvathi von Maparasz, Ann. Mus. Hungarici, III, 1904, 
116, pl. 12 (Pedregosa, Venezuela; orig. descr.; type in coll. Budapest 
Mus.).—BraBourNne and Cuuss, Birds 8. Am., I, 1912, 13 (ref. orig. 
descr.; range). 

Subspecific characters—Similar to Ewpsychortyx cristatus cristatus, but 
back and wings with much less rufescent tinge, and shaft-stripes on sides 
and flanks darker and less uniform. Female differing conspicuously in 
having a streaked or spotted throat. 

Measurements.—Male (one specimen): wing, 98; tail, 62; bill, 12° 
tarsus, 31. Female (two specimens): wing, 98-101; tail, 63-66; bill, 
11-13; tarsus, 30-31. 

Range.—Andes of Merida, Venezuela. 


Remarks.—This form was described and figured by Dr. von 
Madarasz from two male examples forwarded to the Hungarian 
National Museum by the well-known collectors, S. Bricefio Gabal- 
don e hijos. It was said to differ in its thicker and larger bill, 
and also in having the forehead, crown, and throat pure white, 
without any tinge of fawn color, while the lower throat and the 
sides are more sharply outlined and brightly colored. It is true 
that in the single male before me the crest and throat are rather 
purer white than in typical cristatus, but I doubt if this distinction 
would hold in a series. The other characters assigned are cer- 
tainly of no value, notwithstanding which the general coloration 
of the upper parts is decidedly more grayish, less rufescent, and 
the female is so different in the markings of the throat that there 
can be little question as to the propriety of recognizing the form 
as subspecifically distinct. It appears to be restricted to the 
Subtropical Zone of the Andes of Merida. 

Specimens examined.—Venezuela: Valle (2000 m.), 1; Pedregosa 
(2000 m.), 1; Milla (1630 m.), 1. Total, 3. 


Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, Pa. 


220 Topp, The Genus Eupsychortyz. eet 


EXPLANATION OF PLATE V. 


Figure 1.—Eupsychortyx sonnini sonnini, normal phase. No. 46646, 
Collection Carnegie Museum, male, El Trompillo, Carabobo, Venezuela. 

Figure 2.—EHupsychortyx sonnini sonnini, black-throated phase. No. 
78389, Collection American Museum of Natural History, Maripa, Rio 
Caura, Venezuela. 

Figure 3.—Eupsychortyx sonnini mocquerysi, white-throated phase. 
No. 39162, Field Museum of Natural History, Margarita Island, Vene- 
zuela. 

Figure 4.—Eupsychortyx leucopogon leucopogon. No. 147784, Collec- 
tion U.S. National Museum, Panama. 

Figure 5.—Eupsychortyx leucopogon leucotis. No. 17535, Collection 
M. A. Carriker, Jr. (in Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences), 
Aguachica, Magdalena River, Colombia. 

Figure 6.—Eupsychortyx leucopogon decoratus, type. No. 51975, Col- 
lection Carnegie Museum, Calamar, Bolivar, Colombia. 

Figure 7.—Eupsychortyx leucopogon littoralis, type. No. 38151, Col- 
lection Carnegie Museum, Mamatoco, Colombia. 

Figure 8.—Eupsychortyz cristatus cristatus. No. 44090, Collection Field 
Museum of Natural History, Rio Aurare, Venezuela. 


hap Auk, Vou. XXXVII. Prats VII. 


OO 


1. View in narrow southern portion of Lake Burford. Broad-leaved cottonwood 
(Populus wislizeni) at left. 


2. Shore of Lake Burford south of Chama Rod and Gun Club Cabin showing 


fringing growth of tules and sage grown knolls. 


ve * 


eit 


vate iris vat Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 224 


OBSERVATIONS ON THE HABITS OF BIRDS AT LAKE 
BURFORD, NEW MEXICO. 


BY ALEXANDER WETMORE. 
Plates VII-IX 


INTRODUCTION 


Lake Burford, the largest natural body of water found in New 
Mexico, is situated in the Jicarilla (Apache) Indian Reservation in 
the northwestern part of the state. This lake for many years was 
known as Stinking Lake and is so shown on most maps, a name de- 
rived from the Spanish appellation, of “La Laguna Grande Hedi- 
onda”’ (so called from a spring of sulphur-tainted water near the 
western side). Recently the lake has been given much prominence 
as a possible breeding ground for water birds by various interested 
agencies and it was decided that it would be fitting to give it a more 
euphonious name. On May 3, 1918, therefore, by petition of the 
Southwestern Geographic Society and the New Mexico Game 
Protective association, it was rechristened Lake Burford, in honor 
of the late Miles W. Burford of Silver City, New Mexico, a gentle- 
man who had been prominent as a pioneer in promoting the cause 
of game protection in the state. 

The work on which the following notes are based was carried on 
in the interest of the Biological Survey, United States Department 
of Agriculture, and covered the period from May 23 to June 19, 
1918. Through the kindness of Mr. H. L. Hall and Mr. C. Mc- 
Fadden of Chama, New Mexico, permission was received to occupy 
an adobe cabin at the lake, belonging to the Chama Rod and Gun 
Club, while Mr. P. G. Orell rendered aid in assembling needed 
camp equipment. I reached Chama on the afternoon of May 22, 
and left for Lake Burford at noon the following day after outfitting 
for a month’s work in the field. Jimmy Barnett of Chama accom- 
panied me as assistant in camp. ‘The trip to the lake, made in a 
Ford auto truck, required four hours, a sufficient commentary on 
the state of the mountain roads, as the distance travelled was only 
about forty miles. Visits were made to a lumber camp at El Vado 
for mail and supplies on May 31 and June 12, and we returned to 


222 Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. [ever 


Chama on June 19. Our stay at the lake extended over a period 
of four weeks. 


PuysicaL FEATURES 


Lake Burford is located approximately at 7000 feet above sea 
level and lies in a trough or depression extending north and south 
near the summit of the Continental Divide. The lake covers an 
irregular basin surrounded by rolling knolls, that around most of 
the shore come down directly to the water. These are strewn with 
loose fragments of sandstone and overgrown with sage. In sev- 
eral places rocky promontories of yellowish white sandstone rise 
abruptly from the water’s edge. Near these the lake bottom is 
hard and firm; elsewhere it is composed of soft black mud that is 
deep and treacherous. The shoreline in 1918 was between 15 and 
17 miles in all, and the water surface extended over between 4 and 
5 square miles. The northern end of the lake is broad and open, 
while the southern part is cut by projecting promontories into sev- 
eral small bays (Plate VII, fig 1). In the southern area are three 
small islands. The depth of the lake in the center varied from 6 
to 9 feet. Lake Burford receives its water supply from snow 
water and rain, and to some extent from springs. In extremely 
high water it may overflow from a narrow east bay down a great 
cleft in the sandstone rock known as La Puerta Grande, that leads 
down toward the Chama (or Brazos) River, but within modern 
times the water content of the lake has not reached such a level. 
There is, however, an underground flow here that feeds two small 
lakes below the large one, and seepage continues on below these. 

The waters of Lake Burford are distinctly alkaline, though the 
alkali is not concentrated, so that sheep, cattle and horses water 
here without trouble. Where low flats bordered the shore a thin 
alkaline scale or efflorescence formed on the surface of the mud, 
and isolated pools in such areas were found to be strongly saline. 
There was a decided difference in appearance in the water of the 
northern and southern parts of the lake. That in the broad, open 
northern portion was gray, murky. and opaque, so that objects 
four inches below the surface were barely visible. The water in 
the southern end was clearer and contained less sediment, so that 
bottom might be seen at a depth of three feet. This difference 


por aXX Leal Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 223 


may be due in part to the presence of springs in the southern end 
(though none were located) and in part to the fact that the wind 
sweeps strongly across the open north end, so that the waves usu- 
ally run high every afternoon and evening, a condition that would 
tend to keep the water roily. 

The spring of 1918, had been very dry and the fall of snow dur- 
ing the previous winter below normal, so that at the time of my 
work the lake level was two and one half to three feet below that of 
last year. The water area varies greatly as the seasons change 
from year to year, and I was told that in the past ten years the 
water once had been down between 4 and 5 feet below its present 
level. During the spring months there is said to be a running 
stream in a small draw that reaches the lake on the northeastern 
side near the cabin (Plate VIII, fig. 2), but in 1918 this was dry. 
In some places Mexican sheep herders secured water for drinking 
from seep holes dug a few feet from the lake shore, but this was 
found to be too strong to be good, and for our use we carried water 
from some slightly alkaline pools located below a grove of large 
cottonwoods in the draw mentioned above. Later this seepage 
water became too bad, and further search revealed a small spring 
of good water four hundred yards above the cottonwoods. 

The two small lakes formed by seepage from Lake Burford were 
about a mile and a half below the main lake. The first of these 
had an area of about 40 acres and was grown with Scirpus occiden- 
talis. The second, known to the Mexicans as La Laguna de la 
Puerta, or La Laguna Thompson (named for Mr. Thompson of 
Chama, who formerly lived nearby), was a third of a mile long 
and an eighth of a mile broad. There was also a small lake 500 
yards long by 100 yards broad situated northeast of the cabin, cut 
off by low knolls from Lake Burford, that was known as Hayden’s 
or Clear Lake. Water birds of several species flew back and forth 
to these smaller lakes regularly. 

It was said that Lake Burford was usually frozen over by the 
first of December, though ice formed along the shores earlier, and 
that the water was open again by the first of March. It was diffi- 
cult, however, in the short time spent at Chama, to secure accurate 
information on this point as the lake has been remote from travel- 
led paths and few have come here save in summer and fall. With- 


(ave 
April 


224 Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 
in a short period Largo and Tapacitos Canyons to the west have 
been colonized and many more white people have come into this 
area. El Vado is the present railroad point from which these 
settlers receive supplies, and as the road to El Vado passes the 
lake, the region is becoming more frequented. 

Conditions at the lake are such that spring is late and it was 
curious that when I arrived the season was farther advanced on 
the high pine covered slopes than lower down along the shore. 
From May 24 to June 5 the average morning temperature at 6:00 
A. M. was about 40° F., while on May 26 and 27 ice was found in 
the rushes bordering the beaches. After June 5th it became 
warmer. Heavy winds from the west prevailed during May, but 
moderated later. At the time of my arrival black willows were 
beginning to bloom in protected places, and in a few spots along 
the lake shore small broad-leaved and narrow-leaved cottonwoods 
were in bud. Gray willows did not blossom until June 17th. By 
June 6th vegetation showed slight increase as growth, retarded 
by the cold nights, was slow. The breeding season for marsh birds 
(save the passerines) did not begin until about May 25 and was 
not at its height until June 10, while Eared Grebes had just begun 
their nest-building on June 18. 

The work at Lake Burford was undertaken primarily to ascer- 
tain what species of water birds bred there and in approximately 
what numbers these occurred. Comparatively little collecting 
was done, as it was desired to disturb the birds as little as possible, 
but long hours each day were spent in observation, aided where 
necessary by the use of 8-power binoculars. The natural condi- 
tions at the lake were such as to render observation of the avian 
inhabitants a comparatively simple matter. A stand of dead tules 
remaining from last year bordered much of the shoreline, and the 
broken clumps of these rushes were just high enough to form a 
natural blind wherever I cared to sit down and watch. When 
observation at long distance was necessary other cover was avail- 
able in the sagebrush en the knolls above. Most of the birds that 
occurred here were very tame and it was the ordinary thing to 
have them carry on the business of every day life, with no sign of 
fear or uneasiness, within 30 to 100 feet of me as I lay concealed in 
the rushes. 


Vol. XXXVI) Wurmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 225 


GENERAL CONDITIONS 


The water of Lake Burford, while not bad, was at the same time 
distinctly alkaline as has been previously stated, so that the aquatic 
and semiaquatic vegetation was limited to those forms of plant life 
characterized by a marked tolerance for alkali. The round-stem- 
med bulrush or tule (Scirpus occidentalis) was the most prominent 
of these. Considerable areas along the south, west and north 
shores were entirely bare and open but elsewhere this plant formed 
a growth in the water, extending from the shoreline out for a dis- 
tance of from one to fifty feet. In general it grew as a fringing 
band from six to ten feet broad (Plate VII, fig. 2). The dead 
stems of this tule formed dense masses, matted firmly by the 
winter’s snow and ice, to be penetrated and traversed only with 
much trouble, a safe cover for many nests as the ducks were able 
to creep in underneath the interlaced stems and here conceal their 
eggs. On May 24 the new growth was just starting and much of 
it had been frost-bitten so that the tips showed as brown dead 
spikes. ‘Two weeks later the new growth was extensive and form- 
ed an efficient cover (Plate VIII, fig, 1). New clumps were ap- 
pearing in shallow open water also where all last year’s growth had 
been destroyed by ice so that by the first of July the area covered 
by this plant must have been extensive. 

Bayonet grass or three-square (Scirpus paludosus) was com- 
mon and salt grass (Distichlis spicata) was abundant in suitable 
places along the shore where it grew with foxtail (Hordeum juba- 
tum). Sage brush (Artemisia tridentata) covered all of the knolls 
and rolling slopes, in most places coming down to the beach. A 
linear leaved pondweed (Potamogeton pectinatus) was the most 
abundant of the truly aquatic plants and with it, clogging and en- 
veloping its leaves, were great masses of a green alga. On May 23, 
when work was begun at the lake, the pondweed was appearing as 
scattered filaments on the floors of sheltered bays. As the water 
became warmer this growth increased and by June 18, it had be- 
gun to appear in large areas at the surface. By July 1, it must 
have covered practically the entire lake. Ditch-grass (Ruppia 
occidentalis) was found in the Laguna de la Puerta and a musk- 
grass (Chara sp.) was common in the spring holes from which we 


226 Wermors, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. pes 


secured drinking water. The cat-tail (Typha latifolia) was fairly 
common. A black and a gray willow grew at intervals along the 
lake shore, and both narrow-leaved and broad-leaved cottonwoods 
(Populus angustifolia and P. wislizeni) were found in small num- 
bers (Plate IX, fig. 1). At a few points wild currant (Ribes ine- 
brians and R. aureum), choke cherry (Padus melanocarpa) and 
service-berry (Amelanchier) were abundant in the hills and came 
down above the shore of the lake on protected north slopes. The 
yellow pine (Pinus brachyptera) grew in open forests over the higher 
hills (Plate IX, fig. 2) interspersed with pinyons and cedars 
which came down over the lower slopes. Douglas fir was found 
in some of the gulches and there were many groves of a small oak 
in valleys in the hills. 

There were no fish of any species in the lake. The axolotl (Amby- 
stoma) was abundant and was the source of food of mergansers 
and herons. The Mexican name of this curious creature was in 
common use, but was usually corrupted by Americans to “water 
loty.”” These creatures were observed lying on aquatic growth a 
foot or so beneath the surface, basking in the sun’s rays, and at my 
approach turned with a quick wriggle and disappeared in the 
murky water below. In feeding on Chironomids resting on the 
surface film, these water dogs broke at the surface as fish might, 
and at such times seemed surprisingly active for creatures ordi- 
narily considered so sluggish. During June they began to die in 
considerable numbers for no apparent reason (save perhaps that 
they had lived their allotted span of life) and were found floating 
on the surface or washed up along the shore. For a period the 
Night-Herons, acting as scavengers, disposed of them as they ap- 
peared, but later so many of the bodies were present that an efflu- 
vium arose from them in early morning, after the air had lain quiet 
over the surface of the lake during the night. 

Along low marshy shores frogs (Rana pipiens) were fairly com- 
mon while in spring holes back of the lake these were abundant. 

Among mammals coyotes were fairly common, signs of an oc- 
casional badger, wild cat or skunk were found, porcupines were 
seen in the hills and deer were fairly commom. The track of a 
wolf was observed on one occasion. 


ver Pre | Wermort, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. Oot 


GENERAL DIscUSSION 


Though a fair number of breeding individuals of various ducks 
inhabit Lake Burford in summer, it seems from observation, that 
in addition many drakes come there to molt and spend the summer 
after their duties of reproduction are completed. Males of the 
Cinnamon Teal, Mallard and Redhead were the first of these to 
appear, and, though not present at the time of my departure in 
large numbers, still it seemed that they were steadily increasing 
in abundance. A drake Cinnamon Teal, in company with a male 
Mallard, shot on May 27, had evidently finished breeding as the 
plumage was worn, the penis and cloaca reduced in size and the 
testes shrinking. On the following day six drakes of this species 
were observed in one flock, and from then on they were fairly com- 
mon. Male Mallards consorting by themselves or with other 
drakes appeared May 27 and 28, and were seen in small numbers 
until June 10, after which they were common. One that was molt- 
ing into eclipse plumage was observed June 4. Drake Redheads 
began to separate from the females on June 3, and after June 14 
were common. In the case first noted of the Mallard and Cinna- 
mon Teal drakes there can be no doubt but that they represented 
birds that had bred elsewhere, possibly at a lower altitude (though 
of course there is no means available for proving this) and had 
come here afterward to molt and spend the summer. No other 
deduction may be drawn from the facts outlined above, as at the 
time at which they appeared females of the same species were 
just beginning to lay at Lake Burford. The presence of such 
unmated birds as these shows that it is unsafe to rely upon a count 
of all drakes in arriving at an approximately correct census of the 
breeding ducks of any given area.!_ It is true that breeding drakes 
at certain times of the day (usually between 8 and 10 in the morn- 
ing) are found alone, while the female is absent at the nest deposit- 
ing an egg; and these drakes usually linger near at hand for a few 
days after the female has ceased to lay and has begun to incubate. 
(This statement may be qualified by adding that it is more often 


1The statements outlined here do not apply to the Ruddy Duck (Erismatura 
jamaicensis) as the drake of that species, like the male Canada goose, usually re- 
mains true to his spouse during incubation and the rearing of the young. 


ice 
April 


228 Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 
true of the “deep water” than of the “shallow water” ducks). 
These breeding birds however after a little experience may be told 
readily by their actions and demeanor, and seldom need be con- 
fused with those others whose duties of procreation are for this 
season completed. The mated birds when found alone are not 
far from the site of the nest, are more alert and watchful at the 
approach of an intruder, and often call a warning to the female. 
When flushed they may fly only a short distance and then drop 
into the water again, and in any case usually circle around and 
seem loth to leave the neighborhood. In contrast to this the sum- 
mering drake nearly always seeks the company of others of similar 
status, so that little bands of these birds, often containing several 
species, may be found standing about on shore sleeping, preening 
or feeding. In demeanor these birds are more sluggish and when 
flushed usually fly off to some safe spot often a considerable dis- 
tance away. Their entire manner and custom of life is wholly 
different from that of the bird still in company with his mate. 

At Lake Burford these summering male ducks increased steadily 
in numbers until the time of my departure. Certain points and 
open beaches were favorite resorts with them, and there I was sure 
to find little flocks of males alone, or in company with a few pairs 
of mated birds. By the time when these birds must of necessity 
lead a sequestered life because of their inability to fly through 
the molt of their flight feathers, the two prime requisites of food 
supply and shelter would be present, as cover on the waters of 
the lake in the form of growths of the two species of Scirpus was 
steadily increasing while the great masses of potamogetons 
promised abundant food for them. 

The lateness of the breeding season among the waterfowl here 
may be attributed perhaps to the slow development of a proper 
food supply. Until the first of June food suitable for these birds 
was far from common in the waters of the lake. A number of 
Mallards, and a few Cinnamon Teal and Lesser Scaup Ducks that 
I shot for examination for one reason or another were all thin and 
poor, and had very little fatty tissue underlying the skin. A fe- 
male Ruddy Duck was the only individual examined that was fat 
in any degree. It is possible that this poor physical condition 
might retard physiologically the sexual maturity of these birds 


Tar AuK, VoL. XX XVII. Pras, VT. 


2 


1. Growths of tules furnishing shelter for water birds. (Lake Burford, N. M.) 
2. Water hole in gully near cabin at Lake Burford. 


Vol. faa | WETMORE, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 229 


and so postpone the breeding season until a period of comparative 
abundance had been reached. It would seem that this scant store 
of energy must tell heavily on the females who were under the ne- 
cessity of drawing upon their reserves of strength in producing a 
number of eggs. The close of the breeding season finding the 
birds thus reduced brings another call upon their vitality, in the 
renewal of their covering of feathers. It was observed that fe- 
male Mallards were renewing their body feathers at the same time 
that they were mating and laying eggs. 

The occurrence of the Lesser Scaup Duck at Lake Burford was 
of especial interest as, though the birds were present in fair num- 
bers they were not breeding. These ducks were observed first 
on May 25, when a few apparently were’ mated. The mating dis- 
play was observed on several days, and the birds were seen in copu- 
lation occasionally during the first week in June. Two pairs that 
were under observation frequented one area of rushes and the fe- 
males gave the usual alarm note when I came in sight. Careful 
search failed to reveal a nest and finally I shot both females, one 
on June 17, and the second on June 18. Dissection showed that 
- while the ovaries in these two were apparently healthy, as they 
were clear and normal in color, there was no physiological develop- 
ment in ovary or oviduct, and careful examination showed that 
the birds had not laid this year nor would they have done so if 
unmolested. The reason that these ducks remain so far south is 
puzzling. In many cases such ducks are cripples as I have taken 
summering birds at such southern localities as Lake Koshkonong, 
Wisconsin, Minco, Oklahoma, and the Laguna de Guanica, Porto 
Rico, at the end of the month of May and during the first part of 
June and have found that they showed the scars of old wounds. 
Here at Lake Burford, however, the birds were present in fair num- 
bers, and were able to fly without difficulty when approached, and 
the two females collected showed no sign of injury of any kind. 
The males observed were all in full handsome plumage. It may 
be suggested that part at least of these ducks do not breed until 
they are two years old, and that some of these may remain in south- 
ern localities, lacking the physiological incentive for the flight to 
the breeding ground in the north. 

An interesting case of sterility in a female duck was encountered 
in collecting a small series of Mallards, to be preserved as speci- 


eee 
April 


230 Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 
mens. On June 15 I had a pair of Mallards under observation 
for some time and from their actions was certain that they were 
mated as the female remained constantly near the male and the 
two had all of the mannerisms of mated birds. A short time after 
I came nearer and finally shot them both. On dissecting the fe- 
male I found that the ovary showed little or no development 
while the ova exhibited the diseased condition known as black 
atrophy, an affection that is little understood, but one that is 
known to render birds sterile. The oviduct in this Mallard could 
be barely distinguished and showed no development whatever, 
though in healthy breeding females taken at this same time the 
oviduct was greatly enlarged, and exhibited the condition of tur- 
gidity common to the breeding and laying season. The male that 
accompanied this female was molting rapidly into eclipse and had 
already lost much of the breeding plumage. On examining the 
sexual organs in this bird I found the cloacal portion still swollen 
and enlarged, but the testicular substance degenerating so that 
it had been resorbed to a point where the testes were shrunken to 
one-fourth of the full normal size. 

The instances outlined here are a further example of the care 
necessary in allotting ducks as breeding in certain localities simply 
because of their presence there in breeding season. This would 
apply especially to more unusual records in extension of range. 
Further observations on the occurrence of mated sterile females 
among ducks and other birds are of importance and the question 
is one that will repay careful investigation. 


MIGRATION 


At the time of my arrival there was still some movement in 
migration both among the smaller insect-feeding passeriform 
species and the larger water birds. Cliff swallows were not ob- 
served until May 25, Western Warbling Vireos arrived about May 
31, and Orange-crowned Warblers, June 2. Grinnell’s Water- 
thrush was seen on May 23 and 25, and the Pileolated Warbler on 
May 26 and June 2. 

A few observations seem to indicate that Lake Burford is on 
one of the lines of flight for birds passing to and from the Salt Lake 
Valley, Utah. Snowy Herons observed at the lake at intervals 


Vol. 0. 4] Wermorn, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 231 


from May 23 to June 5, were certainly on their way to the mouth 
of Bear River, Utah, as that is the only breeding colony of these 
birds in the interior in this general region. A flock of Franklin’s 
Gulls in full breeding plumage frequented the lake from June 14 to 
16, and it may be that these were in passage to the same place as 
the time of their departure coincided with the arrival of a part of 
the breeding birds on Bear River; while apparently there is no 
intermediate region where they may nest. It may be supposed 
therefore that part of the ducks that come to Lake Burford in 
the fall come down from the Salt Lake Valley and use this lake as a 
resting place before passing on farther south. It is probable that 
this lake is merely one point in a broad line of flight that covers 
western New Mexico and the most of Arizona wherever water is 
found. 


ANNOTATED List or Birps 


1. Colymbus nigricollis californicus (Heermann). Earrp GREBE. 
The Eared Grebe was the most abundant of the breeding marsh birds at 
Lake Burford and while the species was common when work was first begun 
at the lake it increased suddenly in abundance between May 30 and June 
1. Many of these Grebes were seen in pairs on my arrival, but until June 
2, small flocks containing unmated birds of both sexes were found in cer- 
tain of the open bays. As the season advanced these birds showed more 
activity, and after June 5, the Grebes were always found in pairs, that 
rested on the water with male and female never separated far from one 
another. Many were seen in the open water, some near shore and others 
farther out, while other pairs frequented the shelter of the fringing tules. 
All were tame and showed little fear so that when I remained quiet I had 
no difficulty in watching them, often at a distance of only twenty or thirty 
feet. They were without question the most interesting birds on the lake 
and were continually revealing new habits and mannerisms so that the 
watcher was certain to be repaid for any time spent in observing them. 
The displays witnessed during their mating were perhaps of the greatest 
interest. 

The most striking of these courtship displays was one similar to that 
styled the “Penguin” attitude by Julian Huxley in his studies of similar 
actions in the Great Crested Grebe of Europe. I was fortunate in wit- 
nessing this daily in whole or in part during my stay at Lake Burford. At 
the beginning of this, one of the most characteristic acts in the courtship 
of the Eared Grebe, the two birds, male and female, usually rested on the 
water five or six feet apart. Suddenly the male assumed an attitude fac- 


'Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1914, pp. 491--562, 2 plates. 


2352 Wermore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. een 


ing the female with crest and cheeks flaring, head erect, neck extended 
slightly forward, wings half opened with the tips raised so as to display all 
of the handsome markings to the best advantage. The female then dived, 
remaining under twelve or fifteen seconds, while the male maintained his 
position watching intently. As the female emerged she came up slowly 
a few feet away with head and neck extended until when free of the water 
she was standing bolt upright on the surface, treading water rapidly, with 
her whole body exposed. Sometimes she came up facing the male, some- 
times with her back toward him and sometimes behind him. On perceiv- 
ing her he rose at once, assuming the same attitude as that held by his 
mate, and the two, still bolt upright, advanced slowly toward one another, 
until finally their breasts touched, when their feet, suddenly moving more 
rapidly, broke at the surface, making a great boiling in the water. This 
performance was accompanied by constantly varied trilling and whistling 
notes. The birds held this upright position for a few seconds with heads 
turning rapidly from side to side as if pivoted on the neck, then sank slowly 
down to the usual resting position on the water, and at once began to preen 
the feathers of the sides of the breast and neck. This ended the display 
and the birds drifted slowly apart. The performance as described was the 
completed act. Frequently however after birds has been paired for some 
time they rested on the water facing each other, then rose at once to the 
upright position, and touched breasts, while calling excitedly, after which 
they sank back and began to preen. The boiling, rushing sound made by 
their feet as their breasts touched could be heard for a long way and 
often attracted attention to pairs in the open water at some distance that 
were just completing this display. Sometimes the male continued erect 
after the female sank back, and might then turn his back to her and 
travel off across the water for two or three feet. Again the male at times 
rose in display and the female did not respond when he sank back slowly 
after a few seconds. In one variation of the action I saw a male emerge 
very slowly in front of his mate with wings partly raised, submerge, and 
then rise again. The third time he emerged in the erect position but she 
did not respond when he sank back again on the water. The entire 
display was seen at comparatively long intervals but the simplified version 
in which the two birds merely rose together was observed many times each 
day. The entire act required from 10 seconds to nearly a minute to com- 
plete. As the birds stand bolt erect their resemblance to small penguins 
while performing this act is both curious and striking. 

Another very pretty display was as follows. <A pair rested on the water 
8 or 10 feet apart and then swam slowly toward one another, suddenly 
checking to a standstill when their bills almost touched. They remained 
for a second or two in this position and then both turned half around so 
that their tails were almost touching, and the birds were facing away from 
one another. The male then depressed his crest, lowered his head and 
nodded it slowly back and forth, looking at the surface before him as though 


el: ria dl Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 233 


examining a nest and eggs, while both gave a low trilling note that contin- 
ued for some time and was very pleasing. As the season advanced this 
action became more and more common, and when nest-building began the 
male performed in this way over the nest foundation constantly. The 
female now became more active, frequently rising half erect at short in- 
tervals, arching her neck with head bent toward the breast and then giving 
a sudden quick spring forward, seemingly imitating the action of sliding 
up on a nest platform. 

In another action male and female rose from the water, and, standing 
half erect with the male slightly behind but with his breast touching the 
female’s side, rushed off across the surface for six or eight feet calling ex- 
citedly, At other times a pair lay prostrate and travelled off on the water 
with necks extended and wings spread and flapping. Or males alone rose 
on the surface and with neck bent forward, crest and cheeks expanded, and 
flapping wings, ran along in a straight line or in a semicircle sometimes for 
a hundred feet. I thought also that part of the love making of these birds 
took place beneath the surface of the water as mated pairs often dived to- 
gether and remained below for some time. It was a common thing for a 
male to follow a female under as she dived and at times males showed atten- 
tion to females by diving from a few feet away and coming up immediately 
beside them. 

Rival males often threatened one another by half extending their wings 
and then closing them for two or three times as they faced one another, or 
ran at each other striking with their bills. The attacked bird in this case 
usually dived to escape. In their squabbles they seemed often to endeavor 
to strike the feet of an opponent, apparently a tender place, as the attacked 
bird always dived. Occasionally I saw one spring clear from the water at 
another to land on his back and slide off. Females too fought to some ex- 
tent when their mates paid attention to others, and struck vigorously with 
their bills, doing more real fighting than did the males, who often merely 
blustered and seldom really came to blows as the one attacked usually 
dived avoiding a direct encounter. Preening the sides and breast was a 
constant accompaniment of any mating display. 

On cold, sharp mornings, when the temperature was near freezing, these 
grebes frequented sheltered bays away from the wind, and floated about 
on the surface with their backs to the rising sun, the feathers of back and 
flanks expanded, the wing tips raised, and the whole plumage fluffed to 
receive the warm rays to the fullest degree. At these times the birds 
looked as large as Mallards or Gadwall. The sudden change to the usual 
slim form just before the birds dived was almost startling. Frequently 
when at rest the birds drew one foot up among the flank feathers, and 
floated about paddling slowly with the other. Often they stretched after 
resting, extending first one foot and then the other straight back and free 
of the water. I saw them feeding by swimming slowly along with neck 
outstretched, seizing Chironomids floating on the surface film with quick 


2a Wermore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. ben 


jabs of their sharp bills. Often as the grebes neared these flies they gave 
a quick stroke with the feet in order to drive ahead and seize them before 
they were disturbed by the wave that preceded the bird when swimming 
at a regular rate. 

Though these grebes were paired early, actual nest-building did not start 
until about June 13, though a few females were seen in Hayden’s Lake 
playing with nesting material as early as the first of June. Nests were 
begun where the water was from three to five feet deep. The females 
seemed to do the work of nest construction, dragging up masses of algae 
to a central point and diving actively for more while the males remained 
near the nest posturing over it trilling and reaching out as though to aid 
the female as she approached with building material. A colony of a dozen 
or fifteen nests was begun at one point in the lower end of the lake, and 
the grebes were noisy and demonstrative here for several days before 
actual building begun, displaying constantly and fighting with rivals. The 
noise and commotion continued as nest construction was started. No 
completed nests were found nor were any eggs laid up to the time of my 
departure. 

The notes of these grebes were whistled and somewhat varied but were 
of such a nature that it is difficult to transcribe them successfully to paper. 
Males were heard occasionally making a curious soughing sound concern- 
ing whose origin I was uncertain. Occasionally during the night, especially 
when the weather was stormy the Grebes called in chorus making a con- 
siderable volume of wild sound that carried for a long distance. 

After the first of June, when insect life became more abundant, little 
parties containing from six to fifteen of these grebes came swimming up 
from the lower bays toward dusk each evening to feed in the great open 
expanse of water at the northern end of the lake. These bands swam 
steadily ahead in close formation toward the open water, without stopping 
to rest. Little flocks travelling a hundred yards or so apart continued to 
come until it was dark. Occasionally as they passed a single grebe came 
out from the rushes on either side to join them. Frequently I counted 
150 or 175 individuals before it became too dark to see clearly. The 
broad area of water mentioned proved a trap for many insects that came 
flying out from the sage grown hills surrounding it, while Chironomids 
and Ephemerids were emerging constantly from its shallow depths in 
great numbers. Frequently in the morning I found the water surface 
strewn with drowning beetles and ants, while gnats were resting every- 
where on the surface forming an abundant source of food. 

After leaving Lake Burford I visited a lake region at an elevation of 
nearly 9000 feet on a high plateau in the southern end of the Chuska Moun- 
tains. The Eared Grebe was found here also and was nesting in fair num- 
bers on the two lakes known to the Navajos as Be-e-khet-hum-fez and 
To-teh-khih. Though these lie at two thousand feet greater elevation 
than Lake Burford breeding among the grebes was much farther advanced. 


er exe peal Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. Za5 


On July 1, I examined a colony of about forty nests and found that the 
young had hatched in about two-thirds of them while the eggs in the re- 
mainder were heavily incubated. The nests were grouped in a growth of 
Scirpus occidentalis from twenty to thirty feet apart. They were the usual 
rounded masses of decaying vegetation built up two inches above the 
water with a slight hollow in the top to contain the eggs. Some had been 
partly covered by aquatic vegetation drawn up by the parent birds before 
leaving, while in others the eggs lay in the open with no attempt at conceal- 
ment. Apparently the young leave the nest as soon as hatched as though 
I found broken eggshells in which the membranes were not yet dry, the 
young were nowhere to be seen. Adult grebes swam ahead of me through 
the water plants, diving when I came too near, but not seeming greatly 
alarmed. Often they were accompanied by young ten or twelve days old 
that swam close behind, almost touching the body of the adult bird or 
climbed upon the back of the parent to be held beneath the wings while 
the old bird swam away. Adults were seen feeding these young, calling 
them up across the water and placing food in their bills. These Juvenile 
birds had a wrinkled space of thickened reddish skin bare of feathers on 
top of the head. 

2. Podilymbus podiceps (Linnaeus). Prep-BInLED GrEeBE.—This 
species was common at Lake Burford and was breeding. Though part of 
these birds were pairing when I first arrived some were nesting already and 
all bred earlier than did the Eared Grebes. Their actions were no less 
interesting than those of the preceding species but these grebes were some- 
what more difficult to watch. Each male had selected a restricted area 
as his own and though he made excursions occasionally out into the open 
lake, was usually to be found near one certain place. Usually this was a 
small opening in the rushes fifteen or twenty feet across, often with a 
slender line of tules projecting in a point that separated a little inner bay 
from the open water. Ordinarily the male was found in the slight pro- 
tection of the slender tules or in the open a short distance outside while 
his mate lay hidden somewhere within. These birds were continually on 
the alert and watched every move on the marsh, swimming slowly or rest- 
ing quietly, always with their short tails pointing up at an angle of 45 de- 
grees to display the white below prominently. They were the only marsh 
birds of whom the male coots seemed to be afraid, and it was seldom that 
a coot ventured to attack one, though pugnacious to an extreme toward 
most other swimming birds, a respect that was well warranted as the grebes 
were aggressive and savage. These male grebes called at short inter- 
vals, listening to others at a distance and frequently answering them. 
Their notes were loud and sonorous, and in calm weather could be heard 
plainly across the water for half a mile but could be modulated and con- 
trolled also so that though the birds were only a few yards away the sounds 
seemed to come from a great distance. The most common note was a loud 
coh coh coh coh coh coh cow cow cow cow, the first series of notes increasing 


236 Wetmore, birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. heen 


in rapidity as they progressed and the last given more slowly with equal 
intervals between them. This was varied to coo-coo-coo-coo-qua, coo-coo- 
qua, coo-coo-qua continued for some time, the qua note being prolonged 
and with a curious rising inflection. These calls often were given while 
the bird was in the open. The head and neck were held erect in calling 
and as each note was uttered the bill was thrown up. Another note given 
usually from the shelter of the rushes was a loud laughing hah hah hah hah 
hah hah, that was harsh and raucous to an extreme. In addition to the 
calls described above they occasionally uttered a peculiar low whistled 
note. 

The mating displays of this species while not as varied as those of the 
Eared Grebe were strange and interesting. A pair resting quietly in open 
water sometimes dived and then came up to splatter off for a hundred feet 
or so, across the surface with flapping wings with the male in pursuit of the 
female and about ten feet behind. At the close of this the male gave a 
series of loud sonorous calls. Frequently he nipped off a length of tule 
stem twelve or fifteen inches long, holding it by one end in his bill, while 
he swam about or even dived. Again a pair swam toward one another with 
heads and necks held erect. When about a foot apart they stopped and 
then swung half around and presented their tails to one another. At the 
same time the male held his wing tips slightly raised, the feathers of his 
back elevated and the sides of his neck puffed out while both birds turned 
the head alertly from side to side, though seemingly they regarded some 
distant object rather than each other. In a second or two they swung 
back, facing one another again, continued this turning half around and 
then back, as though pivoted in one spot, at ten or fifteen second intervals 
for nearly ten minutes. The male was more regular in turning than the 
female and she was frequently out of time with him. Finally the female 
lowered her head while the male continued to display for a few seconds 
longer, after which the two swam back into the shelter of the rushes. 

When at rest these birds spent much time in preening and when feathers 
were loosened in this procsss (as many were) they were seized, dabbled in 
the water and swallowed. Eared Grebes did the same but often tried to 
shake the feathers free from their bills, usually not swallowing them unless 
they adhered, though I'saw one Eared Grebe discard a feather which was 
immediately picked up and swallowed by its mate. 

The Pied-billed Grebes like the preceding species sunned themselves by 
resting in sheltered bays with their feathers fluffed out. In doing this 
they floated with their backs to the sun with the wing tips and feathers 
well elevated to catch the warming rays so that at a distance they looked 
very large and bulky. 

On June 18, I found a brood of newly hatched young near the lower is- 
land in the south lake. As I approached the rushes bordering the shore 
a female Grebe swam out calling cuh kow cuh cuh cuh and at intervals, 
rising threateningly on the water, made a great boiling noise by treading 


Ber as 


THe Aux, Vout. XX XVII. Prac DX. 


2 


1. Grove of narrow-leaved Cottonwoods (Populus angustifolia) near Lake Burford. 


2. Mouth of gulch above Lake Burford showing Yellow Pines (Pinus brachyptera). 


or aX vit Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. Zot 


rapidly with her feet. After a few minutes four young swam out from the 
shelter of the rushes and joined her, calling with loud whistled notes. 
She swam slowly away followed by the young who one by one succeeded 
in clambering onto her back beneath her wing feathers so that soon she 
was carrying all four. She did not seem to realize this however as several 
times she rose and shook herself throwing them all into the water again, 
when they climbed back as rapidly as possible. Finally she dived once 
carrying the young with her, and then again, leaving them on the sur- 
face. The young were able to swim rapidly with the head extended and 
the base of the neck and forepart of the body entirely submerged in the 
prostrate attitude common to young grebes. They dived when pursued, 
and swam away under water, or hanging suspended five or six inches be- 
low the surface, watched me intently. One or two soon became tired, 
and, attracted by the moving boat, swam over and attempted to clamber 
up the side. One in diving became entangled in algae and had to rise to 
the surface where it remained helpless. All were able to stay beneath 
the water for considerable periods but were captured without difficulty. 
On land they progressed by a series of leaps made with both feet together 
and wings extended, at each jump falling forward on the breast. The 
female disappeared after leaving her young, while the male remained in 
the rushes calling at intervals while I examined them. 

These grebes at times were very pugnacious toward the smaller Eared 
Grebes, driving them about and diving to bite at their feet. At times 
they were seen in pursuit of Coots and Ruddy Ducks. 

3. Larus delawarensis Ord. Rina-Bintep Guu. Immature gulls 
of this species were seen on May 24 and 30, and June 5, 6, 7, 14 and 17. 
One or two were probably present on the western side of the lake during 
the entire period as the birds were seen there on the occasion of every 
visit. There was no indication that they were breeding or intending to 
breed. 

4, Larus franklini Richardson. FRraNKitn’s Guiu.—Fairly com- 
mon in migration. Two adult birds in full plumage were seen on the 
western shore of the lake on June 6. On the morning of June 11, fifteen 
or twenty were scattered about at daylight, resting on the lake in 
front ofthe cabin. All were in immature plumage but were molting into 
adult dress. One was taken. On June 13, about twenty more were circling 
about low over the water so that at first they were taken for terns. On 
the following day a flock numbering thirty or more in full adult plumage 
appeared and remained until June 16. They were wild and would not 
permit near approach. In the evenings they spent much time in aerial 
evolutions that were beautiful to watch. They worked upward in spirals, 
alternately flapping and soaring, maintaining a close formation until 
suddenly all set their wings and rushed downward for several hundred 
feet making a great roaring noise. Rising again they often separated 
into three or four smaller flocks that alternately joined and separated, 


[Apru 


238 Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mez. 
continuing these antics until dark. Another immature bird was taken on 
June 15. 

5. Hydrochelidon nigra surinamensis (Gmelin). American Buack 
Trern.—Three were seen on June 6, apparently in migration. 

6. Pelecanus erythrorhynchos Gmelin. AmpricaN WHITE PELICAN, 
A few were found in migration. Two were observed on May 26, two on 
May 27, and four on May 28, all resting on shore. It is possible that 
these birds were on their way north into the Salt Lake Valley. There is 
no food for them at Lake Burford save the abundant water-dogs (A mby- 
stoma sp.). 

7. Mergus americanus Cassin. AmMericAN MERGANSER.—Found 
at Lake Burford during migration. A small flock was seen on May 27, 
and fourteen pairs were observed on May 30. These remained in open 
water and were very wild. On June 3, four males and two females were 
found. They flew and left the lake immediately when I came in sight 
though a long distance away. On June 10, twenty-five males all in full 
plumage came in, flying in a great V, circled over the lake, and then passed 
on. An adult male was flushed from the shore on June 15. There are no 
fish in the lake so that these birds must come here for water-dogs (A mby- 
stoma sp.). 

8. Anas platyrhynchos Linnaeus. Matuarp.—The Mallard was 
one of the most common species of ducks breeding at Lake Burford and 
I estimated that forty pairs were preparing to nest here this season. These 
ducks shifted about from place to place more than any others on the lake, 
and were seen flying morning and evening. Towards night they came in 
to feed where openings in the rushes allowed them to reach the shore, 
where they secured food that had been washed in by the waves. At day- 
light nearly every morning I found a pair feeding in the spring hole where 
we secured our water supply. About eight in the morning the birds came 
out on little open beaches and remained until towards noon, preening, 
sleeping and resting in the sun. 

Mallards are undemonstrative birds and, though they were under ob- 
servation during much of the time that I was out, it was seldom that I saw 
any sign of mating display among them. This species has a mating flight, 
similar to that of the Gadwall, in which two males and one female rise in 
the air together and fly along rather slowly with the female flying beside 
first one and then the other of the males. In turn these swing in ahead of 
her and setting their wings throw up their heads and display their back 
and wing markings. During this performance the males call constantly 
while the female quacks at intervals. The whole lacks the dash and speed 
of the display of the Gadwall and the birds do not change direction 
so frequently, pursuing a more even course. In another action the female 
came out on shore and walked about in the short grass with head extended 
quacking loudly, perhaps simulating a search for a nest site. Sometimes 
the male accompanied her and sometimes he remained standing quietly 
on shore. 


ny oe 


Yel: x vary Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 239 


From their actions I believed that some of the females were laying on 
May 29. A female that was just beginning to lay was taken on June 7, 
and birds that had deposited several eggs were shot on June 8, 13, 14 and 
15. One taken June 14, had the breast nearly denuded of down. A 
mated female that was sterile was taken on June 15. While females were 
at the nest the males remained from a hundred yards to a half mile away 
standing on shore or swimming in the open water. These males were 
alert and called instantly at the approach of danger. On one occasion I 
shot a female for preservation as a specimen as she rose from the border of 
the lake and her mate came over and swam up and down out of range for 
several minutes calling anxiously. 

As early as May 29, drakes that had finished breeding were banding to- 
gether and it would seem that they must have bred elsewhere. Follow- 
ing that date these males were found daily, alone or in small flocks, and 
their number was augmented steadily by others. They were usually 
found resting or sleeping on shore in open places in company with drakes 
of other species. A bird that was molting into eclipse was noted on June 
4, and from then on birds in changing plumage were common. In this 
molt they become dull in color first about the head and at the same time 
lose the recurled upper tail coverts. A male almost entirely in eclipse 
plumage was seen on June 18. 

On June 18, I saw a Mallard’s egg that had been stolen apparently by 
pack-rats (Neotoma) as it was found on a small island where there was no 
other sign of predatory animals. The contents of this egg had been neatly 
extracted through a hole at one end and the shell laid in a low growth of 
Chrysothamnus with small flat bits of sandstone placed around and over it 
nearly concealing it. It might seem that this was the work of boys save 
that the egg was found on an island inaccessible save by boat, and the only 
boat on the lake was in my possession. 

The female Mallards taken were nearly all molting the body plumage 
and the new feathers that were coming in were very dark. These birds 
differed from northern and eastern Mallards in the color of the bill also. 
This was in general dull greenish slate with the base of the maxilla dull 
orange while the tip of the bill often inclined to dull plumbeous. The 
naked inter-ramal space was tinged with orange. In one or two there was 
a dusky blotch on the culmen, but I examined none with the prominent 
blackish spots on the orange at the base of the bill so prominent in females 
of this species elsewhere. The toes and tarsi were dull orange. The bill 
of these females in a way resembled that of the males but was duller in 
color. 

(On May 25 a large very dark-colored duck in company with a mated 
pair of Mallards passed me several times at close range. It had white 
bars on either side of the speculum and was much darker in color than the 
female Mallard, resembling a Black Duck markedly. It is possible that 
this was a female mallard, but it seemed to have a clear olive green bill 


[aoe 
April 


240 Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 
and was larger, thus resembling a male of the Black Duck group (possibly 
A. diazi). No other ducks of this type were observed). 

9. Chaulelasmus streperus (Linnaeus). GapwaLu.—The Gadwall 
was the most common of the shallow water ducks at Lake Burford, out- 
numbering the Mallards, as it was estimated that about 60 pairs were 
breeding there. The birds were all in pairs at the time of my arrival but 
appeared to nest late as males continued with the females until the time 
of my departure. They shifted about more or less during the day but in 
general were distributed all along the lake shore. On one occasion fifty 
flushed in a flock from a shallow open bay and for a few seconds all were in 
confusion. At once, however, the flock began to divide, and before they 
had gone 150 yards all had separated out in pairs and flew off in that man- 
ner. 

The mating flight of the Gadwall is always interesting and is seen con- 
stantly when the birds are on their breeding grounds. Here at Lake Bur- 
ford opportunities for observing it were excellent. The flight was usually 
performed by two males and one female. In beginning two males approach- 
ed a female in the water, calling and bowing. She usually rose at once 
and flew with a slow flapping flight, mounting in the air with the males 
in pursuit, calling and whistling constantly. First one and then the other 
of the males swung in front of her, set his wings, inclined his body upward 
to show his handsome markings, and, after a few seconds, dropped back 
again to his former position. Late in the season there was always one of 
the males who was favored and who displayed more often than the other, 
flying close to the female, so that in passing his wings often struck hers, 
making a rattling noise. After a short time the second male often left the 
pair and returned to the water. The birds frequently mounted until they 
were 300 yards or more in the air, and darted quickly from side to side, 
flying now rapidly and now slowly. When the flight was over the birds 
descended swiftly to the water again. I was never able to ascertain 
whether there were some extra males about or not, as, though, there 
were usually two with the female in this flight Ifound them at other times 
always in pairs. 

The female Gadwall, like the mallards, also came out in the short grass 
of the shore and walked about with head down, quacking loudly, an 
action that I took for part of the mating display. 

When the birds were in the shelter of the rushes they went through 
other mating actions of interest. The male swam toward the female bow- 
ing by extending his neck until the head was erect and then retracting it, 
bringing his bill down onto his breast. He then approached pressing his 
breast against the sides of the female and shoving her easily, first on one 
side and then on the other, biting her back and rump gently as he did so. 
After a few seconds she lowered her body in the water and copulation took 
place with the female entirely submerged save for the crown of her head 
while half of the body of the male was under water. As the female emerged 
the male turned immediately to face her and bowed deeply, giving a 
deep reedy call as he did so. 


vivl: re va Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 241 


Gadwall fed in the water by tipping, or occasionally came out on shore 
to walk along and skim the surface of the mud with their bills as do 
Green-winged Teal. Like the Mallards they usually spent the morning 
in resting and sleeping in the sun on some open point. 

The call note of the female is a loud quack that is similar to that of the 
female Mallard but is pitched slightly higher and is not quite so loud and 
raucous. Considerable experience is required however to distinguish 
with certainty the calls of the two birds. The male has a loud call like 
Kack Kack, a deep reedlike note resembling the syllable whack, and a 
shrill whistled call. 

Females were laying as early as May 29, but no nests were discovered. 

10. Mareca americana (Gmelin). Batppats.—There were two 
pairs of Wigeon that were apparently nesting at Lake Burford and single 
males were seen occasionally. The birds were tame and often allowed a 
close approach. 

The mating flight of this duck resembles that of the preceding species, 
but is performed with more dash and speed. The birds fly swiftly and 
erratically. The males dart ahead of the females, setting and decurving 
their wings and throwing their heads up, exhibiting their striking mark- 
ings to the best advantage.. The female calls qua-awk, qua-awk and the 
males whistle whew whew constantly during this performance. Occasion- 
ally as a pair swung in low over the water the male darted ahead and, with 
decurved wings and head thrown up, scaled down to the surface. Two 
males and a single female invariablly took part in the display flight which 
began as in the Gadwall by the males approaching the female, bowing 
and whistling and then following her as she rose in the air. 

The birds were observed swimming in open water or feeding in shallow 
bays by tipping to reach the bottom. They were seen with other ducks 
sunning themselves on open points in the mornings. 

11. Nettion carolinense (Gmelin). GREEN-WINGED TEAL.—Five 
pairs of Green-winged Teal were found at Lake Burford. These birds 
were found resting on shore with other ducks or feeding by walking about 
on mud bars like great sandpipers skimming with their bills over the sur- 
face. The call note of the males is a musical whistled note resembling 
pheep to an imitation of which they responded read ly. The females call 
quack, ka-ack, quack in rather a high tone. Female birds were apparently 
laying as they were seen in areas of heavy dead grass and rushes; and called 
anxiously when I examined these, but no nests were found. 

A few drakes that apparently had nested elsewhere appeared on June 14, 
and from then on they accompanied flocks of males of other species of 
similar habit, resting with them on open beaches and sandy points. 

12. Querquedula discors (Linnaeus). Buur-wincep Trau.—A 
pair of these teal was seen on May 25, and another on June 3. About 
June 15 they became slightly more common and it was estimated that 
four pairs were breeding here. Single males appeared on June 11, and 


[au 
April 


242 Wetmors, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 
others on June 14, after which they were found regularly in company with 
other drakes. On June 14 one fed for some time on the open shore in 
front of a blind where I was concealed. This bird walked along working 
eagerly in the mud with its bill with all of the mannerisms of the Cinnamon 
Teal. The call note of the male Blue-wing is a high-pitched tseef tseef 
tseef, entirely different from the notes of the other male teal with which 
I am familiar. 

13. Querquedula cyanoptera (Vieillot). Cinnamon TrAuL.—The 
Cinnamon Teal was common at Lake Burford. One pair frequented a 
marshy area near my boat landing and was seen in the rushes, or resting 
on shore, constantly through the day. On one occasion two of these Teal 
were trying to feed along a rush grown shore where a male Coot had taken 
his stand, but he drove at them savagely time after time whenever they 
came near, forcing them to take wing and fly a few feet to evade him. 

A single drake of this species that was shot on May 27, when in company 
with a male mallard, had evidently bred this year, and after that date 
summering males were fairly common. It was supposed that they had 
bred at a lower altitude and had come up here to spend the summer, as 
resident birds at Lake Burford were just beginning to lay. On June 6 
toward dusk one flock of six males of this species, and later a second flock 
of seven, came in to the lake high in air, circled about, and alighted in the 
water. Apparently they had just arrived from a distance. 

These single males persisted in paying attention to females already 
mated, much to the disgust of the paired drakes, who drove them away, 
bowing at them and chattering angrily. On one occasion six were seen 
making demonstration toward one female who paid no attention to them, 
but followed her mate. He swam first at one and then another after each 
chase returning to his mate and bowing rapidly, while occasionally she 
bowed to him in return. After a few minutes another mated pair of teal 
flew by and four of the males flew off in pursuit of them, leaving the first 
male only two to combat. 

The only note that I have ever heard from the male Cinneamon Teal is 
a low rattling, chattering note that can be heard only for a short distance. 

14. Spatula clypeata (Linnaeus). SHovELLER.—The Shoveller was 
fairly common at Lake Burford and fifteen pairs apparently nested here. 
On May 27, about forty pairs were feeding on the small lake known as 
Hayden’s Lake but these birds were thought to be in migration as they 
disappeared at once. On the large lake, Spoonbills were found in shallow 
bays, in which the shore was open or with only scattered rush growth, 
where they fed by submerging the head and working through the mud at 
the bottom. 

Males bowed to their mates, in the same way as do the Cinnamon Teal, 
by extending the neck straight up and then retracting it with the bill held 
slightly above horizontal. At the same time they often give a low rattling 
note like chu-uck chu-uck. The females usually responded by bowing, 


Nol aX Men Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 243 


but in a less exaggerated manner, simply jerking the head up and down. 
The whistling noise that accompanies the start in flight with these birds 
is made apparently as they gain momentum by beating the sharply pointed 
wings rapidly after their first spring from the water. 

15. Marila americana (Eyton). RepHEap.—The Redhead was a 
common breeding bird at Lake Burford and 30 pairs were located that 
seemed settled for the summer. These birds were found mainly in the 
small bays in the southern part of the Lake where they swam in the open 
water or rested and slept on shore. Small flocks were seen standing on 
the open beaches about sandy points every morning sunning themselves 
or preening their feathers. It was interesting to note that, while the shal- 
low water ducks paid no attention to me unless I came near, the Redheads 
always waddled into the water and swam out into the open as soon as I 
appeared even though I might be half a mile away. 

The peculiar mating display of these birds seen on several occasions was 
observed to advantage on June 4. A party of four males and three females 
were swimming in open water, two of the birds apparently being mated. 
Suddenly one of the females began to display, approaching one of the 
males with her head held high, sometimes jerking it up and down and 
again holding it erect, and at intervals calling quek que-e-ek, the last a 
peculiar rattling note. The male chosen extended his neck, holding his 
head erect, frequently whirling quickly to show the female his back, or 
again sank down with his head drawn in while the female bowed before 
him. At short intervals she opened her mouth and bit at him gently or, 
if he was swimming, sprang quickly in front of him with her head erect and 
back partly submerged. She transferred her attentions from one male 
to another in turn, even approaching the one who apparently was mated. 
The males showed considerable jealously over these favors and drove 
each other about in fierce rushes. At intervals they called, the note being 
a curious drawn out groaning call, resembling the syllables whee ough given 
in a high tone. As it was given the male sometimes raised his breast, 
elevated his head and erected his crest. Again he threw his head straight 
back so that it touched his dorsum above the rump, with the throat up and 
the bill pointing toward the tail. The bill was then thrown up and head 
brought again to the erect position as the call was made. The curious 
actions of the male in calling continued after he was mated, and the strange 
call note was heard often. Mated males were seen driving savagely at 
their mates and biting at them while they escaped by diving. 

On June 4, a nest containing eight eggs was found in a mass of dead 
Scirpus stems in a clump of tules below the cabin. On June 13 this nest 
contained 14 eggs and the female had added a considerable amount of 
down to it. The mate of this bird remained in the open water from a hun- 
dred yards to a quarter of a mile from the nest-site but was never seen to 
go near the nest. The female, who left the nest whenever she heard my 
boat approaching, always flew out to join him. He remained with her 


244 Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. (aver 


until June 17, and then disappeared as she had been incubating steadily 
for three or four days. The nest in this case was built entirely of dead 
Scirpus stems and was deep and well protected. Fluffs of down adhered 
to the tules all about it so that the site was easily located. 

Four single males were observed on June 6, and a flock of twelve was 
seenonJune8. After this males unaccompanied by females were common. 
Part were birds that had nested here and a part I believed came from else- 
where. 

16. Marila valisineria (Wilson). Canvas-BAck.—There were three 
pairs of Canvas-backs on the lake that from their actions seemed settled 
for the summer, but I was unable to find their nests. During the first 
two days of my stay a female frequented a small cove below the cabin act- 
ing as though she was nesting in the rushes but as she was constantly dis- 
turbed she finally left this part of the lake. On June 8, a female was seen 
swimming low in the water away from the rushes but in this case also I 
was unable to locate a nest. 

On one occasion a female swimming after a male, quacked like a 
female Redhead but in a more subdued flattened tone. The males were 
silent. On May 27 while watching birds from a shore blind a male Can- 
vas-back came around a point within 40 feet of me. He saw me and eyed 
me closely but did not seem at all afraid, and swam on past, at intervals 
dipping the tip of his bill in the water. A few minutes later as I stood up 
he rose and flew rather heavily, paddling with his feet for about 80 yards 
before being able to clear the surface entirely. Three pairs of these birds 
were flushed from a resting place on a rocky beach on June 15. 

17. Marila affinis (Eyton). Lesssr Scaup Ducx.—There were ten 
or twelve pairs of bluebills and a few unmated males on Lake Burford 
during the entire time of my stay but none apparently were nesting. 
On June 1, I found 25 males and 23 females on Hayden’s Lake, a part 
of them in pairs. These had evidently stopped here in migration as 
they passed on at once and were not seen again. The summering birds 
were found in the open bays and in the forenoon were often seen resting 
and sleeping on shore at open points. Like the Redheads they swam out 
to open water as soon as I came in sight even though I was a considerable 
distance away. 

The birds were seen in display on several occasions and as in the case 
of the Redheads the more active part in this fell to the lot of the female. 
Parts of the mating actions were witnessed on a number of occasions while 
on June 3 the complete display was seen. A pair rested in open water in 
front of me when suddenly the female began to swim back and forth with 
the head erect, frequently jerking the tip of her bill up while the male drew 
his head in on his breast and lowered his crest, giving his crown a curious 
flattened appearance. The female turned alternately toward and away 
from the male, sometimes biting gently at him, while occasionally he re- 
sponded by nipping at her with open mouth. At short intervals she dove 


ver ears a Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 245 


towards him, barely sliding under his breast, and emerged at once only a 
few feet away, or at times advanced toward him brushing against him and 
then turning away. A second male that tried to approach was driven 
away by quick rushes though the female paid no attention to him. She 
continued her diving and finally at intervals the male began to dive with 
her, both emerging at once. As the display continued he joined her under 
the water more and more frequently and finally both remained below the 
surface for over thirty seconds where copulation apparently took place. 
When they emerged the female swam away for a short distance with the 
male following her. Frequently during these displays the female gave a 
peculiar rattling, purring call like kwuh-h-h-h-h while the males whistled 
in a low tone. 

The female bluebills seemed very anxious when they happened to spy 
my head in the rushes, and swam back and forth with heads erect and 
crests raised giving their peculiar calls. The males were more stolid and 
paid little attention beyond taking care to keep out of gun range. Several 
pairs were found about certain favorable.places for nesting, and I was 
certain for a time that they were going to breed, a supposition fostered by 
the displays that I saw continually among them. Careful search how- 
ever failed to show nests and when finally on June 17 and 18, I shot 
females that were paired and apparently nesting in points of rushes, I 
found that, though in normal physical condition, they had not deposited 
eggs, and, as the sexual organs were not developed, would not have done 
so this year. As this has been treated fully in the introductory portion 
of this report it will not be discussed further here save to state that the 
bluebill apparently should not be listed among the breeding birds of Lake 
Burford at present, though it seems possible that occasionally pairs may 
nest there. 

Some of the unmated drakes exhibited great regularity in habit. Two 
in particular were found every morning resting near a certain clump of 
grass on one sandy point. All of the males observed were in full plumage. 

18. Erismatura jamaicensis (Gmelin). Ruppy Ducx.—This duck 
was one of the most common at Lake Burford and it was estimated that 
55 pairs were breeding at the lake. When I first arrived part of these 
birds had selected the areas where they were to spend the summer and 
were already mated. Others were found in little parties composed of 
both sexes in places where the rushes were too thin in growth to afford 
nesting cover, but by June 1, with the increase in growth of the rushes, 
Ruddy Ducks were distributed around the lake and seemed to be settled 
for the summer. From observations made here it would seem that part of 
these birds at least paired and mated after reaching their breeding grounds. 
Apparently in some areas there were more females than males. 

The curious display of the males was seen every day and was observed 
to the best possible advantage, as frequently birds displayed within 30 
feet of me. They seemed to keep up the curious performance constantly 


[ape 
April 


246 Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 
all day long and sometimes displayed for half an hour or more when no fe- 
males were near. As a matter of fact this action often began whenever 
I drove the males to open water from the shelter of the rushes. the 
manner of procedure was as follows. The male rested on the water with 
tail erect at an angle of 80 degrees. The head was then drawn in and 
jerked rapidly up and down several times with the bill depressed, so that 
the tip of the bill struck the side of the breast above the tracheal air sac! 
(present in the male alone) producing a curious clicking sound. The bill 
tip was gradually lowered until at the last it hit the breast feathers at the 
water line splashing the water into foam. At the same time the tail was 
drawn steadily forward past the vertical to an angle of 60 degrees on the 
opposite side of the are, so that the tip came within one and one half or 
two inches of the head. At the close of this action the head was suddenly 
extended with the mouth open, and the bird emitted a low croak. The 
tail was then thrown back to the usual position and the bird resumed its 
normal attitude. In addition during the display the feathers of the crown 
were elevated at the sides and depressed in the center to form a deep V 
that was broad in front and more narrow behind. Sometimes birds held 
the crest thus elevated constantly, and again it was thrown into this form 
only as the last notes were given, when it was flattened immediately to the 
normal position. The sounds produced during the display may be re- 
presented by the syllables tick-tick-tick-lickety quek. The first series is not 
vocal but is produced by the bill striking the breast above the swollen air- 
sac, so that this sac is apparently used as a tympanum, a use which ex- 
plains its development as a secondary sexual character in the male. The 
last note is vocal and is made up of two distinct elements or sounds uttered 
synchronously. One of these is a harsh frog-like note that may be repre- 
sented by the syllable guok and the second is slightly drawn out, almost 
two-syllabled, with a reedy quality resembling the note of the male Gad- 
wall. It was thought that this second note was made in the normal way 
by the syrinx, and that the first was caused by the expulsion of air from the 
tracheal sac, as a contraction of the dermal muscle known as the cucullaris 
above the sac was plainly evident through movement of the skin of the 
neck as the duck extended his head and made this last sound. As this 
note was given the tips of the wings were elevated for two inches or more, 
so that it seemed possible that the carpal joint of the wings pressing against 
the sac (which occupies the whole front of the neck above the breast) 
aided in expelling air from it. 

Males were seen constantly swimming after the females, checking to 
give the display, and then continuing on. At a distance they resembled 
absurd little manikins with quick jerky motions controlled by the pulling 
of strings. At short intervals the males extended their heads on the sur- 


lef. Wetmore, A., Proc. U. 8S. Nat. Mus. Vol. 52, 1917, p. 479; and Condor, 
Vol. XX, 1918, p. 19. 


Vol. XXOXVU] Waermors, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. DAG 


face and flapping their wings made a quick drive forward for/three or four 
feet making a great boiling in the water with wings and feet. Immediately 
they resumed the erect position and began the display again. Females 
were rather shy and when pursued too closely escaped by diving. 

Males exhibited considerable jealousy and lowering their tails continu- 
ally drove at one another, the attacked bird usually diving to escape. 
Occasionally however he stood his ground when the oncoming male either 
checked and retreated, or occasionally sprang from the water striking on 
his opponent’s head or back with his broad feet and then sliding off. 
Often the two remained close together striking at one another with their 
big feet. This was about the extent of their fighting, at which I was some- 
what surprised as young birds when two thirds grown are very pugnacious 
when handled. 

By June 5, a considerable number of Ruddy Ducks were in pairs and 
swam about when driven from the rushes with the male displaying and the 
female following him. Females then sometimes gave a curious imitation 
of the display of their mates, swimming with tails in the air, jerking their 
heads up and down and then extending the open bill, either without mak- 
ing a sound or at most uttering only a falsetto qua-er. This odd mimicry 
was given at times by females that apparently were unmated. At times 
some of these female ducks produced quite a rattling noise by striking the 
tip of the bill on the breast, a sound however that was entirely different 
from that produced by the male. Males were seen in company with sev- 
eral females as late as June 8. After June 10 the amount of energy spent 
in display lessened somewhat. 

Females were often rather nervous over my presence in the rushes and 
swam back and forth calling whap or quep in a curious flat tone. Another 
note heard from them was Keow Keow in a high tone, a one-syllabled call 
somewhat similar to that of a hen turkey. The breeding season with 
these birds apparently is late as a female shot on June 18 was not yet lay- 
ing though the ova were enlarging and the oviduct was about half devel- 
oped. No nests of this species had been begun at the time of my depart- 
ure. 

These birds in preening the feathers of breast and abdomen stood erect 
in the water treading rapidly with the feet while they did so. Bluebills 
and other deep water ducks usually lie over on the back or side in order 
to dress the feathers of the underparts. 


U. S. Biological Survey, Washington, D. C. 


(To be Concluded) 


248 Hanna, New Birds for the Pribilofs. reer 


ADDITIONS TO THE AVIFAUNA OF THE PRIBILOF 
ISLANDS, ALASKA, INCLUDING FOUR SPECIES NEW 
TO NORTH AMERICA. 


BY G. DALLAS HANNA. 


Tue Pribilof Islands are perhaps more favorably situated for 
intensive biological study than any other place in our Arctic pos- 
sessions. ‘They lie near the center of Bering Sea where there is a 
very prolific development of marine life. They are the home of 
the famous Alaska fur seal and the seat of extensive Government 
establishments for the care of the skins of these animals. Good 
facilities exist for field collecting in almost all branches of biology 
and much detailed study might be done with the equipment and 
laboratories that are maintained there. 

Ornithology is especially interesting in the region because of the 
enormous numbers of sea birds. Various employees of the Govy- 
ernment have given the subject more or less attention and several 
large collections have been made. Whenever even a compara- 
tively small amount of collecting has been done, some unusual 
visitors have been discovered. The permanent bird population, 
comprising breeders and regular migrants, numbers but 35 species, 
of which 21 have been found nesting, while the migrants and acci- 
dental stragglers which have been secured or observed have swelled 
the list to 129 species, including those reported in this paper. Of 
this number specimens have been collected of all excepting 6, and 
the U. S. National Museum contains specimens of all which have 
been collected excepting one. The stragglers come from all di- 
rections, at all seasons, and it appears that the end of the list may 
not be reached until practically all of the avifauna of Northwest- 
ern America and Northeastern Asia shall have been recorded. No 
less than 13 new records for North America have been made here. 
Some remarkable and unexpected visitors have landed, such as 
the northern flicker, Japanese cuckoo, Japanese haw finch, Kam- 
chatkan pine grosbeak, brambling, and Kamchatkan sea eagle. 


1This list was first given before the Biological Society of Washington and a short 
reveiw containing the names of the additions was published in the Journal of the 
Washington Academy of Sciences, Vol. IX, No. 6. (cf. Auk 1919, p. 443.) 


Vol. Gt] «= Hanna, New Birds for the Pribilofs. 249 


No less remarkable is the absence of some expected species such 
as the northern raven, a common bird on islands both north and 
south of these. 

It seems most probable that these rare visitors have been lost 
birds. Theyseem to have been blown from their regular courses of 
flight and upon finding the Pribilofs, have landed there at the 
particular time when some one was prepared to secure the record. 
It is very probable that many of them would have perished had 
they not found this land, and the list may be taken as an indication 
of the great numbers of birds which must be lost at sea. And if 
the number of species which has been secured bears any relation to 
the total number which has actually visited the islands then it 
seems certain that a few years of intensive ornithological study 
would result in the addition of many more records. This is true 
because it must be admitted that the unusual species thus far se- 
cured have been obtained largely through accident. William Pal- 
mer spent the summer of 1890 in collecting birds, but otherwise 
no one has devoted more than a very small fraction of his time and 
energy to this work. 

I have spent six summers and four winters on the Islands and 
my last visit extended from June, 1916, to September, 1918. Dur- 
ing this period 22 new records for the Islands have been made from 
specimens collected, five of which represent birds which had not 
hitherto been reported within the boundaries of North America. 
One of the latter, the Kamchatkan pine grosbeak, was secured by 
Mr. A. H. Proctor on St. George Island and has already been re- 
corded.!| The remaining 21 species are listed below. 

In addition to the specimens which represent new records sev- 
eral other very interesting species were collected or observed 
which seem to deserve mention. Two specimens of the ivory 
gull and one of Ross’s gull were secured on St. George Island. An 
ancient murrelet and a Savannah sparrow were taken on St. Paul 
Island for what appears to be the first time although they had 
been previously reported. A European widgeon, a pomarine jaeger, 
and a wheatear were taken on the latter island. They had pre- 
viously been collected but once. Two specimens of the dark 


1Riley, J. H., Auk, Vol. 34, p. 210, April, 1917. 


250 Hanna, New Birds for the Pribiiofs. [Aver 


phase of Rodger’s fulmar were preserved. These birds are often 
seen in the large colonies which breed on the Pribilofs. They seem 
to mate indiscriminately with light colored birds and in one case a 
slate-colored downy young was seen which had light colored par- 
ents. It does not seem likely that the colonies consist of more 
than one species. A little wren succeeded in getting from St. 
George to St. Paul Island in 1914. The species was completely 
exterminated at the former place during the winter of 1916-17 by 
gyrfalecons. Another probably from Otter Island was found dur- 
ing the summer of 1918. 

In the identification of the specimens and the correcting of 
names I have received much assistance from H. C. Oberholser, 
C. W. Richmond, E. A. Preble, and J. H. Riley, to all of whom I 


wish to express my grateful appreciation. 


New Recorps ror NortH AMERICA AND THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS. 


Eunetta falcata (Georgi). Fatcatrp TEau.—A male of this beautiful 
crested teal was secured on St. George Island, April 18, 1917. Its gorgeous 
coloration was admired by all who saw it. The native hunters there do 
not readily distinguish the several species of ducks and this was called by 
them “Mallard,’’ which name is applied to at least eight separate kinds. 

Heteroscelus brevipes (Vieillot). Potynestan Tatrier.—The his- 
tory of the Polynesian Tattler in North America dates back to October 4, 
1911, when a female was secured on St. Paul Island by Mr. M. C. Marsh, 
then the naturalist of the fur-seal service. The specimen was placed in 
the National Museum collection without being detected as differing from 
the wandering tattler. It was discovered by Dr. H. C. Oberholser while 
he was verifying the identification of a second specimen of the same species, 
a female collected on St. Paul Island, September 2, 1917, by the writer. 
Owing to the difficulty of distinguishing the tattlers it may be that the 
Asiatic form comes across Bering Sea more frequently than the records 
would indicate. 

Thalassoaetus pelagicus (Pallas). KamcHaTKAN Sea Eacur.—A 
bird of this species was shot and wounded on St. Paul Island, December 
15, 1917, but fell into the sea. Five days later it was picked up on the 
beach in badly decomposed condition. Enough of the specimen could be 
saved however to enable the identification to be made in the National 
Museum. The species has been reported from the Aleutian Islands be- 
fore, but the record was not accepted by the American Ornithologists’ 
Union because specimens were not secured to make the identification posi- 
tive. Eagles have been seen on the Pribilofs several times but they pro- 
bably in most cases belong to the species which Palmer has recorded 


Nok rie yah) Hanna, New Birds for the Pribilofs. Zoli 


(Fur Seals and Fur Seal Islands of the North Pacifie Ocean, Pt. 3, 418, 
1898) the Northern Bald Eagle, which is abundant on the Aleutian Islands, 
200 miles south. 

Anthus spinoletta japonicus Temminck and Schlegel. JAPANESE 
Piprr.—A female Japanese Pipit was secured on St. Paul Island on August 
29, 1916. I have found that pipits are regualar fall migrants at the Is- 
lands but heretofore all those collected have been the common North 
American subspecies, Anthus spinoletta rubescens. If a large series were 
secured it is possible other forms might often be found. 


Species New To THE PrRIBILOF ISLANDS ONLY. 


Brachyramphus marmoratus (Gmelin). Marsiuep MuRRELET.— 
A Marbled Murrelet was collected at St. Paul Island, January 13, 1918. 
It was a very unexpected visitor. The ancient murrelet was recorded 
from the Islands about 50 years ago and had not been subsequently ob- 
served. It was the one which was naturally looked for because it is a 
common bird in Bering Sea. It was a great surprise therefore that the 
form which lives south of the Aleutian Islands should be found at the 
Pribilofs in mid-winter. Later, April 18, 1918, a specimen of Synthlibor- 
amphus antiquus was secured. 

Puffinus tenuirostris (Temminck). SLENDER-BILLED SHEARWATER. 
A female Slender-billed Shearwater was picked up on the beach of St. 
Paul Island on June 4, 1918. Another bird was seen shortly after, flying 
about two miles out at sea. Mr. C. E. Crompton told me that numerous 
individuals were seen in the vicinity of St. George Island at about the 
same time. 

Chen hyperborea hyperborea (Pallas). Lesser Snow Goosr.—A 
male was secured on St. Paul Island, September 16, 1916. Ordinarily 
natives are prohibited from using firearms on the Pribilofs during the time 
when the fur seals are there but on that day a man telephoned to the vil- 
lage from North East Point, twelve miles distant, that there was some kind 
of a large white bird in a pond near by. Thinking perhaps a swan was 
seen and knowing the desirability of specimens in order to determine if 
any Asiatic species visit the Islands he was instructed to shoot the bird 
and bring it in. But this snow goose is what he brought. Another bird 
was killed the following year on the same island but since it belonged 
clearly to the same species and time did not permit of its preparation it 
was not preserved. 

Branta canadensis hutchinsii (Richardson). Hurcuin’s Goosr.— 
A female of this subspecies was shot and preserved on St. Paul Island, May 
12, 1918. It is considerably larger than the cackling goose which ordi- 
narily come to the islands each spring and fall, and unlike the latter form 
there is no sharp demarcation in the coloration of the under parts. 

Arctonetta fischeri Brandt. Spscractep Emrr.—Three female 
Spectacled Eiders were secured at St. Paul Island on January 13, 1918, by 


252 Hanna, New Birds for the Pribilofs. eer 


native hunters. They did not recognize them as belonging to a separate 
species from the pacific and king eiders with which they were associated, 
and since the natives must be depended upon by the collector to a large 
extent for sea ducks it is likely the birds come more frequently than has 
been suspected. It would seem natural for individuals to pass in the 
vicinity of the Pribilofs each year because they have been reported in 
winter as far south as the Aleutian Islands. One of the birds collected 
was preserved in formalin for anatomical study. 

Melanitta deglandi dixoni (Brooks). WrsTeRN WHITE-WINGED 
Scorrr.—Four specimens of the Western White-winged Scoter have been 
taken on the Pribilofs during the last three years. All were females but 
this was merely an accidental circumstance because males have been seen. 
The first specimen was secured on October 30, 1916, at St. George Island 
by the writer. The next was taken on November 15, 1916, at the same 
island by Dr. H. P. Adams, formerly physician of the U. 8. Bureau of 
Fisheries. Another was secured at St. George Island on February 4, 1917, 
and one at St. Paul Island, February 8, 1918, both by the writer. 

The species is of regular occurence about the islands in winter. It has 
been seen on several occasions before any specimens were secured but 
was not recorded because positive specific identification could not be 
made. The natives recognize the bird as belonging to a different species 
from the eiders with which it comes and associates. The birds feed along 
shore just outside of the surf line in small flocks. The white speculum 
of the wing makes them excellent targets for the man with the shot gun 
out after fresh meat in the dim light of the arctic winter morning. 

Aristonetta valisineria (Wilson). Canvas-Back.—A beautiful male 
Canvas-back was taken on St. George Island on May 18, 1917. The 
Pochard, which is difficult for the average hunter to distinguish from this, 
has been taken on the island but once so both species must be considered 
as rare visitors. However the natives are inclined to call all ducks “ Mal- 
lards,’”? when the females have a general resemblance to that species and 
the males are brightly colored. Thus Pin-tails, Buffle-heads, Golden- 
eyes, and other river ducks are very apt to be reported as Mallards unless 
the collector makes a personal examination of each bird secured. Pro- 
bably the inability to identify the ducks has prevented the securing of 
many desirable specimens here in the past and delayed the reporting of 
others until recently. 

Clangula clangula americana Bonaparte. AMERICAN GOLDEN-EYE. 
Two specimens which clearly belong to this subspecies were collected; a 
male on St. George Island, May 6, 1917; and a female on St. Paul Island 
January 31, 1918. From a study of female specimens collected in the fall 
of 1913, it is certain that there is a mingling of the European and Ameri- 
can forms in the vicinity of the Pribilofs. 

Nettion crecca (Linnaeus). European TEau.—With the capture of a 
male and female European Teal on St. Paul Island, May 4, 1918, a per- 


Sols ae all Hanna, New Birds for the Pribitofs. 253 


plexing question regarding the avifauna was settled. The American teal 
was recorded in 1898 but no specimens were collected. Subsequently it 
was found that the European form was frequently found in the Aleutian 
Islands and it was a question whether the bird seen on St. George by Wil- 
liam Palmer in 1890 had not been this. Further complications entered 
into the case in 1914, when Mr. Edward A. Preble and I collected a female 
and her unfledged young on St. Paul Island. They could not be identified 
as the one or the other species. But on May 10, 1917, a fine male of the 
American form was secured on St. George Island. Then when the Euro- 
pean was found we knew definitely that both species migrate through the 
islands. But until some way is found to distinguish the females of the 
two forms it will not be known which one stopped on St. Paul to nest in 
1914. 

Haematopus bachmanii Audubon. Buack OystTerR-caTCHER.—An 
adult male of this strange bird was shot on the beach of St. George Island, 
January 12, 1917. Why it should have come up here in the middle of the 
winter cannot be stated; it is another instance of the peculiar movements 
of birds in this region. Other species have done the same thing. The 
Aleutian Sandpiper goes north regularly in the winter and has been se- 
cured on the Islands several times. Once it was found on the drift ice. 
The Aleutian Song Sparrow came to St. George in the winter of 1913-14. 
It is possible that these birds arrived in the fall and had remained until 
they were secured later in the year but it hardly seems possible that so 
striking a form as Haematopus would have escaped detection by sharp 
native eyes for very long. 

There is good reason to suspect that this species has been shot on St. 
George Island before. One native told me he had given a bird like it to 
a Doctor Mills several years earlier but that it had spoiled before being 
prepared as a specimen. 

Numenius tahitiensis (Gmelin). BristLe-rHigHep CuRLEW.—A 
female bristle-thighed curlew was taken on St. George Island, May 26, 
1917. 

Although the Eskimo Curlew has been collected on the Pribilofs and 
the Hudsonian has been reported as having been seen this is the first bird 
of the genus which has come to my notice during my residence'there. It 
is not likely that either species visits the place except as it may accident- 
ally get out of its regular line of flight. 

Archibuteo lagopus sancti-johannis (Gmelin). AmMpRICAN RouGH- 
LEGGED Hawk.—One specimen, unsexed, was secured on St. George Is- 
land in the fall of 1917, by Mr. C. E. Crompton of the U. 8. Bureau of 
Fisheries. He has kindly consented to the record being included in this 
list. 

Large hawks are particularly difficult to secure in the arctic tundra 
country because of the absence of cover for stalking. They have been 
seen several different times on the Pribilofs, both in spring and fall, during’ 


254 Hanna, New Birds for the Pribilofs. een 


recent years but in every case they were flying high and of course could 
not be sufficiently well identified to make a specific record of value. This 
specimen is the first positive evidence that the species occurs. It is en- 
tirely probable that several other large hawks may eventually be secured. 

Petrochelidon lunifrons lunifrons (Say). Ciirr Swattow.—A 
Cliff Swallow was shot and skinned on St. Paul Island about June 10, 1918, 
by a native from whom the specimen was secured. This makes the second 
species of swallow to be collected on the Islands; the Northern Violet- 
green was taken in 1914. The barn swallow has also been recorded but 
not collected. 

Plectrophenax hyperboreus Ridgway. McKay’s Snow Buntine.— 
Since this species is known to wander from its only breeding place, St. 
Matthew Island group, to the mainland of Alaska, it has been expected 
and searched for on the Pribilofs for several years. But it was not definite- 
ly known to come until March 30, 1918, when a male in full winter plu- 
mage was secured on St. Paul Island. It and a female, which escaped, 
were found on the top of Rush Hill, the highest point of the Island. 

Junco hyemalis hyemalis (Linnaeus). SLatTe-coLtoreD JUNCcO.— 
Two female juncos were secured from a flock of six at North East Point, 
St. Paul Island, on September 24, 1917. They were feeding about the 
buildings there, apparently as contented as if they were in the midst of 
civilization. 

Spinus pinus pinus (Wilson). PmINnrE Siskin—A male Pine Siskin was 
secured from a flock of twelve found among the North East Point sand 
dunes, St. Paul Island, on September 24, 1917. The birds seemed to be 
perfectly satisfied to feed on the seeds of the few ground plants which 
grow there. 

Hylocichla aliciae aliciae (Baird). Gray-cHEEKED THrusH.—A 
female Gray-cheeked Thrush was collected on St. Paul Island, September 
9, 1917. It was found feeding on spaded up ground about the Naval 
Radio Station. 


California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, Calif. 


Mel am an Heutmuta, Notes while in Naval Service. yASY) 


EXTRACTS FROM NOTES MADE WHILE IN NAVAL 
SERVICE 


BY W T. HELMUTH 


In the fall of 1917 the ship on which I served as seaman was 
assigned to inspection duty on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts of the 
United States, under Rear-admiral C. McR. Winslow’s flag. We 
left the navy yard at Brooklyn on October 20, 1917, and proceeded 
up the New England coast as far as Machiasport, Maine, which 
we reached on November first. We then journeyed south, close 
inshore, up the Delaware River to Philadelphia, thence to Nor- 
folk, Va., arriving on Thanksgiving day. We left Norfolk on 
February 23, 1918, proceeding south to Key West, Fla. From 
here we went directly to Pensacola, Fla.; from Pensacola to New 
Orleans, up the south pass of the Mississippi; from New Orleans 
to Galveston, Texas; thence to Port Arthur, Texas, and across 
the Gulf of Mexico to Tampa, Fla., arriving on April 1, 1918. 
From Tampa our course took us again to Key West, up the east 
coast of Florida to Jacksonville, and thence north to Charleston, 
S. C., stopping at Brunswick and Savannah, Ga. 

During this time I had excellent opportunities to study the 
birds met with offshore, and a few chances to watch land birds 
on our all too infrequent “liberties” in various places. Some of 
these notes may be of interest to readers of ‘The Auk,’ and I ap- 
pend them herewith. 

My very sincere thanks are due to Mr. John Treadwell Nichols, 
of the American Museum of Natural History, who was kind enough 
to read the original, and perhaps too voluminous, notes, and whose 
suggestions have been invaluable in the separation of the wheat 
from the chaff. 


I 


Notes rrom New ENGLAND Coast Nortu oF CarE Cop, AUTUMN 
oF 1917. 


Across Massachusetts Bay from Provincetown to Boston, 
late October. Boston toward Machiasport, Me., sixty—sixty-five 
miles offshore, October 31; to Machiasport and Bar Harbor, in- 


256 Heitmuty, Notes while in Naval Service. es 


shore, November 1; Bar Harbor to Rockland, Me., inshore, Nov- 
ember 2; Rockland to Portland, Me., November 4. 


Colymbus a. auritus. Hornep Grese.—lIn the harbor of Machias- 
port, November 1, there were nearly 500. [This unusual concentration 
may indicate that the height of southward migration had reached this 
point on the coast. J. T. N.] 

Alle alle. Dovrexkin.—Three Dovekies seen, Oct. 31, one of which we 
almost cut down. ‘The wings of these little birds move incredibly fast, 
and they bear a certain resemblance to tiny Old Squaws in their manner 
of flight. Six observed on November 1. 

November 4, off the Maine coast, my brother counted 83 Dovekies dur- 
ing his hour on the bow look-out, and 103 from the crow’s-nest in an hour. 
We passed through scattered flocks of them all day. They rose before the 
bows in little flocks, flying to either side, usually for only a short distance 
before either dropping down into the water again or diving from the air. 
They flew low over the water for the most part. 

Rissa t. tridactyla. JKirrrwakre.—Several flocks of about a dozen 
each, seen while crossing Massachusetts Bay, late October. Abundant 
offshore north of Boston and inshore north of Rockland. Common along 
coast from Rockland to Portland. [The abundance of this species on 
the Maine coast at this season would seem to indicate that it first moves 
southward inshore and then V’s somewhat outward and also scatters dir- 
ectly outward across the ocean. J. T. N.] 

Sula bassana. GANNrET.—Going north several were seen crossing 
Massachusetts Bay. From Boston to Maine they were common, almost 
all adults, which may indicate that the adults move southward first. 

Phalacrocorax carbo. CormorantT.—On October 31, when well out 
at sea a large, ragged-looking cormorant was seen, which I identified as 
carbo. Three more of the same species were seen on November 1, in the 
early morning, far offshore. 

Spinus pinus. Ping Siskin.—On November 2, between Bar Harbor 
and Rockland, a flock of Siskins and another of Horned Larks came aboard 
lighting all over the rigging. Many large flocks of Siskins noted during 
the day, all going north. Mr. Nichols suggests that this northward mi- 
grational movement may be accounted for by the deeply-indented, broken 
coast line of Maine, affording many opportunities for migrational eddies 
of the type so often observed in similar regions. 


EG 


WATERFOWL IN THE VICINITY OF DELAWARE Bay, In LATE Nov- 
EMBER, 1917. 
November 24, 1917. At anchor in lower Delaware Bay. Red-breasted 


Mergansers, Old Squaws, and Scoters in myriads, especially the first- 
named species. The birds were for the most part flying across the sandy 


Yel. axe val Hetmoutu, Notes while in Naval Service. 251 


dunes at Cape Henlopen, or from the bay to the sea. Certain definite 
pathways seemed to be used by all species, and the birds flew to and from 
sea indifferently. Their activity continued throughout the day. Weather 
raw, cold and windy, with a brisk north-west wind blowing. 

November 28. From League Island Navy Yard down Delaware River, 
en route to Norfolk, Va. Large flocks of Mallard, Black Duck and Brant 
seen along Delaware River. Fifty or sixty Baldpate, a small flock of 
Redhead, and one flock of fifteen Pintails noticed with the above. In 
lower Delaware Bay, near Cape Henlopen, at least five hundred Brant 
were seen. About twenty-five miles to sea, off Cape Henlopen, we ran 
into a tremendous bed of Scoters. All three species were present, but 
White-winged Scoters greatly predominating. There must have been at 
least 20,000 individuals in the flock, which rose in a solid mass, the air 
being so filled with birds that I fully expected some to fly through our 
deadlights! 


Ill 
BouNnD SOUTH, FROM NorRFOLK, VA., TO Key WEsT, FLa., FEB. 
ZA TO 24: 


Larus leucopterus. IceLAND Guuu.—February 24, 1918. Passed 
Hatteras at noon, eight miles off Diamond Shoals lightship. Weather 
cold; sea smooth at Hatteras, becoming lumpy off Cape Lookout and 
very heavy from there on. Strong wind from south-east. At 6:30 A. M. 
an Iceland Gull appeared, which followed us all day to a point approxi- 
mately ninety miles off Cape Fear. Its pure white appearance was strik- 
ing, and the bird looked distinctly smaller than the numerous Herring 
Gulls. Bill proportionately smaller, yellow with a slightly cloudy spot on 
the lower mandible. In some vague way the flight of this bird and its 
general appearance was quite different from the Herring Gulls. It never 
associated closely with the others, hanging on the edges of the always 
following flocks. Occasionally it rested on the water, and we often left 
it far behind, but it had no trouble in overtaking us, and continued to 
follow us all day. 

Sula bassana. Gannet.—Very common off the capes of the Carolinas, 
on February 24, at a distance of from fifty to eighty miles offshore, both 
adults and immature; less common February 25, closer inshore, approach- 
ing Savannah, Georgia; extremely abundant in flocks of considerable 
size fifteen miles off St. Augustine, Fla., February 26; two seen close in- 
shore not far from Palm Beach, February 27. [A sector across the Gan- 
net’s late winter range at the conclusion of an unusually severe season. 
Jeaed,  N.] 

Ardea herodias. Great BLur Hnron.—On February 25, when about 
twenty miles off the coast of southern Georgia, a Great Blue Heron, very 
nearly exhausted, was seen flying south, inshore of us. At intervals the 
tired bird would try to rest on the water, but upon sinking to its thighs 


258 Heitmuta, Notes while in Naval Service. (ven 


would resume its weary flapping again, always keeping low near the sur- 
face. For the frequency with which this species is met with at sea, nearly 
always in an exhausted condition, I am inclined to blame their habit, in the 
south, of feeding on the actual ocean beach, and of their custom of mak- 
ing an extended oversea flight when startled at their fishing. Under such 
circumstances it would be all too easy for so large a bird—and no very 
powerful flyer at that—to be blown out in a strong offshore gale. 

Land Birds seen at sea. [February 25, approaching Savannah, Ga., 
a Savannah Sparrow appropriately enough, spent a few hours on the 
boat deck. On February 27, when about six miles offshore near Palm 
Beach. Fla., a Ruby-throated Hummingbird flew over us and a Yellow- 
throat was with us all day; it was joined later by a Yellow-Palm Warbler, 
and these two caused much excitement among the crew, such “tropical 
looking birds”’ impressing them with how far south we had come! The 
presence of the Hummingbird seemed to me unusual at the time, and it 
seems as though the bird really had no business to be so far north at that 
time of year, though, as Mr. Nichols pointed out, this species is not un- 
commonly met with even at long distances from land. 


IV 


SoME Fioripa Notes, Marcu, 1918. 


Gaviaimmer. Loon. March 18, a bed of over 200 seen in the harbor 
of Pensacola, all swimming in a compact body in one direction,—a novel 
sight. 

Lobipes lobatus. NorrHerN PHALaropr. March 14, about 175-180 
miles off the Gulf coast of Florida, approximately opposite Tampa. Pass- 
ed eight Northern Phalaropes at noon, and three more about two hours 
later. 

Dendroica discolor. Prarrizg WaBLER. One of the commonest birds 
in the mangroves on the west end of Key West, Fla. Nichols speaks of 
this being a common mangrove bird on the west coast of Florida in April. 

Early migration of landbirds. At Warrington, Fla., near Pensacola, 
March 18, the thick, low growth along the swampy shore of a small lake 
was alive with warblers and other small birds, some of which were surely 
migrants. Nichols noticed no such migration further south in the Keys 
in 1917, until a much later date. Among others, the following species 
were seen: Red-eyed Vireo, one; Black and White Warbler, one; Parula 
Warbler, several; Cape May Warbler, two; Myrtle, Yellow-throated, and 
Pine Warblers, eight or ten of each. One Wood Thrush and three Blue- 
gray Gnatcatchers also seen, and a small flock of Carolina Chickadees. 

At Hobe Sound, on the southeast coast of Florida, this spring (1919), 
I observed no movement of migrating warblers, (discounting the depart- 
ure of winter residents there), at all comparable to this, until the first 


1Nichails, J. T., 1918. Bird-notes from Florida; Abstr. Linn Soc., N. Y., No. 30. 


wee ax | Hetmuta, Notes while in Naval Service. 259 


week in April; the height of general migration occurring on April 27. No 
general movement of winter resident species even, was observed there until 
March 22 (1919), at a point much further south than Pensacola. 

From the above it might be supposed that the migration on the north- 
western corner of the peninsula begins at a much earlier date than on the 
east coast, or even on the peninsula proper. 


V 


Notes From Mississippt DELTA AND GULF OF MEXICO, LATE 
Marcu. 


March 22, 1918. Bird life on Mississippi Delta. Sailing from a point 
twenty miles south of South Pass, up the river to New Orleans. When 
about twelve miles from the Delta we encountered huge beds of Ring- 
billed and Herring Gulls, chiefly the former, resting on the already turbid 
and muddy water. This muddy water lay like a film of oil over the clear 
water below, and our passage separated the film, leaving a clear, limpid 
wake behind, over which the Herring, Laughing, and Ring-billed Gulls 
fairly swarmed, as well as several Pelicans and Royal Terns. As far as we 
could see were banks of gulls, like patches of snow on a muddy plain, and 
the Pelicans in the distance were beyond all estimation. Saw many Royal 
Terns and about twenty smaller terns, resembling the Common Tern in 
general appearance, but too far away to identify. 

A flock of Redheads flew over the ship, and we saw several dozen Can- 
vasbacks, which struck me as rather remarkable. Cormorants were abun- 
dant in small flocks of from five to eight near the entrance of the river. 
Saw a few Bonaparte’s Gulls also. 

As we entered the pass a flock of at least 2000 Pelicans rose from a sandy 
point beyond the breakwater with a tremendous flapping of wings, and 
hundreds of ducks started from the reeds on all sides whenever we blew 
our whistle. Royal Terns were common in large flocks here, as well as in 
the marshes, remaining so until the character of the country changed de- 
cidedly. Brown Pelicans were everywhere, flying along in big strings. 
These became less and less common as we ascended the river. 

Throughout the delta, and for a considerable distance up the river (as 
far as Point Hache), the most evident and abundant land bird was the 
Boat-tailed Grackle. They were new birds to me and I was struck by 
their large size, their shrill piercing whistle, the difference between the 
two sexes, and, in short, their utter dissimilarity to our Purple Grackles. 
They were present everywhere on the lower river, in huge flocks mostly, 
but many scattered individuals were seen at the same time. With them 
were quantities of Red-winged Blackbirds, in scattered colonies. 

In the marshes there were ducks by the thousand, and our whistle 
never failed to scare up a perfect cloud of them. Mallards, Shovelers, 
both Teal, and Pintail were the commonest species, named in order of 
abundance. The Pintail, though seen everywhere, were numerically less 


260 Hetmutu, Notes while in Naval Service. ree 


common. Numerous Black Duck (sp.?) were seen, some Scaups, probably 
Lesser Scaups, one flock of about sixty Gadwalls, and three flocks of Bald- 
pates. All these birds were either feeding or resting quietly in the shallow 
pools between the long strips and patches of high grass and reeds, and 
from the main-top I could look directly down upon them. It made a 
splendid sight, and even at the risk of exhausting the patience of the 
reader I cannot help describing the appearance of the scene as it seemed to 
an enthusiastic bird lover, to whom many of the species observed were 
new or unfamiliar. 

From my elevated vantage point, the thousands of ducks first attracted 
attention, but almost immediately one noticed the long strings of flapping 
Pelicans, the noisy hosts of Grackles, and the bands of Laughing and Ring- 
billed Gulls that drifted over the marshes and wheeled in our wake, before 
one’s eyes sought out the various other kinds of fowl not quite so obviously 
in evidence. In the pools were countless Herons, chiefly Little Blues, 
Louisianas, and Great-Blues, with an occasional Egret. Nearly every 
pool sheltered eight or nine ‘assorted Herons,’’ including now and then 
Night Herons of both species. There were beds of Coots in the larger 
pools, and sometimes a Pied-billed Grebe or two. In one pool was a flock 
of some fifteen Greater Yellowlegs. Four Lesser Yellowlegs, some Dow- 
itchers, and many Least or Semipalmated Sandpipers were seen here and 
there. Hudsonian Curlew were at times not uncommon, and we saw sev- 
eral flocks on the wing. 

Small Terns were occasionally seen, perhaps Foster’s, three of which 
flew by uttering harsh rattling cackles and some shrill peeping notes, un- 
like any of the varied notes of the Common Tern. Large Terns were com- 
mon, but whether Royal or Caspian I could not tell. Once we passed 
three great White Pelicans, looming up over the marshes like Norwegian 
barks with skysails set. Further up the river Killdeer, Spotted Sand- 
pipers and Black Vultures were extremely common. So were mosquitoes! 
But it seemed to me that if anything was to be seen in lower Louisiana at 
all it was sure to be found in terrific abundance, and, given the birds, I 
was only too glad to let the mosquitoes do the r worst! 

March 28, 1918. Anchored off Sabine Pass, Texas. Approximately 
500 Blue Geese, (Chen caerulescens), in long strings, flew from the wide 
marshes on shore directly into the Gulf, many passing over the ship. 
Their flight is quite different from that of Canada Geese, being more like 
that of the Brant, and even more like the flapping flight of a Heron, though 
the wing-beats are rapid. Compared to Canada Geese they are poor 
flyers, with broader, more rounded wings. Birds with white heads were 
in the minority. 

March 29, 1918. Migrants and waifs at sea. From Sabine Pass to a 
point south-east into Gulf of Mexico, 100-150 miles offshore. A “north- 
er,’’ with terrific wind and rain. Three Great Blue Herons, (probably 
Ward’s), lit on the main and foremasts, and stayed there all day, balancing 


oe 


or Sail al Hetmutu, Notes while in Naval Service. 261 


themselves against our 42 degree roll by half extending and lowering their 
wings to meet the motion. Among other strange visitors at a distance of 
125 miles from land were a belted Kingfisher, several Tree Swallows, and 
many flocks of warblers, which seemed better able to weather the storm 
than the huge Herons. The only Warblers identified were Myrtles, Paru- 
las, Redstarts, and a female Black-throated Blue. Three Robins came 
aboard in the evening. 

March 30, 1918. Gulf of Mexico, en route to Tampa, Fla. Very 
heavy weather, with violent squalls, wind varying in direction. A Hens- 
low’s Sparrow stayed with us all day, very tame, and ate crumbled hard- 
tack and drank rain water from the boat-covers. Passed five Louisiana 
Herons, making heavy weather of it. 

March 31, 1918. About 85-95 miles off entrance of Tampa Bay. 
Several Myrtles, a Parula, a Black and White, and one Prothonotary 
Warbler flew aboard and spent the morning on the boat-deck, all very 
tame. Strangely enough, the Myrtles ate bread-crumbs and crumbled 
hard-tack thrown to them by compassionate sailors! 


VI 


MIGRANT JAEGERS IN LAST OF MARCH AND EARLY APRIL. 


March 14, Bound north, About 180 miles off the west coast of Florida, 
somewhere between Ft. Myers and Tampa; four Pomarine Jaegers fol- 
lowed us most of the day, the only birds seen with the exception of six or 
eight Herring Gulls and the Phalaropes mentioned elsewhere. 

March 31, to April 10. Cruising in Gulf of Mexico, from Tampa to 
Key West; and from Key West northwards up the east coast of Florida, 
rather close inshore (fifteen to twenty-five miles off). Druing this time 
a few Jaegers were seen every day, numbers being nearly equally divided 
between the Pomarine and Parasitic species. One or more Long-tailed 
Jaegers were definitely identified, and two or three doubtful individuals 
seen at too long range. This latter species, April 8, between Alligator 
Shoals and St. Lucie inlet. On April 9, approaching Jacksonville, eight 
or ten Pomarine and about five Parasitic Jaegers followed us northward 
all day, even up the St. John’s river as far as Mayport. According to 
Cooke practically nothing is known of the northward migration of the 
Jaegers, and the above notes may be of additional interest on this ac- 
count.” 


774 Madison Ave., New York, N. Y. 


2Cooke, W. W., 1915, Distribution and migration North Am. Gulls—and their 
allies: Bull. no. 292 U.S. Dept. Agr. 


262 Dwieut, Pliumages of Gulls. esi 


THE PLUMAGES OF GULLS IN RELATION TO AGE AS 
ILLUSTRATED BY THE HERRING GULL (LARUS 
ARGENTATUS) AND OTHER SPECIES. 


BY JONATHAN DWIGHT, M. D. 
Plates X-XIV 


Ir is nearly a score of years since I placed on record (Auk, 1901, 
pp. 49-63) the fact that Gulls and Terns pass through a perfectly 
definite series of plumages separated by definite moults. This 
record, modified only a little in details, is as applicable today, as 
it was then, to the Gulls of the world, and it is only because I have 
gathered together new characters for determinibg the age of the 
so-called “immature” specimens that I have again brought up 
the subject. 

While each species has pecularities of plumage at different ages 
that are specific, it must be remembered that not all species at the 
same age have equally developed plumages, nor do all birds of the 
same species at the same age have equally developed plumages. 
The large species require a longer time to attain adult plumage 
than do the smaller ones; and there is always a percentage, prob- 
bably a small one, in every species of laggards or backward birds 
that require a longer time in reaching maturity than do the aver- 
age individuals. These laggards are a source of confusion and 
have been largely responsible for wrong estimates of age and of 
the duration of “immature”? plumages. They are apparently 
about one plumage behind their fellows, but in a series of skins 
taken at random, it is hardly possible to do more than guess the 
percentage that deviates from the average plumage. At each 
successive moult, however, birds advance in their plumage towards 
maturity, but not equally. We do find, however, some very defi- 
nite characters that are correlated with age, and by combining 
them, we find that the smaller Gulls attain fully adult plumage 
at their first postnuptial or annual moult, which is at the begin- 
ning of their second year, medium sized Gulls, at the beginning of 
their third, and large Gulls at the beginning of their fourth year. 
The percentage of laggards is apparently greatest at the first period 
of moult and progressively diminishes afterwards. 


Vol. ee | Dwicut, Plumages of Gulls. 263 


Another source of confusion in the study of Gulls is due to the 
fact that different areas of plumage in the same bird advance to- 
ward maturity at different paces, although no changes in plumage 
save fading occur except at periods of moult. The flight- 
feathers of the wings and the quill-feathers of the tail are moulted 
but once in the year while the plumzge of the body is moulted 
twice, so that evidences of immaturity are lost sooner in the body 
plumage. Nor do discrepancies of development stop here for we 
may find well developed wings and tail combined with a backward 
body plumage or vice-versa. But in spite of complications it is 
possible to group together certain characters so that we have defi- 
nite plumages representing the average advance made at each 
period of moult. It may be well to first take up separately each 
of the several characters by which we may judge the age of a given 
specimen. 

1. Shape of primaries and rectrices. Perhaps the most import- 
ant of the characters is the structural difference in the shape of the 
primaries and tail-feathers of birds in their first year as compared 
with those of a second or later year. My attention was directed 
to this by Mr. H. Ira Hartshorn who in making drawings to scale 
for me found discrepancies to exist. An examination of specimens 
of Gulls of the world shows that throughout the first year, and un- 
til the first postnuptial or annual moult, the primaries as a rule 
are more pointed and the rectrices more rounded than in later 
years. The new second year primaries acquired at this moult, 
which removes the juvenal wings and tail, have more rounded, 
broader tips than in the first year, being practically the shape of 
fully adult feathers. There is some variation, but as a rule in 
first year birds, the extreme tip appears to be pinched to a point, 
the outer or distal feather usually showing this pecularity more 
markedly than the others (see Plate X, fig. 1,and Plate XI, fig. 1). 

A similar difference in shape prevails in the tail-feathers of Gulls, 
first-year or juvenal rectrices being rounded (see Plate X, fig 2, 
and Plate XI, fig. 2) and replaced at the first postnuptial moult 
by feathers of the second year which are more or less squared at 
the tip (see Plate XII, fig. 2). The outer rectrix is perhaps the 
most diagnostic and as the wings and tail are moulted only once a 
year the value of these characters is great, for many birds after 


264 Dwiaut, Plumages of Gulls. ee 


the partial prenuptial or spring moult resemble very closely the 
second-year birds that have not as yet begun this moult. 

2. Pattern of primaries and rectrices—Next to shape, the pat- 
terns that mark the quill-feathers of the wings and tail are of im- 
portance. Every species has a definite adult wing pattern, which, 
except in the smaller species, is not even foreshadowed in first, and 
only occasionally indicated in second-year plumages. The same 
thing is true of the tails. The juvenal or first year primaries in 
the larger and medium-sized Gulls are as a rule uniformly dingy 
or black and the second-year primaries that come at the first 
postnuptial moult scarcely differ although the medium-sized 
species may have faint indications of “wedges”’ of a lighter shade 
on the inner primaries, obscure apical spots or perhaps a dingy 
“mirror”? on the distal quill. The small Gulls during the first 
year are marked by primaries with more or less dusky areas, but 
the adult pattern is usually indicated. After the first postnuptial 
moult then, the new primaries of small Gulls are of adult pattern, 
those of the larger sized Gulls have a slight suggestion of adult 
pattern, while those of the largest Gulls at this period hardly differ 
from the first year primaries. The “ wedges”’ develop sooner than 
the apical and other spots and the distal primary is the slowest 
of them all in acquiring adult characters. 

Tails develop a little faster than do primaries, but in the largest 
Gulls three moults are required and often four before all traces of 
immaturity disappear leaving the tail either pure white or banded 
as it is in the adults of some foreign species. 

3. Color and pattern of body plumage.—Under this heading may 
be included all of the plumage except the remiges and rectrices, 
and while there is the greatest divergence between the various 
consecutive plumages, the advance towards maturity in most of 
the species may be traced through the gradual elimination of the 
dusky feathers of youth. As the body plumage undergoes two 
moults each year, the advance is rapid, but at the early moults 
some brown or dusky feathers are acquired that differ little if any 
from those that precede them and these immature feathers are 
often a ready clue to age. The moults of young birds are pro- 
tracted and the postjuvenal overlaps the prenuptial. Small Gulls 
at the postjuvenal moult in the autumn acquire a considerable 


Mel: “ae eel Dwicut, Plumages of Gulls. 265 


part of their adult body plumage, and they assume at the first 
prenuptial moult a plumage that is adult save for wings and tail 
and finally through the first postnuptial moult they become fully 
adult. Larger Gulls are quite or very nearly adult in body 
plumage after the second postnuptial moult but the largest are 
usually not in full adult dress until after their third postnuptial 
moult. 

4. Colors of bill and feet—The bill is not only rather slow in de- 
veloping color, but the color often varies between winter and sum- 
mer. Doubtless there is much more to be learned from fresh 
birds but museum specimens show indications of immaturity in 
dark bands and dusky cloudings up to the third and _ possibly 
fourth year in the larger species while in the smaller, the time 
varies from perhaps less than a year to one or two years as the 
size increases. 

The color of the feet and tarsi and eye-ring (the iris too) may be 
studied successfully only in fresh birds for these parts change 
color as skins dry so that no clue to their original color remains. 
In young birds the colors are, as a rule, pale deepening with age 
to the more brilliant tints or deeper shades of maturity. 

It has been my endeavor to show the characters as we find them 
in average birds and it is difficult not to blur the picture with too 
many details of exceptions. It is no easy matter to pick out typi- 
cal average birds even with large series to choose from but the 
accurate sketches by Mr. Hartshorn of wing tips and tails speak 
for themselves. In explanation of them I will first give a brief 
diagnosis of the plumages of a small species, Bonaparte’s Gull 
(Larus philadelphia) which acquires adult plumage at its first 
postnuptial moult and then of a large species, the Herring Gull 
(Larus argentatus) which does not acquire adult plumage until its 
third postnuptial moult, some few specimens retaining slight evi- 
dences of immaturity even until the fourth. 


Larus philadelphia. Bonapartr’s GULL. 


1. Natal Down. Wholly a body plumage and like most Gulls at this 
stage, the downy chick is whitish or buffy brown clouded with large and 
small dusky spots. 


266 Dwicut, Plumages of Gulls. hee 


2. Juvenal Plumage. Primaries, pointed, largely white, the tips and 
outer webs in part, black (Plate X, fig. 1). Tail with rectrices rounded 
at tips, white, banded subterminally with black (Plate X, fig. 2). Body 
plumage has much to suggest the adult being chiefly white below but the 
upper surface is washed and clouded with browns. Bill, pale with dark 
tip. 

3. First Winter Plumage. A partial postjuvenal moult in the late fall 
replaces many of the brown feathers by adult gray ones, but a number of 
mixed ones may also come in. The juvenal wings and tail remain. 

4. First Nuptial Plumage. A partial first prenuptial moult in the late 
winter brings the body plumage a little nearer to that of the adult, the 
browns being farther diminished. 

5. Second Winter Plumage. The first postnuptial moult produces the 
adult plumage except in a very small number of backward birds. The 
primaries are rounded with the white areas larger (Plate X, fig. 3). The 
tail has square tipped rectrices and is pure white (Plate X, fig. 4). After 
this moult, only an occasional bird shows traces of immaturity in slight 
smudging of the tail or in duskiness of the primaries. 


Larus argentatus. Herrinca GULL. 


1. Natal Down. At this stage only body plumage is found which is 
grayish or buffy, coarsely mottled or clouded with dull clove-brown. 

2. Juvenal Plumage. Primaries, pointed and dull brownish black. 
(Plate XI, fig. 1). Rectrices, rounded at tips, dull brownish black, vari- 
ously but coarsely mottled with white, especially on the outer feathers 
and basally. (Plate XI, fig. 2.) Body plumage, mostly grayish or sooty 
brown irregularly mottled and barred with buff, the markings coarsest on 
the upper surface, the lower parts being of a more uniform grayish brown. 
Bill, black. 

3. First Winter Plumage. More or less of the body plumage is renewed 
by a partial postjuvenal moult which may be delayed until well into the 
winter. The new growth resembles the old, but it usually shows less mot- 
tling, the color areas being larger and less broken up. The juvenal wings 
and tail remain. 

4. First Nuptial Plumage. <A partial prenuptial moult renews some of 
the now worn and faded body plumage, brown feathers, much like those 
of the juvenal or first. winter stages, growing for the third time. The bill 
during the winter slowly grows paler at the base, the extent of the black 
diminishing. The postjuvenal and the prenuptial moults seem to overlap, 
the former often being delayed and perhaps in some cases suppressed, but 
as brown feathers mark all renewals during the first year, many specimens 
of this period appear superficially at least to be in juvenal plumage. 

5. Second Winter Plumage. The result of a complete first postnuptial 
moult. Primaries, rounded and dull black, indistinct ‘“wedges”’showing 


yer ax ee Dwicut, Plumages of Gulls. 267 


on several of the proximal (Plate XII, fig. 1)). Rectrices, square-tipped 
and dull black, more finely peppered or sprinkled with white than in the 
first winter. (Plate XII, fig. 2). Body plumage, much like the first win- 
ter, but usually whiter below and about the head and with a few gray 
feathers on the back. Bill, black from tip to nostrils, the base pale and 
yellowish in dried skins. 

6. Second Nuptial Plumage. <A partial second prenuptial moult renews 
some of the body plumage, birds becoming much whiter below and grayer 
on the back. Many of the new feathers, however, are still brown or parti- 
ally so. 

7. Third Winter Plumage. A complete second postnuptial moult wid- 
ens the field for variation because pattern is now pronounced in the pri- 
maries (Plate XIII, fig. 1). They are black with more or less white 
tipping, a “‘mirror,”’ often with blurred margin, of variable extent is 
found on the ‘‘first”’ or distal, and gray ‘“‘wedges”’ of greater or l-ss extent 
appear. The tail also shows new pattern (Plate XIII, fig. 2), smudges of 
black on the white rectrices varying greatly in extent. In some birds the 
red spot on the bill appears indistinctly but as a rule a dusky band or 
clouding is found. The body plumage is either adult or there may be a 
few obscurely dusky areas on the outer surface of the wings. 

8. Third Nuptial Plumage. <A partial third prenuptial moult is hardly 
noticeable among the body feathers that are already mostly adult. 

9. Fourth Winter Plumage. After the third postnuptial moult, which 
is of course complete, it is unusual for evidences of immaturity to remain. 
The primaries (Plate XIV, fig. 1) are all white tipped and the ‘‘mirror”’ 
on the first is large and clearly defined, sometimes merging with the white 
tip, although it is possible that such specimens are still older. A white 
spot may or may not be found on the next primary, and the “‘ wedges” 
are more extended but vary with each primary. The tail is now wholly 
white (Plate XIV, fig. 2). The body plumage is fully adult. The bill is 
bright yellow with a red spot at angle of mandible. 


So it is possible to trace the development of plumages in the 
Gulls with considerable accuracy and it is a pity to see writers of 
recent date still clinging to the inadequate term “immature,” 
and to the old-fashioned idea that many years are required to 
attain adult plumage. With moulting specimens to bridge the 
gaps between plumages and knowing the characters that develop 
in sequence much can be learned about age and it is with such ma- 
terial at hand that I have endeavored to show as briefly as the 
conditions permit, the correlation that exists in the Gulls between 
plumage and age. 

Taking the Gulls of the North American Check List, they may 
be grouped as follows: 


268 Swartu, Races of Branta canadensis. isan 


1. Two-year plumage-cycle (like Larus philadelphia):—Xema 
sabini, Rhodostethia rosea, Larus minutus, Larus franklini, Larus 
atricilla, Rissa brevirostris and Rissa tridactyla. 

2. Three-year plumage-cycle:—Larus heermanni, Larus canus, 
Larus brachyrhynchus, Larus delawarensis and Pagophila alba. 

3. Four-year plumage-cycle (like Larus argentatus):—Larus cali- 
fornicus, Larus vegae, Larus affinis, Larus occidentalis, Larus schis- 
tisagus, Larus marinus, Larus nelsoni, Larus kumlient, Larus glau- 
cescens, Larus leucopterus and Larus hyperboreus. 

43 W. 70th Street, New York, N. Y. 


THE SUBSPECIES OF BRANTA CANADENSIS (LINNAEUS)! 
BY H. S. SWARTH 


In the January, 1920, issue of “The Auk’ (pp. 94-102) Mr. J. D. 
Figgins has a paper on “The Status of the Subspecific Races of 
Branta canadensis.”’ This paper is devoted in large part to severe 
criticism of a publication of my own upon the same subject.? I 
could not possibly take exception to Mr. Figgins for differing from 
me in matters of opinion, nor for publishing his conclusions. I am, 
however, perfectly justified in feeling resentful at the ungracious 
wording of his argument. I object to such statements, for ex- 
ample, as that measurements I have taken are unreliable and that 
I have suppressed such measurements as did not answer my pur- 
pose. I object to having statements ascribed to me that I did 
not make. I object to having statements of mine “interpreted”’ 
—TI do not think they need it. 

Before discussing in detail some of the statements he has made, 
it is best, perhaps, to give Mr. Figgins’ conclusions, then some of 
my objections to them. He says finally: “It is, therefore, pro- 
posed that ‘hutchinsv’ and ‘occidentalis’ be eliminated as subspecific 
forms, that minima be raised to specific rank and that the occas- 


1Contribution from the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology of the University of 
California. 

2A study of a collection of geese of the Branta canadensis group from the San 
Joaquin Valley, California. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., vol. 12, 1913, pp. 1-24, pls. 
1-2, 8 text figs. 


Mae Auk, VOL. 


XXXVII. 


PLATE 


x 


Larus PHILADELPHIA 


PAC ele 


Tue Aux, Vou. XXXVII. 


ey TTR eS ery 


First Year (JUVENAL), 


LARUS ARGENTATUS. 


PLATE: Noll: 


| 
/ 
j 
| 
| 


_ 
iI 
= 
A 
A 
A 
S 
e) 
> 
eA 
=) 


YEAR 


SECOND 


ATUS. 


ARGENT 


LARUS 


Tue Aux, Vou. XXXVII. 


PLATE ADIT. 


(THirp YEAR). 


TUS. 


LARUS ARGENT: 


Piate XIV. 


Tue Auk, Vou. XX XVII. 


OL tems 
P Pale ge 
Peeay. isa 


(FourTH YEAR). 


is) 
= 
= 
B 
Z 
A 
re) 
= 


LARUS 


Vol. ‘pat eel 


1920 SwartuH, Races of Branta canadensis. 269 


ional ‘inextricable’ examples be recognized as hybrids.”” Presum- 
ably Branta canadensis is also to be considered as a species, though 
he does not say so. At any rate it will be necessary to do so, to 
supply a second parent for his hybrids. 

Now to come to details. “On page three of ‘A Study of a Col- 
lection of Geese . . . Swarth states, in a discussion of thirty- 
six specimens considered as hutchinsi, ‘twenty-five are males.’ 
Without an explanation of his reasons, he employs but ten of that 
sex as representative of the differences he describes on page four- 
teen. It is, therefore, not unreasonable to conclude that the dif- 
ferences he finds in the minimum and maximum measurements of 
wing, culmen and tarsus, as compared with the findings of other 
writers, may be due to the elimination of the remaining fifteen 
males belonging to the series.”” In plain language, I am accused 
of juggling the measurements taken to make them accord with 
my own preconceived ideas. 

Mr. Figgins’ premise is a false one. The diagnoses of the sub- 
species given on pages 14-15 are based on all the specimens ex- 
amined. The summaries of measurements (pp. 14-15) are from 
a limited number (ten in the case of hutchinsi), but on pages 16-18 
he will find the important measurements of all the specimens, all, 
that is, except a very few that were defective so as not to permit of 
accurate measurement of one part or another. Futhermore, the 
extremes as given in the summaries on pages 14-15 are the ex- 
tremes of all the measurements taken, not from a limited selection. 
An ordinarily careful reading of my paper would have shown this. 

Then, in connection with the subspecies occidentalis: “Swarth’s 
contention for a difference in size when compared with canaden- 
sis is not convincing”’ (Figgins, |. c., p. 98). My “contention”’ 
was that “the maximum of occidentalis is below the largest cana- 
densis”’ (Swarth, |. c., p. 7). I did not assert that the size differ- 
ence between the two was diagnostic. Mr. Figgins has not shown 
my statement to be erroneous. Then: “The present writer in- 
terprets Swarth’s description of occidentalis as an attempt to justify 
the continuance of this variation as a subspecies by crediting it as 
being a more or less resident form inhabiting the Pacific Coast 

. , ete. (Figgins, |. c., p. 98). I think I do not need 
Mr. Figgins to “interpret”? my statements, and I resent an “inter- 


[Ape 
April 


270 Swartu, Races of Branta canadensis. 
pretation” that claims to show an unworthy motive. I stated, 
in language that seems to me perfectly explicit (Swarth, 1. ¢., p. 
10), my belief that occidentalis is a recognizable subspecies. I 
have had no reason since to change my mind. 

Another quotation: “Swarth shows that ‘hutchinsv’ attains its 
greatest abundance on the Pacific coast . . . ” (Figgins, I. 
e., p- 101). What I really said was that in California in winter we 
find “vast numbers of typical minima, a lesser number of inter- 
grades, and comparatively few typical hutchinst”’ (Swarth, |. ¢., 
p. 3). One feels rather helpless when he finds his opponent as- 
cribing to him statements exactly the opposite of what he did say. 
The only assumption permitted me is that Mr. Figgins read my 
paper too carelessly to judge its contents. 

So much for the personal side of the matter, though there are 
other statements, too, to which I might well take exception. Now, 
for Mr. Figgins’ conclusions, especially as regards the subspecies 
occidentalis. 

In the first place, there is no evidence in his paper that he ex- 
amined a single example of occidentalis. If he had any specimens 
at hand from the coast of southeastern Alaska he does not say so. 
If he did have, and if he could compare geese from that region with 
Canada Geese from the interior of the United States and still not 
appreciate the differences in color, there is nothing more to be 
said on that score. Others can distinguish these differences with- 
out difficulty. 

Then, Mr. Figgins confuses two entirely different problems, the 
characters of the subspecies that inhabits the northwest coast, 
and the name that should be applied to the race. His argument 
that some of the characters first ascribed to the subspecies are un- 
reliable is, of course, nothing new and of no importance now that 
the more stable characters are better understood. The fact that 
the type specimen of occidentalis is not representative of the mode 
of that subspecies, as now defined, is obviously no reason why the 
form should not be recognized. I consequently fail to understand 
why my detailed description of this type specimen “would appear 
to effectually dispose of occidentalis as a subspecific variety” 
(Figgins, |. ¢., p. 98). 

Mr. Figgins says: “The statement [by Swarth] that ‘Of the 
Alaskan series the Prince William Sound birds are smaller and 


vor are vel SwartH, Races of Branta canadensis. ; Ziel: 
darker than those of the Sitkan district . . . ’ points rather 


conclusively to gradation through hybridism.”’ His wording is 
obscure, but let that pass. Then: “The literature dealing with 
the distribution of the genus Branta fails to take into account the 
region lying between Prince William Sound and Bering Sea. 

A large part of this territory is ideal breeding ground and to the 
present writer’s personal knowledge, examples of Branta are found 
there in considerable numbers during July, August and September, 
although no specimens were taken. There are no land barriers 
that would prohibit these birds crossing from Prince William 
Sound to Cook Inlet and hence it is not unreasonable to expect 
that minima and canadensis and Baird’s so-called occidentalis inter- 
breed and hence the ‘variations’ and specimens that intergrade 
‘inextricably’”’ (Figgins, I. ¢., p. 98). 

“No specimens were taken!”’ Yet we are expected to accept as 
proof of the existence of an extraordinary condition his statement 
(which I will not deny) of the mere fact that geese are abundant 
in certain parts of Alaska. It would require the collection of a 
large series of skins, and the most careful analysis of their peculi- 
arities and of the circumstances under which the birds were taken 
to carry conviction of the truth of the statement that is made so 
airily. “ Hybridism” has been much used of late to explain things 
that seem obscure. Mr. Figgins uses the term repeatedly. It 
is an easy way to wave difficulties aside, but it is an exceedingly 
difficult thing to prove. Of course on questioning the theory of 
“hybridism” on a large scale we at once have the Flickers (Colaptes) 
pointed out in triumphant proof, but it may be said that even 
among these variable woodpeckers there are a great many cases 
of peculiarities, in color at least, that can not be explained by that 
theory. 

“It appears to be established by several authorities that the 
breeding range of the representatives of the genus Branta overlap, 
and it is the present writer’s belief that hutchinsi is a hybrid inter- 
grade between canadensis and minima” (Figgins, 1. ¢c., p. 101). 
Here again Mr. Figgins’ premise is wrong. There are very few 
explicit statements of the subspecific character of geese found 
breeding in the far north. Most observers followed the same 
course as Mr. Figgins—they saw plenty of geese but “no specimens 
were taken.” 


[Apri 
April 


Ze 7 Swartu, Races of Branta canadensis. 

Of course there are “intergrades”’ in collections—many of them. 
Is that not one of our tests for subspecies? It is my own main 
reason for regarding the four forms, canadensis, occidentalis, hutch- 
inst and minima, as subspecies of the one species, Branta canaden- 
Sis. 

In the foregoing discussion my comments have pertained mainly 
to the subspecies occidentalis, but Mr. Figgins’ contentions re- 
garding hutchinsi are, I believe, just as much open to criticism. 
I submit that Mr. Figgins has not proved his points. Furthermore 
he has not described his Mississippi Valley specimens sufficiently 
explicitly to enable anyone else to form an opinion regarding them, 
nor, for that matter, to know just what Mr. Figgins himself thinks 
of any particular one. 

I hope it is not necessary for me to say that I do not regard my 
previously published paper on the races of Branta canadensis as 
the last word on the subject. In one respect I admit that it would 
be difficult to make me change my view—in regard to Branta c. 
occidentalis. I have handled enough specimens of that race, in 
the field and in the museum, to be fully satisfied of its distinctive- 
ness as a subspecies of Branta canadensis, whatever name we may 
eventually apply to the form. Of hutchinsi and minima, breeding 


birds from many points and a study of breeding conditions are 
admittedly necessary to a full understanding of their status. 

I may say that my own views upon this subject have been criti- 
cised before. Once, at least, in print, by Brooks (Condor, XVI, 
1914, p. 123), and in letters to me by others. In each case, 
however, the suggested correction was the recognition as species 
of forms that I regard as subspecies. I still think that, in the lack 
of sufficient breeding birds of certain of the races, my method of 
treatment, which is the same as that in the A. O. U. ‘Check-list,’ is 
the most reasonable course to follow. That is, to regard Branta 
canadensis as a variable species, divided into four recognizable 
subspecies, canadensis, occidentalis, hutchinsi, and minima. 


Musevm of Vertebrate Zoology, Berkeley, California. 


Rok sexx Net Huser, A New Black Duck. 273 


DESCRIPTION OF A NEW NORTH AMERICAN DUCK 
BY WHARTON HUBER 


While collecting ducks south of Las Cruces, Dona Ana County, 
New Mexico, during the winter and spring of 1915, I noticed 
numbers of very dark individuals in the flocks of Mallards flying 
over the sloughs and along the Rio Grande River; while during 
April and May these ducks were generally seen in pairs. 

Upon making inquiries I find these ducks to be fairly common, 
especially during the late spring and early fall; they are however, 
just as plentiful during the winter months but are lost sight of in 
the large flocks of ducks that make their winter home in the Rio 
Grande Valley of New Mexico. 

A careful study of specimens secured seem to indicate that the 
bird in question is an undescribed member of the Black Duck 
group and may be described as follows. 

My thanks are due to the following for assistance rendered in 
preparing this paper: Dr. Witmer Stone, Mr. E. W. Nelson, Dr. 
H. C. Oberholser, Dr. C. W. Richmond and Mr. J. H. Riley. 


Anas novimexicana New Mexican Duck 


Description: Type No. 1928. Collection of Wharton Huber. Adult 
male; along the Rio Grande River west of Las Cruces, Dona Ana County, 
New Mexico. 

May 7, 1915; Wharton Huber. Forehead and top of head black streak- 
ed with pinkish buff. Auriculars and sides of neck pinkish buff streaked 
with black. Throat pinkish buff unstreaked. Breast black margined 
and mottled with cinnamon; turning to vinaceous buff on abdomen. Un- 
der-tail coverts centially black edged with grayish-white, the outer edges 
of the feathers margined with cinnamon-rufous. Flanks black-edged and 
internally streaked with cinnamon and vinaceous-buff. Back, rump and 
upper-tail coverts black streaked and margined with cinnamon and vina- 
ceous-buff. Primaries mummy brown, darker on the outer webs. Under 
wing coverts white. Speculum dark dull bluish-violet bordered by a 
black band then a white band. Bill in life, pyrite yellow. Nailblack. Feet 
an! legs in life, Grenadine orange. 

The fall plumage is much darker and the edgings of the feather smuch 
deeper cinnamon. The feathers of the throat are streaked with black. 

Measurements: Type; length, 545 mm.; wing, 279; tail 94; exposed 
culmen, 55; tarsus, 46. 


274 Proposed Changes in the A. O. U. Check-List. pee 


Male, 1786. Coll. Wharton Huber, Mesilla Dam, three miles south- 
west of Mesilla, New Mexico, April 12, 1915; length, 541 mm.; wing 275; 
tail, 92; exposed culmen, 57; tarsus, 47. 

Male, Belen, New Mexico, December 9, 1917. Collected by Aldo Leo- 
pold; length, 550 mm.; wing, 278; tail, 89; exposed culmen, 51; tarsus, 
48. 

Measurements of three specimens (skins) including the type in mm. 


Length 
C ulmen 


5 
oo 
E|ala-le 
Type No. 1928—Adult Male. Along Rio Grande River, west — 
of Las Cruces, New Mexico, MeN CT 19L5S Colle ae Whar- 
¢ AVES 


ton Huber. 45|279| 94 | 55 | 46 
No. 1786—Male. NMesillar Want 3 sation Ss. W. OF WMiesilla, 

Dona Ana Co., New Mexico, Apull 12; 1915)" “Coll: by 

Wharton Huber... .. . .|541|275] 92 | 57 | 47 
Male. Belen, New ivresieas ee 9. 1917. Coll. by Aldo 

Leopold . : : .|550/278] 89 | 51 | 48 


*The names of the color used are from Ridgway’s ‘“‘Co!tor Standards and Co!or 
Nomenclature.’’ 


Habitat: The Rio Grande Valley of New Mexico from Albuquerque 
south to El Paso, Texas. 
225 St. Mark’s Square, Philadelphia, Pa. 


FIFTH ANNUAL LIST OF PROPOSED CHANGES IN THE 
A. O. U. CHECK-LIST OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. 


BY HARRY C. OBERHOLSER. 


Tus is the Fifth Annual List of Proposed A. O. U. Check-List 
additions and changes in the names of North American birds. 
Like the First, Second, Third, and Fourth,! the present list com- 
prises only ornithological cases—i. e., such as require specimens 
or the identification of descriptions for their determination— 
and consists of additions, eliminations, rejections, and changes of 
names due to various causes. However, only changes known to 
be the result of revisionary work are included; therefore no men- 
tion is here made of changes involved in names in local lists or 


1 For the four previous lists, see Tor Aux, X X XIII, October, 1916, pp. 425-431; 
XXXIV, April, 1917, pp. 198-205; XXXV, April, 1918, pp. 200-217; XXXVI, 
April, 1919, pp. 266-273. The A. O. U. Committee has not aS yet acted on any 
of these cases. 


yor Pere vane Proposed Changes in the A. O. U. Check-List. Ze 


elsewhere, used without sufficient explanation or not known to 
be based on original research, of changes or additions queried or 
but tentatively made, or of the elimination of subspecies by authors 
who, on general principles, recognize no subspecies. 

This list is intended to include everything pertinent up to 
December 31, 1919, and nothing after that date has been taken. 
In view of the volume and widely scattered character of current 
ornithological literature, it is not at all unlikely that some names 
or changes have been overlooked, and the writer would be very 
thankful for reference to any omissions, in order that such may 
be duly given a place in next year’s list. 


ADDITIONS AND CHANGES IN NAMES.! 


Gavia viridigularis Dwight becomes Gavia arctica viridigularis 
Dwight, because only a subspecies of Gavia arctica. (Cf. Bent, THE 
AvuK, XXXVI, No. 2, April, 1919, pp. 238-242.) 

Alcella Stone. Raised to generic rank. (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U. 8. 
Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, pp. 705, 770.) Contains 
one species now in the genus Aethia: 

Alcella pygmaea (Gmelin). 

Ciceronia Reichenbach. Raised to generic rank. (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. 
U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, pp. 705, 767.) Con- 
tains one species now in the genus Aethia: 

Ciceronia pusilla (Pallas). 

Endomychura Oberholser. Raised to generic rank. (Cf. Ridgway, 
Bull. U. 8S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, pp. 704, 751.) 
Contains two species now in the genus Brachyramphus: 

Endomychura hypoleuca (Xantus). 
Endomychura craveri (Salvadori). 
+Cepphus motzfeldi (Benicken). Uria motzfeldi Benicken, Isis, August, 
1824, col. 889 (Greenland). Revived as a species. (Cf. Ridgway, 
Bull. U. 8. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, p. 742.) 
+Uria ringvia Briinnich, Ornith. Bor., 1764, p. 28 (Iceland). Revived 
as a species. (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, 
June 26, 1919, p. 719.) 

Pagophila eburnea (Phipps) becomes again Pagophila alba (Gun- 
nerus) (Larus albus Gunnerus, in Leem’s Beskr. Finm. Lapp., 1767, 
p. 285), since the latter proves to be identifiable. (Cf. Ridgway, 


1 Additions to the A. O. U. Check-List, the Sixteenth Supplement, and the 
First, Second, Third, and Fourth Annual Lists are marked with a dagger (fT). 
Generic (and subgeneric) names so indicated have not hitherto stood in the lists 
in either generic or subgeneric sense. 


276 Proposed Changes in the A. O. U. Check-List. AGE 


Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, pp. 576-577; 
Oberholser, Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XXXII, Dec. 31, 1919, p. 199.) 

jLarus occidentalis livens Dwight. New subspecies. Dwight, Proc. 
Biol. Soc. Wash., XX XII, February 14, 1919, p. 11 (San Jose Island, 
Lower California). Range: Central California to southern Lower 
California. 

Larus brachyrhynchus Richardson becomes Larus canus brachy- 
rhynchus Richardson, because but subspecifically distinct from the 
Old World bird. (Cf. Oberholser, THz Auk, XXXVI, No. 1, Janu- 
ary, 1919, p. 83.) 

7Blasipus Bruch, Journ. fiir Ornith., 1853, p. 96 (type, Larus modestus 
Tschudi). Recognized as a genus (cf. Ridgway, Bull. U. 8. Nat. 
Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, p. 652), to include one North 
American species now in the genus Larus: 

Blasipus heermanni (Cassin). 

{Chroicocephalus Eyton, Cat. Brit. Birds, 1836, p. 53 (type, Larus 
ridibundus Linnaeus). Recognized as a genus (cf. Ridgway, Bull. 
U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, pp. 635-649) to include 
the following North American species now in the genus Larus: 

Chroicocephalus atricilla (Linnaeus). 
Chroicocephalus franklinii (Swainson and Richardson). 
Chroicocephalus philadelphia (Ord). 

Larus atricilla megalopterus (Bruch) becomes Chroicocephalus 
atricilla (Linnaeus). (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, 
VIII, June 26, 1919, pp. 636-641.) 

tHydrocoloeus Kaup, Skizz. Ent.-Gesch. Natiirl. Syst. Eur. Thierw., 
1829, p. 113 (type, Larus minutus Linnaeus). Recognized as a 
genus (cf. Ridgway, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 
1919, p. 649) to include the following North American species now 
in the genus Larus: 

Hydrocoloeus minutus (Pallas). 

Sterninae becomes Sternidae, because raised to family rank. (Cf. 
Ridgway, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, p. 
449.) 

Gelochelidon nilotica aranea (Wilson) becomes Gelochelidon nilo- 
tica (Gmelin). (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U. 8. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, 
June 26, 1919, pp. 479-484.) 

Gelochelidon nilotica (Gmelin) becomes Gelochelidon anglica 
(Montagu), because Sterna nilotica Gmelin is doubtfully applicable 
to the species, and its proper name is therefore Gelochelidon anglica 
(Montagu). (Cf. Hellmayr and Laubmann, Nomenclator Végel 
Bayerns, 1916, pp. 29-30.) 

Hydroprogne caspia imperator (Coues) becomes Hydroprogne caspia 
(Pallas). (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 
1919, pp. 462-466.) 


vel aoe wah Proposed Changes in the A. O. U. Check-List. TATE 


Onychoprion fuscatus (Linnaeus) becomes Sterna fuscata Linnaeus, 
because not generically separable. (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U. 8. Nat. 
Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, p. 514.) 

Melanosterna anaetheta recognita Mathews becomes Sterna anae- 
theta recognita (Mathews), because not generically separable from 
Sterna. (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 
1919, pp. 486, 512.) 

Leptophaethon catesbyi (Brandt) becomes Leptophaethon lepturus 
catesbyi (Brandt), because found to be only subspecifically distinct. 
(Cf. Oberholser, THz Auk, XXXVI, No. 4, October, 1919, p. 556.) 

Scaeophaethon rubricaudus (Boddaert) becomes Scaeophaethon 
rubricaudus rothschildi (Mathews), so far as North America is 
concerned. (Cf. Oberholser, THz Aux, XXXVI, No. 4, October, 
1919, p. 557.) 

Parasula Mathews is considered to be only a subgenus. (Cf. Wetmore, 
Bull. Mus. Comp. Zoél., LXIII, No. 4, August, 1919, p. 168.) 

Piscatrix Reichenbach is considered to be only a subgenus. (Cf. Wet- 
more, Bull. Mus. Comp. Zoél., LXIII, No. 4, August, 1919, p. 168). 

Mergus americanus Cassin becomes Mergus merganser americanus 
Cassin, because but subspecifically different from Mergus americanus. 
(Cf. Millais, British Diving Ducks, I, 1913, p. 89.) 

jAnas platyrhyncha conboschas Brehm. Anas conboschas Brehm, 
Naturg. Handb. Végel Deutschl., 1831, p. 865 (Greenland). Recog- 
nized as a subspecies. (Cf. Hartert, Novit. Zool., XXV, No. 1, 
May 1, 1918, p. 47.) Range: Greenland. 

+Querquedula discors albinucha Kennard. New subspecies. Ken- 
nard, THe Aux, XXXVI, No. 4, October 1919, p. 459 (Grand Chenier, 
Cameron Parish, Louisiana). Range: Breeds in Louisiana; occurs 
east to Florida and west to Arizona; in winter south to Mexico, 
Costa Rica, and West Indies. 

jEunetta falcata (Georgi). Anas falcata Georgi, Reise Russ. Reichs, 
I, 1775, p. 167 (Baikal region, Siberia). Recorded as North American 
from a specimen taken on the Pribilof Islands, Alaska. (Cf. Hanna, 
Journ. Wash. Acad. Sci., [X, No. 6, March 19, 1919, p. 176.) 

Marila americana (Eyton) becomes Marila ferina americana (Hy- 
ton), because considered only subspecifically different. (Cf. Millais, 
British Diving Ducks, I, 1913, p. 14.) 

Marila affinis (Eyton) becomes Marila marila affinis (Eyton), be- 
cause regarded only subspecifically different from Marila marila. 
(Cf. Millais, British Diving Ducks, IJ, 1913, p. 68.) 

{Somateria mollissima islandica Brehm. Somateria islandica Brehm, 
Isis, 1830, col. 998. Recorded from northeastern Greenland. (Cf. 
Millais, British Diving Ducks, II, 1913, p. 3.) 

Somateria v-nigra Gray becomes Somateria mollissima v-nigra 
Gray, because found to intergrade with some of the forms of Somateria 
mollissima. (Cf. Millais, British Diving Ducks, II, 1913, p. 4.) 


278 Proposed Changes in the A. O. U. Check-List. [apt 


Oidemia americana Swainson becomes Oidema nigra americana 
Swainson, because only subspecifically distinct from Oidemia nigra. 
(Cf. Millais, British Diving Ducks, II, 1913, p. 55.) 

Exanthemops Elliot. Raised to generic rank. (Cf. Oberholser, THE 
Auk, XXXVI, No. 4, October, 1919, p. 562.) Its only species, now 
in the genus Chen, therefore becomes 

Exanthemops rossii (Cassin). 

Casmerodius egretta (Gmelin) becomes Casmerodius albus egretta 
(Gmelin), because found to be only subspecifically distinct from 
Casmerodius albus. (Cf. Oberholser, Toe Aux, XXXVI, No. 4, 
October, 1919, pp. 557-558.) 

Canutus canutus rufus (Wilson) becomes Canutus canutus 
(Linnaeus), because not considered subspecifically distinct. (Cf. 
Ridgway, Bull. U. 8. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, pp. 
233, 238.) 

Limnocinclus acuminatus (Horsfield) becomes Pisobia acuminata 
(Horsfield). (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, 
June 26, 1919, p. 266). 

Pisobia minutilla subminuta Middendorff becomes Pisobia sub- 
minuta Middendorff, because considered specifically distinct. (Cf. 
Ridgway, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, pp. 
269, 300.) 

tPisobia ruficollis (Pallas). Trynga ruficollis Pallas, Reis. Russ. Reichs, 
III, 1776, p. 700 (Kulussutai, eastern Siberia). Recorded from 
Nome, Alaska. (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U. 8S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, 
June 26, 1919, p. 292.) 

tPisobia cooperi (Baird). Tringa cooperi Baird, Rep. Explor. and 
Surv. R. R. Pac., [X, 1858, p. 716 (Raynor South, Long Island, 
N. Y.). Considered a good species. (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U. 8. 
Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, p. 289.) 

Pelidna alpina pacifica Coues becomes Pelidna alpina sakhalina 
(Vieillot). (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, 
June 26, 1919, pp. 262-266.) 

Calidris leucophaea rubida (Gmelin) becomes Calidris alba (Pallas). 
(Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U. 8. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, 
pp. 308-314.) 

jNeoglottis Ridgway. New genus. Ridgway, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., 
No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, p. 329 (type, Scolopax melanoleuca 
Gmelin). Includes the following species now in the genera Glottis 
and Iliornis: 
Neoglottis melanoleuca (Gmelin). 
Neoglottis flavipes (Gmelin). 
jHeteractitis brevipes (Vieillot). Totanus brevipes Vieillot, Nouv. 
Dict. d’Hist. Nat., VI, 1816, p. 410 (no locality). Recorded as 
North American from a specimen taken on the Pribilof Islands, 
Alaska. (Cf. Hanna, Journ. Wash. Acad. Sci., IX, No. 6, March 19, 
1919, p. 176.) 


oe a Mol Proposed Changes in the A. O. U. Check-List. 279 


tMesoscolopax Sharpe, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., XXIV, 1896, p. 371 
(type, Numenius minutus Gould). Recognized as a genus. (Cf. 
Ridgway, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, p. 410). 
Includes the following species now in the genus Phaeopus: 

Mesoscolopax borealis (Forster). 

Squatarola squatarola cynosurae Thayer & Bangs becomes Squata- 
rola squatarola Linnaeus. (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., 
No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, p. 79.) 

Charadrius hiaticula septentrionalis (Brehm) becomes Charadrius 
hiaticula Linnaeus. (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, 
VIII, June 26, 1919, pp. 120-124.) 

Elseya dubia (Scopoli) becomes, so far as North America is concerned, 
Charadrius dubius curonicus Gmelin, because not generically 
separable from Charadrius, and because subspecifically different 
from Charadrius dubius dubius. (Cf. Oberholser, Tuz Aux, XXXVI, 
No. 4, October, 1919, p. 559.) 

Leucopolius alexandrinus nivosus (Cassin) becomes Charadrius 
nivosus nivosus (Cassin), because specifically different from Cha- 
radrius nivosus, and not generically distinct from Charadrius. (Cf. 
Ridgway, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, pp. 
136-137.) 

{Charadrius nivosus tenuirostris (Lawrence). Aegialitis tenuirostris 
Lawrence, Ann. Lyc. Nat. Hist. N. Y., VII, 1862, p. 455 (near Guan- 
tanamo, Cuba). Revived as a subspecies. (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. 
U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, p. 139.) Range: 
southeastern United States, south in winter to Paraguay. 

Ochthodromus wilsonius (Ord) becomes Pagolla wilsonia wilsonia 
(Ord), because generically distinct from Eupoda asiatica (Pallas). 
(Cf. Oberholser, Trans. Wis. Acad. Sci., Arts, and Letters, XIX, 
pt. 1, Dec. 30, 1918, p. 520.) 

jPagolla wilsonia beldingi Ridgway. New subspecies. Ridgway, 
Bull. U. 8. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, p. 112 (La Paz, 
Lower California). Range: Pacific Coast of America, from Lower 
California to Peru. 

Podasocys montanus (Townsend) becomes Eupoda montana (Town- 
send) because not generically separable from the type of Eupoda 
Brandt. (Cf. Oberholser, Trans. Wis. Acad. Sci., Arts, and Letters, 
XIX, pt. 1, Dec. 30, 1918, p. 516.) 

Arenariinae becomes Arenariidae, because raised to family rank. 
(Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, 
pp. 25, 42.) 

Haematopus frazari Brewster becomes Haematopus palliatus frazari 
Brewster, because only subspecifically separable. (Cf. Ridgway, 
Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, pp. 28, 37.) 

Asarcia Sharpe, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., XXIV, 1896, pp. 68, 86 (type, 
Fulica spinosa Linnaeus). Raised to generic rank. (Cf. Oberholser, 


280 Proposed Changes in the A. O. U. Check-List. a 


Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XXXII, Dee. 31, 1919, p. 200.) The North 
American forms are: 

Asarcia spinosa gymnostoma (Wagler). 

Asarcia spinosa violacea (Cory). 

Tachytriorchis Kaup. Raised to generic rank. (Cf. Oberholser, THE 
Auk, XXXVI, No. 4, October, 1919, pp. 567-568.) Its only North 
American species, now in the genus Buteo, therefore becomes 

Tachytriorchis albicaudatus sennetti (Allen). 

Archibuteo Brehm becomes a subgenus of Buteo Lacépéde, because not 
trenchantly separable. (Cf. Hartert, Hand-List Brit. Birds, 1912, 
p. 115; Vogel palaarkt. Fauna, Heft IX [Band II, Heft 3], Octo- 
ber, 1914, pp. 1114, 1128-1131; Oberholser, THz Aux, XXXVI, 
No. 3, July, 1919, pp. 420-421). The North American forms of 
Archibuteo will therefore now stand as 

Buteo lagopus sanctijohannis (Gmelin). 
Buteo ferrugineus (Lichtenstein). 

+Thallasoaetus pelagicus (Pallas). Aguila pelagica Pallas, Zoogyr. 
Rosso-Asiat., I, 1811, p. 348, pl. (islands between Kamchatka 
and America). Recorded as North American from a specimen 
obtained on the Pribilof Islands, Alaska. (Cf. Hanna, Journ. Wash. 
Acad. Sci., IX, No. 6, March 19, 1919, p. 176.) 

+Melanerpes erythrocephalus erythrophthalmus Silloway. Melan- 
erpes erythrophthalmus Silloway, Bull. Fergus County Free High 
School, No. 1, 1903, p. 36 (Lewistown, Fergus Co., Montana). Re- 
vived as a subspecies. (Cf. Oberholser, Canadian Field-Naturalist, 
XXXIII, No. 3, Sept. (Oct. 4) 1919, p. 48.) 

{Frugilegus Selys-Longchamps (Faune Belge, I, 1842, p. 68; type, 
Corvus frugilegus Linnaeus). Recognized as a genus. (Cf. Ober- 
holser, Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XXXII, June 27, 1919, p. 141.) In- 
cludes one North American species now in the genus Corvus: 

Frugilegus frugilegus (Linnaeus). 

Agelaius phoeniceus richmondi becomes, so far as North America is 
concerned, Agelaius phoeniceus megapotamus Oberholser. New 
subspecies. Oberholser, Wilson Bull., XX XI, No. 1, March, 1919, 
p. 20 (Brownsville, Texas). Range: Texas to northern Vera Cruz, 
Mexico. 

Quiscalus quiscula versicolor Viecillot becomes Quiscalus quiscula 
ridgwayi Oberholser. New subspecies, Oberholser, THe AUK, 
XXXVI, No. 4, October, 1919, p. 552 (Washington, D. C.). Range: 
middle eastern United States. 

Passer domesticus hostilis Kleinschmidt becomes Passer domesticus 
domesticus (Linnaeus), because not subspecifically distinct. (Cf. 
Witherby, Pract. Handbook Brit. Birds, pt. II, 1919, p. 101.) 

tHypocentor Cabanis, Mus. Hein., I, 1851, p. 131 (type, Emberiza aureola 
Pallas). Recognized as a genus. (Cf. Oberholser, Ture Auk, 


yer ep | Proposed Changes in the A. O. U. Check-List. 281 


XXXVI, No. 2, April, 1919, p. 286.) The only North American 
species is: 
Hypocentor rusticus (Pallas). 

+Passerculus rostratus halophilus (McGregor). Ammodramus halo- 
philus McGregor, THe Aux, XV, No. 3, July, 1898, p. 265 (Abreojos 
Point, Lower California). Reinstated as a subspecies. (Cf. Ober- 
holser, Ohio Journ. Sci., XIX, No. 6, April (May) 1919, p. 353.) 
Range: southern half of western coast of Lower California. 

Centronyx Baird, Rep. Explor. and Surv. R. R. Pac., LX, 1858, p. 440 
(type, Emberiza bairdii Audubon). Raised to generic rank. (Cf. 
Oberholser, Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XXXII, June 27, 1919, p. 141.) 
The only species therefore becomes 

Centronyx bairdii (Audubon). 

Passerherbulus leconteii (Audubon) becomes Passerherbulus cauda- 
cutus Latham (Fringilla caudacuta Latham, Index Ornith., I, 1790, 
p. 459), because antedated by this name. (Cf. Oberholser, Proc. 
Biol. Soc. Wash., XXXII, April 11, 1919, p. 47.) 

+Thryospiza mirabilis Howell. New species. Howell, THe Auk, 
XXXVI, No. 1, January, 1919, p. 86 (Cape Sable, Florida). Range: 
extreme southern Florida. 

Spizella monticola (Gmelin) becomes Spizella arborea Wilson 
(Fringilla arborea Wilson, Amer. Ornith., II, 1810, p. 123, pl. XVI, 
fig. 3; eastern Pennsylvania), since Fringilla monticola Gmelin is a 
synonym of Zonotrichia leucophrys. (Cf. Oberholser, Proc. Biol. Soc. 
Wash., XXXII, June 27, 1919, p. 139.) The subspecies of the Tree 
Sparrow will, therefore, stand as follows: 

Spizella arborea arborea (Wilson). 
Spizella arborea ochracea Brewster. 
+Junco oreganus pontilis Oberholser. New subspecies. Oberholser, 
Condor, XXI, No. 3, June 6, 1919, p. 119 (El Rayo, Hanson Laguna 
Mts., northern Lower Calif.). Range: Hanson Laguna Mountains, 
Lower California. 

Junco mearnsi townsendi Anthony becomes Junco oreganus town- 
sendi Anthony, because found to be subspecifically connected with 
Junco oreganus. (Cf. Oberholser, Condor, XXI, No. 3, June 6, 1919, 
p. 120.) 

Junco mearnsi insularis Ridgway becomes Junco insularis Ridgway, 
because considered to be a distinct species. (Cf. Miller, Toe Aux, 
XXXVI, No. 2, April, 1919, p. 296.) 

tMelospiza melodia semidiensis Brooks. New subspecies. Melo- 
spizia [sic] cineria [sic] semidiensis Brooks, Proc. New Engl. Zodl. 
Club, VII, Nov. 4, 1919, p. 27 (North Semidi Island, Semidi Islands, 
Alaska. 

tPipilo fuscus aripolius Oberholser. New subspecies. Oberholser, 
Condor, X XI, No. 5, Sept. 30, 1919, p. 210 (San Pablo, Lower Calif.). 
Range: middle Lower California. 


282 Proposed Changes in the A. O. U. Check-List. een 


Pipilo crissalis crissalis (Vigors) becomes Pipilo fuscus crissalis, 
because found to be only subspecifically distinct. (Cf. Oberholser, 
Condor, XXI, No. 5, Sept. 30, 1919, p. 211.) 

Pipilo crissalis senicula Anthony becomes Pipilo fuscus senicula, 
because found to be only subspecifically distinct. (Cf. Oberholser, 
Condor, XXI, No. 5, Sept. 30, 1919, p. 211.) 

Pipilo crissalis carolae McGregor becomes Pipilo fuscus carolae 
McGregor, because found to be only subspecifically distinct. (Cf. 
Oberholser, Condor, X XI, No. 5, Sept. 30, 1919, p. 211.) 

Zamelodia melanocephala melanocephala (Swainson) becomes, so 
far as North America is concerned, Hedymeles melanocephalus 
papago Oberholser. New subspecies. Oberholser, THs AUK, 
XXXVI, No. 3, July, 1919, p. 412 (Santa Cruz River, west of Pata- 
gone Mts., Arizona). 

Zamelodia melanocephala capitalis (Baird) becomes Hedymeles 
melanocephalus melanocephalus (Swainson), because found to 
be the typical race. (Cf. Oberholser, THz Aux, XXXVI, No. 3, 
July, 1919, pp. 408-411.) 

Piranga erythromelas (Vieillot) becomes Piranga olivacea (Gmelin). 
(Tanagra olivacea Gmelin, Syst. Nat., I, ii, 1789, p. 889; Hempstead, 
Long Island, N. Y.) because the latter name has priority. (Cf. 
Oberholser, Toe Aux, XXXVI, No. 4, October, 1919, pp. 575-576.) 

Piranga hepatica hepatica Swainson becomes, so far as North America 
is concerned, Piranga hepatica oreophasma Oberholser. New 
subspecies. Oberholser, THs Auk, XXXVI, No. 1, January, 1919, 
p. 74 (Pine Canyon, Chisos Mts., Texas). Range: southwestern 
United States to central Mexico. 

+Lanius ludovicianus grinnelli Oberholser. New subspecies. Ober- 
holser, Wilson Bull., XX XI, No. 3, Sept., 1919, p. 87 (San Fernando, 
Lower Calif.). Range: north central Lower California. 

Dendroica bryanti castaneiceps Ridgway becomes Dendroica eritha- 
chorides castaneiceps Ridgway, because Dendroica bryanti Ridg- 
way proves to be but a subspecies of Dendroica erithachorides Baird. 
(Cf. Oberholser, Toe AuK, XXXVI, No. 1, January, 1919, p. 85.) 

+Anthus spinoletta japonicus Temminck and Schlegel. Anthus 
pratensis japonicus Temminck and Schlegel, Fauna Japonica, Aves, 
1850, p. 59, pl. 24 (Japan). Recorded as North American from a 
specimen taken on the Pribilof Islands, Alaska. (Cf. Hanna, Journ. 
Wash. Acad. Sci., [X, No. 6, March 19, 1919, p. 176.) 

Salpinctes guadeloupensis Ridgway becomes Salpinctes obsoletus 
guadeloupensis Ridgway, because shown to be only a subspecies 
of Salpinctes obsoletus. (Cf. Oberholser, THs Auk, XXXVI, No. 3, 
July, 1919, p. 407.) 

Salpinctes guadeloupensis proximus Swarth becomes Salpinctes 
obsoletus proximus Swarth, because it proves to be a subspecies 


Vel- ax yr Proposed Changes in the A. O. U. Check-List. 283 


of Salpinctes obsoletus. (Cf. Oberholser, Toe Aux, XXXVI, No. 3, 
July, 1919, p. 408.) 

Nannus hiemalis hiemalis (Vieillot) becomes Nannus troglodytes 
hiemalis (Vieillot), because found to be a subspecies of Nannus 
troglodytes (Linnaeus). (Cf. Oberholser, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 
LV, April 28, 1919, p. 236.) 

Nannus hiemalis pacificus (Baird) becomes Nannus troglodytes 
pacificus (Baird), because found to be a subspecies of Nannus tro- 
glodytes (Linnaeus). (Cf. Oberholser, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus., LV, 
April 28, 1919, p. 235.) 

Nannus hiemalis helleri (Osgood) becomes Nannus troglodytes 
helleri (Osgood), because found to be a subspecies of Nannus troglody- 
tes (Linnaeus). (Cf. Oberholser, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., LV, April 28, 
1919, p. 234.) 

Nannus hiemalis semidiensis Brooks becomes Nannus troglodytes 
semidiensis Brooks, because found to be a subspecies of Nannus 
troglodytes (Linnaeus). (Cf. Oberholser, Proc. U. 8S. Nat. Mus., LV, 
April 28, 1919, p. 234.) 

Nannus alascensis (Baird) becomes Nannus troglodytes alascensis 
(Baird), because found to be a subspecies of Nannus troglodytes 
Linnaeus. (Cf. Oberholser, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., LV, April 28, 
1919, p. 229.) 

Nannus meliger Oberholser becomes Nannus troglodytes meligerus 
(Oberholser), because found to be a subspecies of Nannus troglodytes 
(Linnaeus). (Cf. Oberholser, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., LV, April 28, 
1919, p. 227.) 

jNannus troglodytes kiskensis Oberholser. New subspecies. Ober- 
holser, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., LV, April 28, 1919, p. 228 (Kiska 
Harbor, Kiska Island, Aleutian Islands, Alaska). Range: Kiska 
Island and Little Kiska Island, Alaska. 

+Nannus troglodytes petrophilus Oberholser. New subspecies. Ober- 
holser, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., LV, April 28, 1919, p. 232 (Unalaska, 
Unalaska Island, Alaska). Range: Unalaska, Amaknak, and Akutan 
islands in the Aleutian Islands, Alaska. 

+Nannus troglodytes tanagensis Oberholser. New subspecies. Ober- 
holser, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., LV, April 28, 1919, p. 230 (Tanaga 
Bay, Tanaga Island, Aleutian Islands, Alaska). Range: Islands of 
Tanaga, Adak, and Atka, Aleutian Islands, Alaska. 

Acanthopneuste borealis (Blasius) becomes Acanthopneuste bore- 
alis kennicotti (Baird). (Phyllopneuste kennicotti Baird, Trans. 
Chicago Acad. Sci., I, 1869, p. 313, pl. XXX, fig. 2; St. Michael, 
Alaska), because the North American bird proves to be subspecifically 
separable. (Cf. Oberholser, THz Auk, XXXVI, No. 3, July, 1919, 
p. 407.) 

Hylocichla aliciae aliciae (Baird) becomes Hylocichla minima aliciae 
(Baird), because Hylocichla minima (Lafresnaye), which is Hylocichla 


284 Proposed Changes in the A. O. U. Check-List. ean 


aliciae bicknelli Ridgway, is earlier. (Cf. Bangs and Penard, Bull. 
Mus. Comp. Zo6l., LXIII, No. 2, June, 1919, p. 30.) 

Hylocichla aliciae bicknelli Ridgway becomes Hylocichla minima 
minima (Lafresnaye) (Turdus minimus Lafresnaye, Rev. Zool., XI, 
No. 1, Jan., 1848, p. 5 [Bogota, Colombia]), because the latter name 
has priority. (Cf. Bangs and Penard, Bull. Mus. Comp. Zodl., 
LXIII, No. 2, June, 1919, p. 30.) 


REJECTIONS AND ELIMINATIONS|:! 


*Coprotheres pomarinus camtschaticus (Pallas) = Coprotheres po- 
marinus (Temminck). (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, 
VIII, June 26, 1919, pp. 681-686.) 

Larus hyperboreus barrovianus Ridgway vs. Larus hyperboreus 
hyperboreus Gunnerus. Proposed elimination as a subspecies (cf. 
Dwight, THe Aux, XXXVI, No. 2, April, 1919, pp. 242-248) re- 
jected. (Cf. Oberholser, Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XXXII, Sept. 30, 
1919, pp. 173-175.) 

*Onychoprion Wagler = Sterna Linnaeus. (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U.S. 
Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, pp. 459, 485.) 

*Melanosterna Blyth = Sterna Linnaeus, because not generically sep- 
arable. (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 
1919, p. 486.) 

*Aestrelata diabolica (Lafresnaye) = Aestrelata hasitata (Kuhl). 
(Cf. Bangs and Penard, Bull. Mus. Comp. Zodl., LXIII, No. 2, 
June, 1919, pp. 21-23.) 

Scaeophaethon Mathews vs. subgenus Scaeophaethon. (Cf. Wet- 
more, Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., LXIII, No. 4, August, 1919, pp. 166- 
167.) Change to subgeneric rank rejected. (Cf. Oberholser, THs 
Auk, XXXVI, No. 4, October, 1919, p. 557.) 

Nettion carolinense (Gmelin) vs. Nettion crecca carolinense 
(Gmelin). Proposed reduction to a subspecies (Cf. Committee Brit. 
Ornith. Union, List Brit. Birds, ed. 2, 1915, p. 171) rejected. (Cf. 
Oberholser, THzE Auk, XXXVI, No. 1, January, 1919, p. 81-82.) 

*Netta Kaup considered not generically separable from Nyroca Fleming. 
(Cf. Millais, British Diving Ducks, I, 1913, p. 4.) 

*Limnocinclus Gould = Pisobia Billberg. (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U. S. 
Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, p. 266.) 

*Erolia ferruginea chinensis (Gray) = Erolia ferruginea (Briinnich). 
(Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, 
pp. 250-255.) 


1 Eliminations from the A. O. U. Check-List, the Sixteenth Supplement, the 
First, Second, Third, and Fourth Annual Lists are designated by an asterisk (*). 
Generic (and subgeneric) names so marked are merely discontinued in both 
generic and subgeneric sense, while the species included under them remain in 
the lists. 


pou ceria va Proposed Changes in the A. O. U. Check-List. 285 


*Vetola Mathews = Limosa Brisson. (Cf. Wetmore, Bull. Mus. Comp. 
Zool., LXIII, No. 4, August, 1919, pp. 180-182.) 

*Leucopolius Bonaparte = Charadrius Linnaeus. (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. 
U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, VIII, June 26, 1919, p. 114.) 

*Arenaria interpres oahuensis Bloxham = Arenaria interpres inter- 
pres (Linnaeus). (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, 
VIII, June 26, 1919, pp. 46, 51.) 

Astur Lacépéde vs. Accipiter Brisson. Proposed elimination of Astur 
as a genus (cf. Hartert, Vogel paliarkt. Fauna, Heft IX [Band II, 
Heft 3], October, 1914, pp. 1145-1151) rejected. (Cf. Swann, Synop. 
List. Accip., I, July, 1919, p. 19.) 

*Brewsteria Maynard = Archibuteo Brehm, because not separable even 
as a subgenus. (Cf. Oberholser, Tos Auk, XXXVI, No. 3, July, 
1919, pp. 420-421.) 

*Bubo virginianus neochorus Oberholser = Bubo virginianus heter- 
ocnemis (Oberholser). (Cf. Noble, Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., LXII, 
No. 14, March, 1919, p. 551.) 

Dryobates pubescens microleucus Oberholser vs. Dryobates pubes- 
cens medianus (Swainson). Proposed elimination (Cf. Noble, Bull. 
Mus. Comp. Zodl., LXII, No. 14, March, 1919, p. 552) rejected. 
(Cf. Cory, Zool. Series, Field Mus. Nat. Hist., XIII (Pub. 203), Dec. 
31, 1919, p. 490.) 

Acanthis Bechstein vs. Carduelis Brisson. Proposed mergence (Cf. 
Hartert, Pract. Handbook Brit. Birds, pt. I, 1919, pp. 50, 59-61) 
rejected. (Cf. Hellmayr and Laubmann, Nomenclator Végel Bayerns, 
1916, p. 2.) 

Spinus Koch vs. Carduelis Brisson. Proposed mergence (cf. Hartert, 
Pract. Handbook Brit. Birds, pt. I, 1919, pp. 50, 54) rejected. (Cf. 
Hellmayr and Laubmann, Nomenclator Végel Bayerns, 1916, pp. 
2-3.) 

*Passerculus rostratus sanctorum Ridgway = Passerculus rostratus 
guttatus Lawrence. (Cf. Oberholser, Ohio Journ. Sci., XIX, No. 6, 
April (May), 1919, pp. 349-351.) 

*Toxostoma redivivum pasadenense (Grinnell) = Toxostoma redi- 
vivum redivivum (Gambel). (Cf. Oberholser, Tos AuK, XXXV, 
No. 1, January, 1918, pp. 52-54.) 


U.S. Biological Survey, Washington, D. C. 


286 General Notes. A orl 


GENERAL NOTES 


A Loon (Gavia immer) Caught on a Fishing Line.—November 17, 
1918, Mr. Fred Lynn, of Branchport, caught a female Loon while trolling 
for bass in Lake Keuka. He had just felt his line ease up when the Loon 
broke water about a hundred feet behind and began to shake its head. 
At the same time he thought that he had a bite and began to pull in his 
line when he saw at once that he had ‘‘hooked”’ the Loon. It had swal- 
lowed the bait, a minnow, which was on a small Kinzie hook and in its 
struggles got tangled in the line and was landed with difficulty. As soon 
as it was landed in the boat it struggled and set up a great cry. It was 


impossible to dislodge the hook so Mr. Lynn cut the line as far down the. 


Loon’s neck as possible and gave the Loon to Mr. Albert Boyd who lived 
nearby. Mr. Boyd kept it just one day, then returned it to the lake. It 
dived at once and after coming up way out in the lake was last seen swim- 
ming rapidly away. Both Mr. Lynn and Mr. Boyd are well known to 
me and I vouch for the truth of the above.—Vurpi Burtrcu, Branchport, 
ve as 


Intestinal Ceca in the Anhinga.—Intestinal ceca in Anhinga an- 
hinga seem subject in different individuals to variation in development, 
so that there has been some discrepancy and uncertainty in descriptions 
of them. In the following note is given a brief account of a few speci- 
mens that I have examined with some discussion of observations made 
by others. 

In an immature male Anhinga, hatched in the National Zoological 
Gardens, that died when about six months old from the effects of an ill- 
advised meal of sand, I found two exca, each about four mm. long. They 
were developed as small nodules partly embedded in the wall of the in- 
testine, 125 mm. from the anus. While both ecxca were well-formed. 
firm, and rounded, the one on the right side was slightly larger than the 
one on the left. From the inside these blind-guts appeared as shallow 
pockets in the intestinal wall with their inner, anterior margins somewhat 
thickened, more opaque in color than the surrounding tissue and per 
ceptible as slight projections to the sense of touch. The rightpocket 
was about one millimeter deep while the left one was slightly less. 

The intestine (preserved in formalin) of another bird collectedu}y 
Francis Harper in the Okefinokee Swamp had two cea, one of whictir..5 
represented merely by a slight, thickened ridge in the intestinal wAu.* 
third specimen—an adult male that I killed in the mangrove swamps 
behind Cape Sable, Florida—when examined in the flesh had two ceca 
barely indicated as slight thickenings in the intestine that were almost 
imperceptible from the outside. The lower part of the intestine of this 
bird was placed in alcohol at the time but now shows no indication of the 
ceca even when examined minutely with the aid of a low power mag- 


ii 
xs 


Vol. “orrnaal General Notes. 287 


nification under a dissecting microscope. Another bird that I have seen 
had the cxea represented by small, slightly thickened ridges that would 
have been overlooked without careful search. 

Several notes on the cxca of the American Anhinga have appeared in 
print previously. Garrod! remarks that there was one cecum present, 
as in herons, in specimens that he dissected. In a second communica- 
tion? he confirms his previous observation, stating that in this species he 
found no trace of a second eecum. Forbes’ notes that normally he found 
one cecum but that in one individual there was in addition to a single 
eexcum of the ordinary size a much more rudimentary one developed on 
the other side of the intestine. While in another paper‘ he says that “it 
is not unusual . . . in a group of birds in which the cxca are of 
small size, and probably of no physiological importance, to find specimens 
or species with the normal number of cca reduced by one. I may give 
asinstances . . . Plotus anhinga amongst the Steganopodes.”’ Bed- 
dard® records one cecum in some specimens of the Anhinga while in others 
he notes that there were two. Mitchell® found only one vestigial caecum 
in a bird that he examined. 

From this it would appear that as Forbes has supposed the intestinal 
exca in this species are not functional; and that they are on the road to 
disappearance. One cecum often seems to be larger than the other, while 
the second may be vestigial. It is my belief, from my own observations, 
that some indication of this second one may be found if the gut is exam- 
ined while fresh or after preservation in some fluid that causes rapid 
hardening. It would seem that at times this rudiment may be imper- 
ceptible in specimens dissected from alcohol or that it may be overlooked 
without minute search for it. It is possible that czeca are more prominent 
in young birds and that one or both of them may decrease in size with 
age.—ALEXANDER WETMORE, Biological Survey, Washington, D.C. 


On the Nesting of the Black Duck in Ohio.—In regard to the 
article in the last number of ‘The Auk’ on this subject by Mr. E. A. 
Doolittle, I would like to state that the species formerly nested quite 
frequently at the Grand Reservoir here in western Ohio, especially at two 
places, where the Big and Little Chickasaw creeks empty into the Reser- 
voir. Mr. Doolittle quotes my article in ‘The Auk’, January, 1910, but 
evidently overlooked my record for the recent nesting of this duck in 
the spring of 1911, as recorded in ‘The Wilson Bulletin,’ December, 1912, 
page 198, which is a good and reliable record. Writers on Ohio birds 


1 Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1876, p. 344. 

2 Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1878, p. 681. 

3 Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1882, p. 210. 

4 Voy. of Challenger, Zool., Vol. IV, Pt. XI, 1882, p. 22. 

5 Structure and Classification of Birds, 1898, p. 403. 

6 Trans. Linn. Soc. (London), Zool., Ser. 2, Vel. VIII, p. 192. 


288 General Notes. [April 


will do well to consult the pages of ‘The Wilson Bulletin’ before rushing 
into print.—W. F. Hennincer, New Bremen, Ohio. 


The American and European Widgeons in Massachusetts.—In 
‘The Auk’ for April, 1911, in writing of ten years’ observations on mi- 
grating ducks at Wenham Lake, Mass., I reported four occurrences of 
the European Widgeon (Mareca penelope) and suggested that this species 
is probably more common than is usually supposed. 

Those records ended with the year 1909, and since then I have accurate 
notes for nine additional years at the same place, a series of nineteen years 
in all. In 1911 no shooting was done and no records kept. 

During those nine years seven more specimens of M. penelope have been 
taken among only seven specimens of M. americana, as follows: 

1910—M. americana, 1. 

1912—M. americana, 3; M. penelope, 1, on October 24. 

1913—No Widgeon taken. 

1914—M. americana, 0; M. penelope, 2, on November 21. 

1915—No Widgeon taken. 

1916—M. americana, 3; M. penelope, 4, October 20 and November 2. 

1917—No Widgeon taken. 

1918—No Widgeon taken. 

1919—No Widgeon taken. 

Total for the nine years—M. americana, 7; M. penelope, 7. 

Total for 19 years—M. americana, 59; M. penelope, 11. 

All specimens of the European species were in female plumage and 
showed both the typical rusty coloring of the head and the dark gray 
axillaries. It is very likely that some specimens of M. penelope were 
classed as M. americana in the early years of shooting at Wenham, before 
the diagnostic value of the axillars was learned. 

On November 14, 1919, I noted one specimen of M. penelope hanging 
up in a duck blind on the south shore of Great Bay in the town of Green- 
land, N. H., not far north of the Massachusetts state line. This bird 
was also in female or in immature plumage. I was told that a small flock 
of twenty or thirty Widgeon had been feeding in Great Bay for several 
days, but this was the only one that had been shot. At Squibnocket 
Pond, Chilmark, Mass., which is situated at the southwest corner of 
Martha’s Vineyard Island, out of 120 Widgeon taken between October 22 
and December 10, 1919, one fine male of M. penelope was shot Novem- 
ber 6. I examined all these Widgeon very carefully myself. 

On December 8, 1919, I watched another full plumaged male M. pene- 
lope through a glass at close range, among a raft of many hundred Widgeon 
and Red-heads at Squibnocket. 

It certainly seems that among the rare straggling Widgeon which appear 
irregularly east of Boston, at Wenham, M. penelope is at least relatively 
more abundant than among the Martha’s Vineyard birds. Can it be 


Vol. foo | General Notes. 289 


that M. penelope comes mostly down the coast from the northeast, per- 
haps from Greenland, while our M. americana arrives from the West? 
This would explain the apparent increase of the European bird by con- 
tinuous increments from some far northeastern breeding ground. 

It is also remarkable that we have never noted a full plumaged male 
Widgeon, either americana or penelope, at Wenham Lake, whereas at the 
“Vineyard”’ full plumaged males are much in evidence as early as mid- 
October. Probably those individuals occurring east of Boston, at Wen- 
ham, are young birds of the year which are much more likely to straggle 
beyond their regular migration route; the normal range of americana 
reaching only to Martha’s Vineyard. 

It may be worth while to note here that the American Widgeon, which 
is generally considered an irregular and scarce migrant all over Massa- 
chusetts, is really a very common duck on the south shore of Martha’s 
Vineyard Island, frequenting Squibnocket and Black Point ponds as 
well as Poucha Pond on Chappaquiddick Isle. 

The first M. americana arrived this year (1919) at Squibnocket on 
August 31 (six or eight birds). By September 15 there were thirty in 
the pond and on the 21st about seventy-five. During October the num- 
bers increased to 1500 or 1800 and at times in November to possibly 2000. 
They never spend the night in Squibnocket but fly to other and better 
feeding grounds at dark. This body of Widgeon usually remains, so 
I am told, until driven out by ice.—J. C. Puintiips, Wenham, Mass. 


Whistling Swan (Olor columbianus) in Massachusetts.—On 
November 6, 1919, I saw a flock of seven swans at Squibnocket Pond on 
Martha’s Vineyard Isle, in the town of Chilmark, Mass. They were 
still in the pond on the following day and residents told me they had 
already been there several days when I first saw them. They left on 
November 10 or 11. 

This is the largest flock of Whistling Swans that I recall for Massachu- 
setts, most of the records having been for single birds. Mr. John E. 
Thayer received two swans from this same pond in 1906, shot on Novem- 
ber 28 and 29. Three swans were observed at Squibnocket within the 
past few years, but I have not the exact date. This pond has a good sup- 
ply of Widgeon grass and musk grasses, with some wild celery, and could 
probably furnish good feeding ground for swans. 

So far as I know these seven swans were not persecuted and left for 
the south in as good condition as when they arrived. The recent marked 
increase of the Whistling Swan in Currituck Sound, N. C., where it is 
said to be doing considerable damage to ducking property, may account 
for its more frequent occurrence in Massachusetts.—J. C. PHr.uips, 
Wenham, Mass. 


Habits of the Two Black Ducks, Anas rubripes rubripes and 
Anas rubripes tristis—This past autumn of 1919, while shooting at 


290 General Notes. AGEL 


Squibnocket Pond, Chilmark, Mass., a very interesting fact was brought 
to light, namely, that no Red-legged Black Ducks resort to this region, 
and this experience was so different from that to which we are accustomed 
in any of the eastern Massachusetts ponds, where Black Ducks are shot 
through the entire season, that it seemed worth while to record it. It is 
of especial interest because it brings out the different habits of the two 
forms. 

The south shore of Martha’s Vineyard Isle consists in the main of a 
chain of fresh, brackish, and salt ponds, separated from the sea by a 
beach. There are no salt marshes proper, and no tidal flats off the shore. 
In many of these ponds there is excellent feeding ground for diving ducks, 
but not much shallow ground for surface feeders. Nevertheless a goodly 
number of Black Ducks resort to Squibnockett, using it as a day-time 
refuge, and flighting to small sloughs scattered through the pastures and 
uplands at night. Squibnocket is entirely fresh. The ducks have been 
systematically baited there for many years and a number of pairs breed. 
On August 20 last there were some 250 to 300 Black Ducks and on Sep- 
tember 15 this number had not increased greatly. On September 20 
some 600 were counted and by early October they had about doubled. 
After the 10th of October it did not appear that there was any increase; 
and the same number persisted until driven away by the big freeze of 
December 12, 18, and 14, 1919. 

Black Ducks were shot on the following dates: September 23, 24; 
October 14, 22; November 6, 7, 14, 21, 25; December 1, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10. 
In all, 224 were taken during the season, and all of these, except 28, I 
examined personally. There was no marked change in the appearance 
of these ducks as the season advanced. In some of the mlaes the color 
of the legs increased slightly in richness, but never approached the coral 
red of rubripes. No other rubripes characters were noted. The average 
weight of the males in mid-October was 2.86 pounds and the females 
averaged 2.43 pounds. By December 10 these weights had increased to 
3.24 in the males and 2.66 in the females, a very high average, induced 
no doubt by artificial feeding. 

This body of birds became almost sedentary in its habits as the season 
advanced, and when not disturbed they spent almost the entire day asleep 
on the beaches at the west end of the pond. Even when greatly disturbed 
they seemed loth to go to sea, although it meant a flight of only a couple 
of hundred yards. They seldom remained long in the ocean. At night 
many of these ducks resorted to small bog holes scattered through the 
pastures, up to the time when ice made this impossible. 

It is fair to presume that nearly all these ducks would have passed 
south early in the season if they had not been attracted and held by grain. 
The absence of the tidal flats and marshes of course explains the non- 
appearance of rubripes, but that there should be such a sharp line of 
demarkation between the two forms at any one place seemed hardly 
possible. 


Vol. ae | General Notes. 291 


The habits that characterize the two forms as they appear in autumn 
in New England may be thus summed up: Anas rubripes tristis: Breeding 
locally and often migrating as early as, or before, mid-September, or at 
least “shifting ground”? from inland nesting grounds to better feeding 
grounds near coast. Feeding in both ponds and salt meadows, but if 
in salt meadows resorting to fresh water once or twice a day. Much 
less nocturnal in feeding habits than rubripes, because less shy, and much 
less inclined to spend day on open ocean. Prefers good fresh water and 
brackish water food, but spends the winters on the coast of New England 
in small numbers, along with rubripes. Reaches great size at times. 
Largest male 3 pounds 10 ounces; largest female 2 pounds 15 ounces 
(Squibnocket, 1919). More difference in size between sexes than in 
rubripes! Comes readily to live decoys, no matter how extreme the voice 
may be (too high or too low); and is more loquacious than the red-legged 
form. 

A. rubripes rubripes: Late migrant, never becomes localized except 
near sea, and where marine food in the form of small mollusca is abundant. 
Very seldom resorts to small ponds or bogs, but likes large open sheets of 
fresh water near ocean, to which it often makes daily trips to drink and 
rest, but not to feed. Is better able to sit off-shore in rough seas; and in 
general appears a more rugged bird with heavier feathering and superior 
resistance to extreme cold. In winter, it does not depend on ponds for 
fresh water, but obtains a sufficient supply in small springs about salt 
meadows at low tide. 

This is a much more wary bird, is more silent itself, and comes less 
easily to live decoys, towards which it manifests an instinctive fear, es- 
pecially if they be loud or shrill callers. In the salt meadows the best 
gunners prefer sea-weed bunches or canvas sacs, and find the live decoys 
useless, especially late in the season. 

When a flock of rubripes alights on a pond near a shooting stand, they 
nearly always keep at a safe distance until perfectly satisfied of their 
surroundings. Then, more often than not, they will swim away from the 
stand and its live decoys. If they approach the stand, which they do 
with the utmost caution, and with necks erect, they are not apt to keep 
closely together as tristis does. 

Extreme weights not much above that of tristis. Heaviest male noted 
by myself, 3 pounds 12 ounces. Average is a good deal heavier than 
tristis, females perhaps more nearly size of males than in tristis, but no 
figures at hand to bear out this point.—J. C. Puinurps, Wenham, Mass. 


Flight of Water-fowl at Washington, D. C.—On February 24, 1920, 
an unusual flight of water-fowl, bound in a southerly direction and flying 
at an altitude of probably one thousand feet, passed over Washington. 
During the following three days we experienced the coldest weather of 
the winter, the thermometer hovering about the 13 degree mark. 


Zoe General Notes. eet 


On February 7, with the temperature at 15 above zero, a flock of five 
Canada Geese passed over the city and alighted in East Potomac Park. 
The wind on that day at times attained a velocity of forty-five miles an 
hour.—Brent M. Moraan, 224 Eleventh St., S. W., Washington, D. C. 


Nesting of the Greater Yellow-Legs in Newfoundland.—On 
June 20, 1919, Mr. J. R. Whitaker and the writer had the satisfaction of 
discovering a female of this species (J’otanus melanoleucus) brooding four 
young just out of the shell and still in the nest, in a large bog in the vicinity 
of Grand Lake, N. F. Led to the spot by the ever increasing cries of the 
male bird, the nest, which was nothing more than a bare depression ten 
inches in diameter and three inches deep, upon the top of a mound of 
peat otherwise covered over with a short growth of sheep laurel, was 
noticed three yards from where we had stopped in doubt as to where next 
to proceed. 

It presented an unusual domestic picture; one youngster was perched 
on the mother’s back, while one or two others appeared from under her 
wings after the manner of domestic fowls. The parent remained until 
we closed in, when she flew low from the nest with a piercing ery, and after 
circling about overhead took up a position on a dead stub nearby, from 
which she continued to kip, kip, kip, kip—incessantly as long as we re- 
mained near the nest, the male likewise calling and circling above. 

The young, whose legs were not as yet strong enough to bear their 
weight, lay flat in the nest. They were mottled in gray, brown and black 
down, white below. Some of the lighter spaces on the back tending 
toward buffy. The eyes were large and black, bill one-half an inch long, 
lead-black in color, while the legs were characteristically long and greenish 
in color. Notwithstanding the recent hatching of the eggs, only one or 
two small pieces were to be found, the empty shells doubtless having been 
carried away by the parents. 

On visiting the nest the day following, the young could not be found, 
although the actions of the old birds indicated their presence in the vicin- 
ity —Grorce H. Sruart, 3rd, Girard Trust Co., Philadelphia. 


Nesting of the Little Black Rail in Atlantic County, N. J.—On 
July 4, 1919, Mr. Julian K. Potter and the writer flushed a small rail in 
a marsh an acre or two in extent, beyond the sand dunes immediately 
back of the ocean beach, on an island below Beach Haven, N. J. Search- 
ing for the nest in the belief that the bird was a Little Black Rail, we 
were rewarded by finding it placed among the long grasses, the tops of 
which were so drawn over as to almost completely hide the eggs from 
view. The nest, which was composed entirely of the same rather fine 
grass, was placed about one inch above the damp ground and contained 
eight eggs, very heavily incubated. 


Mh oe an General Notes. 293 


On returning several times at intervals of ten minutes we had oppor- 
tunities of observing the female on the nest, her bright red eyes being the 
most prominent feature. On each occasion when leaving the eggs, she 
darted from the nest into the surrounding grass, never taking wing, and 
with such celerity that it was impossible to observe her movements, the 
action resembling more that of a mouse than a bird. 

Eventually she was seen and caught in the hand while moving through 
some shorter grass. Mr. J. Fletcher Street secured some excellent photo- 
graphs of the bird while thus held. On being released, the bird again 
disappeared into the grass by a similar dart as before, never at any time 
showing the slightest indication of wing power. The first bird, flushed 
some ten yards from the site of the nest, was doubtless the male, forced 
to fly because of insufficient cover when surprised.—GrorGs H. Stuart, 
3rd, Girard Trust Co., Philadelphia. 


Maggots in the Ears of Nestling Cooper’s Hawks (Accipter coop- 
eri).—On July 8, 1913, when examining three Cooper’s Hawks seventeen 
days old, I found maggots in their ears and took a maggot from each ear 
of the three birds. In one ear of one of the birds there was another maggot 
which I could not get as it went far back into the ear. Possibly these 
maggots were the larvae of the Serew-worm Fly (Campsomyia macellaria). 
I visited these birds again July 20, when their ears appeared to be quite 
normal.—VsrpI Burtcu, Branchport, N. Y. 


Age Attained by the Hyacinth Macaw.—A venerable specimen of 
the Hyacinth Macaw (Anodorhynchus hyacinthus) well known to the 
visitors to the Philadelphia Zoological Gardens, died on February 28, 
1920. The records of the Zoological Society show that the bird was 
received on July 22, 1893, so that it had been on exhibition in the bird 
house for over twenty-six years. How long the bird had lived before it 
was captured it is of course impossible to say. At the time of its death 
it was still in perfect plumage.—WitTMER Stonn, Academy of Natural 
Sciences, Philadelphia, Pa. 


Curious Habits of the Whip-poor-will.—Mr. Moritz Boehm, a 
neighbor of mine, has a very beautiful place surrounded on two sides by 
a deep ravine. Each year for the past six or seven seasons a pair of Whip- 
poor-wills have spent the summer on his grounds, and have become quite 
tame. The male has certain stands around the house, and comes up from 
the depths of the ravine at night and calls, first from one perch, then 
another, until he has gone around the house several times, usually answered 
by Mr. Boehm. On different occasions, while the male was calling, he saw 
the female going through some peculiar antics, but in the dusk could 
not make out just what she was doing. One evening, when he was sitting 


294 General Notes. rest 
on the lower step, the birds came up and performed within ten feet of 
him. He kept perfectly quiet. The male called from a low branch over- 
head, while the female strutted on the gravel path below, with wings 
and tail outspread and head lowered, and sidestepped back and forth, 
half way around to the right, then to the left, all the time uttering a curi- 
ous gutteral chuckle. This performance was kept up for ten or fifteen 
minutes. 

One morning he saw them sleeping on a log. They were sitting close 
together facing each other, their heads about half way along side of one 
another, while each had one wing spread over the other’s head. This 
male bird had a peculiar call which could be recognized from the other 
Whip-poor-wills which were heard in the woods nearby, and Mr. Boehm, 
who is a close observer of nature, is quite sure that the same pair come to 
visit him every summer.—HeEnry K. Coan, Highland Park, Ill. 


Aeronautes melanoleucus (Baird) versus Aeronautes saxatalis (Wood- 
house).—The White-throated Swift of western North America is 
commonly called Aeronautes melanoleucus (Baird) (Cypselus melanoleucus 
Baird, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., VII, June, 1854, p. 118; ‘‘Camp 123, 
west of San Francisco Mountains” [on Bill Williams River, west of Ives 
Peak, Lat. 34° 15’ N., Arizona]). As is well known, there is an earlier 
name in Acanthylis saxatalis [sic] Woodhouse, in Sitgreaves’ ‘Report of 
an Expedition down the Zuni and Colorado Rivers,’ 1853, p. 64, based 
on a bird seen at “Inscription Rock, New Mexico.’”’ This name has been 
rejected chiefly because no specimen was obtained and because the deserip- 
tion given was not entirely accurate. This description is as follows: 

“Head and rump white; back, tail, wings, and sides black, beneath 
white; upper tail coverts black; under coverts white; about the size of 
A. pelasgia, and in its mode of flight the same.”’ 

The chief discrepancies in this account are the statements that the 
head and rump are white, and that the under tail-coverts are white. Any 
one who has seen this species in life, however, will readily recall that when 
the bird is flying the white flank patches spread out both above and below, 
so that the rump and even the under tail-coverts also, have all the appear- 
ance of being white, which circumstance readily explains these two dis- 
erepancies in Woodhouse’s description of a bird seen in flight. The head 
is in some individuals very light colored, and in certain lights might readily 
at a distance appear superficially white. There can be no doubt at all 
that the White-throated Swift was the bird seen at Inscription Rock by 
Dr. Woodhouse and described as above; and this most writers on the 
subject readily admit. Furthermore, there is no rule of nomenclature 
that provides for the rejection of a name based on the printed description 
of an animal only seen in life, nor for the rejection of a name if certainly 
identifiable even though the description be partly inaccurate. We see, 
therefore, no reason for not hereafter calling our White-throated Swift 


yer eed General Notes. 295 


Aeronautes saxatalis (Woodhouse).—Harry C. OBERHOLSER, Washington, 
Ds€. 


A New Name for Phaeochroa Gould.—The name of the genus of 
Trochilidae now known as Phaeochroa Gould (Introd. Troch., 1861, p. 54; 
type, Trochilus cuvierii De Lattre and Bourcier) proves to be preoccupied 
by Phaeochrous Laporte de Castelnau (Hist. Nat. Ins., II, 1840, p. 108), 
a genus of Coleoptera. As it seems to be generically separable from 
Aphantochroa Gould and appears to possess no synonym, we propose 
to call it Bombornis (86u.80¢ bombus; deytc avis) nom. nov., with Trochilus 
cuviertt De Lattre and Bourcier as type. The following species are refer- 
able to this genus: 

Bombornis cuvierti cuvierit (De Lattre and Bourcier). 

Bombornis cuvierii saturatior (Hartert). 

Bombornis roberti (Salvin).—Harry C. OBERHOLSER, Washington, D.C. 


Great Crested Flycatcher in Massachusetts in Winter.—On 
December 8, 1919, at Nahant Beach, Mass., I found a Great Crested 
Flycatcher (Myiarchus crinitus). The bird was in apparently good con- 
dition and quite tame. When alarmed at my close approach it seemed 
reluctant to leave the immediate vicinity and allowed me to observe 
it at close range. On the beach, where I first flushed it, was a mass of 
kelp, washed up by the tide, and covered with hundreds of black insects 
the size of a common fly. When I walked by, the insects rose in clouds 
covering my clothes. Upon these insects the bird was feeding, catching 
them from its perch on the rocks or from a wooden fence that runs along 
a walk near the beach. It would be interesting to know whether or not 
it will survive the winter.—Cuar zs B. FLtoyp, Auburndale, Mass. 


The Song of the Boat-tailed Grackle.—During a six weeks’ trip 
through central and eastern Florida in January and February, 1917, the 
writer had numerous opportunities to improve acquaintance with this 
distinctive grackle (Megaquiscalus major major). Here its range is not 
strictly maritime (as it appears to be elsewhere along the Atlantic Coast 
from Georgia to Maryland), for it makes its home also about the many 
bodies of fresh water throughout the interior of the state as far north 
as the vicinity of Gainesville. It is known everywhere to Florida people 
as the ‘Jackdaw,’ a name probably adopted and handed down by the 
early settlers because they saw in this species some slight similarity to 
the Old-World Jackdaw (Coleus monedula), a small representative of 
the family Corvidae. The females differ so much in size and color from 
the resplendent males that they have gained, here and there, a separate 
appellation; in the Kissimmee region, for instance, they are said to be 
alled ‘Cowbirds.’ 


296 General Notes. een 


In view of the lack of any intensive study of the Boattail’s life history, 
it is perhaps not surprising that a certain deceptive feature of its song 
has failed to be generally understood. 

The species was in full voice as early in the season as January 20, at 
Mayport. Here some males were perching in a live-oak and uttering 
their not unpleasing notes, which suggested somewhat a European Star- 
ling’s medley. On Merritt’s Island, where I found small numbers of 
these birds on February 19, I began to pay close attention to the male’s 
musical performance, and more particularly to that part of it which Chap- 
man describes as ‘‘a singular rolling call, which bears a close resemblance 
to the sound produced by a Coot in pattering over the water.’”! A male, 
which was sitting on a stake in the marsh and indulging persistently in its 
curious song, furnished a convenient subject for observation. The song 
seems to vary in length with individuals, but one performance that I 
heard to particular advantage (this was at Sebastian, a few days later) 
might be rendered as follows: kip, kip, kip, kip-kip-kip-kip-kip-kip-kip, 
chrrr, chrrr, chrrr, chrrr, chrrr, chrrr, pt-pt-pt-pt-pt-pt-pt-pt. The first 
part consists of a succession of simple, short kips, the first few given more 
slowly than the rest; the second part, of rolling, guttural chirrings; and 
the third part, of the sound described by Chapman. I noticed that 
when the bird reached the final part of its song, it vibrated or slightly 
fluttered its wings, so that their tips appeared to strike either together 
or against the upper side of the tail. At the same time the bill had the 
appearance of partly closing. I therefore concluded that the sound was 
not vocal, but wing-made; and a number of subsequent observations 
strongly confirmed me in this opinion. 

It was not until my last morning in Florida (at Fernandina, Febru- 
ary 27) that I was undeceived. I then had an excellent view of a bird 
that was walking over the muddy shore, and saw that its wing-tips did 
not touch during the final part of the song, though they vibrated a little. 
A little later another bird, perched on a telephone pole, did not appear 
to vibrate its wings at all during the song. I could plainly see the bill 
in a sort of rattling motion, however, and finally realized that it was the 
rapid striking together of the mandibles that produced the sound sug- 
gestive of that which a Coot makes in pattering over the water. 

On my return from the field I was interested to find that the few pub- 
lished accounts of this feature of the song disagree as to the manner in 
which it is produced. Mr. Arthur T. Wayne writes that “the males 
: perch upon a limb of some tree and with their wings make a 
loud rolling sound. This peculiar noise is also made while the birds are 
flying.’ Bradford Torrey, in his delightful ‘Florida Sketch-book,’ has 
given so apt an account of the Boattail and its music that it seems worth 


1 Handbook of Birds of Eastern North America, 1912, p. 368. 
2 Birds of South Carolina, 1910, pp. 112-113. 


eit si | General Notes. 297 


while to quote at length from this gifted observer and interpreter of bird 
ways: 

“He opened his bill—set it, as it were, wide apart—and holding it thus, 
emitted four or five rather long and very loud grating, shrikish notes; 
then instantly shook his wings with an extraordinary flapping noise, and 
followed that with several highly curious and startling cries, the con- 
cluding one of which sometimes suggested the cackle of a robin. All this 
he repeated again and again with the utmost fervor. . . . The intro- 
duction of wing-made sounds in the middle of a vocal performance was 
of itself a stroke of something like genius. 

“That the sounds were wing-made I had no fhought of questioning. 

Two days afterward, nevertheless, I began to doubt. I heard a 
grackle ‘sing’ in the manner just described, wing-beats and all, while 
flying from one tree to another; and later still . . . I more than once 
saw them produce the sounds in question without any perceptible move- 
ment of the wings, and furthermore, their mandibles could be seen moving 
in time with the beats. 

“Tf the sounds are not produced by the wings, the question returns, 
of course, why the wings are shaken at just the rightinstant. . . . The 
reader may believe, if he will, that the bird is aware of the imitative quality 
of the notes, and amuses itself by heightening the delusion of the looker-on. 
My own more commonplace conjecture is that the sounds are produced 
by snappings and gratings of the big mandibles . . . and that the 
wing movements may be nothing but involuntary accompaniments of 
this almost convulsive action of the beak. But perhaps the sounds are 
wing-made, after all.’’! 

The first, second, and third parts of the song, as described by Torrey, 
correspond, respectively, to what I have considered the second, third, and 
first parts. In view, however, of the continuous nature of the Boattail’s 
performance, almost any part of the song might be taken as the first. 

Mr. Alexander Wetmore tells me that his observations on the species 
at Punta Gorda in early February, 1919, fully support the conclusion 
that the pattering sound is produced mechanically by the mandibles.— 
Francis Harper, Biological Survey, Washington, D. C. 


Clark’s Crow in Denver.—The undersigned saw, to his amazement, 
a pair of Clark’s Crows (Nucifraga columbiana) flying over the city well 
within the residential district on December 7, 1919; the region of Denver 
had had, previous to this date, two spells of zero weather, and whether 
the extreme cold caused these unusual visitors to our city it is hard to 
determine. This is the first occasion that I have seen this crow so far 
away from the mountains of our neighborhood, and the first time in 
Denver.—W. H. Brererotp, 1121 Race St., Denver, Colo. 


1A Florida Sketch-book, 1894, pp. 108-110. 


298 General Notes. Pees 


Another Occurrence of a Starling Near Montgomery, Ala.— 
On Sunday, January 4, 1920, two gentlemen from Montgomery, while 
hunting at the mouth of the Coosa and Tallapoosa Rivers, and near old 
Fort Toulouse, noted a large flock of what they thought to be Waxwings. 
As they looked rather large, however, they fired one shot to settle the 
question, killing two birds, which proved to be Starlings (Sturnus vulgaris). 
They estimated the number to have been conservatively from 150 to 200, 
and noted two other small flocks of from eight to twelve birds later on 
during the day. They think, however, that these two last named groups 
were from the original flock which had alighted in a tree, and which they 
later in the day saw feeding in the neighborhood. 

I was presented with one of the birds, which proved to be a male. The 
other one killed had been picked before I learned of its having been killed. 
The male has been mounted, and presented to the Museum of the State 
Geological Survey at Tuscaloosa. 

This is the second occurrence in the past two years of the Starling near 
this city, the other one having been reported by me in ‘The Auk’ for 
April, 1918. It was killed on the night of January 14, 1918.—PrtTer A. 
BRANNON, Montgomery, Ala. 


A Flight of Newfoundland Crossbills.—Apparently the cone crop 
in Newfoundland has been a failure this season and, on account of the 
searcity of food, the resident Crossbills have been induced to wander far 
in search of food. I have had five specimens of Loxia curvirostra percna 
sent to me in the flesh from Chathamport, Mass.; Mr. Harry T. Hathaway 
has sent me three from Rhode Island; and Mr. Alexander Wetmore has 
sent me one from Virginia. These specimens, which are all typical percna, 
indicate an extensive flight of this subspecies. It would be interesting 
if other observers elsewhere would be on the lookout for this subspecies 
and report them, so that we can determine the limits of this rather unusual 
flight and learn how universal it is and how abundant the birds are. 

Loxia curvirostra per.na is easily distinguishable, even in life, from 
Loxia curvirostra minor, with which it seems to be associated in this flight, 
by its decidedly larger size and by its much longer and heavier bill. I 
should be glad to identify any specimens that may be sent to me for deter- 
mination.—A. C. Brent, Taunton, Mass. 


Evening Grosbeak at Valley Falls, N. Y.—On January 20, 1920, 
a flock of Evening Grosbeaks appeared in town. They were first seen 
near the public school and later I counted twelve feeding on the seeds of 
a sugar maple in my front yard. They uttered a single sweet note from 
time to time and seemed little disturbed by persons passing by. A few 
days later a single female was seen in the same tree. I saw her break off 
a twig at least an inch long and apparently devour it whole-—GRaAcE 
Youna Bowen, Valley Falls, N. Y. 


Wer aoex Mat General Notes. 299 

Evening Grosbeak at Brantingham, Lewis Co., N. Y.—LEarly on 
the morning of May 20, 1916, Mr. C. F. Stone and myself saw a female 
Evening Grosbeak in the woods near the hotel at Lake Brantingham. 
When first seen it was on the ground where it soon picked up a small twig 
in its bill, flew with it up into a beech tree, and we had hopes of finding 
the nest. However the twig did not seem to suit, as it was soon dropped 
to the ground and the Grosbeak flew off through the woods and we could 
not again locate it—VrrpI Burtcu, Branchport, N. Y. 


The Evening Grosbeak in Monte Vista, Colo.—In order to add 
to the fullness of the records concerning the great wave of Evening Gros- 
beaks (C. vespertina) which seemed to have been widespread over a large 
part of the United States this winter, the following notes are here recorded: 
The Western Evening Grosbeak (C. v. montana) was first seen in Monte 
Vista, this year, on October 17, there being three females. They were 
eating buds from the willow trees in my yard. On October 21, a flock 
of more than twenty-five males and females was noted in the yard. Many 
more were seen thereafter, from October 24 to October 28, inclusive. 
They left the vicinity of my house on October 28, just before a severe 
snowstorm, which occurred the next day. These birds seemed to prefer 
the buds of willow trees, and it also seemed to me that at first the males 
and females kept apart, though the sexes mingled later on; the females 
arrived first. Because of their extraordinary tameness they could be 
studied at close range and to great advantage, hence the realtive ease in 
determining the sexes.—Mrs. Jesse StepHENSON, Monte Vista, Colo. 


Some Sparrow Notes from Madison, Wisconsin.—On May 17, 
1919, I collected a typical specimen of Gambel’s Sparrow (Zonotrichia 1. 
gambelii) in the vicinity of Madison. My identification was later affirmed 
by Dr. Oberholser. The bird was unaccompanied by any other sparrow. 
A point of passing interest may lie in the fact that I obtained this spring 
only one record, May 4, of the White-crowned Sparrow (Z. leucophrys) 
during the course of forty extensive field trips. The status of Z. 1. gambelii 
in the middle-western states, east of the Mississippi, follows: There are 
no records for Ohio through 1919 (Lynds Jones), for Indiana through 
1897 (Butler), for Michigan through 1912 (Barrows), or for Illinois through 
1909 (Cory). For Wisconsin a typical specimen dated April 20, 1871, 
was taken by Dr. Hoy, and a further entry in the Kumlien-Hollister State 
List adds, “Specimens have been taken a number of times about Lake 
Koshkonong which are almost, if not quite, typical gambeliz.” 

The writer has two spring observations to record of Le Conte’s Sparrow 
(Ammodramus leconteii), both singing males from the vicinity of Madison. 
The birds in each case were relatively easy of approach, in moist prairie 
fields, and were studied under ideal conditions. The first sparrow was 
observed while the writer was in company with Norman DeW. Betts on 


300 General Notes. [apn 


April 16, 1916; the second by the writer alone on May 10, 1919. There 
are apparently no other spring records for Wisconsin, only one record— 
time of year not stated—for Michigan, while most of those from Illinois 
seem to be in the fall. The writer took two specimens of the Clay-colored 
Sparrow (Spizella pallida) in a dry, shrub-covered field, remote from the 
city, on May 8, 1919. In the same field on May 30, a nest with three 
eggs was found on the ground at the foot of a bush. In May of 1918, in 
the same area, I recorded twenty males on May 4. This sparrow is not 
rare in southern Wisconsin but is eccentrically local— WarNnrER TAyLor, 
Madison, Wisconsin. 


Zonotrichia albicollis Again in Colorado.—Since writing ‘The 
Birds of the Clear Creek District,’ published in the last issue, the writer 
has had the good fortune to secure a specimen of the White-throated 
Sparrow, which is not only a new species for this region, but is also the 
fourth record for Colorado. 

The specimen, C. M. N. H. No. 7490, is an adult male, and was taken 
in the Clear Creek Valley, Colorado, Nov. 2, 1919. It is preserved in the 
collections of the Colorado Museum of Natural History.—F. C. Lincoin, 
Denver, Colorado. 


The Proper Name of the West African Serin.—The bird 
figured and described from Cuba by d’Orbigny as Linaria caniceps was 
without any reason whatever referred by Gundlach (Jour. f. Orn., 1871, 
p. 276) to the Nonpareil, Passerina ciris (Linné), which it does not re- 
semble in any way. Later Ridgway (Birds of North and Middle Amer- 
ica, Part I, 1901, p. 589) includes the name, with a query, in the synonymy 
of P. ciris. 

As d’Orbigny’s work on Cuban birds was based in part on specimens 
from Cuba in the Lafresnaye collection—Lafresnaye’s written labels for 
his specimens bearing testimony to this in more instances than one— 
we have had, in the course of our work on the Lafresnaye collection, to 
study critically all species described as new by d’Orbigny. It was at 
once evident to us, as soon as we saw Plate 16 of the Atlas, that it repre- 
sented an African Serinus and not the Nonpareil. We therefore searched 
among the specimens of this genus in the Lafresnaye collection for one 
that might possibly have been the subject of this plate and found num- 
ber 6785 with a label in Lafresnaye’s handwriting, which reads as follows: 
“Crithagra chrysopyga Sw. W. af. 1. 206 pl. 17. junior? Cuba. an e 
Senegarabia allatus?”’ The specimen agrees minutely with the original 
description and with the plate, except that the gray of the head has faded 
from long exposure to direct sunlight, as a mounted bird, to a dull, dirty 
grayish. It is thus in all probability the type of the species. 

We identify both bird and plate positively as the species which Reich- 
enow (Voég. Afr. III, (1), 1904, p. 272) calls Serinus hartlaubi (Bolle). 


co secon ed General Notes. 301 


The example was of course brought from West Africa, probably from 
Senegal, to Cuba, and very likely it was an escape from captivity actually 
taken there. 

D’Orbigny’s name for the Gray-headed Serinus being older than any 
of the other names applicable to the species, must be used instead of 
S. hartlaubii, and the species will have to stand as— 


SERINUS CANICEPS (d’Orbigny). 


Linaria caniceps d’Orbigny in: La Sagra, Hist. Nat. Cuba, 1840 (=1839) 
p. 107, Atlas pl. 16 (Cuba, escaped cage-bird—we substitute Senegal, 
West Africa). Type (?), M. C. Z. 83869, Lafr. coll. 6785.—OvuTRAM 
Banes and Tuomas E. Penarp, Mus. Comp. Zool., Cambridge, Mass. 


The Louisiana Tanager in Massachusetts.—On December 19, 
1919, Miss M. J. Sitgreaves found an adult female Louisiana Tanager 
(Piranga ludoviciana) in a dying condition in a garden in Brookline, Mass. 
It was taken into the house and warmed and fed by the ladies, but soon 
died. The weather was extremely cold at the time. 

The bird was given to Prof. Roland Thaxter who brought it to the 
Museum of Comparative Zoology, where it was skinned and found to be 
fat and apparently in perfect health. 

I believe this is the second record for Massachusetts, and the fourth 
for New England. The others are: Maine, near Bangor, about Octo- 
ber 1, 1889; Massachusetts, Salem, January 20, 1878 (taken alive); Con- 
necticut, New Haven, December 15, 1892. Thus three of the four New 
England records are of birds taken in winter. 

The specimen has been transferred to the Boston Society of Natural 
History, where New England record specimens, so far as possible, are 
gathered together.—OutTram Banes, Mus. Comp. Zool., Cambridge, Mass. 


Bohemian Waxing in Illinois.—Northeastern Illinois is having a 
visitation of Bohemian Waxwings (Bombycilla garrulus) this winter. They 
were first noticed in Jackson Park, Chicago, by Nathan Leopold, who 
wrote of seeing several hundred of them on Thanksgiving day, feeding 
on the red berries of certain trees in the Park. The following Sunday 
Colin Sanborn and H. L. Stoddard went up to the pine woods along the 
Lake Michigan shore at Beach, about twelve miles north of here, and 
succeeded in taking a number of specimens. It was a very cold day with 
a high north wind, and flock after flock passed over, heading south. They 
were wild and hard to reach with fine shot. Mr. Stoddard estimated that 
about fifteen hundred passed over while they were in the pines. Those 
taken had the throats and stomachs stuffed with Juniper berries. Dur- 
ing December numerous small flocks were seen about the town. They 


302 General Notes. [Apr 


would appear in a mountain ash tree or hedge of barberry or high bush 
cranberries, and stay several days, until every berry was eaten. Mr. 
Charles Douglas, of Waukegan, also reports several flocks there, and 
many were seen later in December by Mr. Stoddard among the sanddunes 
near Gary, N. W. Indiana. This is a rare bird here, and it is the first 
time I have ever seen it alive-—Hurnry K. Coats, Highland Park, Ill. 


The Yellow-Throated Warbler in Central New York.—A Correc- 
tion.—Mr. J. T. Nichols has kindly called my attention to an omission 
in my note (Oct., 1919, pp. 580, 581, The Auk, XXXVI) on this species. 
The date of the record is missing. It should be May 23, 1919, and the 
phrase ‘‘he replied” should appear “I replied.”,—A. H. Wricut, Cornell 
University, Ithaca, N. Y. 


The Louisiana Water-Thrush Breeding at Graniteville, Aiken 
County, South Carolina.—I am indebted to Misses Marion Jay Pellew 
and Louise Petigru Ford for the privilege of announcing the breeding of 
the above species at Graniteville, S. C. These ladies observed three 
young birds being fed by their parents during the early part of May, 1919. 
About ten years ago Mr. B. F. Taylor, of Columbia, 8. C., found a nest 
containing eggs and the bird setting near Columbia. This breeding of 
the Louisiana Water-Thrush in the Lower Austral life zone is certainly 
surprising because Mr. Leverett Mills Loomis during all the years he 
spent at Chester, S. C., studying birds found this species a very rare 
migrant, and did not detect it breeding. In ‘The Auk’ (Vol. VIII, 1891, 
p. 172) Mr. Loomis has the following: ‘This species has been taken 
only upon three occasions, viz., Aug. 10, 1887; July 25 and 31, 1888.” 
Chester is certainly in, or very near, the Upper Austral life zone.—Ar- 
THUR T. WayYNg, Mt. Pleasant, S.C. 


Elminia Bonaparte Preoccupied.—The genus of Muscicapidae 
hitherto known as Elminia Bonaparte (Compt. Rend. Sci. Nat., XX XVIII, 
1854, pp. 388, 652; type, Myiagra longicauda Swainson) is apparently 
in need of a new name. It is invalidated by Elminius King (Zool. Journ., 
V, 1831, p. 334) for a genus of Crustacea. As it appears to have no 
other name, it may stand as Erannornis (¢eavvdc, delicatus; 6evtc, avis) 
nom. noy., with Myiagra longicauda Swainson as type. The species 
referable to this generic group are as follows: 

Erannornis longicauda (Swainson). 

Erannornis teresita (Antinori). 

Erannornis schwebischi (Ouslalet). 

Erannornis albicauda (Bocage).—Harry C. OBERHOLSER, Washington, 
Doe. 


vol. 20" Mr General Notes. 303 


Toxostoma crissalis versus Toxostoma dorsalis.—The current technical 
name of the Crissal Thrasher is Toxostoma crissalis, but this apparently 
must be changed. The species was originally described under the 
name Toxostoma dorsalis by Dr. T. Charlton Henry from a specimen 
obtained by him at Fort Thorn, New Mexico. This description appeared 
in the number of the ‘Proceedings’ of the Academy of Natural Sciences of 
Philadelphia for May, 1858, on page 117. In the June number of the 
same publication, pages 117-118 of the May number were reprinted with 
some typographical changes. Among them the name of Toxostoma dorsalis, 
was altered to Toxostoma crissalis, under which name the species has 
since been known. In ‘Directions to Binder” for Volume 10 (1858) 
of the above mentioned ‘Proceedings’ there appears the following state- 
ment: “Pages 117 and 118 in the April and May numbers to be cancelled, 
and pages 117 and 118 at the close of the June number substituted for 
them.’ This name, Toxostoma dorsalis, evidently was intended to appear 
originally as Toxostoma crissalis, but the former has priority of publica- 
tion. It is merely a mistake involving the use of another and entirely 
different word, not a typographical error, and was not corrected in the 
original publication, but at least a month later. Therefore, since mis- 
takes in the original publication of scientific names can not be altered, 
this name, T'oxostoma dorsalis, can not for this reason be rejected in favor 
of Toxostoma crissalis, as Toxostoma dorsalis is apparently not preoccupied 
or otherwise untenable. We must therefore call the Crissal Thrasher 
Toxostoma dorsalis. 

In connection with the use of the generic name Toxostoma, it might 
be well to note that this word is not of neuter gender as currently used, 
but feminine, since its terminal element is an appelative noun, and, there- 
fore, must be either masculine or feminine, whichever the original em- 
ployer of the name may determine—in this case, feminine.—Harry C. 
OBBRHOLSER, Washington, D. C. 


The Wheatear (Oenanthe oenanthe leucorhoa) in Eastern Penn- 
sylvania.—On October 6, 1919, Mr. James R. Gillen saw a strange bird 
on the ground, near Lansdale, Pa., which in a general way reminded him 
of a Horned Lark, although he recognized it as something different. Pro- 
curing a gun, he shot it and presented it to his father, Mr. Thomas 8. 
Gillen, who mounted it and added it to his collection. Being anxious 
to ascertain what sort of bird he had found, Mr. Gillen described it to me, 
and I at once suspected that it might be a Wheatear. Showing him a 
tray of skins containing some of this species he immediately picked out 
a female in winter plumage as the exact counterpart of the bird he had 
shot. 

Thanks to Mr. Thomas 8. Gillen, the specimen was later exhibited at 
a meeting of the Delaware Valley Ornithological Club, and its identity 
confirmed. This is the first record of the occurrence of the Wheatear 


304 General Notes. ret 


in the State-—WiTmgER Stone, Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, 
Pa. 


Additional Notes on the Birds of Red Deer, Alberta.—In Mr. 
Taverner’s article on the Birds of Red Deer (The Auk, 1919) he invites 
further information on that region, and the following notes are offered 
as perhaps worthy of record. They are from my own investigations on 
June 2 to 6, 1903, at Innisfail; June 19 to 26, 1906, at Red Deer and Innis- 
fail; and May 30 to June 9, 1911, at Camrose and the Miquelon Lakes, 
fifteen miles north. The numbers are those of Mr. Taverner’s list: 

2, HotuBorti’s Gress. In nearly every medium-sized lake, this 
species was found to outnumber the Western by several to one. Though 
in spots, the latter was the more abundant. Lakes would be frequently 
found with a population of Holboell’s exclusively. 

4, Earep Gress. Abundant in many of the smaller lakes. 

5, Piep-BILLED GREBE. Rare. 

10, Tern. A species thought to be the Common, was in hundreds on 
the Miquelons in 1911. None were taken for identification. 

Hooprep Merraanser. One seen on June 3, another on June 6, 1911, 
at Miquelon. 

RED-BREASTED MERGANSER. One at Miquelon, June 2, 1911. 

Rinq-NeckED Ducx. Ten seen on Wavy Lake, June 3, 1903. 

35, Great BLun Heron. The only spruce tree on the Pelican Island 
at Miquelon, June, 1911, had so many Cormorants’ nests that one’s 
clothes got very dirty in forcing through them to reach the top of the 
tree, where there were five nests of the Great Blue Heron. There were 
thirty or forty nests of the Cormorant. 

PECTORAL SANDPIPER. ‘Three. 

Hupsonrtan Gopwit. One. 

MarBLED Gopwi?t, three. 

All these at a little lake ten miles northeast of Camrose on June 6, 1911, 
also two more of the last named on May 30, 1911, near Camrose. The 
Hudsonian was in the spectacular cinnamon plumage which, with his long 
bill, made identification extremely easy. 

51, BLACK-BELLIED PLover. One at the same place as the three above. 
J have also a skin taken near Edmonton on September 23, 1896. 

53, Huncarian Partripes. Mr. Farley informs me that this spe- 
cies is approaching nearer to Camrose, and it is now affording fair shooting 
south of Calgary, appearing to be well suited by the prairie conditions. 

73, Osprey. A nest was found at Pine Lake (a name that is of abun- 
dant occurrence in the west) twenty miles 8. E. of Red Deer on June 2, 
1906. The birds were feeding young, but were too wary to approach 
the nest while we were near. It was on a broken topped tree near the 
lake, about fifty feet up, and immediately below it, within six feet, a Red- 
breasted Nuthatch was incessantly going to feed her young. 


ag i920 ial General Notes. 305 


89, RuBy-THROATED HUMMING-BIRD. One seen at Miquelon, June 2, 
1911. 

94, OLIvE-sIDED FLiycatcHEeR. Seen on two or three occasions. The 
presence of spruce ought to guarantee this species as a regular resident 
in fair numbers, and probably only a little search is needed to reveal it. 

104, Cowsirp. Common, ten to seventy daily in 1911, two to five 
daily in June, 1903. 

108, BattrmorgE OrtoLe. I have no familiarity with the notes of the 
Bullock’s Oriole, and have failed to identify it positively, but all the 
orioles which I have seen well, or shot, have been the Baltimore. One 
to ten each day at Camrose, 1911. 

110, Rusty Buacksrrp. About as common as the Brewer’s. Several 
nests found in the typical location, over water. One was shot to make 
identification positive, but it was unnecessary, as I am thoroughly familiar 
with both species. Exceptions doubtless occur, but I have never found 
nests of the Rusty other than over water, and Brewer’s never very near 
water. Mr. Taverner would appear to have duplicated Mr. Farley’s 
note ‘breeding along the streams in willows.”’ Mr. Farley does not think 
he said it with reference to Brewer’s, and if he did, it was a slip. He only 
finds the Rusty beside water. 

114, Pine GrospEak. My specimens vary in shade of color from the 
eastern ones, both in red and gray phases, but no stress is laid on this 
character in the western variety. 

118, Reppotu. A bird of extreme abundance in winter. About 1900, 
a pair were held in captivity at Innisfail, and laid eggs and attempted to 
raise young, with what success the writer is not informed. Some bird- 
lovers of the region are beginning to leave some pig weed stems in the 
garden as an attraction for these regular visitors. 

138, Arctic TowHEEr. ‘Three to eight seen and heard daily at Innisfail, 
June, 1906. 

Barrp’s SpaRROw. Six seen June 6, 1903. 

136, Swamp Sparrow. Recorded daily in June, 1903. 

139, Ross-BREASTED GROSBEAK. Observed daily in 1903 at Innisfail 
and a few were also seen at Red Deer in 1906. Small numbers were seen 
daily at the Miquelon Lakes in 1911. 

145, Tree Swattow. Four to forty seen daily in June, 1911, and one 
to ten daily in June, 1903. 

157, TENNESSEE WARBLER. One of the common breeding warblers 
near Red Deer. 

170, Repstart. Three to five seen daily in the four days at the Mique- 
lon Lakes in June, 1911. 

173, SpraguB’s SKYLARK. One to ten seen or heard daily in June, 
1903. 

178, Rep-BREAsteD NutHatcH. While watching for an Osprey to 
return to feed its young at Pine Lake, near Red Deer, on June 2, 1906, 


306 General Notes. rest 


we were entertained by one of these birds which was feeding young in 
the same stub about six feet below the Osprey’s nest. 

180, HupsonraAn CuickapEr. Taken at Edmonton, September 24, 
1896. 

183, OxLtve-BACKED TurusH. One to ten daily near Red Deer in 
June, 1906.—W. E. SaunpeErs, London, Ont. 


Birds of Irregular Occurrence on Long Island, N. Y.—The follow- 
ing were recorded at Orient, Long Island, during the winter of 1918-19: 

Phalacrocorax auritus auritus. One December 9. This was prob- 
ably a belated transient. Covering a period of twenty years the writer 
has not listed it more than three or four times in winter. 

Nettion carolinense. One February 9. To be listed with the rarest 
of winter visitants near Orient. 

Rallus elegans. On January 23, a fine specimen was taken in a steel- 
trap set for muskrats. Retained in the writer’s collection. This is 
apparently a very uncommon species on Long Island at any time. It 
has been observed in Orient several times in mid-winter, where it is to 
be looked for at that season along the exposed mud-flats of the brackish 
creeks at ebb tides; hiding in the grasses when tide is flood. 

Oxyechus vociferus. One February 13 and another, or the same 
bird, on the 14th. Although frequently recorded in December, Janu- 
ary and March, this is the first February record for Orient. 

*Sphyrapicus varius varius. One December 22. Very rare and 
irregular in winter. 

Molothrus ater ater. February 2, flock of eleven; February 7, flock 
of twenty-four; February 27, flock of eight. In recent years this species 
is fairly regular in winter. Usually in flocks. 

Pinicola enucleator leucura. Three January 19; one February 1. 
This is the third winter that the writer has recorded stragglers since the 
great flight of 1903-4. 

Carpodacus purpureus purpureus. One January 23. Never com- 
mon near Orient and to be classed with the rarest birds in winter. 

*Melospiza georgiana. Wintered through in numbers. The colony 
of thirty seen on December 22 in a swamp. It appears to be a regular 
winter sparrow in Orient, though usually rare and local. 

*Lanius ludovicianus migrans. Seen on December 22 and on 
February 7. Rare, but not out of place on Long Island in winter. 

*Geothlypis trichas trichas. A female was seen through the mouth 
of November. Recorded on December 22 and again on January 28. 

Dumetella carolinensis. One February 12. They occasionally 
winter in Orient, confining themselves to a favored locality, as a cedar 
grove, or other suitable haunt affording both food and shelter. 

*Telmatodytes palustris palustris. One December 22. This is 
the first winter record in Orient. The species is unknown in Orient in 
summer and has occurred only as a very rare fall transient. 


Nr go20 | General Notes. 307 


The species starred were reported in the ‘Bird-Lore’ Christmas Census. 
Vol. X XI, No. 1, 1919.—Roy Latuam, Orient, N. Y. 


Rare and Uncommon Birds at Branchport, Yates Co., N. Y.— 
Macrorhampus griseus. DowircHEr.—While I was concealed in a 
blind at the marsh at Branchport, August 6, 1911, a Dowitcher came 
on the mud and I had it under observation with 8 power binoculars for 
nearly two hours. August 13 I saw another Dowitcher at this same place. 
This seems to be the only Dowitcher record for Yates County. 

Sterna caspia. Caspian Trern.—My first record for Caspian Tern 
was May 2, 1912, when five of these beautiful birds were around Lake 
Keuka at Branchport all day long. Two more were seen May 4, four 
May 6, and two May 9. My next record was two birds seen May 11, 
1915, and ten birds May 17 to 19, 1915. In 1916 none were seen. In 
1917 two were seen April 25 (my earliest record) and two more July 15 
(my only summer record). In 1918 three birds were seen May 6, and 
this year (1919) four were seen May 2 and two May 4. 

Spinus pinus. Pine Sisxkin.—Two Pine Siskins were under the 
balsams in my yard the morning of May 10, 1912. Two more were in 
the road in front of my house May 12. May 20, 1917, I saw a flock of 
about twenty-five Siskins in the bushes and on the ground along the 
“Big Gully” north of Branchport. 

Spatula clypeata. SHoveLER.—Two Shoveler ducks were shot on 
the lake at Branchport, November 12, 1912, and brought to me for identi- 
fication. 

Sterna hirundo. Common Trern.—May 9, 1913, ten Common Terns 
appeared on the lake at Branchport where they were seen in company 
with Ring-billed and Bonaparte’s Gulls until May 16, when they disap- 
peared. May 11, 1915, there were several Common Terns with a small 
flock of Bonaparte’s Gulls and they were again seen on May 25. May 3, 
1917, two were seen with a large flock of Bonaparte’s Gulls. May 20, 
more than twenty were seen and May 27 there were more than forty 
Terns on the lake. April 28, 1918, and again May 12, eight were seen 
with Bonaparte’s Gulls. May 2, 4, and 11, 1919, from two to twelve 
Terns were seen. Prior to 1913 I had never seen a Common Tern on 
Lake Keuka, but now they seem to be of regular occurrence. 

Ammodramus nelsoni subvirgatus. AcapIAN Sparrow.—June 3, 
1913, I saw an Acadian Sparrow in the thick marsh grass at Branchport. 
I had a good look at it at a distance of only three feet, but after it dis- 
appeared into the grass I was unable to flush it again. October 5, 1919, 
I saw another Acadian Sparrow in this same place, and October 14 an- 
other one lit in the cat-tails only ten feet away. 

Nettion carolinense. GreeN-WINGED Trau.—November 21, 1913, 
a trapper told me that he had caught a small duck in one of his traps and 
that he had left it in a barrel beside his boat-house. I got the duck and 


308 General Notes. [Apri 


found it to be a female Green-winged Teal. It had been caught by the 
bill in a steel trap that was set for muskrats. This same man brought 
me a Green-winged Teal that he had shot October 8, 1914. The Green- 
winged Teal is rather rare in this locality. 

Pinicola enuncleator leucura. Pine GrosBEak.—December 9, 
1913, I saw a single female Pine Grosbeak in a locust tree in the streets 
of Branchport. 

Hesperiphona v. vespertina. Evreninc GrosBreak.—I saw eight 
Evening Grosbeaks in a pear tree in the streets of Branchport the morning 
of March 28, 1916. They soon took flight and could not be again located. 

Progne s. subis. Purpte Martin.—A single Purple Martin stopped 
for a little while on the telephone wire in the street at Branchport, April 23, 
1916. 

Asio flammens. SnHort-HareD Own.—November 2, 1916, a dead 
Short-eared Owl was picked up in the swamp at Branchport. Evidently 
it had been shot and left where it fell. 

Aluco pratincola. Barn Owni.—May 27, 1917, a Barn Owl was 
brought to me by a young man who had shot it. He said that it was 
after his chickens. This is the first record of the Barn Owl for Branch- 
port.—Vurpi Burcu, Branchport, N.Y. 


Unusual Winter Bird Records for Iowa City, Iowa.—Although 
the early winter season has been unusually severe in this locality and 
cold weather has continued almost without intermission since late No- 
vember, 1919, a number of species of birds which ordinarily winter farther 
south have remained with us. The minimum temperature to date has 
been—25° Fahr. and the ground has been practically covered with snow 
since early December. Among eighteen species of birds seen on Decem- 
ber 26, 1919, between the hours of 8:00 A. M. and 2:30 P. M., the three 
following seem worthy of special mention. 

Falco sparverius sparverius. Sparrow Hawk.—One example of 
this species was seen in a small wooded plot about one-half mile west of 
town. The bird was studied with the glasses at a distance of twenty 
yards. It was being tormented by a pair of blue jays which appeared to 
have no hesitancy in attacking the hawk, thus causing it to change its 
perch frequently in the tops of the trees. This is my first and only winter 
record for this bird. 

Anderson (Birds of Iowa, Proc. Davenport Acad. Sei., XI, 1907, 257) 
says concerning the status of this hawk in Iowa: ‘A common migrant 
in all parts of the state and somewhat less common as a summer resi- 
dent. * * * A male specimen was shot at Iowa City, November 28, 
1905.’ Bailey (The Raptorial Birds of Iowa, Iowa Geol. Surv. Bull., 
No. 6, 1918, 170) adds: ‘‘ Although rarely found with us during the winter, 
Mr. G. H. Berry, of Cedar Rapids, brought the writer one that was killed 
in the month of January while pursuing English Sparrows.” 


oso. | General Notes. 309 


Colaptes auratus luteus. NortHerNn Fiicker.—A single individual 
was seen in a low, wooded area along the Iowa river one mile south of 
Iowa City. It was very wary and a close-up observation of the bird was 
impossible. This form has been reported in winter a few times locally 
but I have seen no published record of such occurrence. 

Anderson (Il. c. 278) remarks as follows concerning this bird: ‘‘Occa- 
sionally individuals are observed in winter. In Winnebago County, I 
have seen specimens in November, December and February, but very 
rarely during these months.”’ Spurrell (Wilson Bull., X XI, No. 4, 1919, 
120) gives the Northern Flicker as a rare winter resident in Sac County, 
western Iowa. 

Pipilo erythropthalmus erythropthalmus. Towsrr.—One indi- 
vidual, a male, was found in a sparsely wooded and somewhat sheltered 
hollow three-fourths of a mile west of town. Several houses are in the 
immediate vicinity of the brush pile where the bird was first seen and which 
probably served as his shelter. Attention was first called to the bird by 
the familiar “‘chewink”’ which was uttered several times; however, the calls 
were neither so loud nor so frequently given as is characteristic of the 
species in spring and summer. In an attempt to photograph this unusual 
winter resident, the writer approached to within fifteen feet of the bird 
when it flew to a nearby blackberry patch. It seemed to have a dislike 
for standing in the snow and immediately hopped upon a low bush; when 
pressed too closely it flew away a considerable distance before alighting. 

Anderson (l. c. 326) gives this bird as a common summer resident. His 
winter records are as follows: A few in Van Buren County, a female 
near the Rock Island Arsenal and another individual at Webster City.— 
Dayton Stoner, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Ia. 


Notes on Winter Birds of the Missouri Ozarks.—On February 2, 
1920, after about five days of very warm weather for this time of year, I 
observed three Killdeers feeding together in a horse lot beside a slough. 
The previous earliest date in the spring, for Missouri, is February 17. 
Though I took no specimens, I was too close for any possibility of error 
in my identification. 

On January 2, 1920, I saw and listened to a Bewick’s Wren singing his 
full song for almost an hour. The day on which I heard him singing was 
very warm for January. Although I have observed the Bewick’s Wren 
several times this winter, this is the first time that I had heard one singing 
since late in November. Up to date, February 7, I have not heard an- 
other. 

On February 4, a friend brought me a fine female specimen of the Great 
Horned Owl. He had found it sitting on two eggs in a slight depression 
in the hay in a barn loft. There had been no apparent effort to arrange 
the hay in any way, and there were no sticks nor any sort of building 
material from the outside. I can find no record of a similar nesting of 
this species.—PrewittT Roserts, Conway, Missouri. 


310 General Notes. [Aphn 


Mesa County, Colorado, Notes.—The following notes relate to 
birds which have not yet been recorded from this County, or are relatively 
rare within its limits, and warrant being placed on record so as to help 
round out our knowledge of avian distribution in the State: 

Charitonetta albeola. Burrie-Heap Duck.—A pair of these ducks 
stayed in a slough near the Sugar Factory at Grand Junction, having 
first been noticed there on April 18, 1918. 

Oidemia deglandi. Wutrr-WINGED Scoter.—In October, 1918, a 
flock of five females of this species was seen by J. W. Spencer, Forest 
Supervisor, at Mesa Lake, Grand Mesa. One is now a mounted specimen 
in the collection of the Riverside School of Grand Junction. The deter- 
mination of this specimen was confirmed by Dr. W. H. Bergtold. 

Astur atricapillus striatulus. Western GosHawxk.—A single in- 
dividual of this species was taken at Clifton in October, 1919; this speci- 
men is now amongst the mounted birds of the Riverside School. 

Falco peregrinus anatum. Duck Hawx.—On May 19, 1918, I 
secured a dead bird of this species, which had been found in the yard of 
Allen School (just east of Grand Junction). This specimen was sent to, 
and examined by, Dr. Bergtold, who confirmed my previous diagnosis. 

Tyrannus tyrannus. Kincpirp.—A pair of this species was seen 
by the writer at Grand Mesa, near Loma, on August 25, 1919. 

Vermivora celata lutescens. Lurescenrt WARBLER.—A single indi- 
vidual of this warbler was studied for a long time at close range on Aug- 
ust 22, 1918, at Pinon Mesa. 

Sitta canadensis. Rrp-Breastep NutHatcH.—This species has been 
noted several times lately in or near Grand Junction; one was found dead 
within the city limits on March 10, 1917, during January, 1917, several 
were detected along the Grand River in its course through the city, quite 
a number were noted near my cabin which is located in the hills neigh- 
boring Grand Junction, during the summer of 1919, and on September 2 
of that year one appeared at my residence in Grand Junction. I have 
also seen this species at Clifton. 

Sitta pygmaea pygmaea. Piamy NutTHatcu.—Twelve individuals 
of this species were seen at Enoch’s Lake, Pinon Mesa, on August 12, 
1919, and a flock of about twenty birds was noted on August 21, 1918, 
and a smaller flock was seen on August 31, 1918, both flocks having been 
noted on the Mesa just mentioned. 

Sialia mexicana bairdi. CuHresTNuUT-BACKED BLuEBIRD.—This spe- 
cies was seen in Grand Junction on April 1, 1918, a pair was noticed feed- 
ing three young on Pinon Mesa on August 9, 1918, and during August 
of the same year nearly every flock of Mountain Bluebirds (Stalia curru- 
coides) coming under my observation contained a few of the chestnut- 
backed species. This species is seen mostly at or above the 8000 feet 
level of latitude, and is seen in the ‘‘ Valley” only during migration.— 
Apa B. CoprLanp, Grand Junction, Colo. 


Vol. Fe | General Notes 311 


Some North American Birds Obtained in Japan.—Of North 
American birds which stand recorded in the literature as having been 
obtained in Japan, there are: The Buff-breasted Sandpiper, Tringites 
subruficollis (Vieill.), once obtained in the Province of Owari (Stejneger, 
Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus., Vol. XVI, 1893, p. 616); the Short-billed Gull, 
Larus canus brachyrhynchus Richardson, obtained in the Kurile Islands 
(Dresser, Man. Pal. Bds., p. 830); and Cassin’s Auklet, Ptychoramphus 
aleuticus (Pall.), which occurred also in the Kurile Islands (Uchida, ‘ Ni- 
honchorui Zusetsu,”’ Vol. I, p. 301). To the writer are known three more 
eases of North American birds having been met with as stragglers in 
Japan. They are as follows: 

Mareca americana (Gmelin). Batppats.—A nearly adult male of 
this duck was obtained December 4, 1908, in the duck-decoy pond owned 
by me at Haneda, between Tokyo and Yokohama (Kuroda, Zool. Mag. 
Tokyo, Vol. XXI, 1909, p. 145). A second example, an adult male, of 
the same species, was captured at the same pond, January 16, 1918 (Kur- 
oda, ‘‘Tori,” Vol. II, No. 6, 1918, p. 52). 

This remarkable duck seems to occur in Japan only as a rare straggler 
in migration, mixed in flocks of the European Widgeon (M. penelope). 
It is said that it is occasionally captured in the neighborhood of Tokyo. 
I have not yet seen a female example of this duck obtained in this country. 
Dr. Stejneger (Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1887, p. 136) has recorded that a 
single straggler of the species was picked up dead on a sand-dune in Bering 
Island, and Dresser (Man. Pal. Bds., 1903, p. 616) has mentioned that 
the species occurred two or three times in Great Britain. 

Nettion crecca carolinense (Gmelin). GRrrEN-wINGED TrEaL.—A 
fully adult male, with white crescentic bands on each side of the chest, 
was obtained at Haneda in the same pond mentioned above, February 17, 
1916 (Kuroda, Zool. Mag. Tokyo, Vol. XXVIII, 1916, p. 413). This 
is the only instance known to me of this teal having occurred in Japan. 
It is probably a rarer straggler in this country than the American Widgeon. 
According to Dresser (Man. Pal. Bds., 1903, p. 612) the teal in question 
had been obtained twice at least in Great Britain. 

Xema sabini (J. Sabine). Sasrne’s Guiui.—A male of this gull in 
complete summer plumage was collected on the coast of Kesen-numa Bay 
in Prov. Rikuzen, November, 1909 (Kuroda, Zool. Mag. Tokyo, Vol. 
XXIV, 1912, p. 55). This is the only case known of its occurrence in 
Japan. 

This Gull like the two species of duck already mentioned is properly 
an American species, of which some individuals are known to have been 
met with as accidental stragglers in Europe. Thayer and Bangs (Proc. 
N. Eng. Zoél. Club, Vol. V, 1914, p. 11) have noted that it was not ob- 
served on the Arctic coast of Siberia, while Koren says he has examined 
a skin of the species in possession of a native at Nijni Kolymsk, East 
Siberia.—Nacamicut Kuropa, Tokyo, Japan. 


SES General Notes. faye 


The Color of Natal Down in Passerine Birds.—Some years ago I 
started taking notes on the appearance of young birds when newly hatched. 
I found that young passerine birds differed widely, not only in size, but 
in color of skin and in amount, distribution and color of natal down. 
So far as I know, nothing has been published on this subject, except that 
Dr. Dwight has given the color of natal down of a good many passerine 
species. (The Sequence of Moults and Plumages of the Passerine Birds 
of New York.) 

In a number of species of birds I have found the natal down white in 
color, among them the Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius p. phoeniceus) 
and the Robin (Planestictus m. migratorius). I was rather surprised 
when I came to study Dr. Dwight’s work to find that the down of these 
two species was given as mouse-gray. This year (1919) I verified my 
observations concerning the down of the newly-hatched Robin, and then 
also verified those of Dr. Dwight. My observations were all made from 
living young in the nest. Dr. Dwight tells me that his were made from 
the skins of juvenal birds, where the natal down still adhered to the feathers. 
A young Robin in just such a condition was brought me by one of my 
pupils for identification this spring. The down still adhering to the 
feathers was undoubtedly mouse-gray, and in great contrast to the color 
of the down of newly-hatched young of this species. 

It seems, therefore, that either some pigment change occurs in the 
down, due to exposure to light and air, or what is more probable, that 
the dirt and dust of nest-life change the color of the down from white 
to gray. Whichever cause, it is evident that the down of a number of 
species is probably much lighter in color when the birds are hatched than 
examination of older specimens would indicate—ArgtTas A. SAUNDERS, 
South Norwalk, Conn. 


Birds and Tent Caterpillars.—For a number of years prior to 1917 
the Tent Caterpillar (Malacosoma americana) was unusually abundant 
in many parts of New England and perhaps in other places. Having 
been in the west until 1913 I do not know just when the scourge of these 
insects began, but I first noticed their great numbers at Newport, R. L., 
in the spring of 1913. The next few years the insects appeared to spread 
and increase in numbers. I noted them about Norwich, Clinton, New 
Haven, Bridgeport, and Norwalk, Connecticut, and in the spring of 1915 
at St. Albans, Vermont, where they were even more abundant, if possible, 
than in Connecticut. 

In the winter of 1916-17, the egg clusters of the tent caterpillar seemed 
as abundant as ever, and early in the spring these eggs hatched, and 
the nests of young caterpillars began to appear. I had made it a practise 
each winter and early spring to destroy the eggs or young caterpillars 
at every opportunity. As the spring of 1917 advanced, I soon found 
that my work had been done for me. Each nest that I visited, with 


Vol. Siu General Notes. 313 


intention of destroying it, was empty of caterpillars, and usually had a 
large round hole through the web. At this time the caterpillars were 
still very small, less than half an inch long, and the nests were only a few 
inches across. The majority of people do not notice these nests until 
the caterpillars are full-grown, and their depredations on surrounding 
foliage begin to be extensive. For that reason many were of the opinion 
that there were none in the spring of 1917, and I have heard it stated that 
a fungus disease destroyed them in 1916. My observations go to show 
that they were still abundant early in 1917 and that they disappeared 
that year when only half-grown. A fungus disease may have had some- 
thing to do with it, but a large part of the credit, according to my observa- 
tions, goes to birds, at least in the vicinity of Norwalk. 

It is generally known that this caterpillar is immune from the attacks 
of all birds but the Cuckoo because of its long hairs. It is my opinion 
that when the caterpillars are small, and the hairs decidedly shorter, 
that birds can eat them in case of necessity. The spring of 1917 was late 
and cold. After the middle of May came the great flight of warblers, 
thrushes and other insectivorous birds. Their arrival was coincident 
with the disappearance of the tent-caterpillars. Other insect life was 
scarce, and many birds died from cold or starvation. I actually observed 
a Parula Warbler (Compsothlypis americana usneae) and a Yellow-breasted 
Chat (Icteria v. virens) in the act of eating these caterpillars. The numer- 
ous empty nests with holes in them, such as a bird would make with its 
beak, were abundant evidence that what I had seen twice had taken place 
many times. How effectually the birds did their work was shown by 
the fact that only a single nest was observed in 1918 and none in 1919.— 
Aretas A. Saunpmrs, South Norwalk, Conn. 


314 Recent Literature. [April 


RECENT LITERATURE. 


Baldwin’s ‘Bird-Banding by Means of Systematic Trapping.’1— 
One of the most important contributions to bird-banding activities and 
the study of bird migration, of recent years, is Mr. 8. Prentiss Baldwin’s 
report of his operations at Thomasville, Georgia, and Cleveland, Ohio, 
during the years 1914-1918, which constitutes the principal article in the 
thirty-first ‘Abstract of the Proceedings’ of the Linnaean Society of New 
York, for the year ending March 11, 1919. 

Mr. Baldwin found that a far greater number of ‘‘return’’ records could 
be obtained from the systematic trapping of birds in connection with 
banding them than by limiting one’s operations to the banding of young 
birds in the nest and trusting to their possible discovery elsewhere. His 
paper is so full of valuable information and suggestions that everyone 
interested in the matter should read it in its entirety and we shall here 
quote only some of his more important results. 

The work at Thomasville was carried on for from four to six weeks 
during three winters. Government sparrow traps were used, two the 
first two years and five the third. The birds seemed to regard the traps 
as feeding stations and were not frightened by being caught and handled, 
in fact the problem was rather to keep some individuals out of the traps 
than to entice them to enter. Some birds were in the trap every day, and 
out of 654 individuals taken 441 were records of birds that were taken 
more than once. 

Two White-throated Sparrows banded at the Thomasville trap in 1915 
were retaken in 1916 and another one in 1917, while four of those banded 
in 1916 were taken at the same place in 1917. No less than 25 of the 
birds banded in 1916 and six in 1915 were trapped again in 1917. Mr. 
Baldwin has thus demonstrated that migrants come back to the same place 
to winter year after year, and others have proven that they come back 
to the same spot to nest. He has also shown however that they do not 
always do so and he states that the average observer is all too prone to 
regard a pair of birds occupying a certain box or hole as the same pair 
that occupied it the year before. The chance he considers is about one 
in five that one of the pair will return and perhaps one in twenty-five that 
they both return. 

In the case of House Wrens he shows that a pair reared a brood on his 
farm near Cleveland while a second brood in the same box was found 
to be the offspring of one of the original pair and a new mate, the other 
parent of the first brood, having also secured a new mate, was caring for 
a brood in another box. These facts as well as the return of birds to the 


1 Abstract of the Proceedings of the Linnaean Society of New York. For the 
year ending March 11, 1919. No. 31, 1918-1919. Issued December 23, 1919. 


Sr 1o20° ol Recent Literature. 315 


same nest site have important bearing upon the question of whether 
birds mate for life, recently agitated in ‘The Condor.’ 

As Mr. Baldwin points out, much valuable data on the age to which 
birds live, the length of time that migrants remain at a given spot on 
their line of flight, the return of young birds to the spot where they were 
raised, ete., may be secured by this method. 

The practice of trapping renders bird-banding a much more attractive 
study with more definite returns, and we trust that Mr. Baldwin’s success 
will lead others to follow his example. In this connection attention might 
be called to similar work that has been carried on in England, especially 
with reference to the movements of Starlings, where many records of 
individual birds have been obtained.—W. 8. 


Chapman on New South American Birds.'—Studies of various 
collections of South American birds received at the American Museum 
of Natural History have led Dr. Chapman to propose seventeen new 
species and subspecies and one new genus as follows: Micropus peruvianus 
(p. 253), Ollantaytambo, Peru; Grallaria watkinsi (p. 256), Prov. Piura, 
Peru; G. boliviana (p. 257), Cochabamba, Bolivia; Synallaxis stictothorax 
piurae (p. 257), Piura, Peru; Phacelodomus striaticeps grisetpectus (p. 258), 
Cuzco, Peru; Hylocryptus (p. 258), new genus, H. erythrocephalus (p. 259), 
Alamor, Peru-Ecuador boundary; Xenops rutilus connectens (p. 259), 
Cochabamba, Bolivia; Xiphorhynchus triangularis bangsi (p. 260), Cocha- 
bamba, Bolivia; Thripobrotus layardi madeirae (p. 261), Rio Madeira, 
Brazil; T. warscewiczi bolivianus (p. 262), Incachaca, Bolivia; Mecocerculus 
subtropicalis (p. 262), Urubamba Canyon, Peru; Anaeretes agraphia (p. 
263), Sta. Anna, Peru; Mionectes striaticollis columbianus (p. 264), Sta. 
Elena, Colombia; Myioborus bolivianus (p. 265), Incachaca, Bolivia; 
Basileuterus luteoviridis superciliaris (p. 265), Urubamba Canyon, Peru; 
Pheucticus uropygialis terminalis (p. 266), Urubamba Canyon, Peru; 
Catamenia analoides griseiventris (p. 267), Cuzco, Peru. 

As is customary in Dr. Chapman’s papers, the descriptions are full and 
there are numerous critical remarks upon allied forms, while all of the 
material examined is listed.—W. S. 


Cory’s ‘Catalogue of Birds of the Americas.’—The second volume 
of Mr. Cory’s comprehensive work,” constituting the second half of the 
second part, appeared on the last day of 1919. It covers the families, 
Trogonidae, Cuculidae, Capitonidae, Ramphastidae, Galbulidae, Buc- 


1 Descriptions of Proposed New Birds from Peru, Bolivia, Brazil, and Colombia. 
By Frank M. Chapman. Proc. Biological Society of Washington, Vol. 32, pp. 
253-268. December 31, 1919. 

2 Catalogue of Birds of the Americas. By Charles B. Cory, Field Museum 
of Natural History Publication 203, Zoological Series, Vol. XII1. Part II, 
No. 2, pp. 315-607. Chicago, December 31, 1919. 


316 Recent Literature. [phn 


conidae and Picidae, bringing the catalogue down to the Passerine fam- 
ilies. The pagination, it will be noticed, is continuous with the first half 
of the part and the present instalment has an index to all the genera 
and species listed, as well as addenda and errata to the first part of the 
publication. 

The general style of the work follows closely that of the first instal- 
ment but there are a number of new forms described of which there is 
no list and they could easily be overlooked in a casual examination of 
the volume. The propriety of publishing new names in this manner has 
already been discussed in these columns and we shall only add that where 
the practice is followed there should be a list of the new forms given some- 
where in the publication. A painstaking search through the pages dis- 
covers the following, though it is possible that some have been overlooked: 
Coccyzus minor caymanensis (p. 336), Grand Cayman; Nystalus maculatus 
nuchalis (p. 398), Soroplex campestris cearae (p. 414), Chrysoptilus melano- 
chlorus juae (p. 444), all from Ceara, Brazil; Celeus elegans approximans 
(p. 450), Boa Vista, Amazonia; Chrysoptilus melanolaemus perplexus 
(p. 442), Conchitas, Buenos Aires; Chrysoptilus punctigula notata (p. 446), 
“Colombia” and Crocomorphus flavus peruvianus (p. 457), Lagunas, Peru. 

The propriety of basing a new name on a specimen with no more de- 
tailed locality than ‘Colombia,’ in these days of minute accuracy, is 
certainly open to criticism as it will prove a hindrance to anyone else 
working upon the genus Chrysoptilus. The ‘provisional’? naming of 
another form (perplerus), which is not recognized in the list proper, in 
case the “differences prove constant,” is also against present-day prac- 
tices. A name that is once published with a description is established 
for all time, no matter whether it is properly and conspicuously printed 
or proposed provisionally and buried in a foot-note, and the author who 
adopts the latter method at once exposes himself to criticism. 

Mr. Cory has done an important and tedious piece of work in bringing 
out this volume and it will be of great use to all who are interested in the 
avifauna of the New World. We happen to know that he has already 
made considerable progress on the next part and we trust that it will not 
be long before it is ready for the press and that the Field Museum will 
be able to carry on a publication which is of so much importance to all 
systematic ornithologists —W. 8. 


Witherby’s Handbook of British Birds.'—Part 6 of this important 
work, comprising pages 337-400, was issued January 12, 1920, and covers 
the warblers and part of the thrushes. One half-tone plate illustrates 
each group and there are a number of text cuts of wings, tails, ete. The 


1A Practical Handbook of British Birds. Edited by H. F. Witherby. London, 
Witherby & Co., 326 High Holborn, W. C. I. Part 6, Jan. 12, 1920. Price 4s, 
net per part. 


ok Piri at Recent Literature. OL7 


standard of treatment is fully up to the preceding parts and the descrip- 
tion of the plumages of the warblers very full and detailed. We are 
informed that the two remaining parts needed to complete Volume I 
and the order Passeres, will be issued together on April 6.—W. S. 


A Geographical Bibliography of British Ornithology.'—Part 2 of 
this excellent bibliography, the initial number of which was noticed in 
our last issue, was published early in January. It covers the county lists 
and notes from Essex to Middlesex in alphabetical order. The quotation 
from Gilbert White’s Selborne which appears on the cover is appropriate 
and could well be taken to heart by many bird students today who, while 
lacking time and opportunity for broad scientific work, may produce 
valuable results by specializing upon a limited locality. The lines referred 
to are as follows: “‘Men that undertake only one district are much more 
likely to advance natural knowledge than those that grasp at more than 
they can possibly be acquainted with; every kingdom, every province, 
should have its own monographer.”’ This part is beautifully printed 
like its predecessor and is a handsome publication.—W. 8. 


Annual Report of the National Association of Audubon Societies. 
The fifteenth annual report of the National Association of Audubon 
Societies,? a pamphlet of over one hundred pages, demonstrates once more 
the splendid work that this organization is accomplishing. We are be- 
coming so accustomed to hearing of the work of the National Association 
that we are likely to imagine that we have always had it with us and it 
would be well if some of those who read the pages of this year’s report 
would turn to the reports of the A. O. U. Committee on bird protection 
published in ‘The Auk’ twenty years and more ago, in order to better 
realize present-day conditions. 

Among the leading topics in the report of the Secretary, Mr. T. Gilbert 
Pearson, we may mention just a few: the seizure of $150,000 worth of 
illegally imported plumes by the customs authorities at New York; the 
raising of $13,000 toward the erection of a Roosevelt memorial bird 
fountain and the ornithological education in the past nine years of no less 
than one million children in the schools of the country. The appeal for 
an endowment fund to further develop and maintain this work is certainly 
warranted. 

The work of the wardens is also well worthy of careful consideration 
and the reviewer, who enjoyed the privilege of visiting the Breton Island 


1A Geographical Bibliography of British Ornithology from the Earliest Times 
to the End of 1918. By W. H. Mullens, H. Kirke Swann, and Rev. F. R. C. 
Jourdain. Witherby & Co., 326 High Holborn, London, 1920. Part 2, Price 6s. 
net. 

2 Bird Lore XXI, No. 6, pp. 395-502. 


318 Recent Literature. Per 


Reservation with Warden Sprinkle last spring, can testify to the pains- 
taking devotion of these men to the work that they have undertaken 
and the need of more adequate remuneration for their services. The 
patrol of the government reservations has now passed from the Audubon 
Societies to the Biological Survey of the U. 8. Department of Agriculture, 
where it properly belongs. The long list of reports of allied and State 
societies contain much of interest and illustrate how widespread the 
interest in popular bird study has become. 

In the face of this most encouraging report it is distressing to turn to 
the editorial in the last issue of ‘ Bird-Lore,’ in which we learn of the action 
of Legislatures and Congress leading to the drainage and opening to 
settlement of portions of the Klamath Lake Reservation in Oregon and 
California. The former operations have already converted part of the 
lake into a desert, and the only hope for saving this most important refuge 
seems to lie with the Secretary of the Interior whose interest might be 
aroused if sufficient appeals were made to him.—W. 8. 


Bulletin of the Essex County Ornithological Club.'—Thisattractive 
publication introduces a new bird club apparently of a type of which we 
cannot have toomany. We have only praise for the numerous “ Audubon”’ 
clubs which are springing up all over the country, but of necessity their * 
activities are so completely taken up with conservation of wild life and 
the furthering of popular and elementary nature study, that the more 
serious side of ornithology, such as has engaged the attention of the ‘‘ Nut- 
tall,” “Cooper” and ‘Delaware Valley’? Clubs, has not come within their 
scope. The mingling of the two activities in one organization has not 
been productive of very happy results and we therefore welcome the 
organization of “ornithological” clubs wherever the material for such clubs 
exists. The presence of an “Audubon” club in the same community in 
no way complicates the situation and members of the former may readily 
be also active in the latter. The Essex County Club, like two of the three 
mentioned above, is a men’s club and was formally organized in 1916, 
although a nucleus had existed since 1907 as the ‘Ipswich River Bird 
Trip.” The present officers of the club are: President, Frank W. Benson; 
Vice President, Albert P. Morse; Secretary, Ralph Lawson; and Treasurer, 
Albert B. Fowler; and the meetings are held at the Peabody Museum at 
Salem, Mass. 

Besides the account of the founding of the Club, By-Laws, Calendar 
and List of Members, the present publication contains an article on the 
‘Identification of Hawks in the Field’ by Dr. C. W. Townsend; ‘Thir- 
teen Ipswich River Bird Trips’ by Ralph Lawson, with a list of 136 species 
observed; ‘Codperative Effort in Bird Study’ by Arthur A. Osborne; and 
‘Told Around the: Big Table’-—a department for general notes. Under 


1 Bulletin of the Essex County Ornithological Club, December, 1919. Salem, 
Mass. pp.1-55. Price 50 cts. 


ol ax el Recent Literature. 319 
the last head we notice that the contributions are signed only with the 
initials of the authors, a practice which sanctioned by custom in the case 
of reviews is certainly open to criticism in the case of scientific contribu- 
tions. 

In looking over the various records we wonder if the observer of the 
Connecticut Warbler in May fully realized the excessive rarity of this 
species in the east, in spring, or was familiar with the plumage of the fe- 
male Mourning Warbler which has a more or less conspicuous eye-ring 
and bears a striking resemblance to the Connecticut. Mr. Brewster’s 
statement that there was not a single spring record of the bird in any part 
of Massachusetts in which he had full confidence, is significant. 

We wish the Essex County Club every success and trust that the present 


publication is the forerunner of a series of valuable bulletins upon the 
bird life of the district.—W. 8. 


Hollister’s Account of the National Zoo.'—In the Report of the 
Smithsonian Institution for 1917, published in 1919, there is an admirable 
popular account of the animals in the National Zoological Park, prepared 
by the director, Mr. Ned Hollister. It is fully illustrated by half-tones 
from photographs and a number of these are devoted to the birds, the 
Californian Condor, Whistling and Trumpeter Swans being among the 
more notable of the North American species. Among foreign. species 
figured are the Horned Screamer, Cape Barren Goose—inadvertantly 
marked “Barren Ground Goose”—Black and Mute Swans, etc. 

This pamphlet should serve an excellent purpose in producing a more 
intelligent interest in foreign birdsandmammals. The great trouble with 
American systematic zoologists until quite recently has been that they 
have dealt almost exclusively with North American species and the broad- 
ening of the field in the present generation is most encouraging. In 
furthering this tendency our zoological gardens offer the best opportunities 
but too often there is a lack of accessible information about the mammals 
and birds that may be on exhibition. Mr. Hollister’s ‘popular account” 
furnishes just what is needed, and may lead many a young student to a 
wider study of mammalogy and ornithology than he would otherwise 
have followed.—W. S. 


Cory’s Review of the Genus Rhynchocyclus.’—In this useful paper 
Mr. Cory gives the results of his study of the specimens belonging to 
this genus in the collection of the Field Museum of Natural History. 


1The National Zoological Park: A Popular Account of Its Collections. By 
Ned Hollister. From the Smithsonian Report for 1917, pages 543-593, with 46 
plates. Washington, 1919. 

2The Relationships and Geographical Distribution of the Species and Races 
belonging to the Genus Rhynchocyclus. Proc. Biological Society of Washington. 
Vol. 32, pp. 217-224. December 31, 1919. By Charles B. Cory. 


320 Recent Literature. [April 


As a result he recognizes eight species as follows, with the number of 
subspecies into which each is divided: sulphurescens, with six subspecies; 
cinereiceps, with two; peruvianus, with two; marginatus, two; megacephalus, 
one; poliocephalus, three; grisescens, one; and flaviventris, three. There 
is a full synonymy and discussions of relationship, with reprints of a 
number of the original descriptions.—W. 8. 


Recent Papers by Bangs and Penard.—These authors have recently 
considered the proper name for the Common Jungle Fowl! and decide 
that it should be Gallus gallus gallus (Linn.), the fact that this name was 
based upon a domestic variety in no way invalidating it. They select 
Bengal as the type locality. The other two races will therefore become 
G. g. bankiva Temminck, from Sumatra, and G. g. ferrugineus (Gmel.), 
from China. 

Mr. Penard calls attention? to some untenable names. One, Planchesia 
fusca (Bodd.), is preoccupied and, as there is no other available, he pro- 
poses P. pullata (p. 21). Muscicapa sibirica fuliginosa (Hodgson) being 
also preoccupied, M. c. cacabata (p. 22) is proposed. For the same reason 
M. ferruginea (Hodgson) becomes M. cinereiceps (Sharpe) and EHophona 
melanura melanura (Gmel.) becomes EL. migratoria pulla (p. 22), nom. nov. 
In another paper,® Mr. Penard describes as new from Mt. Roraima, British 
Guiana: Chloronerpes rubiginosus roraimae (p. 29) and Tanagra violacea 
rodwayt (p. 30). 

Mr. Bangs has also proposed‘ as a new form, Buteo lineatus ex imus 
(p. 35) from the Florida Keys.—W. 8. 


Van Oort’s ‘Birds of Holland.’’—Part 5 and the plates of Part 6 of 
Dr. Van Oort’s notable work are now before us, the text to the latter to 
appear with Part 7. The ten plates of Part 5 illustrate the geese and 
brant, while those of the next part comprise the Shelldrakes (Casarca and 
Tadorna), the Mallard, Gadwall and three species of Teal. The various 
plumages are fully illustrated, including the summer or “eclipse” plumage 
of the males, in such species as exhibit this interesting phase. The high 
standard of both text and plates as described in reviewing the earlier 
parts is fully maintained.—W. 8. 


1The Name of the Common Jungle Fowl. By Outram Bangs and Thomas 
Edward Penard. Proc. N. E. Zool. Club, Vol. VII, pp. 23-25. October 31, 1919. 

2Some Untenable Names in Ornithology. By Thomas Edward Penard. 
Ibid. pp. 21-22, October 31, 1919. 

3Two New Birds from Roraima. By Thomas Edward Penard. Ibid. pp. 
29-31, December 23. 

4A New Red-shouldered Hawk from the Florida Keys. By Outram Bangs. 
Ibid. pp. 35. January 16, 1920. 

5 Ornithologia Neerlandica. De Vogels van Nederland door Dr. E. D. Van 
Oort. Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff. Part 5 text and plates; part 6, plates only. 


ee i920" all Recent Literature. 321 


Kirk Swann’s ‘Synoptical List of the Accipitres.’'—This useful 
list is continued from Herpetotheres to Pernis in the present instalment, 
completing eighty genera. We notice that our American White-tailed 
Kite is regarded as a subspecies of the Australian Hlanus axillaris. With 
actual intergradation out of the question this disposition of the bird 
must have been made upon the claim of overlapping of characters, but 
we fail to find the claim sustained upon an examination of material at 
hand, though it is interesting to note the resemblance between the two 
species in connection with the arguments for a relationship between the 
Australian and South American faunas which have from time to time 
been published. 

This instalment of Mr. Swann’s work contains an additional list of 
ten species and subspecies omitted from the preceding parts, among which 
we notice Spizaetus batesi W. Sclater, which we regard as identical with 
S. africanus Cassin.—W. 8. 


Dr. Shufeldt’s Bibliography.—In the ‘Medical Review of Reviews’ 
for January, 1920,? there is begun a bibliography of the writings of Dr. 
R. W. Shufeldt prepared by himself, with a short introduction from which 
we learn that since the appearance of his first paper in 1881, he has pub- 
lished from twenty-five to thirty papers or books annually, the total at 
the present time numbering considerably over 1500. The subjects while 
largely biological, cover a wide range of topics. The present instalment 
runs to the end of 1888 and carries the list to No. 201. The author’s 
papers, as is well known, are so widely scattered that a bibliography of 
this sort will be a convenience to those who wish to consult them, and 
surely no one is so well fitted for compiling the list as the author himself. 


Our only regret is that the biographical portion is not more complete.— 
W.S. 


Stuart Baker on Egg Collecting and Its Objects.—It is very grati- 
fying to have an article on egg collecting from one who is himself a col- 
lector and yet who fully appreciates what is meant by the word science. 
When the scientific ornithologist has attempted to point out the weak 
points in egg collecting, he receives scant attention from the egg collector 
who considers that he knows nothing about the subject, while many a 
collector who claims to be collecting for “scientific”? purposes fails to 
show the slightest appreciation of the meaning of that term. 


1Synoptical List of the Accipitres (Diurnal Birds of Prey) Part III. Janu- 
ary 20, 1920, pp. 77-114. Price, 4 shillings. 

2Complete List of My Published Writings. With Brief Biographical Notes. 
(First Instalment.) By R. W. Shufeldt, M. D., Major, Medical Corps, U. S. 
Army. Medical Review of Reviews, XXVI, No. 1, January, 1920, pp. 17-24. 
Frederick H. Robinson, senior editor, 51 East 59th St., New York City, N. Y. 
Price per number, 25 cents. 


BYE Recent Literature. Rent 

Mr. Baker starts out with the quotation of a leading ornithologist: 
“Of egg collectors we have many, of odlogists, alas! but very few,’’? which 
he says is “a very true summing-up of the situation, however depressing 
it may be.” He goes on to say that the basal idea of those egg collectors 
who have some object in view is to ascertain and record the color and 
description of the eggs of each species of bird, but he adds, all such pre- 
liminary work has already been done. The real work now is to discover 
the underlying reasons for coloration and peculiar shape and the method 
of adaptation and eliminative protection. There is also the study of 
relationship in egg structure between birds of different families and genera 
as an ald to working out the true classification of birds, as well as the study 
of geographic variation in eggs in connection with the range of the species 
and the recognition of subspecies. 

“The crudest and most deservedly abused form of collector,” says Mr. 
Baker, ‘‘is the man sets out with the ambition of filling one box or drawer 
with the eggs of one species. Such collections merely form a mass of 
beautiful dead things which gratify his eye and sense of possession.’”’? He 
also warns against making a specialty of abnormal sets for such a collec- 
tion, while it may be very beautiful is ‘‘scientifically almost useless,” 
since all scientific work must be done upon normal sets. 

There are great opportunities for developing “‘odlogists’”’ out of our host 
of “egg collectors” if they are guided in the right paths, and Mr. Baker’s 
paper may be read with profit both by the collector and by those who are 
opposed to collecting. Incidentally the journal in which the paper ap- 
pears, ‘The Oologists’ Exchange and Mart,” is an admirable little pub- 
lication dealing with the serious side of egg collecting and well worthy of 
perusal by American odlogists.—W. 8. 


Economic Ornithology in Recent Entomological Publications.— 
Allusions by entomologists to the bird enemies of various insects are cited 
and discussed in the following paragraphs, each devoted to a different 
insect or group of insects. 

False wireworms (Eleodes).—These are the larvae of beetles of the family 
Tenebrionidae, which are injurious in western states to grain, fruit and 
garden crops. The author of the paper reviewed? notes from various 
sources that Burrowing Owls, Butcher Birds, Crows, Crow Blackbirds 
and Red-headed Woodpeckers prey upon these beetles and further states 
that adults have been found by the Biological Survey in stomachs of 
13 species of birds. This record may now be considerably improved. 
The most important economic species of false wireworm (Hleodes tricostata) 
has been found in the stomachs of eight species of birds, as follows: Frank- 


1The Oologists’ Exchange and Mart. Kenneth L. Skinner, Editor, Brook- 
lands Estate Office, Weybridge, England. Subscription, $1.25 per year. 
2McColloch, J. W. Journ. Ec. Ent., Vol. Il, No. 2, April 1918, pp. 219-220. 


prob aan an Recent Literature. 323 


lin’s Gull, Upland Plover, Red-headed Woodpecker, Lewis’s Woodpecker, 
Crow (in 21 stomachs), Crow Blackbird, Meadowlark, and Curve-billed 
Thrasher. Various other species of Hleodes have been found to be eaten 
by the following 16 birds in addition to the eight Just named: Avocet, 
Sparrow Hawk, Burrowing Owl, Great-horned Owl, Hairy Woodpecker, 
Red-shafted Flicker, Road-runner, Horned Lark, Arkansas Kingbird, 
Magpie, Brewer’s Blackbird, Yellow-headed Blackbird, Loggerhead Shrike, 
Mockingbird, Sage Thrasher, and Robin. The total list of known bird 
predators on Eleodes, therefore, is now 24. Of these, the crow, magpie 
and roadrunner probably are the most effective. 

Lotus borer (Pyrausta penitalis)—This moth larva feeds on a variety 
of plants but seems to damage man’s interests only when feeding on the 
American lotus. The larvae frequently destroy every seed in the recep- 
tacle of this beautiful waterlily. In an account! of the species, Dr. F. H. 
Chittenden states that blackbirds are said to eat the larvae before they 
go into shelter. In July, 1919, the reviewer had an opportunity to ob- 
serve an infestation of Nelumbo by this species at the Dardenne Lakes, 
Missouri, and the work of blackbirds against the pest. A large proportion 
of the receptacles of the water chinquapin were blasted and the exit holes 
of the larvae with the accompanying frass and silk gave a clue to the pests, 
good specimens of which were soon found. Red-winged Blackbirds were 
observed working at the receptacles and investigation showed they knew 
well how to dig out the larvae. All of the infested receptacles near the 
fringe of trees in which the birds perched, seemed to have been freed of 
the lotus-borers. 

Round-headed apple-tree borer (Saperda candida).—Mr. Fred E. Brooks 
says that this species is the most destructive in the eastern United States 
of any of the several kinds of insects that injure apple-trees by boring into 
the bark and wood. Birds are the only important enemies, and the author 
states” that ‘‘ Woodpeckers destroy great numbers of the borers by remov- 
ing them from their burrows. . . . In some cases from 50 to 75 per 
cent. of the borers are destroyed in this way. . . . Probably both the 
hairy and downy woodpeckers feed on the borers.” It should be noted 
that Mary Treat has definitely recorded* that the Downy Woodpecker 
and Flicker feed upon this pest. 

The Biological Survey has found beetles of the same genus as the apple- 
tree borer in stomachs of the Laughing Gull, Cassin’s Kingbird, Magpie, 
Bluejay, Meadowlark, Red-eyed Vireo and Robin. 

Flat-headed apple-tree borer (Chrysobothris femorata).—The same author 
quoted with reference to the preceding pest, notes! that Woodpeckers 
devour also many flat-headed borers, and gives the names of three species 


1 Journ. Ec. Ent., Vol. II, No. 6, Dec. 1918, p. 457. 

2 Farmers’ Bul. 675, U. S. Dept. Agr. Revised, Sept. 1919, p. 12. 
3 Journ. N. Y. Ent. Soc., Vol. I, 1893, p. 17. 

4 Farmers’ Bul. 1065, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture, Oct. 1919, p. 9. 


324 Recent Literature. rest 


of birds, in the stomachs of which adults have been found by the Biological 
Survey. This list can now be increased to five species: the Kingbird, 
Crow, and the Red-eyed, Warbling, and Yellow-throated Vireos. Beetles 
of other species of the same genus have been found in stomachs of 11 kinds 
of birds, namely, the Downy, Hairy and Red-headed Woodpeckers, King- 
bird, Phoebe, Wood Pewee, Crow, and the Red-eyed, Solitary, Yellow- 
throated and White-eyed Vireos. 

Striped Cucumber Beetle (Diabrotica vittata)—While this is one of 
the pests that ravage truck crops every year, evidently not being appreci- 
ably checked by its enemies, still it is of interest to know what these are. 
One of the recent bulletins prepared in the Bureau of Entomology cites 
from Biological Survey records! the names of 15 bird enemies of the striped 
cucumber beetle. Two names can now be added to the list, viz.: Red- 
eyed and Philadelphia Vireos. 

Grain bug (Chlorochroa sayi).—In recent years this species has become 
a pest of considerable importance in the Great Basin and Southwestern 
States, blasting the newly formed heads of cereals, to such an extent in 
some instances as to cause the crop to be cut for forage. Authors of a 
bulletin on this pest say:2 ‘‘The offensive odor secreted by the scent 
glands of Chlorochroa sayi has been commonly supposed to protect them 
from the attacks of predatory enemies.”” However, the insect has ‘“‘quite 
a variety of both vertebrate and invertebrate enemies.’’ The Biological 
Survey is quoted as authority for reporting the grain bug from stomachs 
of the nighthawk and western meadowlark, and related species from the 
stomachs of five other species of birds. The latter list may now be in- 
creased to eight, including: Franklin’s Gull, Bobwhite, Nighthawk, King- 
bird, Magpie, Eastern Meadowlark, Brewer’s Blackbird and English 
Sparrow. 

White-grubs (Phyllophaga).—These are the larvae of the so-called 
May-beetles or June-bugs, the more familiar generic name for which is 
Lachnosterna. ‘Their destructiveness, in grain fields, pastures, lawns and 
elsewhere need not be detailed here: suffice to it say they are among the 
most important insect pests and constantly receive the close attention of 
economic entomologists. Mr. John J. Davis, in a recent treatise* of the 
natural enemies of Phyllophaga, says: ‘On account of the difficulty of 
controlling the common white grubs, which pass ninety-five per cent. of 
their life under ground, their natural enemies are of unusual importance 
to the farmer.’’ It is of much interest, therefore, that the author in this 
formal treatise on the enemies of these pests, should state that: ‘“ Birds are 


1 Chittenden, F. H. Farmers’ Bul. 1038, U. S. Dept. Agriculture, May 1919, 
p. 10. 

2 Caffrey, D. J., and Barber, Geo. W. Bul. 779, U. 8. Dept. Agriculture, 
June 1919, p. 31. 

3 Bull. Ill. Nat. Hist. Survey, Vol. 13, Art. 5, Feb. 1919, pp. 53-138. Pls. 3-15, 
45 figs. 


Nea Chie all Recent Literature. 325 


among the most efficient . . . more especially in the newer regions 
where they are still to be found in large numbers.”’ He mentions 52 spe- 
cies of birds among which probably the crow and the crow blackbird are 
the most valuable. Mr. Davis has gathered together and abstracted most 
of the information in economic publications on the bird enemies of Phyllo- 
phaga, but his total of 52 species can be largely increased if we take into 
consideration unpublished records of the Biological Survey. Phyllophaga 
adults and larvae have been found in the stomachs of 83 species of birds 
of the United States. The common crow is pre-eminent as an enemy of 
both adults and larvae. Other birds especially worthy of mention in 
the latter role (from a total of 15 species) are the Upland Plover, Rusty 
Blackbird and Robin, and in the former (from a total of 81 species) the 
following named approximately in the order of their importance: Star- 
ling, Crow Blackbird, Meadowlark, Brown Thrasher, Robin, Nighthawk, 
Chuck-wills-widow, Whip-poor-will, Screech Owl, Kingbird, the five species 
of Hylocichla, and these ten of about equal rank: Red-winged Blackbird, 
Upland Plover, the two Cuckoos, Flicker, Blue-jay, Catbird, Red-headed 
Woodpecker, Mockingbird, English Sparrow, Magpie and Towhee.— 
W.L.M. 


Pine-seed Eaters in British Garhwal.—An interesting note on this 
subject by A. E. Omaston, may be called to the attention of ornithologists. 
The Chir Pine (Pinus longifolia), says! the author, is a tree which produces 
large quantities of edible seeds, but it is eaten by so many animals that 
one is forced to marvel how sufficient seed survives to bring about the 
complete natural regeneration which is so characteristic of the species. 
In this case, as in many others, nature is lavish, providing against all 
possible losses. Birds mentioned as important consumers of Chir seeds 
are: Eastern Wood-pigeon (Palumbus casiotis), a Nutcracker (Nucifraga 
hemispila), two species of Pied-Woodpeckers (Dendrocopus himalayensis 
and D. auriceps), and the Black and Yellow Grosbeak (Pycnorhamphus 
icteroides). The article contains also interesting notes on the local dis- 
tribution and habits of these birds.—W. L. M. 


The Ornithological Journals. 


Bird-Lore. XXII, No.1. January-February, 1920. 

The Ring-Necked Pheasant. By Verdi Burtch.—Has become quite 
common in western New York, where it has taken the place of the Ruffed 
Grouse as a game bird. 

Bobbie Yank. By Katrine Blackinton.—Account of a White-breasted 
Nuthatch. 


1 Indian Forester, Vol. 44, No. 10, Oct. 1918, p. 463. 


326 Recent Literature. [pen 


The Staghorn Sumac. By E. A. Doolittle—As a bird-attracting 
shrub. 

The Twentieth Christmas Bird Census, brings forth 169 lists from all 
parts of the country. We notice considerable diversity in the recording 
of Chickadees. From many localities quite beyond the range of carolinen- 
sis they appear simply as ‘‘Chickadee.”” At Mt. Holly, N. J., they appear, 
no doubt correctly, as ‘Carolina Chickadee,” while at Moorestown, N. J., 
a few miles farther south, the record is of ‘‘Black-capped Chickadees.” 
In such a winter as the past one both kinds no doubt occurred in central 
and southern New Jersey, but at the two localities mentioned the Carolina 
is certainly the usual one. It would seem better to use ‘‘Chickadee’’ 
without any qualifying term where there would seem to have been an 
error. In connection with the lone Tree Swallow at Gardiner’s Island, 
N. Y., it may be of interest to know that this species was quite common at 
Cape May Point, N. J., on December 31, 1919, flying over the frozen lake 
and feeding on the wax myrtle berries as observed by the reviewer. 

As to the Northern Phalarope at Telford, Pa., to which special attention 
is called in the introduction, a little investigation would have shown serious 
doubt as to the correctness of the identification. 

The Condor. XXII, No.1. January-February, 1920. 

Autobiographical Notes. By Henry W. Henshaw. 

A Return to the Dakota Lake Region. By Florence M. Bailey.—These 
two continued articles maintain their interest. 

Importance of the Blind in Bird Photography. By Frank N. Irving. 
Illustrated with admirable close-up photographs of the Flicker at its nest, 
showing more clearly than any pictures that we have seen the method 
of perching of this species. 

The Rusty Song Sparrow in Berkeley and the Return of Winter Birds. 
By Amelia 8. Allen—A Yukutat Fox Sparrow which was a regular visitor 
to a feeding shelf was banded and returned the next winter; while a Rusty 
Song Sparrow, supposedly the same bird, returned for three successive 
winters. These data are of particular interest in connection with Mr. 
Baldwin’s work (see p. 314). 

A Peculiar Feeding Habit of Grebes. By Alexander Wetmore.—The 
habit of eating feathers practiced by birds of this family may, the author 
suggests, be for the purpose of providing a “‘strainer’’ which checks the 
passage of fish bones and scales into the intestines until they are fully 
disintegrated. A brush-like fringe of corneous filaments supposed to serve 
a similar purpose is present around the pyloric opening in the Anhinga, 
a bird of similar feeding habits. 

Notes on the Limicolae of Southern British Columbia. By Allan 
Brooks.—Notes on 88 species. 

Edward Garner, A Pioneer Naturalist. By H. C. Bryant. 

Description of a New Otocoris from California. By Harry C. Ober- 
holser.—O. alpestris sierrae (p. 34), the Sierra Nevada in California from 
Placer to Lassen Counties. 


pot > ois ea Recent Literature. 327 


The Oologist. XXXVI, No. 12. December 1, 1920. 

Some Nesting Birds of the Palisades Interstate Park. By P. M. Sil- 
loway.—Including a record of the breeding of the Black-throated Blue 
Warbler at Highlands, N. Y. 

Among the Birds of the Virginia Coast. By B. R. Bales.—This article 
dealing apparently with Cobb’s Island calls attention to the fact that 
egging is still carried on there (1919) on a large scale. 

Bachman’s Sparrow in Arkansas. By H. E. Wheeler.—An accom- 
panying illustration is labelled nest of Bachman’s “Warbler,” but we 
suppose this to be an error. 

The Oologist. XXXVII, No.1. January 1, 1920. 

Turkey Vultures Feeding. By Winsor M. Tyler.—A careful piece of 
observation. 

New Hampshire Notes. By S. T. Danforth.—Many records of in- 
terest. 

The Ibis. (11th Series), II, No.1. January, 1920. 

Further Ornithological Notes from the Neighborhood of Cape San 
Antonio, Province of Buenos Ayres. Part III, Phoenicopteridae-Rheidae. 
By Ernest Gibson.—The present instalment brings to a close this valuable 
paper, a supplement as it were, to the ‘Argentine Ornithology’ of Sclater 
and Hudson, better known and more in demand than ever before since 
the reputation of Mr. Hudson has become so widespread. In one of his 
comments upon this work, Mr. Gibson calls attention to the erroneous 
attitude of the Black-necked Swan in the plate of this species, the neck 
being curved and the back elevated, whereas this species is one of the 
“stiff-necked”’ Swans with a straight back. The Coscoroba Swan, however, 
does curve the neck as depicted. This error in posture has extended to 
other “‘stiff-necked” species as well. 

List of the Birds of the Canary Islands, with detailed reference to the 
Migratory Species and the Accidental Visitors. Part V. Alcidae—Phasi- 
anidae. By David A. Bannerman.—Another instalment of this carefully 
prepared paper. 

Notes on the Birds of Quetta. By Col. R. Meinertzhagen.—The 
results of a two years’ study of the avifauna of this locality in the high- 
lands of Beluchistan. In his method of presentation the author attempts 
a suppression of the subspecies which, like similar attempts in America, 
causes more or less confusion. The binomial names appear in bold-faced 
type with the trinomials under them in italic precisely like the treatment 
of synonyms or references in other papers in the same issue. It seems 
high time for a universal “Systema Avium”’ when we encounter so many 
methods of nomenclature in vogue that it requires some study toascertain 
just what the author is trying to do. 

Notes on the Birds of Southern Palestine. By Col. R. Meinertzhagen. 
Another valuable list by the same author, with the same system of nomen- 
clature. 


328 Recent Literature. [apni 


Ornithology of the Marocecan [sic] ‘‘Middle-Atlas.”” By Captain 
Lynes.—This paper, while no doubt containing valuable information, is 
the most remarkable publication to appear in an ornithological journal 
in the experience of the reviewer. It appears to be the contents of a field 
notebook printed verbatim, and abounding in abbreviations of the most 
remarkable sort, marginal dashes, and sentences that have absolutely 
escaped the editing of either author or editor. 

As an example we may quote the following under the Shore-Lark which 
is called ‘‘Hremophila alpestris (? atlas Whit.) : 

Coll. 8 of ad., 4 9 ad. 23.5 to 10.7; f ad. + 9 ad. +N., 2e. 2d. 9.6; 
1 juv. ab. 12.6 ? R. com. Plat. Almost certainly atlas (a specn. sent to 
Sicily to compare with type). 

N. of 9.6 prob. second laying. My first acq. with Plateau, 23.5; shot 9 
carrying “stonefly,” obv. to young. From bare breast, think < shares 
incub.,”’ ete. 

Even with a page of explanations of abbreviations, life is too short to 
take the time to decipher such records! 

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. No. CCXLYV. 
December 8, 1919. 

A large number of new forms are described in this issue. Dr. Hartert 
proposes Ammoperdix heyi nicolli (p. 4), Wadi Hof, Egypt; Mr. D. A. 
Bannerman shows that the two names, Lampribis cupreipennis and L. 
olivacea, refer to the same species and proposes for the Prince’s Island 
(Gulf of Guinea) bird L. rothschildi (p. 6); he also names Cercococcyx 
mechowt wellsi (p. 7), from Cameroon, and Sarothrura somereni (p. 8), 
from British East Africa. Messrs. Robinson and Kloss present descrip- 
tions of ten new Malay birds and Dr. V. G. van Someren nineteen from 
Africa. Mr. Stuart Baker describes Galloperdix spadicea stewarti (p. 18), 
Travancore. Capt. Lynes describes Sitta europaea atlas and Erithacus 
rubecula atlas (p. 32), from Morocco but his descriptions are very meager 
and no types are indicated. W. L. Sclater presents descriptions of Spi- 
zaetus nipalensis fokiensis (p. 37), Fokien, China; Spilornis cheela ricketti 
(p. 37), Fokien; S. c. kinabaluensis (p. 37), Mt. Kinabalu, Borneo; S. c. 
palawanensis (p. 38). Palawan and Pernis celebensis steerei (p. 41), 
Negros, Philippines. C. Chubb describes Legatus albicollis successor 
(p. 43), British Guiana, and L. variegatus nevagans (p. 43), Panama, but 
gives no data for his types. G. M. Mathews contributes descriptions 
of two new Australian races. 

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. No. CCXLVI. 
December 31, 1919. 

Stephenson Clarke describes five new birds from Somaliland, including 
a new genus Warsanglia (p. 48), apparently related to Pseudacanthis 
from Yemen, and widely different from any known African bird. But 
one specimen is known which becomes the type of W. johannis (p. 48). 
J. D. La Touche presents descriptions of four new forms from Hupeh, and 


Peetasa0 aa Recent Literature. 329 


V. G. van Someren sixteen from Africa. E. Hartert describes Turdus 
citrinus courtoisi (p. 52), from eastern China. E. C. Stuart Baker con- 
tributes Carine brama fryi (p. 60), Madras, and C. Chubb proposes Ser- 
pophaga helenae (p. 61), Bartica, British Guiana, and Myiodynastes soli- 
tarius duncani (p. 62), Supenaam and Aarwai Rivers, British Guiana. 

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. No. CCXLVII. 
January 30, 1920. 

Stephenson Clarke describes Heteromirafra archeri (p. 64), from British 
Somaliland; Lord Rothschild, Jthaginis clarkei (p. 67), from Yunnan; 
E. C. Stuart Baker, Anuropsis malaccensis saturata (p. 68), N. Sarawak; 
and C. Chubb, Pachyrhamphus macconnelli (p. 73), Bonasika River, 
British Guiana; P. albiloris (p. 73), San Estahan, Venezuela; P. chapmani 
(p. 74), Antioquia Colombia; P. costaricensis (p. 74), Bebedero, Costa 
Rica; and Empidonomus varius parvirostris (p. 75), Kamakabra River, 
British Guiana. G. M. Mathews also proposes seven new forms from 
Australia. 

British Birds. XIII, No.7. December 1, 1919. 

Notes on the Migration of Birds over the Mediterranean Sea. By C. 
Sufferin. 

The Birds of Bardsey Island. By N. F. Ticehurst. Part V. 

British Birds. XIII, No.8. January 1, 1920. 

Nesting Habits of the Merlin in Glamorganshire. By G. C. 8. Ingram. 

The Oystercatcher’s Progress towards Maturity. By J. M. Dewar.—A 
study of the habits and development of nineteen families of these inter- 
esting birds from the day of hatching (eight a little later) up to the 23rd 
and 35th day. A most interesting and important study in behavior. 
One cannot but think how many nests of the American Oystercatcher 
have been found and all we have to show are the empty shells of a lot 
of eggs. Comparatively few ‘‘oologists’? have any conception of what 
constitutes the science of ornithology. 

British Birds. XIII, No.9. February, 1920. 

On the Nesting of the Storm Petrel. By Audrey Gordon.—On the 
Inner Hebrides. 

British Birds ‘‘Marking Scheme.” Progress for 1919. By H. F. 
Witherby. The total number of birds ‘ringed’? now numbers over 
91,000 for the eleven years. A list of interesting recoveries is appended 
to the report. 

The Avicultural Magazine. X, No. 14. December, 1919. 

Bird Photography at the Zoo. By W. 8. Berridge.—With an excellent 
picture of the Greater Bird of Paradise in display. 

The Breeding of My Kagus, All but—. By an Old Australian Bird- 
Lover.—Interesting notes upon these curious birds in captivity. The 
unfortunate modesty of the author in concealing his identity prevents 
others who may be interested from getting in touch with him. 

Notes on the Birds of the Balearic Islands. By Philip Gosse. (Con- 
tinued in January number.) 


330 Recent Literature. een 


The Color Question. By an Old Australian Bird-Lover.—Experience 
and pertinent suggestions as to the effect of food on color. 

The Avicultural Magazine. XI, No.1. January, 1920. 

The Mantchurian Crane. By W. H. St. Quintin. 

The Emu. XIX, Part III. January, 1920. 

Notes on Sea Birds. By W. Macgillivray.—Observations from a troop 
ship to and from England. 

Nesting of the White-rumped Swift (Cypselus pacificus). By H. L. 
Cochrane. 

Material for a Study of the Megapodidae. By R. W. Shufeldt. Part 
Ill. Addenda.—Treats of Megacephalon maleo with a colored plate of the 
head and neck and half-tones of the eggs and skeleton. 

Annual Report of the R. A. O. U. and of the Bunya Range Excursion. 
By A. H. Chisholm; and a list of the birds observed by 8. A. White and 
J. B. Cleland. 

South Australian Ornithologist. IV, Part 4. October 1, 1919. 

The Weights of Some Australian Birds. By A. M. Morgan.—Birds 
lose weight rather rapidly after death. Many weights of eggs and their 
relation to the bird’s weight are also given. 

Morning Bird Calls. By J. Sutton. Time of morning song during 
August. 

Birds Recorded from the Early Days Up to the Present Time for the 
Reed Beds District. By 8. A. White. 

The Austral Avian Record. III, No.7. December 3, 1919. 

Devoted entirely to biographical sketches, with portraits, of the three 
Australian ornithologists, S. A. White, T. Carter, and W. D. K. Mac- 
gillivray. All by Mr. Mathews. 

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. XI, No. 126-127. October- 
November, 1919. [In French.] 

Inquiry on the Disappearance of the Sparrow. By A. Menegaux. 

The Distribution of the Penguins and Its Geological Interpretation. 
By M. Boubier. 

Legends, Prejudices and Emblems Relating to Birds. By F. Cathelin. 
(Continued in later numbers, to Part 130.) 

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. XI, No. 128. December, 1919. 

On the Protection of Birds in the Province of Quebec. By F. Gaguin. 

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. XII, No. 129. January, 1920. 

An Amateur Bird Guide for One Visiting Africa. By Dr. Millet- 
Horsin. (Continued.) 

Observations on the Song of Birds in Winter. By J. Berlioz. 

Der Ornithologische Beobachter. XVII, No. 2. November, 1919. 
[In French and German. ] 

A Contribution to the Avifauna of Binntal (Wallis). By A. Hess. 
(Continued in Nos. 3 and 4.) 

Ornithological Notes from the Region of the Bosphorus. By A. Mathey- 
Dupraz. 


pic im | Recent Literature. ool 


Der Ornithologische Beobachter. XVII, No.4. January, 1920. 

The Summer Life of the Starling. By H. Fischer-Sigwart. 

Le Gerfaut. 5-9 Ann. Fasc. I, 1919. [In French.] 

This is the first issue since the German occupation of Belgium in Aug- 
ust, 1914, as explained in a note to the readers, from which we also learn 
that the treasurer of the Belgian Ornithological Society was murdered 
by the Germans at Louvain while the secretary fell on the field of battle 
at Voltin. The publication, however, starts out again with renewed 
energy and four issues appeared in 1919. : 

Biographical Sketch of Alfred Sacre. 

Fauna of Belgium. Buteo buteo zimmermannae. By G. van Havre. 

An American Bird New to the Fauna of Belgium. By M. de Con- 
treras.—Larus fuliginosus. 

Le Gerfaut. 5-9 Ann. Fasc. II, 1919. 

Ornithological Observations from 1914-1918 at Wyneghem. By G. 
van Havre. 

Remarks on the Life of the Cuckoo. By M. Mairlot. 

Birds and the War. Migration in the Eastern Region. By L. Coop- 
man. (Continued.) 

Fauna of Belgium. Cinclus cinclus cinclus. By G. van Havre. 

The Food of the Starling. By A. Mercier.—Mainly from Collinge’s 
paper. 

Le Gerfaut. 5-9 Ann. Fase. III, 1919. 

The Red-throated Pipit. Anthus cervinus. By L. Coopman. 

The Yellow Bunting. Hmberiza citrinella citrinella. By M. Mairlot. 

Habits of the Cuckoo. By A. Paque. 

Le Gerfaut. 5-9 Ann. Fasc. IV, 1919. 

Brunnich’s Murre in Belgium. By C. Dupond.—Specimen proves to 
be Alca torda. 

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 23, No. 9. September, 
1915. [In German.] 

We have before us this complete set to the end of 1916. The principal 
papers are listed below with all new forms. 

On the Migration of Gannets into German Binnen Land. By H. 
Schalow. 

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 23, No. 10. October, 1915. 

New Species. By Reichenow. Tanagra ehrenreichi (p. 154) Hyntana- 
ham, on the upper Purus; regarded as probably a race of T. coelestis; 
Anthus leucocraspedon (p. 155), Wendhuh, 8. W. Africa. No type speci- 
mens mentioned as is unfortunately the custom of this author. 

The Geographical Forms of Corythornis. By O. Neumann.—Recog- 
nizes four: C. c. cristata, Madagascar and Comoren Island; C. c. galerita, 
tropical Africa; C. c. nais, Prince’s Island; C. c. thomensis, St. Thomas. 

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 23, No. 11. November, 
1915. 


BEY Recent Literature. ern 


Nomenclatural Remarks on the Genus Alcedo Linn. By A. Laub- 
mann. 

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 23, No. 12. December, 
1915. 

Birds of Northern France. By H. Boeker. 

New Tropical Birds. By O. Neumann.—Paleornis krameri borealis 
(p. 178) Assam; Chalcopsittacus duyvenbodeit syringanuchalis (p. 179) 
Stephansort, New Guinea; Opopsitla nigrifrons ramuensis (p. 180), Bis- 
mark Mts., New Guinea; Tanysiptera nigriceps leucura (p. 180), Rook 
Island, near New Guinea; Pitta brachyura beryllofulgens (p. 181), a speci- 
men bought in Calcutta; Grauwcalus caledonicus thilenii (p. 181), New 
Hebrides; Graucalus macet andamanus (p. 181), Chaetura ussheri sene- 
galensis (p. 182), Thies, Senegal. 

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 24, No. 1. January, 1916. 

Nomenclatural Remarks on the Genus Alcedo Linn. By A. Laubmann. 
(Continued. ) 

Wasp Enemies Among Birds. By E. Hesse. 

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 24, No.2. February, 1916. 

Ornithological Observations in Husum (Germany). By W. Hagan. 

New Birds from Siam. By N. Gyldenstolpe.—Alseonax siamensis 
(p. 27), Bang Hue Pong, N. Siam; Gerygone griseus (p. 27), Koh Lak, 
Siamese Malakka; T’urdus aureus angustirostris (p. 28), Koon Tan, N. 
Siam; Lanius hypoleucus siamensis (p. 28), Koh Lak; Picus vittatus ei- 
senhoferi (p. 28), Pa Hing, N. Siam; P. canus hessei (p. 28), Brachylophus 
chlorolophoides (p. 29), Koon Tan, N. Siam; Sphenocercus pseudo-crocopus 
(p. 29), Bang Hue Pong, N. Siam. 

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 24, No.3. March, 1916. 

On the date of publication of Pallas’ ‘Zoographia Rosso-Asiatica.’ 
By E. Hesse.—Date of 1811 as printed on the title page is endorsed. 

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 24, No. 4. April, 1916. 

New Forms from Africa. H. Freiher Geyr von Schweppenberg.— 
Pterocles lichtensteini targius (p. 56), Quelle Tahart; P. l. abessinicus 
(p. 57), Dire Daura; Columba livia targia (p. 58), Ain Tahart; Turtur t. 
hoggara (p. 59), Ideles am Nordrande, Hoggar Plateau; Cotyle rupestris 
spatzi (p. 59), Gara Djenoun. 

On Rhynochetos. By Reichenow.—Account of the structure of the 
Kagu with cut of the bill and nostril. 

On the Name Columba pallida Lath. By E. Hesse. 

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 24, No. 10. October, 1916. 

New Species. By Reichenow.—Cinnyris schillingsi (p. 154), Kaliman- 
jaro; Sylvietta carnapi dilutior (p. 154), Ruwenzori; Certhia brachydactyla 
lusitanica (p. 154), and Parus ater lusitanica (p. 154), both from Oporto, 
Portugal; P. brunnescens (p. 154), Kubub in Namaland; Carpospiza 
brachydactyla psammochura (p. 155), Kousha, Beluchistan. 

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 24, No. 11. November, 
1916. 


ae i920, el Recent Literature. 333 


Lagonosticta rhodopareia neglecta (p. 168), Portuguese Guinea; Estrilda 
astrild niediecki (p. 168), Nanneala, Rhodesia; EH. a. adesma (p. 168), 
Kissenji, Kiwusee; EH. incana hapalochroa (p. 168), Pseuwdospermestes 
microrhyncha (p. 168), West side of Victoria Nyanza; Munia calaminoros 
(p. 169), New Guinea; Parus palustris balticus (p. 169), Bialowies. 

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 24, No. 12. December, 
1916. 

New African Pycnonotidae. By Reichenow.—Bleda notata pallidior 
(p. 180), Loango; Phyllastrophus zenkeri (p. 180), and P. albigularis ada- 
metzi (p. 181), both from Camaroons; P. placidus munzneri (p. 181), Munz- 
ner, Mahenge; Andropadus gracilirostris congensis (p. 181), Leopoldsville, 
Congo; Pycnonotus xanthopygus palaestinae (p. 181), Jafa, 8. Palestine. 

Journal fiir Ornithologie. Vol. 63, No. 4. October, 1915. [In 
German. | 

Characters of the Flight-Feathers of the Birds of N. W. Germany. 
By H. Reichling. 

Hans Graf von Berlepsch. By C. E. Helmayr.—Portrait and bibli- 
ography of 84 titles. 

Some Noteworthy Records of German Birds in the Royal Zoological 
Museum at Berlin. By E. Hesse. 

Journal fiir Ornithologie. Vol. 64, No.1. January, 1916. 

South Somaliland as a Zoogeographical Province. By O. Graf Sedlitz. 
(Continued.)—The following are proposed as new, all from Afgoi: Oriolus 
larvatus reichenowi (p. 1); Gymnoris pyrgita reichenowi (p. 42); Serinus 
dorsostriatus harterti (p. 47), Anthreptes longmari neumanni (p. 73); Apalis 
flavida neumanni (p. 89); Cichladusa guttata mulleri (p. 108). 

A Contribution to the Avifauna of Hesse Nassau. By W. Hagan. 

Materials for a Revision of the Genus Campephaga Vieill. By O. 
Neumann.—Seven forms and several “aberrations” are listed. 

Journal fiir Ornithologie. Vol. 64, No. 2. April, 1916. 

A Contribution to Our Knowledge of the Ornithology of Saxony. By 
R. Heyder. (Continued.)—This instalment contains a bibliography of 
415 titles and enumerates 62 species. 

On the Elevations to Which Birds Range. By H. Krohn.—A miscella- 
neous compilation. 

Remarks on Some Forms of Sylviidae. By E. Hesse.—Hippolais 
pallida and caligata and Calamoherpe brehmii. 

Journal fiir Ornithologie. Vol. 64, No.3. July, 1916. 

A New Catalogue of the Birds of Germany. By E. Hesse and A. 
Reichenow.—Nomina conservanda are recognized, and the International 
Code is ignored. 

War Observations in Belgium and France. By J. Gengler. 

Journal fiir Ornithologie. Vol. 64, No. 4. October, 1916. 

Report on Ornithological Observations at Rossiten for 1915. By J. 
Thinemann. 


304 Recent Literature. [ape 


Remarks on Some Turkestan Birds. By P. Kollibay. 

Ardea. VIII, No. 2. November, 1919. [In Dutch.] 

Dr. Coenraad Kerbert. Obituary with Portrait. 

Arrival of Certain Migrant Birds in Holland in 1918. By H. Ekama. 
Migration of the Swift (Apus apus). By A. E. H. Swaen. 

Condition of the Cormorant Colonies in Holland. By G. J. Van Oordt. 
Communication on the Breeding Birds of Holland. By T. de Vries. 


Ornithological Articles in Other Journals. 


Shufeldt, R. W. Osteological and Other Notes on the Monkey- 
eating Eagle of the Philippines, Pithecophaga jefferyi Grant. (Philipp. 
Jour. Sci., XV, No. 1. July, 1919.)—Eleven plates from photographs 
of the skeleton of this and other species. 

Criddle, Norman. Birds in Relation to Sunflower Growing in Mani- 
toba. (Canadian Field Naturalist, November, 1919.) 

Oberholser, H. C. A New Cliff Swallow from Canada. (Ibid)— 
Petrochelidon albifrons hypopolia (p. 95), Fort Norman, Mackenzie. Ranges 
from central Alaska over western British America to Alberta and Mon- 
tana. 

Fleming, J. H. Birds of Northern Saskatchewan and Northern 
Manitoba Collected in 1914 by Capt. Angus Buchanan. (/bid. Decem- 
ber, 1919.) 

Stephens, T. C. Records of the Past Winter (1917-1918) in the 
Upper Missouri Valley. (Proc. Iowa Acad. Sciences, XXV, pp. 71-83. 
1919.) 

Stephens, T. C. Birds of Union County, South Dakota. (/bid. 
pp. 85-104.) 

Gabrielson, Ira N. A List of the Birds Found in Marshall County, 
Iowa. (Lbid. pp. 123-153.) 

Allen, A. A. Illustrated Articles on the Gulls and Terns; Rails, Coots 
and Gallinules; Herons; Loons and Grebes. (American Forestry, XXV, 
pp. 1291, 1000, 1229, 1419.) 

Gates, Moody B. Protecting Birds as an Act of Patriotism. (lbid. 
p. 1063.) 

Wetmore, Alexander. Description of a Whippoorwill from Porto 
Rico. (Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 32, pp. 235-238. December 31, 
1919.)—Setochalcis noctitherus (p. 235). 


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 con- 
tained in the accessions to the library from week to week. 


A 1950, | Recent Literature. 335 


Harper, Francis. A New Subspecies of Prunella modularis from the 
Pyrenees. (Ibid. pp. 2438-244, December 31, 1919.)—P. m. mabbotti 
(p. 243), Saillagouse, France. 

Wetmore, Alexander. A Note on the Eye of the Black Skimmer 
(Rynchops nigra). (Ibid. p. 195, December 31, 1919.)—The pupil was 
found to contract in sunlight to a narrow vertical slit as in the eye of the 
cat, a peculiarity unique among birds in the experience of the writer. 

Lincoln, F. C. Some Notes on the Plumage of the Male Florida 
Red-wing (Agelaius p. floridanus). (Ibid. p. 196, December 31, 1919.) 
Apparently adult birds but with undeveloped sexual organs had the red 
shoulder patches very poorly developed and the general appearance of 
the plumage dull. 

Swales, B. H. A Former Record of the Heath Hen (T’ympanuchus 
cupido) at Washington, D.C. (bid. p. 198, December 31, 1919.)—Based 
wholly upon an entry by Prof. Baird of a specimen, since destroyed, re- 
corded as secured at Washington, April 10, 1846, by Dr. Alex. McWilliams. 

Oberholser, H. C. Pagophila eburnea versus Pagophila alba. (Ibid. 
p. 199, December 31, 1919.)—Upholds the applicability of Larus albus 
Gunnerus. 

Oberholser, H. C. The Status of the Genus Asarcia Sharpe. (Ibid. 
p. 200, December 31, 1919.)—Regards it as a full genus instead as a sub- 
genus of Jacana as usually held. 

Oberholser, H. C. The Names of the Subfamilies of Scolopacidae. 
(Ibid. p. 200, December 31, 1919.)—Agrees with Lowe as to the recogni- 
tion of three subfamilies but would change the names of them to Scolo- 
pacinae, Canutinae and Numeniinae. 

Oberholser, H. C. Notes on the Names of Halobaena caerulea and 
Prion vi tatus. (Ibid. p. 201, December 31, 1919.)—Differs from Mathews 
in regarding Forster’s Procellaria vittata as a tenable name for the “ Blue 
Petrel,”’ which therefore becomes Halobaena vittata. This of course pre- 
cludes the use of Gmelin’s Procellaria vittata of later date, for the Prion 
which must become Prion forstert. 

Oberholser, H. C. Mutanda Ornithologica. VIII. (lid. pp. 239- 
240, December 31, 1919.)—Turdus sordidus Miller being an older name 
for Pitta atricapilla, it must become P. sordida. Riparia paludicola 
sinensis being preoccupied becomes R. p. chinensis (Gray). Stoparola 
melanops for the same reason becomes S. thalassina (Sw.), while Hemipus 
obscurus becomes H. hirundinaceus (Temm.) and Tachyphonus rufiventris 
will be known as T.. metallactus nom. nov. (p. 240). 

Ober, E. H. The Life History of the Sage Hen. (California Fish 
and Game, January, 1920.) 

Gunthorp, Horace. Bird Collections for Colleges and High Schools. 
(School and Society, VII, May 1918).—Suggests the use of colored pic- 
tures of birds for seasonal exhibits of birds present at a given locality 
as a substitute for a collection of the birds themselves. 


336 Recent Literature. [Apr 


McAtee, W. L. Good Birds and Bad Birds. (Twenty-first Biennial 
Rept. Kansas State Board of Agriculture, 1917-18.)—Published 1919. 
An excellent resume of the subject of economic ornithology. 

Krum, Olin C. The Progress of Wild Life Conservation Work at 
Cornell. (Bull. Amer. Game Protect. Asso., October, 1919.)—A most 
interesting illustrated account. 

LaDue, H. J. The Protection of Winter Birds. (Jbid.)—Admirable 
suggestions on this matter. 

Holland, R. P. [Federal Government to the Rescue of the Egrets. 
(Ibid.)—Describes the seizure of egrets in the hands of wholesale milliners 
and plume hunters in Florida and calls the attention of women to the 
fact that they are now liable to prosecution if they appear on the street 
wearing egrets. 

Holland, R. P. Egg Destroying Vermin. (Jbid., January, 1920.) 
Calls attention to the attitude of all game-keepers against all hawks as 
well as various gulls and other birds which destroy eggs. The breeding 
of game of course creates abnormal conditions on the breeding grounds 
and attracts predaceous animals. The outlawing of all of the latter 
regardless of what their original character may have been is the next step. 
At every move, however, we are further upsetting the balance of nature. 
Where it will eventually land us it is difficult to say. 

Brownell, L. W. Getting Acquainted. (Blue Bird, XII, 1919-1920.) 
A series of illustrated accounts of our familiar birds. 

Bowen, Georgia M. The Way of the Protectionist. (Ibid.) A 
serial on the history and method of bird protection. 

Bowles, J. Hooper. Nesting Habits of the Cowbird. (The Oolo- 
gists’ Exchange and Mart, November, 1919.) 

DeBeaufort, L. F., and DeBussy, L. P. Birds of the East Coast of 
Sumatra. (Bijd. tot. de Dierkunde, XXI, pp. 229-276.)—List of 282 
species, with annotations and a map. None new. [In Dutch.] 

Virchow, Hans. The Possible Movements of the Vertebral Column 
of the Flamingo. (Archiv. fiir Anatomie und Physiologie, IV, pp. 245- 
254. 1916.) [In Dutch.] 

Currie, C. C. Birds of a Gippsland Garden. (Victorian Naturalist, 
XXXVI, No. 6, October, 1919.)—Popular account of familiar Australian 
birds. 

Gillespie, T. H. The Breeding of the King Penguin. (Nature, CIV, 
p. 314, November 20, 1919.)—This describes the breeding in the Zoological 
Garden at Edinburgh of birds received in 1914 and 1917 from South 
Georgia Island. An egg laid September 1 hatched October 24 (7 weeks 
and 4 days). The young was small and the skin bare, but it grew rap- 
idly. It was kept at first between the parent’s feet and covered by the 
skin fold as was the egg. It was fed on disgorged, partly digested fish. 

Ochoterena, Isaac. The Geographic-Botanic Regions of Mexico. 
(Boletin Soc. Mex. Geogr. y. Estadist., VIII, part 2, 1919.)—Considers 
animals also. [In Spanish.] 


yor facae toa Recent Literature. * 337 


Oberholser, H. C. An All-day Bird Trip at Washington, D. C. 
(Amer. Midl. Nat., VI, pp. 103-110, 1919.) 

Duerden, J. E. New Adaptive Callosity in the Ostrich. (Records 
Albany Museums, Africa, III, No. 3, September 30, 1919, pp. 190-195.) 
A median ankle callosity has apparently become hereditary while an 
accessory one has not. 

Philpott, Alfred. Noteson the Birds of Southwestern Otago. (Trans. 
and Proc. New Zealand Institute, LI, September, 1919, pp. 216-224.) 
Thirty species listed. 

Duerden, J. E. Breeding Experiments with the North African and 
South African Ostriches. V. Crossing the N. and 8S. African Ostriches. 
(Bull. No. 3, Dept. Agric. Union of South Africa, 1919.)—One hundred 
hybrids have been raised and two chicks of the second hybrid generation 
have now been reared. 

Bond, C. J. On Certain Factors Concerned in the Production of Eye 
Colors in Birds. (Jour. of Genetics, December, 1919, pp. 69-81.) 

Pearson, K., and Others. On the Nest and Eggs of the Common 
Tern (S. flwiatilis). A Codperative Study. (Biometrika, XII, Part I1I- 
IV, November, 1919, pp. 308-354.)—Mathematical relationship between 
dimensions and coloration of eggs and structural characters of nests. 
Some admirable photographs of the birds are presented in illustration. 

Rollinat, R. Breeding of the Eagle Owl in Captivity. (Bull. Soc. 
Nat. d’Acclimat. de France, Year 67, No. 10-11, October-November, 
1919.) [In French.] 

Bartels, M. On Some Birds New to Java. (Treubia. Recuil de 
Travaux. Zool. Hydrobiol. et Oceaogr., August, 1919, I, Pt. 2, Batavia, 
pp. 51-52.) [In German.]—Accipiter gularis, Eurystomus calonyx, Por- 
zana pusilla, Tringa canutus, Sula longipennis, S. sula. 

Oudemans, A.C. Dodo Studies. (Verhandl. der Kon. Akad. Weten- 
shap. Amsterdam, XIX, No. 4, June, 1917.)—An elaborate historical 
account of the Dodo and its allies, with bibliographies and lists of pub- 
lished illustrations, many of which are reproduced. The species are 
given as Raphus cucullatus Linn., Apterornis solitarius Selys., and Pezo- 
phaps folitarius Gm. [In Dutch.] 

Schouteden, H. Contribution to the Ornithological Fauna of the 
Lower Congo. (Rev. Zool. Afracaine, VII, No. 2, October 1, 1919, pp. 
188-192.) Forty species isted.—{In French.] 

Hahn, Erna. On Color Perception of Diurnal Birds and the Oil 
Gland of the Eye. (Zeitschr. Wissen. Zool., CXVI, I, pp. 1-42.) [In 
German.]—Considers that the secretion of colored oils in the eyes of 
different species affects the extent of their color perception. 

Noll-Tobler, H. Remarks on Our Native Rails. (Jahrb. St. Gal- 
lischen Naturw. Gesell., 54, pp. 209-245, 5 plates.) [In German.] An 
excellent account of the breeding of the Rails of Central Europe, with 
admirable photographic reproductions. 


ae 
April 


338 Recent Literature. 

Duerden, J. E. Methods of Degeneration in the Ostrich. (Jour. of 
Genetics, IX, No. 2, pp. 131-193, Plates V-VI.) 

Soderberg, Rudolf. Results of Dr. E. Mjoberg’s Swedish Scientific 
Expeditions to Australia, 1910-1913, XIII. Studies of the Birds in 
Northwest Australia. (Kungl. Svensk. Vetensk. Handl., 52, No. 17, 
pp. 3-116, pl. I-IV, 1918.)—An extended report with many text figures. 
No new forms are described. [In English.] 

Kruimel, J. H. Investigations on the Feathers of Gall naceous Birds. 
(Bijd. tot. de Dierkunde Amsterdam, XX, pt. 2, pp. 1-93, pl. I-IV, 1916.) 
An exhaustive study of structure, coloration, ete. [In Dutch.] 

Thysse, J.P. On Bird Song. (bid. XXI, pp. 119-122.) [In Dutch.] 

Portielje, A. F. J. Biological Observations in the Garden of the 
Royal Zoological Society. (Jbid. XXI, pp. 137-144, pl. Il1.)—Downy 
young of Ardea goliath, Pseudogeranus leucanchen and Catharista are 
shown with their parents in the plate. [In Dutch.] 


Additional Publications Received.—_—Richmond, C. W. In Mem- 
orium. Edgar Alexander Mearns. Smithsonian Report for 1917. Re- 
printed from ‘The Auk,’ 

American Bird House Journal. J. W. Jacobs, Waynesburg, Pa. 
IV, No. 1, January, 1919. 

Bird Notes and News. VIII, No. 8. Winter, 1919. 

Bulletin of the Charleston Museum. XV, No. 8, and XVI, No. 1. 
December, 1919, and January, 1920. 

Fins Feathers and Fur. No. 20, December, 1919. 

Florida Audubon Bulletin. Florida Audubon Society, Winter Park, 
Fla. I, No.3. October, 1919. 

New Jersey Audubon Society. Ninth Annual Report. October, 
1919. 

Scottish Naturalist. Nos. 95-96. November-December, 1919. 

Philippine Journal of Science. XIV, Nos. 5 and 6, and XV, Nos. 
land 2. May-—August, 1919. 

Records of the Australian Museum. XII, No. 12. December, 
1919. 


Reise | Correspondence. 339 


CORRESPONDENCE 
An ‘‘Occult Food Sense’’ in Birds. 


Epitor or ‘THE Aux’: 


Articles dealing with the subject of instincts or intelligence in birds 
or in mammals have for me a peculiar fascination and are read with much 
interest. Mr. Beck’s article in ‘The Auk,’ on ‘The occult senses in 
birds,’ proved no exception. 

The scene pictured by the author was vividly visualized as I continued 
to read the well written lines. The crisp morning, the music of the speed- 
ing hounds, the tingle of eagerness and the keen expectation of the early 
hunters—then the puzzling change in the whole scene and the end of a 
stirring fox chase in the prosaic killing of a mad dog. 

But with mind absorbed in the captivating account I am still dimly 
conscious of another scene, which persists in intruding upon the first. 
High overhead, on motionless wing, soar two black birds, mere specks 
in the uncertain light. Greater vision would have revealed them as 
vultures keenly intent upon the drama below, all-hearing, all-observing; 
but they themselves unobserved, unheard. When the last echo of the 
gun and the last whimper of disappointed hound and the last sound of 
human voice had passed away, and all was silent and restored to its wonted 
order, they began to descend. Rapidly, as they drew near the earth, 
their sharp eyes and tenacious avian memories which so often before had 
unerringly guided them on similar missions, led them now into close 
proximity of the very spot where that something had taken place, which 
merited their searching investigation. In a time that was incredibly 
short from the human viewpoint their marvelous eyesight, assisted now 
by—yes, by a degree of smelling power and also by a “resourcefulness” 
peculiar to such as are accustomed to seek the necessities of life in many 
different situations—they soon found themselves before the banquet hall, 
or, more precisely, the banquet hole. 

It may be, however, that after all it was not these particular two birds, 
for the mental picture is more or less blurred and obscured by a second 
one, of a pair of vultures soaring above the South Mountain, taking their. 
morning constitutional in sweeping circles that measured their radii— 
I had almost said in miles—who caught the sound of hound and gun on 
the still morning air, and ‘‘understood.”’ 

Now, the whole point I wish to make by all this rambling is, merely, 
that it seems to me quite unnecessary to call forth an “occult food sense” 
in order to explain the phenomenon described by the author of the above 
mentioned article. On the evidence there presented it is not at all clear 
that the case can not be explained by the operation of senses that are 


340 Correspondence. [Apri 


well known and are possessed by birds as well as by most other animals. 
While the author, in his analysis of the case, has apparently to his own 
satisfaction eliminated the question of sight and of smell, he seems to have 
overlooked the application of a third highly developed faculty, that of 
hearing, to which reference had already been made, in a general way, in 
his first paragraph. 

One need look no further, it seems to me, than to the remarkably devel- 
oped functions of sight and hearing in order to arrive at a tenable explana- 
tion of the first essential and striking phase of the observation made by 
Mr. Beck, namely, the coming of the vultures so soon and apparently 
from nowhere, to the scene of action. The hunters, intent upon the 
chase, had no thought, most likely, for such things as vultures which 
even at the very time may have been within the range of the men’s vision, 
or, if not, were at no greater distance than was well within the limits 
of their own superior senses. Whether seen or heard by the birds the 
action below was beyond doubt sufficient to bring them nearer the scene, 
for to respond to such and similar stimuli, signals if you please, we may 
well believe is a function of their inherited instincts. 

And what reason have we to believe that to their well attuned ears the 
sound of ‘‘the voices of the hounds on the twisted night track” was not 
audible, even from their aerial pathway above the South Mountain? 
It has been shown, I believe, if my memory serves me aright, from experi- 
ments in acoustics, that the voice of the dog possesses a remarkable carry- 
ing quality, perhaps greater than that of any other domestic animal, 
and that it is the last animal sound that the aviator hears in ascending 
to a great height. It may safely be assumed, therefore, that to certain 
birds, especially such as the vultures and other birds of prey, the sound 
is audible to a very much greater distance than we ourselves are able to 
appreciate, with our limited powers. 

Having in the first phases of the phenomenon been directed by either 
the auditory or the visual sense, or for that matter by both, after having 
reached the ground it may with sound reason be presumed that a little 
search, their sharp eyes now ably assisted by some degree of olfactory 
sense, would soon reveal the object of their quest. The time element, 
which was three hours or more, seems to me entirely adequate, even 
should the birds have come all the way from their roosting place on the 
slope of South Mountain. 

As to the analogies drawn by the author from insect life, with respect 
to a ‘mating sense,” the evidence brought forward seems, in my humble 
opinion, entirely to lack force even in a ‘“‘contributive”’ way, so far as it 
suggests the existence of a sense different in kind from those which are 
well known to be present in insects and which have been scientifically 
proved beyond peradventure. The olfactory sense, if I mistake not, is 
generally recognized by entomologists as the dominant sense among 
insects. The degree of refinement it here attains and its “‘differentiative 


Vol. eral “|| Correspondence. 341 


capacity” are alike of an order difficult for man to appreciate. But so 
far as known the difference is one rather of degree than of kind. Applied 
to the case of the wasp, Pelecinus, is not the established olfactory sense 
sufficient to explain how the elusive males can find the females, thus being 
drawn forth from their retirement, probably from no such great distances 
as we may sometimes be led to imagine, and revealing themselves to the 
comparatively dull visual faculties of the naturalist? Every hunter has 
experienced a parallel case, hardly less striking, in the magical appearance 
of swarms of blowflies which arrive to “‘inspect”’ his game almost as soon 
as itis dead. It cannot be seriously questioned, I believe, that the highly 
refined olfactory sense is adequate to account for all this, and that it is 
the same in kind as that which brings the bear to the bait from afar and 
enables the dog to trail his master through the crowded street. 

It is not the intention to deny the possible existence in animal life of 
other senses than the orthodox five that come within the pale of human 
experience; far from it. That the “homing sense”’ is a sixth one may well 
be true. When we shall have learned more about the functions of all 
parts of the internal ear and shall have added something more definite 
to our knowledge of what has been called “‘muscle sense,’’ then this ques- 
tion may possibly be answered with a degree of assurance. While freely 
admitting the attractiveness and stimulating effect of formulating working 
hypotheses and theories, the point I wish to emphasize is simply that 
we should first of all exhaust the explanatory possibilities of the scien- 
tifically proven sense functions, in the analysis of observed phenomena 
where matters of this nature are involved, before proceeding to draw 
from the realm of the unknown. On the evidence adduced I feel that 
this procedure has not been followed in the case of the two vultures, and 
that the assumption of the existence of an “active sense which may be 
called ‘occult’’’ even ‘simply because it is hidden from the experience 
and understanding of man,” is not justified. 

CHARLES EUGENE JOHNSON. 

Department of Zoology, University of Kansas. 


The Search for Food by Birds. 


Epitor or ‘Tur Aux’: 


The following remarks suggest interpretations that may be placed 
upon observations, different from those associated with them by Messrs. 
Beck and Grinnell in ‘The Auk’ for January, 1920 (pp. 55-59 and pp. 
84-88). In the former article, an occult sense is invoked to account for 
Turkey Vultures finding the carcass of a mad dog thrown out of sight 
in a sinkhole by fox hunters. From evidence given in the article, there 
can be no certainty that the entire performance of killing the dog and 
throwing it in the hole was not watched by buzzards. Had some of the 


342 Correspondence. [Apeir 


birds been sailing overhead at a considerable height (a common habit), 
probably they would not have been seen by the hunters, yet every move 
of the latter might have been observed by the birds; the presence and 
actions of the pack of hounds would almost certainly have attracted the 
attention of any birds on the wing, even had they just left the supposed 
nearest roost, eight miles away. Furthermore the observations as re- 
ported do not exclude the possibility that the vultures were already in 
the hole where the carcass was thrown. Either of these suggestions 
seems easier to entertain than that the buzzards were guided to the car- 
cass by a means outside of human experience. 

Certainly in the classic experiments of John Bachman as reported by 
Audubon (Orn. Biogr., Vol. 2, 1835, pp. 44-49), both Turkey and Black 
Vultures, showed their absolute dependence for food-finding upon the 
sense of sight, and ignored food they would have found immediately had 
they been able to smell, much less had they been possessors of an “occult” 
food-finding faculty. Consider the following extract, ‘‘The most offensive 
portions of the offal were now placed on the earth; these were covered 
over by a thin canvass cloth; on this were strewed several pieces of fresh 
beef. The Vultures came, ate the flesh that was in sight, and although 
they were standing on a quantity beneath them, and although their bills 
were frequently within the eighth of an inch of this putrid matter, they 
did not discover it. We made a small rent in the canvass, and they at 
once discovered the flesh, and began to devour it. We drove them away, 
replaced the canvass with a piece that was entire; again they commenced 
eating the fresh pieces exhibited to their view, without discovering the 
hidden food they were trampling upon.” 

Dr. Grinnell’s thesis is that certain call-notes may have been fixed by 
selection on account of their utility in preventing individual birds from 
seeking food in areas recently searched by another bird. His examples 
are the Ruby-crowned Kinglet and Audubon’s Warbler. The eastern 
representative of the latter bird, the Myrtle Warbler, is similar in habits 
and has a very similar call-note. This is uttered frequently whether by 
the few warblers or perhaps single wintering bird in a given locality, or 
by the individuals of a perfect swarm of the warblers such as winter in 
coastwise parts of the Carolinas. In the former case risk of searching the 
same area twice practically does not exist; in the latter that the same area 
will be gone over more than once daily is inevitable. In either event 
the call-note cannot have the significance hypothecated by Dr. Grinnell. 

In fact birds do habitually go over the same places. A tree infested 
by bark-beetles is not freed of its pests by continuous work on the part of 
woodpeckers; on the contrary they return to it again and again. Our 
feeding-stations with practically inexhaustible supplies are periodically 
visited, and tempting as they are, usually do not localize the birds. These 
have other business elsewhere, but they return. Many observations by 
the writer, confirmed by comparing notes with others, indicate that vari- 


Vol. 00° ve Correspondence. 343 


ous birds have more or less regular beats which they cover approximately 
on schedule. This means they do repeatedly go over the same trees; 
but in their territory they undoubtedly make excursions, for when we 
test them by exposing food supplies they quickly find them. Their sys- 
tem of food-finding, like that of various other animals (as ants and mice), 
is, I am convinced, to look everywhere in their domain. They have all 
their time for the work, and searching all day every day, in the compara- 
tively restricted area, to which most birds at any given time, appear to 
confine themselves, it is inevitable that the same spots will be inspected 
again and again. 

The appeal to theory when observed facts really have nothing particu- 
larly mysterious about them, seems to be due to taking too seriously the 
so-called “struggle for existence.”’ Except at the breeding season, an 
individual bird has practically nothing to do but to search for food. Under 
anything like normal conditions there must be no great difficulty in secur- 
ing the required amount. In fact in the case of Audubon’s Warbler and 
numerous other birds of mixed feeding habits there is always available 
‘a reserve food supply, in the form of overwintering fruits, upon which 
the birds can draw at will. Such birds, therefore, distinctly are not under 
constant pressure of necessity of food-finding. They at least have leisure, 
though their actions may belie it. In the writer’s opinion, all birds, 
normally, are not in dire straits for food. Of the smaller species, at least, 
I would say, they make countless unnecessary excursions, they peck a 
hundred times for each morsel of food secured, they are, they must, they 
will be busy. This ceaseless unproductive activity in itself is sufficient 
evidence that the struggle for existence is not the gripping, controlling 
thing some would believe. 

In conclusion I would mention briefly certain other points in the two 
papers reviewed that seem rather too highly tinged by theory. The sense 
of direction, admittedly marvellously developed in certain birds, is not 
entirely occult to man. Australian natives and other savages have been 
recorded as having it in marked degree and civilized man certainly does 
not entirely lack it. The wonderful cases of male insects finding females 
immediately after issuance from their pupal cases certainly are more 
satisfactorily explicable on the basis of a finely developed tropic sensitivity 
than on an occult mate-finding sense. Results of experiments certainly 
support this view, since female moths emerging in indoor cages, as in 
greenhouses, have attracted numerous males, though the circumstances 
could not agree in the province of any mate-finding sense that would have 
developed under natural conditions. In other words, since greenhouses 
have never been part of the normal environment, an ‘occult’? mate- 
finding sense developed by natural selection would not take male moths 
into such a structure. However, a very sensitive tropic reaction would 
take them there or to any other accessible place where the excitatory 
object, the female, happened to be. 


344 Correspondence. [Apri 


With respect to Dr. Grinnell’s note, it should be pointed out that in 
winter when the observations were made, insect life, for the most part, 
does not “move about again.” Hibernating insects are relatively sta- 
tionary and a considerable part of the insect food available to small birds 
at this season consists of the eggs and chrysalides of numerous insects, 
and adult scale insects, which do not change location at all. Further- 
more, since there is no hard and fast line between non-flocking and flock- 
ing birds, any sequestration theory is bound to run counter, to the recog- 
nition-mark and related theories. Indeed, does it not appear that the- 
ories are best avoided? When facts accumulate sufficiently, their average 
tendencies, which we are in the habit of calling “natural laws,’”’ are ap- 
parent of themselves. 

W. L. McATEE. 

U.S. Biological Survey, Washington, D. C. 


[In connection with the oft-quoted Bachman-Audubon experiment 
which Mr. McAtee once more falls back upon, why cannot some of our 
ornithologists in the Southern States, where Vultures abound, try this 
experiment over again? We are not usually willing to accept a statement 
of this sort without corroboration and why should we not have more 
light upon this matter?—Ep.] 


Ridgway’s Birds of North and Middle America, Vol. VIII. 


Epitor or ‘THE Aux’: 


In a monumental work such as Ridgway’s ‘Birds of North and Middle 
America,’ errors are certain, however careful and competent the worker 
may be. Part VIII of that work has just been received and I hasten to 
indicate rather an unfortunate mistake so that correction may be at once 
undertaken. 

On p. 608 appears “ Larus affinis Reinhardt, Siberian Gull,” and its only 
claim to inclusion in the work appears to be the record of the type de- 
scribed from ‘‘Nenortalik, Julianehaab, 8. Greenland.’ I have shown 
that the type was not referable to the Siberian Gull so-called, but was a 
specimen of the form of Larus fuscus Linné which Lowe had separated 
under the name L. f. britannicus. This has been accepted by all British 
ornithologists and the entry in Ridgway’s synonymy, p. 609, ‘Larus 
fuscus affinis Kennedy, Ibis, Jan. 1917, 31” refers to this fact and not 
to the “Siberian Gull.’’ Consequently all the matter under the heading 
“Larus affinis’”’ on pp. 608-609, save that dealing with Reinhardt’s speci- 
men and the one above quoted, must be eliminated as not pertinent to 
the American fauna. The essential references in confirmation read: 

Lowe, British Birds (Witherby), Vol. VI, No. I, p. 2. June 1, 1912. 

Lowe, Bull. Brit. Orn. Club, Vol. X XIX, p. 119. July 17, 1912. 


Vaattcory ial Correspondence. 345 


Iredale, Ibid. XX XI, p. 68. March 29, 1913. 

Iredale, British Birds (Witherby), Vol. VI, No. 12, p. 360. May 1, 
1913. 

Larus fuscus affinis, List Brit. Birds Comm. B. O. U., 2nd Ed., p. 255. 
1915. 

Ibid, British Birds (Witherby), Vol. IX, p. 10. 1915. 

Another less important matter may be here attended to. 

On p. 554, Ridgway has used “ Megalopterus minutus atlanticus’”’ for 
the Caribbean White-capped Noddy referring to Mathews, ‘Birds of 
Australia,’ Vol. II, pt. 4, Nov. 1, 1912, p. 423, but on that page Mathews 
proposed Megalopterus minutus americanus for the subspecies from the 
Caribbean Sea and British Honduras separating it from the bird from 
Ascension Island to which he gave the name used by Ridgway. As the 
name americanus has anteriority and was given to the American bird, it 
should have been used or the matter discussed, but the name is quite 
ignored. Just previously in his key on the same page, Ridgway defined 
a form from the Kermadec Islands calling it ‘‘ Megalopterus —?”’ stating, 
“T am unable to place this bird.’”’ He also noted, ‘‘Owing to absence of 
specimens, I am unable to compare this [M. m. atlanticus] form with 
M. m. minutus.”” Mathews had included the Kermadec Island bird, 
which he figured and described, with the typical subspecies (from Torres 
Straits), but later in the ‘Austral Avian Record,’ Vol. III, No. 3, April 7, 
1916, p. 55, has introduced for it the name Megalopterus minutus ker- 
madect. 

It is displeasing to me to record such errors in such a magnificent work, 
but I am sorry to think that probably others'may even occur as Ridgway 
has apologized for lack of first-hand reference to certain works, and there 
is evidence in the work itself of unverified references in other connections. 
On p. 797 it is written, ‘“‘The remainder are names given by an anonymous 
author and therefore, according to my view, not eligible.” On p. 308 
he had utilized ‘‘Calidus alba (Pallas)’’ but the names in Vroeg’s Catalogue 
must be accredited to Vroeg, otherwise the author is anonymous. ‘Tun- 
stall’s’’ names are barred also by absolute anonymity. 

Tom T. IREDALE. 

39 Northwest Ave., Ealing, London, England, 

Dec. 26, 1919. 


346 Notes and News. [Apel 


NOTES AND NEWS 


James Metvitte Macoun, C.M.G., F.L.S., and chief of the Bio- 
logical Division of the Geological Survey, Canada, died on January 8, 
1920, aged fifty-seven. Mr. Macoun was best known as a botanist but 
had a wide acquaintance with ornithology and ornithologists and as joint 
author with his father, Prof. John Macoun, of the 1909 edition of the 
Catalogue of Canadian Birds, his death demands notice in the ornitho- 
logical press. 

Perhaps no one has had as much first hand experience in the less known 
areas of Canada—Lake Mistassini, James and Hudson Bay, the Churchill 
and Peace Rivers and Little Slave Lake were all scenes of intensive work 
by him and he was familiar with the more accessible parts of the Dominion 
under conditions of the past that will never return again. 

One of the most important pieces of work conducted by him was on 
the Bering Sea Fur Seal Commission, which he conducted with so much 
satisfaction to his government as to win his decoration C. M. G. (Com- 
panion of St. Michael and St. George). 

Of late years he did most of his work in British Columbia, and after 
completing his father’s intensive surveys of two cross sections of that 
province along the lines of the southern railways he was just beginning 
another along the Grand Trunk Pacific to the north. 

Death stayed his hand and work just at the height of his powers when 
years of preparation and ripening judgment made him most valuable to 
science, to the institution of which he was an honored member and to his 
country. 

Besides a father and mother, a brother and sister, he is survived by 
his widow, one daughter, and a host of friends and sorrowing colleagues.— 
P. A. TAVERNER. 


The following Fellows have been appointed by the President of the 
A. O. U. to constitute the Committee on Classification and Nomenclature 
of North American Birds for the year 1920: Witmer Stone, Chairman, 
Jonathan Dwight, Harry C. Oberholser, T. 8. Palmer, and Charles W. 
Richmond. 

The committee held a two days’ session in Washington, D. C., Febru- 
ary 11 and 12, 1920, and various general matters were discussed in regard 
to the method of work of the committee and the preparation of a new 
edition of the A. O. U. Check-List which should constitute the Nearctic 
volume of the proposed ‘Systema Avium’ to be gotten up by the B. O. U. 
and the A. O. U. jointly. 

Dr. Oberholser was chosen Secretary of the Committee and many 
nomenclatural cases which had been considered by the sub-committee 


Vol. sania al Notes and News. 347 


of nomenclature of the old committee were formally passed upon while 
several new ones were decided. Altogether very satisfactory progress 
was made. 


A case involving the constitutionality of the Migratory Bird Treaty 
Act, in which the law was sustained by the Federal Court for the Western 
District of Missouri, has been appealed to the Supreme Court of the 
United States by the State of Missouri and arguments were heard on 
March 2, 1920. This case, No. 609, is entitled The State of Missouri, 
appellant, vs. Ray P. Holland, United States Game Warden. 


Two very important efforts toward the establishment and maintenance 
of bird reservations are now attracting much attention. First the drain- 
age of Klamath Lake which threatens the destruction of this valuable 
reservation. According to the report of William L. Finley in the Janu- 
ary issue of ‘California Fish and Game,’ the building of a dyke has already 
converted much of the lake into an alkali desert which the director of 
the reclamation service himself states is of no use for agriculture. Mr. 
Finley urges appeals to the Californian representatives in Congress while 
Mr. Pearson, in ‘Bird-Lore,’ suggests a »pea's to the Secretary of the 
Interior (cf. antea p. 318). 

The other matter is the effort to have part of the Okefinokee swamp on 
the Georgia-Florida boundary established as a reservation. Timber 
rights and subleases seem to complicate this effort but much interest has 
been aroused. There is an excellent account of the enterprise in the 
Bulletin of the American Game Protective Association for October, 1919, 
by Dr. J. F. Wilson, Secretary of the Okefinokee Society, while the Bio- 
logical Survey is also taking an active interest in the matter. 


A modification in the Federal bird regulations has been made, allowing 
the killing of Grebes, Loons, Gulls, Terns, Mergansers, Bitterns, Great 
Blue, Little Blue, Green and Black-crowned Night Herons where these 
birds are injurious to and destructive of fishes at public or private fish 
hatcheries. The birds may only be killed or trapped by the owners, 
superindendents or bona fide employes of the hatcheries, and all portions 
of the birds must be entirely destroyed and not possessed, transported 
or shipped outside the grounds except that they may be presented to a 
public museum or educational institution. 


There has been organized at Seattle, Washington, the Pacific North- 
west Bird and Mammal Club which aims to promote social and fraternal 
relations among the working ornithologists and mammalogists of Wash- 
ington, British Columbia, Alaska and northern Oregon. The officers 
for the current year are: President, F. S. Hall, Director of the State 


348 Notes and News. [apt 


Museum, Seattle; Vice-President, J. H. Bowles, Tacoma; Secretary and 
Treasurer, Stanton Warburton. 

Coéperation is always productive of much good and it would seem 
that there is a good field in the northwest for just such an organization 
as this. We trust that those interested in joining the organization will 
lose no time in communicating with Mr. Hall, and we hope that the club 
may have a long and prosperous history. 


CoMPLETE Sets or ‘THE AvxK.’—A series of ‘THe Aux’ now includes 
36 full volumes accompanied by two general indexes for the years 1876- 
1900 and 1901-1910. Owing to the limited editions of the early volumes 
the number of possible complete sets probably does not exceed 500, but 
the total at present known is not much more than 150. Sales, destruction 
of copies, and the death of early members have broken the continuity of 
series and resulted in the transfer or loss of many volumes. As time 
goes on some sets now in private hands will pass into the possession of 
public libraries and the number of such sets now a little more than 60, 
will increase. Since the appearance of a brief note on this subject in 
‘Tue Aux’ for October, 1919, several members have reported the pos- 
session of sets and a few series previously incomplete have been completed. 
The data now available are published in the hope of stimulating further 
efforts in this direction. 

In the following list arranged geographically by states, sets in public 
libraries are mentioned first and are followed in alphabetical order by 
those in private hands. Most of the sets are bound and nearly all include 
the two general indexes. Seven sets (indicated by an asterisk) are prac- 
tically complete but lack a single volume or part of a volume. In addition 
to those here enumerated about 20 others are known which lack some of 
the first six volumes but which may be completed later. It is interesting 
to note that while these sets are distributed in 27 states, the Philippines, 
Canada, and England, less than one-fifth are located west of the Mississippi 
River. Nearly as many are credited to the District of Columbia while 
the only ones reported from the Southern States are one each in Virginia, 
South Carolina, Florida, and Texas. 

Such a list as this is necessarily incomplete and subject to frequent 
correction as private sets change hands and gaps are filled in series now 
incomplete. Members are requested to send to the Secretary any cor- 
rections or additions which will increase the accuracy or completeness of 
the list. 


CALIFORNIA—13 
California Academy of Sciences, Museum of History, Science and 
San Francisco Art, Los Angeles 
Leland Stanford, Jr., University, University of California, Berkeley 
Palo Alto Dawson, W. L., Santa Barbara 


Vol. Ol 
1920 


Chambers, W. Lee, Eagle Rock, 
Los Angeles 

Evermann, Dr. B. W., San Fran- 
cisco 

Fisher, Prof. W. K., Pacific Grove 


CoLoRADO 


Coburn Library, Colorado College, 
Colorado Springs 


CONNECTICUT 


Pequot Library, Southport 
Watkinson Library, Hartford 
Yale University, New Haven 


District or CoLUMBIA—24 


Library of Congress, Washington 
U.S. Dept. Agriculture, Wash. 
U.S. National Museum, Wash. (2) 
Bailey, Vernon, Washington 
Bartsch, Dr. Paul, Washington 
Bond, Frank, Washington 
Cooke, Miss M. T., Washington 
Fisher, Dr. A. K., Washington 
Fox, Dr. William H., Washington 
Henshaw, H. W., Washington 
Hollister, Ned, Washington 
Howell, A. H., Washington 


FLORIDA 
Nehrling, H., Gotha 


ILLINOIS 


*Tllinois State Laboratory of Nat- 
ural History, Urbana 
John Crerar Library, Chicago 
Public Library, Chicago 
Barnes, R. Magoon, Lacon 


INDIANA 


Indiana State Library, Indianapolis 


Iowa 


Iowa State College, Ames 


Notes and News. 


349 


Fowler, Capt. F. H., Palo Alto 
Grinnell, Dr. Joseph, Berkeley 
Mailliard, Joseph, San Francisco 
Morcom, G. Frean, Berkeley 
Stephens, Frank, San Diego 


Bergtold, Major W. H., Denver 


Bishop, Dr. Louis B., New Haven 
Sage, John Hall, Portland 
Seton, Ernest T., Greenwich 


Knowlton, Dr. F. H., Washington 
Merriam, Dr. C. Hart, Washington 
Nelson, E. W., Washington 
Oberholser, Dr. H. C., Washington 
Palmer, Dr. T. 8., Washington 
Richmond, Dr. Chas. W., Wash. 
Riley, Joseph H., Washington 
Stejneger, Dr. Leonhard, Wash. 
Swales, B. H., Washington 
Wetmore, Dr. Alexander, Wash. 
Williams, R. W., Washington 


Coale, Henry K., Highland Park 
Cory, Charles B., Chicago 
Deane, Ruthven, Chicago 
Gault, B. T., Chicago 

Osgood, Dr. W. H., Chicago 


Butler, Amos W., Indianapolis 


Stephens, Prof. T. C., Sioux City 


350 


IKANSAS 


State Library, Topeka 
MAINE 


Public Library, Portland 
Merrill, Harry, Bangor 


MARYLAND 


Enoch Pratt Free Library, Balti- 
more 


MaSssACHUSETTS—20 


Boston Public Library 

Boston Society of Natural History 

Mass. Agricultural College, Am- 
herst 

Mass. State Library, Boston 

Museum Comparative Zoology, 
Cambridge 

New Bedford Public Library 

Springfield Library Association 

*Taunton Publie Library 

Thayer Museum, Lancaster 

Wellesley College, Wellesley 


MIcHIGAN 


Detroit Public Library 


Mich. Agricultural College, East 


Lansing 
MINNESOTA 
Minnesota Athenaeum Library, 
Minneapolis 
Missouri 
Bolt, Benjamin F., Kansas City 
Harris, Harry, Kansas City 
NEBRASKA 


University of Nebraska, Lincoln 


New HAMPSHIRE 


Levey, Mrs. William M., Alton 
Bay 


Notes and News. 


[Apri 
April 


Norton, Arthur H., Portland 


Kirkwood, Frank C., Monkton 


Batchelder, Charles F., Cambridge 

Bent, A. C., Taunton 

Brewster Estate, William, Cam- 
bridge 

Chamberlain, Chauncy W., Boston 

Durfee, Owen, Fall River 

Farley, John A., Malden 

Jeffries, Wiliam A., Boston 

Morris, Robert O., Springfield 

Phillips, Dr. John C., Wenham 

Tyler, Dr. Winsor M., Lexington 


Wood, Norman A., Ann Arbor 


Roberts, Dr. Thomas 8., Minne- 
apolis 


Widmann, Otto, St. Louis 


Dille, Frederick M., Valentine 


White, Francis Beach, Concord 


Vol. cae | 
1920 


New JERSEY 


Princeton University, Princeton 
Bowdish, B. 8., Demarest 


New Yorx—20 


American Museum Natural His- 
tory, New York 

Brooklyn Museum 

Brooklyn Public Library 

Buffalo Publie Library 

*Columbia University, New York 

Cornell University, Ithaca 

Nat. Association Audubon Socie- 
ties, New York 

New York Public Library 

N. Y. State College of Forestry, 
Syracuse 

New York State Library, Albany 


OHIO 


*Adelbert College, Cleveland 
Cincinnati Public Library 


Cincinnati Society Natural History 


PENNSYLVANIA 


Academy Natural Sciences, Phila- 
delphia 

Carnegie Library, Pittsburgh 

Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh 

Burns, Frank L., Berwyn 


RuopeE IsLaAND 

Flanagan, John H., Providence 
SouTH CAROLINA 

Wayne, Arthur T., Mt. Pleasant 
TEXAS 

University of Texas, Austin 
VIRGINIA 

*Public Library, Newport News 
WASHINGTON 


*Publice Library, Seattle 


Notes and News. 


dol 


Havemeyer, H. O., Mahwah 
Rhoads, Samuel N., Haddonfield 


New York Zoological Park, New 
York 

Vassar College, Poughkeepsie 

Allen, Dr. J. A., New York (2) 

Braislin, Dr. Wm. C., Brooklyn 

Chapman, Dr. Frank M., New 
York 

Dwight, Dr. Jonathan, New York 

*Fuertes, L. A., Ithaca 

Grinnell, Dr. Geo. Bird, New York 

Herrick, Harold, New York 

Pearson, T. Gilbert, New York 


Oberlin College, Oberlin 
Ohio State University, Columbus 


Fisher, Miss Elizabeth W., Phila- 
delphia 


_ Norris, J. Parker, Jr., Philadelphia 


Stone, Dr. Witmer, Philadelphia (2) 


Hathaway, Harry 8., Providence 


Rathbun, Samuel F., Seattle 


352 Notes and News. a 


WISCONSIN 
Milwaukee Public Museum 
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS 


Bureau of Science, Manila 


CANADA 
Geological Survey, Ottawa Arnold, Edward, Montreal 
Laval University, Quebec Fleming, James H., Toronto 
McGill University, Montreal Saunders, W. E., London 
Reference Library, Toronto Taverner, Percy A., Ottawa 
ENGLAND 
British Museum Natural History, Jourdain, F. R. C, Abingdon 
London Mathews, Gregory M.,Foulis Court, 
Zoological Society of London Fair Oak 


T. S. PaLMEr. 
Washington, D. C. 


The fifth annual meeting of the Wilson Ornithological Club was held 
at St. Louis, Mo., in affiliation with the meeting of the American Associa- 
tion for the Advancement of Science, on December 29 and 30, 1919. 
Fifteen papers, many of them illustrated with lantern slides, were pre- 
sented and contained much of interest. At the business session plans 
were laid for renewed activities after the comparative inaction of the war 
period and the following officers were elected: President, Dr. R. M. 
Strong; Vice-President, Dr. H. C. Oberholser; Secretary, A. F. Ganier; 
Treasurer, G. L. Fordice; Editor, Dr. Lynds Jones; Councillors, Dr. 
M. H. Swenk, Dr. B. R. Bales, and Dr. T. C. Stephens. 


Correction.—In the list of members of longest standing in the A. O. U., 
published in the January ‘Auk,’ Dr. William H. Fox, of Washington, 
D. C., was recorded as having been elected in 1885 instead of 1883. This 
unfortunate error originated in the earliest lists of members (Auk 1886 to 
1890) from which our data were copied. Dr. Fox is therefore outranked 
only by the nine surviving founders of the Union. 


Errata.—In the list of contributors to the Brewster Memorial Fund, 
printed in the January number of ‘The Auk,’ the names of Messrs. Chauncy 
W. Chamberlain and Thomas E. Penard were accidentally omitted. 
Dr. Edward Waldo Emerson appeared as ‘‘ Edward M. Emerson,” Mr. 
Howard P. Hottle as ‘‘Edward P. Hottle,” and Mr. J. A. Hagar’s name 
was spelled ‘‘ Hager.” 


ee or ae ee, 
¢ J 


THE AUK 


A Quarterly Journal of Ornithology 
ORGAN OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION 


Edited by Dr. Witmer Stone 
ACADEMY OF NATURAL ScIENCES, LOGAN SQUARE, 
PHILADELPHIA, Pa. 


To whom all articles and communications intended for publi- 
cation and all books and publications for review should be sent. 
Manuscripts for leading articles must await their turn for publi- 
cation if others are already on file, but they must be in the editor’s 
' hands at least six weeks before the date of issue of the number for 
which they are intended, and manuscripts for ‘General Notes,’ 
‘Recent Literature,’ etc., not later than the first of the month 
preceding the date of issue of the number in which it is desired 
they shall appear. 
Twenty-five copies of leading articles are furnished to authors 
free of charge. Additional copies or reprints from ‘General Notes,’ 
‘Correspondence,’ etc., must be ordered from the editor. 


THE OFFICE OF PUBLICATION 
8 West Kine STREET, LANCASTER, Pa. 
Subscriptions may also be sent to Dr. JonatTHan Dwicur, 
Business Manager, 43 West 70th St., New York, N. Y. Foreign 
Subscribers may secure “The Auk’ through Witherby & Co., 326 
High Holborn, London, W. C. 
Subscription, $3.00 a year. Single numbers, 75 cents. 


Free to Honorary Fellows, and to Fellows, Members, and Assoc- 
iates of the A. O. U., not in arrears for dues. 


OFFICERS OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGIST’S UNION 
President, JOHN Haut Sace, Portland, Conn. 


Vice-Presidents, WITMER StonE, Academy of Natural Sciences, 
Philadelphia. GrorcE Brrp GRINNELL, 238 E. 15th St., New 
York. 


Secretary, T. S. Patmer, 1939 Biltmore St., Washington, D. C. 
Treasurer, JONATHAN Dwicut, 43 E. 70th St., New York. 


SEPARATES FOR SALE 


In order to meet a general demand for separates of the leading 
articles published in ‘The Auk’ arrangements have been made to 
furnish copies of any leading article published in the present issue 

_and following issues, at 25 cents each, post paid. 


Orders for these separates should be addressed to the editor: 
DR. WITMER STONE, 


ACADEMY OF NATURAL SCIENCES, 
LOGAN SQUARE, PHILADELPHIA, PA. 


*PUBLICATIONS OF THE 


American Ornithologists’ Union 


FOR SALE AT THE FOLLOWING PRICES: 


The Auk. Complete set, Volumes I-XXXYVI, (1884-1919) in origi- 


nal covers, $120.00. 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. Paper, $3.25. 


Index to The Auk (Vols. XVIII-XXVII, 1901- 1910), Svo, pp 
xviii+ 250, 1915. Paper, $2.00. 


Check-List of North American Birds. $3.00. Second edition, 
revised, 1895. Cloth, 8vo, pp. xi+372. $1.15. Original edition 
1886, anc third edition, 1910, 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, 314 5°34 inches. 30 cents, 
Ten copies $2.50. 


Code of Nomenclature. Revised edition, 1908. Paper, 8vo, pp. 
Ixxxv. 50 cents. 


Original edition, 1892. Paper, 8vo, pp. iv4-72. 25 cents. 


A. O. U. Official Badge. An attractive gold and blue enamel 
pin, with Auk design, for use at meetings or onother 
occasions. Post-paid, 50 cents. 


Address JONATHAN DWIGHT 3 
43 W. 70th STREET NEW YORK, N. Y. 


SS 
ay 


- _ re * 9 ra rs 


~ — - 
me Se “rr m 


BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB Series, 


CONTINUATION OF THE New 
Vol. XXXVII 


The Auk 


QA Quarterly Journal of Ornithology 


Vol. XXXVII JULY, 1920 


— 
= Tas - 
alee => 


PUBLISHED BY 
The American Ornithologists’ Union 


LANCASTER, PA, 


Entered as second-class mail matter in the Post Office at Lancaster, Pa. 


CONTENTS 


Norres on Some Amurican Ducks. By Allan Brooks. (Plates XV— 


WA Vue ee co 1p oe PMD Xo i = 
RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF WiLpD Ducks aT DeLavan, Wisconsin. By 
Ras oc 7 ee | SES SME NER An me St 


REcoLLECTIONS oF AupUBON Park. By George Bird Grinnell ( 
DQG DED. CNM WS Ce ea A <— 2 ‘ ; : . ne a 372 


CourtTsHIP IN Birps. By Charles W. Townsend, M.-De os ae eee 


OBSERVATIONS ON THE Hasits or Birps aT Lake Burrorp, New Mexico 
By “Alewander “Wetmore: s-%6 5 es) sae | nes te 


Nores ON THE BREEDING HaBITS OF THE Rusty BLACKBIRD IN NORTHERN 
New Enauanp. By Fred H. Kennard. (Plates XIX-XX) . 412 


Tue GENERA OF CERYLINE KINGFISHERS. By Waldron DeWitt Miller. 422 
Ontario Birp Notes. By J. H. Fleming and Hoyes Lloyd . . . .. 429 


SEVENTEENTH SUPPLEMENT TO THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION 
CHrck-List oF Norra AMERICAN Birps ...... . 489 


GenerRAL Notes.—Notes on the Black-crowned Night Heron in Western New York, 
449: Bittern Displaying its White Nuptial Plumage, 450; The Knot in Mon- 
tana, 451; Tringa Auct. versus Calidris Anon., 451; Early Virginia Rail in New 
York, 452; Least Flycatcher in Michigan in April, 453; A New Name for Anair- 
etes Reichenbach, 453; A Raven Pellet, 453; The Purpte Grackle at Albany 
Georgia, 454; Note on the Generic Names Schiffornis Bonaparte and Scoto- 
thorus Oberholser, 454; Evening Grosbeak Hesperiphona vespertina) in Minne- 
sota in Midsummer, 455; Evening Grosbeaks Common at Lakewood, N. J. 
456; Evening Grosbeaks at Princeton, N. J., 456; The Newfoundland Cross- 
bill in the Washington Region, 456; White-winged Crossbill (Lozia leucoptera) 
in West Virginia, 457; An Erroneous Kansas Record for Baird’s Sparrow, 457; 
A Scarlet Tanager at-Thirty-fourth Street, New York, 458; Bohemian Wax- 
wing at Seattle, Washington, During the Winter of 1919-1920, 458; Bohemian 
Waxwing at Salem, Mo., 460; Bohemian Waxwing (Bombycilla_ garrula) at 
Rochester, N. Y., 461; Bohemian Waxwing at Rochester, N. Y., 462; Autumnal 
Stay of the Parula Warbler in Maine, 462; The Blue-winged Warbler (Vermi- 
vora pinus) on the Coast of South Carolina, 462; Hooded Warbler (Wilsonia 
citrina) at Detroit, Michigan, 463; Penthestes hudsonicus hudsonicus in North 
Dakota, 463; Labrador Brown-capped Chickadee (Penthestes hudsonicus nigri- 
cans) at Rochester, Monroe County, N. Y., 463; Blue-gray Gnatcatcher in the 
Boston Public Garden, 464; The Blue-gray Gnatcatcher (Polioptilla caerulea 
caerulea) at Quebec, P. Q., 464; The Russet-backed Thrush (Hylocichla ustu- 
lata ustulata) Taken near Charleston, S. C., 465; Remarkable Migration of 
Robins, 466; Some Rare Birds for Yates County, N. Y., 466; Notes from 
Springfield, Mass., 467; Notes from St. Louis, Mo., 467; Merrem’s Beytrage, 


468; Erratum, 468. 


Recent LireraTuRE.—Mathews’ ‘Check-List of the Birds of Australia. Part 1,’ 469; 
Mathews’ ‘Birds of Australia,’ 470; MacGregor’s ‘Index to the Genera of Birds,’ 
471; Witherby’s ‘Handbook of British Birds,’ 472; Hartert’s ‘Die Vogel der 
Palaarktishen Fauna,’ 472; Chapman’s ‘What Bird is That?,’ 473; Horsfall on 
the Habits of the Sage Grouse, 474; Kirk Swann’s ‘Synoptical List of the Accipi- 
tres,’ 475; Bibliography of British Ornithology, 475; Brook’s ‘Tbe Buzzard at 
Home,’ 475; The Nebraska Waterfowl and their Food, 476; Bartsch on the 
Bird Rookeries of the Tortugas, 476; Bangs and Penard on Two New American 
Hawks, 477; Kuroda on New Japanese Pheasants, 477; Freeman’s ‘ Bird Calen- 
dar for the Fargo Region; 478; Grinnell on the English Sparrow in Death Val- 
ley, 478; Rowan and Others on the Nest and Eggs of the Common Tern, 479 
Report of the National Zoological Park, 480; Ornithology of the Princeton 
Patagonian Expedition, 480; Nicoll’s Handlist of the Birds of Egypt, 481; 
Sachtleben on Goldfinches, 481; Carter’s ‘Shooting in Early Days,’ 482; Re- 
cent- Publications on Conservation and Education, 482; A Fascicle of Papers on 
British Economic Ornithology, 483; The Ornithological Journals, 485; Ornith- 
ological Articles in other Journals, 494; Additional Publications Received, 497. 


CoRRESPONDENCE.—A. O. U. Luncheons, 498; Popular Nomenclature, 499; Precellaria 
vittata Forster is not Halobaena Gmelin, 505. 


Nores AND News.—Obituary Notice: Frank Slater Daggett, 508; Horace Winslow 
Wright, 509; Thomas McAdory Owen, 510; Charles Gordon Hewitt, 511; 
Johan Axel Palmen, 511; Bird Banding 512; The Permanent Funds of the A. O. 
U., 513; Annual Meeting of the B. O. U., 514,; Annual Meeting of the R. A. 
O. U., 515; Anrual Meeting of the Swiss Society for the Study and Protection 
of Birds, 516; American Fossil Birds, 516; Handwriting of Ornithologists, 516; 
Distribution of Ornithologists, 517; Personal Mention, W. H. Osgood, 517; 
Alexander Wetmore, 517; James L. Peters, 517; Washington Meeting of the 


ALOU; SLT: 


A ‘Oy aHL 


THE AUK: 


A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF 


ORNITHOLOGY. 


VOL. XXXVII. Juny, 1920. No. 3 


NOTES ON SOME AMERICAN DUCKS. 


BY ALLAN BROOKS 
Plates XV-XVI 


This contribution has been stimulated by the many valuable 
papers by American ornithologists on these hitherto rather neg- 
lected birds. Mr. Hollister’s paper on the Ringneck in “The Auk’ 
for October 1919 is especially welcome, expressing as it does the 
first appreciation of the real affinities of this species. 

The changes that he proposes for the next A. O. U. ‘Check-List’ 
regarding the position of this duck are quite in order, but a more 
important one is to put the Ruddy Sheldrake where it belongs, 
its present position in the ‘Check-List’ being quite impossible. 

There is a great deal of work to be done yet even on the 
commonest of North American ducks especially with the plum- 
ages of the females. The variation in these is considerable. In 
the surface-feeding ducks it consists largely of a decrease in 
the spotting of the lower surface in many species. I always 
put this down to age but since I have found that a similar con- 
dition found in the larger Falcons, is really an individual variation 
without any change through successive moults, I am inclined to 
wait until observations are recorded of female ducks in captivity. 

The variation in the females of the diving ducks is not as 
a rule so pronounced, but it occurs in many species. 

353 


te 


304 Brooks, Notes on American Ducks. July 


Marila americana. RepHEAD. 

There is a very frequent tendency to albinism in the female 
Red-head, not in the male. Adult females are almost always 
plentifully sprinkled with white feathers on the back of the head 
and neck; this is accompanied by a varying amount of white in 
the down. I have carefully plucked the outer feathers from a 
number of females, the down on the lower surface may or may 
not be white. The amount of white in the down seems to 
parallel the amount of white in the feathers of the head, 
very rarely is the down continuously white but is usually marbled 
with patches of dusky colored down. The fattest birds very 
often have the largest areas of white in the down on the lower 
surface, it may be that the down may not be properly pigmented 
because of the heavy layer of fat. 

On the lake in front of my house at the present moment among 
the hundreds of Redheads is a female with an almost entirely 
white head, the body being quite normal. 

The variation in the numerical strength of the sexes accord- 
ing to season is probably as pronounced in this species as in any 
duck. At present (November), the proportion of females to 
males is about 2 to 3, in midwinter, (January), one hardly sees a 
female in the large flocks of males, and not until the end of Feb- 
ruary are the proportions anything like equal. A similar se- 
quence occurs in nearly every species of duck at this latitude, 
with the possible exception of the Mallard, in which the sexes 
are usually proportionate throughout the year. 


Marila marila. Scavp. 

The A. O. U. ‘Check-List’ gives this species as breeding in south- 
ern British Columbia; I can find no reliable record of this, and 
consider it in the highest degree improbable, as I have never 
seen the species in summer even as far north as I have been in 
central British Columbia, (lat. 54°), except for a few crippled 
birds. 

Marlia affinis. Lesser Scaup. 

This is a common breeder in central British Columbia (the 
region between Quesnelle Lake and Lac la Hache), but a scarce 
one in the southern portion of the province. 


_ 
el, oo. vin Brooks, Notes on American Ducks. 355 


Unlike the larger species the females are very variable, in many 
fully adult and breeding birds there is no white at the base of 
the bill, the whole head being light brown; in others the head is 
very dark brown with a conspicuous white patch on the face, as 
in the Greater Scaup. These dark birds very often have the 
back freckled with white, a character I have not noticed in the 
light brown headed birds, in which the whole body plumage, 
except the breast and belly, is uniform light brown. 


Marila yvalisineria. CANVAS-BACK. 


Breeding range exactly as in the Lesser Scaup. Southern breed- 
ing records are Lumby—one pair in 1902, and Grand Forks— 
three pairs in 1919. 


Marila collaris. Rinc-NeckED Duck. 


I can completely endorse all that Mr. Hollister says about 
this duck. One other point of similarity between it and the 
Redhead is the color of the downy young, exactly the same in 
both birds and quite different from the dusky ducklings of the 
Seaups. When in England I frequently watched the Tufted 
Ducks very closely, to see points of affinity to our Ringneck. 
The full plumaged males certainly look very much alike, espec- 
ially when one sees them diving in shallow water, the whole body 
being almost enveloped in the light colored flank feathers. They, 
like the male Ringnecks, are very conspicuous as they dart about 
along the bottom rising like corks after a short immersion. 

But the females are not so much alike, and the young are utterly 
different, the downy young of the Tufted Duck being the most 
dusky colored ducklings I know of. And the females and young 
are a far better indication of affinities than the males. The fe- 
male of the old world Pochard (Marila ferina) is extraordinarily 
like a female Canvas-back, a female Redhead in the London 
Zoo ponds alongside of the Pochards looked utterly unlike, both 
in form and color, but strangely like a couple of female Rosy- 
billed ducks (Metopiana peposaca) which often came alongside 
of her. 

And yet a certain well-known ornithologist in England pro- 
poses to make our Redhead a subspecies of the Old World Pochard! 


: Auk 
356 Brooks, Notes on American Ducks. Tiily 


Clangula islandica. Barrow’s GOLDEN-EYE. 


This is an attempt to find a reliable method for separating 
two perfectly distinct species. For Barrow’s Golden-eye is a 
perfectly distinct species and has always been recognized as such, 
yet it would be more than difficult for an ordinary man to identify 
a series of specimens by the aid of any of the works of reference 
I have come across. 

Even the best authorities themselves seem uncertain as to the 
reliability of their points for distinguishing the females and young 
of the two species. 

This has probably led to the slighting references and inadequate 
descriptions by minor authors. 

Barrow’s Golden-eye is not a ‘‘perpetuated accident of varia- 
tion’ except to those who know nothing of the bird. The adult 
males are not only easily distinguishable in the hand by at least 
eight points of difference (including structural) but are readily 
identified in the field as far as one can separate one species of 
duck from another. | 

Millais in his ‘British Diving Ducks’ is the only author who 
recognizes this, probably because he is the only one familiar with 
the species in life. 

The crescentic cheek mark, the purplish head, the black wing 
bar, and the spotted scapulars, are the marks usually given for 
field identification of the adult male; but the most striking differ- 
ence is the very black appearance. 

Adult males of the Common and American Golden-eyes are 
very white birds, the body looks almost altogether white, just as 
a male Bufflehead’s does, especially when sitting. The adult 
male Barrow’s on the other hand looks to have a body more black 
than white. The most conspicuous feature of a duck at rest is 
the flank. Whatever color the flank feathers are, they will domi- 
nate the mass of the bird, as they overlap the whole wing and 
sometimes even a portion of the back. 

Thus a fully plumaged Ringneck drake looks to be almost as 
white as a Scaup, a Black Brant looks more white than black, 
and so on. 

The flank feathers in Barrow’s Golden-eye (adult male) are 
heavily margined with black, fully two-thirds of an inch wide, 


THE Auk, VoL. XXXVII 


PLATE 


1. BaRRow’s GOLDEN-EYE. Mates Prun.na. FEMALE ASLEEP. 
Barrow’s GOLDEN-EYE COURTING. 
MALE IN SWALLOWING ACTION. 


FEMALE BosBBING Up Aanp Down. 


XVI. 


Hel rs Mee Brooks, Noles on American Ducks. 307 


and the black comes almost, or quite, to the water line in front 
of the wing. 

But while a child could distinguish the adult males of the two 
species, it is a very different matter when it comes to the females 
and young. 

The case of the Cinnamon and Blue-winged Teal is similar, 
and there are many others where two utterly dissimilar males 
have females that are almost identical. In the Golden-eyes this 
has been complicated by the oft-quoted recognition marks that 
have no value, as they are common to both species. 

Perhaps it may be as well to go over the accepted and proffered 
distinctions for separating islandica from americana. 

1. The wing bar. This is the most often quoted distinction. 
In the adult male of Barrow’s there is certainly a constant and 
conspicuous black bar separating the white patch on the wing, 
this is caused by the bases of the greater coverts being black. 
But the bar formed by the black tipping of these feathers in the 
females and young is, as pointed out by Mr. Brewster (Auk, 
Vol. XXVI, p. 159), an utterly valueless distinction, as both 
species may or may not have it in different individuals. 

Five adult females of Barrow’s in my collection have these 
feathers as follows: 

No. 1. Solid black, no bar. 

No. 2. Base black, terminal half white with small black tips, 
forming a slight bar. 

No. 3. Tips black, well-defined bar. 

No. 4. Trace of spots on tips of two feathers, no bar. 

No. 5. Slight bar. 

All of these are absolutely identified, being taken in the spring 
when paired. 

The most pronounced bar in a female in my collection belongs 
to an otherwise typical americana, which has all the coverts tipped 
black, while another has a trace of a bar. 

2. Deeper coloring of head and neck in female Barrow’s. This 
is a fairly reliable distinction but it is a comparative one. Ridg- 
way in his manual says of zslandica, “brown of head descending 
to middle of neck all round.”’ I can see no difference in amount 
of brown in fresh specimens of the two species; the above dis- 
tinction probably depends on the make-up of the skin. 


é A 
358 Brooks, Notes on American Ducks. hare 


3. Wider gray pectoral band. Probably a sound distinction 
but one which is dependent, in the skin, on a uniform method of 
make-up. 

4. Shape and proportions of bill. The more tapering bill of 
islandica is a thoroughly good distinction, but as given by all 
authorities it is a comparative one, just as is “ bill more goose-like.”’ 

How can a man who has only one Golden-eye tell whether the 
bill is tapering when no measurements are given, or that it is 
goose-like if he has no example of the other species to compare 
with it?) Ridgway’s ‘Manual’ however has a definite formula 
as the best distinction between the two species. 

“Al. Height of upper mandible at base, measured from point of frontal 
angle to nearest point on cutting edge, less than distance from anterior 
edge of loral feathering to anterior end of nostril, and usually little if any 
greater than distance from latter point to tip of upper mandible 


G. clangula. 
151. G. clangula americana.” 


“A?. Height of upper mandible at base, measured from extremity of 
frontal angle to nearest point on cutting edge, equal to distance from an- 
terior point of loral feathering to anterior end of nostril, and much greater 
than from latter point to tip of upper mandible 

152. G. islandica.”’ 

I have carefully tested this with the following results: 

If the first measurement is taken by placing one point of the 
dividers on the frontal angle, and the other on the cutting edge, 
i. e., the chord of the distance around the bill, the results are 
wrong in one-fourth of my specimens of islandica, including 
one adult male, and wrong in two-thirds of my specimens of 
americana including two adult males. 

If this measurement is taken by holding one point of the dividers 
level with the frontal angle in line immediately above the nearest 
point of the cutting edge, 7. e., the actual height of the former 
above the latter, the results are hopelessly out in nearly all my 
islandica, but correct for all but one of my americana. 

If the first portion of the proposition is taken, eliminating 
the distance from nostril to end of bill, measurements taken by 
first method, the results are correct in all my americana, but 
wrong in four out of eleven islandica. So this distinction, which 
I had great hopes of, proved a “no thoroughfare.” 


SO 


tha on oad Brooks, Notes on American Ducks. 309 

5. Nail of bill. Ridgway gives width in americana female 
“not more than .20.” I have a female with a nail width of .22. 
In islandica female “not less than .23,” this holds good even 
when a very young islandica is included, it has a nail .26 wide. 
Brewster says he is unable to verify this distinction with his 
series, so it must be reckoned uncertain. 

Nail larger and more hooked at tip (‘Game birds of Cali- 
fornia’), also Munro in ‘The Condor,’ No. 1, Vol. XV. “Nail is 
wider at the front, projects further over tip of bill, and is slightly 
raised above the bill forming a noticeable lump.” 

All of these distinctions hold good but then again, as given, 
they are mostly comparative. 

6. Color of bill. The yellow color of the bill in zslandica is an 
oft-quoted distinction and one to which Mr. Brewster attached 
great faith. 

The following facts I can vouch for: Adult females of americana 
usually have a yellow or dull orange bar on the terminal third 
of the upper mandible, sometimes more than one-third of the 
bill is yellow and in one instance (and here I speak from memory 
only) the entire bill orange yellow. 

The young of this species have always (?) an olive bill—no 
yellow. 

The young females of islandica have an olive, brownish, or 
blackish bill, no yellow. In the adult females it is wholly orange 
or cheese-colored, or else the same with the base more or less 
flecked with dusky. But this is a seasonal feature only. During 
the past summer (1919) I kept a number of breeding females 
under observation. When pairing with the males in the latter 
part of April and early in May, all had orange bills, even some 
of the unmated immatures of the previous year had the bill more 
or less orange. In July, when these same females were each 
leading a brood on their respective ponds, all had dusky or black- 
ish bills, showing no yellow at all. 

So the yellow bill, which can only apply to adult females at 
best, cannot be relied on at all seasons. 

7. Skull. The difference in the shape of the frontal bones has 
been noticed by several authorities, it is pronounced enough in 
adult males, but a rather subtle distinction when applied to young 
birds (see figures p. 362). 


360 


am WW 


and 
and 
and 


and 


Brooks, Notes on American Ducks. 


7 3 


to] 
Barrow’s Golden-eye 2 ad. March 21, 1914. 
American Golden-eye 2 ad. April 7, 1914. 
Barrow’s Golden-eye o ad. April 15, 1911. 
American Golden-eye o ad. March 17, 1891. 


pa 


nek Pana va Brooks, Notes on American Ducks. 361 

Now the sum of all of this discussion seems to be that it would 
be easy to wrongly identify a bird of either species from the works 
of reference available in America, nor do ‘those of European authors, 
up to and including Millais’ very elaborate work, give a really 
reliable method of distinguishing the two species at all stages. 
As their main distinction, that of the greater size of zslandica, 
only applies when it is compared with the smaller old world sub- 
species, C. clangula clangula. The following attempt to differ- 
entiate them may also prove abortive, but it works out well with 
my series. 

This series is small, as events of recent years have interfered 
with my plan of making a really good series of both species. Still 
I have eleven thoroughly identified specimens of the rarer bird, 
and have had exceptional opportunities of identifying these, 
by taking the paired female of an undoubted male islandica, or 
the young of the same species after watching them through the 
summer. 

Also I have had a very much larger number through my hands, 
and since my first introduction to Barrow’s Golden-eye some 
twenty-three years ago, I have lived in a region where it is the 
commonest breeding duck, for the greater part of my time. 

This fact must be my excuse for attempting what is apparently 
a rather difficult undertaking. To get correct measurements, 
and ones that properly illustrate the differences, has not been 
easy. First, the nail has ill-defined boundaries in many cases. 
I have found it advisable to wet the bill to more clearly define 
these. Second, it has been difficult to get a measurement that 
shows the very pronounced taper of the bill in islandica; if the 
width is taken near the tip, where it is most prominent, there 
must be a definite point. Through the base of the nail would 
seem to be the best, but the longer nail of islandica brings this 
measurement further back in that species, and so makes them 
more nearly alike than the actual shape of the bill would indi- 
cate. Half way between nostrils and base of nail suffers from 
the same cause, so I have had to take the measurement across 
the anterior angle of the nostrils although the taper is not so 
pronounced there. 

As Mr. Brewster has done (loc. cit. p. 159), I shall place the 
characters in what I consider the order of their importance. 


362 Brooks, Notes on American Ducks. (Gaes 


I is 
7. 6. "4 
Ms: MELE 
= { 


= 
5 6 
— 


1. Barrow’s Golden-eye o ad. April 15, 1911. 

2. American Golden-eye o& ad. March 17, 1891. 

3 and 5. Barrow’s Golden-eye o’ ad. October 15, 1913. 
4 and 6. Barrow’s Golden-eye @ ad. October 15, 1913. 


ee rs see Brooks, Notes on American Ducks. 363 


Those relating only to adult males are disregarded as these 
can be separated by any one without difficulty. 


1. Nail. Americana—Nail flattened or depressed, not conspicuously 
raised above the contour of the bill when viewed from the side, and not 
arched in its transverse section towards base. 

Length of nail, o, less than .46 in., longest .44, shortest .38, average 
.406; @, less than .40, average .37. 

Islandica—Nail arched in both longitudinal and transverse sections, 
showing as a conspicuous hump above the contour of the bill. 

Length of nail, o’, over .46, longest .53, shortest .48, average 508; 
2 , over .40, longest .46, shortest .41, average .43. 

2. Shape of bill. Americana—Bill not conspicuously tapered when 
viewed from above. 

Width at a point through anterior angle of nostril, co’, over .69, widest 
.82, narrowest .70, average .74;  Q , over .60, average .69. 

Tslandica—Bill conspicuously tapered, width taken as above, ©”, less 
than .69, widest .68, narrowest .63, average .65; Q , less than .60, widest 
.59, narrowest .55, average .57. 

3. Color of head in Q. Americana— Hair brown or grayish amber.” 

Islandica—“ Deep sepia or purplish snuff brown.” (Ridgway.) 

4. Shape of Skull. Americana—Frontals continuing the slope of cul- 
men, without trace of a bulge. 

Islandica—Frontals conspicuously bulging in adult males, hardly less 
so in immature males of second year, bulge distinctly noticeable to the 
touch in adult females, and faintly so in juvenals. 


Something might be made out of the amount of black at base 
of greater coverts. This is decidedly more in islandica, usually 
showing beyond the overlap of the lesser coverts, and sometimes 
covering the entire feather. In young males commencing to show 
the white cheek patch a crescentic formation is sometimes ap- 
parent in americana, this is due to the fact that the white feathers 
commence to come in along the edge of the bill, following the 
curve of its base, but it may be noted that this crescent is con- 
fined to the lower portion of the bill, in islandica it continues up 
to the mental angle, even in its first stages. 

The diagrams of bills appended are drawn from dried speci- 
mens, as this will be the condition of most of the birds to be com- 
pared with them. 

The tomia is apt to roll up and enclose the under mandible 
in drying, sometimes more on one side than the other, giving the 
bill a lop-sided appearance. 


292 = : Auk 
364 Brooks, Notes on American Ducks. [ July 


The top views of the bills of the juvenal male and female tslandica 
show a greater length as these are made from skulls, where there 
is no feathering to cut off the extreme base when viewed in this 
manner. 

The differences in the trachea have been commented on before, 
but it is as well to include them here, the figures illustrate these. 
The sketches of courting antics are from a notebook, and were 
made in the field. (Plates NV and XVI.) 

The most common form of display in the drake is the ‘swallow- 
ing’ or ‘gulping’ action, this may or may not be followed by a kick 
which throws the water up behind. ‘Chasing,’ with the head 
close to or level with the water, and the body sunk, always occurs 
when one male invades another’s territory. The pursuer often 
dives and comes up under the intruder who then makes off at 
great speed. 


1. Trachea of American Golden-eye. 
la. Barrow’s Golden-eye. 


Continually between these antics the males preen themselves, 
frequently turning over on the back. 

The females pay little attention to their lords, occasionally 
they approach bobbing or pumping their heads up and down, 
and turning the bill from side to side; more rarely they will join 
in the chase of an intruding male. 


Vol. cpa 
1920 


Brooks, Notes on American Ducks. 365 

Quite often a female will turn her head around, tuck her bill 
away in the back feathers and calmly go to sleep, oblivious of 
the display of the drake who seemingly does not care whether 
his spouse looks at him or not. 

Once in November I watched a lone drake going through the 
whole performance by himself—water-kick and all. When asleep 
the tail is held up at a good angle, though not such a conspicuous 
cant as is affected by Ruddy Ducks and Scoters when resting. 

Barrow’s Golden-eye is a common breeder throughout the arid 
interior of British Columbia, from the southern boundary north 
at least to lat. 54 , and from 1000 ft. altitude up to at least 6000 
ft., wherever the mountain lakes are sufficiently clear of ice to 
allow them to rear a brood. I have only twice seen the common 
Golden-eye breeding in this region. 

All the drakes, including those of the preceding year (which 
do not acquire the full plumage until their second autumn), leave 
for the coast before the middle of June, and before the young are 
hatched. 

The bulk of the females and young follow them about the 
middle of September as in the case of the Harlequin Duck. 

I have so far been unable to actually verify that they do so 
to the salt water, but hope to during the coming summer. 

A few birds may be seen throughout the fall and winter, includ- 
ing adult males. I am inclined to believe these are not the birds 
that have bred here, but rather migrants from the northeastern 
districts. 

I have found Barrow’s Golden-eye fairly common at the coast 
in the winter, and much tamer than the common Golden-eye. 


Oidemia americana. AmpRICAN ScoTsr. 

In British Columbia this Scoter is an exclusively maritime 
duck, at least I have not come across a single reliable inland 
record. Not only is it a maritime bird, but it is seldom found 
in the small bays and inlets where the other species swarm, but 
frequents the exposed shores and outer reefs together with the 
Harlequin. It has many points in common with that duck, 
rising easily from the water and doing much flying about in 
small lots of four or five—mostly males—seemingly for the pleas- 
ure of flying, usually returning to the point they started from. 


[ Auk 
July 


366 Brooks, Notes on American Ducks. 

In flight the silvery under-surface of the primaries, in both 
sexes, is very conspicuous. In fine calm weather they call a 
great deal and their plaintive ‘cour-loo’ is the most musical of 
duck-cries, very different from the croaking notes of most diving 
ducks. While very strongly opposed to multiplying genera, I 
must agree with Dr. Dwight that this Scoter is hardly con-generic 
with the other two American species, this difference is most pro- 
nounced in its actions. 


Oidemia deglandi. WuttTr-wINGED ScoTER. 


This duck throws a good deal of light on the movements of 
many of the sea-ducks, as its migrations are largely made by 
daylight. The northward movement is en masse in May and 
very early June, and a large proportion of the flocks migrate 
diagonally across country in a northeasterly direction. I think 
the bulk of the Mackenzie River Valley birds migrate across 
British Columbia. The sexes in the flocks at this time seem to 
be proportionate. 

A few birds of all ages remain on the coast all through the 
summer—now breeding adults and young birds of the preceding 
year. Late in July and early in August small flocks of adult 
males return by the same route, and passing down the inland 
lakes they arrive on the coast and form very large flocks. As 
Dr. Dwight has recorded there is no eclipse in the Scoters, these 
birds are all in worn plumage. 

Early in October comes the great migration of the females and 
young, these are usually in small lots of eight to a dozen—evi- 
dently the female with her brood. 

They frequently remain on the inland lakes for a few days, 
forming larger flocks, and then pass on to the coast, a few adult 
males are with them. None breed in southern British Columbia. 


Oidemia perspicillata. Surr Scormr. 


While this is not an exclusively maritime duck, like the Amer- 
ican Scoter is with us, its migrations, while generally similar to 
those of the White-winged Scoter, are much more coastwise. A 
few, both adults and young, on both the Spring and Fall migra- 
tions, migrate across country, but for the real movement one 
should be about a mile off shore on the salt water. 


ver, aaah Hal Houuister, Abundance of Wild Ducks. 367 


Along the British Columbia coast for about two weeks in 
October there is a constant succession of flocks of females and 
young of this and the preceding species, the numbers that pass 
must be incalculable. 

There is no reliable record of its breeding in the Province, 
although I have seen them vigorously courting in central British 
Columbia, well along in June; three or four males whirling about 
a female on the water like whirling beetles, and uttering a curious 
low, liquid note, like water dropping in a cavern. Large num- 
bers of both this and the White-winged Scoter die from parasitic 
diseases (intestinal), but nothing to the thousands that are killed 
through contact with floating patches of crude oil at sea. 

Okanagan Landing, B. C. 


RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF WILD DUCKS AT 
DELAVAN, WISCONSIN. 


BY N. HOLLISTER. 


RECENTLY, in looking over some old ducking records kept by 
myself and companions at Delavan, Wisconsin, it occurred to 
me that certain parts of these records are well worthy of per- 
manent preservation. They furnish fairly accurate data on the 
relative abundance of many species of wild ducks at that time 
and may serve for important and instructive comparisons with 
similar figures which may be kept at some future period. It is 
evident that there has been a considerable change in the relative 
abundance of various species during the past twenty-five years, 
and it would be very interesting indeed if we had comparable 
records for the same region for still earlier times. 

From the fall of 1892 until the fall of 1899, inclusive, we occu- 
pied a cottage at Delavan Lake each autumn and spring for a 
week or two of duck shooting. In a book provided for the pur- 
pose, complete records were kept of every game bird brought 
into this cottage. All of the shooting was over decoys in open 


[uly 


368 Houuister, Abundance of Wild Ducks. 


water, the blinds being built on the shore, usually on a point 
extending out into the lake. For this reason the cottage gun 
record is essentially an open-water record of deep-water ducks. 
The river ducks were not commonly obtained in such places and 
comparatively few of them were included in the bags. 

In all, 701 ducks, besides geese, snipe, and other game birds, 
are listed in these records, the species carefully distinguished 
by their local names. Unfortunately, though, the common prac- 
tice of duck hunters of lumping the Greater and Lesser Scaups 
and the Ring-neck under the common name of ‘ Blue-bill,’ was 
followed in our cottage game book. Although we recognized 
the three species perfectly we simply followed general custom 
in keeping them together in such records. From my own recol- 
lection, and I examined practically every bird recorded, as well 
as from a study of my personal ornithological journal covering 
these years, I should judge that the 270 ‘ Blue-bills’ listed in the 
lake records should be divided about as follows: Lesser Seaup, 
60 per cent.; Ring-neck, 35 per cent.; and Greater Scaup, 5 per 
cent. Sometimes the Lesser Scaup was the commonest, and 
again, for an entire week, the Ring-neck far outnumbered the 
other ‘Blue-bills.’ I find, for instance, in my own bird journal, 
under general remarks covering the first two weeks of November, 
1895, at Delavan Lake, the following: 

Ducks were very abundant, even older hunters say they never saw 
blue-bills so plentiful. The air was fairly dark with them at times; fully 
500 or even 1,000 Lesser Scaups to one of any other kind. Did not seea 
Ring-neck during the two weeks, although this is usually a common species. 
There were more American Scaups [Greater Scaups] than I have ever 
seen before, indeed they might almost be said to be common. A few 
Canvas-backs, Red-heads, Butter-balls, Hooded Mergansers, Golden-eyes, 
Red-breasted and American Mergansers, Green-wings, Mallards, and 
Pintails. Canada and Snow Geese common, especially the first; a few 
Swans also. 

Records for a number of successive years must therefore be 
kept to give any reasonably accurate figures on the relative abun- 
dance of the species. Almost every season is exceptional as 
regards some particular species; either some kind is unusually 
abundant or some kind is unaccountably rare. 


Vol. Te | 


1920 HouuistEer, Abundance of Witd Ducks. 369 


Since these cottage records give us comparable figures only for 
the deep-water and so-called sea-ducks, I have carefully gone 
over my daily bird journals for the same eight years—1892—1899— 
and listed all ducks mentioned, additional to those listed at the 
lake cottage. These include ducks shot by myself and com- 
panions, if I was in company, and such others as were brought to 
me by sportsmen friends to add to my collection of local birds. 
These ducks, totalling in number 466, added to the records of 
the cottage at the lake, give us a fair average for all species and 
all sorts and conditions of shooting—lakes, marshes, prairie, 
creeks, and woodland ponds. The total figures, including 1167 
ducks, may, I think, be taken as fairly representative of the place 
at that time. In my own journals I have usually discriminated 
between the Scaups and the Ring-neck, and in the following totals 
I have divided the ‘ Blue-bills’ listed in the cottage gun records 
according to my above estimates as to their relative abundance, 
on the average, over the eight years period. 

Below is a combined list of the 1167 ducks, arranged in the 
order of numbers handled, with the relative approximate abun- 
dance on basis of 100, following the method used by Mr. Aldo 
Leopold for the ducks of the Rio Grande Valley,! in the second 
column of figures. 


Recorp or 1167 Witp Ducks KintEp N&AR DELAVAN, WISCONSIN, 
FROM 1892 To 1899. 


Relative 
Species Number Abundance 

recorded per 100 
Lesser Scaup Duck (Marila affinis)......... 182 15.6 
Hooded Merganser (Lophodytes cucullatus).. 156 13.4 
Ring-necked Duck (Marila collaris)......... 111 9.6 
Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos).............. 101 8.7 
Buffle-head (Charitonetta albeola)........... 96 8.2 
Golden-eye (Clangula clangula americana)... 70 6.0 
Green-winged Teal (Nettion carolinense)..... 68 5.8 
Wood) Ducki(Avr'sponsa)=.4. 32.2.0 ee 008 2. 61 5.3 
Blue-winged Teal (Querquedula discors)..... 49 4.2 
Shoveller (Spatula clypeata)................ 36 Sal 


1 Condor, vol. 21, p, 122. May, 1919. 


370 Ho.utster, Abundance of Wild Ducks. aes 


Canvas-back (Marila valisineria)........... 34 2.9 

Pinta (Daila acuta) ee ab. cee re en: 32 Qt 

Baldpate (Mareca americana).............. 30 2.51 
Redhead (Marila americana)....... ee FOU) Deoilt 
Red-breasted Merganser (Mergus ee tha 25 2.14 
Greater Scaup Duck (Marila marila)....... 20 ileal 
Ruddy Duck (Hrismatura jamaicensis)...... 18 1.54 
American Merganser (Mergus americanus)... 13 este 
Gadwall (Chaulelasmus streperus)........... 10 0.85 
Old-squaw (Harelda hyemalis).............. 8 0.71 
American Scoter (Oidemia americana)....... 6 0.49 
White-winged Scoter (Oidemia deglandi)..... 4 0.34 
Black Duck (Anas ‘robni pes ine sae ae os + 0.34 
Surf Scoter (Oidemia perspicillata).......... 3 0.25 

1,167 100 per cent 


In estimating the actual relative abundance of the birds, from 
records of this kind, allowance must be made, of course, for the 
size of the flocks; as mentioned by Mr. Leopold in the paper 
above cited. The Golden-eyes, Buffleheads, and Hooded Mer- 
gansers, for instance, commonly occur in small groups, and the 
proportion killed to those seen is far greater than in the case of 
the ‘ Blue-bills,’ which frequently decoy in very large flocks. The 
ducks which habitually gather in small bunches are consequently 
much more rapidly reduced in numbers on an open lake than are 
the species that occur in great flocks. 

Some of the species run about even in the records for spring 
and fall. With others, the Lesser Scaup and Pintail for instance, 
the figures for spring greatly outnumber those for autumn. If 
the Pintail had beeen as abundant in fall as it was in spring it 
would have ranked much higher in the above list. The Mallard, 
Teals, and Wood Duck were protected in spring in Wisconsin 
during all this period, and consequently were not regularly hunted 
at that season; so that the figures for these birds are relatively 
low as compared to those for some other species, like the Canvas- 
back, Baldpate, and Redhead, which were taken in about equal 
numbers during spring and fall migrations. The Hooded Mer- 
ganser, Buffle-head, and Golden-eye were most commonly killed in 
fall, as follows: 


Vol. ot] «= Honuster, Abundance of Wild Ducks. 371 


Hooded 
Season Merganser Buffle-head Golden-eye 
pring (1893-1899). 2.0. 6k ccs 14 22 18 
Autumn (1892-1899)............... 142 74 52 
156 96 70 


It is doubtful if records for the present or for any future period 
will give anything like the above relative abundance. That the 
records may be equalled in numbers is entirely possible, as they 
are by no means large as such records go; but I do not believe 
that ever again will the Hooded Merganser, Buffle-head, or Golden- 
eye stand so near the top of such a list. These three species have 
suffered a greater reduction proportionally than have most of the 
other ducks. On the other hand, the Canvas-back and Redhead 
are much more common on Delavan Lake than they were during 
the period covered by this report; and the Black Duck, in that 
region, is now increasing in numbers year by year. A successful 
planting of wild celery in the lake accounts for the increase in the 
Canvas-back and Redhead; but only a general western extension in 
the regular distribution of the Black Duck would seem to explain 
the more common occurrence of that species. 

Spring shooting, we all hope, has been permanently abolished, 
and under careful protection ducks may, on the whole, increase 
in numbers in North America; but certain species, if they do not 
actually disappear from our fauna, will undoubtedly become very 
rare within a comparatively short time. There must be, scat- 
tered throughout the country, many records of gun clubs, or of 
individual sportsmen, that might be consulted by those who have 
the opportunity. If the species are properly distinguished in the 
lists, accurate data on the former relative abundance of various 
species of wild ducks may be obtained from them. This exact 
information can be had from no other source, and in view of the 
still greater changes that are to be expected in the future, it will 
become of very great interest and value. 


National Zoological Park, Washington, D. C. 


Se GRINNELL, Audubon Park. anes 


RECOLLECTIONS OF AUDUBON PARK. 
BY GEORGE BIRD GRINNELL. 
Plates XV II-XVIII. 


THE interest which we all feel in John James Audubon, and in 
those connected with him, must plead my excuse for writing this 
and for the too frequent use of the first person singular. 

I spent my boyhood in Audubon Park, and what I have to say 
relates to members of the Audubon family and chiefly to the 
woman to whom—quite as much as to her husband—we owe the 
greatest work on ornithology that America has produced. I 
should like to give you some impression of the personality of 
Madam Audubon and her son, John Woodhouse, and to make 
you see the surroundings of their later lives somewhat as I recall 
them. 

Lucy Bakewell Audubon was a fit mate for her great husband, 
for her steadfastness and determination supplied qualities which 
in some degree he lacked. I believe that of the two she was the 
stronger—as she was the better balanced—character. If she did 
not have her husband’s vivacity, charm, versatility and artistic 
talent, she possessed characteristics more important: the force to 
keep him up to his work, the faith to cheer his heart when dis- 
couraged, the industry and patience to earn money that he might 
continue his struggle, and the unyielding will to hold the family 
together. It was largely through her assistance and support that 
at last he won success. 

A few years after the death of Audubon my father moved to 
Audubon Park. I was a very small boy about far enough ad- 
vanced in polite learning to know A from B. At that time Madam 
Audubon conducted a little school for her grandchildren, which 
was attended also by some of the neighbors’ children, of whom 
I was one. It was my first attendance at a school. 

Except for two houses with the plots of land about them, the 
whole tract of Minnie’s Land, or Audubon Park, then belonged to 
Madam Audubon. Victor, the eldest son, was bedridden as the 
result of an accident, and John Woodhouse, a man of great energy, 


THe AuK, Vout. XXXVII PuaTeE XVII. 


Mrs. Lucy BakEWELL AUDUBON 


a 


- 


. XXXVITI 
vot 1920 Mi | GRINNELL, Audubon Park. ote 


managed the property and looked after the sale of the books. 
The family had abundant land, which was more or less encum- 
bered and quite unsalable, but its resources in money were small 
and uncertain. I have a vivid memory of an occasion when my 
father took me with him when he went to see Madam Audubon 
to conclude the purchase of a piece of land, and of the great relief, 
satisfaction, and even gratitude, that she expressed to him for 
his willingness to make the purchase. The scene touched me, 
even though for years afterward I did not understand its meaning. 

John W. Audubon was quite without business training, but 
he worked hard and faithfully to relieve the family embarrassment. 
He built several houses in Audubon Park, which were sold or 
rented, and in a field east of what is now Broadway, built a large 
frame house which for some years was occupied as a tenement 
by workmen in the nearby sugar refinery. All these things brought 
in some money, but there was always a heavy burden of debt. 

Madam Audubon was a most kindly, gentle, benignant woman. 
She was loved and admired by everyone and—by most people— 
I think a little feared, for she had the repose and dignity of a great 
lady, and was not given to jokes or laughter. With the children 
she unbent far more than with older people, and they loved her 
dearly, and took their small troubles to her with the utmost con- 
fidence. Yet the children too stood a little in awe of her, and in 
her presence were never mischievous or playful at inopportune 
times. Her grandchildren, of course, called her Grandma, and 
she became Grandma to many other little ones of different blood. 

She lived with her son Victor and the school was carried on in 
her bedroom, the southeast corner of the second floor of that 
house. In the schoolroom she was tireless, passing from one child 
to another, seeing that each was properly at work, helping, ex- 
plaining, encouraging. During the hours of school each child 
received a personal supervision that was practically continuous. 

She was tall, slender, erect, always clad in black, and always 
wore her white cap. I never saw her without her spectacles. 

The Audubon Park of that day was quite different from what 
it became later. Except for the land about the Audubon houses, 
near the river, and that immediately about two houses higher 
up on the hill, it was a tangle of underbrush and saplings, above 


[uty 


374 GRINNELL, Audubon Park. 
which rose many forest trees, some of them of great size. Much 
of the land between the present 155th and 157th Streets was 
overgrown with thick-standing young hemlocks, and no grass 
grew on the shaded ground. North of 157th Street were the 
“near woods,”’ so-called, through which ran a brook, and this tract 
remained wild and unimproved until the year 1870, when it was 
added to Audubon Park. To the north of 158th Street was a 
larger piece of woodland. Great white pines stood about the 
Audubon houses, and on one of them grew a vine of fox grapes, 
some of which the children always managed to get, after the first 
hard frost of autumn. 

At a little distance from the houses the Hudson River Railroad 
ran across a wide cove, on an embankment, and the tide from the 
river rose and fell in the ponds lying between this causeway and 
the old river bank. In these ponds the boys fished for killies 
and eels, and in summer went crabbing. In winter the quiet 
water froze and we had good skating. The ponds were long 
ago filled up and even their memory has passed away. 

The interior of the Audubon House was attractive—an old- 
fashioned country house, more or less worn and shabby from the 
tramping and play of a multitude of children. In the hall were 
antlers of elk and deer, which supported guns, shot pouches, 
powder flasks, and belts. Pictures that now are famous hung on 
the walls. In the dining-room facing the entrance from the hall, 
was the portrait of the naturalist and his dog, painted by John 
Woodhouse Audubon. The painting of pheasants started by a 
dog—now in the American Museum—was in the parlor south of 
the hall, and the picture of the eagle and the lamb upstairs in 
Madam Audubon’s bedroom. Everywhere were vivid reminders 
of the former owner of the land. 

To the north of the Victor Audubon and east of the John Audu- 
bon house, on a hillock, was the wooden building with a cellar 
known as “the cave,” where some of the old copper plates were 
stored for a time. This building was always locked, and the boys 
seldom had an opportunity to look into it, except when John 
Audubon opened it and they were permitted to follow him in. 
John Harden, the man who boxed these plates, died last summer 
in his eighty-ninth year, on the very borders of Audubon Park, 
where he had lived for sixty-seven years. ’ 


ha i920" a) GRINNELL, Audubon Park. 375 


Grandma Audubon gave me my first conscious lesson about 
birds. I cannot remember a time when the common names of the 
more familiar species were not known to me, though I presume 
the list was not a long one. It included, however, the passenger 
pigeon, which was seen in the dogwood trees each autumn, and 
the white-headed eagle, which in winter was extremely abundant 
on the floating ice of the river and sometimes brought its captive 
fish to the trees in the park, there to eat them or as often to quarrel 
about them with its fellows, and sometimes to drop the prey. 

One of my early recollections is of being called from the break- 
fast table one morning to look at a large flock of Passenger Pigeons 
that was feeding in a dogwood tree twenty-five or thirty feet from 
the house. There were so many of the birds that all could not 
alight in it, and many kept fluttering about while others fed on 
the ground, eating the berries knocked off by those above. 

Thirty years ago an account was printed in ‘The Auk’ by Mr. 
Geo. N. Lawrence of birds at Manhattanville before 1850. Audu- 
bon Park was only a mile above Manhattanville, and fifteen or 
twenty years later than the time written of by Mr. Lawrence, 
conditions there had not changed. The region was still untouched 
country. The City of New York had not begun its northward 
march. On Sixth Avenue the pavements stopped at 23rd Street, 
and on Broadway the dirt road began at 36th Street. 

It was Grandma Audubon who, when I was a little fellow, 
identified for me a bird that I had never seen before. One morn- 
ing in late winter, or early spring, on my way to school I had al- 
most reached the Victor Audubon house, when I saw a dozen 
or twenty small greenish birds feeding on the grass under a pine 
tree. I approached them slowly, trying to see what they were; 
and they did not fly, even when I was within a few feet of them. 
I did not know them, and they were so tame that I resolved to 
try to catch one. The crabnet used in summer always hung in 
the area under the Victor Audubon piazza, and backing away 
from the birds I ran there, secured the net, and returned. It 
was not difficult for a cautious lad to get near enough to the little 
birds to pass the net over one, and when I had caught it I rushed 
into the house and up to Grandma’s room, and showed her my 
prize. She told me that the bird was a Red Crossbill—a young 


[uty 


376 GRINNELL, Audubon Park. 
one—pointed out the peculiarities of the bill, told me something 
about the bird’s life, and later showed me a picture of it. Then 
after a little talk she and I went downstairs and out of doors, 
found the birds still feeding there, and set the captive free. 

Two or three years later Mr. John Audubon performed a like 
service for a small companion and me. Neither of the two boys 
was as yet permitted to carry a gun. But, like some other boys, 
they managed now and then to get hold of guns, borrowed or stolen, 
and to go shooting. In the large piece of woods north of 158th 
Street we saw a flock of birds fly up into a tulip tree, and recog- 
nized them as ‘pigeons,’ but small ones. It happened to be my 
turn to use the gun, and after appropriate care in stalking I killed 
one of the flock. As we had supposed, it was a ‘pigeon,’ unlike 
those we knew, yet one whose picture we had seen. We found 
the plate of the bird—a Ground Dove—and to make sure we were 
right, took the bird to Mr. John Audubon who was mending 
fence at the corner of 158th Street and Riker’s 12th Avenue, and 
asked him what it was. He looked at it with interest, and told 
us that it was a Ground Dove, adding that there were many of 
them further south, but that he had never seen one here before. 
This may have been in the autumn of 1860 or 1861—not in 1862 
as I have said earlier. 

After a year or two of attendance at Madam Audubon’s school 
I was sent to a boys’ school. For years, however, I took lessons 
in music and French from a granddaughter of Madam Audubon, 
daughter of John Woodhouse and granddaughter of Rev. John 
Bachman, and was always in close association with the family. 

A favorite playground of the boys of Audubon Park was the 
loft of John Woodhouse’s barn, where, piled up against the walls, 
were rows of wooden boxes full of bird skins, collected by the 
naturalist and his sons. We had been told not to meddle with 
these, and usually obeyed the injunction, knowing that if we did 
any harm, this playground would be closed to us. Here in the 
barn, too, were piles of the old red muslin bound ‘Ornithological 
Biography.’ One of these sets was given my father perhaps 
sixty years ago, but unfortunately the old red covers have been 
torn off and something more modern substituted for them. 

One day in winter a great pine tree in front of the Victor Audu- 
bon house was cut down and while splitting it into lengths for 


finn AWK Vous XOXOCV LL PLATE XVIII. 


JOHN WoopHousr AUDUBON 


378 Grinnett, Audubon Park. [sane 


fuel the men found, almost in the center of the trunk, a cluster of 
small round black objects which proved to be leaden bullets—rifle 
balls. We boys were tremendously excited by the find and imag- 
ined an Indian tragedy where the captive was tied to the tree 
and tortured by being shot at, as was a common practice of the 
savage, according to the dime novels of the day. When Mr. 
John Audubon came up and saw the bullets and the wood, he 
recalled that many years before his father, some visitors and he 
had shot rifle at a target tacked upon this tree trunk, and here 
were the balls revealed by the ax. 

When I was twelve or thirteen years old, some of us were given 
guns and made weekly excursions—no longer secret ones—after 
the robins, yellow hammers, and wild pigeons that during the fall 
migration congregated in the berry-bearing trees that were so 
abundant in the woods. At a somewhat later date the boys in 
autumn used to go up on the roof of our house and shoot at the 
wild pigeons passing over. Sometimes we killed several in a day, 
though there was much waste of ammunition. 

With Jack Audubon, son of John Woodhouse, and the oldest 
grandson of the naturalist, I often in winter and spring went over 
to the Harlem River to lie in wait for muskrats on an arm of the 
river, which, if it existed today, would cover the old Polo Grounds 
—155-157th Streets and 8th Avenue—and run back about to the 
present 145th Street, west of 8th Avenue. 

In those days wild ducks were often seen in spring and fall 
along the lower Hudson. Usually they were out of the reach of 
small boys, though I remember that Jack Audubon killed a Blue- 
winged Teal on the Hudson in the early 60’s. Nevertheless, 
when we made excursions up to Dyckman’s Flats we occasionally 
killed in the marshes there and along the Harlem River, a wood 
duck, teal or black duck, but such great game was most unusual. 
Almost always at the proper season of the year there were many 
small shore birds on the Dyckman marshes, which the little boys 
hunted faithfully. English Snipe were often started there, but 
I do not know that any of us ever killed one. Sometimes we went 
as far as “ Bronson’s’”—now Van Cortland Park—where quail were 
started and an osprey had its nest in a tall tree that no one could 
climb. 


Nor Aeon vo GRINNELL, Audubon Park. 3719 


I saw John Woodhouse Audubon almost daily, for as a playmate 
of his sons I was always in and out of his house, and besides, he 
was a close friend of my father, and often in the evening came to 
our house. He was a most kindly man, but sometimes spoke 
quickly and I was a little afraid of him. If he felt like coming 
up to our house in the evening he came out of his door and stood 
before his house, a hundred yards distant from ours, and shouted 
my father’s name, and when answered called out, “If you have 
nothing to do, I'll come up and play you a game of billiards.”’ 
A little later he appeared, hatless and without overcoat, often 
powdered with snow if it was storming, and shod with old-fash- 
ioned carpet slippers from which he stamped the snow as he opened 
the front door. 

Often John Audubon painted in the barn, and the boys stood 
at a little distance and in silence watched him as the subject grew 
under his brush. He had a beautiful mare, Donna, of which he 
was very fond, that he painted. 

Often he received natural history specimens from a distance 
and we boys gathered about him and with breathless interest 
waited to see what wonderful things he would draw forth from 
his boxes. I recall especially a great white arctic hare that he 
held up for us to see, which to my wondering eyes seemed longer 
than I was tall. With the hare were some dark colored birds, which 
must have been Spruce Grouse, and some white Ptarmigan— 
strange creatures from the North. 

The picture of the eagle and the lamb always possessed a fas- 
cination for me. I greatly admired it and often talked about it 
to Grandma Audubon, and on one occasion she told me that after 
her death the picture should be mine. Boylike, I treasured this 
memory, but the promise was not again referred to. However, 
on the day that Madam Audubon departed for Louisville, Sep- 
tember 18, 1873, I received from her a note, perhaps one of the 
last she ever penned, which said that in case of accident to her on 
her journey south I should take possession of the eagle and the 
lamb, and that if she and her granddaughter safely reached their 
destination the picture would be in her will for me. It now hangs 
in my house. 

I never again saw Grandma Audubon, for in 1874 she died— 
full of years. She was a great woman and as good as great. The 


380 TOWNSEND, Courtship in Birds. hy 


help she gave to the people about her who needed it—rich as well 
as poor—will be remembered as long as those who knew her shall 
live. Some tributes to her greatness have been printed—but no 
words, written or spoken, can ever tell of all the good she did. 


238 E. Fifteenth St., New York, N. Y. 


COURTSHIP IN BIRDS. 


BY CHARLES W. TOWNSEND, M.D. 


Tue difference between the mentality of birds and of man is 
enormous and we must be on our guard against imputing purely 
human motive to the lower animals. On the other hand the 
difference between man and the lower animals in many important 
matters is not one of kind, but one merely of degree. 

A gull will drag a dried fish from the upper beach to the water 
to soften it before eating, a grackle will dip a tough bit of biscuit 
in the water for the same purpose, and a man will soften a hard 
crust in his coffee. How much is sub-conscious instinct or reflex 
action in some or all of these cases and how much is self-conscious 
reasoning and forethought—it is not my purpose to discuss here. 
To call it instinct in all cases in the lower animals and reason in 
all cases in man may possibly savor of conceit. 

The desire to live, to obtain food and to mate are primitive 
inborn instincts common to both the lower animals and to man. 
To gratify these instincts similar actions are resorted to by both 
the lower animals and man. The actions of a child desiring food 
from a table and those of a dog under the same circumstances 
are very much alike. Each appeals by voice and actions for 
the food, each is anxious to please the owner of the food, and 
each—unless the point has been reached in its experience of life 
will avail itself 


when it fears the consequences of unlawful acts 
of an opportunity to surreptitiously snatch the food. 

In the same way the desire of the male bird to please the female 
more than its rivals please the same bird appeals to us as a very 


er x el TowNSEND, Courtship in Birds. 381 


reasonable and very human point of view. This is what leads to 
courtship, and in this courtship rivalry it is natural to suppose 
that the best bird wins. Although it has been somewhat the fash- 
ion of late to decry Darwin’s theory of sexual selection and to 
substitute others for it, its simplicity and common sense still ap- 
peal to many, and it is worth while occasionally to consult the 
original text. 

Darwin published his “Origin of Species’ in 1859. In Chapter 
IV he says he is led “to say a few words on what I have called 
Sexual Selection. This form of selection depends, not on a struggle 
for existence in relation to other organic beings or to external 
conditions, but on a struggle between the individuals of one sex, 
generally the males, for the possession of the other sex. The 
result is not death to the unsuccessful competitor, but few or no 
offspring. Sexual selection is, therefore, less rigorous than natural 
selection. Generally, the most vigorous males, those which are 
best fitted for their places in nature, will leave most progeny. 
But in many cases, victory depends not so much on general vigor, 
as on having special yeapons confined to the male sex. A horn- 
less stag or spurless cock would have a poor chance of leaving 
numerous offspring. 

“Amongst birds, the contest is often of a more peaceful char- 
acter. All those who have attended to the subject, believe that 
there is the severest rivalry between the males of many species to 
attract, by singing, the females. The rock-thrush of Guiana, 
birds of paradise, and some others, congregate; and successive 
males display with the most elaborate care, and show off in the 
best manner their gorgeous plumage; they likewise perform strange 
antics before the females, which, standing by as spectators, at 
last choose the most attractive partner. 

“T cannot here enter on the necessary details; but if man can 
in a short time give beauty and an elegant carriage to his bantams, 
according to his standard of beauty, I can see no good reason to 
doubt that female birds, by selecting, during thousands of genera- 
tions, the most melodious or beautiful males, according to their 
standard of beauty, might produce a marked effect.” 

Eliot Howard,' on the other hand, believes that display and 
extravagant bodily antics are merely “reflex actions directly re- 


1The British Warblers. 


382 TownsEND, Courtship in Birds. lane 


sulting from any excessive excitement, that they are not confined 
solely to courtship and do not in any way influence the female.” 
The fact that the brilliantly arrayed male Argus Pheasant and the 
dull-colored Savin’s Warbler both spread out and raise their wings 
and tails during courtship seem to Howard a strong argument 
against sexual selection. 

Pycraft! says, “In these pages it is contended that neither 
brilliant coloration nor any other form of ornamentation is to be 
ascribed to the direct action of ‘sexual selection.’ That is to say 
such conspicuous features have not been dependent on the action 
of formal choice for their survival and development, but are rather 
the ‘expression points’ of the internal, inherent growth variations, 
which, not being inimical to the welfare of the species, have been 
free to pursue their development in any direction which apparent 
chance may dictate.” In another place he says: “The frills 
and furbelows’’—crests, vivid hues, ete., can—‘be traced to the 
stimulating action of the ‘hormones’ which control both pig- 
mentation and structure, as is shown by the fact that both are 
modified by any interference with the glands in question. Such 
ornamental features then are the concomitants, not the results, of 
sexual selection,” and again “sexual selection, other things being 
equal, operates by according the greatest number of descendants 
to the most amorous and not necessarily to those of the highest 
hues.”” He is therefore willing to admit that amorous behavior 
by song and dance and display of plumage influence and attract 
the female but he objects to the bold statement that she selects 
the male. Such mental qualifications satisfy those who would 
cast aside Darwin’s theory of sexual selection, but after all is said 
this theory, if not taken too literally, explains the facts better 
than any other. It is not necessary to assume that the female 
critically examines the display of color, dance or song of the rivals 
and balances them in her mind, but if we admit, as Pycraft is willing 
to do, that she is attracted and influenced by these, even if only 
in a reflex or sub-conscious way, we have practically admitted 
the truth of Darwin’s theory. The fittest male in any or all of 
these respects will be more likely to perpetuate the race. 


1Courtship of Animals. 


vel. care yar TOWNSEND, Courtship in Birds. 383 


The motives of display of color, dance and song are easily under- 
stood, for in one form or another they have all been used in human 
courtship. The likenesses are fundamental and extend from the 
lowest to the highest in the human species, but are most strikingly 
seen in the lowest, more primitive races. 

Although at the present day and among the highest developed 
human races the display of bright colors is more marked among 
the females than the males, it must be remembered that this is a 
recent development. Only a few generations back the males, 
instead of wearing black or sombre clothing, were as brilliantly 
apparelled as the females, and among savages it is the male that 
is strikingly bedecked with feathers, tatoo markings and paint, 
while the female is quiet enough in her apparel or lack of apparel. 
The tendency of the highly civilized male to revert to brilliant 
display of clothing is shown in his fondness for military finery and 
for striking colors when he is freed from the restraining hand of 
convention, as witness the cow-boy and the sportsman. 

In both bird and man the display of bright colors and attractive 
patterns, the dance and the song, even if of courtship origin and 
competitive in character, may lose the conscious sexual side and 
be continued at other times for mere pleasure, in other words the 
original incentive for display, song and dance may be entirely 
lost, but that does not seem to me to be any argument against 
the theory of sexual selection. 

The explanation of the brilliant colors of male birds on a mere 
physico-chemical basis due to exuberance of vitality, the male- 
ness of the males, or the stimulation of the hormones in the court- 
ship season fails to account for the fact that the brilliance of dis- 
play in this season may occur without the growth of new feathers, 
but merely by the wearing down of old feathers and the unveiling 
of concealed patterns. This is true in the case of the Snow Bunt- 
ing, the Junco and the Chewink, and is strikingly shown in the case 
of the English Sparrow, where the process goes on all unnoticed 
at our feet. 

The ultra-concealing-colorationists say that the brilliant colors 
serve to conceal, but one who has watched Eiders in the north, 
even though he admits that the green and white and black may 
match the iceberg and the sea and the rocks, is as sure that the 


384 TOWNSEND, Courtship in Birds. kanes 


colors are for display and for conspicuousness as he is that black 
is black and white is white. The speed with which the male dis- 
cards his brilliant dress when the spring madness is over seems to 
bear him out in this opinion. 

A recent writer! in ‘The Auk’ states his opinion, that the brilliant 
colors and markings of the group of warblers ‘fact as a uniform, 
facilitating the recognition by a bird of its own kind just as they 
facilitate its recognition by a bird student.” How then does 
he account for the fact that the females and young, who need 
most to be identified, are most obscurely marked, and who can 
doubt that birds can not only identify their own species with 
ease no matter how poorly marked, but can pick out even their 
own offspring from others? Does a Chinese woman have any 
difficulty in recognizing her own offspring in a group of hundreds, 
all similarly dressed and looking alike as peas to our untrained 
eyes? Or, to bring the matter nearer home, watch a mother 
enter a school-yard in which a hundred small children all of the 
same age and dress are playing. She picks out her own child, 
brushes its dress and wipes its nose with a perfect certainty of 
conviction as to its identification, but if asked for the field marks, 
is unable to give them. 

That the brilliant colors and markings of birds are of use in 
courtship and that many of them are the slow result of sexual 
selection seems to me to be a reasonable supposition because the 
male bird in courtship always displays these colors and markings 
to the best advantage. Where two or more males, as is often the 
case, are eagerly doing their best in display it would seem natural 
that the one who makes the most display is more likely to excite 
and win the female. If this were not the case the display would 
fall into innocuous desuetude. Mr. William Brewster once told 
me the interesting case of a pair of Summer Tanagers in the south 
where he shot the male. In a short time the female appeared 
with another male. This one also he shot and so on until he 
had obtained three or four of this female’s spouses. On careful 
examination of plumage it was seen that the most brilliant plum- 
age was possessed by number one and that the brilliancy decreased 
successively in the others. 


1J. T. Nichols. Auk, 1912, XXXVI, P. 228. 


ol. Aer ya TOWNSEND, Courtship in Birds. 385 


The fact that the brilliant plumage is assumed in many birds 
for the nuptial season only seems to bear out the importance of 
display for courtship. The ducks go into the eclipse plumage 
immediately after the courtship season. The brilliantly marked 
male Wood Duck and the Eider alike assume the modest and 
quiet dress of the female. This is true of many other birds. The 
Bobolink and the Scarlet Tanager, the Goldfinch and the Myrtle 
Warbler doff their striking dress in the fall and appear in the 
modest apparel of the female and immature. 

Courtship means the act of wooing in love. Whatever theory 
we accept we must admit that the male appears to endeavor to 
attract the female in one or all of three ways: first by a display 
of bright or striking colors, secondly by postures or movements 
which accentuate this display or call attention to his agility or 
skill—in other words by the dance in its broadest sense—and 
thirdly by sounds either vocal or instrumental—song in its broad- 
est sense. 

The classical courtship of the Peacock illustrates in an extreme 
form the display of color. It also includes the two other factors 
of dance and song. It may well be sketched here as an exagger- 
ated form and epitome of our subject. 

In the presence of the hen and when in an amorous mood the 
Peacock erects the stiff tail feathers which support the marvelous 
plumes that arise from the back and form the upper tail coverts. 
He walks with mincing steps, turning this way and then that, so 
that his beauty may be seen from all points by the hen who walks 
carelessly by. Seen from in front, his blue-green head and neck 
with black and white face markings and tufted plumes stand 
out like a Chinese jade carving in the center of a concave sea- 
shell of shimmering green, embossed at regular intervals with 
eyes of marvelous beauty and detail. From behind, the stiff 
gray tail feathers supporting the shell are seen to be set off below 
by an abundance of black and white down. The wings of brown 
and blue frame the sides. Suddenly the Peacock turns and flashes 
the full radiance of his beauty directly at the hen, he vibrates his 
downward stretched wings and quivers his stiff tail feathers so 
that they give forth a sound of rattling reeds. The green disk is 
thereby set all of a tremble in time with this instrumental music, 


[ Auk 


386 TOWNSEND, Courtship in Birds. July 


the great bird bows towards the object of his affection, emits a 
raucous cry, and the green, quivering sea shell curves beseech- 
ingly towards her. Who can resist such fascination? 

But all birds are not so well fitted for display as the Peacock 
who appears to have reached the very acme in this direction, but 
a study of some of the less brilliant birds bears out, perhaps more 
clearly, the efforts of the male in display. The male Red-winged 
Blackbird, when engaged in feeding on the ground, appears as a 
simple black bird. Sometimes not a trace of color is visible, 
although he may show a narrow yellow line or a somewhat broader 
line with red in it on his shoulders. When engaged in courtship 
these same shoulders blaze with scarlet color. Not only are the 
surrounding black feathers pushed back so that the epaulets are 
broad and conspicuous, but each individual scarlet feather is 
erected and the epaulets are thick and striking. Not only that, 
but he flies slowly and directly towards the female and the beauty 
spots are displayed to her eyes, if she will but bestow a glance 
at them, under the most favorable and dazzling circumstances. 

The male Eider swimming about and bowing to the female 
suddenly rises up on his tail in the water and flashes out the mag- 
nificent jet black shield on his belly, a color that ought not to be 
there according to the concealing colorationists. In the same 
way the Merganser drake displays his splendid white shirt front 
with its delicate tinge of salmon pink. 

The male Bittern, as he strides about, extends the fluffy white 
feathers from under the wings in striking display. The male 
Blue-headed Vireo puffs out the yellow flank feathers till he seems 
nearly double the size of the slender female, and the Myrtle War- 
bler droops his wings to display his yellow rump and puffs out 
the yellow and black feathers on his sides. 

The Black Guillemot as he courtesies to the female in the water 
opens wide his mouth and displays for her admiration the scarlet 
lining. The display of the inflated orange-colored neck-sacks of 
the Heath Hen is but a small part of the remarkable courtship 
display of this bird. 

The Black Duck and the Domestic Pigeon in the ardor of court- 
ship take short flights by the females and the white lining of their 
wings become momentarily in evidence. The Golden-eye drake 


pet are vine TOWNSEND, Courtship in Birds. 387 


displays from time to time his brilliant orange-yellow tarsi and 
feet above the water as he performs his song and dance before 
the modest duck. Incidentally, and perhaps accidentally at first, 
he increases the display by the spurt of water caused by the move- 
ment of the foot. In the Merganser this spurt of water has evi- 
dently become of primary importance and is a most conspicuous 
feature, but it is plain that it arose from an endeavor to display 
a colored foot. From a display of color it has become a form of 
a dance with an added mechanical feature. All three factors of 
courtship are so intricately mingled that it is not always possible 
to treat of a single one alone. 

Secondly the dance, using the word in the broadest sense, is 
frequently employed in avian courtship. In the simplest form 
the bird spreads its tail, slightly opens its wings and puffs out 
its feathers. This may be done rhythmically, and, with each 
motion, the song is emitted, for song and dance are almost always 
associated. The Bronzed Grackle illustrates this simple dance 
and at the same time very simple song. In slightly more elab- 
orate form the bird may also bob its head and with still more 
elaboration swing or sway its whole body or jump up and down. 
The Blue-headed Vireo, for example, bobs and bows in addition 
to puffing out its yellow flanks, the Cowbird, besides puffing and 
spreading, bobs its head and swings its whole body, the Bluebird 
in the excitement of courtship jumps up and down on its perch 
and the Flicker bobs and courtesies in true cake-walk fashion. 

That the dance does not necessarily mean leg movements is 
exemplified not only by birds but by various primitive human 
races where posturing and movements of the head, arms and 
trunk may constitute a large part of the performance. Among 
the ducks the movements of the head and neck are sometimes 
very striking and bizarre. The Golden-eye, besides performing 
with its feet in the way already described, has a remarkable head 
and neck dance and posturing in the courtship. The drake ex- 
tends its head and neck straight forward like a bowsprit, then 
vertically upwards, then backwards so that the occiput rests on 
the rump, and lastly forward to the normal position. Black 
Ducks, Baldpates, Buffle-heads and others make short springs 
and flights from the water; Mallards, Scaups and Pintails bob 


hae 
July 


388 TOWNSEND, Courtship in Birds. 
or bow and Red-breasted Mergansers courtesy with a swinging 
dip of the whole body. Bowing and courtesying are as common 
in avian as in human courtship. 

Among our birds the Gannet has perhaps the most elaborate 
dance, one that in completeness and in many of its features sug- 
gests the dance of the Laysan Albatross so well described by Prof. 
W. K. Fisher. It is worth while describing this dance of the 
Gannets in detail, for, as far as I can discover, there is no descrip- 
tion of it in any American ornithology and I have found no men- 
tion of it in the pages of the ‘ Nuttall Bulletin’ or ‘The Auk.’ Mr. 
P. A. Taverner? is the only one in this country who has referred 
to this dance as far as I know, and his description is very brief 
and omits many of the most interesting details. He calls it “a 
sort of conventionalized ritual.” A fuller description is given 
by Mr. J. H. Gurney? in his monograph on the Gannet. He says: 
“This sort of thing can be seen, with variations, any fine day in 
July, on the Bass Rock, but it cannot be the affection of court- 
ship, because the courting season is passed.’’ He ascribes it to 
the affection of the Gannets for each other. 

The bowing and posturing and other strange antics of the Lay- 
son Albatross is spoken of by Prof. Fisher as ‘a curious dance, 
or perhaps more appropriately a cake-walk,” and he goes on to 
say: “This game or whatever one may wish to call it very likely 
originated in past time during the courting season, but it certainly 
has long since lost any such significance. I believe the birds 
now practise these antics for the pure fun they derive.” These 
remarks I believe apply exactly to the dance of the Gannets. 
I spent many hours this last summer under most favorable con- 
ditions near the great Gannet nesting ledges on the Cliffs of Bona- 
venture Island, P. Q., and I saw the dance repeated by hundreds 
of pairs many times and I came to the conclusion that Prof. Fisher 
did in the case of the Layson Albatross, namely that it was orig- 
inally a courtship dance and that it was continued from habit 
and from the joy of it, in the same way that the Song Sparrow 
continues to sing long after the nuptial season. 


1 Auk, XXI, 1904, pp. 8-20. 
2 The Gannets of Bonaventure Island, Ottawa Naturalist, XXXII, 1918, p. 24. 
3 The Gannet, p. 377. 


vel: al TOWNSEND, Courtship in Birds. 389 

Let me describe a typical performance: As the sexes are alike 
in plumage they cannot be distinguished apart. One of them, 
we will assume it is the male, is swinging around in great circles 
on rigidly outstretched and motionless wings. He passes within 
a few yards of me and swings towards a shelf crowded with birds 
brooding their downy, black-faced young. Alighting on the edge 
he elbows his way along the ledge, notwithstanding the angry 
looks, the black mouths suddenly opened and the vicious pecks 
of his neighbors. All of these he returns in kind. Arrived at 
his nest he is enthusiastically greeted by his mate, who, disre- 
garding the young bird beneath her, rises up to do her part in the 
dance. The birds stand face to face, the wings slightly raised and 
opened, the tails elevated and spread. They bow towards each 
other, then raise their heads and wave their bills as if they were 
whetting these powerful instruments, or as if they were perform- 
ing the polite preliminaries of a fencing bout. From time to time 
this process is interrupted as they bow to each other, and appear 
to caress each other as each dips its pale blue bill and cream- 
colored head first to one side and then to the other of its mate’s 
snowy breast. With unbated enthusiasm and ardor the various 
actions of this curious and loving dance are repeated again and 
again and often continue for several minutes. After the dance 
the pair preen themselves and each other, or the one first at the 
nest flies away and the new arrival waddles around so as to get 
back of the nestling, and the strange process of feeding takes 
place. 

This dance is not only performed by pairs as just described, 
but not infrequently individuals perform a pas seul, it may be 
because he or she is wearied with waiting for its mate. The 
wings are slightly raised and opened, the tail elevated and spread, 
the bill pointed vertically upwards and waved aloft, then dipped 
to one side under the half open wing and then to the other, the 
bill raised and waved again and so on over and over again. Owing 
to the great volume of sound from the ledges it is impossible to 
distinguish any individual performer, and I was unable to tell 
at what point in the dance and to what extent the song was im- 
portant. The sound is like that of a thousand rattling looms 
in a great factory, a rough, vibrating, pulsing sound—car-ra, 
car-ra, car-ra. 


lets 


390 TOWNSEND, Courtship in Birds. July 


The movements in the air that may or may not be accompanied 
with song may be classed in this division of the dance. The 
Bobolink, rising in irregular circles, or progressing in a horizontal 
plane on rapidly vibrated down-curved wings, is expressing his 
amorous feelings by dance as well as by song. His flight often 
concludes by a rapid descent with wings pointing obliquely up- 
ward, forming a display by posture and motion—in themselves 
forms a dance. The ardor of courtship bears many a bird aloft, 
and he expresses his feelings with his wings as well as with his 
voice. One may name not only the Oven-bird and the Maryland 
Yellow-throat, the Bobolink and the Orchard Oriole, the Semi- 
palmated Sandpiper and the Upland Plover, the Horned Lark 
and the Pipit, but many other birds in this category, some of 
which, like the Song Sparrow, sing chiefly from a perch. The 
Horned Lark mounts silently to a great height and pours forth 
his song in long periods, sometimes out of sight in the low-lying 
clouds. The Pipit sings as he ascends nearly vertically and, 
arrived at the summit of his ambitions, descends quickly, still 
singing, to the earth. 

All birds who indulge in flight song are apt to quiver their wings 
rapidly in their ecstacy. Sometimes this motion of wings becomes 
of primary importance and the bird flies with quivering wings 
but voiceless, or even vibrates his wings rapidly from a perch. 
This sometimes happens in birds that ordinarily sing at the same 
time. I have seen it, for example, in the Song Sparrow. The 
Pheasant quivers his wings rapidly but nearly noiselessly, then 
emits his vocal crow to be followed by a loud clapping of the 
wings. The Ptarmigan vibrates his wings rapidly in flight and 
calls at the same time; the Spruce Partridge flies from a tree stub 
to the ground with audibly vibrating wings, while the Ruffed 
Grouse stands on a log and, by the rapid whirring of his wings, 
emits his characteristic ‘drumming.’ That this drumming is 
evolved from a flight song and that there was once a vocal part 
of the performance, I have little doubt. These examples show 
the stages in the evolution. 

The loud clapping together of the wings behind the back in 
Domestic Pigeons during flight and their habit of soaring with 
wings obliquely upwards, although common at all times, are 


Vol. cee call 
1920 


TOWNSEND, Courtship in Birds. 391 
most marked in the courtship season and are probably of court- 
ship origin. The V-shaped pose of the tail-feathers of the Bronzed 
Grackle is probably of the same nature for it is discarded in mid- 
summer. 

Both the Savannah and the Vesper Sparrow stand or walk on 
the ground and elevate and sometimes vibrate their wings rapidly 
above their backs. They also fly slowly a short distance above 
the ground with head and tail up and wings rapidly fluttering and 
deliver their song. 

The rapid headlong plunges of the Nighthawk may be classed 
as a display of motion, a form of the dance. Incidentally, and 
perhaps accidentally at first, a loud booming sound is produced 
by the rush of air through the wing feathers. This instrumental 
music is now the important feature, although the dance is by no 
means a negligible one. The Raven turns a rolling-over somer- 
sault in the air, and the Marsh Hawk plunges from a great height, 
loops the loop or turns a sidewise somersault. The Chat with 
dangling legs dances crazily about in the air, and the Kingbird 
executes a series of zig-zag and erratic flights, emitting at the same 
time a harsh double scream. ‘This is a true courtship flight song 
but it is neither graceful to our eyes or pleasing to our ears. The 
taste of the Kingbird in these matters appears to us to be poor. 

The impossibility of treating in turn only one of the primary 
divisions—display, dance and song—is well shewn by these ex- 
amples. The case of the courtship of the Heath Hen is still more 
difficult for all three factors are inextricably mingled. I have 
already alluded to the display of the neck-sacks of this bird, 
orange in color and shape, a very striking and beautiful feature, 
but secondary or incidental to the production of ‘song’ to be 
described later. The erection of the neck-wings which ordinarily 
help cover the deflated neck-sacks, the spreading and erection of 
the tail, the vibration of the down-stretched wings, the pirouetting 
and turning of the body and the rapid stamping of the feet in this 
species are all forms of the dance. 

Lastly, in this brief review and rough classification of the court- 
ship actions of birds, the song is to be considered. By song I do 
not mean necessarily a melody or musical strain pleasing to human 
ears—although many of these produced by the higher species of 


392 TOWNSEND, Courtship in Birds, [sue 


birds are extremely pleasing—but any sound which is customarily 
connected with courtship. Courtship song, as thus understood, 
may be either vocal or instrumental. The rattling of the stiff 
tail feathers of the Peacock and the rolling drum made by the 
wings of the Ruffed Grouse fall into the instrumental category. 
The rapid stamping of the feet by the Heath Hen produces a 
ratta-tat-tat like that made on a kettle drum. The tooting sound, 
similar to that made by blowing across the top of a bottle, pro- 
duced by the neck-sacks of this same bird, should, I suppose, be 
classed as instrumental song. The sounds made by the clapping 
together behind the back of the wings of the Domestic Pigeon, 
of the clapping on the sides of the Pheasant are, of course, in the 
instrumental class. 

The Woodcock in his wonderful courtship flight, as he ascends 
straight up in the dim light of early morning or late evening, 
gives forth loud sounds that cease whenever the bird sets his 
wings and momentarily soars—instrumental sounds made ap- 
parently by his wings. During the last part of the ascent and 
during the descent he gives forth sweeter vocal notes or whistles. 
Before he is again on the wing he emits at intervals loud vocal 
peents, preceded by faint gulping sounds accompanied by a puffing 
out of the body and slight raising of the wings. 

The Wilson Snipe flies about in his ecstatic courtship when the 
light is so poor that it is difficult to observe his flight, and sounds 
arise—quavering or bleating in character—which are believed to 
be instrumental in their nature, due to the passage of the air 
through his stiff primary feathers. The loud booming or whirring 
sound made by the Nighthawk in his spectacular plunges has 
already been mentioned, an instrumental music of curious char- 
acter. 

The drumming of the Flicker on a hollow stub or on a roof or 
chimney-pot is clearly to be classed as instrumental music. I 
have heard this bird interrupt his spring song to drum and later 
continue with his vocal music. 

The song of courtship produced by the vocal organs of the 
bird varies from the rasping, vibrating note of the Golden-eye or 
the aa-ou of the Eider, emitted at the height of the dance and 
display, the harsh scream of the Kingbird or the tis-ik of the 


pet aa | Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 393 


Henslow’ Sparrow to the clear, plantive, whistle of the White- 
throated Sparrow, and the serene, spiritual hymn of the Hermit 
Thrush. While the simpler, more primitive songs are given 
forth only during courtship excitement, it is evident that many, 
especially the more complicated and aesthetic ones, although 
at their best and sometimes elaborated or extended under court- 
ship excitement, are often continued and repeated for the mere 
enjoyment of the performer in his own music. The autumnal 
recrudescence of the amatory instinct, often displayed in song, 
is well known. 

The subject of bird song is one apart by itself, and I have alluded 
to it in this brief manner merely to round out the classification, 
made in the beginning of this paper, of display, dance and song— 
the important features of bird courtship. 


98 Pinckney St., Boston, Mass. 


OBSERVATIONS ON THE HABITS OF BIRDS AT LAKE 
BURFORD, NEW MEXICO. 


BY ALEXANDER WETMORE. 
(Concluded from p. 247.) 


19. Botaurus lentiginosus (Montagu). AmmricaAN BirrerN.—One 
was heard pumping in the rushes several times on the morning of May 29. 
Another was found at the first of the small lakes in the canyon below on 
June 11. It was pumping also so that it is possible the Bittern breeds 
here. 

20. Ardea herodias Linnaeus. Great BLuzr Heron.—Present during 
migration. Three were seen on May 29, and one on May 30 and June 3. 

21. Egretta candidissima candidissima (Gmelin). SNowy HsrRon. 
Found at Lake Burford during migration. One was seen at the crossing 
of the Brazos River below Park View, N. M., on May 23, and another 
was observed at Lake Burford that evening. Two were noted at the 
lake on May 26, and another was seen on the morning of June 5. One 
flew past the cabin several times on the evening of that day and finally 
alighted in the rushes nearby where it was collected. It was an adult 


394 Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. kanes 


female in full plumage, with the ova showing some development. It 
seems probable that these birds were on their way to the mouth of Bear 
River at the northern end of Great Salt Lake, Utah, as that is the only 
interior breeding colony in the region. These late migrants would reach 
there in time to form the breeding units that came in to the colonies as 
late as the middle of June. 

22. Nycticorax nycticorax naevius (Boddaert). BLAcK-cROWNED 
Nicut Hrron.—Fifteen pairs of these Herons were found at Lake Bur- 
ford and at the time of my departure were preparing to breed in the rushes 
at the upper end of the Laguna de la Puerta. It is possible that there 
may have been another colony established later at the main lake. A 
few were present when I first arrived at Lake Burford, but they did not 
become common until May 29. Birds were flushed from the rushes during 
my work along the lake shore or were seen occasionally, five or six to- 
gether, enjoying the sun on open beaches. In evening they flew back 
and forth in front of the cabin to convenient points from which to watch 
for the water-dogs (Ambystoma) that with frogs formed the only food- 
supply available here. On one occasion while I was sitting in a blind in 
the rushes a Night Heron flew by and spying a dead Axolotl floating in the 
lake alighted on the water (where it was six feet deep) to seize the water- 
dog in its bill. After resting thus for a minute the bird rose easily from 
the surface and flew off with its prey. It was somewhat of a surprise to 
find the Night Herons acting as scavengers, but they kept the dead Axo- 
lotls well cleaned up until the last part of my stay, for though I saw many 
floating on the surface of the water, comparatively few were found at 
any time washed up along the shore. 

The birds often were found during the day time watching for water- 
dogs in the shadow of rocky points. Until the first of June I thought 
that at times they were rather hard-pressed for food for, as the water 
was cold, the Ambystoma seemed still inactive, and dead ones had not 
appeared on the surface in any numbers. 

Night Herons in second year plumage were seen at intervals. 

23. Rallus virginianus Linnaeus. VircintA Rait.—One was heard 
ealling on May 25 and one was flushed in a narrow band of tules on the 
lake shore on May 27. Others were heard calling on June 7, 10, 11 and 12, 
so that it is possible that one pair at least nested here. 

24. Fulica americana Gmelin. AmpricaAN Coor.—Next to the Eared 
Grebe and Yellow-headed Blackbird the Coot was the most abundant 
breeding species here and it was estimated that 150 pairs in all were nest- 
ing at the lake. Many were in pairs on the date of my arrival, but until 
June 5 small flocks of unmated birds remained feeding in the open bays 
or rested in little bands on open beaches. Toward the latter part of 
this period these flocks at short intervals presented a scene of great anima- 
tion as the birds displayed and fought savagely with one another. A 
little later on the companies broke up entirely. Each male selected an 


Ney GO cal Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 395 


area of shoreline in the tules and remained near this constantly, guarding 
it jealously, taking frequent occasion to drive away ducks and Eared 
Grebes who might chance to trespass, and having many fights with neigh- 
boring males. In these encounters they drove at each other with heads 
extended on the water and the wing-tips elevated. When near they began 
striking viciously with their bills and then, lying back, struck heavily 
first with one large foot and then the other, a most effective means of 
fighting as their claws were long and sharp, and their leg muscles powerful. 
Each tried to guard against these blows by seizing the feet of his antagon- 
ist so that often the two held each other by means of their feet, while they 
thrust savagely with their bills. The females frequently took part in 
these squabbles also, so that sometimes three or four birds were engaged 
at one time, while neighboring males came rushing up also seeming minded 
to interfere. When they separated the males sometimes rested for several 
minutes with heads down on the water and wing-tips raised, eyeing each 
other like two game cocks. 

Their mating actions were interesting. Males frequently rushed after 
females, paddling over the surface of the water with flapping wings, while 
the females made off in the same manner, ten feet or so ahead. Fre- 
quently the females made merely a pretense at escape, striking out with 
their feet and making a great splashing but traveling slowly, but if too 
closely pressed they dove leaving the males looking about for them on 
the surface. In the most common act of display the male came paddling 
out with head and neck prostrate on the water, wing tips raised high 
above the tail, and the tail spread and elevated so that the white markings 
on either side were very prominent. As he came near the female usually 
assumed the same attitude. When two or three feet away the male turned 
and presented the prominently marked tail to the female, swimming off 
slowly and then returning to repeat the performance. This action was 
seen constantly whenever coots were under observation. Paired birds 
often swam toward one another from a distance of several feet with heads 
extended on the water calling kek kek kek kek. As they met they assumed 
a more erect attitude and then as they brushed against one another and 
turned about they dabbled in the water with quick jerks of the open bill 
that threw drops of water from side to side. Frequently the female reached 
over and worked her bill gently through the feathers on the male’s head 
and then lowered her head while he preened her feathers in return. 

A nest foundation was found on May 29 and on June 3 one bird was 
observed resting in a completed nest. By June 7 nests were common 
and by June 12 nests newly begun or containing sets of eggs were to be 
found in every projecting point of tules. In building the female arranged 
the dead stems of the round-stalked Scirpus occidentalis to form a plat- 
form, bending them over and striking them repeatedly with her bill to make 
them stay in position, causing a peculiar knocking, hammering noise that 
at this season was to be heard in the rushes on all sides. Frequently 


396 Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. ae 


the first one or two eggs of a set were laid on a mere platform and the 
completed nest built up later, depending perhaps upon the need of the 
female for a place to deposit her eggs. A complete set of seven eggs with 
incubation begun was seen on June 7 and after this sets were common. 
The males seemed to take no part in nest building, but stood about in the 
rushes a few feet away. This guard continued as the eggs were laid and 
incubation began. When the females were on the nest it was amusing, 
as I approached slowly in the boat, to see the males stalk truculently 
down and slide into the water, eyeing me closely all the while. Fre- 
quently at this season they rose on the surface of the water, treading 
heavily for a few strokes, making a loud turmoil in the water and driving 
themselves backward for a foot or more with the force of the effort, ap- 
parently a threatening act intended to frighten away an intruder. 

Many of the nests were mere floating platforms anchored among the 
tule stems in two or three feet of water so that I was able to pass a boat 
paddle beneath them without meeting with any obstruction. Some 
were built in exposed situations where they were visible on all sides, so 
that the birds evidently have no fear of enemies approaching from the 
water. Incubating females frequently sat closely, allowing me to pass 
within a short distance, but took care to turn their heads so as to conceal 
the prominent white bill. One nest examined in an isolated clump of 
tules was composed entirely of green stems but this was unusual, as it 
was customary to utilize dried stalks only, even when it was necessary 
to carry them from a distance of several yards. 

One bird was seen eating algae and slime that had collected on dead 
tule stems floating in the water. It fed eagerly on this material, seizing 
and stripping one piece after another. 

25. Steganopus tricolor Vieillot. Wurtson’s PHaLAROPE.—This spe- 
cies was present here in migration. On May 24 about twenty, most of 
them males, were feeding on the open water in two small flocks. On 
May 27 a dozen were found on a mud bar in the upper end of Hayden’s 
Lake. On June 8 two males and a female were found on one of the islands 
in the lower lake and it seemed as though they might be ready to breed 
here as the locality was a favorable one. They disappeared at once how- 
ever, and, thovgh a pair was seen in another locality on June 14, this 
Phalarope did not nest here this season. 

26. Himantopus mexicanus (Miiller). BuAckK-NEcKED Stitt. Four 
were found in an open area on the north shore on May 30. They passed 
on at once. 

27. Catoptrophorus semipalmatus inornatus (Brewster). Wust- 
ERN WILLET.—One was seen on May 27. 

28. Actitis macularia (Linnaeus). SporreD SANDPIPER. The Spotted 
Sandpiper was found during the spring migration but none nested at 
Lake Burford, though they bred only ten or twelve miles away, along the 
Brazos River. Two were observed on May 24, while on the following day 


Niel. aris ‘all Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 397 


there was a considerable influx of migrants so that about twenty-five were 
seen. The species was fairly common until May 28 and then decreased 
in numbers. Single birds were seen on June 1, 3 and 5. On June 18 an 
adult appeared, probably a bird come from the breeding grounds nearby, 
the forerunner of the summer migrants. : 

29. Oxyechus vociferus (Linnaeus). KiLupEER.—One pair of Kill- 
deer nested on the western shore of Lake Burford and another pair bred 
at the Laguna de la Puerta. 

30. Meleagris gallopavo merriami Nelson. Merriam’s TurKEY.— 
Old Turkey sign was seen in a gulch east of the lake on May 26 and the 
birds were reported as fairly common farther south. 

31. Zenaidura macroura marginella (Woodhouse). WESTERN 
Movurnina Dovs.—The Western Mourning Dove was an abundant 
breeding species in the forested hills surrounding Lake Burford and often 
was seen along the rocky shores or in the sage brush. Pairs came down 
to water on the open beaches, or occasionally flew out and alighted upon 
floating masses of dead tules and walked down the edge to drink. Males 
were heard cooing and were seen in the short sailing flights, made with 
stiffly spread wings that are characteristic of the breeding season. In 
the early morning many came down on the floor of the open canyon below 
the lake and sometimes two or|three hundred were gathered in a small 
space. They seemed to prefer the shaded side of the canyon, even though 
the mornings were crisp and cool. The birds were very nervous here, 
frequently flushing and flying for short distances perhaps through fear 
of predatory hawks. Later on in the day they rested in Pinyons or cedars 
or fed on the ground in the shadow of these trees. 

One was found that had been killed by a Sharp-shinned Hawk. 

32. Cathartes aura septentrionalis Wied. Turkny Vuttrurr.—The 
Turkey Vulture was fairly common about Lake Burford and individuals 
often were seen soaring above the hills or about the broad sandstone ledges 
in the canyon below 

On June 15 six pairs of these huge birds were seen walking about on a 
rocky beach where apparently they were looking for dead axolotls that 
often were washed up here by the waves. I drifted up in the boat until 
I was within thirty yards of one pair, and others showed little fear even 
when I landed and walked about. Two walked solemnly down to the 
water’s edge and drank, dipping in the water and then raising the head 
(but not throwing the bill vp) in order to swallow. They clambered over 
the piles of Potamogeton and algae cast up last year and left on the shore, 
pecking at it experimentally, pulling off the surface and digging into the 
interior with their bills as they would into carrion. One, suddenly feeling 
the warm sun extended its wings and spread its tail, remaining thus for 
several minutes. On the following day a pair came to search for bird 
bodies and other refuse at the cabin. It is probable that food was scarce 
at this time as bands of sheep that had been grazing here had all been moved 


398 Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. [fue 


farther south into the mountains so that carrion from this source was no 
longer available. 

33. Circus hudsonius (Linnaeus). Marsa Hawx.—On May 29, a 
female was observed high over the lake and one was seen four miles above 
El Vado on May 31. An adult female was noted at the lake again on 
June 14. Apparently this species did not nest here. 

34. Accipiter velox (Wilson). SHArRp-sHINNED Hawx.—This hawk 
nested in small numbers in the pine-grown hills around the lake. A male 
was seen playing in the air with a Cooper’s Hawk on May 26. On May 27 
one came darting through the sagebrush near the cabin and on June 2 
one was seen in the gulch east of the lake. On the evening of June 6, 
attracted by an uproar among the Yellow-headed Blackbirds, I found 
a sharp-shin in the sagebrush just above the lake and shot it. This bird 
was a breeding female and had both right and left ovaries present and 
about equally developed, a common peculiarity among hawks of this 
group. The right ovary had produced two mature ova as was shown 
by the ruptured follicles and had another partly developed. The left 
ovary had already produced one egg and had another ovum greatly en- 
larged. The left oviduct only was developed. 

35. Accipiter cooperi (Bonaparte). Cooprr’s Hawk.—One was ob- 
served on a forested hill east of the lake on May 26. 

36. Buteo borealis calurus Cassin. WerstrerN Rep-raru.—One or 
two pairs nested in the rocky hills bordering the canyon below the lake. 
Individuals were seen at short intervals from May 26 to June 14. 

37. Aquila chrysaetos (Linnaeus). GonpeN EacGur.—single birds 
were seen three miles above El Vado on May 31 and June 12, and on 
the latter date a pair of these eagles was observed near the Laguna de la 
Puerta. Apparently they nest in the rock ledges bordering the canyon 
below the lake. Limb bones of a Golden Eagle were picked up near the 
East Bay. 

38. Falco mexicanus Schlegel. Prairie Fatcon.—A pair of these 
falcons had a nest containing young on an inaccessible ledge high up on 
the sandstone cliffs bordering the canyon below the lake. The adults 
frequently came across to hunt along the lake shore and harried the Yellow- 
headed Blackbirds so mercilessly that these set up an outcry whenever 
a bird of any size appeared on the skyline. Near the nest these falcons 
frequently perched in dead trees as well as on the rock ledges. The nest 
was easily located by watching and following the adults but was on a rock 
shelf where it could not be reached without ropes. 

39. Falco peregrinus anatum Bonaparte. Duck Hawx.—A pair 
of these swift-flying falcons had a nest in the canyon south of the lake 
and the adults were observed hunting at the lake and in the open country 
around it. The young left the nest about June 10 and were heard calling 
from rocky points nearby for a day or two afterward. One was shot 
from the boat on June 15 but was lost as it fell in a great expanse covered 
with sagebrush above a shale bluff. 


Vol. Sot] Wernors, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mec. 399 


40. Falco sparverius phalaena (Lesson). Drsprt SPARROW-HAWK. 
The sparrowhawk was fairly common about Lake Burford and one or two 
were seen daily. One fed much of the time on a small flat below the 
cabin where it seemed to be catching the abundant grasshoppers. Often 
it perched on anthills or clumps of dead rushes in default of other resting 
places. On June 10 one was seen pursuing a magpie through a grove of 
cedars, striking at it repeatedly. These little falcons delight in playing 
with other hawks and were seen darting down at Redtails and Cooper’s 
Hawks as they circled about in the air. 

41. Bubo virginianus occidentalis Stone. WrsteRN HorNep OWL. 
Horned Owls were fairly common in the timbered gulches above Lake 
Burford. On two occasions birds were heard hooting during the early 
forenoon and June 15 several were heard calling in the evening. On 
June 16 one was seen in a gulch east of the lake, and a large nest in the 
top of a Yellow Pine nearby may have belonged to this bird. That even- 
ing at dusk as I sat in the grove of Cottonwoods above the cabin a Great- 
horn came flying down from the hills above and alighted in the top of a 
tall dead tree over my head. It eyed me closely when I squeaked, but 
soon lost interest and continued looking around. Once it scratched the 
side of its head violently with one foot. After watching it a few minutes 
I shot it and found that it was a female bird of large size. The wing 
measured 405 millimeters, and the specimen appears to be typical of the 
form B. v. occidentalis. 

42. Dryobates villosus (Linnaeus). Harry Woopprecker.—Hairy 
Woodpeckers were fairly common and were nesting in the forested bills 
around Lake Burford. A male was seen drumming on a dead pine on 
June 2 and a female was found near the same place on June 9. One was 
observed in pines below the lake on June 11 and another came into the 
grove of cottonwoods above the spring on June 17. None were taken. 

43. Sphyrapicus thyroideus (Cassin). WILLIAMSON’s SAPSUCKER. 
Fairly common among Yellow Pines on the hills above Lake Burford. 
On June 2 I found a pair of these birds east of the lake. The female was 
working steadily at a new row of drill holes in the bark of a Yellow Pine, 
where the area covered by old pits was already a foot square. This pair 
had a nesting hole driven in the trunk of a dead Yellow Pine about 50 
feet from the ground, and the male remained on guard near it to prevent 
House Wrens and Violet-green Swallows that were busy about other 
cavities in the same tree from usurping it. He made little demonstration 
save to fly down to the hole and look in when one of the other birds came 
near it, but this was sufficient as they remained at a safe distance. After 
each inspection he sidled around on the other side of the trunk from me. 
The call note of this sapsucker is a low rattling keh-h-h given in a some- 
what guttural tone. It resembles the call note of S. varius in a general 
way but is given in a stronger, more decided manner, and is louder. On 
June 16 a female in another location was working at a new row of pits 
in a large limb of a Yellow Pine. 


a 


400 Wermore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. [sane 


44. Colaptes cafer collaris Vigors. Rep-sHarreD Fuickrer. Flickers 
were fairly common in this area. One pair nested in a dead cottonwood 
near the spring hole above the cabin and others were breeding nearby. 
These birds spent much time in feeding on the ground in the sage brush. 
Ants were very abundant here so that food was easily secured. 

45. Chordeiles virginianus henryi Cassin. WrstmrN NIGHTHAWK. 
The first nighthawk, a female, arrived at Lake Burford on June 2. A 
male was heard calling and booming on June 6 and the birds were fairly 
common until June 16. On the following day there was a great increase 
in their numbers and evidently the bulk of the breeding birds arrived at 
this time. These birds frequented the rocky ridges covered with open 
forest above the lake, but came down over the flats to feed. On the 
evening of June 17 a number of pairs were seen and males were calling 
and booming excitedly. Locally it is believed that the male has a hole in 
either wing that he opens in producing the loud whirring boom, as he 
dashes down through the air. 

46. Aeronautes melanoleucus (Baird). WHITE-THROATED SwIirtT. 
The high cliffs of light-colored sandstone in the canyons near Lake Bur- 
ford furnished suitable nesting sites for these swifts and the birds were 
fairly common about the ledges. From May 30 until June 4 flocks of 
them seemed to be in migration and were seen circling high in the air or 
feeding over the flats. Near the cabin they joined bands of Violet-green 
Swallows that were coursing back and forth above the sage brush, feeding 
on the swarms of chironomids driven in here by the wind. A few were 
collected here but it was difficult to pick them out from the innumerable 
swallows and shoot before they bad darted away out of range. The call 
note of this bird is a shrill laughing he he he he heard usually when two or 
three are coursing along together. 

47. Selasphorus platycercus (Swainson). Broap-TaILED HUMMING- 
BIRD.—This hummingbird was fairly common about Lake Burford and 
was seen daily among the pines and pinyons or crossing the flats. 

48. Tyrannus vociferans Swainson. Casstn’s Kineprrp.—This 
Kingbird was first observed on May 25 and from then on it was fairly 
common. They frequented rocky hillsides where scattered Yellow Pines 
rising above the low undergrowth made convenient perches from which 
to watch for insects and look out over the valleys. The birds nested 
here in small numbers and males were seen at intervals in crazy zigzag 
sky dances made to the accompaniment of harsh calls and odd notes, 
similar to those of none of our other birds. Toward dusk they called 
constantly their harsh, stirring notes making a pleasing sound that 
mingled with the songs of House and Rock Wrens, the scolding of an 
occasional Mockingbird and the cheerful calls of the Robins. 

49, Myiarchus cinerascens cinerascens (Lawrence). ASH-THROATED 
FiycaTcHEer.—One was found among cedars on a sage-covered hillside 
on the afternoon of May 26. 


per re | Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 401 


50. Sayornis sayus (Bonaparte). Say’s PHoppa.—Say’s Phoebe was 
fairly common on the open flats below Lake Burford, and was heard calling 
plaintively in the evenings. Occasionally they were seen hovering over 
open flats in much the same manner as the Mountain Bluebird. The 
call note is a whistled phee-ur. A nest found on June 9 in a deep, narrow 
arroyo was placed on a narrow shelf three feet above the bottom, where 
the overhanging bank concealed it from view. This nest was composed 
of a few bits of weed stems and rootlets, bound together with spider 
webbing, and was felted firmly with a mass of sheep’s wool gathered from 
the surrounding sagebrush. The interior was made almost entirely of 
wool, and was very soft and resilient. It contained four pure white 
eggs. 

51. Myiochanes richardsoni richardsoni (Swainson). WrsTERN 
Woop Pewrr.—The Wood Pewee was fairly common among the Yellow 
Pines on the hills above Lake Burford. 

52. Empidonax wrighti Baird. Wricut’s FiycatcHer.—This small 
flycatcher was common among junipers and pines in the dry hills back of 
Lake Burford. It was first seen on May 25, but was probably present 
on my arrival. These birds were found over the dry hillsides above the 
gulches, perching near the ground, or, at times, mounting thirty or forty 
feet in the Yellow Pines. Sometimes they hopped restlessly from one 
perch to another, trying several in succession before being satisfied. The 
birds were often shy and difficult to approach. The ordinary call note 
was a loud tsee-wick, given almost as one syllable, that when heard near 
at hand was startlingly like the chebec of the Least flycatcher. At a dis- 
tance however this resemblance was lost. The males had a peculiar 
jerky song divided into couplets with slight pauses between that may be 
represented by the syllables see-wick, tsee-ee, se-wick, tsil-ly tsee-ee. 

53. Pica pica hudsonia (Sabine). Maaprr.—One or two pairs of 
Magpies nested near the eastern shore of Lake Burford. The birds were 
seen almost daily and one or two old nests were observed. 

54. Cyanocitta stelleri diademata (Bonaparte). LoNG-crREsTED 
Jay.—This Jay was common among the Yellow Pines on the hills above 
Lake Burford. Well grown young out of the nest were observed on June 
16. 

55. Perisoreus canadensis capitalis Ridgway. Rocky Mountain 
Jay.—One was seen on a high hill east of the lake on June 16. 

56. Corvus corax sinuatus (Wagler). AmErican Raven.—Common 
around Lake Burford and nesting along the cliffs in the canyon below the 
lake. Ravens came over daily to feed along the lakeshore and in the 
sage-brush above it. On May 28 one alighted near the cabin and picked 
up and ate several white-footed mice that I had trapped in the cabin 
and thrown out near the door. 

57. Corvus brachyrhynchos hesperis Ridgway. WersTeRN Crow. 
Several pairs nested about the lake and came down daily to the shore. 


A02 Wermore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mer. lee 


Here they walked about in the open hunting for beetles, or flew along 
low over the rushes searching for the nests of blackbirds. The male 
Yellowheads and Redwings flew up and attacked them savagely but the 
crows paid them little attention. 

58. Cyanocephalus cyanocephalus (Wied). Pinyon Jay.—The 
Pinyon Jay was common among the Pines and Cedars on the hills around 
the lake. During May and the first part of June little parties of half 
a dozen or more were observed at intervals flying in the open or working 
through the pinyons. On June 14 a flock of about 100 appeared and 
fed among the sage-grown knolls until the time of my departure. On 
the ground these jays walked quickly, holding themselves upright with 
heads very high. This attitude, with the short tail and general build 
gave them a striking resemblance to Starlings though the neck appeared 
longer than in that species. When startled the whole flock flew off by 
easy stages through the cedars giving their pleasant, curiously modulated 
call notes. A considerable number of these birds were young of the year, 
and some of these, though well grown, were still being fed by their parents. 
In color these young birds appeared distinctly grayer, less blue, than 
the adults, and their call note was a persistent quay-quay, quay-quay 
that at once attracted attention. 

59. Molothrus ater (Boddaert). Cowsirp.—The Cowbird was not 
observed at Lake Burford until May 30, when a female appeared near the 
cabin. On the following day a male was seen. This second bird took 
up his residence at the cabin and, becoming very tame, remained within 
a few yards of it constantly until my departure. When not feeding on 
the ground nearby he was usually to be found in the top of a low bush 
near the cabin door. The performance in singing was as follows: the bird 
would rest quietly for a few seconds, then expand the tail and draw the 
tip slightly forward, erect the feathers of the back and to a less extent 
those of breast and abdomen, and then sing bub ko lum tsee. In giving 
the first three notes he rose twice to the full extent of his legs and sank 
back quickly. After singing the bird relaxed and sat quietly for a short 
time. At noon on June 1, while watching this bird, I heard a low call 
like tsee tsee, to which the bird under observation responded. At once a 
second male came flying in, and, suddenly checking when two or three 
feet from the bush, extended the bill straight up and in this attitude came 
down slowly to a perch three feet from the first bird. This one at once 
assumed the same attitude, and the two remained thus for two or three 
minutes with bills pointing straight in the air, twisting their heads around 
but seeming never to look directly at one another. Finally first one 
and then the other lowered his bill and glanced at his neighbor but im- 
mediately stiffened up again in the erect attitude. The newcomer gradu- 
ally relaxed, finally sinking down and fluffing out his feathers to remain 
almost asleep. The original male then began to sing, opening his wings 
wide and then closing them again in addition to his other motions, and at 
times nearly overbalancing in the violence of his display. 


pel ris eu Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 403 


The original male was mated on June 2 and the pair of Cowbirds re- 
mained constantly nearby for ten days or more. On June 5 and 6 a second 
female appeared and fed with the others. The male was seen running 
at them with his bill pointing straight in the air and then pausing to sing 
and display. The second female disappeared at once while the pair re- 
mained together until June 13. After this the male was seen alone. He 
continued to sing during the remaining time that I was there but ceased 
displaying almost entirely. If observations made here are a proper cri- 
terion the breeding season for the Cowbird is very short. 

60. Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus (Bonaparte). YELLOW- 
HEADED BLACKBIRD.—Next to the Eared Grebe the Yellow-headed Black- 
bird was the most abundant breeding bird at Lake Burford and the small 
lakes nearby. It was estimated that in all 210 pairs were nesting here. 
The adult males were settled in large part on their breeding grounds on 
my arrival, though many of them were not yet mated. Each selected a 
stand in the tules at the border of the lake, and, unless away feeding, 
was certain to be found in the immediate vicinity constantly from that 
time on. The birds were always tame but certain individuals whose 
domain I passed almost daily on foot or in a boat soon became fearless 
and I was able to recognize and look for these in certain spots constantly. 
At this season the male seems fully conscious of his handsome coloring 
and in his displays makes every effort to attract attention. In the most 
common display the male started towards the female from a distance of 
30 or 40 feet with a loud rattling of his wings as a preliminary. The head 
was bent down, the feet lowered and the tail dropped while he flew slowly 
toward his mate. The wings were brought down with a slow swinging 
motion and were not closed at all so that the white markings on the coverts 
were fully displayed, the whole performance being reminiscent of a similar 
wing display of the Mocking-bird. In flying from one perch to another 
males often dangled their feet, frequently breaking through small clumps 
of dead tules with considerable racket. Or they clambered stiffly along, 
hobbling over masses of bent-over rushes, with heads bent down, tails 
drooping and back humped, appearing like veritable clowns. 

The song of these Yellowheads was subject to much variation, but 
ordinarily resembled the syllables Klee Klee Klee Ko-Kow-w-w, the last 
low and much drawn out. Their colonies were always noisy, and strange 
cat-calls, drawn out wailing notes, and chattering protests came to my 
edrs constantly from birds in the rushes below camp as I worked on notes 
or specimens. The ordinary call note of the males was a liquid cluck, 
somewhat unlike the call of any other blackbird, while the call of the 
female was more Redwing-like. 

Some of the birds had nests on my arrival and by May 2x nest-building 
was going on everywhere. This task was performed entirely by the females 
who worked at it nervously and energetically, using wet or damp materials 
and molding them rapidly into shape. One brood of young had left the 


404 Wermore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. ties 


nest, and another nest contained young from two to five days old, on 
June 14. Most of the birds, however, still had eggs at the time of my 
departure. The nests examined were all suspended in growing clumps 
of green tules (Scirpus occidentalis) over water from one to three feet 
deep, and were in danger of being overturned by the unequal rate of growth 
of the stems which frequently thrust one side of the nest high above the 
other. The adults seemed to take no steps to alter this condition beyond 
constructing their baskets with deep cup-shaped hollows to hold the eggs 
in if possible. 

In feeding the Yellowheads gathered in little flocks containing both 
males and females, and flew back into the sagebrush where thousands 
of Chironomids blown in to shelter by the wind were gathered. The 
birds walked quickly along on the ground or clambered over the bushes, 
picking up the luckless insects and moving along quite rapidly. Some- 
times these feeding flocks penetrated a mile or so inland but more often 
they were found near the lakeshore. Should a hawk appear, as fre- 
quently happened, males in the marsh below rose in the air with shrill 
chattering calls, giving the alarm to their feeding companions. These 
immediately rose and flew swiftly, low over the slopes, down to the shelter 
of the rushes. On calm still evenings when the gnats were emerging 
in numbers from the lake and were flying in toward land the Yellowheads 
remained in the rushes, and rising at short intervals captured the insects 
in the air as they passed. During the day flocks of the birds were con- 
tinually passing up and down the slopes on their way to or from their 
feeding grounds. 

The feet of the Yellow-head are relatively very large with long, strong 
toes and the birds use them to advantage in walking about on floating 
aquatic vegetation or soft mud. In the rushes they prove themselves 
expert gymnasts. Often they alighted near the tips of the tall round- 
stemmed tules and as these swayed under their weight the birds sup- 
ported themselves by their wings while they slid their feet quickly down 
to a new hold, trying several grips until finally they were low enough 
so that the rush supported them. This was done with great quickness 
as the birds shifted from grip to grip rapidly. At times instead of sliding 
down they reached out and grasped a second stem with one foot, dividing 
their weight between the two and standing suspended with the feet five 
inches or so apart. 

61. Agelaius phoeniceus neutralis Ridgway. San Dirco REDWINE. 
—The Redwing was abundant at Lake Burford and it was estimated that 
20 pairs were nesting here, scattered along the shore of the lake among the 
abundant Yellowheads. A nest found near the cabin on June 14 contained 
four eggs. This nest was placed in a mass of dead tules of last year’s 
growth where it had a secure foundation. Later it was robbed by 
crows. One male near the cabin in evening often slowly ran along the 
ground with wings partly spread and half-raised and epaulets showing to 
their fullest extent, a very pretty display. 


Bet aoa ae Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 405 


62. Sturnella neglecta Audubon. WesterN MrapowLarK.—Mea- 
dowlarks were fairly common in open localities about the shores of the 
lake. On June 11 a nest containing four eggs and two newly-hatched 
young was found below the cabin at the edge of the marsh, placed in a 
last year’s growth of Foxtail and Salt grass. As several bands of sheep 
had been trailed through here it was only by chance that this nest sur- 
vived. Another young bird hatched on June 12 and a fourth one on the 
following day. The other two eggs may have been infertile as they had 
not hatched on June 19 when I left the region. The adult meadowlarks 
savagely attacked Redwings and Yellowheads that chanced to approach 
the nest site and permitted no intruders whatever. 

63. Euphagus cyanocephalus (Wagler). Brewer’s BLackBrrD.—A 
pair nested near a hayfield below the Laguna de la Puerta, where they 
were observed on May 31 and June 12 and 19. None were found nearer 
the large lake. 

64. Carpodacus cassini Baird. Cassin’s Fincu.—A male was seen 
among Yellow Pines on a high hill east of Lake Burford on June 9. It 
was perched in the top of a very tall pine and was singing. The song in 
general was like that of the Purple Finch but was given more rapidly and 
emphatically. 

65. Carpodacus mexicanus frontalis (Say). Housm Fincu.—A 
House Finch was observed near the eastern shore of Lake Burford on 
June 16. 

66. Spinus pinus (Wilson). Pine Siskin.—Pine Siskins were seen 
in the hills above the lake on May 26 and 28 and on June 16. 

67. Pooecetes gramineus confinis Baird. WrstERN VESPER SPAR- 
Rrow.—The Vesper Sparrow was common through the sage brush on the 
flats and knolls surrounding the lake and males sang constantly around 
the cabin. On June 6 a female flushed from a nest near the western shore 
of the lake, ran away along the ground through the bushes with her wings 
extended and held stiffly above her back. The nest was placed in a small 
hollow at the foot of a partly dead sage where the trunk arched out over 
it, protecting and partly concealing it, a needed shield from the trampling 
feet of sheep that were grazed here. The nest was a large, well-formed 
cup of dried grasses, lined with finer material of the same nature. It 
contained two young apparently five or six days old, partly covered with 
grayish white down. 

- 68. Passerculus sandwichensis alaudinus Bonaparte. WESTERN 
SAVANNAH SPARROW.—Savannah Sparrows were found in small numbers 
in dead weatherbeaten growths of Bayonet Grass near the open shores 
on the northern and southern sides of the lake. Apparently they bred, 
as birds were noted here on May 28 and 30 and June 6, but no nests were 
found. On June 6 a male was singing. 

69. Chondestes grammacus strigatus Swainson. WersTERN LARK 
Sparrow.—Fairly common in the country near El Vado. At Lake Bur- 
ford one pair nested on an open flat above the grove of large cottonwoods. 


ae 
July 


406 Wermors, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 

70. Zonotrichia leucophrys (J. R. Forster). WHITE-cROWNED SPAR- 
Rrow.—These sparrows appeared in migration in the bushes near the lake 
on May 28 and remained until June 4. During this period they were 
fairly common in growths of Amelanchier and Ribes and were also found 
in the sagebrush. 

71. Spizella passerina arizonae Coues. WrESTERN CHIPPING SPAR- 
Row.—The Chipping Sparrow was fairly common in junipers near the 
lake shore and was found also among the pines covering the hills back 
from the lake. 

72. Spizella breweri Cassin. Brewer’s Sparrow.—The Brewer’s 
Sparrow was one of the most common breeding birds in the extensive 
sage grown areas surrounding the lake. The birds were seen constantly 
and males sang daily about the camp. A nest found June 4, placed in 
a fork in a sage 14 inches from the ground, was a small compact cup of 
grasses and weedstems, firmly woven externally, and lined with horsehair 
and bits of fine grass. The three eggs were clear pale green in color, 
spotted with brown. On June 12 a nest containing two newly hatched 
young was seen, and the following day another containing three eggs was 
found. A nest examined June 15 contained four eggs that were apparently 
fresh, two found June 16 contained two and three eggs respectively, and 
one seen June 17 contained 3 newly hatched young. All were similar 
in form and location to the one first described. 

The birds themselves were quiet and unobtrusive merely flying up to 
lookout points on the tips of sage or hiding in the thick growth when 
disturbed. The song of the male with its shifting repetition of notes 
reminded me of a vocalist practising scales. 

73. Amphispiza nevadensis nevadensis (Ridgway). SaGu Spar- 
row.—Locally distributed and breeding in the sage grown areas. A 
breeding female was taken May 30 and other sage sparrows were seen on 
June 4 and 6. 

74. Melospiza melodia montana (Henshaw). Mountain Sona 
Sparrow.—The Song Sparrow in the main inhabited the fringing clumps 
and growths of dead tules (Scirpus occidentalis) remaining from last year, 
venturing up into the sage brush to feed, or occasionally to nest. In the 
dead tules the birds made a great rustling in creeping about so that I 
looked continually for larger birds, when I heard them. A nest found 
May 28 was placed on the ground in a slight hollow at the foot of a sage 
about 30 feet above the border of the rushes. It was a slight cup of 
grasses lined with hair from horses’ tails and contained four eggs. I 
judged from their actions, however, that most of the birds were nesting 
in the more secure shelter of the tules. A female was seen carrying ex- 
crement from a nest on June 1, and June 4 young were heard calling. 
After this date young became common. 

75. Pipilo maculatus montanus Swarth. Mountain TowHEE.— 
This Towhee was common on the slopes and in the gulches above the lake, 


vot: reer vel Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford., N. Mex. 407 


seeming to prefer for cover, thickets of scrub oak and clumps of Ribes 
and Amelanchier. The birds were common on my arrival and males were 
singing, but they may be late in nesting as a mated female collected June 9 
was not yet ready to lay. 

76. Oberholseria chlorura (Audubon).* GrrEN-TAILED TOWHEE.— 
Fairly common on the sage grown slopes above the lake. Males were 
heard singing daily, and occasionally the birds were observed skulking 
about in the dense growth. A nest found on June 11 was placed in a sage 
about two feet from the ground. It was large and well-cupped in form 
and was composed externally of grass and weedstems while the lining 
was made of finer material. It contained three eggs whitish in color, well 
spotted with brown and lilac. 

77. Zamelodia melanocephala (Swainson). BLAcK-HEADED GRos- 
BBAK.—This grosbeak was rather rare in occurrence about the lake. Males 
were observed on June 2 and 9 in a gulch in the hills. 

78. Piranga ludoviciana (Wilson). WrsTeRN TANAGER.—This Tana- 
ger was fairly common among the Yellow Pines in the hills. The song 
resembled that of the Scarlet Tanager but was short, slightly more broken 
and somewhat less harsh in tone. 

79. Progne subis (Linnaeus). Purete Martin.—Migrant birds were 
observed above the lake on June 8, 9 and 138. 

80. Petrochelidon lunifrons lunifrons (Say). Ciirr Swattow.— 
One cliff Swallow was seen with a flock of Violet-green Swallows on May 25 
and on the morning of May 26 a flock of 25 appeared. The birds were 
common from then on. Old nests were observed under the cliffs in several 
localities but the birds did not begin building this year until June 9. On 
June 11 they were building nests on the sandstone cliff above the Laguna 
de la Puerta. The birds came down to the lake shore in little bands of 
ten or a dozen and alighted close together with trembling wings extended 
at an angle from their backs, standing high on their legs to avoid soiling 
their feathers. After alighting they leaned over, filled the mouth with 
mud with one or two sharp digs and then rose to fly back up the steep 
slopes to the colony. Males frequently alighted on the backs of the fe- 
males as they gathered mud and copulation took place while the birds 
were on the ground. Males as well as females took part in nest-building, 
as a male shot here had the mouth filled with mud held in a mass in the 
mouth cavity above the tongue. 

81. Hirundo erythrogastra Boddaert. Barn Swattow.—A male 
came about the cabin at the lake on June 10, examining ledges under the 
eaves, and a pair was seen on June 14. 

82. Tachycineta thalassina lepida Mearns. NorruerN VIOLET- 
GREEN SwaLLow.—These swallows came in flocks about the cabin at the 
lake during May and swung tirelessly back and forth in the wind, barely 
skimming over the tops of the sage brush, in searcb of the many Chirono- 
mids that had taken refuge there. Often they came beating about me, 


*Oreospiza chlorura of the A. O. U. ‘Check List.’ 


408 Wermorge, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. ves 


almost passing within reach, so that I heard the soft click of their bills 
as they seized their prey. On calmer days they circled high in the air 
or at intervals returned to sweep down over the sage. Occasionally in 
early morning I saw them resting in little flocks in the sun in the tops 
of still leafless cottonwoods. By June 2 the flocks of these swallows had 
retired to the hills where they were found about the limbs of dead yellow 
Pines inspecting woodpecker holes with much chattering and flying about. 
The birds then often hovered in the air with rapidly moving bills, the 
males seeming to endeavor to seize the females by the feet, or the feathers 
of the abdomen, while others circled about calling excitedly. Cold storms 
during the first week of June frequently brought them back in flocks to 
feed over the flats but when the sun came out again they disappeared once 
more in the hills. After June 7, though fairly common in the gulches 
above, comparatively few came down along the shore of the lake. 

83. Stelgidopteryx serripennis (Audubon). RouGH-wINGED SwWAL- 
LOW.—Single individuals were observed on May 24 and 25, and a pair 
was found in an arroyo near the cabin on June 8. 

84. Vireosylva gilva swainsoni (Baird). WrsteERN WARBLING 
VirEo.—These Vireos were found in the thickets lining the gulches and 
among groves of aspens. They were not observed until June 2 but prob- 
ably arrived two days or more earlier, as I found one pair on that date 
with a nest partly constructed in a chokecherry tree (Padus melanocarpa). 

85. Lanivireo solitarius plumbeus (Coues). PLUMBEOUS VIREO.— 
The Plumbeous Vireo was common among the Yellow Pines in the hills 
above the lake on May 26, and was noted on all of my subsequent work in 
areas suited to it. On May 26, males were in full song, and one was ob- 
served carrying a bit of nesting material about with it and singing at the 
same time. The birds were found entirely in the Yellow Pines and often 
ranged in the tops of the tallest of these. They continued in full song 
until the middle of June and then became more silent. Some of the call 
notes given by this bird reminded me of the chattering calls of Lanivireo 
flavifrons while many notes introduced into the song were similar to some 
of the phrasing used by the White-eyed Vireo. 

86. Vermivora virginiae (Baird). VirGinta’s WARBLER.—This war- 
bler was common among the thickets of small oaks in the gulches and on 
the higher slopes around the lake, but was so secretive that it was difficult 
to observe. The males often sang from the tops of tall yellow pines, where 
they chose a hidden perch and remained motionless. When disturbed 
by some one moving about below they flew off for some distance, some- 
times remaining in the pines and continuing to sing, or again pitching 
down into the undergrowth where they were hidden from sight. The 
song varied somewhat but usually could be identified without particular 
trouble. An incubating female was shot on June 16. The callnote of 
this species is a sharp emphatic chip, but though the birds scolded at me 
frequently it was seldom that they came out in sight to do so. 


Vol. SSAV"] Wurmorn, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mec. 409 


87. Vermivora celata celata (Say). ORANGE-CROWNED WARBLER.— 
This Warbler nested in small numbers in the gulches below the lake. 
Apparently it was a late migrant as it was not observed until June 2, 
when a female was collected in a grove of quaking aspens. On June 9 
a male was encountered on an oak-grown hillside over which small Yellow 
Pines and Douglas Firs were distributed. This bird was rather inactive 
and often flew up into trees, usually conifers, to remain quiet and sing 
from some hidden perch. Once or twice while under observation it stopped 
to rest in the sun on a dead limb. The song, given constantly ,was a rapid 
hurried trill, resembling the syllables tsee-ee-ee-ee-er-er-er. 

88. Dendroica aestiva (Gmelin). YrLLOw WARBLER.—This warbler 
apparently was found at the lake only as a migrant, though it nested 
along the Brazos River farther east. Single individuals were observed 
along the lake shore on May 23 and June 1 in willows and small cotton- 
woods. No specimens were taken. 

89. Dendroica auduboni auduboni (J. K. Townsend). AupuUBON’s 
WarBLER.—This warbler nested in fair numbers in the Yellow Pine areas 
surrounding the lake. Males were found singing from the tops of the 
tallest Pines and were slow and leisurely in their movements in great con- 
trast to their habit at other seasons. Frequently while singing they 
remained on one perch for some time so that often it was difficult to find 
them. The song resembled the syllables tsil tsil tsil tsi tsi tsi tst. In a 
way it was similar to that of the Myrtle Warbler but was louder and 
more decided in its character. 

90. Dendroica graciae Baird. Gracr’s WARBLER.—A small number 
of Grace’s Warblers were encountered at the head of one of the gulches 
east of the lake, first on June 9, and again on June 16. Males only were 
observed. In actions and general appearance they reminded me strongly 
of Dendroica dominica. Usually they were found in the tops of the Yellow 
Pines where they worked about rather leisurely, exploring the smaller 
limbs and at short intervals pausing to sing. The song was a rapid repe- 
tition of notes somewhat reminiscent of the efforts of the Chipping Spar- 
row, but with the notes evenly spaced, not blurred at the end, and closing 
abruptly, so that the last syllable was as strongly accented as any of the 
others. It resembled the syllables chip chip chip chip chip given in a loud 
tone. Occasionally one was found working about through the oak under- 
growth at times coming down almost to the ground. The flight was 
undulating and rather quick and jerky. 

Grace’s Warblers showed some curiosity toward me but in the thick 
brush it was difficult to follow them abovt. The callnote was a very 
faint tsip that carried only a few feet at best, and was so weak and soft 
that it was hard to locate the direction from which it came, so that birds 
that could not be found were heard often among the oaks. 

91. Seiurus noveboracensis notabilis Ridgway. GrRINNELL’S WATER 
TarusH.—One of these birds was observed at the spring near the cotton- 
woods on May 23 and 25. 


[ruts 


410 Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 

92. Geothlypis trichas occidentalis Brewster. WrsTERN YELLOW- 
THROAT.—It was estimated that fifteen pairs of Yellowthroats were nesting 
around the lake. These birds were found in the tules, usually in that 
part of the growth that was standing in water adjacent to the shore. 
They sang constantly, but were so retiring that they seldom came under 
observation though it was usually possible to call them up into sight in 
the rushes by squeaking. Occasionally they gave the grasshopper-like 
trill that is sung so commonly by eastern birds. 

93. Wilsonia pusilla pileolata (Pallas). PiLnnoLaTED WaARBLER.— 
A few of these birds occurred during migration. A female was shot on 
May 26 in oak scrub on a dry hillside and one was seen on June 2 near 
the spring at the cottonwoods. The specimen taken belongs to this form 
and all other notes are included here. 

94. Oreoscoptes montanus (J. Kk. Townsend). Sagan THRASHER.— 
This Thrasher was observed first on May 29 after which it was fairly 
common in the areas covered with sagebrush about the lake. Males 
frequently sang from perches at the summits of the tall sage and the birds 
were observed occasionally in passing across the knolls and flats. At its 
beginning the song is somewhat like that of a grosbeak. As the notes 
wander on, to change and become more intricate, burring calls, that while 
harsh are not unmusical, creep in as an accompaniment to clearer whistled 
notes that are varied and pleasing. Low trills and changing combinations 
mark the song, reminding one of the improvisation of some gifted musician 
who, playing apparently at random, brings forth tones that follow one 
another in perfect harmony. 

95. Mimus polyglottos leucopterus (Vigors). WrstTeRN MockINc- 
BIRD.—The mockingbird was fairly common in the junipers on the flats 
and in the canyons near the lake. Males were heard singing frequently 
and one pair nested not far from the cabin. 

96. Salpinctes obsoletus obsoletus (Say). Rock Wren.—The Rock 
Wren was common around the lake and was seen frequently. Long 
slopes covered with fragments of broken sandstone were their favorite 
haunts. 

97. Catherpes mexicanus conspersus Ridgway. Canyon WREN.— 
On June 2 I found a pair of these wrens about some sandstone ledges in a 
gulch east of the lake. The female was working busily carrying nesting 
material into a rock crevice, while the male remained nearby but made no 
effort to assist her. Once as the female passed him he ran out across the 
rock face with spread tail, and wings partly open and trailing, giving a 
low churring note. And at short intervals I heard his fine song ringing 
through the woods. The female ceased her labors once and sat for a few 
minutes in the warm sun to preen her feathers, finally resting for some 
time with eyes partly closed, apparently almost asleep. 

On June 9 I examined the nest site and found the female on the com- 
pleted nest, which however was empty. She remained on the nest until I 
had nearly touched her, though I had made considerable noise in climbing 


wok oan a Wetmore, Birds of Lake Burford, N. Mex. 411 


along the rock face as I approached. The nest was placed on a small 
shelf of rock in the top of a shallow cave or hollow in a sandstone cliff. 
This ledge was about fifteen feet from the floor of the gulch, and the cave 
was approximately three feet high. 

On June 16 this nest contained four eggs. The female darted from the 
nest as I came up to it and went on away without stopping to scold. The 
male was singing a short distance away but did not come near. The 
nest measured 8 inches across the base and 3 inches tall. The cup con- 
taining the eggs was 214 inches in diameter and 2 inches deep. The 
foundation was composed of a dozen or more small twigs upon which were 
placed moss and masses of spider webbing with bits of leaves, catkins and 
bud scales. The nest lining was composed of a heavy felting of sheep’s 
wool, most of it white, though a few bits of dark brown wool were mixed 
through it. In addition, in the cavity containing the eggs, were a few 
feathers of Great Horned Owl, Violet-green Swallow and Cassin’s Finch. 
The eggs were translucent white in color, dotted mainly about the large 
end with small spots of reddish brown. 

98. Troglodytes aedon parkmani Audubon. Western Hovuse 
WreEN.—The House Wren was fairly common in the wooded areas on the 
hills above Lake Burford, and was nesting in Woodpecker holes and other 
cavities in trees. 

99. Telmatodytes palustris plesius (Oberholser). Tuts Wren.—On 
May 27 a Tule Wren in very worn plumage was seen creeping about in a 
stand of dead rushes, but no others were observed during the course of the 
work at the lake. The growths of tules seemed favorable for them in 
every way so that their absence was rather surprising. 

100. Sitta carolinensis nelsoni Mearns. Rocky Mountain Nour- 

HATCH.—This Nuthatch was fairly common among the pines above the 
lake. 
101. Sitta pygmaea pygmaea Vigors. Pycmy Nursatcu.—The 
Pygmy Nuthatch was fairly common among the Yellow Pines and was 
breeding here as incubating females were taken on June 9 and 16. This 
was one of the few mountain birds that showed marked curiosity and 
responded readily to squeaking. 

102. Penthestes gambeli gambeli (Ridgway). Mountain Cuicka- 
DEE.—Fairly common in the Yellow Pine forests about Lake Burford. 
On June 16 I found a nest of this species in a living quaking aspen in an 
old woodpecker hole located about five feet from the ground The tree 
grew on a slope in a narrow gulch and the nest opening was well con- 
cealed in the brush so that I had some difficulty in finding it. Cutting 
into the nest I found that it contained five young nearly fledged. Later 
in another locality I saw a female carrying food to young. 

103. Planesticus migratorius propinquus (Ridgway). WuxrsTERN 
Rosin.—The Western Robin nested commonly in the gulches around Lake 
Burford and one or two pairs were found in the grove of cottonwoods 


kine 
July 


412 KENNARD, Breeding Habits of Rusty Blackbird. 
near the spring. ‘Two empty nests found on June 16 were placed in scrub 
oaks on sloping limbs about six feet from the ground. 

104. Sialia mexicana bairdi Ridgway. WursterN BLurBirp.—A few 
of these birds were found among the Yellow Pines on the hills above the 
lake. They were nesting here and were observed at frequent intervals. 

105. Sialia currucoides (Bechstein). Mounrarin Buiursrrp.—The 
Mountain Bluebird was common about Lake Burford, ranging from the 
lake shore to the tops of the hills. A nest found May 25 near the cabin 
was placed in a cleft between two forking limbs of a cedar four feet from 
the ground. A cavity about ten inches deep had rotted out here and the 
bluebirds had built in the bottom of it. Immediately beside the opening 
was a notice printed on muslin, posted by Biological Survey trappers 
to warn against the theft of wolf traps. The nest when found contained 
five eggs that hatched about June 3. It was interesting to note that 
young were found out of the nest among the pines on the hills on May 
26, another instance of the fact that the season was farther advanced on 
the hills than it was in the valley below. 


U.S. Biological Survey, Washington, D. C. 


NOTES ON THE BREEDING HABITS OF THE RUSTY 
BLACKBIRD IN NORTHERN NEW ENGLAND. 


BY FRED H. KENNARD. 
Plates XIX-XX. 


Wui Le the Rusty Blackbird is a common spring and autumn 
migrant in New England, and is known to breed along our north- 
ern boundaries, but little seems to have been written about its 
nesting habits, except by Bendire, who has described them in 
some detail; while its eggs are comparatively rare in collections. 
Hence, in the spring of 1914, I fell a victim to the blandishments 
of Owen Durfee and agreed to join him in a hunt for their nests. 
I had noted Rusty Blackbirds several seasons before, while fish- 
ing for landlocked salmon in Essex County, away up in the north- 
east corner of Vermont, and thither we decided to journey. 


PLATE X1LX@ 


XXXVII 


THE AUK, VOL. 


STING Sites or Rusty BuacKkBIRps 


= 
4 


NE 


anded Spruce bough. 


© 
« 


In str 


9 


1. On top of old stump. 


pick Fao ed KENNARD, Breeding Habits of Rusty Blackbird. 413 


As the limited space at my disposal will not allow of the tell- 
ing of all the pleasures and disappointments of our quest through 
this and succeeding seasons, I shall try merely to give an account 
of the nests we discovered, with a brief description of the sur- 
roundings of each, and then tell collectively of the bird’s habits 
as I observed them. 

Carefully, as we thought, arranging the time of our hunt so as 
to find freshly laid sets of eggs, we were on the ground on May 
30, and on the 31st succeeded on finding two nests, both with 
young birds. 

One containing four young birds, two or three days old, was 
placed about six feet up, against the trunk of a small, thick-grow- 
ing spruce, on the edge of a thicket of evergreens, growing in a 
swamp at the endiof a small trout pond. 

The other, containing three young birds one or two days old, 
and one addled egg, was placed about seven feet up, between the 
trunks of two spindling little balsams in an almost impenetrable 
clump of evergreens. This was beside a logging road, perhaps 
twenty-five yards back, on the bank of an inlet to a large lake. 

As the season hereabouts had been late this year and the woods 
and swamps were, I am told, still deep in snow during the first 
week in May, these birds must have started their nest building 
before the snows disappeared. 

In 1915 we were again-in the field after the Essex County birds, 
and determined to be there on time. May 21 found us in camp, 
and we spent the morning in a fruitless hunt for the trout pond 
birds, which had apparently moved back into the swamp, and 
in the afternoon succeeded in finding two nests on the shore of 
the larger lake. The first contained four young birds, and was 
placed about eight feet up. between the tops of two thin little 
spruces in a thick clump of evergreens. This undoubtedly be- 
longed to the same pair of birds whose nest we had discovered 
last year, and was only about fifty yards from their last year’s 
location. These eggs must have been laid by May 5 and the nest 
started in April. sometime before the snow is ordinarily out of 
the woods in this region. While the month of May had been ex- 
ceedingly cold, wet, and disagreeable, the weather during April 
-had been warm and fine, and this perhaps may account for the 
unusually early nesting of the species this year. 


414 KENNARD, Breeding Habits of Rusty Blackbird. fare 


July 


Later in the day we discovered another nest, about a quarter 
of a mile away, containing five eggs, too hard set to save, placed 
about five feet above the ground, between the tops of two stocky 
little spruces, in a thick second growth of evergreens. This nest 
was on the bank, well above the level of the lake, and perhaps 
fifty yards from its shore. 

Disappointed but not discouraged we continued our hunt for 
a week; and finally on May 27, located another nest over in Coos 
County, New Hampshire, with four young two to three days old. 
This nest was in a swamp at the end of a small pond, and was 
about six feet up in a small dead spruce standing out by itself. 

The top of the tree had been broken, and bent over at an angle 
of about forty-five degrees, and here just below the break, in a 
tangle of dead branches and usnea moss, the nest was _ placed. 
About this time our enthusiasm began to ooze and we returned 
home, to resume the hunt in 1916. 

May 19, 1916, found us again in Essex County, and this time 
we were rewarded by finding a nect and two fresh eggs. I took 
the set of four on the 22d, after visiting the nest twice daily. 
This probably belonged to the same pair whose nests we had 
found the two previous seasons, and located perhaps fifty feet 
from their last year’s nest, was built about five and a half feet up, 
in a little spindling spruce, in an almost impenetrable thicket, 
close to the shore. The female was sitting on her eggs at each of 
my several visits, though she flew off silently upon my close ap- 
proach. 

I did not get over into New Hampshire this year, but on May 
29, Durfee visited the location of the last year’s nest, that we had 
found in the swamp, and again found young birds three to four 
days old. This nest was perhaps fifty feet from last year’s, and 
was placed about six feet above the surfaze of the swamp against 
the trunk of a small spruce. 

I was unable to do any collecting in 1917, but on May 16, 1918, 
was again in the field, this time with Mrs. Kennard, in Penobscot 
County, Maine, about seventy-five miles northeast of Bangor, 
where I had seen Rusties while on a fishing trip during a previous 
season. There is a trout brook there, that for the last hundred 
yards or so, flows through a swamp before joining the waters of a 


Vol. ax | Kennarp, Breeding Habits of Rusty Blackbird. 415 
small lake. Because of the shyness of the bird, and the fact that 
incubation had not yet begun, it was not until May 21, that we 
finally succeeded in locating the nest, with two fresh eggs, in a 
dead spruce top, that had floated down the stream in the spring 
floods, and become stranded near its mouth. It was only a foot 
above the surface of the water, in a tangle of usnea moss, and so 
well hidden that we had paddled by it in our canoe time after 
time without ever suspecting its presence. The nest was visit- 
ed daily until the 24th when I took it with five eggs. 

On June 5, I found the second nest of this pair, containing five 
eggs,—this time perhaps a hundred yards back in the swamp, 
about twenty feet up, in a tall, unhealthy looking spruce. It was 
placed in one of those thick bunches of evergreen twigs that 
sometimes grow close to the trunk of a spruce, and could not be 
seen from the ground. They had built this second nest and laid 
five eggs in exactly twelve days. 

On June 16, I found their third nest, containing four eggs, this 
time it was built near the first nest, beside the brook, in a tangled 
growth of sweet gale overhanging a ditch, and about two feet 
above the water. They had finished this third nest and laid four 
eggs just eleven days after the taking of the second nest. I felt 
like a pirate in taking it, but wanted to find out how persistent 
these birds could be under continued adverse conditions. 

I was called home at this time, but on July 14, returned to the 
woods, and found their fourth nest. This time they had built 
upon the opposite side of the brook, about ten feet back from the 
edge of the stream, in a thick growth of button-bushes. The 
nest was placed in a crotch, a couple of feet above the water, just 
as a Red-wing’s would have been, and contained three young 
birds only a few hours old, and one egg which hatched the next 
morning. The young were watched daily till fledged. Allowing 
fourteen days for incubation, it appears that this industrious pair 
built their fourth nest and laid this last set of four eggs, in four- 
teen days, a remarkable and exceptional performance, as other 
pairs left at once when their nests were taken. 

On June 10, I found another nest containing four eggs, in var- 
ious stages of advanced incubation. This was placed about four 
feet up against the trunk of a comparatively isolated, thickly 


416 KENNARD, Breeding Habits of Rusty Blackbird. kanes 


branched small spruce, back on dry land about seventy-five yards 
from the shore of a large lake. The nest was normal in construc- 
tion and position, but the eggs closely resembled, except in size, 
those of the Bronzed Grackle,—so much so, that had I not found 
the nest myself, and had a close view of the very distressed old 
birds, I should have had grave doubts as to their identity. 

The spring of 1919, found me again in Penobscot County, where 
I succeeded in finding the following nests: 

On May 19, I again discovered the nest of the trout brook 
birds, placed about five feet up, in a thin clump of slim spruces, 
close beside a logging road that leads through the swamp there. 
I took the eggs, evidently slightly incubated, supposing that they 
would build another nest, as they had done last year, and which I 
could watch from start to finish. My intentions, however, seem 
not to have been appreciated, for they promptly disappeared and 
were not seen there again during the summer, discouraged no 
doubt, and who could blame them. 

On May 25, in Washington County, Maine, I took a nest with 
five perfectly fresh eggs, the first I had ever seen, as in all sets 
taken previously, incubation had apparently begun with the lay- 
ing of the first egg. This nest was built about two feet up in a 
little, low black spruce, one of a clump on a floating island, in 
a swamp caused by raising the waters of the large lake on which 
it was situated. 


A nest discovered on May 27, in Penobscot County, contained 
five recently hatched young. This nest, near the shore of a large 
stream, bordered by miles of dead wood, was placed about eight 
feet up, and absolutely hidden in a matted tangle of dead limbs 
and usnea moss, where a big spruce had fallen across a smaller 
one. 

On June 5, also in Penobscot County, I found still another nest 
with four unincubated and slightly addled eggs, built about five feet 
and a half above the ground, in a small thick spruce, in a clump of 
evergreens a few feet from the shore of a large lake. This nest 
had evidently been deserted. 

Arriving in southern New England usually in the latter part of 
March, or early in April, these birds loiter along on their leisure- 
ly migration, and arrive on their breeding ground along our 


Tue Auk, Vou. XXXVII PLATE XX 


Nest aNp Eaas or Rusty BLACKBIRD 


Vol. xoxo] Kennarp, Breeding Habits of Rusty Blackbird. 417 


northern borders late in April or early in May, about the time the 
ice goes out of the lakes and often before the snow is melted in 
the surrounding woods and swamps. Here they spread out 
through their accustomed haunts, along the shores of the secluded 
lakes and ponds, among the swamps, or along the brooks and 
streams, showing a particular fondness for the “dry-kye” or 
dead-wood among the back-waters. To these places they return 
season after season. Though gregarious throughout most of the 
year, I have never found more than one pair in a given area dur- 
ing their nesting season. There may be colonies of Bronzed 
Grackles and Red-wings breeding close by, but never more than 
one pair of Rusties. The nearest I have ever found them being 
a quarter of a mile apart. 

C. J. Maynard in his ‘ Birds of Eastern North America’ writes 
of some “perfectly inaccessible” “sloughs” in the Magdalen Is- 
lands, as follows: “I had observed Blackbirds about there on sev- 
eral occasions, but as they kept well in the centre of the large 
tracks, I could not make out at first what they were, but after a 
time found a large colony of Rusty Grackles were evidently build- 
ing in one of the above described places.” As Mr. Maynard 
seems to have been doubtful as to the identity of the birds in the 
first place, and later confesses that “all efforts to penetrate this 
fastness proved unavailing” this evidence as to these birds some- 
times breeding in colonies seems hardly conclusive. 

In northern Vermont and New Hampshire where the migration 
up the Connecticut valley seems to bring them early to their 
breeding grounds, they start their nest building early in May, 
while in eastern Maine, only a trifle farther north, they usually 
do not start until the middle of the month. 

For sites they seem more apt to choose evergreens, preferably 
thick clumps of second growth spruce and balsam, though I have 
found them in dead trees or in clumps of deciduous bushes, button- 
bush and sweet gale, along the shores of some stream. Audubon 
writes of finding “their nest among the tall reeds of the Cats- 
tail or Typha.” Samuels tells of nests along the Magalloway 
river in Maine, built in low alders overhanging the water, and 
Chapman records their having built upon the ground, though I 
can find no further record of their so doing. 


418 JKXENNARD, Breeding Habits of Rusty Buackbird. kanes 


My friend, William Lyman Underwood, tells me of a nest he 
found on June 19, 1900, in Penobscot County, Maine, built in 
the top of an old stump, standing in the water, out from the shore 
of a lake. and containing three eggs upon which the female was 
sitting. Owing to the difficulty of photographing the nest and eggs 
in situ, he had his guides saw off the stump, carry it across the 
lake, perhaps a quarter of a mile, to a beach where he could set 
it up and photograph it. They then brought the stump back, and 
replaced it securely upon its foundation; and the female return- 
ing, continued her parental duties and raised her young. 

The nests in situ, are in the majority of cases difficult to photo- 
graph, because in the positions usually chosen, in thick clumps of 
low evergreens or bushes, the cutting necessary in order to set up 
one’s camera and properly focus, would destroy the natural sur- 
roundings. 

While, owing to their shyness, I have never been able to catch 
the birds at nest-building, I have examined a good many deserted 
nests besides those recorded above, and a careful examination 
of the nests in my collection shows their method. 

In construction, those that I have seen, have all been partic- 
ularly well built, rather bulky structures, and practically alike. 
A foundation is usually laid of usnea moss, sometimes in thick 
masses, and upon this they build their outside frame-work of twigs, 
usnea, lichens and occasionally a few dried grasses. In one of the 
nests In my collection the twigs used were mostly dead hackme- 
tack, in another spruce, while in the remainder, twigs from decid- 
uous trees predominated. This framework usually becomes thick- 
er and more substantial as it progresses upward. 

Within this outside frame they construct a well modeled hol- 
low bowl, between five and one-half and six centimeters in depth, 
and between eight and one-half and nine and one-half centimeters 
inside diameter. This bowl, which seems to the casual observer 
to be made of mud, is in reality made of “duff,” the rotting vege- 
table matter with which the ground of this region is covered, and 
which when dried becomes nearly as hard and stiff as papier 
mache; and shows their interesting adaptability to conditions, as 
real mud must at this season be hard to find. A cross-section of 
the nest shows the bowl to be of varying thickness, but averaging 


veh rots | KENNARD, Breeding Habits of Rusty Blackbird. 419 


between five and ten millimetres, and so pressed onto its surround- 
ing frame as to become, when it hardens, a part of it. 

After the bowl has been carefully modeled and smoothed off on 
the inside, it is lined with the fine, long green leaves of grasses that 
grow in the swamps thereabouts, and is finally topped off with 
dried grasses and fibres of various sorts, and a few thin, bendable 
twigs. In recently constructed nests I have found the green lin- 
ing to be absolutely constant, although as incubation progresses, 
these grasses, of course, gradually turn brown. The diameter 
of the nest when finished, just across the outside of the bowl, 
averages about twelve centimetres, while the diameter of the en- 
tire structure, except for a few outreaching twigs, varies from four- 
teen to twenty centimetres. The usual measurements from foun- 
dation to top of bowl are from eight and one-half to nine centi- 
metres. 

Audubon in Vol. II of his ‘Ornithological Biography,’ writes 
that “The nest is not so large as that of the Redwing, but is com- 
posed of much the same materials. In Labrador I found it lined 
with moss instead of coarse grass. The eggs are four or five, of a 
light blue color, streaked or dashed with straggling lines of brown 
or deep black, much smaller than those of the Redwing, but in 
other respects bearing considerable resemblance to them.” 

Such nests as Audubon may have found, must, if they were 
Rusty Blackbirds’, have been very exceptional, and the above in- 
formation is certainly misleading. The female Rusty is consid- 
erably larger than the female Redwing, and builds a much larger 
and bulkier nest, and the eggs, four or five in number, are ovate 
in shape, larger, more fully rounded and less elongated than Red- 
wing’s, which they in no way resemble; and smaller than those of 
the Bronzed Grackle; the fifty-three in my collection averaging 
25.57 millimetres x 18.56 millimetres. 

Bendire describes them well as follows: “The ground color 
is a light bluish green, which fades somewhat with age, and is 
blotched and spotted more or less profusely, and generally about 
the larger end of the egg, with different shades of chocolate and 
chestnut brown and lighter shades of ecru, drab, and pearl-gray. 
The peculiar scrawls so often met with among the eggs of our 
Blackbirds are rarely seen on these eggs, which are readily dis- 


420 KENNARD, Breeding Habits of Rusty Blackbird. kas 


tinguishable from those of the other species.”” As I have noted 
with other species, the last laid egg may be less heavily marked; 
particularly if the birds have been disturbed in previous settings. 
In the two last sets of the trout brook pair, the last laid eggs were 
grayer and without the glaze of the others. Apparently they run 
out of pigment towards the last. 

The female usually starts incubation with the laying of the first 
egg, particularly in the early spring, when the weather is cold, and 
sits pretty close, flying off only upon one’s near approach. Par- 
ticularly shy birds may, when disturbed, disappear without utter- 
ing a note, but the great majority that I have observed will re- 
main in the vicinity of the nest, uttering their loud “chips” of 
alarm, becoming more and more distressed, when disturbed, as in- 
cubation progresses, until after the hatching they are particular- 
ly vociferous. During incubation the male is very assiduous in 
his attentions to the female, feeding her frequently, and seldom 
flies far from the nesting locality. The female at this season is 
usually seldom in evidence, but by watching the male, one can 
soon determine by his actions the approximate locality of the nest. 
He has the very conspicuous habit of sitting on the top of some 
tall dead stub or tree, often with a nice fat grub in his bill and 
ealling to the female. This call note is a two-syllabled “ conk-ee,”’ 
very similar to the three-syllabled “conk-a-ree’’ of the Redwing, 
but clearer and more musical, and usually distinguishable from 
the notes of the other blackbirds. 

If disturbed by the proximity of watchers, he may delay for a 
while, uttering an occasional “chip” of alarm, but sooner or later 
he will fly close to the nest or to the top of some nearby stub, when 
the female will fly out to him, and with low “chucks” and much 
fluttering of wings, partake of the delicious morsel he has brought 
her. The knowledge of this habit, acquired during our second trip, 
greatly simplified our hunts during succeeding seasons. 

It has so happened that I have never been able, from personal 
observation, to check up the exact time of incubation, but Ben- 
dire states it to be “about two weeks” and Dr. Bergtold states 
that it is “14 days.” 

The young, when hatched, are covered with a long, thin, fuscous 
natal down; and fed by both parents, at frequent intervals, de- 


Vol. S30] Kennarp, Breeding Habits of Rusty Blackbird. 421 


velop rapidly, as such young birds do. The nest is kept clean, 
and I saw the female frequently drop a white fecal sac in the near- 
by brook, as she flew away from feeding her charges. By the 
fifth day, the primary quills and other wing feathers are well under 
way, while the growths along the remaining feather tracts are 
starting; and slight slits begin to show between their eyelids. By 
the tenth day the young are well covered with feathers, through 
which some of their natal down still protrudes, and their eyes are 
nearly but not quite wide open. 

A tragedy occurred to the only brood I was able to watch, for 
on the tenth day after hatching, one of the young was found in 
the water, about ten feet from the nest, dead and partially eaten. 
Whether he deliberately climbed from the nest, and later fell in- 
to the water, or was taken by some animal, will never be known, 
but the next day the three remaining young all climbed out into 
the adjoining bushes, it seemed to me, ahead of schedule time, 
for their eyes were hardly open, and they were still unable to fly. 

They remained in the immediate vicinity of the nest for the 
next two days, climbing and hopping from bush to bush, with 
both parents in close attendance, till on the thirteenth day, they 
had learned the use of their wings; and in the evening the last one 
was seen to fly across the stream, followed by its mother, and to 
disappear in the swamp beyond. 

The actions of the male, of this particular brood, were peculiar, 
for, after being very attentive to the female during incubation, 
he spent his days, as soon as the young had hatched, away from 
the locality, never helping the female in any way with her duties, 
except in the evenings, when returning with some other Rusties, 
that he had apparently been spending the day with somewhere, 
he would help feed the young, and spend the night in the vicinity. 

As soon, however, as the young climbed out of the nest, he re- 
sumed his share of the parental duties throughout the day. Per- 
haps under normal conditions, he would have been taking care of 
the young of a first brood, while the female took care of a second. 

Whether or not Rusty Blackbirds may occasionally raise a sec- 
ond brood, I am unable to say. I believe the Redwings do, for 
I have found their nests late in the season; and on July 20, 1918, 
in Washington County, Maine, I watched, for some time, a pair 


[uty 


422 Miuer, Genera of Ceryline Kingfishers. 


of Rusties feeding fledglings. This was near a colony of Bronzed 
Grackles, and it is possible that their previous nests may have 
been disturbed, but it seems probable that this may have been a 
second brood. 

About the middle of July, the Rusty families seem to desert 
their solitary breeding haunts, and again become gregarious, and 
are seen in small flocks, flying high overhead, between the lakes, 
or feeding along their shores, getting ready for their southern mi- 
gration. 


Dudley Road, Newton Centre, Mass. 


THE GENERA OF CERYLINE KINGFISHERS 


BY WALDRON DEWITT MILLER 


In a note published in ‘The Auk’ (1918, p. 352) the writer ad- 
vocated the union in one genus, Megaceryle, of all the large, con- 
spicuously crested Ceryline Kingfishers. These had been div- 
ided by Mr. Ridgway (Birds N. and Mid. America, Pt. VI, 407) 
into Megaceryle and Streptoceryle. At that time I overlooked the 
fact that Streptoceryle might be inadmissable on nomenclatural 
as well as on zoological grounds. 


I. NOMENCLATURE. 


In my ‘Revision of the Classification of the Kingfishers’ (Bull. 
Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., XXX, 1912, p. 265) the type of Meg- 
aceryle Kaup, 1848, was given as M. maxima by subsequent desig- 
nation of Gray in 1855. The early history of the genus Meg- 
aceryle is briefly as follows: 

Megaceryle new subgenus, Kaup, 1848. Contained four species, 
all of which are still referred to it when the genus is used in the 
broad sense. 

“ Megaceryle Kaup,’ Reichenbach, 1851. (Handb. Alced.) 
The same species given by Kaup, (except that the Asiatic spec- 


rot Fee an Miter, Genera of Ceryline Kingfishers. 423 
ies M. guttata was replaced in Ceryle) with three others, none of 
which is more than subspecifically distinct. 

“ Megaceryle Reich.”’ Bonaparte, 1854. (Consp. Volucr. Ani- 
sod.) The same Old World species given by Kaup with the ad- 
dition of M. lugubris (the Japanese representative of the contin- 
ental Asiatic M. guttata, perhaps only subspecifically distinct). 
A new genus, Streptoceryle, was proposed for the two American 
species. ; 

“ Megaceryle Reichenb. 1851” Gray, 1855 (Cat. Gen. and Sub- 
gen. of Birds). Type “(Alcedo maxima, Pall.).” 

As stated in my paper, “In specifying the last species as the 
type (mazima being the fourth and last species mentioned by 
Kaup) Gray was probably influenced by Reichenbach’s ill-advised 
action (in 1851) in transferring guttata (guttulata) from Megaceryle 
back to true Ceryle, and by Bonaparte’s removal (in 1854) of tor- 
quata and alcyon to his genus Streptoceryle leaving only the single 
species maxima in Megaceryle. Possibly also the fact of there be- 
ing two guttatas, that of Boddart (= maxima Pallas) and that of 
Vigors (=guttulata Stejn.) made it seem undesirable to Gray to fix 
guttata as the type.”’ M. maxima stood first both in Reichen- 
bach’s and Bonaparte’s arrangements. 

Chloroceryle and Megaceryle were proposed by Kaup in the same 
sentence, both as subgenera. Reichenbach credited both to Kaup, 
raising them to generic rank. Bonapart credited Chloroceryle to 
Kaup, but for some unexplained reason or more probably through 
carelessness gave Reichenbach as the authority for Megaceryle. 
Gray, a year later, credited both genera to Reichenbach. 

Five years later (1860) Cabanis and Heine proposed the name 
Ichthynomus* for the African species M. maxima, quoting as a 
synonym “Megaceryle Rchb. 1851 (nec Kaup 1848),’’ properly 
crediting Megaceryle to Kaup but restricting it to guttata and 
lugubris. It is not evident whether they overlooked or purposely 
ignored Gray’s designation of maxima as the type of Megaceryle. 

In the ‘Hand-list of Birds’ (1869) Gray followed the arrange- 
ment of Cabanis and Heine, thereby repudiating his original type 


* In the Birds of North and Middle America (Pt. VI. p. 407) this name is erron- 
eously quoted as ‘‘Ichthyonomus.’’ 


424 MILER, Genera of Ceryline Kingfishers. [sate 


designation. Sharpe (Monograph Alcedinide, 1870, and Cata- 
logue of Birds, 1892) also gave guttata as the type of Megaceryle. 
The A. O. U. ‘Check-List’ (Third Edition, 1910, p. 183) however, 
gives maxima as the type of Megaceryle, following Gray’s orig- 
inal designation. Mr. Ridgway, on the other hand, follows Caba- 
nis and Sharpe in considering guttata as the type. 

The fact that Gray credited Megaceryle to Reichenbach does 
not, in my opinion, affect the validy of his designation of maxima 
as the type. Reichenbach himself gave Kaup as the authority 
for the genus, and used the name in the same sense except for 
the omission of M. guttata. Bonaparte, however, although ac- 
crediting the genus to Reichenbach, restored M. guttata to its for- 
mer place. If Megaceryle Kaup and Megaceryle Reichenbach are 
not considered identical from a nomenclatural point of view, at 
least the latter can be treated as equivalent to a substitute name. 
In this case the type of Megaceryle Reichenbach, M. maxima, be- 
comes ipso facto the type of Megaceryle Kaup. Dr. J. A. Allen has 
shown (Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 1910, 332) that Ispida Bris- 
son 1760 may be considered a substitute name for Alcedo Linn. 
1758, thus rendering [spida a synonym and obviating the possible 
necessity of having to use Alcedo in place of Megaceryle. I have 
had some correspondence with Dr. Chas. W. Richmond regarding 
the nomenclature of this group and wish to express my indebted- 
ness for his advice. 

With M. maxima as the type of Megaceryle this becomes the 
proper generic name for the American species, it now being uni- 
versally agreed that the latter are congeneric with the African 
species. Bonaparte in proposing Streptoceryle for M. torquata and 
M. alcyon considered M. maxima to be more nearly allied to M. 
guttata (= guttulata) than to the American species. 


II. GENERIC AND SUBGENERIC CHARACTERS. 


If the Asiatic species M. guttulata and M. lugubris are con- 
sidered worthy of generic rank they must be given a new name. 
As stated in my note in ‘The Auk’ already mentioned, I do not 
believe this necessary for the following reasons: first, because 
the differences are virtually bridged by intermediates; second 


Biol on ea MILER, Genera of Ceryine Kingfishers. 425 
because M. alcyon is nearly if not quite as distinct from M. torquata 
and M. maxima as is M. guttulata; third, because if Megaceryle 
is divided Chloroceryle must also be split up, for C. amazona stands 
alone in several respects. 

A character of M. guttulata and M. lugubris that has not been 
pointed out is the considerably more extensive fusion of the third 
and fourth toes as compared with M. torquata and M. alcyon. 
In the former these toes are united to a point opposite the base 
of the claw of the second toe or sometimes even decidedly be- 
yond; in the latter the union falls decidedly short of this point. 
M. maxima is perfectly intermediate; the toes are united just 
to the point mentioned or sometimes a little short of it. In this 
character Ceryle agrees with Megaceryle torquata and M. alcyon, 
while Chloroceryle agrees with M. guttulata and M. lugubris. 

Further study has brought out additional characters separating 
the genera of Ceryline Kingfishers. In Ceryle and Megaceryle 
(M. alcyon and M. torquata examined) the greater secondary 
coverts of the under side of the wing although vestigial are dis- 
tinct; in Chloroceryle (C. amazona and C. americana examined) 
these coverts are utterly wanting. In Ceryle and in Chloroceryle 
(all except aenea examined) the slip of the deep plantar tendon 
that supplies the hallux leaves the main tendon decidedly above 
the point where the latter trifurcates to supply the anterior toes. 
In Megaceryle (only M. alcyon examined) the four branches all 
originate at nearly the same point. 

In Megaceryle (perhaps most so in M. lugubris) the planta 
tarsi is strongly papillose. In the three smaller species of Chloro- 
ceryle (subgenus Amazonis) the tarsus is not at all papillose while 
in C. amazona and Ceryle it is intermediate and apparently some- 
what variable. Some specimens of Ceryle agree well with Mega- 
ceryle, in others the tarsus is less papillose. Chloroceryle amazona 
is nearer the smaller species of the genus, the tarsus never being 
as papillose as in Megaceryle. 

I find that Ceryle varia agrees with Chloroceryle amazona and 
Megaceryle in having eighteen secondaries, these differing from 
the three smaller species of Chloroceryle which have but fourteen 
or fifteen secondaries. Dr. C. W. Richmond (Proc. U. 5. Nat. 
Mus. 1893, 16, p. 511) states that the voice of Chloroceryle 


[aus 


426 Miter, Genera of Ceryline Kingfishers. July 


amazona is quite different from that of the smaller species of the 
genus, much more resembling that of Megaceryle alcyon and M. 
torquata. 

In my ‘Revision’ I quoted from’P. Chalmers Mitchell’s paper 
on the ‘Anatomy of the Kingfishers’ (Ibis, 1901, 120) regarding 
the deep plantar tendons of Megaceryle and Chloroceryle. Mr. 
Mitchell’s description and figures show a striking difference 
between these two genera in the arrangement of the tendons. 
Of Megaceryle he described M. maxima and M. alcyon; of Chloro- 
ceryle, C. americana and C. inda. I have examined M. alcyon, 
C. americana, C. inda, C. amazona and Ceryle varia. My dissec- 
tion of M. alcyon agrees essentially with that of Mitchell. On 
the other hand, my diagrams of the tendons of Chloroceryle ameri- 
cana and C. inda differ in important respects from Mitchell’s 
figures of these species. They, as well as C. amazona and Ceryle 
varid, all agree essentially with each other and differ from Mit- 
chell’s figure of M. alcyon only in the position of the branch to 
the hallux. In Megaceryle the flexor perforans digitorum divides 
almost simultaneously into four branches, one for each toe, while 
in the other genera the slip for the hallux leaves the main tendon 
decidedly above the point where the tendon divides to supply 
the anterior toes. My dissections were made with great care, 
knowing that they did not agree with Mitchell’s results, and a 
second specimen of C. americana was examined as a check upon 
the first; I therefore feel confident that the above statements 
are correct. 

The following key shows the main differences, both internal 
and external, not only between the genera of the Cerylinae but 
also between the more marked groups of species. 


a DrtasTaTaxic; acrotarsuim scutellate; anterior toes shorter; upper parts 
not green; sexes alike in color of axillars; maxillary bone abruptly 
and somewhat more broadly expanded. 

b A conspicuous vertical crest; bill stouter, its rami not overlapt by 
interramal plumage, the tomia more or less distinctly ser- 
rate; tarsus and hallux shorter and stouter; tail more round- 
ed, rectrices not widened terminally, somewhat pointed; 
plumage rather harsh and lusterless, partly blue-gray and 
rufus, with no large white areas in scapulars, secondaries, 
outer webs of primaries, nor tail; larger (wing more than 


vol. acGe | Miter, Genera of Ceryline Kingfishers. 427 


144 mm). Clavicle with no distinct process near proxi- 
mal end; coracoid with an upstanding process at inner side 
of foot; spina sterni externa shorter; projection on outer 
edge of preilium conspicuous; lacrymal less swollen, reach- 
ing maxillary; tendinal slip to hallux arising at end of ten- 
don (Megaceryle) 
c Culmen more curved and with thicker tip; crest larger; 3rd 
and 4th toes more extensively united. 
Megaceryle lugubris 
Megaceryle guttulata 
cc Culmen straighter and with more slender tip; crest smaller, 
3rd and 4th toes less extensively united. 

d_ Bill stouter, the culmen nearly straight, the tomial ser- 
rations distinct; crest smaller; 10th primary nearer 6th 
than 7th (rarely exceeding 6th). Male with rufus in 
plumage; female with under wing-coverts rufous; larger 
(wing not less than 180 mm). 

Megaceryle maxima 
Megacryle torquata 

dd Bill more slender, the culmen distinctly curved, the 
tomial serrations less distinct, often obsolete; crest 
larger; 10th primary nearer 7th than 6th (always 
decidedly longer than 6th). Male with no rufous; female 
with under wing-coverts white; smaller (wing not more 
than 170 mm). 

Megaceryle alcyon. 

bb No vertical crest; bill more slender, its rami overlapt by inter- 
ramal plumage, the tomia entire; tarsus and especially hal- 

lux longer and more slender; tail less rounded, rectrices 
broadened and obtusely rounded terminally; plumage soft 

and silky, wholly black and white, with large white areas 

in scapulars, remiges and rectrices; smaller, (wing less than 

144 mm). Clavicle with a distinct process near proximal 

end; coracoid with no upstanding process at inner side of 

foot; spina sterni externa longer; projection on outer edge 
of preilium very small; lacrymal much swollen, not reach- 
ing maxillary; tendinal slip to hallux arising above end of 

LETICL ONE CML) amt ie yeloner ahs drs. cus aa aha ago oes Ceryle varia. 

aa EHuraxic; acrotarsium not scutellate; anterior toes longer; upper 
parts glossy bronze-green; sexes differing in color of axillars; 
maxillary bone gradually and somewhat less broadly expanded. 
Other skeletal characters and plantar tendons as in Ceryle varia. 
(Differing further from Megaceryle in absence of vertical crest; 
entire tomia, and longer tarsus and hallux; and from Ceryle in 
more extensively fused anterior toes, shorter wing-tip, tenth pri- 
mary shorter than sixth instead of longer; more rounded tail, 
and presence of rufous in plumage). (Chloroceryle). 


lien 


428 MILER, Genera of Ceryline Kingfishers. July 


b A conspicuous occipital crest; 18 secondaries; tail graduated for 
one-thirteenth of its length; 2nd toe with claw normally ex- 
ceeding 4th without claw; outer webs of secondaries uni- 
form green; green chest-band incomplete, the feathers not 
barred; larger (wing 125-146 mm)...Chloroceryle amazona. 

bb Secarcely crested; 14 or 15 secondaries; tail graduated for one- 
fifth or one-sixth of its length; 2nd toe with claw rarely ex- 
ceeding 4th without claw; outer webs of secondaries light- 
spotted; green chest-band complete, the feathers barred; 
smaller (wing 54-106 mm).......... Chloroceryle americana 

Chloroceryle inda 
Chloroceryle enea 


The interrelationships not expressed in the key may be briefly 
stated. Megaceryle maxima agrees with M. lugubris and M. 
guttulata in the pattern of the primaries and approaches them in 
the markings of the upperparts and in the extent of cohesion of 
the toes. M. alcyon resembles these same two species in the 
slight development of the tomial serrations, and approaches them 
in the curvature of the bill and the size of the crest. M. torquata 
is practically identical with M. alcyon in the union of the toes and 
in the color of the upperparts, but MW. t. stellata recalls M. maxima 
in the pattern of the upper surface. 

At the time my paper was written no skeleton of Ceryle varia was 
available and the skull only of Chloroceryle amazona. I now have 
a complete skeleton of each of these species and am able to com- 
pare them with skeletons of Megaceryle alcyon, M. torquata and 
Chloroceryle americana. 

Chloroceryle amazona resembles C. americana in the coracoid, 
spina sterni, and preiliac process; in the form of the clavicle it 
is intermediate between its congener and Megaceryle. 

As indicated in the accompanying key, Ceryle agrees with 
Megaceryle in the form of the expanded maxillary, and with Chloro- 
ceryle in the shape of the coracoid and clavicle, in the long spina 
sterni, in the narrow lacrymal, the descending process of which 
is greatly swollen and does not reach the maxillary, and in the 
small size of the preiliac process. The anterior edge of the sternal 
keel agrees with that of Chloroceryle amazona and both of these 
species are in this feature intermediate between Megaceryle and 
Chloroceryle americana. In the relation of the pars plana to the 


Vol. el 


1920 FLEMING AND Lioyp, Ontario Bird Notes. 429 


descending process of the lacrymal Ceryle is intermediate between 
the two other genera. 

In internal characters therefore, at least in the skeleton and 
the deep plantar tendons, Ceryle bears a much closer resemblance 
to Chloroceryle than to Megaceryle, agreeing better with the latter 
only in the somewhat broader maxillary. While this conclusion 
is probably correct it cannot be considered final until confirmed 
by examination of the remaining species, particularly Megaceryle 
guttulata or M. lugubris. 


ONTARIO BIRD NOTES. 


BY J. H. FLEMING AND HOYES LLOYD. 


Tue following notes refer chiefly to the birds of Toronto, On- 
tario, although there are some references to occurrences in other 
parts of the Province. 

Since the senior author published his article “ Birds of Toronto, 
Ontario,”’! twelve years ago, there has been much change in con- 
ditions affecting bird-life near Toronto. The land birds have 
not been seriously affected. The ravines, especially those of the 
Don and Humber Rivers, form decided obstacles to the expansion 
of the city and still contain wooded tracts which provide shelter 
and food for many migrants. However, the Humber River is 
now flanked by an automobile road and since the completion 
of the Bloor Street Viaduct the ravines of the Don Valley, already 
cut up by railroads, will soon be absorbed in the ever-growing 
city. 

There has been a large aerial training camp on the banks of 
the Don, from which aeroplanes have been flying in scores for 
the past three years, but they did not drive away the smaller 
birds. Large hawks and gulls have been seen, pursued by the 
cadets in their aeroplanes, and fleeing in terror before such huge 


1Auk XXIII, pp. 437-453 and Auk XXIV pp. 71-89. 


: 5 Auk 
430 FLEMING AND Luoyp, Ontario Bird Notes. vale 


adversaries. This camp is now closed and the original birds 
of the air may resume their travels in peace. 

The most important changes from an ornithological point of 
view are those on the water-front. Ashbridge’s Bay, once the 
haunt of many rare species of shore-birds and water-fowl, is all 
but converted into a cement-walled turning basin for freight 
vessels, and large areas of the marsh have been filled and the 
reclaimed section is being rapidly built up with factories. Even 
a street-car line runs across a portion of it. 

Toronto Bay is no longer seriously polluted by sewage. In 
1913 two interceptors were put in service which cross the city 
from east to west and convey all but storm sewage to a Dis- 
posal Plant at the north-east corner of what was once Ashbridge’s 
Bay. Here the sewage is sedimented, and the liquid portion car- 
ried 2900 feet off shore into Lake Ontario by an outfall sewer. 
The separated sludge is drained and air-dried in large open beds. 

This series of changes in the water-front has had and will con- 
tinue to have a considerable influence on bird life. The harbor, 
being free from sewage, provides a safe haven for water-fowl, for 
they are protected there at all times. There is probably little 
food there now, but there may be more as the water becomes purer. 

As little unsedimented sewage is emptied into the harbor or 
lake the number of gulls must decrease as many depended on this 
source of food especially in the winter. Through the field-glasses 
gulls may be seen feeding over the point in Lake Ontario where 
the outfall sewer discharges, so evidently enough solid material 
escapes after sedimentation to provide food for some birds. 

The sludge beds at the sewage disposal plant provide food for 
many waders. The sludge often swarms with the larve of a fly 
and with an annulid worm and fairly large flocks of shore-birds 


stop there on migration. They are safe and inaccessible while on 
these sewage beds, in fact, only an ardent ornithologist would 
stay to observe them. Considering all these points we can be 
sure that the marsh-birds, the waders, and the water-fowl will not 
visit us in anything like their former numbers, and those that do 
come, to the marsh particularly, will not remain long. 

Colymbus holbelli. Hotsa@uy’s Grese.—One taken at Toronto 


on March 5 and one on April 13, 19138, are early records, both in winter 
plumage.—J. H. F. 


vor ax y aa] FLEMING AND Luoyp, Ontario Bird Notes. 431 


Colymbus auritus. Hornep Grespe.—On February 9, 1918, one 
was seen leisurely swimming among the drift ice in Lake Ontario near 
Toronto. It was —23°-F. on February 5th, but rained on the night of 
February 8.—H. L. 

Podilymbus podiceps. Prep-BILLED GreBu.—A male was taken at 
Toronto on April 2, 1918, by Mr. J. S. Carter. This is the earliest To- 
ronto record and the bird had not yet assumed the adult male plumage. 
—H. L. 

Larus marinus. Great Buiack-BAcKkED Guti.—A bird, not fully 
adult, was taken at Toronto Island October 31, 1914.—J. H. F. 

Sula bassana. Gannet.—On Noveinber 5, 1918, Thomas and Dun- 
can McDonnell shot a Gannet on Lake Ontario, near Gibraltar Point, 
Toronto. I obtained the bird from them in the flesh and found that it 
was a male (?) in immature plumage. Its stomach was empty but the 
bird appeared to be in good condition. There is one previous Toronto 
specimen! and about 4 others from the rest of the Province of Ontario, 
one being from Oshawa, one from Hamilton and two from Ottawa have 
been recorded.—H. L. 

Mergus americanus. Mrrcanser.—During August, 1916, a family 
of Mergansers regularly swam past my cottage, in the Narrows of Lake 
Joseph, Muskoka. On the tenth I made a careful count and found one 
adult female in charge of thirty-one young, oné of which was noticeably 
smaller than the others. The flock usually passed only a few yards from 
the house but there was only the one old bird.—J. H. F. 

This is corroborated although the bird may have been a Red-breasted 
Merganser by the following note. On July 5, 1909, as I came into Lake 
Obabika from Wakimika Creek, Temagami Forest Reserve, Ontario, a 
Merganser swam out ahead of me and she was the proud possessor of 
thirty-seven ducklings.—H. L. 

Mergus serrator. Rep-BREASTED MEerGANSER.—A female taken near 
West Hill, Ontario, from a small flock, on May 9, 1916, is the latest spring 
record for the Toronto district. West Hill is about 8 miles east of To- 
ronto.—H. L. 

Marila affinis. Lesser Scaup Ducx.—The latest Toronto date is 
October 29, 1895. On November 21, 1913, I took a male at Lake Scugog 
about sixty miles north-east of Toronto.—H. L. 

Marila collaris. Rina-NeckED Ducx.—On November 5, 1918, Mr. 
C. A. H. Clark shot one in the plumage of the female over our decoys at 
Honey Harbor, Muskoka District, Ontario.—H. L. 

Oidemia deglandi. Wuite-wiNGeD Scorer.—I examined an adult 
male at Toronto May 14, 1913, and saw a large flock at the mouth of the 
Niagara River on May 18, 1914. Mr. J. Hughes Samuel noted in his 
diary in 1897 large flocks seen May 26, one bird on June 3, and from 


1, Fleming, Auk XXX, p. 225. 


432 FLEMING AND Luioyp, Ontario Bird Notes. Gas 


November 20 to December 15, on Toronto Bay. Mr. Lloyd has a young 
male taken on Lake Ontario October 20, 1904, and he saw one which 
had just been killed at Scarboro Heights, Toronto, on November 11, 
1916.—J. H. F. 

Oidemia perspicillata. Surr Scorpr.—A female was taken on Lake 
Ontario near Toronto on September 27, 1907.—H. L. 

Chen hyperboreus hyperboreus. Snow Gooss.—An adult taken 
at Weller’s Bay, Prince Edward County, on Lake Ontario, October 21, 
1916, is now in the Provincial Museum, Toronto.—J. H. F. 

Chen cerulescens. Biur Goosr.—An adult female shot on No- 
vember 2nd, 1914, at Port Rowan on Lake Erie is in the collection of Mr. 
John Maughan. An immature female was shot by Mr. Bert Gardner at 
Point Pelee on October 21st, 1916, the upper and lower mandibles of this 
specimen were black becoming flesh purple at base, commissure dusky 
black; legs and feet dark lead gray (plumbeous), webs dusky. Another 
immature bird was taken on the Holland River near Schomberg, in York 
County, on November 6th, 1916. The bird was in poor condition and 
had probably been previously wounded. This and the other immature 
bird were in dark gray plumage.—J. H. F. 

Olor columbianus. Wauistitinc Swan.—A flock of about twenty 
settled in Ashbridge’s Bay, Toronto, on the evening of April 17th, 1914, 
leaving next morning. One was killed at Whitby, thirty miles east of 
Toronto, on Lake Ontario on the 18th.—J. H. F. 

Herodias egretta. Ecarer.—A bird, without dorsal plumes, was 
killed on August 3rd, 1916, in Dundas County, Ontario, and identified 
by Mr. Oliver Spanner. It was subsequently mounted by a local taxi- 
dermist, but I have been unable to learn who owns it at present.—J. H.F. 

Rallus elegans. Kina Rary.—One taken at Picton, Bay of Quinte, 
on March 28, 1917, is in the Provincial Museum, Toronto.—H. L. 

Rallus virginianus. VircintiaA Rar.—One taken on November 10, 
1906, at Toronto, is in my collection. This is the latest record.—J. H. F. 

Porzana carolina. Sora Raiw.—Specimens taken on October 12, 
1904; October 15, 1914; and October 17, 1914, are late Toronto dates.— 
is al by 

Calidris leucophea. SanpERLING.—A specimen was taken at To- 
ronto on September 15, 1905, a late fall date.—H. L. 

Limosa hemastica. Hupson1an Gopwit.—One was shot on Sep- 
tember 18th, 1912, on the Eastern Sandbar, Ashbridge’s Bay, Toronto, 
by Mr. H. M. Sheppard. The bird was flying in company with nine Gol- 
den Plover, some of which were taken at the same time. The record is 
based on a letter written by the late S. T. Wood, who published an ac- 
count of the occurrence in the ‘Globe’ of October 12th, 1912.—J. H. F. 

Helodromas solitarius solitarius. Sonirary SanppiperR.—Spring 
occurrences are rare in Ontario. On May 16, 1918, three were seen at 
Coldstream, Ontario, and one taken; and on May 23, 1918, two were tak- 


Volt, a | FLEMING AND Luioyp, Ontario Bird Noles. 433 


en at Toronto. The latest fall date recorded for Toronto is September 
16, 1891. Later specimens have been taken at Toronto as follows: 
Sept. 15, 1917; Sept. 30, 1916, and October 2, 1907.—H. L. 

Accipiter cooperi. Cooprr’s Hawk.—Winter and spring records are 
unusual in the Toronto region. One was taken on December 6th, 1890, 
at Toronto; one on January 23rd, 1915, at Oakville, 19 miles west of To- 
ronto; one on February 8th, 1907, at Newmarket, 34 miles north of To- 
ronto; one at Toronto, on March 8th, 1913; all immature birds. A full 
plumaged adult male was taken on April 30, 1914; and another adult on 
April 6th, 1918, at Toronto.—J. H. F. 

Aquila chrysaetos. Go.tpEN Eacur.—One was taken alive at Pal- 
grave, in Peel County, on November 1 th, 1915, and sent to Toronto. 
Palgrave is about 32 miles north-west of Toronto.—J. H. F. 

Halizetus leucocephalus alascanus. NorrHerN BaLtp Eaqun.— 
An adult male Bald Eagle was shot at Scarboro Bluffs, Toronto, on 
January 26, 1918. The bird was in poor condition from starvation. Jan- 
uary was an exceptionally cold month, with a heavy fall of snow.—H. L. 

Pandion haliaetus carolinensis. Osprey.—One shot on April 16, 
1904, at Toronto Island is an early record, and two taken on September 
10, 1913, and October 11, 1915, respectively, are late records.—H. L. 

Asio wilsonianus. Lona-narED Owx.—Late Toronto dates are: 
November 10, 1917; November 11, 1918; November 14, 1914; November 
18, 1916; and December 19, 1914.—H. L. 

Bubo virginianus. Hornep Own.—The senior author has already 
recorded a migration of Horned Owls into Southern Ontario that occurred 
during the winter of 1907—’08,! and though much the largest up to that 
time, it was insignificant compared with the movement that took place 
between the last week of October, 1917, and the end of January, 1918. 
The resident form Bubo virginianus virginianus seems to have had warn- 
ing, and moved out ahead of the rush from the north; the last one was 
examined on October 22nd and the local bird did not reappear till towards 
the end of the following January after the last of the invaders had gone 
home or been killed. The only exception noted was a typical resident 
bird taken on December 25. The first non-resident bird appeared on the 
27th of October and by the second week of November the movement had 
assumed large proportions, commencing to slow up early in December, and 
had virtually ceased by the middle of that month, though a few loiterers 
continued to be taken up to the third week of January and a dark male 
referred to subarcticus, was taken on March 16th, 1918. In all, about one 
hundred and twenty-five Horned Owls were examined, of these, quite one 
hundred were taken in the immediate vicinity of Toronto, and the others 
within a radius of sixty miles. The owls were in good condition, some had 
obviously eaten skunk, some had eaten cottontails and muskrats, and 
a few had eaten mice, but the majority found poultry the easiest food, 


1Auk, 1908, p. 487. 


[July 


434 FLEMING AND Luioyp, Ontario Bird Notes. 
and from what was learned, there must have been serious losses of pure 
bred stock, besides the large number of ordinary fowls destroyed; at least 
the owls had managed to keep fat, during one of the coldest winters known 
in Southern Ontario. 

Believing the owls had probably not arrived in one flight, fifty-three 
were gathered together in the workshops of Mr. Oliver Spanner, from 
among those taken before the middle of December; and on sorting them 
some support for this theory was found. There were twenty seven Arc- 
tic Horned Owls, Bubo virginianus subarcticus, representing both the light 
and dark phases; ten were referred to the Labrador Horned Owl, Bubo 
virginianus heterocnemis, some of them very dark; of the remainder fifteen 
were difficult to place, the majority were darker than the Great Horned 
Owl, Bubo virginianus virginianus, usually resident here, and possibly some 
were colour phases of the Labrador bird. An owl taken on October 22nd 
belonged to the resident type. The remaining one taken at Toronto on 
November 12th was perhaps the most interesting; it was light but with 
much more ochraceus, than any of the Arctic Horned Owls with which it 
was compared and approached closely a skin of Bubo virginianus occi- 
dentalis, Stone, from North Dakota, from which it differed, in having less 
ochraceus at the base of the feathers, and darker edgings to the feathers 
of the breast and back. The first Arctic Horned Owls were taken on 
October 27th, but the migration was not in full swing till the middle of 
November, when birds dark enough to be assigned to the Labrador Horn- 
ed Owl began to come with the lighter coloured ones, and after 
that the two were mixed together in the same territory. Though it was 
impossible to asign any route for the migration, it is likely the owls, on 
reaching the north shore of Lake Ontario, drifted east. The information 
about the food conditions is largely due to the interest taken in the mat- 
ter by Mr. H. M. Sheppard, who skinned and mounted many of the owls. 
—J. H. F. 

Chordeiles virginianus virginianus. NigHTHawk.—One was seen 
on September 30, 1918, and four on October 10, 1918, at Toronto. The 
last ones were observed at close range for some time.—H. L. 

Archilochus colubris. Rusy-rHroaTteD Humminasirp.—It is not 
always easy to tell when the adult Hummingbirds leave Ontario. On 
July 5th, 1911, after one of the hottest weeks ever recorded in Southern 
Ontario, the adult male Ruby-throats began to pass through my garden 
in Toronto, and from then until the 18th, at least one was seen every day. 
In 1914, I saw adult males in the garden from July 8th to 10th, when they 
disappeared, and no more Hummingbirds were seen till white throated 
birds appeared on the 26th, and were present every day till August 9th, 
but it was impossible to tell if there were any old females among them. 
At Lake Joseph, Muskoka, I met with a family party consisting of the 
old brds and two fully fledged young on August 17th, 1917, which would 
indicate that the old birds do not all leave in July.—J. H. F. 


gs eae all FLEMING AND Luoyp, Ontario Bird Notes. A435 


Tyrannus tyrannus. Kinesrrp.—One was taken at Rosebank, On- 
tario, which is 18 miles east of Toronto, on May 10, 1915. This is an 
early date for the Toronto district.—H. L. 

Sayornis phebe. PHa@ss.—tThe latest Toronto date is November 3, 
1917, when a specimen was taken.—H. L. 

Nuttallornis borealis. Ouive-sipep FiycatcHer.—Near Toronto, 
on August 17, 1918, a female was secured. The only other specimen, 
other than spring migrants, which has been procured at Toronto, was tak- 
en August 9, 1899.1 Two spring migrants were seen this year, 1918, on 
May 27th and one on June 8th. 

Empidonax flaviventris. YsLLOW-BELLIED FLYCATCHER.—On Sep- 
tember 14, 1918, these flycatchers were fairly common in a small ravine 
of the Don Valley, near Toronto. They were difficult to observe, but 
five were recorded. The identification was confirmed by specimens.— 
15 ol 

Empidonax trailli alnorum. A.LpEerR FLycatcHEer.—In dense wil- 
lows, on the Searboro cliffs, near Toronto, two of these birds were taken 
in midsummer, one a male, on July 18, 1905, and the other on August 4, 
1905. This flycatcher has not previously been recorded in summer and 
the last bird taken was uttering the characteristic note of the species.— 
H. L. 

Empidonax minimus. Last FrycatcHer.—A new, early Toronto 
date is May 6, 1905; and a new late date August 31, 1918. Both are con- 
firmed by specimens.—H. L. 

Otocoris alpestris praticola. Prairtms HorNep LarK.—Four Horned 
Larks were taken from a large flock on November 24, 1917, all males. 
They were submitted to Dr. H. C. Oberholser, for examination, and his 
identification, which is of interest, is quoted below: 

“They prove to be of considerable interest, and a word or two con- 
cerning them may be desirable. Three of them are nearly typical Oto- 
coris alpestris praticola, although they have rather bright yellow throats. 
The fourth specimen is much more brownish on the upper parts and seems 
to be more or less intermediate between Otocoris alpestris praticola and 
Otocoris alpestris hoyti,with possibly a strain of Otocoris alpestris alpes- 
tris in rather yellowish eyebrow. The bird is, however, altogether too 
small for either Otocoris alpestris alpestris or Otocoris alpestris hoyti.”’ 

Corvus brachyrhynchos brachyrhynchos. Crow.—Two albino 
Crows were taken from the nest by Mr. Ernest Dunn on June 29, 1908, 
at a spot nine miles north of Toronto. Both birds were grayish white, 
the eyes blue-gray; the feet lead-black; and the beaks horn colour.—J. H. 
F. 

Sturnella magna magna. Merapow1arK.—lI saw a flock of these 
birds that numbered between twenty and thirty, on January 14, 1913, 


1 Auk, XXIV, 1907, 77. 


436 FLEMING AND Luoyp, Ontario Bird Notes. [sue 


near Glenwilliams, in Halton County. It is not unusual to have one or 
two wintering about the farm buildings, but a flock of any size is rare. 
—J. H. F. 

Euphagus carolinus. Rusty Buackprrp.—One was taken from a 
flock on March 30, 1904, which is an early Toronto record, and one tak- 
en on November 5, 1904, is late.-—H. L. 

Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina. EvmEniInc GrRosBEAK.—A 
flock was reported at Glenwilliams, in Halton County, on April 3, 1913, 
and on December 27, I examined two males that had been taken at To- 
ronto. Two more males were taken at Oshawa, thirty-eight miles east 
of Toronto, on March 22, 1914. The late 8. T. Wood saw a flock at East 
Toronto on February 18, 1915.—J. H. F. 

Pinicola enucleator leucura. Pine GrospHaKk.—An early fall date 
for Toronto is October 24, 1903, when a male was taken.—H. L. 

Loxia leucoptera. WHITE-WINGED CrossBiILL.—These birds were 
abundant, in flocks, at Sutton, Ontario, on the South Shore of Lake Sim- 
coe, on November 5, 1915. An early fall date for Toronto was November 
16, 1917, when one was taken.—H. L. 

Zonotrichia albicollis. Wuirs-THROATED SpaARRow.—Late Toronto 
dates are October 26, 1918, and October 31, 1914.—H. L. 

Melospiza georgiana. Swamp Sparrow.—A late Toronto date is 
October 20, 1917, when a specimen was taken.—H. L. 

Cardinalis cardinalis cardinalis. Carpinat.—A male was taken 
on December 3, 1917, near the Humber River, Toronto, and afterwards 
examined by me.—J. H. F. 

Zamelodia ludoviciana. Rosr-BREASTED GROSBEAK.—Fall records 
are rare. A male was taken at Toronto on BugueD 19, 1913, and a female 
on September 18, 1915.—H. L. 

Passerina cyanea. Inp1Go Buntinc.—Additional Toronto fall dates 
are August 12, 1916, and September 3, 1917.—H. L. 

Piranga erythromelas. Scariet TANAGER.—There were more Tana- 
gers than usual in my garden at Toronto, during September, 1913; on the 
14th I took an adult male, on the 18th I saw two, one of which had the 
black wings of the male; one was seen on the 19th and one on the 20th; 
two seen on the 22nd one of which proved to be a female; the last seen on 
the 27th.—J. H. F. : 

Progne subis subis. Purete Martin.—The earliest Toronto date is 
given as April 18th. On April 6, 1904, about 5 p. m. a male came to my 
bird-house in Toronto, leaving immediately. This, or another, a male, 
came to the house on April 10th of the same year and remained perched 
on the house for some time.—H. L. 

Stelgidopteryx serripennis. RovuGH-winceD SwaLLow.—At West 
Hill, Ontario, about 8 miles East of Toronto City limits, and not far from 
the shore of Lake Ontario, I found two adult and four young of this spec- 
ies on July 20, 1918. The young birds were flying well at that date. This 


pel: aon | FLEMING AND Lioyp, Ontario Bird Notes. 437 


extends the range of this species eastward a few miles more on the north 
shore of Lake Ontario.!. Specimens were taken, which proved the iden- 
tity of the species. As it is understood specimens were taken on the Rid- 
eau River, during the summer of 1918, a general extension of range may 
be occurring.—H. L. 

Vireosylva philadelphica. PHiLaprLpHrA VirE0.—The latest spring 
date is June 2, 1917, when a female was taken at Toronto. They were 
common on the morning of May 22, 1918, when at least twelve were seen 
in a section of the Don Valley and several were taken.—H. L. 

Vermivora rubricapilla rubricapilla. NasHvitte WarBLER.—The 
earliest spring date is April 29, 1905, when a male was taken at Toronto. 
The latest fall date is September 28, 1918, when another was secured. 

Vermivora peregrina. TENNESSEE WARBLER.—The latest spring 
date recorded for Toronto is May 22. One was seen on May 31, 1917, 
and a female taken on June 7, 1907. Early fall records are, an immature 
bird taken on August 17, 1914, and one taken on September 9, 1913.— 
EE. LL. 

Dendroica tigrina. Cape May WArBLER.—A male seen on May 31, 
1917, at Toronto, is the latest spring record. A moulting male, taken on 
August 22, 1908, and one seen at Toronto Island, on August 23, 1915, 
are early fall records. In 1913, Cape May Warblers were passing through 
my garden, at Toronto, from September 12 to 21.—J. H. L. 

Dendroica coronata. Myrrite WarsLer.—The earliest spring record 
for Toronto is a female, taken on April 23, 1904.—H. L. 

Dendroica magnolia. Maanouia WarsBLer.—The latest spring rec- 
ord for Toronto is a male taken on June 6, 1907, and the latest fall record 
is a female taken on October 16, 1915.—H. L. 

Dendroica cerulea. CrRULEAN WaARBLER.—On May 23, 1918, I 
took a female Cerulean Warbler near Toronto. I was watching another 
warbler, which I considered to be a Parula Warbler, when it pursued a 
plainer bird across a stream. I followed and took the plainer one of the 
two, which proved to be a Cerulean Warbler. I concluded at once that 
the pursuing bird had been a male of the same species but did not see it 
again. There are seven or eight previous Toronto records at least one of 
which is a female taken in 1856.1—H. L. 

Dendroica castanea. Bay-BrReEASTED WARBLER.—This is one of the 
warblers that has increased as a migrant at Toronto, within the last 
twenty years. The first record of the bird being in any numbers, is in 
the diary of the late J. Hughes Samuel under date of May 19th, 1898, at 
Toronto Island. ‘Bay-breasted Warblers were astonishingly numerous, 
—so much so that I counted twelve feeding on the ground at one time and 
in a space of a few feet.”’ This warbler breeds in Nipissing District, as 


1 Auk, XXXIV, 460. 
1 Auk, XXIV, 1907, 84. 


[ae 
July 


438 FLEMING AND Luioyp, Ontario Bird Notes. 
a breeding pair was taken on July 11th, 1906, at Annina, Nipissing (near 
Latchford) by Mr. W. B. Rubridge. Of late years it has become a fair- 
ly common and regular migrant, during August and September at To- 
ronto, though in 1907, there was only one to record, and we have young 
birds taken there between August 13th and September 9th, and one from 
Lake Joseph, Muskoka, on September 17th, 1907. We have adults from 
Toronto in full moult taken between August 10th and 29th; and adult 
males taken on August 17, 1918, September 2, 1918, September 2nd, 
1908, and September 30th, 1907, and one adult female taken September 
22, 1917. 

Dendroica striata. BrLack-pott WarBLerR.—The latest spring date 
for Toronto is a female taken on June 7, 1907.—H. L. 

Dendroica fusca. BLAckBURNIAN WarBLER.—The latest Toronto 
spring dates are a female taken on June 7, 1907, and a male taken on 
June 8, 1907.—H. L. 

Dendroica vigorsi. PINE WarBLER.—The latest spring date for the 
Toronto district is a male, taken at Etobicoke Creek, by Mr. Osborne H. 
Shenstone on May 31, 1902.—H. L. 

Seiurus aurocapillus. Oven-pirp.—The latest fall dates for Toronto 
are a female taken on September 28, 1918, and another taken on October 2, 
1908.—H. L. 

Icteria virens virens. Y®rLLOW-BREASTED CHatT.—A female was 
taken at Coldstream, Middlesex County, Ontario, on May 14, 1918.— 
H. L. 

Wilsonia pusilla pusilla. Wu1tson’s Warsier.—The earliest spring 
record for Toronto is a male taken on May 10, 1904.—H. L. 

Wilsonia canadensis. CaNapIAN WaARBLER.—This species has not 
yet been recorded as breeding at Toronto. The birds were found on four 
different occasions in June, one in July, and three in August in the same 
section of the Don Valley during the summer of 1918.—H. L. 

Toxostoma rufum. Brown TuHrasHpr.—A female taken on Oc- 
tober 8, 1917, is the latest fall date for Toronto.—H. L. 

Thryothorus ludovicianus ludovicianus. Carotina WrEeN.—The 
first Toronto record was taken in my garden on May 20, 1917, a male in 
worn plumage.—J. H. F. 

Sitta canadensis. Rep-sreEaAsteD NuTHatcH.—A male was taken 
at Toronto on May 20, 1916. This is the latest spring date.—H. L. 

Regulus calendula calendula. Rusy-crowNep KinGiet.—Speci- 
mens were taken at Toronto on August 31, 1918, September 19, 1916, and 
September 21, 1908, which are all earlier than recorded fall dates ——H. L. 

Polioptila cerulea cerulea. Biun-Gray GNATCATCHER.—A female 
was taken at Coldstream, Middlesex County, Ontario, on May 14, 1918.— 
A . 

Planesticus migratorius migratorius. Roprn.—Late fall and win- 
ter dates are November 3, 1917, November 24, 1917, and December 10, 


pol. NAL Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. 439 


1904. Between August 28 and September 7, 1918, Mr, Robert Moor- 
croft obtained four, which had been killed or wounded by wires, at the 
same street corner. He saw many others, during the same few days, and 
says he has found dead or wounded Robins, at the same place, for some 
time past. The stomachs were empty in each case, so that the birds are 
evidently killed during the night or before feeding in the morning. A few 
high wires pass over a small wooded park at this corner but no definite 
reason can be given for high Robin mortality at this point.—H. L. 


267 Rusholme Road, Toronto, Ontario. 
496 Queen St., Ottawa. 


SEVENTEENTH SUPPLEMENT TO THE AMERICAN 
ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION CHECK-LIST OF 
NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. 


THE Sixteenth Supplement, the only one since the appearance 
of the Third (1910) Edition of the American Ornithologists’ Un- 
ion ‘Check-List of North American Birds,’ was published in July, 
1912. Since that time it has for various reasons not been ex- 
pedient to publish further decisions. The Committee on Nom- 
enclature, since its reorganization at the A. O. U. meeting in 
November, 1919, has decided to begin the preparation of a new 
A. O. U. ‘Check-List’. This is undertaken as part of the coopera- 
tion between the British Ornithologists’ Union and the American 
Ornithologists’ Union in the production of a series of lists of the 
birds of the several zoogeographical regions of the world, and will 
probably be issued as the Nearctic volume of the proposed ‘Sys- 
tema Avium.’ 

Since the publication of the last A. O. U. ‘ Check-List’ the great 
activity among American ornithologists has resulted in an almost 
unbelievable number—several hundreds—of additions and changes 
most of which have been listed from time to time in ‘The Auk’ and 
will have the consideration of the A. O. U. Committee. As fast 
as these cases are disposed of, it is planned to publish the decisions 
in supplements to the ‘Check-List,’ in order that those who have 
occasion to use the names of North American birds may have the 
benefit of the opinions of the Committee. 


440 Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. [fas 


The present supplement is made up almost wholly of purely 
nomenclatural changes and represents a considerable portion of 
such cases now pending. The number of additions and changes 
here treated is 32; of rejections, 35. 


{ Wirmer Stone, Chairman 
| Harry C. OBERHOLSER, Secretary 


| JONATHAN DWIGHT 
bar S. PALMER 
| CHARLES W. RIcHMOND 


ADDITIONS AND CHANGES OF NOMENCLATURE. 


Megalestris Bonaparte becomes Catharacta Briinnich (Ornith. Boreal., 
1764, p. 32), because the latter has for its type, by subsequent desig- 
nation of Reichenbach 1851, Catharacta skua Briinnich, and, further- 
more, is not preoccupied by Catarractes Brisson, a word of different 
classical ending. (Cf. Mathews, Novit. Zool., XVII, No. 3, Dec. 15, 
1910, p. 498; Oberholser, ‘The Auk,’ XXXVI, No. 3, July, 1919, 
p. 418.) The only North American species is 

35, Catharacta skua Briinnich. 

Subgenus Thalasseus Boie becomes Hydroprogne Kaup (Skiz. Entw.- 
Gesch. Nat. Syst. Eur. Thierw., 1829, p. 91; type by subsequent 
designation [Gray, Genera Birds, III, 1846, p. 658], Sterna caspia 
Pallas), because the type of Thalasseus is Sterna sandvicensis Lath- 
am, and Hydroprogne Kaup is the earliest available name for the 
present group. (Cf. Mathews, Novit. Zool., XVII, No. 3, Dec. 15, 
1910, pp. 497-498.) 

Subgenus Actochelidon Kaup becomes Thalasseus Boie, because the 
type of Thalasseus proves to be, by designation of Gray (List Gen. 
Birds, 1840, p. 79) (cf. Stone, Science, N. 8., X XVI, No. 666, Oct. 4, 
1907, p. 445; Mathews, Novit. Zool., XVII, No. 3, Dec. 15, 1910, 
pp. 497-498), Sterna cantiaca Gmelin (= Sterna sandvicensis Lath- 
am), which designation the previous action of Kaup in proposing 
Actochelidon with the same species as type does not nullify. 

Hydrochelidon Boie becomes Chlidonias Rafinesque (Kentucky Ga- 
zette, I, No. 8, Feb. 21, 1822, p. 3, col. 5; type by monotopy, Chlidonias 
melanops Rafinesque (= Sterna surinamensis Gmelin) (ef. Rhoads, 
‘The Auk,’ XXIX, No. 2, April, 1912, pp. 197-198), because the 
latter name has priority. The North American forms of this genus 
are: 


77. Chlidonias nigra surinamensis (Gmelin). 
78. Chlidonias leucoptera leucoptera (Temminck). 


Yel. oat | Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. 441 


Thalassidroma Vigors becomes Hydrobates Boie (Isis, 1822, col. 562; 
type, by subsequent designation [Gray, List Genera Birds, 1840, 
p. 78], Procellaria pelagica Linnaeus), because the latter name is of 
earlier date, and is not invalidated by Hydrobata Vieillot, a word 
with a different classical ending. (Cf. Hartert, Hand-List British 
Birds, 1912, p. 149.) The only North American species is: 

104. Hydrobates pelagicus (Linnaeus). 

Aestrelata Bonaparte becomes Pterodroma Bonaparte (Compt. Rend. 
Ac. Sei., XLII, May, 1856, p. 768; type by subsequent designation 
[Salvin, Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., XX V, 1896, p. 397], Procellaria macrop- 
tera Smith), because the earliest place of publication of both Aestrelata 
and Pterodroma proves to be Comptes Rendus, XLII, May, 1856, 
p. 768, and here Pterodroma has anteriority. (Cf. Mathews, Birds 
Australia, II, pt. 2, July 31, 1912, p. 131.) 

Sula cyanops Sundevall becomes Sula dactylatra Lesson (Voyage 
Coquille, I, April, 1829, p. 494; Ascension Island). (Cf. Mathews, 
Novit. Zool., XVIII, No. 1, June 17, 1911, pp. 9-10.) While Sula ° 
dactylatra is not with certainty determinable at the original place of 
publication in the ‘Voyage of the Coquille,’ Lesson himself soon 
afterward (Traité d’Ornith., 1831, p. 601) made its identity certain. 
It should, however, date from its first introduction. 

Moris Leach, Syst. Cat. Spec. Indig. Mamm. and Birds Brit. Mus., after 
August, 1816, p. 35 (type by monotopy, Moris bassana [ = Pelecanus 
bassanus Linnaeus]). Recognized as a genus, and adopted because 
considered neither a nomen nudum, nor preoccupied by Moruwm 
Bolten, although Morus Vieillot, also proposed for the gannets, having 
a termination differing merely in grammatical gender from Moruwm 
Bolten, is thereby invalidated. The name Sulita Mathews (Austral- 
Avian Record, II, No. 7, Jan. 28, 1915, p. 123; type by original desig- 
nation and monotypy, Pelecanus bassanus Linnaeus), proposed in 
place of Moris and Morus, becomes now also a synonym of Moris 
Leach. (Cf. Oberholser, ‘The Auk,’ XXXVI, No. 3, July, 1919, 
p. 417.) The only North American species of this group will there- 
fore now stand as 

117. Moris bassana (Linnaeus). 

Ibididae becomes Threskiornithidae, because the type of the genus 
Ibis proves to be a stork, Tantalus ibis Linnaeus; and the proper name 
for the genus /bis, the type genus of the family, now becomes Thres- 
kiornis Gray. (Cf. Mathews, ‘The Auk,’ XXX, No. 1, January, 
1913, p. 95; Richmond, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus., LIII, August 16, 
1917, pp. 580, 636.) 

Herodias Boie becomes Casmerodius Gloger (Gemein. Hand-und Hilfsb. 
Naturg., 1842, p. 412; type by subsequent designation [Sharpe, 
Cat. Birds Brit. Mus., XX VI, 1898, p. 88], Ardea egretta Gmelin), 
because the type of Herodias Boie is, by subsequent designation 
(Gray, List Gen. Birds, ed. 2, 1841, p. 86) Ardea garzetta Gmelin 


442 Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. [7a 


(cf. Stone, Science, N. S., XXVI, No. 666, Oct. 4, 1907, p. 445), 
making Herodias thus a synonym of Egretta Forster. The earliest 
available name for the present genus is therefore Casmerodius Gloger. 
The only North American species is 

196. Casmerodius egretta (Gmelin). 

Clangula Oken becomes Glaucionetta Stejneger (Proc. U. S. Nat. 
Mus., VIII, Oct. 9, 1884, p. 409; type by original designation, Anas 
clangula Linnaeus), since Clangula Oken proves to be a nomen nudum 
(cf. Committee British Ornithologists’ Union, List Brit. Birds, 1915, 
p. 384); Glaucion Kaup to be preoccupied by Glaucion Oken (Mollusea, 
1816); and Bucephala Baird to be invalidated by Bucephalus Baer 
(Vermes, 1827). The North American forms are: 

151. Glaucionetta clangula americana (Bonaparte). 
152. Glaucionetta islandica (Gmelin). 

Harelda Stephens becomes Clangula Leach (in Ross’ Voyage Disc., 
1819, append., p. xlviii; type by monotypy, Anas hyemalis Linnaeus), 
as this is the oldest tenable name for the genus. (Cf. Hartert, Hand- 
List Brit. Birds, 1912, p. 142.) The employment of Clangula Leach 
in the above sense now proves necessary since it was based exclusively 
on the Old-squaw, and since Clangula Oken (Isis, I, 1817, col. 1183), 
along with the other Oken generic names published in the same 
connection, are considered nomina nuda because not definitely re- 
ferring to Cuvier’s groups. (Cf. Committee British Ornithologists’ 
Union, List Brit. Birds, 1915, p. 384.) The only species of this genus 
will now stand as 

154. Clangula hyemalis (Linnaeus). 

Scolopacinae is recognized as a subfamily of Scolopacidae, to include 
Nos. 227 to 230.1 of the A. O. U. Check-List. (Cf. Ridgway, Bull. 
U.S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, pt. VIII, 1919, pp. 145-146.) 

Macrorhamphus Forster becomes Limnodromus Wied (Beitr. Naturg. 
Brasil, IV, Abth. 2, 1833, p. 716; type, by monotopy, Scolopax grisea 
Gmelin), because Macrorhamphus Forster 1817 is preoccupied by 
Macrorhamphus Fischer 1813, and Limnodromus becomes the earliest 
available name. (Cf. Mathews, Novit. Zool., XVIII, No. 1, June 17, 
1911, p. 22.) The North American forms of the genus are: 

231. Limnodromus griseus griseus (Gmelin). 
232. Limnodromus griseus scolopaceus (Say). 

Eroliinae is recognized as a subfamily of Scolopacidae, to include Nos. 
231 to 252, 260, and 262, of the A. O. U. Check-List (cf. Lowe, Ibis, 
10th ser., III, No. 3, July, 1915, pp. 609-616; Ridgway, Bull. U. 8S. 
Nat. Mus., No. 50, pt. VIII, 1919, pp. 146-147); but becomes Canuti- 
nae, because Canutus [anonymous], not Erolia Vieillot, is the type 
genus of this subfamily. (Cf. Oberholser, Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., 
XXXII, Dec. 31, 1919, p. 200.) 

Pisobia aurita (Latham) becomes Pisobia acuminata (Horsfield) 
(Totanus acuminatus Horsfield, Trans. Linn. Soe. Lond., XIII, May, 


wel. eon Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. 443 


1821, p. 192; Java), because Tringa aurita Latham proves to have 
been based on a drawing of Actitis hypoleuca (Linnaeus). (Cf. Math- 
ews, Novit. Zool., XVIII, No. 1, June 17, 1911, p. 7.) 

Calidris Illiger becomes Crocethia Billberg (Synop. Faunae Scand., I, 
pars 2, 1828, tab. A; p. 132; type, T’ringa arenaria Linnaeus), because 
Calidris Illiger is preoccupied by Calidris [anonymous] 1804. (Cf. 
Richmond, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus., LIII, Aug. 16, 1917, p. 581; Math- 
ews and Iredale, Austral Avian Record, III, No. 5, Dec. 28, 1917, 
p. 114.) The only species: 

Calidris leucophaea (Pallas) becomes Crocethia alba (Pallas) (Trynga 
alba Pallas, in Vroeg, Cat. Col. Oiseaux, Oct. 6, 1764, p. 7; coast of 
North Sea), by reason of the change of the generic name Calidris to 
Crocethia (cf. swpra), and the rejection of Tringa leucophaea ‘ Pallas” 
as non-binomial. (Cf. Stone, ‘The Auk,’ XXIX, No. 2, April, 1912, 
p. 208.) 

Tringinae is recognized as a subfamily of Scolopacidae, to include 
Nos. 253 to 259, 261, 263, and 264 to 268 of the A. O. U. Check- 
List (cf. Lowe, Ibis, 10th ser., III, No. 3, July, 1915, pp. 609-616; 
Ridgway, Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., No. 50, pt. VIII, 1919, pp. 147- 
149); but becomes Numeniinae, because Nwmenius Brisson, not 
Tringa Linnaeus, is the type genus of this subfamily. (Cf. Ober- 
holser, Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XX XII, Dec. 31, 1919, p. 200.) 

Helodromas Kaup becomes Tringa Linnaeus, because the type of 
Tringa Linnaeus is, by tautonymy, Tinga ocrophus Linnaeus. (Cf. 
Mathews, Novit. Zool., XVIII, No. 1, June 17, 1911, pp. 5-6.) The 
North American forms will therefore now stand as follows: 

256. Tringa solitaria solitaria Wilson. 
256a. Tringa solitaria cinnamomea (Brewster). 
257. Tringa ocrophus Linnaeus. 

Heteractitis Stejneger becomes Heteroscelus Baird (Rep. Explor. and 
Surv. R. R. Pac., [X, 1858, p. 734; type by monotypy, Totanus brevipes 
Vieillot); since Heteroscelus Baird 1858 is not invalidated by Hetero- 
scelis Latreille 1825. (Cf. Mathews, Novit. Zool., XVIII, No. 1, 
June 17, 1911, p. 5; Oberholser, ‘The Auk,’ XXXVI, No. 2, April, 
1919, pp. 278-279.) The North American species will therefore 
stand as 

259. Heteroscelus incanus (Gmelin). 

Charadrius Linnaeus becomes Pluvialis Brisson (Ornith., V, 1760, p. 42; 
type by tautonymy, Charadrius apricarius Linnaeus), because Chara- 
drius Linnaeus proves to apply to the genus known as Aegialitis 
(cf. Mathews, Novit. Zool., XVIII, No. 1, June 17, 1911, pp. 5-6), 
and Pluvialis Brisson is the earliest tenable name for the Golden 
Plovers. The North American forms are: 

271. Pluvialis apricaria (Linnaeus). 
272. Pluvialis dominica dominica (Miiller). 
272a. Pluvialis dominica fulva (Gmelin). 


444 Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. [ue 


Aegialitis Boie becomes Charadrius Linnaeus, because the type of 
Charadrius Linnaeus is, by tautonymy, Charadrius hiaticula Lin- 
naeus. (Cf. Mathews, Novit. Zool., XVIII, No. 1, June 17, 1911, 
pp. 5-6.) The North American species are: 

274. Charadrius semipalmatus Bonaparte. 
275. Charadrius hiaticula Linnaeus. 

76. Charadrius dubius Scopoli. 

77. Charadrius melodus Ord. 

78. Charadrius nivosus (Cassin). 

79. Charadrius mongolus Pallas. 

Chaemepelia passerina terrestris (Chapman) becomes Chaemepelia 
passerina passerina (Linnaeus) (Columba passerina Linnaeus, Syst. 
Nat., ed. 10, I, 1758, p. 165; ‘‘America inter tropicos’’), because 
Bonaparte in 1855 was the first author to fix the type locality of 
Columba passerina Linnaeus, and he restricted it to North America. 
(Cf. Todd, Annals Carnegie Mus., VIII, 1913, p. 533.) 

Catharista Vieillot becomes Coragyps Geoffroy (Le Maout, Hist. Nat. 
Oiseaux, 1853, p. 66; type, Vultur urubu Vieillot), because the type 
of the former proves to be Vultur aura Linnaeus, and Coragyps Geof- 
froy is therefore the earliest tenable generic name for the Black Vul- 
ture. (Cf. Stone, Princeton Patag. Exped., II, pt. IV, 1915, p. 540; 
Chubb, Birds Brit. Guiana, I, 1916, p. 208.) The only North Amer- 
ican form is 

326. Coragyps urubu urubu (Vieillot). 

Aluco Fleming becomes Tyto Billberg (Synop. Faunae Scand., I, pars 2, 
1828, tab. A; new name for Strix Savigny; type, Strix alba Scopoli), 
because Aluco Fleming 1822 is preoccupied by Aluco Link 1807; and 
because Tyto Billberg, not being invalidated by T'yta Billberg 1820, 
a word of different classical termination, is the earliest available name. 
(Cf. Mathews, Novit. Zool., XVII, No. 3, Dec. 15, 1910, p. 500.) 

Oreospiza Ridgway becomes Oberholseria Richmond (Proc. Biol. Soe. 
Wash., XXVIII, Nov. 29, 1915, p. 180; type by original designation, 
Fringilla chlorura Audubon), because Oreospiza Ridgway 1896 is 
preoccupied by Oreospiza Keitel 1857, and Oberholseria is proposed 
in its place. (Cf. Richmond, loc. cit.) The only species is 

592. 1. Oberholseria chlorura (Audubon). 

Mniotiltidae becomes Compsothlypidae, because Compsothlypis 
Cabanis, not Mniotilta Vieillot, is the type genus of the family. (Cf. 
Oberholser, Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XXXII, April 11, 1919, p. 46.) 

Helinaia Audubon becomes Limnothlypis Stone (Science, N. 8., XL, 
No. 1018, July 3, 1914, p. 26; type by original designation and mono- 
typy, Sylvia swainsonii Audubon), because the type of Helinaia 
Audubon is, by subsequent designation (Gray, List Gen. Birds, ed. 
2, 1841, p. 33), Motacilla vermivora Gmelin, which makes Helinaia a 
synonym of Helmitheros Rafinesque. (Cf. Stone, loc. cit.; and Rich- 


NSE: Sih wall Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. 445 


mond, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus., LIII, Aug. 16, 1917, p. 598.) The 
only species is 
638. Limnothlypis swainsonii (Audubon). 

Vermivora rubricapilla (Wilson) becomes Vermivora ruficapilla 
(Wilson) (Sylvia ruficapilla Wilson, Amer. Ornith., III, 1811, p. 120, 
pl. XXVII, fig. 3; near Nashville, Tenn.), because the latter is not 
preoccupied by Sylvia ruficapilla Latham 1790, since this is merely 
a nomenclatural combination—7. e., not an original description. (Cf. 
Cooke, ‘The Auk,’ XXIX, No. 4, Oct., 1912, p. 545.) The races of 
this species therefore become 

645. Vermivora ruficapilla ruficapilla (Wilson). 
645a. Vermivora ruficapilla gutturalis (Ridgway). 

Compsothlypis americana usneae Brewster becomes Compsothlypis 
americana pusilla (Wilson), because Sylvia pusilla Latham (Suppl. 
Ind. Orn., 1801, p. 56), which supposedly preoccupied Sylvia pusilla 
Wilson (Amer. Ornith., IV, 1811, p. 71, pl. 28, fig. 3; eastern Penn- 
sylvania), is only a nomenclatural combination, not an original de- 
scription, and thus does not invalidate Wilson’s name; and the latter, 
therefore, becomes available for the bird later described as Comp- 
sothlypis americana usneae Brewster. (Cf. Brewster, ‘The Auk,’ 
XXXV, No. 2, April, 1918, p. 228.) 

Saxicola Bechstein becomes Oenanthe Vieillot (Analyse Nouv. Syst. 
Orn. Elément., 1816, p. 43; type by tautonymy, Motacilla oenanthe 
Linnaeus), because the type of Sazicola is, by subsequent desig- 
nation, Motacilla rubicola Linnaeus, a number of the genus Pratincola 
Koch. (Cf. Mathews, Novit. Zool., XVIII, No. 1, June 17, 1911, p. 20). 
The North American forms are: 

765. Oenanthe oenanthe oenanthe (Linnaeus). 
765a. Oenanthe oenanthe leucorhoa (Gmelin). 


CHANGES OF NOMENCLATURE REJECTED. 


Colymbus Linnaeus versus Podiceps Latham. (Cf. Mathews, Novit, 
Zool., XVII, No. 3, Dec. 15, 1910, pp. 494-495; Mathews and Iredale. 
Ibis, 1913, pp. 217-218.) Change rejected, because the earliest valid 
type designation of Colymbus Linnaeus is Colymbus cristatus Linnaeus, 
by the Committee of the American Ornithologists’ Union (Check-List 
North Amer. Birds, 1886, p. 73). The designation of Colymbus 
arcticus Linnaeus by Gray (Cat. Gen. and Subgen. Birds, 1855, p. 
125) must be regarded as ineffective, since it is specifically stated to 
refer to Linnaeus at 1735 (‘1735 nec 1766’’), and therefore cannot 
be used for the 1758 edition of the ‘Systema Naturae.’ (Cf. Hartert, 
Brit. Birds, IX, 1915, p. 55.) 

Gavia Forster versus Colymbus Linnaeus. (Cf. Sclater, List Brit. 
Birds, ed. 2, 1915, pp. 398-399.) Change rejected, because by the 


446 Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. [Fats 


earliest tenable designation (Committee American Ornithologists’ 
Union, Check-List North Amer. Birds, 1886, p. 73) the type of Colym- 
bus Linnaeus is determined as Colymbus cristatus Linnaeus, and con- 
sequently this generic name must be continued in use for the grebes. 
(Cf. Hartert, Brit. Birds, [X, 1915, p. 55.) 

Lunda Pallas versus Ahea [lege Alea] Boddaert. (Cf. Mathews, Austral- 
Avian Record, III, No. 2, Nov. 19, 1915, p. 37.) Change not ac- 
cepted, because Alea is to be regarded as clearly a typographical 
error for Alca. 

Pagophila alba (Gunnerus) versus Pagophila eburnea (Phipps). 
(Cf. Committee British Ornithologists’ Union, List Brit. Birds, ed. 2, 
1915, p. 394.) Change rejected, because the original description of 
Larus albus Gunnerus, in Leem’s Beskr. Finm. Lapp, 1767, p. 285, 
is considered recognizably applicable to the Ivory Gull. (Cf. Ober- 
holser, Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., XXXII, Dec. 31, 1919, p. 199.) 

Larus hyperboreus Gunnerus versus Larus glaucus Briinnich. (Cf. 
Hartert, Hand-List British Birds, 1912, p. 202). Change rejected, 
because Larus glaucus Briinnich 1764 is rendered invalid by the 
prior Larus glaucus Pontoppidan 1763, which was applied to Larus 
canus Linnaeus. 

Sterna caspia Pallas versus Sterna tschegrava Lepechin. (Cf. Hart- 
ert, Hand-List British Birds, 1912, p. 192.) Change rejected, because, 
while Sterna tschegrava is sufficiently described, and has anteriority 
over Sterna caspia Pallas, Lepechin is clearly non-binomial in the 
article (Nov. Com. Acad. Sci. Imp. Petrop., XIV, pt. 1, 1770, p. 500) 
in which Sterna tschegrava is described. 

Daption Stephens versus Petrella Zimmermann. (Cf. Mathews, ‘The 
Auk,’ XXXI, No. 1, Jan., 1914, pp. 90-91.) Change rejected, be- 
cause Zimmermann is not binomial in the publication in question 
(Bartram, Reisen Nord- und Sud-Karolina, 1793, p. 293), nor is he 
a binary author accepted by the International Zoological Commission. 

Clangula Oken versus Bucephala Baird. (Cf. Hartert, British Birds, 
IX, No. 1, June 1, 1915, p. 7.) Change rejected, because Bucephala 
Baird 1858 is preoccupied by Bucephalus Baer 1827, a genus of Ver- 
mes. Furthermore, the proper name for the genus is Glaucionetta 
Stejneger (cf. antea, p. 442). 

Clangula Oken versus Glaucion Kaup. (Cf. Committee British Orni- 
thologists’ Union, List Brit. Birds, 1915, p. 384.) Change rejected, 
because Glaucion Kaup 1829 is preoccupied by Glaucion Oken, 1816, 
a genus of Mollusca. 

Erismatura Bonaparte versus Oxyura Bonaparte. (Cf. Mathews, Novit. 
Zool., XVIII, No. 1, June 17, 1911, p. 9.) Change rejected, as 
Oxyura Bonaparte 1828 is considered preoccupied by Oxyurus Swain- 
son 1827. 

Erismatura Bonaparte versus Cerconectes Wagler. (Cf. Mathews, 
Novit. Zool., XVIII, No. 1, June 17, 1911, p. 9.) Change rejected, 


tet oe | Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. 447 


2 


because, while Cerconectes possibly appeared before Erismatura, the 
exact dates of publication are still too indefinitely determinable. 

Olor Wagler versus Cygnus Zimmermann. (Cf. Richmond, Proc. U. 8. 
Nat. Mus., LIII, Aug. 16, 1917, p. 587.) Change rejected, since 
Zimmermann is here neither binomial nor an accepted binary author. 

Himantopus Brisson versus Hypsibates Nitzsch. (Cf. Mathews, Novit. 
Zool., XVIII, No. 1, June 17, 1911, p. 7.) Change rejected, because 
Brisson’s names are held to be valid. 

Pisobia maculata (Vieillot) versus Pisobia pectoralis (Say). (Cf. 
Mathews, Birds Australia, III, pt. 3, Aug. 18, 1913, p. 261.) Change 
rejected, because T'ringa maculata Vieillot is not preoccupied by 
“Tringa maculata” Linnaeus, since there is no such combination in 
the writings of Linnaeus. (Cf. Oberholser, ‘The Auk,’ XXXV, 
No. 1, January, 1918, p. 68.) 

Tringa ocrophus Linnaeus versus Tringa ochropus Linnaeus. (Cf. 
Hartert, British Birds, IX, No. 1, June 1, 1915, p. 9.) Change re- 
jected, on the ground that Tringa ocrophus cannot be considered a 
mere typographical error. 

Arenaria Brisson versus Morinella Meyer and Wolf. (Cf. Mathews, 
Novit. Zool., XVII, No. 3, Dec. 15, 1910, p. 498.) Change rejected, 
because Brisson’s names are held to be valid. 

Chaemepelia Swainson versus Columbina Spix. (Cf. Allen, Science, 
N. S., XXXIII, 1911, pp. 336-337.) Change rejected, because the 
type of Columbina Spix was first designated (Gray, List Gen. Birds, 
1841, p. 75) as Colwmbina strepitans Spix, which is generically dis- 
tinct from the species of the genus currently called Chaemepelia. 
(Cf. Todd, Annals Carnegie Mus., VIII, 1913, p. 515.) 

Falco aesalon Tunstall versus Falco regulus Pallas. (ff. Hartert, 
Hand-List British Birds, 1912, p. 112.) Change rejected, because 
Falco aesalon Tunstall is not a nomen nudum, but a valid name, 
based on the ‘“ Merlin’”’ of Pennant’s ‘British Zoology’ and “l’Emer- 
illon” of Brisson’s ‘Ornithologie.’ 

Aluco Fleming versus Flammea Fournel. (Cf. Mathews, Austral Avian 
Record, I, No. 4, Sept. 18, 1912, p. 104). Change rejected, because 
the earlier Tyto Billberg is not preoccupied by Tyta Billberg, and 
is therefore the proper name for the Barn Owls. 

Cryptoglaux Richmond versus Aegolius Kaup. (Cf. Hartert, Hand- 
List British Birds, 1912, p. 105.) Change rejected, on the ground 
that Nyctala Brehm, from whatever date taken, is preoccupied by 
Nyctalus Bowdich 1825; and that Aegolius Kaup 1829 is preoccupied 
by Aegolia Billberg 1820. The only tenable name for the genus is 
therefore Cryptoglaux Richmond. 

Cryptoglaux funerea richardsoni (Bonaparte) versus Cryptoglaux 
tengmalmi richardsoni (Bonaparte). (Cf. Hartert, Hand-List 
British Birds, 1912, p. 105). Change rejected, because Strix funerea 
Linnaeus refers undoubtedly to this species, notwithstanding the 
statement that it is of the size of a crow. 


448 Supplement to the A. O. U. Check-List. [suis 


Dryobates Boie versus Dendrocopos Koch. (Cf. Hesse, Ornith. Mo- 
natsb., 1911, pp. 160-162.) Change rejected, because Dendrocopos 
Koch, July, 1816, is preoccupied by Dendrocopus Vieillot, April, 1816, 
and therefore the proper name for the present genus is Dryobates 
Boie. 

Loxia Linnaeus versus Crucirostra Scopoli. (Cf. Mathews, Novit. 
Zool., XVII, No. 3, Dec. 15, 1910, pp. 501-502.) Change rejected, 
because the removal of Lovxia curvirostra from Loxia as the monotypic 
type of Crucirostra Scopoli does not prevent the same species from 
later being designated as the type of Lozvia. Furthermore, Loxia 
curvirostra is by tautonymy the type of Loria Linnaeus. 

Passerina Vieillot versus Linaria Bartram 1791 and Zimmermann 1793. 
(Cf. Mathews, ‘The Auk,’ XXXI, No. 1, Jan., 1914, pp. 88-90; 
Richmond, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., LIII, Aug. 16, 1917, p. 599.) 
Change rejected, because neither Bartram nor Zimmermann are 
either binomial or binary authors accepted by the International 
Zoological Commission. 

Piranga Vieillot versus Merula Zimmermann. (Cf. Mathews, ‘The 
Auk,’ XXXI, No. 1, Jan., 1914, pp. 88, 90; Richmond, Proc. U. S. 
Nat. Mus., LIII, Aug. 16, 1917, p. 608.) Change rejected, on the 
ground that Zimmermann is here neither binomial nor a binary 
author accepted by the International Zoological Commission. 

Hirundo Linnaeus versus Chelidon Forster. (Cf. Mathews, Novit. 
Zool., XVII, No. 8, Dee. 15, 1910, p. 501.) Change rejected, because 
Forster did not actually fix the type of Hirundo Linnaeus when pro- 
posing (Syn. Cat. Brit. Birds, 1817, p. 17) for Hirundo rustica Lin- 
naeus the generic name Chelidon; wherefore Selby (Illustr. Brit. 
Ornith. (text), I, 1825, p. XXVIII) was the first to designate the 
type of Hirundo Linnaeus, and he selected Hirundo rustica Linnaeus. 

Bombycilla Vieillot versus Ampelis Linnaeus. (Cf. Committee British 
Ornithologists’ Union, List Brit. Birds, ed. 2, 1915, p. 362.) Change 
rejected, because the type of Ampelis Linnaeus is not determinable 
by tautonymy, since, in the ‘Systema Naturae,’ ed. 12, I, 1766, 
p. 297, the supposed synonym ‘‘Ampelis” is not used in the proper 
sense of “the Ampelis.”” Thus Gray’s designation (List Gen. Birds, 
1840, p. 34) of Ampelis cotinga Linnaeus becomes the first fixation 
of the type of Ampelis. Consequently Bombycilla is left as the 
earliest tenable name for the Waxwings. 

Dumetella S. D. W. versus Lucar Bartram 1791 and Zimmermann 
1793. (Cf. Mathews, ‘The Auk,’ XXXI, No. 1, Jan., 1914, pp. 
88-91; Richmond, Proc. U. 8. Nat. Mus., LIII, Aug. 16, 1917, p. 600.) 
Change rejected, because neither Bartram nor Zimmermann are either 
binomial or binary authors accepted by the International Zoological 
Commission. 

Regulus Cuvier versus Regillus MacGillivray. (Cf. Richmond, Proc. 
U. S. Nat. Mus., LIII, 1917, p. 620; Mathews and Iredale, Austral 


Bei tieso | General Notes 449 


Avian Record, III, No. 5, 1917, p. 119.) Change rejected, because 
the authors of Regulus Bartram 1791 and Regulus Zimmermann 1793, 
which supposedly preoccupy Regulus Cuvier are neither binomial nor 
acceptedly binary. 
Sialia Swainson versus Rubecula Zimmermann. (Cf. Mathews, ‘The 
Auk,’ XXXI, No. 1, Jan., 1914, pp. 89-90.) Change rejected, be- 
cause Zimmermann is not binomial in the publication in question 
(Bartram, Reisen Nord- und Siid-Karolina, 1793, p. 287), nor is 
he a binary author accepted by the International Zoological Com- 
mission. Furthermore, Rubecula is not actually adopted as a generic 
name by Zimmermann, but simply cited as a polynomial synonym. 
The list of ‘‘Nomina Conservanda”’ proposed by the Committee of the 
British Ornithologists’ Union (List Brit. Birds, ed. 2, 1915, p. 355 
contains the following five names that affect the present status of the 
A. O. U. Check-List: 
Turdus musicus Linnaeus versus Turdus iliacus Linnaeus. 
Asio flammeus (Pontoppidan) versus Asio accipitrinus (Pallas). 
Cryptoglaux Richmond versus Nyctala Brehm. 
Anas platyrhyncha Linnaeus versus Anas boschas Linnaeus. 
Pterodroma Bonaparte versus Oestrelata Bonaparte. 

These changes are not acceptable under the law of priority. 


GENERAL NOTES. 


Notes on the Black-crowned Night Heron in Western New York. 
According to all published accounts the Black-crowned Night Heron 
(Nycticoras n. naevius) seems to be rare in western New York. The 
“Auburn List’ 1874 records but a single specimen taken on Seneca River, 
no date given. Eaton, ‘Birds of New York,’ records it as a transient 
visitant, uncommon in the counties of Cayuga, Monroe and Ontario, 
occasional in Seneca, fairly common in Onondaga and with no record for 
Yates. And the only breeding record is for Erie County. 

My first record for this bird was May 7, 1911, when I saw a single indi- 
vidual perched in a tree along the inlet of Keuka Lake at Branchport. 

June 17, 1914, in company with Dr. G. S. Britten and Dr. George D. 
Lynch, of Syracuse, I visited a breeding colony of Black-crowned Night 
Herons in a small swamp at Lakeside, Onandaga Lake. There were about 
75 nests in the herony, about 50 of the Night Heron and 25 of the Green 
Heron. They were all intermingled, with sometimes nests of both species 
in the same tree, and some nests were as low as six or eight feet from the 
water. At this time a few of the nests contained eggs and the others held 
young of various sizes from newly hatched to about one-half grown. This 


Y Auk 
450 General Notes [5 ie 


herony was discovered May 15, 1914, by Miss Nettie M. Sadler, of Syra- 
cuse, a teacher of biology and an enthusiastic bird student. 

In 1915 Miss Sadler saw the Night Herons several times but they did 
not nest at Lakeside. In 1916, however, she found them nesting in a 
swampy wood across tbe outlet of Onondaga Lake and east of the Oswego 
canal. 

July 21, 1914, 10 P. M., I heard Night Herons ‘‘quawking”’ as they flew 
around over the streets of Branchport. They seemed to be flying in cir- 
cles and working to the west, then again in the evening of July 25 a single 
Night Heron was seen at Branchport by Miss Sadler. April 23, 1916, 
two Night Herons were seen by Mr. C. F. Stone and myself. They were 
perched in a tree along the inlet. 

My last record for these birds was in the evening of June 18, 1919, 
when I saw and heard one flying over the streets of Branchport.—VERDI 
Burtcu, Branchport, N. Y. 


Bittern Displaying Its White Nuptial Plumes.—On May 21, 1920, 
when motoring with my friend, Dr. Lyman F. Bigelow, of Norwood, 
Mass., we visited a swamp of moderate extent within the town of West- 
wood, set as a bowl in the midst of woodland and surrounded on three 
sides by the wooded land on slopes rising well above the level of the swamp, 
which for the most part was bush-grown and not mucb open to view. 
But on the fourth side, where a town road runs beside it, it lay fully open. 
We had made the circuit of this swamp on foot, observing and enjoying 
the singing land birds, and were returning on the road to our car when 
our eyes, turned toward the swamp lying unobstructed before us, ob- 
served two pure white patches, not stationary, but moving slowly along 
among the bushes at the edge of the swamp. Our glasses at once revealed 
the form of a Bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus) carrying these most con- 
spicuous patches of white at each shoulder, as large as a man’s hand but 
not as long perhaps, being essentially round in form. Occasionally during 
our observation of the bird, which was continued for twenty minutes or 
more, these white feathers were raised as a ruff standing out from the nat- 
ural contour of the bird; at other times they appeared to be more nearly 
even with the other feathers. These ruffs almost met across the back, 
but a narrow strip of brown feathers of the back was seen to separate 
them. To our eyes these ruffs were pure white. This conspicuous display 
of these large white patches was maintained without variation while we 
remained—different positions which the bird assumed did not materially 
change them. This Bittern occasionally ‘pumped’ and_ occasionally 
moved at a more rapid pace than the usual slow dignified walk, and at 
times strutted with the head carried forward. The erect stakelike posi- 
tion was also at times assumed, more especially when we first viewed 
the bird and it appeared that he was taking notice of our forms on the 
highway. If he did discern us, it had no effect to dissuade him from 


picl- Sea el General Notes 451 
his desire to display himself, for at no time did he withdraw the white 
ruffs into concealment. Several times for an instant a second Bittern, 
presumably the female, appeared in view, but only to become hidden 
at once behind one of the clumps of bushes. On the other hand, the male 
bird made no use of the bushes to screen himself. The distance travelled 
by this male bird during our observation was but a few rods, for he moved 
first in one direction and then in the opposite, first towards us and then 
away from us, and was only slightly further removed from us when we 
proceeded on our way, than when we first saw him. Our position had 
been about a hundred yards distant. 

Mr. William Brewster’s very interesting detailed description! of the dis- 
play of these white nuptial plumes as witnessed by him and friends in the 
Great Meadows in Concord in April, 1910, then for the first time observed 
by him, presents the exhibition quite as we ten years later were fortunate 
enough to observe it in this Westwood swamp.—Horacge W. WRIGHT, 
107 Pinckney St., Boston, Mass. 


The Knot in Montana.—On October 4, 1915, I found the mummified 
body of a Knot (Tringa canutus) on Woody Island in Lake Bowdoin, 
Montana (nine miles east of Malta), among remains of a large number 
of shorebirds and other species that had perished from disease. From 
the appearance of these bodies it appeared that the birds had died near 
the end of August or during the early part of September of that same year. 
All were lying on a muddy shore just above the water line, apparently 
where they had dragged themselves out of the water after becoming sick. 
Like the other specimens examined the Knot was not in suitable con- 
dition for preservation as a skin, and so was prepared as a skeleton. It 
is now in the osteological collections of the U.S. National Museum. This 
is apparently the first published record of the Knot in Montana.—ALEx- 
ANDER WETMORE, Biological Survey, Washington, D. C. 


Tringa Auct. versus Calidris Anon.—It has been conclusively shown 
by Mr. G. M. Mathews (Novit. Zool., XVIII, No. 1, June 17, 1911, 
pp. 5-6) that the generic name Tringa Linnaeus must be transferred to 
the group commonly called Helodromas Kaup. This leaves the Knot, 
Tringa canutus Linnaeus, without a generic name, and Mr. Mathews 
proposes the use of Canutus Brehm (Naturg. Vég. Deutschl., 1831, p. 653; 
type, Tringa canutus Linnaeus). Dr. C. W. Richmond has called atten- 
tion (Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., LIII, August 16, 1917, pp. 581-582) to a 
still earlier publication of this name by an anonymous reviewer of Bech- 
stein’s Ornithologische Taschenbuch. This name, however, must give 
way to Calidris of the same anonymous reviewer (Allg. Lit.-Zeitung, 1804, 
II, No. 168, June 8, 1804, col. 542), which has anteriority over Canutus 
and which was introduced as follows: 


1‘ Auk,’ XXVIII, Jan. 1911. Pp. 90-100. 


Auk 
452 General Notes [july 


“ Kniissel, Calidris. 
Schnabel walzenférmig, gegen die Spitze hin dicker, glatt. Mittlere 
und dussere Zehe etwas verbunden. 
Tringa calidris, arenaria u. a.”’ 

The Tringa calidris here mentioned should by tautonymy be considered 
the type of Calidris [Anonymous], although the other species mentioned, 
[Tringa] arenaria, has as a synonym the same specific name calidris 
(= Charadrius calidris Linnaeus, Syst. Nat., ed. 12, I, 1766, p. 255). 
In such cases of tautonymy it seems by all means more logical to con- 
sider as the type the species the cited name of which is the same as the 
generic name proposed, rather than the species having the same name 
as a synomyn. 

The type of Calidris Anonymous being thus settled as Tringa calidris, 
it remains to determine the identity of this Tringa calidris. It is, of 
course, the Tringa calidris of Bechstein (Ornith. Taschenb. Deutschl., 
1803, p. 308), which is in turn the Tringa calidris of Linnaeus, (7. e., Gmelin) 
since Bechstein quotes ‘‘ 7 [ringa] calidris Linn.”’ and “Linné, |. ¢., p. 681, 
N. 19,” which latter, of course, refers only to Gmelin. But Tringa calidris 
Linnaeus (Syst. Nat., ed. 12, I, 1766, p. 252) and Tinga calidris Gmelin 
(Syst. Nat. I, ii, 1789, p. 681) are, anyway, one and the same; and as is 
unmistakably shown by the diagnoses of both and by the descriptions 
given by the authors on which both are based, they both clearly refer to 
the Knot, Tringa canutus Linnaeus; not to the Redshank, Totanus totanus 
(Linnaeus), as intimated by Mathews and Iredale (Austral Avian Record, 
III, No. 5, December 26, 1917, p. 114). This unexpected development 
makes it necessary to use the generic name Calidris Anonymous for the 
Knot, which will, therefore, now stand as 


Calidris canutus (Linnaeus.) 


This use of the generic name Calidris, of course, precludes its employ- 
ment for the Sanderling just as effectively as though it were to be em- 
ployed for the Red-shank. Consequently the substitution of the generic 
name Crocethia Billberg for the Sanderling, made by Messrs. Mathews 
and Iredale (Austral. Avian Record, III, No. 5, December 26, 1917, p. 
114), remains valid, even though they misidentified the Tringa calidris 
on which Calidris Anonymous is based.—Harry C. OBERHOLSER, Wash- 
ington, D.C. 


Early Virginia Rail in New York.—On March 13, 1920, Mr. William 
Gee, of Stony Point, N. Y., picked up a Virginia Rail at Bear Mountain, 
near Stony Point. The bird evidently had been killed by flying into 
telegraph wires. It was sent to me for identification by Mr. Fred E. 
Sleight, Principal of: the Stony Point High School, and the record seems 
unusual enough to be reported to ‘The Auk.’—Lns 8. Cranpatu, N. Y. 
Zoological Park. 


a apa General Notes 453 


Least Flycatcher in Michigan in April.—April 4, 1920, weather 
cool, and many patches of snow still on the ground, Dr. Christofferson and 
myself, while on a bird jaunt much to our surprise discovered a Least 
Flycatcher. How the bird arrived here at such an early date is a mystery, 
as it should not have been much north of the latitude of Washington. 
This was just at the time of the severe storms accompanied by tornadoes 
that swept the country to the south of us, and it is possible that the bird 
was swept up and carried to this northern point in that way. 

The earliest date I can find for the Least Flycatcher is April 23, at 
Petersburg.—M. J. Maaun, Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan. 


A New Name for Anairetes Reichenbach.—The generic name 
Anaireles Reichenbach (Avium Syst., 1850, pl. LX VI), or as it is often 
written, Anaeretes, is in common use for a group of South American Tyran- 
nidae. It is, however, unfortunately preoccupied by Anaeretes Dejean 
(Catal. Col., 3rd ed., 1837, p. 181) and, therefore, needs to be replaced. 
It may be called Spizitornis (omtCitys, parus; Geuts, avis), nom. nov., 
with Muscicapa parulus Kittlitz as its type. 

The species of this genus are as follows: 

Spizitornis parulus parulus (Kittlitz). 

Spizitornis parulus aequatorialis (Berlepsch and Taczanowski). 

Spizitornis fernandezianus (Philippi). 

Spizitornis requloides (d’Orbigny and Lafresnaye). 

Spizitornis nigricristatus (Taczanowski). 

Spizitornis flavirostris (Sclater and Salvin). 

Spizitornis agilis (Sclater)—Harry C. OBERHOLSER, Washington, 
Dc: 


A Raven Pellet.—In January of this year I picked up in a field at 
Santa Cruz Island, California, a pellet presumably ejected by a Raven 
(Corvus corax sinuatus). The pellet was three inches long with a diameter 
of one inch. It was examined by Mr. H. C. Bryant, of the California 
Fish and Game Commission, who writes: ‘‘Without pulling the pellet 
to pieces I discovered the following elements; parts of two Camel Crickets 
(Stenopelmatus sp.); parts of grasshoppers; 20 seeds of Poison Oak (Rhus 
diveratola); hulls of Wild Oats (Avena fatua).”’ 

Mr. H. Harris, of Kansas City, Mo., who has kindly looked through the 
literature for me for mention of Raven pellets, writes that tbe only refer- 
ence he has been able to find is in Vol. II of the fourth edition of Yarrell’s 
‘British Birds,’ edited by Alfred Newton, where, on page 260, it is stated: 
“A pair of Ravens known for many years to the Editor lived almost ex- 
clusively on moles, as he had ample facility for determining from repeated 
examination of the pellets of bone and hair which they, like so many other 
carnivorous birds, cast up.””’ Mr. W. L. MacAtee tells me that there are 
no Raven pellets in the collection of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. 


; Auk 
454 General Notes aie 


It may be that when the birds feed on refuse or carrion that there is not 
enough binding material to hold the pellets together for any length of time. 
Will not some one who lives in Raven territory collect more data?—RaLrH 
Horrmann, Santa Barbara, California. 


The Purple Grackle at Albany, Georgia.—During the week of 
April 14 to 22, I was very much interested in observing two pair of Purple 
Grackles feeding in the residence section of Albany, Ga., within one block 
of the business district. The four birds frequented this locality only, 
so far as I was able to learn, during that time and were observed and 
commented on by a number of people. They were remarkably tame 
and fed on the lawns within five feet of parties in conversation. Both 
pairs, so far as I could judge, were in full plumage and attracted con- 
siderable attention. The locality on which they fed during the entire 
week did not cover more than two city blocks. We never note these birds 
in the cities, through this section, which caused my interest.—PETER A. 
BRANNON, Department of Archives, Montgomery, Ala. 


Note on the Generic Names Schiffornis Bonaparte and Scoto- 
thorus Oberholser.—The generic name Schiffornis was first proposed by 
Bonaparte (Ateneo Italiano, II, No. 11, August, 1854, p. 314) as follows: 

“34. Schiffornis, Bp.—74. major, Bp.—75. turdina Wied.—76. minor 
Schiff.”’ 

As Dr. C. E. Hellmayr has already indicated (Genera Avium, IX, 
1910, p. 24). two of the three specific names originally included—major 
Bonaparte and minor Schiff—were at that time nomina nuda. The 
third, ‘‘turdina Wied,” is readily identifiable as Muscicapa turdina Wied 
(Beitr. Naturg. Brasil, III, Abt. 2, 1831, p. 817), which is the type of the 
genus Scotothorus Oberholser (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1899, p. 208). 
Dr. Hellmayr concludes that the name Schiffornis as used by Bonaparte 
in the publication above cited is a nomen nudum, because “two of the 
three species mentioned (S. major and S. minor) were undescribed at that 
time, while the third (S. turdina) belongs to Scotothorus.’”’ It seems clear, 
however, that this disposition of the name is not the correct one, while 
the two species, S. major and S. minor. being then undescribed, are, of 
course, not to be considered, the third, S. turdina Wied, which is perfectly 
tenable, becomes, by virtual monotypy, the type of Schiffornis Bona- 
parte. Since, furthermore, the name Schiffornis Bonaparte is long ante- 
rior to Scotothorus Oberholser and has the same species for its type, it 
must take the place of the latter, and the species and subspecies of that 
genus stand as follows: 

Schiffornis turdinus turdinus (Wied). 

Schiffornis turdinus wallacit (Sclater and Salvin). 
Schiffornis turdinus olivaceus (Ridgway). 
Schiffornis turdinus amazonus (Sclater). 


aa Sen all General Notes 455 


Schiffornis turdinus rosenbergi (Hartert). 

Schiffornis turdinus furvus (Ridgway). 

Schiffornis turdinus veraepacis (Sclater and Salvin). 
Schiffornis turdinus stenorhynchus (Sclater and Salvin). 
Schiffornis unicolor (Bonaparte). 

Schiffornis pallescens (Lafresnaye). 

Schiffornis sulphureiventer (Hellmayr). 

Schiffornis chrysocephalus (Pelzeln). 

This disposition of the generic name Schiffornis leaves the group for- 
merly called by this name without a generic designation, and we, there- 
fore, propose to call it Massornis (udasowy, major, Geytc, avis), nom. nov., 
and designate as the type species Schiffornis major Des Murs. This, the 
only species of the genus, will consequently be known as Massornis major 
(Des Murs).—Harry C. OpERHOLSER, Washington, D.C. 


Evening Grosbeak (Hesperiphona v. vespertina) in Minnesota in 
Mid-summer.—On July 28, 1900, on a bright and beautiful sunny day, 
ketween the hours of 12 and 1, while the family was seated at the dinner 
table, I was startled by a flock of at least five or six Evening Grosbeaks, 
which lit in a medium-sized Box-Elder tree near my home in Aitkin. I 
was so astonished that in our eagerness to see the birds both Mrs. Lano 
and I rushed to the open door to get a glimpse of them. They evidently 
heard us, for they were alarmed and flew away before we could see any 
of them. The distance between the tree and the dinner table was less 
than twenty-five feet and since there was also an open window beside the 
door on the same side of the house as the tree, their call notes could be 
beard very distinctly. They were very restless and called loudly, more 
so than I had ever heard them during winter seasons. Of their identity 
I was positive beyond the slightest shade of doubt, for I had observed the 
species for more than 15 years during their winter visits to the state. 

Again I take the following from my notes: Aug. 4, 1903, while on my 
way from my home to my place of business at 7:30 A. M., I saw two 
Evening Grosbeaks flying over in a northwesterly direction. Both were 
uttering their familar plaintive notes which can not possibly be mistaken 
for any other North American species. 

My latest spring date is May 19, 1901, when a small flock was observed 
in town. But these, no doubt, were belated migrants on their way north 
to their summer home. If Evening Grosbeaks do not nest in Aitkin 
County, what were these birds doing there in mid-summer? If only an 
individual had been observed on one or two occasions it would be con- 
sidered accidental. Iam certain that some future day some ornithologist 
living in Aitkin County or even farther north, who will have more time 
at his disposal, will discover the species nesting, if not regularly, at least 
occasionally.—ALBErT Lano, Fayetteville, Arkansas. 


Auk 
456 General Notes 5 ne 


Evening Grosbeaks Common at Lakewood, New Jersey.—It may 
be recalled that Evening Grosbeaks (Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina) 
have twice been recorded in ‘The Auk’ from Lakewood, New Jersey, as 
rarities. During the winter of 1919-20 they occurred frequently through- 
out my stay in the town, from February 11 to April 24; and there were a 
good many of them. On April 15, 1920, I counted eighteen in two maples 
on Lexington Avenue, near Main Street. 

Has this garrulous bird often been heard to sing at the time of its eastern 
visits? I have never heard it sing, though I have met with it on many 
occasions in northern New England up to the middle of May.—NaTHAN 
CLIFFORD Brown, Portland, Maine. 


Evening Grosbeaks at Princeton, New Jersey.—A flock of four 
Evening Grosbeaks (Hesperiphona v. vespertina), consisting of one male 
and three females, were recent visitors in the town of Princeton for sev- 
eral weeks. They were first observed by Mrs. Alfred T. Baker on Feb- 
ruary 16. They were positively identified by Prof. Alexander H. Phillips 
—well known as an ornithologist—feeding on the seed spread for birds 
at his own residence, on March 1; and by me on March 2, and were last 
seen by Prof. Phillips on March 13, the number having increased to eight 
—all females. 

So far as I am aware this is the first record of these birds in the im- 
mediate locality —Hrnry Lang Eno, Princeton, N. J. 


The Newfoundland Crossbill in the Washington Region.—A Red 
Crossbill secured at Four-Mile Run, Virginia, opposite the city of Wash- 
ington, D. C., on November 30, 1919, proves to be an individual referable 
to the subspecies recently described from Newfoundland (Loxia curvi- 
rostra percna Bent). On first examination some doubt arose as to the 
identity of this bird as the skins of perena available were all in summer 
plumage. Mr. A. C. Bent, who has kindly examined the specimen in ques- 
tion and compared it with other fall and winter examples of the New- 
foundland bird in his possession, informs me that it is undoubtedly a speci- 
men of percna.!. The bird is a male in plain plumage with little red evident 
on the feathers. It is noticeably dark in color and is of large size, being 
within the limits of variation given for percna. Measurements are as fol- 
lows, wing 93 mm., tail 56 mm., and culmen 18.1 mm. _ It is probable that 
study of the series of Red Crossbills taken a number of years ago by various 
collectors in this region may reveal other specimens representing the 
Newfoundland race.—ALEXANDER WETMORE, Biological Survey, Washing- 
ton; D.C. 


1 See ‘Auk,’ 1920, p. 298. 


poe See uel General Notes 457 


White-winged Crossbill (Loxia leucoptera) in West Virginia.—The 
following notes on the recent occurrence of this species at French Creek, 
Adrian and Buckhannon, all in Upshur County, West Virginia, have been 
sent to me by competent observers. These records are as follows, and 
constitute the first reliable data in regard to the presence of the White- 
winged Crossbill in West Virginia: 

“T saw the Crossbills at French Creek, W. Va., on the afternoon of 
January 22, 1920, and the two days following. January 22 was a cold 
day with a heavy sleet. I walked to the village, and, as soon as I came 
in sight of the hemlocks, noticed the birds in the trees and on the ground 
beneath. A nearer view revealed them as strangers, and I at once noticed 
their remarkable tameness. One finely colored male was working busily 
at a cone on a branch a foot above my head, and I stroked his side with 
the tip of my umbrella. Instead of flying he edged away, threw his head 
to one side and scolded me softly for interrupting his feast. There must 
have been thirty or forty of the birds present and I looked and puzzled 
until I was tired. I did not catch a sight of the crossed beak and could 
not think what they were. An hour later I returned and found the birds 
still there. A little group of three females were sitting in the road eating 
from a cone, and I approached them and picked one up in my hand. Then 
I saw the beak and recognized the birds, I carried the specimen home 
with me, made sure of the identification, then took it out on the porch and 
opened my hand. The bird flew about two feet and alighted on a vine. 
I think I might have picked it up again without any difficulty. 

“Another flock appeared at the same time around the hemlocks near 
Adrian. I think I heard of a dozen being caught in the hand. Three or 
four days thereafter all disappeared and have not been seen since.” 

The next note was written in reference to a flock of White-winged Cross- 
bills observed at Buckhannon,.W. Va., the same day. It is as follows: 

“On January 22, when passing by a large hemlock tree that stands 
well down on Kanawha Street, in Buckhannon, my attention was attracted 
to unfamiliar bird notes. I stopped and found that the birds making the 
notes were in the hemlock tree and on the ground under it. Just as I 
looked several of them flew down and began picking at the cones. I 
walked up closer to get a good look and found that they were very tame. 
There was a full-plumaged male very close and, by practising a little In- 
dian stealth, I was able to place my hand over it. It kept prying at the 
cone scales all the time I was approaching, and only a few times looked 
up. Isaw two or three males and perhaps five or six females or immature 
birds. The day was stormy and the birds acted as if they were very 
hungry.”—Earue A. Brooks, Everett, Massachusetts. 


An Erroneous Kansas Record for Baird’s Sparrow.—In the Odlo- 
gist for 1907,1 Mr. Logan Evans has recorded Baird’s Sparrow (Ammo- 


1Vol. XXIV, Aug., 1907, p. 124. 


458 General Notes [3 ae 


dramus bairdi) as breeding near Wilsey, Kansas, on the basis of a set of 
eggs taken with two specimens of the bird. At the time this note was 
published, I wrote from the University of Kansas at Lawrence requesting 
that the specimens be forwarded for examination. Mr. Evans responded 
promptly to this request, and on receiving the skins, I found that they were 
not Baird’s Sparrow, but instead were Henslow’s Sparrow (Passerherbulus 
henslowi). The bird was unknown to Mr. Evans and his note was made 
on the basis of the eggs which he forwarded to a dealer for identification. 
Although Baird’s Sparrow probably passes through western Kansas during 
migration there is no record known of this species for the State. I have 
made careful search for it at a number of localities in the eastern part 
of the State (a search that has entailed a considerable mortality among 
obscurely marked individuals of LeConte’s Sparrow, a species that abounds 
in migration) but as yet have failed to find it—ALEXANDER WE5TMORE, 
Biological Survey, Washington, D. C. 


A Scarlet Tanager at Thirty-fourth Street, New York.—On May 
22, 1899, I took lodgings at 30 West Thirty-fourth Street, New York 
City, for a stay of three days; and on one of these days, as I sat at a south 
window, looking out over nearby yards into a solitary, rather large de- 
ciduous tree, I caught sight of a Scarlet Tanager (Piranga erythromelas) 
descending from a great height in a northeasterly direction. A moment 
or two later he had alighted in the tree before me. 

I do not remember what next happened to this bird, but I believe that 
he had disappeared when I returned to the window after a short absence. 
It may be assumed, I think, that he was migrating and, since he was mak- 
ing his journey so late in the month and did not go a few blocks farther 
to one of the parks before alighting, that he was an example of the lag- 
gards, more or less subnormal, which are always to be found at migration 
time.—NatHAN CrirrorD Brown, Portland, Maine. 


Bohemian Waxwing at Seattle, Washington, During the Winter 
of 1919-20.—After the remarkable invasion of this region in the winter 
of 1916-17 by the Bohemian Waxwing (Bombycilla garrula), it was hardly 
to be expected that another might soon occur, but during the past winter 
1919-20, this locality has again been visited by this attractive bird, al- 
though by comparison the number of individuals was not nearly as great 
as in the preceding flight of three years ago. 

The first report given us of their occurrence came from Mr. C. J. Al- 
brecht, of this city, who noted a small flock November 25, about. twelve 
miles east of the city and from that date the birds began to be seen in 
flocks of varying sizes, these increasing in numbers until about the middle 
of December when the maximum appeared to be reached, and it is also 
at this time and during a few subsequent weeks that the largest flocks 
were seen, we on two occasions observing one aggregating fully two thous- 
and individuals. 


yer Sage 7] General Notes 459 


We had many opportunities to watch these beautiful birds and observe 
their actions, so quote our notes made at the time: 

“December 22—The weather the past week has been lowery witb 
frequent rains and a temperature at times as high as 52 degrees. This 
morning we heard the Bohemians and found them in the same locality 
where we had previously seen flocks on two other occasions. The flock 
was a large one, a majority of the birds being perched in or near the top 
of a large maple tree, all headed directly into the wind which seems to 
be customary when any appreciable wind is blowing, from which indi- 
viduals were constantly dropping down to feed on the berries in some 
adjacent mountain ash trees. As usual there was a constant movement 
in the flock, birds continually leaving it and returning and judging from 
the sound the greater number were uttering their soft rolling notes that 
are so pleasing to the ear. 

“A striking and very noticeable thing about a flock is, when disturbed 
nearly all the birds will take wing and circle around a number of times 
until they come together in a close and compact body, then it appears 
as if at the same instant all were impelled by the same impulse to alight 
and the flock will sail up to the chosen spot on stiffly extended wings, 
this action on the part of each individual bird being uniform and so 
marked as to almost stamp their identity, and during these various evo- 
lutions the soft lisping notes of the birds are always much in evidence. 

“December 25—We again watched the waxwings in the same locality 
as heretofore, it certainly is a favorite spot with them. For a long 
time our observations continued and we saw a repetition of the actions 
already noted, but among the birds in this flock were a few Cedar Wax- 
wings, some California Purple Finches and the ever-present Western 
Robin, and these latter resented the intrusion of the Bohemians for they 
would frequently make a dash at the feeding birds and attempt to drive 
them away. This was futile for the Bohemians would simply shift their 
positions from wherever they might happen to be and resume feeding. 
During this time there was considerable noise made by all the birds which 
evidently had a reflex action on some few Shufeldt’s Juncos and Oregon 
Chicadees in the neighborhood, for these quickly came over and joined the 
flock, making it quite a heterogeneous one. 

“Among the Bohemians were many that evidently had eaten their full 
of the berries and these would quietly sit in the top of a large tree nearby 
and preen themselves, but from time to time some one of the birds with 
the same action as a flycatcher would fly from its perch after a passing 
insect, being at times successful, for on one occasion we were close enough 
to see the bird catch a large-sized light-colored moth. As these actions 
on the part of the birds were frequent there must have been numbers of 
the insects in the air. 

“December 29—Early this morning saw a flock of the Bohemians 
alight in a large tree in the locality before mentioned, and as we watched 


Auk 
460 General Notes [5 ay 


the birds several other flocks of varying numbers also appeared and joined 
the first, thus making a large one of nearly two thousand individuals, 
this estimate being based on as careful a count as could be made. The 
majority of the birds occupied the tops of three trees adjacent to each 
other from which many flew to small mountain ash trees close by to feed 
upon the berries, the remainder of the flock being perched on the tele- 
phone wires in the vicinity. There was a continual ‘milling’ going on 
in the flock, the individuals being constantly in motion, this activity 
being accompanied by their lisping notes. 

“Near the base of the largest of the trees grew a tall decorative rose 
bush close to the edge of a retaining wall at the side of the street walk. 
This wall was about five feet in height, and as the bush had many hips 
numbers of the birds attempted to alight therein to feed, but its branches 
being too weak to sustain them would continually give way, and this 
in turn caused a constant commotion, for it kept the birds fluttering and 
interfering with each other and also dislodged many hips which fell to 
the walk beneath to be eaten by the birds alighting thereon. 

“The appearance of this proceeding reminded one of a swarm of bees 
and the feeding birds were so engrossed as to be almost oblivious of our 
presence as we stood within a few feet of them. 

“Several times the flock took wing and circled above the trees, then 
returned to scatter about—some in the bushes, some on the phone wires, 
but the greater number gathered in the tops of the trees and no 
matter how engaged or whether or not on the wing they did not cease 
their notes. Finally being disturbed all arose in a body, made a wide 
swing or two and breaking up into several small flocks left the locality.” 

Flocks of Bohemian Waxwings continued to be seen in this vicinity 
during January and the early part of February, after which their numbers 
rapidly diminished and they were less frequently seen. Our last record 
is March 1, when a few birds were noted by Mr. C. J. Albrecht in the 
northern part of the city. 

The species was also well distributed throughout this region, for we 
have records of its appearance from as far to the north as Prevost, on 
one of the San Juan group of islands north of the eastern extremity of 
the Strait, this being given us by Mr. D. E. Brown, of Seattle, to as far 
south as Olympia, and it is a fair assumption that the movement must 
have been of quite wide extent.—S. F. Rarusun, Seatile, Wash. 


Bohemian Waxwing at Salem, Mo.—January 1, 1918, a bunch 
of about ten of these birds were seen in an apple tree near my home, in 
Salem, feeding on the withered apples still on the tree. They were very 
tame and unsuspicious, and one could come within ten feet of them as 
they fed, without disturbing them. Their lisping notes and their method 
of flight were like the Cedar Waxwing. They were, however, appreciably 
larger; the black stripe along the eye, the black spot on the throat, the 


ae Boon General Notes 461 


white and yellow on each wing, and the broader band of yellow on the 
tail were clearly seen. The general body color seemed grayer than the 
Cedar Waxwing. One bird was also seen January 2 near the same place. 
Pauxn Dent anp Dent JousErst, St. Louis, Mo. 


Bohemian Waxwing (Bombycilla garrula) at Rochester, N. Y. 
A flock of 65 of these birds was first seen on February 28, 1920, by Mr. 
Horsey, who then called Mr. Edson and both of us then studied them 
until we saw clearly all the points which separate them from the Cedar 
Waxwing (Bombycilla cedrorum). We were able to observe the chestnut 
rufous under-tail coverts, white and yellow on wings, larger size and 
grayer coloration. The notes, too, are very distinctive, being much 
louder, and could perhaps be described as a lisped whistle. The flock 
remained intact for four days and from 65 to 2 were seen every day until 
March 9. But 2 to 35 birds were noted several days afterwards until 
March 26, when five birds were seen. They were here 18 days in all.— 
W. L. G. Epson anp R. E. Horsty, The Herbariwm, Highland Park, 
Reservoir Ave., Rochester, N. Y. 


Bohemian Waxwings, at Rochester, N. Y.—March 3 was the first 
day that I had an opportunity to study the waxwings recorded above by 
Messrs. Edson and Horsey. Thirty of them were in the same crabapple 
tree in which they were first seen feeding on the fruit. Only eight or 
ten being in the tree at one time, the others were in the top of a nearby 
elm. As soon as one would get two or three berries in its crop it would 
fly to the elm while another bird would fly to the vacated place in the crab- 
apple. As they flew past, some within four feet, their flight seemed to be 
slightly swifter than the Cedar bird’s. I was able to approach within 
eight feet of the birds without having them show any signs of alarm, 
but if I moved slowly forward they would watch me carefully, only those 
on the opposite side of the bush feeding, until I was about six feet from the 
nearest bird. Then he would leap into the air and fly to the elm to be 
quickly followed by the others. At this close distance the distinguishing 
marks were very readily observed. It was very apparent that the birds 
were larger than the common waxwings and seemed to be nearer two 
than one inch longer. The body coloration was lighter than in the Cedar 
bird and the black throat showed much more plainly. The other identi- 
fication marks such as the chestnut under tail-coverts and the yellow on 
the tip and lower margin of the primaries and the white on the tips of the 
secondaries were very clearly seen. The notes, which were to be heard 
continually, were much louder than those of the Cedar Waxwing and were 
more like a trill than a lisp. 

The next opportunity I had to observe the birds was March 5. Twenty- 
three individuals were at the same place but five was the largest number 
seen in the crab-apple at one time. 


Auk 
462 General Notes ae 


On March 6 twenty birds were seen in the elm but none were in the crab- 
apple. Probably they had finished eating, as I did not see the birds until 
8:45 A.M. They always fed in the early morning and left the park about 
nine o’clock. : 

Only two birds were seen in the elm on March 9. 

Then the weather grew warm and the Waxwings were not seen for a 
day or two and we thought they had gone north. They appeared again, 
however, and my next date is March 18. A flock of thirty-five was found 
feeding on a species of crab-apple in a different part of the park, the other 
bush having been stripped practically clean of the fruit. 

On March 23 I found fifteen of the birds feeding at the second place. 

March 26, the last day they were seen here, five Bohemians were feed- 
ing on this crab-apple in company with three Cedarbirds. The differences 
were very plain and I fail to see how any one can confuse the two.—Rticu- 
ARD M. Cuass, Rochester, N. Y. 


Autumnal Stay of the Parula Warbler in Maine.—The evidence 
at hand led to the statement! in 1882 that the Northern Parula Warbler 
(Compsothlypis americana usnee) left Portland, Maine, and its vicinity 
early in September; but observations of subsequent years have shown 
that it remains up to the very end of the month, at times, some of the 
males singing in a subdued manner to the last. Possibly stragglers tarry 
much later, for on October 26, 1914, I came upon a cat at the west end of 
Portland, which held in its mouth a dead Parula. I could not get pos- 
session of the bird, but, as the cat mouthed and played with it, I could 
see that its neck and feet were free from stiffness and that its plumage 
was unmatted and clean, suggesting that it had just been killed—NaTHAN 
CiiFFoRD Brown, Portland, Maine. 


The Blue-winged Warbler (Vermivora pinus) on the Coast of 
South Carolina.—On April 30, 1920, I heard the song of a warbler that 
was new to me, and as the beginning of the song closely resembled that 
of Bachman’s Warbler (Vermivora bachmani) I at once tried to locate 
the singer. This bird was in a ravine of second growth and was so rest- 
less that 20 minutes elapsed before I could see it plainly, when I identi- 
fied it as a male in very high plumage, the yellow of the under parts being 
very brilliant. The character of the place was so dense that at no time 
could I get a shot at it, and the bird ceased singing and finally disappeared. 
The only other previous record for South Carolina is a specimen taken by 
Mr. Leverett Mills Loomis at Chester on April 30, 1887 (‘Auk,’ VIII, 
1891, 169).—ArtHuR T. Wayne, Mount Pleasant, S. C. 


1Proc. Port. Society Nat. Hist., 1882, p. 7. 


Vol. | General Notes 463 


Hooded Warbler (Wilsonia citrina) at Detroit, Michigan.—On 
May 6, 1920, I saw an adult male of the Hooded Warbler (Wilsonia citrina) 
at Belle Isle, the island park of Detroit. The bird was seen within a dis- 
tance of ten feet in low bushes, and carefully watched for some little time. 
From long familiarity with the species at Washington, D. C., the identi- 
fication is beyond question. I have never been able to add this species 
to the list of Birds of southeastern Michigan, although I have a record 
of a male seen by myself, September 19, 1903, also at Belle Isle, a record 
that in after years I have held open to question. The nearest record 
adjacent to this region is that of a young female secured in the fall of 1880 
at Ypsilanti, Washtenaw County, by Dr. Van Fossen, which is in the col- 
lection of the Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan.—Brapsuaw H. 
Swatuss, U.S. National Museum, Washington, D. C. 


Penthestes hudsonicus hudsonicus in North Dakota.—An inter- 
esting new bird for North Dakota is reported by Mr. Alfred H. Eastgate, 
of Bottineau, North Dakota, to whom the writer is indebted for the privi- 
lege of placing it on permanent record. While working near Upsilon 
Lake, west of St. John, in the Turtle Mountains, North Dakota, on No- 
vember 13, 1919, Mr. Eastgate noted two or three strange Chickadees, 
but could not approach them closely enough to be sure of their identity. 
Later in the same day one was found dead, and it proved to be the Hud- 
sonian Chickadee, Penthestes hudsonicus hudsonicus.—Harry C. OBER- 
HOLSER, Washington, D. C. 


Labrador Brown-cap Chickadee (Penthestes hudsonicus nigricans) 
at Rochester, Monroe County, New York.—Two birds individuals 
of this subspecies were observed by the undersigned on November 6, 1919. 
They were identified by the much darker mouse-colored cap than that 
of the Acadian Chickadee (Penthestes hudsonicus littoralis) with which 
we became very well acquainted in the winter of 1913-1914. Another 
point which seems characteristic is the activity of the Labrador as com- 
pared with the rather logy action of the Acadian, the latter bird could 
almost be picked off from a tree, while the Labrador seems even more 
active than our common Black-cap Chickadee (Penthestes atricapillus). 
The notes, too, are different from either of the others. This bird uses 
only three notes at a time, thus “Chicka dee dee,” and they are pitched 
higher than those of the Acadian. Except on November 6 and 8, 1919, 
only one bird was seen at a time. From December 20, 1919, on to the time 
he left on March 30, 1920, he came to the Herbarium feeding station for 
suet. As this suet is packed into holes bored in a stick and the stick is 
hung on the window casing we were able to watch the bird at very close 
quarters by merely looking through the window. He was observed on 98 
days during his stay with us.—W. L. G. Epson anp R. E. Horsgy, High- 
land Park, Rochester, N. Y. 


Auk 
464 General Notes Fac 


Blue-gray Gnatcatcher in the Boston Public Garden.—On May 18, 
1920, in the largest flight of migrant birds which has visited the Public 
Garden this season, came a Blue-gray Gnateatcher (Polioptila caerulea 
caerulea). The bird, a male, all at once appeared in a moderate-sized 
English elm at the Arlington Street side of the grounds near Beacon Street 
before two fellow observers, Mrs. Calvert Cravy, Mr. Allan B. Craven, 
and myself, and remained in view scarcely more than two minutes, taking 
one other perch in a neighboring tree, and then being lost to our view. 
As there were many observers in the Garden on this occasion, it being the 
appointed morning for the visit of members of the Brookline Bird Club, 
and this Gnatcatcher could not be found again by any of them, it is prob- 
able that the two-minute period during which it was under observation by 
us marked the entire length of its visit and that it passed out immediately 
to other haunts. Only one other visit of the Gnatcatcher to the Garden 
has been observed and recorded,! that of one on October 22, 1904, follow- 
ing a southeast rainstorm with warm winds of almost gale force. On the 
present occasion a southwesterly breeze during the preceding night warm- 
ing up the day to a maximum temperature of 77° had brought in natural 
sequence a flight of nearly sixty migrant birds to the Garden, of thirty-one 
different species, including fifteen species of warblers. One other record,? 
intermediate in time with the two above given, was obtained in Olmsted 
Park, lying between Boston and Brookline, on December 3, 1910, when 
the Gnatcatcher was in companionship with an Orange-crowned Warbler. 
The citation of dates of these three occurrences observed by me indicates 
how accidental as to season, as well as visitant at all, is the Blue-gray 
Gnateatcher in the Boston Region.—Horace W. Wriaut, 107 Pinckney 
St., Boston, Mass. 


The Blue-gray Gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea caerulea) at 
Quebec, P. Q.—About 2:15 p. m. (Eastern Standard Time) on May 18, 
1920, I stood on the wooden walk which has been built just below the 
southern wall of Quebec Citadel, three hundred feet above the St. Law- 
rence River, at the top of the steep, rocky cliff which forms the southern 
face of Cape Diamond. The surface of the declivity below me was partly 
bare and partly covered by grass and dead weeds or scattering clumps 
of bushes. There were no trees anywhere in the vicinity. Among the 
bushes were many migrating birds, for the most pronounced wave of bird 
migration of the spring of 1920 reached Quebec May 18. The preceding 
night had been warm and hazy, with light, variable winds, and the day 
itself was fine and quite summer-like, with an official maximum tempera- 
ture at Quebec of 76° F. 

In a bush on the cliff a few feet below me I saw what at first glance 
I took to be a Parula Warbler. I focused my binoculars (3) on the 


1‘ Auk,’ XXII, Jan. 1905, pp. 87, 88. 
2" Auk,’ XXVIII, Jan: 1911: pps 17, 118. 


ner aieeo, | General Notes 465 


bird and soon saw that my first supposition was wrong. I distinctly ob- 
served that the bird was about the size of a Kinglet, with upper parts 
almost uniform bluish-gray, seeming slightly lighter on the upper tail- 
coverts, wings fuscous, tail black centrally but with white outer feathers, 
and underparts uniform whitish. It was catching insects on the wing in 
a rather leisurely way, and I watched it for seven or eight minutes in ex- 
cellent light with binoculars at distances varying from twenty to thirty 
feet, and obtained many clear and satisfactory views of it as it perched 
on the bushes and dead weed-stalks. Owing to the extreme steepness of 
the cliff, it was always below my eye, and while I thus saw its upperparts 
clearly, I could not satisfy myself as to whether or not there was black 
on its forehead. It frequently twitched its tail, and at irregular intervals 
uttered its note, which was a pe-e-e, low, weak, and rather hoarse. It re- 
sembled somewhat the mew of a Catbird, but was much lower and lighter. 
The bird was still among the bushes when I left. 

At 4:15 p. m. the same day I returned and soon found the bird, which 
I watched for about half an hour, using my binoculars, and often seeing it 
clearly, sometimes at a distance of but fifteen feet. I verified my pre- 
vious observations, and when the bird perched in a bush close beside the 
walk, where it was nearly at the level of my eye, I found that a clear, 
steady view of its forehead revealed no black. I left it where I found it, 
but could not rediscover it next day, nor on the day after. 

Undoubtedly the bird was a Blue-gray Gnatcatcher, Polioptila caerulea 
caerulea (Linn.). I had never seen the species before, and so do not 
know just how conspicuous the black on the forehead of the male should 
be. The only previous claim of this species to a position in the avifauna 
of Quebec Province appears to be the statement by Wintle (Birds of 
Montreal, 1896, p. 126), which reads as follows: 

“* Accidental visitant’ [at Montreal]. Mr. Kuetzing saw one ‘example 
of this species in Mr. Craig’s collection, shot on the island of Montreal 
a number of years ago,’ but Mr. Craig says he ‘does not remember having 
it in his possession.’”’ 

As this can hardly be considered satisfactory, the present appears to 
be the first certain and definite record of the Blue-gray Gnateatcher in 
Quebec Province.—Harrison F. Lewis, Quebec, P. Q. 


The Russet-backed Thrush (Hylocichla ustulata ustulata) Taken 
near Charleston, S. C.—On October 22, 1901, I shot a male of this 
species near Mt. Pleasant that was feeding upon dogwood berries, and on 
May 3, 1902, I shot another specimen. These two birds were without any 
hesitancy labeled by me Hylocichla ustulata swainsoni and packed away. 
Last year I received a specimen of H. wu. swainsoni taken by Mr. Otto C. 
Hastings at Bridgeport, Conn., which led me to compare my two South 
Carolina birds with his specimen with the result that the South Carolina 
specimens were entirely different as regards the coloration of the back. 


466 General Notes [suis 


This spring I made a special effort to obtain an Olive-backed Thrush, 
and on May 5, I shot a typical adult male near my home. As soon as 
I lifted the specimen from the ground I was satisfied that the two birds 
I had taken in 1901 and 1902 were none other than the Russet-backed 
Thrush; but to place the identification beyond question I wrote my friend, 
Mr. J. H. Riley, to send me a specimen of H. wu. ustulata from the U. S. 
National Museum collection. Mr. Riley sent me an adult male taken by 
Mr. Ridgway on June 16, 1899, at Sitka, Alaska, which is identical in 
coloration with the two South Carolina birds. Here is a case of a Pacific 
coast bird occurring in South Carolina, in the autumnal as well as in the 
spring migration and may prove to be a regular migrant. 

When I collected with my late friend, Mr. William Brewster, near 
Charleston in 1884 and 1885 I remember perfectly of his shooting Olive- 
backed and Gray-cheeked Thrushes and of his explaining the difference 
between these birds from specimens shot in the woods which he laid side 
by side. My impression is that all the of the Olive-backs he shot were 
typical representatives of swainsoni. 

Since I began to collect birds in 1883 I do not believe I have shot six 
Olive-backed Thrushes, but of the great numbers I have seen at close 
range the backs seemed to me to be of the same color as the Gray-cheeked 
Thrush.—Artuur T. Waynn, Mount Pleasant, S. C. 


Remarkable Migration of Robins.—On March 19, 1920, during a 
rain at midday at Chicago, the wind died out, causing the fog and smoke 
to settle down bringing total darkness. This condition lasted several 
minutes when the wind shifted from southwest to north and freshening, 
brought a heavy fall of wet snow. A large flock of Robins numbering 
several hundreds was observed on the south side of the city, near the 
loop, flying northwest. It took fully five minutes for them to pass a given 
point. A small bunch leaving the main flock would settle on wires, house- 
tops and vacant lots, apparently to rest before going on. These small 
flocks were passing for at least half an hour after the main flight had gone 
on. This is the first time I have seen flocks of Robins, in the daytime, 
in such unusual numbers.—Epw. E. Armstrone, 2249 Calumet Avenue, 
Chicago, Ill. 


Some Rare Birds, for Yates Co., N. Y.—Melospiza lincolni lin- 
colni. Lincoun’s Sparrow.—On October 13, 1901, I secured a male of 
this species, the only one I have ever observed here. 

Tringa canutus. Knor.—This is a rare bird in Western New York, 
to say nothing of Yates Co. I obtained a specimen for identification on 
September 11, 1904, while it was associating with a host of other Sand- 
pipers along Lake Keoka. This seems to be the first recorded occurrence 
of the Knot here since 1874. 

Nuttallornis borealis. OLtve-sipep FLycaTcHER.—It was my pleas- 
ure to add this bird which is extremely rare here to my Yates Co. list on 


Rae *7920. | General Notes 467 


June 7, 1911, when I heard its oft repeated ‘‘pip pip pip”’ always three 
times with an interval before the next call. I found him perched on the 
peak of a dead pine along a hemlock clad gully. 

Buteo platypterus. Broap-wincep Hawx.—The only time I ever 
observed this hawk hereabouts, was on April 24, 1913, when I not only 
heard the familiar plaintive cry, but observed the bird clearly as it flew 
along the willow-fringed shore of Lake Keoka. It is singular that the 
Broad-wing does not occur here as a breeder for the moist woodland of 
Potter swamp would be an ideal nesting haunt for it. This is the only 
noted occurrence during 29 years of active field work. 

Olor columbianus. WuisTLING Swan.—Five of these graceful 
swans descended into the west branch of Lake Keoka during a snow 
storm on November 13, 1919, remaining all afternoon and night. So far 
as I am aware this is the first occurrence of swans hereabouts since Nov- 
ember 1, 1905, when five appeared on Lake Keoka near Penn Yan. Of 
the latter one was reported killed on November 25. 

Just previous to November 13, 1919, five swans were reported on Seneca 
Lake which were probably the same birds, that were seen here.—CLARENCE 
F. Stone, Branchporl, N. Y. 


Notes from Springfield, Mass. Aluco pratincola. Barn Owi.— 
About the first of last December a Barn Owl was taken in Forest Park, 
in Springfield. There are but two other records of the presence of rep- 
resentatives of this species of bird in this part of the Connecticut valley. 

Spizella monticola monticola. Tree Sparrow.—In February, 
1916, ten Tree Sparrows were taken alive in Longmeadow, a suburb of 
Springfield, banded, and then liberated. This act was done on premises 
where, for a long time during the colder months of each year, wild birds 
had been liberally supplied with food. Three of these banded birds re- 
turned and made their home on these premises during each of the two 
succeeding winters. During the season of 1918 and 1919 the house on 
this lot was closed, and it was not known whether any of these birds were 
then present or not. This winter the house was again occupied, and 
food provided for the birds, and two of these Tree Sparrows appeared 
there, each wearing the band that was placed on its leg four years ago.— 
Ropert O. Morris, Springfield, Mass. 


Notes from St. Louis, Mo.—Four Whistling Swans(Olor columbianus) 
were seen on Dardenne Island, Mississippi River, about ten miles above 
the mouth of Illinois River, March, 1919. 

They are the first wild swans seen in this locality in many years—I 
found only one old fisherman and trapper who could recall seeing swans 
in this locality before, and he stated they were the first he had seen since 
the early nineties. I saw these four adults on the Island, March 20, 
1919, at 10:42 A. M., and approached within fifty yards of them in a motor 
boat. They were such a grand sight, I did not attempt to collect a speci- 
men. They were first seen in this locality about March 1, 1919. 


[eae 
July 


468 General Notes 

A Blue Goose (Chen caerulescens) was killed at Golden Eagle, Ill., on 
the Mississippi River, October 25, 1919. It was a fine adult male, the first 
seen in this locality in many years, and was shot by C. A. Vogel.—F. Roy 
Dean, St. Louis, Missouri. 


Merrem’s ‘Beytrage.’—As is well known, Merrem’s ‘Beytrage zur 
besondern Geschichte der Végel’ consists of two parts published in 1784 
and 1786, both in German. A Latin edition of both parts appeared in 
1786. 

Recently Dr. C. W. Richmond wrote me that there was some question 
about the names which appear on the plates of the first part. A copy 
before him when he wrote had only German names, while the copy that 
he had consulted some time before in the library of the Academy of Nat- 
ural Sciences of Philadelphia, according to his memoranda, had both Ger- 
man and Latin names, as is the case with the second part. Upon examin- 
ing this latter copy I find that Dr. Richmond is correct. It is, however, 
perfectly evident that the Latin names have been added after the plates 
had been engraved, for while the German names are centered, the Latin 
ones are placed either before or after them wherever there was more space, 
and are in a different hand. At first I was of the opinion that they had 
been written by hand, but after a very careful examination I am con- 
vinced that they have been etched into the plate as there is some differ- 
ence in the color of the ink on the several plates, some being jet black 
while others are decidedly brown, and in every case the Latin names 
correspond in tone with the rest of the plate. Moreover the handwriting 
of the Latin names in part one is the same as that of all the names in 
part two. 

The conclusion is therefore obvious that the 1784 edition of part one 
was printed without Latin names, but that when part two appeared the 
engraver added Latin names to the plates of part one and an extra edition 
was printed to accompany part two, although the date was not changed. 
The result is that the names Cotinga rubra and C. cuprea (Plate 1); Gracula 
nobilis (Plate 2); G. chrysoptera (Plate 3); Mellisuga coccinea (Plate 4); 
Merops spiza (Plate 5); and Muscicapa ferruginea (Plate 6) have no stand- 
ing from this part at 1784 but date, so far as this work is concerned, from 
1786.—WITMER STONE, Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia. 


Erratum. The memorial to the late William Brewster, adopted by 
the Nuttall Ornithological Club and published in ‘The Auk’ for January, 
p. 27, was prepared by Mr. F. B. White, not ‘“E. B. White” as printed.— 
Ed. 


Mel. ee | Recent Literature. 469 


RECENT LITERATURE. 


Mathews’ ‘Check List of the Birds of Australia, Part I.’!\—Having 
reached the half-way point in his great work on the birds of Australia, 
Mr. Mathews publishes a list of all the species so far treated, with the 
synoymy of each and references to his own plates and those of Gould. 
He explains that while the work was in progress so many questions relat- 
ing to the proper names for the various species were under discussion, 
that the names used on the plates are in many cases not those that he would 
use today. Hence the need of a list of present day names with the proper 
concordance. 

As Mr. Mathews’ work progressed there has been noticeable a con- 
stantly lessening degree of importance attached to the subspecies, until 
now they have reached a condition of degradation that will delight the 
hearts of certain of his Australian friends whofor some years past have been 
complaining of the tremendous increase in the number of “kinds” of birds 
that he hasnamed. Mr. Mathews explains that ‘‘the number of subspecies 
accepted must always be a variable one, according to the material avail- 
able and to a certain extent upon the personal idiosyncrasy of the worker,”’ 
and therefore he thinks that a list of the species only, with the subspecies 
arranged under them will be of more general use. As a matter of fact 
he lists the subspecies along with synonyms etc., so that it is absolutely 
impossible to tell from the list how many he intends to recognize. Some 
are in binomial form, others in trinomial and some of each class he accepts 
while others he rejects. Never the less this list, as he says, will probably 
be of more general use than any of its predecessors. 

A very valuable feature is the determination of the exact date of publi- 
cation of each name as nearly as it is possible to ascertain it, as well as 
the place and method of the type fixation of each genus. 

In the preface Mr. Mathews has a brief defence of his attitude on 
generic subdivision in which he claims not to be an extreme splitter. 
His comparison with the work of the B. O. U. Committee does not 
seem to us very well taken and the fact that of the 279 genera that he 
considers are necessary for the 334 species listed, he has had to establish 
at least sixty that were not deemed necessary by any writers up to the time 
of the ‘British Museum Catalogue’—and sometime after—seems to stamp 
him as rather an extremist in the matter of generic division. Mr. Mathews 
certainly shows commendable perseverance in his efforts to make his 
generic division consistent but the point is that a large majority of scien- 
tific workers do not concede the necessity for such effort when our nomen- 


1Supplement No. 1. The Birds of Australia. By Gregory M. Mathews. 
Check-List of the Birds of Australia, Part I. Orders Casuariiformes to Menuri- 
formes. London: Witherby & Co., 326 High Holborn, W. C. I. February 16, 
1920, pp. 1-116. 


A70 Recent Literature. [x ‘ite 


clature is, by the process, rendered meaningless except to the favored 
few. ‘The reviewer has already expressed at length his view that the 
groups demanded by consistency or for phylogenetic purposes can just 
as well be expressed as subgenera without making a plaything of our 
nomenclature. (Science, April 20, 1920, p. 427.) Generic subdivision 
seems to us, to quote Mr. Mathews’ expression, even more a matter of 
“personal idiosynerasy”’ than the coining of subspecies. We are all 
agreed with Mr. Mathews on the importance of recognizing differences 
(and resemblances too!) but it should and can be done without incon- 
veniencing everyone else. As the instructions to the binder suggest the 
binding of this ‘‘ Part”’ at the end of Volume VII we infer that ‘‘ Part 2” 
will not appear until the work is entirely completed, by which time let us 
hope that our good friend the author will have adopted the same con- 
servative stand upon genera that he has now reached in regard to sub- 
species.—W. 8S. 


Mathews’ ‘Birds of Australia’.1—Part I of Volume VIII appeared on 
May 5, 1920, and in it Mr. Mathews begins the treatment of the long list 
of passerine birds. The Pittidae, Atrichornithidae and Hirundinidae are 
completed in this number and the first species of the Muscicapidae are 
considered. 

A rather lengthy discussion of the classification of the Passeriformes 
begins the number which is well worth careful reading. While the author 
does not advance any new ideas in the classification which he adopts, he 
presents some rather caustic criticism of characters used and diagnoses of 
groups, presented by others. His principal grievance seems to be with 
the importance accorded to anatomical characters and after quoting a 
diagnosis of the family Picidae: ‘Feet zygodactyle; after-shaft small or 
elementary; oil-gland tufted. Muscle formula of leg, AXY (AX); gall 
bladder elongated; skull without basipterygoid processes,”’ he says: ‘‘Surely 
it is time to provide some more reasonable kind of guide to bird study 
than such inadequate terminology,” and again in referring to anatomical 
terms he says that they “mean little or nothing to the ornithologist who 
has to deal with skins and not much more to anyone else.”’ 

While we are willing to admit Mr. Mathews’ contention that too much 
weight may have been given to certain anatomical characters and that 
even the structure of the syrinx in the Pittidae may not necessarily indi- 
cate any close relationship to Neotropical groups with similar structure, 
but may merely indicate degeneration in both instances from ‘‘oscinine”’ 
types; there is still no reason why they may not have come from the same 
stock and represent isolated groups of a widespread type now approaching 
extinction. Mr. Mathews does not think, moreover, that similarity in 
syrinx structure should be held to unite such dissimilar-looking birds as the 


1The Birds of Australia, Witherly & Co. Vol. VIII. Part 1, May 5, 1920. 


igs Sip eal Recent Literature. A471 


Pittas, the Philepittas of Madagascar and the Xeniscidae of New Zealand, 
but in the South American Tyrannidae or Formicariidae we find just as 
much divergence in external characters among species which we feel sure 
must be closely allied. 

At any rate we cannot think that Mr. Mathews is really serious in the 
statement quoted above, regarding the work and terminology of the anat- 
omist, since in his succeeding pages he repeatedly calls for anatomical 
investigation of Australian birds and states that a description of the skele- 
tons of the principal types of Muscicapidae would be ‘“‘worth much more 
than any series of skins.’ This is the true scientific spirit and we can 
hardly think that he would do away with the characters proposed by the 
anatomist merely because the terminology is meaningless to the student 
of skins. There is, however, much food for thought in the matter that 
he has discussed.—W. 8. 


McGregor’s ‘Index to the Genera of Birds’.—In 1889 appeared a 
work entitled ‘Index Generum Avium. A List of the Genera and Sub- 
genera of Birds,’ by F. H. Waterhouse, librarian to the Zoological 
Society of London. For over thirty years this has constituted an indis- 
pensable work of reference to all systematic ornithologists and in 1902, 
1909 and 1917 Dr. C. W. Richmond published in the ‘Proceedings of 
the U. S. National Museum,’ three supplements to it, listing not only the 
generic names proposed for birds in the intervening years, but a list of 
names overlooked by Waterhouse and another list of names given by 
him which are not proposed as genera or apply to other groups than birds. 

Mr. McGregor’ has now given us another volume very similar in scope 
to that of Waterhouse but bringing the matter up to 1917. He does not 
base his catalogue upon Waterhouse’s ‘List’ but begins de novo, cata- 
loguing successively the generic names mentioned in Bonaparte’s ‘Con- 
spectus’ of 1850 and 1865; Gray’s ‘Hand-list,’ 1869-1871; the ‘Catalogue 
of Birds of the British Museum,’ 1874-1895; Sharpe’s ‘Hand-list,’ 1899— 
1909; DuBois’s ‘Systema Avium,’ 1899-1904; and Richmond’s three 
‘Supplements’ to Waterhouse. The names thus compiled were then 
arranged in alphabetical order and under each is given the volume and 
page reference to all of the above works in which it may have been men- 
tioned, the reference being printed in heavy-faced type if the name is 
recognized as valid, and in light-faced type if it is given as a synonym. 
The author of the name does not appear, nor does the original place of 
publication, but from the references cited the full history of the name can 
usually be ascertained and these matters looked up by the investigator. 
' As Waterhouse usually only gave one reference, and that by no means 
always the original one, Mr. McGregor’s plan really leads us directly or 
indirectly to much more information regarding the name which we are 
investigating than did the older work. Furthermore the brevity of his 
references enables him to print the names in three columns to the page 


A472 Recent Literature. h ae 


and makes it possible to include the whole 8839 names and some 24,000 
references on 180 octavo pages. 

A casual glance over the pages does not disclose any typographical 
errors and we have been able to find only one omission. The real test of 
course must come from actual use, but the general appearance of the list 
indicates a very careful piece of work. 

A recent letter from the author states that his editorial duties seriously 
interfere with his ornithological research work, but if his time and oppor- 
tunities permit only of the preparation of such valuable compilations as 
the one before us he need have no fear of being charged with neglecting 
his favorite science. Anyone who has had experience with the dreary 
monotony of compiling a list or index will fully appreciate the labor in- 
volved in Mr. McGregor’s modest publication and will recognize the 
indebtedness that all those interested in systematic ornithology must feel 
toward him for his helpful work. MceGregor’s ‘Index’ will henceforth 
take the place of the familiar ‘Waterhouse’ and the fact that a publication 
of this sort bears the imprint of Manila is a tribute to the good judgment 
of those who direct the Philippine Bureau of Science.—W. 8. 


Witherby’s ‘Handbook of British Birds.”—The appearance of a 
bulky double part 7-8, on April 8, completes the first volume of this ad- 
mirable work. The birds treated cover the Thrushes and their allies, 
the Wrens, the Dippers and the Swallows, while two half-tone plates 
illustrate the juvenal plumages of the first of these families and a third 
depicts the several geographic races of the Wren and the Dipper. 

The genus Nannus is regarded as not separable from Troglodytes and our 
American Winter Wren and Barn Swallow are regarded as subspecies of 
their European representatives instead of distinct species. 

The work lives up to the high standard established by the first part and 
volume one is completed before the time set by the publishers, on both of 
which accomplishments they are to be congratulated.—W. 8. 


Hartert’s ‘Die Vogel der palaarktischen Fauna.’—The present 
part of Dr. Hartert’s famous work covers the Ibises, Herons, Flamingos 
and Ducks and Geese. .The treatment is the same as in the preceding 
parts and the same high standard is maintained. We notice in the nomen- 
clature certain practices which differ from those of the A. O. U. ‘Check- 
List.’ The genera Herodias and Egretta for instance are united, as are 
also Anas, Nettion, Querquedula, Chaulelasmus, Mareca and Dafila, while 


1 Index to the Genera of Birds. By Richard C. McGregor. Manila, Bureau of 
Printing, 1920, pp. 1-185. (Dept. of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Pub- 
lication 14, March 31, 1920.) 

2A Practical Handbook of British Birds. Edited by H. F. Witherby. Parts 
7-8, April 8, 1920. Price 4s. net per part. Witherby & Co., 326 High Holborn, 
W.C. I. 


Vol. ed Recent Literature. 473 


Chen is not considered separable from Anser, nor Olor from Cygnus. Our 
Redhead, moreover, is regarded as a subspecies of Nyroca ferina, and 
our Green-winged Teal a subspecies of Nettion crecca. While we person- 
ally approve some of the generic reductions we do not think that the 
facts warrant these subspecific references. The reference of all the forms 
of Green Heron as subspecies of the South American Butorides striatus 
also seems unwarranted. Under this species we notice two new forms: 
B. s. degans (p. 1251), Seychelles; and B. s. moluccarum (p. 1251), Mo- 
luceas. 

Increased cost of printing necessitates an increase in the price of the 
work of eight marks per part.—W. 8. 


Chapman ’s ‘What Bird is That?’!—In these days when almost every 
other person one meets is a bird student, there is a constant demand for 
bird books especially those that present the subject in a novel manner. 
Such a work is the latest of Dr. Chapman’s ornithological textbooks 
entitled ‘What Bird is That?’ which answers the question presented in 
its title in a most satisfactory manner. 

Instead of the usual analytical key we find at the beginning of the vol- 
ume little colored pictures of all the land birds of the Eastern United 
States. They are represented on stands and branches as mounted mus- 
eum specimens, arranged on the shelves of a case, or series of cases, and are 
grouped according to season, so that in cases 1 and 2 we find all of the 
winter birds of the region, in cases 5 and 6 the early spring migrants and 
soon. Having found our bird among the colored figures we turn to the 
main text which covers the 300 species of the Eastern States and find a 
short description with dates of occurrence at several localities, taken from 
the author’s well-known ‘Handbook,’ and a paragraph covering the more 
striking habits of the species, and its nesting. 

The book is an elaboration of the plan, first adopted, we believe, by Dr. 
Chapman, in the American Museum of Natural History, of exhibiting in 

‘one case the birds present about the immediate neighborhood and chang- 
ing the specimens from month to month as the winter birds depart and 
the migrants arrive from the south. This narrows down the task of iden- 
tification to the species most likely to be seen at the time and eliminates 
many confusing possibilities. 

The artist Mr. E. J. Sawyer is to be congratulated upon the accuracy 
of his figures for in spite of their small size—there are sometimes over 40 
on a page— he has presented characteristic poses for the most part, while 
no important detail of color seems to have been overlooked. 


lWhat Bird Is That? A Pocket Museum of the Land Birds of the Eastern 
United States arranged according to Season. By Frank M. Chapman. Curator 
of Birds in the American Museum of Natural History and Editor of ‘ Bird-Lore.’ 
With 301 Birds in Color, by Edmund J. Sawyer. D. Appleton and Company, 
New York and London, 1920. 12mo., pp. i-xxvi, 1-144, 8 color plates. Price 
$1.25 net. 


A474 Recent Literature. [s ae 


Dr. Chapman’s text is admirable and the whole conception of the work 
is another illustration of his ability to feel the pulse, as it were, of the bird 
loving public and provide what they need. The several line cuts which 
are scattered through the text might well have been omitted as they have 
not come out very satisfactorily on the rough surfaced paper, that of the 
Red-shouldered Hawk intended to illustrate the barred tail showing this 
appendage solid black. 

The scientific nomenclature wisely follows that of the A. O. U. ‘Check- 
List’ and does not, like certain recent publications—even some issued by 
the Biological Survey, attempt to be up to date by using names not yet 
considered by the A. O. U. Committee and which the popular reader 
cannot find in the books with which he is familiar. If we do not follow 
a standard nomenclature in works intended for the general public we had 
better omit scientific names entirely. 

In his English names Dr. Chapman also follows the “Check-List’ with 
two notable exceptions. Water-Thrush appears with the prefix “Northern” 
and Crossbill with that of ““American.’’ The abbreviated names have 
never met with favor and are ambiguous as there is another Water-Thrush 
and two other Crossbills. While we heartily endorse ‘‘ Northern Water- 
Thrush” we prefer ‘“‘Red Crossbill’’ which has been suggested by several 
writers, and trust that the Committee may adopt these changes in the next 
edition of the ‘Check-List.’ 

We heartily recommend Dr. Chapman’s little book to those desiring 
to name the birds they see, as probably the best pocket guide that has yet 
appeared.—W. 8. 


Horsfall on the Habits of the Sage Grouse.'—In ‘The Auk’ for 1900, 
Mr. Frank Bond has an article and an original drawing illustrating the 
nuptial performance of the Sage Cock. He corrects Dr. Newberry’s 
statement that the bird drags its wings Turkey-like and describes in detail 
a process of bending over and pushing the distended breast sacks over 
the ground, thus producing the wearing away of the feathers on these 
parts, something that was not previously explained. 

Those who attended the A. O. U. meeting in New York in November, 
1919, and saw Mr. W. L. Finley’s motion pictures of these birds in action 
were surprised to see that Mr. Bond’s account is apparently as much 
in need of correction as was Dr. Newberry’s and that the bird’s breast 
is held high and never touches the ground at all, the edges of the wings 
being rubbed over it when the sacks are distended. Mr. Horsfall who 
accompanied Mr. Finley now describes the activities of the mating birds 
and presents several sketches and a color plate to illustrate the successive 
stages of the performance. His account of the wearing away of the 
breast feathers is however by no means as clear and explicit as might be 
desired.—W. 8. 


1 Zoologica. Scientific Publication of the N. Y. Zool. Soe. 


Mesto ie | Recent Literature. AT5 


Kirke Swann’s ‘Synoptical List of the Accipitres.!—Part IV of this 
work brings it to a conclusion and from the preface which accompanies 
it we learn that it is largely based upon the late Dr. Bowdler-Sharpe’s 
‘Catalogue of the Accipitres in the British Museum,’ the author’s an- 
notated copy with his additions having been accessible to Mr. Swann; 
and also upon Mr. W. L. Sclater’s manuscript list of the specimens in 
the Museum. While the author uses subspecies extensively he does not 
seem to recognize intergradation as the criterion upon which they must be 
distinguished from species since he recognizes three ‘species’ of our Amer- 
ican Sparrow Hawks, all of which are usually regarded as subspecies of 
sparverius. 

He also considers that the dark Gyrfalcons which visit Canada in winter 
as young of F.. rusticolus candicans rather than true rusticolus. 

While Mr. Swann’s little work summarizes our present systematic knowl- 
edge of the Accipitres it seems to indicate that much has still to be accom- 
plished before we are prepared to satisfactorily monograph the group.— 


‘MASE 


Bibliography of British Ornithology.’—The third part of the ‘Bio- 
graphical Bibliography of British Ornithology’ by Messrs. Mullens, Swann 
and Jourdain contains the contributions to county ornithology from 
Middlesex to Surry. One will gain some idea of the extent of the litera- 
ture relating to the birds of the English counties when he finds that for 
Norfolk alone the authors have listed 600 titles, while the number of addi- 
tions each year is constantly increasing. Few of our states can show such 
a bibliography while many of our counties are without any ornithological 
notes whatever. This work serves as an excellent illustration of the 
extent of intensive study of birds in Great Britian and the vast number 
of persons who are interested and capable of publishing local notes of 
value. Part four completes England and begins Wales.—W. 8S. 


Brook’s ‘The Buzzard at Home.’—This little brochure is entitled 
“British Birds Photographic Series’? and is apparently the first of the 
series. It consists of twelve excellent half-tone reproductions of photo- 
graphs of the European Buzzard, its nest and young, with fourteen pages 


1A Synoptical List of the Accipitres (Diurnal Birds of Prey). Part IV. Fal- 
conidae and Pandiones. By H. Kirke Swan. London: John Wheldon & Co., 
1920. Price 4s. 

2A Geographical Bibliography of British Ornithology from the Earliest Times 
to the end of 1918. Arranged under Counties, being a Record of Printed Books, 
Published Articles, Notes and Records Relating to Local Avifauna. By W. H. 
Mullens, H. Kirke Swann and Rev. F. R. C. Jourdain. Witherby & Co., 326 
High Holborn, London. 1920. Part 3, 193-288; Part 4, 289-384. Price 6s. net. 
per part. 

1The Buzzard at Home. By Arthur Brook, with 12 photographic plates. 
London: Witherby & Co. Price 3/6. 


476 Recent Literature. fap 


of text by Mr. Brook describing the habits of the birds and his experiences 
in photographing them. The whole forms an attractive and interesting 
contribution to the life history of this hawk, likely to lead others into the 
field of bird photography and the study of the living birds in which the 
author seems to be an adept.—W. 8. 


The Nebraska Waterfowl and their Food.—This contribution 
from the Biological Survey consists of two parts, ‘Waterfowl in Nebraska, 
by Dr. Harry C. Oberholser and ‘Wild Duck Foods of the Sandhill Region 
of Nebraska’ by W. L. McAtee. 

The sandhill region of Nebraska, containing as it does innumerable 
small lakes and marshes is a natural resort of various species of waterfowl 
and the object of the present publication is to place those who may be 
interested in the conservation of these birds, data on their relative abun- 
dance and habits and the methods by which this region may be made more 
attractive for them. Dr. Oberholser visited most of the lakes and obtained 
a wealth of information regarding the birds which inhabit them as well as 
data on past and present conditions there. He has given lists of the species 
found on the more important lakes and an annotated list of all of the 
species observed, their habits, relative abundance, etc., together with 
warnings as to the dangers attending the draining of the lakes in the 
consequent extermination of the wildfowl. 

Mr. McAtee has reported upon collections of the marsh vegetation 
gathered about a number of the lakes, pointing out the relative value of 
the various plants as duck food and suggesting other species which would 
probably thrive there if introduced. 

As a whole the pamphlet, which we trust may have a wide circulation 
in the region of which it treats, gives to the sportsmen of Nebraska all of 
the data required in any effort that they may be inclined to make for the 
conservation of this natural breeding ground for the ducks. And in view 
of the rapid destruction of the former breeding grounds farther north, 
it is none too soon to take every opportunity to save all such regions as 
this, which still remain in the United States, from thoughtless destruction. 
It would be a fine thing if the Legislature of Nebraska would make this 
lake region a permanent State preserve for the breeding of waterfowl, 
which could apparently easily be done without any inconvenience to the 
grazing or farming interests as it is not suitable for either.—W. S. 


Bartsch on the ‘Bird Rookeries of the Tortugas.’'\—Among the 
contributions to the “Annual Report’ of the Smithsonian Institution for 


2 Waterfowl and Their Food Plants in the Sandhill Region of Nebraska. Part I. 
Waterfowl in Nebraska. By Harry C. Oberholser, Assistant Biologist. Part 11. 
Wild-Duck Foods of the Sandhill Region of Nebraska. By W. L. McAtee, 
Assistant Biologist. Bulletin 794, U. S. Department of Agriculture. March 23, 
1920, pp. 1-77, plates I-V. 

1 The Bird Rookeries of the Tortugas. By Paul Bartsch. Smithsonian Report 
for 1917, pages 469-500 (with 38 plates). Washington, 1919. 


net oo0 | Recent Literature. AGT 


1917, which has recently appeared, is a paper on ‘The Bird Rookeries 
of the Tortugas’ by Paul Bartsch. Dr. Bartsch is familiar with the 
islands and gives us an account of their physical features from his personal 
observations and a series of thirty-eight plates from original photographs 
of the bird colonies. The Tortugas are by no means unknown ground 
to the ornithologist for from the time of Audubon’s visit in 1832, many 
bird students have visited them and described their bird life; while it was 
on these islands, that Dr. J. B. Watson conducted his now famous ex- 
periments on the homing of wild birds. From all of these writings, Dr. 
Bartsch has compiled interesting accounts of the various species of birds 
which inhabit the group, adding personal observations as well, and con- 
cluding with a table of the species observed or collected by such ornith- 
ologists as have visited the islands since 1857. The pamphlet makes a 
handy summary of our knowledge of the bird life of this interesting island 
group. Dr. Bartsch has also published in diary form some observations 
on the birds of the Florida Keys and southern Florida in the ‘Year Book 
of the Carnegie Institution’ for 1919, pp. 205-210, including notes on 97 
species.—W. S. 


Bangs and Penard on ‘Two New American Hawks.’!—In studying 
the birds of prey in the Lafresnaye collection at the Museum of Com- 
parative Zoology the attention of the authors was attracted to the exis- 
tence of two races of Accipiter superciliosus and the form inhabiting Costa 
Rica southward to Colombia has been named A. s. exitiosus (p. 45) type 
from Carrillo, Costa Rica. The difference in the size of the White-tailed 
Kites from the United States and Middle America as compared with those 
of South America has also prompted the naming of the former as new, 
and it appears as Hlanus leucurus majusculus (p. 47), type from San Rafael, 
California. The difference in the average wing length is only 15 mm., 
however, and the individual specimens overlap by 10 mm.—W. 8. 


Kuroda on New Japanese Pheasants.’— In this review of the Japanese 
pheasants of the genus’ Phasianus, printed in Japanese, the descriptions 
of the new forms are also given in English. These are P. versicolor ro- 
bustipes (p. 299), Sado Island; P. v. kiwsiuensis (p. 300), Kiusiu Island; 
P. v. tanensis (p. 300), Tanegashima Island; P. soemmerringi subrufus 
(p. 303), warmer districts on the Pacific side of Hondo, type from Oisan, 
Prov. Suruga; P. s. intermedius (p. 304). Shikoku and southwestern Hondo, 
type from Yunoyamamura, Prov. Iyo.—W. S. 


1Two New American Hawks. By Outram Bangs and Thomas Edward Pen- 
ard. Proc. N. E. Zool. Club, Vol. VII, pp. 45-47. February 19, 1920. 

2 Descriptions of Five New Forms of Japanese Pheasants. By Nagamichi 
Kuroda. Dobutsugaku Zasshi (Zoological Magazine) Vol. XXXI, 1919, pp. 
309-312. 


A7T8 Recent Literature. [3 ie 


Freeman’s ‘Bird Calendar for the Fargo Region’*—As an aid to 
local bird students Mr. Freeman has presented in the April, 1919, issue of 
the ‘Fargo College Bulletin’ a list of the birds of the vicinity of Fargo, 
N. Dakota, with the dates of arrival or of occurrence taken mainly from 
his personal records. While the author makes no claim for completeness 
and solicits additional data, the fact that he has been able to include 181 
species, hows that his little list forms an important contribution to the 
published literature of the birds of North Dakota. The species are ar- 
ranged in systematic order with annotations. Let us hope that this 
excellent start may be the forerunner of a more extensive report later on, 
when the co-operation for which the author asks will undoubtedly add a 
number of species and further data of interest.—W. S. 


Grinnell on the English Sparrow in Death Valley.'—Dr. Grinnell 
on a recent trip to Death Valley was surprised to find a colony of English 
Sparrows established at the Greenland Ranch, 178 feet below sea level. 
He points out the fact that so far, during a period of about fifty years, no 
differentiation from the original English stock has been detected in the 
birds reared in this country. The fact remains, however, that the con- 
ditions under which the birds live have perhaps not differed materially 
from those prevalent in England. Now, however, we have a colony of 
them established in a spot characterized by probably the highest tempera- 
ture and lowest relative humidity of any place in North America, and the 
presence of the birds at this point constitutes, as Dr. Grinnell says, an 
experiment actually under way which should show how permanent are the 
subspecific characters which separate this bird from the related European 
forms. The negative evidence obtained from a study of the bird in other 
parts of the United States which upholds the permanency of these char- 
acters seems to Dr. Grinnell to suggest that they are really germinal rather 
than somatic. 

In his apparent haste to be up-to-date, Dr. Grinnell has adopted Klein- 
schmidt’s separation of the English race from that of the continent, al- 
though neither Witherby nor Stresemann has been able, with abundant 
material, to satisfactorily distinguish them. This latter fact seems to 
emphasize the remarkable permanency of the characters of this bird. 
Does it not seem that some forms are very much more plastic and sensitive 
to environmental conditions than others and that Passer domesticus do- 
mesticus is one of the most difficult to change? Dr. Grinnell’s problem 
is an interesting one and in the same connection would it not be in order 
to repeat Mr. Beebe’s experiment on the effect of humid atmospheric con- 


3 A Bird Calendar of the Fargo Region. By Daniel Freeman. Fargo College 
Bulletin, XV, No. 1, April, 1919, pp. 9-16. 

1 The English Sparrow has Arrived in Death Valley: An Experiment in Nature. 
By Joseph Grinnell. American Naturalist, Wol. L1II, Sept.—Oct., 1919, pp. 
468-473. 


he 900] Recent Literature. A79 


dition on the coloration of the Ground Dove? That single experiment 
is quoted more than perhaps any other in exploiting the evanescent char- 
acter of subspecific differences and so far as we know it has never been 
checked nor has very serious consideration been given to food or a variety 
of other factors that may have entered into it.—W. 8. 


Rowan and Others on the Nest and Eggs of the Common Tern.! 
The egg collector who applies for a collecting permit on the ground that 
he is engaged in ‘‘scientific research”? would do well to consult this paper 
in order to appreciate the opportunity for real scientific research that is 
offered in the study of birds eggs. Only expert mathematicians will be able 
to follow intelligently the computations and calculations which are pre- 
sented but the results and hypotheses are of interest to all. Briefly stated 
the work here reported consisted in the measurement of some 800 clutches 
of Tern’s eggs with notes on the character of the markings and shade of 
color of the eggs and the nature and location of the nests in which they 
were deposited. With these data it was possible to prepare tables and to 
determine the probable correlation between certain measurements and 
colors, or between measurements and colors and character of nests, as 
well as the cause or meaning of differently colored eggs in the same nest. 
The work was accomplished by three field workers, one reporter and three 
tabulators and computers, and was in reality a continuation of a similar 
study carried on in the previous year. The final results show that the 
eggs averaged larger in 1914 than in 1913 and exhibited more uniformity, 
both due apparently to the bad season of 1913, when the very young and 
very old birds may have perished, and to the exceptionally favorable 
year of 1914, when food was unusually abundant. 

In regard to shape of egg and character of nest it was found that the 
more nearly spherical eggs were in the most careless, and loosely con- 
structed nests, while the denser brown and lighter green eggs were more 
often in nests without much material, 1. e., mere hollows in the ground. 

The resemblance of the color pattern to the nest brings in all sorts of 
complications. With eggs as variable as those of the terns it is incon- 
ceivable that the bird has, when building her nest, any conception of what 
her eggs are going to be like. As the authors say such an instinct would 
be conceivable in the case of a species laying uniform eggs and building 
a specific type of nest, but not in the present case. The fact that the 
terns were frequently found to begin laying before they gathered any nest 
materials would raise the possibility of their adapting the materials to the 
character of the eggs. Then comes the possibility of there being two 


10On the Nest and Eggs of the Common Tern (S. fluviatilis). A Comparative 
Study. W. Rowan, E. Wolf, and the late P. L. Sulman, Field Workers; Karl 
Pearson, Reporter; E. Isaacs, E. M. Elderton, and M. Tildesley, Tabulators and 
Computers. Biometrika, Vol. XII, Nos. 3 and 4, November 26, 1919, pp. 308— 
354, plates II-VI. 


480 Recent Literature. [3 ay 


types or genes of terns, one laying green eggs and the other brown. This 
would, however, necessitate mating always within the gens or the trans- 
mission of the egg coloring mechanism through the female only. The 
former is hardly conceivable while the latter is contrary to the experience 
of breeders that female characters are transmitted through the males. 
This theory too would require some Cuckoo-like females laying in the 
nests of other individuals to produce the varied sets of green and brown 
eggs in the same nests, which for various reasons does not seem credible. 
The most likely theory seems to be that any female tern may lay either 
a green or a brown egg but that with the physiological exhaustion inci- 
dent to successive egg laying the nature of the pigment of the egg laying 
glands changes. This would explain the undoubted fact shown by the 
tables that the number of green eggs increases with the number in the 
clutch, there being 74 brown to 63 green in clutches of a single egg; 153 
brown to 203 green in clutches of two; and 216 brown to 393 green in 
clutches of three. There are a number of admirable photographic plates 
showing the birds and nests and a color plate illustrating extreme phases 
of egg coloration. The paper is well worth careful study by those in- 
terested in the theories upon which it touches or in mathematical methods 
in research—W. 8. 


Report of the National Zoological Park.’—In his annual report as 
superintendent of the National Zoo, Mr. Hollister presents a number of 
interesting statistics. The number of species of birds in the collection 
is 190, exactly the same as last year, although the individuals are slightly 
more numerous. The death of the female Trumpeter Swan which had 
just been successfully mated with the male loaned by Mr. R. Magoon 
Barnes was a calamity, and until other specimens of this disappearing 
species can be secured will check any attempt to perpetuate it. Several 
birds, long residents of the garden, also died during the year, including a 
Crowned Hawk Eagle (Spizaetus coronatus), a resident for nearly 18 years; 
two tree ducks (Dendrocygna arcuata) which had lived there for 15 years 
and a Snowy Egret for eleven years.—W. 8. 


Ornithology of the Princeton Patagonian Expedition.—Part IV 
of this sumptuous work appeared in July 8, 1915. Like the preceding 
parts it is the work of the late Dr. R. Bowdler Sharpe and W. E. D. Scott, 
their manuscripts having been published with only slight changes in no- 
menclature and minor details. The editing has been done by Dr. Witmer 
Stone who will prepare the text for the remainder of the work as the manu- 
scripts of the late authors were only completed to the end of the Accipi- 
triformes. The present part covers pages 505-718, and includes the Pele- 
caniformes, Accipitriformes and Strigiformes. 


2 Report of the Superintendent of the National Zoological Park for the Fiscal 
Year ending June 30, 1919. Ann. Rep. Smithson. Inst. for 1919, pp. 68-81, 1920. 


pet eel Recent Literature. A81 


The text is very full with extended quotations from various writers 
on the birds of the region and there are 116 text figures of heads, feet, 
wings, etc., from line drawings by Bruce Horsfall.—J. A. G. R. 


Nicoll’s ‘Handlist of the Birds of Egypt.’\—This well prepared work 
is an annotated list of 486 species of birds occurring in Egypt north of 
Wadi Halfa, the nothernmost town of the Sudan. It is based upon Mr. 
Nicoll’s thirteen years’ experience in studying the birds of the country 
and upon a collection of about 4000 specimens obtained during that 
time and now deposited in the Zoological Museum at Giza. 

The English and scientific name of each species is given, the latter 
being the ‘most suitable and easily understood”’ of the several that may 
be current. Then follows a statement of the relative abundance and time 
of occurrence, and a short concise description. There is also a reference 
to Shelley’s ‘Birds of Egypt’ if the species is mentioned in that work, 
though we notice that Mr. Nicoll has added quite a number not found 
by that author. A few species entered in previous lists but not verified 
he has wisely omitted, quoting in this connection the apt saying that 
““What’s hit is history; what’s missed is mystery.’”’ An Appendix gives 
such Arabic names as have been applied to the Egyptian birds. The 
illustrations consist of 31 plates, most of them half-tones of skins of 
Chats and Warblers while the others are rather crudely tinted figures of 
a number of species. The book is a publication of the Ministry of Public 
Works issued by the Government Press at Cairo to meet a demand for 
information upon the identity of the native birds, which was especially 
urgent during the period of the war, when many visitors were in the 
country. Mr. Nicoll is to be congratulated upon an excellent piece of 
work both for the instruction of the public and for handy reference of the 
ornithologist who desires an up to date list of the birds of Egypt.—W. S. 


Sachtleben on Goldfinches.*—This paper is an elaborate discussion 
of the geographic forms of the Black-headed Goldfinches of Europe and 
Africa. Eleven races are recognized by the author and long lists of speci- 
mens with measurements are presented, with a full discussion of synonymy 
and relationship. 

Names are available for all of the forms recognized, though we notice 
that one of them, Carduelis c. balcanica, was named by the author in a 
previous paper in the ‘Anzeiger Ornith. Gesellsch. Bayern’ for February, 
1919.—W. 8. 


1 Hand-List of the Birds of Egypt. By M. J. Nicoll, F. Z. S., M. B., O. U. 
Assistant Director, Zoological Service. Publication No. 29. Ministry of Public 
Works, Cairo, Egypt. Government Press, 1919, pp. i-xii, 1-119, pll. 1-381. 
iPrice: Pak. 15: 

2 Die geographischen Formen des schwarzkopfingen Distelfinken. Von Dr. H. 
Sachtleben. Arch. f. Naturg. 84 Jahrgang. February, 1920. 


482 Recent Literature. [i ie 


Carter’s ‘Shooting in Early Days.’—In a neatly printed little pamph- 
let issued privately by Mr. Charles Morland Carter he describes his ex- 
periences as a gunner beginning about the year 1864. His early reminis- 
cences deal with New England and are full of association with William 
Brewster and Ruthven Deane, two of his boyhood acquaintances. Later 
come his experiences in Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma and other portions of 
the middle West. 

Besides the interest that attaches to a personal narrative of this kind 
there is much of value to the ornithologist in the accounts of the Quail 
and Woodcock shooting of those times and the several mentions of Pass- 
enger Pigeons, especially of a trap shooting contest at Concord Junction 
in 1872, in which Deane and Brewster participated and in which the 
birds were 200 Passenger Pigeons purchased for the occasion. 

If other sportsmen whose experiences date back to the sixties, would 
follow Mr. Carter’s example we should have preserved many valuable 
records of the early abundance of game birds which otherwise will be lost 
forever.—W. S. 

Recent Publications on Conservation and Education.—The April 
1920, number of the ‘Nature Study Review’! is a bird-study number con- 
taining many short articles on various species. The most noteworthy 
contribution is by Anna B. Comstock: ‘Suggestions for a Graded Course 
in Bird Study’ which will be welcome to many teachers. The suggestion 
is made of collecting one or more old nests and mounting them in eard- 
board boxes beside which may be mounted a standard outline drawing 
of the species colored by the student. The use of colored drawings in- 
stead of mounted birds or skins will soon become a necessity as the supply 
of old birds in museums, etc., becomes exhausted. 

Mr. John H. Wallace’s ‘Alabama Bird-day Book” is as usual an admir- 
able assistant to teachers engaged in conducting Bird-Day exercises. 
This year’s issue contains a special article by E. H. Forbush on the migra- 
tion of North American birds into the countries to the south of us and the 
importance of securing co-operation there for their protection as has been 
accomplished with Canada on the north. 

Miss Althea R: Sherman has an interesting ‘Historical Sketch of the 
Park Region about McGregor, Iowa, and Prairie Du Chien, Wisconsin’”’ 
in ‘Iowa Conservation’ Vol. III. Nos. 1 and 2, in which she advocates 
the establishment of a park or reservation on the Iowa side of the Missis- 
sippl, opposite the one secured by Senator Robt. Glenn at the mouth of 
the Wisconsin River. 


1 Shooting in the Early Days, from 1863 to 1919. By Charles Morland Carter, 
St. Joseph, Missouri. December, 1919. Printed for Private Distribution. 
Grogg Printing Co., pp. 1-38. 

1 Nature Study Review. Ithaca, N. Y. 

2 Alabama Bird-Day Book, Dept. of Game and Fish. Montgomery, Alabama. 

3’ Towa Couservation, Vol. IIT. 


Ba: ser || Recent Literature. 483 


‘Fins, Feathers and Fur’ for March, 1920 contains an appeal from 
Harry J. LaDue for the extermination of ‘‘vermin’’ by the sportsmen. 
Everything which may destroy game is today ‘‘vermin,”’ but the de- 
struction of all this wild life may so upset the balance of nature that the 
game will go too before we realize the complicated interrelation between 
wild creatures with which we are interfering. Such work should be done 
only after most careful consideration by those who understand the prob- 
lem. The statement that ‘‘the Crow is now everywhere regarded as one 
of the great menaces to song and game birds” is hardly supported by the 
reports. It is destructive locally to certain crops and should be dealt 
with accordingly, but in other places and other seasons it is unquestion- 
ably beneficial. The hue and ery against the Crow which has lately 
spread over the country seems to have been inspired by certain manu- 
facturers of guns and ammunition more than by anyone else. ‘Blue- 
bird”? in its March issue takes up the cudgels for the Crow just as earnestly 
as the previous journal denounces him. 

‘California Fish and Game’ tells of the arrest in that state of violators 
of the Migratory Bird Treaty all of whom were fined substantial amounts. 
There is also an account of the efforts to rid San Diego of the English 
Sparrow which promises to be successful as the number now remaining is 
estimated not to be over 100. The Illinois Audubon Society has published 
another of its attractive ‘Bulletins for the spring of 1920, which contains 
an admirable commentary on the State game laws, and many notes and 
reports on bird study. 

A Fascicle of Papers on British Economic Ornithology.—All of 
the articles here reviewed are by Dr. Walter E. Collinge who is giving 
more attention to economic ornithology than any other of his country- 
men. Two of the papers were published in the new ‘Journal of the Wild 
Bird Investigation Society,’ Dr. Collinge, editor, which is devoted to the 
preservation and to all other interests of British birds. One! of these is 
general in nature, calling attention to the close relationship of birds to 
the welfare of agriculture, the greater attention paid to this matter in 
other countries and the desirability of doing more work on the subject 
in Great Britain. The Rook and the Pheasant are discussed in some 
detail as examples, respectively, of destructive and beneficial species, and 
a tabulation is given of the principal food items of 22 species of British 
birds which shows ‘‘that the sum total of their activities is distinctly in 
favor of the farmer and fruit-grower.’’ The paper concludes by pointing 
out the great importance at the present time of aiding British agriculture 


4 Minnesota Game and Fish Dept., St. Paul, Minn. 

5 Bluebird, 1010 Euclid Ave., Cleveland, Ohio. 

6 California Game and Fish Commission, Sacramento, Cal. 

7 Tilinois Audubon Society, 1649 Otis Building, Chicago, III. 

1 Wild Birds: Their Relation to the Farm and the Farmer. Op. cit. Vol. 1, 
No. 2, March, 1920. 


484 Recent Literature. [3 ty 


in every way, and in making a special plea for investigations in economic 
ornithology upon which, alone, rational treatment of birds can be based. 

Two of Dr. Collinge’s articles relate to fish-eating birds, in one of which? 
it is pointed out that past statements on the matter have not been based 
on careful investigation, and preliminary results are announced of a study 
begun under the auspices of the Carnegie Trust for the Universities of 
Scotland. More than 3000 specimens representing 14 species have been 
examined, and the striking results are that ‘‘fish does not constitute the 
bulk of their food or anything like the major portion of it,” that only 
two species, the Cormorant and the Shag, are purely fish-eaters, that only 
one other, the Common Tern preys chiefly on fish, and that 11 of 14s pecies 
consume fish to the extent of less than 20 percent of their food. The diet 
of the Black-headed Gull is treated in some detail, with a conclusion 
favorable to the bird. 

The Kingfisher is the subject of the second paper* on fish-eating birds; 
the bird’s habits are sketched and a report is presented on the examination 
of stomach contents and food remains taken from nesting burrows. Aver- 
aging results from both sources, Dr. Collinge shows that 61.5 per cent of 
the Kingfisher’s food consists of fish, 12.52 of which is trout. Stated in 
economic terms, 13 per cent of the birds food is taken at man’s expense, 
16 per cent contributes to human welfare and 71 per cent is neutral. An 
especially interesting feature of the analyses is the close agreement between 
the proportions of the principal items of food in the material taken from 
stomachs and in the disgorged indigestibles from the nest. A table of 
percentages exhibiting this relationship follows: 


From stomachs From nests 
EUS asa 2e 8 srsnn geese away sie ogee aie aso 63.5 59.5 
Nhollisks i) ana ck hector e eee 4.0 4.0 
PA GPOLES ct, ne AG Sea adit a eeeuent soe a ete 3.5 5.5 
Tngurious lnsects.\24<ccas skiau.d <.2.6 ais brs 16.5 15.5 
INeutrallinsectsin 9-es cacy e bine 6.0 4.5 
@rustaceans s,s tase 6 2 sesie sto eae eEe 3.0 6.5 
IVVOLTINS aay teva crareisicvdtn ee eae ica netebee ween 125 1.5 


Thus it is quite evident that digestion, (at least so far as it is carried 
by pellet-disgorging species) does not materially alter the relative volumes 
of food items. The reviewer believes that this condition extents to excre- 
ment also, at least in the case of nestlings, and elsewhere! he has urged 
study of this evidence as to food-habits. The particular importance of 
Dr. Collinge’s findings lies in the validity they give to analyses of materials 
which can be collected and studied without destruction of bird life. 


2 Sea-birds: Their Relation to the Fisheries and Agriculture. Nature, April 8> 
1920, reprint, 7 pp. 

3The Kingfisher—Is It Injurious? Illustrated Sporting and Dramatic News, 
March 6, 1920, reprint, 1 galley. 

4 Bul. 32, U. S. Biological Survey, 1908, pp. 23-24. 


Mel: Sa a Recent Literature. A85 


Dr. Collinge made good application of this method in his report® on 
the Barn Owl, founded on the contents of 12 stomachs and more than 
300 pellets. The investigation like all others relating to this species is 
emphatically in the bird’s favor. 

A study of ‘The Food of the Nightjar (Caprimulgus europaeus Linn- 
aeus)”® is prefaced by a statement that this species had been greatly 
diminished in numbers by persecution because of its being considered a 
hawk and on account of general prejudice and superstition due to its 
nocturnal, hence little-known, habits. This is unfortunate as the species 
is almost exclusively beneficial. The case parallels that of the American 
Nighthawk and Dr. Collinge’s conclusion like that of bird-lovers in this 
country, is that these birds should receive the maximum of protection.— 
W. L. M. 


The Ornithological Journals 


Bird Lore. XXII, No. 2. March-April, 1920. 

A Bird Watcher in France. By Dr. Herbert R. Mills. 

Field Sparrows. By F. N. Whitman.—Some excellent photographic 
illustrations of the nest and young 

A Surprised Crow. By Verdi Burtch.—An amusing set of photographs. 

An Unusual Horned Lark Family. By Frank Levy.—Eight eggs all 
of which hatched. 

Migration Group Chart. By 8S. A. Hausman.—A good diagramatic 
representation of residents, summer residents, ete. 

The Plumages of North American Birds. By F. M. Chapman, Color 
plate by L. A. Fuertes.—The Arizona, Florida, California and Santa 
Cruz Jays. 

Dr. A. A. Allen in the School Department and the Editor on the pre- 
ceding page dwell upon the importance of accuracy in observation. The 
latter suggests the desirability of writing down an accurate description 
of all parts of the bird that may be under observation so as to compel 
the observer to gain a complete idea of what he sees while Dr. Allen urges 
that teachers do not hesitate to question the accuracy of children’s identi- 
fications when they would seem to be unlikely. Too much emphasis 
cannot be placed upon the importance of this matter. The carelessness 
is not limited to children but to many of those whose observations are 
being published as part of the records of the National or State govern- 
ments or of clubs and societies and we are forced to rely upon the rigorous 
pruning and questioning of an editor to save us from a mass of absolutely 
worthless records. The plan practiced by certain careful observers of 


5 Some remarks on the food of the Barn-Owl (Strix flammea Linn.), Journ. 
Wild Bird Investigation Soc., Vol. 1, No. 1, Nov. 1919, pp. 9-10. 
6 Journ. Ministry Agr., Vol. 26, No. 10, Jan. 1920, pp. 992-5. 


486 Recent Literature. [i Hie 


never recording a bird that both have not seen and satisfactorily identified 
is excellent though of course it can only be practiced by two observers 
working always together. Confirmation of other observers is an excellent 
feature and the person who always works alone and always sees the largest 
number of species cannot help but arouse a doubt as to whether his 
enthusiasm has not carried him away. 

Bird-Lore. XXII, No. 3. May-June, 1920. 

Spring Thunder. By H. E. Tuttle—Drumming of the Ruffed Grouse, 
with photograph of bird in action. 

Some Robins’ Nests. By W. F. Smith.—Curious locations, on the 
hub of a wagon, a stove-pipe, ete. 

A Much-used Robin’s Nest. By D. D. DuBois.—Six broods reared 
in the same nest during several successive years. 

The educational leaflet deals with the Yellow-bellied Sapsucker with a 
plate by Sawyer and text by T. Gilbert Pearson. In the latter the author 
seems a little mixed in his migration dates; the swallows as a rule are 
early migrants in the autumn but the Swift instead of leaving with them 
as he states remains in the vicinity of New York about as late as does 
the Sapsucker. 

Arthur A. Allen has an excellent article on bird song in which he adopts 
a scheme of notation somewhat like that advocated by A. A. Saunders in 
‘The Auk.’ (1915, p. 173.) 

An unfortunate newspaper article on a supposed Audubon collection of 
birds at Amherst College is reprinted in the Audubon department ap- 
parently without making any effort to determine its accuracy, while a 
line to Mr. Bangs, whose name appears in connection with the story, 
would have shown that, like many articles in the daily press, the whole 
thing was the result of some reporter’s too vivid imagination. 

The Condor. XXII, No.2. March—April, 1920. 

The Nesting Habits of the Alaska Wren. By Harold Heath.—Raises 
the interesting question as to the possible restocking of the island of St. 
George where the bird is found. The wrens are reported by natives to 
be abundant there some years and to disappear in others. As the Aleutian 
Islands, according to Oberholser, are populated by different races with the 
exception of Kodiak, then the repopulation must take place from this 
remote island, 700 miles away, but it is hardly conceivable that some 
representatives from the other nearer islands should not also come to the 
Pribilofs, if any such migration occurs. Mr. Heath prefers to think 
that one or more pairs have survived even in years when they seemed to 
have disappeared. In the winter of 1919, however, only a single pair of 
the birds could be found and it would therefore seem that the existence of 
the bird in the Pribilofs was precarious. 

Autobiographical Notes. By Henry W. Henshaw. (Continued.) 

Nesting of the Dusky Poorwill near Saugus, Los Angeles Co., California. 
By A. J. Van Rossem and J. H. Bowles. 


a eiaeon | Recent Literature. AS7 


Bryant Marsh Sparrow upon the Hills. By Jos. and J. W. Mailliard. 

A Return to the Dakota Lake Region. By Florence M. Bailey. (Con- 
tinued.) 

Wilson Bulletin. XXXII, No. 1. March, 1920. 

The Raptores of Nelson County, Kentucky. By B. J. Blincoe. 

Notes on the Birds of Wakulla County, Florida. By John Williams 
(Completed in June number). 

Bluebird Migrations. By Howard C. Brown. 

A Synopsis of the Genus Thryomanes. By Harry C. Oberholser.—This 
revision recognizes the same races and species as the author’s previous 
monograph of the genus with the addition of 7’. albinuchus (Cabot) placed 
in the genus by Mr. Ridgway, and the two races described by Grinnell, 
T. b. catalinae and T. b. marinensis with a new race, 7. b. ariborius (p. 25) 
from Agassiz, B. C., which is said to range over the southwestern corner 
of British Columbia and adjacent Washington. 

Wilson Bulletin. XXXII, No. 2. June, 1920. 

List of Birds made during service in France and Germany. By C. C. 
Sanborn. 

The Oologist. XXXVII, No. 3. March 1, 1920. 

Bird Nesting Notes from Yates County, N. Y. By C. F. Stone.—Addi- 
tional notes in May issue. 

The Oologist. XXXVII, No. 4. April, 1920. 

Bohemian Waxwings in Kansas. By P. B. Peabody. 

The Oologist. XXXVII, No. 5, May, 1920. 

Annotated List of the Birds of Brooke County, W. Va.—Anonymous. 

Journal of the Museum of Comparative Oology. I, No. 3-4. 
March 31, 1920.—Like its predecessor this issue is largely devoted to 
articles by Mr. W. L. Dawson in exploitation of his Museum of Com- 
parative Oology. There are, however, several special articles dealing 
with birds eggs, as follows: 

An Odlogical Revision of the Alciformes. By W. L. Dawson.—This is 
a remarkable contribution in which the author first admits that he is not 
“deeply versed in the lore of taxonomy” and then states that the tax- 
onomist is ‘“‘all too easily satisfied with incomplete, or superficial evidence.’”” 
Following this and some ridicule of the systematic worker he proposes 
that classification be based upon eggs alone. It is true that a knowledge 
of eggs is an aid to classification, and in certain groups has pointed to im- 
portant relationships, just as have many other characters, but to insist 
upon using one character only, no matter what the character may be, is 
preposterous. There are resemblances between eggs that mean nothing 
from the phylogenetic point of view, just as there are resemblances in 
structure between birds which are only remotely related. Mr. Dawson’s 
italicised ‘‘propositions’”’ governing the matter we can hardly regard 
seriously. 

Gaps in Our Knowledge of Eggs. By A. C. Bent.—Calls attention to 
certain species of North American birds the eggs of which are unknown 
or about which additional information is needed. 


A88& Recent Literature. jh a 


The Ibis. (11th Series), II, No 2. April, 1920. 

List of the Birds of the Canary Islands, with detailed reference to the 
Migratory Species and the Accidental Visitors. Part VI. Appendix A- 
Appendix B. By D. A. Bannerman. 

A Contribution to the Ornithology of the Island of Texel. By C. B. 
Ticehurst. 

A List of the Birds collected in northern Saskatchewan and northern 
Manitoba by Captain Buchanan in 1914. By J. H. Fleming [published 
also in ‘The Canadian Field Naturalist’ for December, 1919]. 

Notes on South African Accipitres. By C. G. Finch-Davis.—Treats 
of habits and distribution. 

A Review of the African Dicruridae in the British Museum. By D. A. 
Bannerman. 

A Nominal List of the Birds at present known to inhabit Siam. By 
Count N. Gyldenstolpe. 

On the Type Specimen of Chloephaga inornata King in the British Mu- 
seum, and some further Notes. By F. E. Blaauw.—The type specimen is 
really a young magellanica so that inornata King becomes a synonym of 
that species while the Black-banded Goose reverts to the name C. dispar. 

On a New Species of Bower-bird. By T. Carter and G. M. Mathews. 
Chlamydera maculata nova Mathews. Under certain contingencies not 
clearly explained, Mr. Mathews suggests that the form be renamed C. 
maculata carteri (p. 499). 

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. No. CCXLVIII. 
March 4, 1920. 

Largely devoted to an address by E. C. Stuart Baker on ‘The Value of 
Subspecies to the Field Naturalist.’ Dr. Hartert, in commenting upon the 
address, stated that he objected to making supposed intergradation be- 
tween two forms a criterion of the subspecies and cited the case of island 
races which were formerly regarded by American ornithologists as full 
species because of the impossibility of intergradation but which now they 
regard as subspecies. This action as we understand it has not been a 
change of opinion but rather the recognition of another kind of intergra- 
dation, 7. e., the overlapping of characters. While we do not think that 
the actual existence of intergrades should be required to establish a form 
as a subspecies, we nevertheless cannot admit subspecific relationship 
between forms separated by great distances and by other species of the 
genus, as for instance Dr. Hartert’s listing of the Carolina Chickadee 
(Penthestes carolinensis) as a subspecies of an old world species. 

The following new forms were described: 

By Dr. Van Someren: from East Africa and Uganda: Cercomela turkana 
(p. 91) Turkana country, west of Lake Rudolf; Eremomela badiceps turnert 
(p. 92) Yala River; EZ. elegans elgonensis (p. 92) 8. Elgon; Sylvietta isabellina 
macrorhyncha (p. 92) Tsavo; Dryodromus rufifrons turkanae (p. 93) Meu- 
ressi; Prinia mistacea immutabilis (p. 93) Nakuru Lake; Hedydipna platura 


er cata Recent Literature. A89 


karamojoensis (p. 93) Karamojo; Cinnyris habessinicus turkanae (p. 94) 
Lake Rudolf; Anaplectes jubaensis (p. 94) Juba River; Charitillas kaviron- 
densis (p. 95) Kakamega Forest; Dicrurus elgonensis (p. 95) Lerundo; 
Crateropus melanops clamosus (p. 95) Naivasha; Campothera teniolaema 
barakae (p. 96) Baraka. 

By J. D. LaTouche: Petrophila solitaria magna (p. 97) a large race of 
P. s. manilla without type locality or mention of type specimen. 

By A. DeCarle Sowerby: Uragus sibiricus fumigatus (p. 99) Tataschew, 
southern Siberia. 

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. No. CCXLIX. 
March 31, 1920. 

G. M. Mathews described six new forms of Australian birds. 

C. Chubb proposed: Dendrocinclopa (p. 107) new genus; type D. guianen- 
sis Chubb; Vavasouria (p. 107), type Ampelis nivea (Bodd.) ; Calloprocnias 
(p. 107) type Casmarhynchus tricarunculatus (Verr), also Rhynchocyclus 
sulphurascens examinatus (p. 108) Bartica, British Guiana; R. polioceph- 
alus inquisitor (p. 108) Bartica; R. flaviventris gloriosus (p. 108) Quonga, 
British Guiana; R. f. collingwoodi (p. 109) Trinidad. 

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. No. CCL. April 
30, 1920. 

E. C. Stuart Baker presented a revision of Prinia sylvatica recognizing 
three races and of Pericrocotus peregrinus and P. brevirostris recognizing 
five forms of the former and four of the latter. The following are described 
as new: P. p. vividus (p. 114) Attaran River, Burma; P. p. pallidus (p. 
115), Larkhana, Sind; P. p. saturatus (p. 115), W. Java; P. p. styant 
(p. 117), Sechuen; and P. speciosus fohkiensis (p. 116), Yamahan, Foh- 
kien. 

H. F. Witherby publishes some notes on birds from southern Spain 
showing among other things that the true Cisticola cisticola cisticola must 
be restricted to this country and north Africa and proposes for the bird 
of the rest of Europe, Asia Minor and Egypt, C.c. harterti (p. 120). Platea, 
Greece. 

An account of the seventh oological dinner is appended. 

British Birds. XIII, No. 10. March, 1920. 

Ornithological Notes from Norfolk for 1919. By J. H. Gurney.—In- 
cludes an account of the destruction of Rooks during migration. 

On Some Results of Ringing Certain Species of Birds. By H. F. With- 
erby. (Continued in April.) 

British Birds. XIII, No. 11. April, 1920. 

Breeding of the Knot in Grinnell Land. By Col. H. W. Fielden.— 
Eggs found by the late Admiral Peary on June 26, 1909. 

The Dutch and British Little Owls. By H. F. Witherby.—Athene 
noctua mira (p. 283) Limburg, Holland, is described as new; being darker 
than the bird from Germany, etc. The British bird was introduced from 
Holland. 


490 Recent Literature. [3 ike 


Migration Notes from Bardsey Island, October, 1919. By F. W. 
Headley. 

British Birds. XIII, No. 12. May 1, 1920. 

The Common Gull Breeding on Dungeness Beach. By N. F. Tice- 
hurst.—Excellent half-tones from photographs of bird at nest. 

Some recent results of Ringing Certain Species of Birds. By H. F. 
Witherby. 

Avicultural Magazine. XI, No. 2. February, 1920. 

Notes on the Birds of the Balearic Islands. By Philip Gosse. 

Avicultural Magazine. XI, No.3. March, 1920. 

Birds in the National Zoological Gardens at Washington. By R. W. 
Shufeldt. 

Avicultural Magazine. XI, No. 5. May, 1920. 

The Cry of Owls. By A. Trevor-Battye. 

Cockatoo-Catching in Victoria. By Thornton Skinner. 

The South Australian Ornithologist. V, Part 1. January, 1920. 

The Birds of the Mallee. By Edwin Ashby. 

New Subspecies of Emu Wren. By F. E. Parsons.—Stipiturus mal- 
achurus halmaturina (p. 15) Kangaroo Island. 

Ornithological Nomenclature: Its History and Reason. By G. M. 
Mathews. 

A Fortnight on Kangaroo Island, 8. Australia. By J. N. McGilp. 

Tori. Bulletin of the Ornithological Society of Japan. II, No. 
8. July, 1919. [In Japanese] 

On Some Specimens of Birds from Saghalin in the Sapporo Museum. 
By T. Momiyama.—Cichloselys sibircus davisoni, Locusteila ochotensis, 
Parus ater pekinensis, Chelidon rustica gutturalis, Surnia ulula pallast. 

On the Migration of Some Common Species of Birds in the Vicinity 
of Seoul, Corea. By Y. Kuroda and J. Miyakoda. 

On the Habits and Sexual Differences of the Himalayan Cuckoo. By 
M. Kawaguchi. 

Migration and Habits of Swallows in Shikoku. By Y. Enomoto. 

Notes on Some Birds from Iruma-gun Saitama. By T. Momiyama 
and M. Nomura. List of 182 species. 

Tori. II. No.9. April, 1919. [In Japanese.] 

Notes on and Descriptions of the Flower-peckers of Formosa. By N. 
Kuroda.—Dicaeum minullum uchidai new race from Horisha, Nanto 
District. [This paper reprinted in English.] 

On Some Birds from the Quelpart Island, Corea. By T. Mori.—Forty- 
nine species. 

On the Sexual Differences of Pseudotadorna cristata Kuroda. By 
N. Kuroda.—[Tadorna casarca X Querquedula falcata? ] 

Notes on Chelidon rustica gutturalis and C. daurica nipalensis. By Y. 
Kanetsune. 

Description of a New Subspecies of Aplonis from the western Micro- 
nesia. By T. Momiyama.—A. kittlitei kurodai subsp. nov. Yap Island, 
western Carolinas. (This paper in English.) 


mol aries al Recent Literature. 491 


Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. No. 131. March, 1920. [In 
French. ] 

On the Song of Birds in Winter. By H. Darviet. 

An Amateur Bird Guide for One Visiting Africa. By Dr. Millet- 
Horsin. (Continued.) 

Inquiry on the Disappearance of the Sparrow. By A. Menegaux. 
(Continued in April.) 

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. No. 132, April, 1920. [In French.]| 

Contribution to a Study of the Forms of Bubo ascalaphus of North Africa. 
By Louis Lavauden. 

On the Bird Producers of the Peruvian Guana. By J. Berlioz. (Ab- 
stract of Coker’s Report.) 

L’Oseau. Vol. 1, No.1. January, 1920. [In French.] 

Birds of the London Zoo. By D. Seth Smith. Mentions such rare 
birds as Irena, Comatibis, eremita, Scopus, ete., and figures the two speci- 
mens of the Kagu now living in the garden. 

Hummingbirds in Captivity. By J. Delacour. (Continued in Feb- 
ruary.) 

Observations on Some Waeverbird Hybrids. By A. DeCoux.—Colored 
plate of Zonogastris melba X Estrilda phoenicotis. 

Breeding of the Demoiselle Crane. By A. Touchard. 

Ornithological Reminiscences of Belgium during the Occupation. By 
C. Dupond. (Continued in February.) 

L’Oseau. Vol. I, No. 2. February, 1920. [In French.] 

The Golden-naped Woodpecker. By H. D. Astley.—Chrysophlegma 
flavinucha. 

Descriptive Notes on Hummingbirds that have been imported living 
into Europe. By E. Simon. 

Some Experiences in Crossing Peafowls. By F. E. Blaauw. 

The Mikado Pheasant, Syrmaticus mikado. By J. Delacour. 

L’Oseau. Vol. I, No.3. March, 1920. [In French.] 

The Blue-tailed Pitta. By H. D. Astley. 

Acclimatization in French West Africa. By Dr. Millet-Horsan.— 
Possibility of introducing Paradise-birds on the Ivory Coast. (Con- 
tinued in No. 4.) 

Some Collections of Living Birds in England. By J. Delacour. 

Calliste in Captivity. By A. DeCoux. 

L’Oseau. Vol. I, Nos. 4-5, April-May, 1920. [In French.] 

The Kite. By R. Reboussin.—With numerous pen sketches of atti- 
tudes. 

Note on Three West African Birds. By A. DeCoux. 

Hybrid of Peafowl and Common Fowl. By E. Trouessart. 

A ‘Feministe.’ By C. Debreuil. A female Golden Pheasant exhibiting 
plumage of the male. 

La Gerfaut. 10 Ann. Fasc. 1, 1920. [In French.] 


A92 Recent Literature. [sche 

Ivan Braconier. By L. Coopman.—With portrait. 

Capture of a Red-necked Brant in Belgium. By A. Paque.—With 
colored plate. 

The Birds of Devon (England) Compared with those of Belgium. By 
Th. Bisschop. 

Der Ornithologische Beobachter. XVII. No.5. February, 1920. 

Influence of Meteorological Conditions on the Migration of the Wood- 
cock. By Dr. L. Pittet. [In French.] 

Summer Life of the Starling. By H. Fischer-Sigwart. [In German. ] 

Der Ornithologische Beobachter. XVII, No. 7. April, 1920. 

On Zoological Nomenclature. By A. Hess.—The use of and between 
two specific names to indicate intermediates, the open end of the “V”’ 
being toward the species which it most resembles. [In German.] 

Ornithological Notes on the Region of the Bosphorus. By A. Mathey 
Dupraz. [In French.] 

The Call-Notes of Birds and their Significance. By H. Noll-Tobler. 
[In German. | 

Der Ornithologische Beobachter. XVII, No.8. May, 1920. 

Report of the Swiss Central Station for Bird Ringing in Bern, 1917- 
1919. By A. Hess. [In German.] 

Influence of Meteorological Conditions on the Migration of the Wood- 
cock. By L. Pittet. [In French.] 

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 27, No. 3-4. March- 
April, 1919. [In German.] 

Remarks on the Breeding Habits of the Swift (Cypselus apus.) By 
W. Bachmeister. 

Ornithologische Monatsberichte, Vol. 27, No. 5-6. May-June, 
1919. [In German.] 

Why do the larger Migrating Birds fly in the Wedge Formation? By 
W. R. Eckardt. 

New East African Forms. By H. Grote.—Macrosphenus albigula (62), 
Alseonax murinus roehli (p. 62), Phyllastrephus tephrolaemus usambarae 
(p. 62), and P. fischeri cognatus (p. 63) all from Mlolo, Usambara. 

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 27, No. 7-8, July—August, 
1919. [In German.] 

Geographic Errors in Connection with Scopoli in Hartert’s ‘Vogel der 
Palaearctischen Fauna’. By G. Schiebel. 

On the Nomenclature of the Genus Phalaropus Brissen 1760. By A. 
Laubmann.—Adopts the same nomenclature as already used in the A. O. 
U. Check-List of 1910. 

On the Position of the Feet of the Bustard in Flight. By E. Hesse.— 
Holds them straight back under the tail. See also November-December 
issue for comment. 

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. Vol. 27, No. 9-10. September- 
October, 1919. [In German] 


Vol. Serre Recent Literature. 493 


On Some Species of the Genus Callocalia. By O. Neumann.—C. 
uropygialis heinrotht (p. 110) Nusa, New Mechlenberg, is descriked as 
new. 

Journal fiir Ornithologie. Vol. 67, No. 1. January, 1919. [In 
German. | 

The Migration Routes of European Birds and the Results of the Ring- 
ing Experiments. By F. von Lucanus. See also note in No. 3. 

A Contribution to the Ornithology of Munsterland. II. By H. 
Reichling. 

Journal fiir Ornithologie. Vol. 67, No. 2. April, 1919. [In Ger- 
man. | 

A Contribution to the Ornithology of South Venetia and the Coast- 
lands. By E. Paul Tranz. 

The Pleistoceme Bird Fauna of Pilifszante. A Critical Review. By 
Geyr von Schweppenberg. 

Some Critical Remarks on the Palaearctic Corvidae. By J. Gengler. 

Journal fiir Ornithologie. Vol. 67, No. 3. July, 1919. [In Ger- 
man. |] 

Annual Report of the Bird Observation Station at Rossiten. By J. 
Thenemann. 

Should Connecting Forms be Named? By E. Stresemann. 

On Some Birds from the Southeast Coast of German East Africa. By 
H. Grote. LEstrilda astrild litoris (p. 301) Ruvu; Lagonosticta rubrica‘a 
reichenowi (p. 301), Mikindani described as new. 

An Ornithological Account of Sedan. By R. Zimmerman. 

Journal fiir Ornithologie. Vol. 67, No. 4. October, 1919. [In 
German. | 

Ornithological Observations in the South Ural Country. By H. Grote. 
(Continued in January.) 

Birds of the Leipzig District. By E. Hesse. 

The Fissirostres of Egypt. By A. Koenig. 

On the Forms of Turdus musicus. By O. Graf Zedlitz. 

Journal fiir Ornithologie. Vol. 68, No. 1, January, 1920. [In 
German. | 

On the Eastern Forms of Certhia. By O. Graf Zedlitz—C. familiaris 
bachmeisteri (p. 72), C. brachydactyla neumanni (p. 76), both from Slonim, 
Western Russia. 

New Genera and Species of African Birds. By O. Neumann.—Knes- 
trometopon (p. 77), type Sigmodus scopifrons Peters; Suaheliornis (p. 77), 
type Phyllastrephus kretzschmari Rehw. [here selected] Sathrocercus 
(p. 78) type Bradypterus barakae Sharpe, Vibrissosylvia (p. 78), type 
Callene cyornithopsis Sharpe. Also sixteen new races of Glareola, Ptern- 
istes, Francolinus, Gymnobucco, Malaconotus, Lamprocolius, Onychog- 
nathus, Potoptera, Ploceus, Geocichla, and Erythropygia. 

Berajah. pp. 55-62 ppl. XXVIII-XXXI. 1918. [In German.] 


494 Recent Literature. [ ae 


Deals with Falco peregrinus. Numerous plates of feathers. 

Falco. XIV. No. 2. ‘Schluss-nummer’ for 1918. (April, 1919.) 
[In German. ] 

Ornis Germanica. III, April, 1919. Supplement to ‘Falco.’ [In 
German. | 

A list of German birds with names according to the peculiar ideas of 
the author, O. Kleinschmidt. 


Ornithological Articles in other Journals! 


L. MclI. Terrill. Fall Migrants. (Canadian Field Naturalist, Janu- 
ary, 1920.)—A review of the autumn migration at Quebec. 

Criddle, Norman. Notes on the Nesting Habits and Food of the 
Prairie Horned Larks in Manitoba.  (Ibid.) 

Laing, Hamilton M. Lake Shore Bird Migration at Beamsville, 
Ontario. (Ibid. February, 1920.)—An annotated list covering the sum- 
mer and autumn of 1918. 

Morris, Frank. Belated Guests. (Ibid.)—Midwinter records of 
Brown Thrasher, Towhee and Goldfinch at Peterborough, Ontario. 

Nichols, J. T. Wintering Snipe and Rainfall. (Forest and Stream, 
May, 1920.)—“‘ Heavy precipitation the last half of the year is favorable 
to the presence of Snipe on Long Island at its close.’ 

Anderson, R. M. The Brant of the Atlantic Coast.—A leaflet of 
the Canadian Geological Survey in the interests of the protection of these 
birds under the Migratory Bird Treaty. 

Nelson, E. W. Federal and State Game Preserves. (Bulletin Amer. 
Game Protective Asso., April, 1920.) 

Lawyer, George A. Results from the Migratory Birds Treaty Act. 
(Ibid.) 

Allen, Arthur A. A Day with the Ducks on Lake Cayuga. (Ameri- 
can Forestry, April, 1920.) With photographs of Canvas-backs and 
duck-shooting. 

Burroughs, John. Bird Photographs of Unusual Distinction. With 
extracts from the writings of John Burroughs (Natural History, December, 
1919.)—Following a review of his ‘Field and Study.’ 

Allan Brooks Birds and a Wilderness. (Ibid.)—In France. 

Nelson, E. W. Region too Alkaline for Crops. (Ibid.)—A further 
illustration of the folly of draining the Klamath Lake region, which is 
resulting in the ruination of the famous bird reservation. 


1Some of these jonrnals 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. 


Vol. Fea | Recent Literature. 495 


Grinnell, George Bird. A Chapter and Natural History in Old New 
York. (Ibid, January-February, 1920.)—With recollections of Audu- 
bon Park. 

Worcester, Dean C. A Nesting Place of Micropus subfurcatus in 
Mindoro. (Philippine Journal of Science, December, 1919.) 

Anderson, J. A., Rintoul, L. J., and Baxter, E. V. Occurrences of 
the American Wigeon in Scotland. (Scottish Naturalist, January—Febru- 
ary, 1920.) 

Baxter, Evelyn V. and Rintoul, Leonora J. The Wigeon as a 
Scottish Breeding Species. (Scottish Naturalist, January-February, and 
March-April, 1920.) 

Macready, Prof. The Birds of Prince Edward Island. (Bull, No. 
1, Prince of Wales College, Charlottetown, P. E. I.)—Reprinted from the 
‘Teachers Magazine’, April 1916. <A briefly annotated list in the form 
of a table. 

Oberholser, H. C. A Synopsis of the Races of the Guiana Flycatcher 
Myiarchus ferox (Gmelin.) (Proc. Indiana Acad. Sci., 1918, pp. 304-308.) 
—Eight races recognized, none new. 

Eifrig,C.W.G. The Birds of the Sand Dunes of Northwestern Indiana. 
(Ibid. pp. 280-303.) 

Shufeldt, R. W. The Mounted Collection of Australian Birds in 
the United States National Museum. (Museum Work, 1920, pp. 212- 
218.)—From the author’s account one might judge that the National 
Museum Collection of Australian birds was the most important in America 
while as every ornithologist knows the original Gould Collection contain- 
ing the great majority of the types of this pioneer is at the Academy of 
Natural Sciences in Philadelphia where an almost complete exhibition 
series mounted by the famous Verreaux brothers has been displayed for 
many years. 

Frowhawk, F. W. Birds Beneficial to Agriculture. (Economic 
Series, No. 9. Guidebooks of the British Museum (Natural History) 
47 pp. 22 plates. An excellent review of economic ornithology in Great 
Britian. 

Duerden, J. E. Breeding Experiments with North African and South 
African Ostriches, VI. Degeneration. (Bull. no. 7. 1919. Dept. of 
Agric., Union of South Africa.)—A continuation of the author’s valuable 
reports on Ostrich farming. (Cf. also Nature, CV, pp. 106-108, 1920.) 

Butterfield, E. P. The Common Wren. (Irish Naturalist, March, 
1920.)—Roosting and in one instance breeding in the ‘‘male nests.” 

Gladstone, H. S. A Naturalist’s Calendar, kept by Sir. William 
Jardine. (Trans. & Proc. Dumfrieshire and Galloway Nat. Hist. & Antiq. 
Soc., VI, pp. 88-124. 1919.)—Covering January 1 to May 31, 1829. 

Philpott, Alfred. On the Occurrences of the Australian Coot in New 
Zealand. (New Zealand Jour. of Science and Tech., III, pp. 55-56. 1920.) 

Donald, C. H. The Birds of Prey of the Punjab. III. (Journal 
of the Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. XXVI, pp. 826-835. 1919.) 


496 Recent Literature. [F ue 


Whistler, H. Some Birds Observed at Tagoo, near Simla, [India]. 
(Ibid pp. 770-775)— Fifty-eight species listed. 

Stuart-Baker, E. C. The Game Birds of India, Burma and Ceylon. 
Part XXVIII. (/bid. pp. 705-715.)—Deals with Tragopan satyra. 

Chubb, E. C. A Skeleton of the Dodo (Didus ineptus.) (Annals 
of the Durban Museum II, pp. 97-99 with plate. )—This specimen obtained 
by the Durban Museum from the heirs of E. Therioux of Mauritius, is 
more complete than any of the other known specimens, possesing the tail 
bones intact. The other Dodo remains according to the author are: 
four mounted skeletons in the museums of Cambridge, England, British 
Museum, Paris and Mauritius; a foot and head at Oxford, England, being 
remains of a mounted specimen destroyed by moths in 1755; a foot in 
the British Museum and a head at Copenhagen. 

Longinas Navas, R. P. Birds of Aragon. (Revista de la Academia 
de Ciencias exactas, fisicequinicas y naturales de Zaragoza, III, pp. 8- 
69.)—The author’s unique policy of changing the generic name to avoid 
tautonymy instead of the specific as has usually been done by those who 
refuse to use tautonymic names, results in some new generic names which 
of course become synonyms viz: Melanopica (p. 15) for Corvus pica; 
Pycnorhinus (p. 20) for Loxia coccothraustes and Ocelletus (p. 56) for 
Motacilla regulus. {In Spanish.] 

Bannerman, David A. On Some Rare Birds from the Belgian Congo 
collected by Dr. Cuthbert Christy. (Revue Zool. Africaine, VII fase. 3, 
pp. 284-295. 1920)—Notes on 17 species rare or new to the Congo 
region. [In English.] 

Schouteden, H. Contribution to the Ornithological Fauna of the 
Lake Region of Central Africa (Ibid. V, pp. 209-297. 1918.)—An anno- 
tated list of 554 species. [In French.] 

Lonnberg, Einar. Notes on some interesting Birds from British 
East Africa. (Ibid V, pp. 97-102. 1917.)—The following are described 
as new: Astur tachiro tenebrosus (p. 99), Londiana, and Zosterops Bayert 
(p. 100), Elgen. [In French.] 

Schouteden, H. Note on a Woodpecker from the Congo. (Ibid. 
IV, p. 143. 1916.)—Dendromus kasaicus Dubois proves to be D. caroli 
(Malh.) with some plumage from another bird added. [In French.] 

Dehaut, E. G. A Contribution to a study of the Vertebrate Life of 
the Islands of the Eastern Mediterranean, with special reference to Sar- 
dinia and Corsica. Paris, 1920. [In French.] 

Godard, Andre. The Utility of Birds. (La Nature, No. 2386. 1919.) 
See also No. 2390 [In French.] 

Rollinat, Raymond. The Breeding of the Horned Owl in Captivity. 
(Bull. Soc. Nat. Acclim. France, 1919. December, pp. 373-376) [In 
French. | 

Schalow, Hermann. A Contribution to our Knowledge of the Bird 
Life of Various Battlefields. (Die Naturwissenschaften. CXX pp. 176- 
178.) [In German, ] 


pee peal Recent Literature. A97 


Helfer, H. Bird Observations in Spring. (Zool. Anziger. XLIX, 
1917, pp. 214—220.)—Gives dates for first song. [In German.] 

Lebedinsky, N. G. On the influence of the method of feeding on the 
form of the lower mandible of Birds. (Zool. Anzeiger. September 20, 
1918, pp. 36-41.) [In German.] 

Demoll, R. The Flight of Insects and Birds. (Die Naturwissen- 
shaften, XX VII, 1919, p. 480.) [In German.] 


Additional Publications Received. Shufeldt, R. W. (1) Material 
for a Study of the Megapodidae (The Emu, July and October, 1919, and 
January 1920.) (2) Osteological and Other Notes on the Monkey-eating 
Eagle of the Philippines, Pithecophaga jefferyi Grant (Philipp. Jour. of 
Sci., XVI, No. 1., July, 1919.) (38) My Published Writings Second In- 
stallment (Medical Rev. of Rev., February, 1920.) 

Hudson, W. H. (1) Adventures Among Birds. (2) Birds in Town 
and Village. E. P. Dutton & Co. N. Y. 1920. 

Bulletin Charleston Museum. XVI, Nos. 2, 3, and 4. February, 
March and April, 1920. 

Condor, The. May-June, 1920. 

Phillippine Journal of Science. XV, Nos. 5 and 6, XVI. No. 1, 
Novemberand December, 1919, and January, 1920. 

Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia. 
FOE Part Til, 1920: 

Proceedings of the Nova Scotia Institute of Science. XIV, Part 
4. August, 1919. 

Records of the Australian Museum. XIII. No. 1. March 16, 
1920. 

Revue Francaise d’ Ornithologic. May, 1920. 


AIS Correspondence. 7 we 


CORRESPONDENCE 


A. O. U. Luncheons 


Epitor oF ‘THE AuK’: 


One of the most pleasant features of our annual meetings is the lunch 
provided each day by the local committee as it gives those in attendance 
an opportunity for social intercourse which would otherwise be impossible. 
Many of our members have long felt the obligation we are under to the 
Delaware Valley Ornithological Club, the Nuttall Club, the Linnaean 
Society of New York, the Biological Society of Washington, and the 
members of various local committees who in the past have so cheerfully 
and silently contributed to the entertainment fund, but very few of us 
have fully understood, even with our own experience with the “high 
cost of living,”’ how great a burden the more recent meetings have proved 
to the financial resources of our local committees. 

The meeting of the American Society of Mammalogists in New York, 
last May, has shown that the lunch hour can be equally successful if the 
members pay for their own lunch and the feeling expressed on this point 
was one of general approval. Some of us, who from our geographical 
position cannot hope to return the hospitality of our fellow members, 
feel that on that account we are less embarrassed in suggesting that while 
the daily lunches be continued as heretofore that each one pay his own 
share as is already the custom in connection with our annual dinner. 


Toronto, Ontario. W. E. SAUNDERS, 
June 7, 1920. J. H. FLEMING. 


[While we feel sure that the several local committees have been only too 
glad to entertain the visiting ornithologists at past A. O. U. meetings 
and are quite willing to continue to act as hosts at the luncheons, we 
realize that there is a more serious factor involved in this. matter which 
directly affects the welfare of the Union. We must all realize that the 
influence of the Society would be greater if meetings could be held in a 
greater number of localities than is now customary, but the local expenses 
referred to by our correspondents, make it impossible to hold meetings 
away from the several centers of ornithological activity where there is a 
large resident membership. Increased attendance at the meetings which 
is especially desirable, tends further to aggrivate this condition. We 
therefore feel that Messrs. Saunders and Fleming in their courteous and 
thoughtful note have opened up the way to an important innovation 
which may prove a lasting benefit to the A. O. U. 

Epitor.] 


Vol. 2 ny | Correspondence. 499 


Popular Nomenclature 


Epiror or ‘THe Aux’: 


The question of nomenclature has been so persistent recently here, 
there and everywhere, that I trust you will pardon me for touching on 
this controversial subject once again. It is not to the scientific names 
that I wish to make reference, but to the popular ones. Mr. Ernest 
Thompson Seton has recently expressed his views on this subject both in 
the columns of ‘The Auk’ (April, 1919, Vol. XXXVI, pp. 229-235) and in 
those of the ‘Journal of Mammalogy’ (Feb., 1920, Vol. I, pp. 104 & 105). 
Since Mr. Seton draws a clear line of demarkation between the scientific 
and the field student and presumably puts forth the views of the latter 
in his articles, I trust you will also find the space for the views of a scien- 
tific student. Not that I have ever before considered myself as such, for 
the majority of my published papers have been on field work pure and 
simple, but my views differ so fundamentally from those of Mr. Seton, 
that I now think I must belong to the class he designates as scientific. 

Mr. Seton advocates a system by which popular names should be fixed 
entirely by popular taste and sentiment. It is an excellent principle 
but cannot be achieved, so it seems to me, if Mr. Seton’s attitude be gen- 
erally adopted. If a line must be drawn between the scientific and the 
field student, and in these days such a line seems more artificial than 
real, the problems of popular nomenclature can never be solved by an 
antagonistic attitude, but by one of frank co-operation. If the rules of 
priority, which have been carefully formulated by international experts 
are to be ignored by those, be they field men or otherwise, who personally 
disagree with them, a rational nomenclature, scientific or popular, can 
never be arrived at. 

The reason I am re-opening the popular side of the question is this. 
In the last issue of ‘Country Life’ (March, 1920) there are two illus- 
trated articles on the Sparrow Hawk. The one is entitled ‘Faleonry”’ 
(pp. 68 & 69), the other merely the ‘Sparrow Hawk”’ (p. 156 et seq.). 
Throughout the articles no other name than Sparrow Hawk is given to 
the respective subjects, but on glancing at the photographs accompanying 
them one notices at once that each is dealing with a completely different 
bird. The first relates to the British Sparrow Hawk, AcciIPITER NISUS, 
the second to the American Sparrow Hawk, Fatco sparverius. The 
photographs are good and must be puzzling in the extreme to those gen- 
iuses of language who are ignorant of the existence of countries other than 
North America, whom Mr. Seton extols throughout his paper. 

How the little falcon known in this country as the Sparrow Hawk ever 
came by this absurd misnomer is too late in the day to argue about. The 
fact remains and must be faced. If Mr. Seton’s system is allowed to take 
its course such muddles as this must continue indefinitely. As he rightly 
contends the name is one now pleasing to and understood by the popular 


500 Correspondence. [i ae 


mind and will have to remain in use. No efforts of the scientist can 
eradicate it. Yet there is a solution to the problem and a very simple 
one—by the use of the prefix ‘‘American.’’ There is no doubt that 
ACCIPITER NIsus was known by the name of Sparrow Hawk before Fatco 
SPARVERIUS received it and therefore by the rules of priority and common 
sense the latter should be modified to ‘‘American Sparrow Hawk.’ It 
is the only way of saving such an absurd situation as has arisen in the last 
number of ‘Country Life.’ It is all very well to argue as Mr. Seton does 
“that the genius of language does not know of the existence of South 
America or concern itself with priority or with anything but getting the 
idea into the mind and memory.’”’ Such an argument is too restricted 
to be of value. The genius of language may devise the name of Sparrow 
Hawk, but surely it will not be too difficult for him to learn and remember 
that another genius of language in another country (even if he has to be 
informed of its existence) discovered this name a century or two earlier 
and applied to to a different bird and therefore the word American will 
have to be prefixed to his Sparrow Hawk to distinguish it from the origi- 
nal. Earlier in his letter Mr. Seton mentions the Robin and states with- 
out comment that “actually even the scientific lists give the bird as 
American Robin.’”? (The italics are mine). Here he takes an example 
in which the rules of priority have been tacitly acknowledged by the use 
of the prefix ‘“‘American’’ and acclaims the result, but he then proceeds 
to deprecate this only possible way of arriving at a satisfactory popular 
nomenclature. The principles of priority may primarily concern the 
scientific student but they cannot be ignored by the field worker. They 
are fundamental. There is no doubt that the names now firmly fixed in 
the popular mind will have to stand, but there is no reason why in the 
case of the many birds that have names in use in other countries, if these 
latter have priority, the American species should not be differentiated by 
the use of the prefix ‘“‘American.’’ It has been done in the case of the 
Robin. It should likewise be done in all other cases. 

I feel that I am unduly trespassing on your space, but there is one other 
point to which I should like to call attention. Mr. Seton gives a number 
of very interesting examples of birds that have several popular names all 
well established in the districts in which they are respectively used. If 
standard books would give a list of these recognized names instead of 
attempting to eradicate them in favor of a single one and give to the one 
in most general use the most prominent place, the book would be of uni- 
versal value. In a country the size of North America it is only reasonable 
to expect that a bird should have more than one popular name. Even 
in England, small as it is, many of the people in the north do not know 
what is meant if a southern name be applied to some of their commonest 
birds. As Mr. Seton points out, Doctor Elliot Coues hit upon this plan. 
It has been followed by one or two other authors, e. g., Mr. Bailey in his 
‘Birds of Virginia’ and Mr. Taverner in his ‘Birds of Eastern Canada.’ 


el ont a Correspondence. 501 
If the scheme were generally adopted, the list being restricted to names 
that are really and truly well known, the genius of language should be 
taught to take his choice rather than to be encouraged to increase con- 
fusion by the invention of more names. The plan has been widely and 
successfully used in other countries. It should succeed equally well here. 

I fear this letter sounds as if I had a quarrel with Mr. Seton. Far from 
it. He has, however, put his views strongly. I have followed suit. 


Wm. Rowan (M. Sc., M. B. O. U.) 
University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, April 4, 1920. 


Epitor or ‘THe Aux’: 


Various aspects of the English language nomenclature of the A. O. U- 
‘Check-List’ have recently been given publicity by prominent ornitholo- 
gists, and the desirability of some changes has been made apparent. 

When the first edition of the ‘Check-List’ was being prepared, the terms 
““Junco”’ and ‘‘Vireo”’ were adopted, in preference respectively to the 
terms “Snowbird” and ‘‘Greenlet,’’ as the result of an appeal to the 
readers of ‘The Auk’, made through its pages. The wisdom of the choice 
made at that time in accordance with the majority of the preferences 
expressed in answer to the appeal has been well proven in the succeeding 
years. Could not a similar appeal now be made in the expectation of 
equally happy results? 

It is suggested that the five propositions stated hereunder, intended to 
apply only to the standard “‘common”’ names of the birds included in 
the ‘Check-List,’ be submitted to the readers of ‘The Auk’ for expressions’ 
of opinion, each proposition to be considered separately, and that any 
of them which may be favored by a majority of the replies received be 
applied in the revision of the ““common’’ nomenclature of the ‘Check-List.’ 
While the writer personally favors the application of each and all of these 
propositions, he would make clear that he is not here directly urging their 
adoption, but merely their submission to the judgment of the entire per- 
sonnel of the A. O. U. 

Proposition 1. Hach species shall be given a name which shall be distinct 
and applicable to the species as a whole, and the names of the subspecies, if 
any, into which the species may be divided shall each consist of the name of 
the species with an appropriate modifying term prefixed. 

This is merely the logical application of trinomial nomenclature to 
“common” names. At present the English-language names of the ‘Check- 
List’ do not properly indicate the difference between speciesand subspecies 
and in this respect they are neither scientifically accurate nor practically 
convenient. We have “Yellow Palm Warbler” as an equivalent of Den- 
droica palmarum hypochrysea and ‘Palm Warbler” as an equivalent of 
D. p. palmarum, but we have no English-language equivalent of the 
species name, D. palmarum. The result is to contribute to what Dr. 


pee 


502 Correspondence. July 


Dwight has termed ‘‘the exaltation of the subspecies’? and to prevent 


exact reference in English to a subdivided species without awkward cir- 
cumlocution. Mr. P. A. Taverner, who has applied the principle of this 
proposition to the names used in his recent ‘Birds of Eastern Canada,’ 
suggests the extension of ‘‘Palm Warbler” to indicate the entire species 
and the adoption of the name ‘Interior Palm Warbler” for D. p. palm- 
arum, which is a fair example of the type of changes which would be brought 
about by the acceptance of the proposition. 

Proposition 2. Clumsy descriptive names shall not be introduced and, 
where such are already authorized, they shall be replaced by appropriate 
shorter names. 

This is but an expression of a tendency which has long been apparent. 
“Blue Yellow-backed Warbler” has given place to “Parula Warbler,”’ 
“Bay-winged Grass Bunting” has yielded to ‘‘ Vesper Sparrow,’’ and we 
are well satisfied with the changes; why should not “Black-throated 
Green Warbler” be discarded in favor of ‘Vee Warbler,’’‘‘Canada Spar- 
row”’ be substituted for “‘White-throated Sparrow,” and similar changes 
take place where needed throughout the “‘Check-List?’ The acceptance of 
Proposition 2 would render much more satisfactory the application of 
Proposition 1. 

Proposition 3. Adjectival parts of names which give a whoily erroneous 
idea of the bird named shatt be replaced by others more in keeping with the 
known facts. 

There does not appear to be any reason for retaining ‘‘Connecticut”’ 
Warbler, ‘‘ Nashville Warbler, ‘‘Tree’? Sparrow, and other poorly chosen 
terms, except the fact that they are now in use. Appropriate names 
authorized in these cases by the ‘Check-List’ would quickly become current 
and supplant the misnomers. 

Proposition 4. The name of a human being shall not be used as the Eng- 
lish-language name of a bird, and any such names at present authorized 
shall be replaced by other appropriate terms. 

Even the coining of scientific names from the names of men is a yielding 
to human weakness which can be justified, if at all, only on the ground 
that a name is a name only and does not necessarily mean anything. 
This justification is not applicable to English-language names, each cf 
which should mean much about the species to which it appertains. In 
’ the case of many existing bird names derived from human names there is 
no pretense of a real connection between the bird and the particular 
human being for whom it is named, but in any case the connection be- 
tween a short-lived human individual and a species whose life is of indefi- 
nitely great duration must be relatively so small as to afford no sound 
basis for attempting to give the species in perpetuity the name of the indi- 
vidual. ‘‘Wilson’s Thrush” has been happily replaced by “ Veery”’; 
why cannot ‘‘ Wilson’s Warbler” be bettered? 


Vol. eee | Correspondence. 503 


Proposition 5. Where a term is used as the name or the principal part 
of the name of more than one species it shall, in the case of each species con- 
cerned, be accompanied by a distinguishing modifier. 

At present Penthestes carolinensis carolinensis is called “Carolina Chick- 
adee”’ and P. atricapillus atricapillus is called simply “‘Chickadee.”’ This 
may serve passably well where but one species of Chickadee occurs, but 
where the ranges of two species overlap it causes confusion and many 
departures from the English-language nomenclature of the ‘Check-List.’ 
It is to prevent such occurrences that an application of Proposition 5 is 
suggested. 

It may be noted that, in the example cited, to revert to “ Black-capped 
Chickadee,”’ as is often done, would not be in accordance with Proposi- 
tion 2. Some other suitable name, such as ‘‘Cheery Chickadee,’’ could 
be decided on for P. a. atricapillus. 

In their able handling of the scientific nomenclature of the ‘Check-List’ 
the A. O. U. Committee are guided by their Code, but no such Code exists 
for the English-language nomenclature, which should be arranged as far 
as possible in accordance with the wishes of the majority of the bird stu- 
dents in Canada and the United States. These are the people who use 
this nomenclature; their judgment concerning it can be trusted; and 
without their approbation it cannot remain truly standard. By submit- 
ting the above propositions, or others of similar import, to the readers 
of ‘The Auk’ for their decisions, the Committee will obtain for its guid- 
ance in preparing a new edition of the ‘Check-List’ the concensus of opinion 
of the great body of well-informed American ornithologists, bird students, 
and bird lovers. 


Harrison F. Lewis 
P. O. Box, No. 6, Quebec, P. Q., May 21, 1920. 


[The foregoing communications on popular names open up a question 
of far greater general interest than that of techical nomenclature, to which 
so much space is devoted in ornithological literature, and deserve the 
most careful consideration. Fortunately we have not and cannot have 
a code covering the use of popular names. Any attempt in this direction, 
such as is suggested in Mr. Lewis’s propositions 2—4, will merely create a 
a set of “book names”’ which no one but certain pedantic writers will use. 
Popular usage makes our popular names and while they may sometimes 
be coined arbitrarily and meet with general acceptance this is rarely the 
case. As regards the attempts of the A. O. U. Committee in this direc- 
tion the name “Vesper Sparrow” quoted by Mr. Lewis was a success 
because it was already in general use in defiance of the books; but “‘Snow- 
flake”’ and “‘ Dovekie”’ proposed at the same time were failures and were 
not taken up in popular usage, so that the former was rejected in the last 
edition of the ‘Check-List’ in favor of the former name ‘‘Snow Bunting”’ 
and the latter should similarly have reverted to “Little Auk.’ Mr. 


ESS 
July 


504 Correspondence. 
Lewis must have, we think, much more faith in the power of the ‘Check- 
List’ than have its compilers if he thinks that it could influence general 
usage In such matters. 

What we have said is applicable to all names, not only those denoting 
birds or other natural objects. We cannot enforce upon the public what 
the public will not have, as witness the failure of the advocates of ‘‘motion 
picture”’ as against “‘moving-picture,’”? and we may see the day when 
“movie” will be the recognized word in our dictionaries. 

Propositions such as Mr. Lewis advocates while all very well in theory 
would produce a set of English names but not a set of popular names, and 
the ornithologist who would be expected to use them surely has troubles 
enough as it is in the matter of names without adding to his burdens. 

In these remarks it will be seen that I am in the main endorsing the 
attitude of Mr. Rowan and it would probably be well to follow his sug- 
gestion of giving several popular names in the ‘Check-List’ where there 
are several in general use, though the Committee would probably be criti- 
cised for errors of omission and favoritism if they made such a selection. 

As to the addition of the word American to distinguish certain of our 
birds from English species bearing the same popular name, I cannot agree 
with Mr. Rowan. This practise was followed in the earlier editions of 
the ‘Check-List’ but was deliberately abolished in 1910 even in the case 
of the Robin. The reason for this action was that the Committee recog- 
nized in these names just such book-names as I have referred to above. 
Nobody thinks for a moment of calling our bird anything but Robin and 
we shall continue to call it so, all the check-lists and ornithologies to the 
contrary. It would seem quite as unnecessary to insist upon printing 
the name of our bird “American Robin” as it would to try to compel 
our British friends to call their bird “English Robin”’ whenever they refer 
to it. Americans will, it is true, use this name when they refer to the 
English bird Just as the English will call our bird ‘‘ American Robin” but to 
each in his own country the respective birds are simply Robins, and they 
will continue to be called so just as various identical household implements 
are given entirely differen names by the English speaking people on the 
two sides of the Atlantic. The Sparrow Hawk case cited by Mr. Rowan is 
simply an illustration of editorial ignorance and distinctive terms should 
of course be used in print wherever ambiguity exists. 

There is it seems to us more justice in the claim of some of our western 
ornithologists that the ‘Eastern’? Robin should be so designated in con- 
trast with the “Western Robin” on the grounds that one is no more ‘‘the”’ 
Robin than the other. If we are to have any book-names let them be 
of this kind with the understanding, however, that in popular usage the 
geographical prefix in each case is to be dropped. 

Mr. Lewis’s fifth proposition is well taken. Where we have two kinds 
of any group of birds inhabiting the same region the unadorned name 
rarely serves as a term for either one of them. ‘ Chickadee” as he says 


a ea | Correspondence. 505 


is not distinctive as compared with ‘Carolina Chickadee”’ and where the 
two occur we have to use the qualifying term ‘‘Black-capped”’ for the 
former. This is done now in spite of the ‘Check-List’ and the sooner this 
name is incorporated in the volume the better. So too “Crossbill’’ which 
lost its qualifying name “ American” at the same time that the Robin did, 
is unsatisfactory and ambiguous and consequently in popular usage and 
in not a few publications it appears, as it should, “‘Red Crossbill.” 
So too ‘‘Water-Thrush” should be officially as it is popularly called 
“Northern Water-Thrush” and there are doubtless others. In some cases 
however, there seems to have been no ambiguity as ‘‘Palm”’ and “ Yellow- 
Palm” Warbler but these may also be changed if it is thought better. 
Mr. Lewis’s proposition concerning the consistent naming of a species and 
its component sub-species has already been discussed in these columns. 
While granting the need of some collective heading such as he suggests 
we do not think what the use of a word in the singular for the collective 
concept embracing all of the subspecies of a species will be anything but 
ambiguous. The word “Song-Sparrow” and “ Melospiza melodia” have 
been used so long, and are still used, to denote the eastern race alone 
that we cannot now use the same terms to denote the whole assemblage 
of Song Sparrows. A better plan and one which we hope to see adopted 
in the next edition of the ‘Check-List’ has been suggested: namely to use 
the plural name “Song-Sparrows”’ for the complex Melospiza melodia. 
After all, as stated at the outset, popular nomenclature is radically diff- 
erent from technical nomenclature and we must follow popular usage 
rather than try to arbitrarily influence it, even though we be not consis- 

tent. 
WITMER STONE.| 


Procellaria vittata Forster is not Halobaena caerulea Gmelin. 


Epiror oF ‘THE AUK’: 


In the ‘Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash.,’ Vol. 32, p. 201, Dec. 31, 1919, Mr. 
H. C. Oberholser has claimed that Procellaria vittata was given by Forster 
to the bird now known as Halobaena caerulea Gmelin, and as it was pub- 
lished prior to the latter it should replace it. 

Apparently Mr. Oberholser’s contention is based upon the information 
provided by myself in the ‘Birds of Australia,’ and as his conclusion is 
incorrect, I here re-state the facts as clearly as possible so that no future 
misapprehension may arise. 

Forster accompanied Cook on his second voyage round the world as 
naturalist and his son George was with him as painter. The elder For- 
ster, whose initials are J. R., considered himself entitled to publish the 
results of the voyage, but the Admiralty who had engaged him did not 
agree with that view when his engagement concluded and definitely for- 


: Auk 
506 Correspondence. [5 We 


bade him to publish anything. He overcame that obstacle in a small 
degree by the publication of a book entitled ‘Voyage round the World’ 
which was issued under his son’s name. A preface by the son tells of the 
‘fll treatment” of the father by the powers that were. 

Casually making notes of the birds met with on the voyage, G. Forster, 
in Vol. I, p. 91, 1777, mentioned ‘‘ Blue Petrel, so called from its having a 
bluish gray color, and a band of blackish feathers across the whole wing.” 
On p. 98, when Blue Petrels were again mentioned, a footnote (perhaps 
by J. R.) gives a Latin equivalent, Procellaria vittata. I concluded “the 
name cannot be accepted as of this introduction, as it is indeterminable.” 

Had Mr. Oberholser consulted Forster’s work he might have found a 
stronger claim to the name on p. 153 when about Dusky Sound, New 
Zealand, in April, 1773, Forster wrote: ‘‘Here they found an immense 
number of petrels of the bluish species, common over the whole southern 
ocean,* some being on the wing, and others in the woods. . . . They 
have a broad bill, and a blackish stripe across their bluish wings and 
body, and are not so large as the common shear-water or mank’s petrel 
of our seas.”’ Mr. Oberholser concluded ‘‘there is, no doubt at all’? what 
Forster called vittata, and this paragraph would suggest that he was right, 
but that the bird so called was not the one Mr. Oberholser decided. The 
broad bill mentioned is diagnostic of Prion, and is not seen in Halobaena. 
The two birds are similar with peculiar diagnostic and easily observed 
characters, the Prion having a broad bill and dark tips to its wedge-tail, 
the Halobaena having a narrow bill and white tips to its square tail. Con- 
sequently no general description could be valid unless the peculiar features 
were mentioned. 

Why Mr. Oberholser ignored the detailed account given in Cook’s 
account of the same voyage which I quoted in full, I cannot say, as there 
the matter was so clearly stated that no reader should misunderstand it. 
I may recapitulate shortly. Under date of October 16, 1772, Cook logged 
“were now accompanied . . . and small grey petrel less than a 
pigeon. It has a whitish belly, and grey back, with a black stroke across 
from the tip of one wing to the tip of the other. These birds sometimes 
visited us in great flights. They are southern birds; and are, I believe, 
never seen within the tropics, or north of the Line.”” On December 23, 
1772, Cook reported ‘Mr. Forster, who went in the boat, shot some of 
the small grey birds before mentioned, which were of the petrel tribe, 
and about the size of a small pigeon. Their back, and upper side of their 
wings, their feet and bills, are of a blue grey color. Their bellies, and 
under sides of their wings, are white, a little tinged with blue. The upper 
side of their quill feathers is a dark blue tinged with black. A streak 
is formed by feathers nearly of this color, along the upper parts of the 
wings, and crossing the back a little above the tail. The end of the tail 


* See page 91. 


‘as Bioco Correspondence. 507 


feathers is also of the same color. Their bills are much broader than any 
I have seen of the same tribe, and their tongues are remarkably broad. 
These blue petrels, as I shall call them, are seen nowhere but in the south- 
ern hemisphere, from about the latitude of 28° and upwards.” Under 
date December 27, 1772 (p. 32) is written: ‘“‘Some of the petrels (shot by 
Mr. Forster) were of the blue sort, but differing from those before men- 
tioned, in not having a broad bill; and the ends of their tail feathers were 
tipped with white instead of dark blue. But whether these were only the 
distinction betwixt the male and female was a matter disputed by our 
naturalists.” 

J. R. Forster apparently had no doubt on the matter as in his Manu- 
seript he named Procellaria vittata under date November 30—December 23, 
and gave the range as ‘Habitat a Tropico capricorni in Circulum Antarc- 
ticum usque, volant celerrime.’ He fully described thereunder the Prion, 
describing his broad bill and the dark tips to the tail. On the date De- 
cember 28, he added Procellaria similis, giving the character of the Halo- 
baena and the range as ‘Hab. in Oceano simillimum Proc. vittatae at 
examin Antarctico cirea gradum latitudinus 58° primam observata.’’ The 
former he called ‘‘The Banded Petrel’’ and the latter ‘‘The white-edged 
silvery Petrel.”’ 

This is not novel, as these descriptions were published in 1844 under 
the editorship of Lichtenstein and consequently ‘There is no doubt”? what 
Forster called Procellaria vittata, but this assuredly was not the species 
now known as Halobaena caerulea (Gmelin) which Forster also fully de- 
scribed under the name Procellaria similis. It may interest Mr. Ober- 
holser also to note that J. R. Forster’s names were published, also as 
nomina nuda, in the ‘Tagebuch Reise Siidsee unter Cook,’ 1781, p. 35, 
where Procellaria similis and vittata both occur. 

Consequently if Procellaria vittata Forster were to be recognized as a 
valid name, it would apply only to the species commonly known as Prion 
vittatus (Gmelin) and no change save that of authorship would be neces- 
sary. 

Grecory M. MaTHews. 

Foulis Court, Fair Oak, Hants, England. 

February 24, 1920. 


rae 


508 Notes and News. July 


NOTES AND NEWS 


FRANK SLAterR Dacasrtt, a Member of the American Ornithologists’ 
Union, died at Redlands, Cal., April 5, 1920, at the age of 65. He went 
to Riverside to attend the sunrise Easter services at Mount Rubidoux 
and shortly after returning to Redlands with members of his family and 
friends he was taken ill and died early Easter Monday. 

Mr. Daggett was born at Norwalk, Ohio, January 30, 1855. He be- 
came interested in birds at an early age and was elected an Associate of 
the A. O. U. in 1889 and was one of the first advanced to the class of Mem- 
bers when that class was established in 1901. When first identified with 
the Union he was living at Duluth, Minn., but in 1895 he moved to Pasa- 
dena, Cal., where he remained until 1904, when he returned East and en- 
gaged in business in Chicago until 1912. He then took up his permanent 
residence in Los Angeles and became Director of the Museum of History, 
Science and Art, a position which he retained until his death. Under 
his management the Museum has developed rapidly until it has become 
one of the leading institutions of the kind in the West. It is perhaps 
best known on account of its wonderful collection of Pleistocene fossils 
obtained from the asphalt pits of the Rancho La Brea on the outskirts 
of Los Angeles. Excavations in these beds began in 1906 under the direc- 
tion of Dr. John C. Merriam and continued with great success for several 
years. In 1913 the owner of the property, Mr. G. Allan Hancock, gener- 
ously granted to Los Angeles County the exclusive privilege of excavating 
for a period of two years with the understanding that the specimens 
secured would become the property of the Museum where they now form 
the Hancock collection. These fossils constitute perhaps the largest 
collection of Pleistocene material in the world and in addition to sabre 
tooth tigers, ground sloths, elephants, mastodons and other mammals 
include the remains of about 60 species of birds of which the most remark- 
able are an extinct Peacock (Pavo californicus) and several peculiar vul- 
tures and eagles belonging to the genera Teratornis, Cathartornis, Pleis- 
togyps, Neophrontops and Morphnus. 

Mr. Daggett’s contributions to ornithology appeared chiefly in ‘The 
Auk’ and ‘The Condor.’ He was not a voluminous writer and most 
of his papers comprised notes on the occurrence of rare or interesting 
species or observations based on his own field experiences. He was, how- 
ever, a man of broad vision and occasionally expressed his views on gen- 
eral questions as exemplified by his notes on accuracy in local lists, the 
membership of the A. O. U., and the proper limits of the Check List of 
Birds. He was a man of charming personality, quiet, affable and tactful 
but at the same time forceful and a good administrator. For several 
years he served as Highway Commissioner of Los Angeles County and 
in 1916, when the asphalt beds of Rancho La Brea comprising a tract 


pak Se al Notes and News. 509 


of 32 acres were presented to the county for a park, to be known as Han- 
cock Park, the work of development was placed under Mr. Daggett’s 
direction. He was an active member of the Cooper Ornithological Club 
for 25 years and when Vice President of the Southern Division in 1900 
his portrait was published in ‘The Condor’ (Vol. II, p. 9). In recog- 
nition of his ornithological work his name is now borne by two California 
birds (Sphyrapicus v. daggetti Grinnell and Morphnus daggetti Miller), but 
his greatest monument will always be his work in connection with the 
Museum and its collection of fossils from Rancho La Brea. He is sur- 
vived by his wife, Mrs. Lelia Axtell Daggett, of Los Angeles, a daughter, 
Mrs. Paul Stuart Rattle, of Cynwyd, Pa., and two brothers who reside 
in the East.—T. S. P. 


Horace WINSLOW WRIGHT, since 1902 an Associate of the American 
Ornithologist’s Union, died on June 3, 1920, at his summer home in Jeffer- 
son Highlands, among the White Mountains of New Hampshire. Born 
at Dorchester, Mass., June 21, 1848, the son of Edmond and Sarah A. 
(Hunt) Wright, he graduated from Harvard College inthe Classof1869. 
The year following, he entered the New Church Theological School, then 
in Waltham, where he completed his preparation for the ministry in 1873, 
and was at once made minister of the New Jerusalem Church(Sweden- 
borgian) at Abington, Mass. In 1876, his decided literary tastes induced 
him to relinquish his ministerial work, and in 1878, he was made President 
of the Abington Public Library, an office which he held until 1892. Mag- 
azine-indexing and the revising of Latin translations, mainly theological 
occupied much of his time during the years from 1879 to 1896, and he 
prepared a catalogue of the Abington Public Library. 

A summer’s residence at Jefferson Highlands for five months of each 
year since 1882, gave him opportunity for a closer enjoyment and apprecia- 
tion of Nature, an opportunity of which his more ample leisure in later 
years allowed him to make much avail. So arose his active interest in 
the observation of birds, a pursuit that became, in the last quarter-century 
of his life, an absorbing passion, leading him to devote much of his time to 
systematic rambles by field, wood and shore, eager to see and record the 
bird-life about him, finding in this a constant source of delight and profit- 
able adventure. To his enthusiasm he added a painstaking care in ob- 
servation and quickly developed skill and accuracy in field-study. In 
1902, he became a member of the Nuttall Ornithological Club of Cambridge 

During these later years he spent the winter and spring months in 
Boston, when it was his almost daily custom to visit favorable spots of 
the near-by region and to keep an accurate record of the numbers and 
local movements of birds seen. Being much abroad and in widely varied 
areas, he was frequently able to note unusual birds, the records of which 
appear in sundry shorter communications to ‘The Auk,’ beginning in 
1905, with a brief account of an Arctic Three-toed Woodpecker seen on 
successive days in Belmont. 


510 Notes and News. ae 


The Boston Public Garden and Common,—a green sanctuary in the 
heart of the roaring city,—he discovered to be a favorable stopping- 
place for migrating birds; and for a period of years he kept an accurate 
record of the numbers and species seen there in the course of daily visits 
during the spring and fall. A summary of his observations here, he finally 
published in an attractive little volume entitled Birds of the Boston 
Public Garden (Boston, 1909),—a valuable contribution to the study of 
migration and local movements of birds. On these early-morning tours 
of the Garden, he was often joined by other bird-lovers—men and women, 
city-dwellers, whom he inspired with his own zeal to seek recreation and 
profit from a brief association with birds. His kindly spirit invited all 
interested to share with him in these walks, until of recent years it was a 
familiar sight to those passing betimes through the Garden, to see him 
leading an eager group of men and women from spot to spot, halting here 
and there to focus their atention upon some feathered mite, all uncon- 
scious among the trees or shrubs. Indeed, so many availed themselves 
of his friendly company on these occasions that he had almost become a 
Boston institution. Many will date their first knowledge of birds from 
these quiet-hour observation walks with Mr. Wright. } 

In 1911, he published a carefully annotated list of the ‘Birds of Jeffer- 
son Highlands,’ with notes covering a considerable period of years; and 
subsequently a valuable series of shorter contributions came from his 
pen, dealing chiefly with the occurrence of interesting species. Of special 
note, were two papers on the relative order in which the commoner species 
of birds begin and end their daily song-periods in the breeding-season. 

Unassuming and gentle by nature, he yet possessed a quiet dignity and 
a clear sincerity which at once commanded the respect and confidence of 
all with whom he came in contact. Though he never married, he was of 
eminently social instincts, delighting in companionship and ever thought- 
ful of others. For him the fevered activity of modern life held no at- 
traction; but in the serene and quiet atmosphere of scholarly pursuits he 
found life’s satisfaction. 


GLovEeER M. ALLEN. 


Dr. THomas McApory Owen, Director of the Department of History 
and Archives, State of Alabama, died of apoplexy at Montgomery, Ala- 
bama, March 25, 1920. He was in the 54th year of his age, having been 
born at Jonesboro, Alabama, December 15, 1866. Dr. Owen was a sub- 
scriber to ‘The Auk’ and his name had been proposed for membership 
in the American Ornithologists’ Union. He took a deep interest in natural 
history and as a result of this interest established under his Department a 
local collection of mounted birds in the State Capitol. His reputation 
as a historian was firmly established and at the time of his death he was 
working assiduously on a Memorial History of Alabama. In connection 
with his work on the history of the State he had planned to issue in his 


Vi oa | Notes and News. 511 


Department a series of reports on the local natural history, the first of 
which is to be the ‘Birds of Alabama,’ by Arthur H. Howell of the U.S. 
Biological Survey. This is now in the hands of the printer and is ex- 
pected to be published soon. 

A. A. oH: 


Dr. CHARLES GorDON Hewitt, Consulting Zoologist of the Depart- 
ment of Agriculture of Canada, who was elected an Associate of the Union 
in November, 1918, died of pneumonia at Ottawa on February 29, 1920. 
He was the son of Thomas Henry and Rachael Hewitt and was born 
near Macclesfield, England, February 23, 1885. His early education 
was received in the Macclesfield grammar school and later in the Uni- 
versity of Manchester, where during his college course he took first class 
honors in zoology. In 1904 he was appointed by-his Alma Mater as- 
sistant lecturer in zoology and two years later lecturer in economic zoology. 
In 1908 he organized a committee of the British Association for the Ad- 
vancement of Science and the Board of Agriculture, known as the Eco- 
nomic Ornithological committee, for the investigation of the food of 
British birds, and began an experiment which proved successful in using 
nesting boxes to attract birds to an area near Manchester which was 
infested with the larch sawfly. 

When only twenty-four years of age he received the appointment of 
Dominion Entomologist and arrived in Canada September 16, 1909, and 
in 1910 was elected vice-president of the Ontario Entomological Society. 
While his interests were primarily in entomology, Dr. Hewitt was a broad 
and unusually well-informed zoologist. He published a number of papers 
on entomology and economic ornithology, but his most important work 
was in connection with the treaty for the protection of migratory birds 
in the United States and Canada. It was largely through his diplomacy, 
energy, and enthusiasm that the negotiations in Canada were conducted 
so expeditiously and successfully. As Secretary of the Advisory Board 
on Wild Life Protection, organized in 1916, he took an active part in the 
broader questions of conservation and was interested in the establishment 
of bird and game refuges. 

Dr. Hewitt was peculiarly well qualified for his special field of activity 
by his quiet, tactful manner, his broad vision, and his practical knowledge 
of economic zoology. His death at this time when his work was so suc- 
cessfully under way is an irreparable loss to the cause of conservation.— 
(ES Hel 


Dr. JoHAN AxEL PatmeEn, of Helsingfors, Finland, a Corresponding 
Fellow of the American Ornithologists’ Union, died on April 7, 1919, in 
his 74th year. He was born November 7, 1845, and when elected to the 
Union at its first meeting he was one of the youngest Corresponding 
Members. 


2 Auk 
BIZ Notes and News. levies 


Dr. Palmén devoted much attention to the fauna of Finland, on which 
he published a number of papers, but he was distinguished chiefly as a 
contributor to the subject of bird migration. His early papers were 
devoted mainly to birds and one of the first was his work on migration 
which appeared in Swedish under the title ‘Om Foglarnes flyttningsvagar,’ 
Helsingfors, 1874. It attracted little attention until it was translated into 
German two years later under the title ‘Ueber die Zugstrassen der Végel,’ 
when it was widely noticed. An elaborate criticism by E. F. von Homeyer 
induced Palmén to publish an ‘Antwort’ in 1882. Two other extended 
papers should also be mentioned, namely his ‘Geographische Verbreitung 
der Hiihner, Sumpf- und Wasservégel im faunistischen Gebiete Finn- 
lands,’ which appeared in the ‘Journal fiir Ornithologie’ in 1876 (pp. 40- 
65), and his Report on the Migration of Birds published in German for 
the Second International Ornithological Congress held at Budapest in 
1891. An English translation of this ‘Report,’ by C. W. Shoemaker, 
appeared in the Annual Report of the Smithsonian Institution for 1892 
(pp. 375-396), and is the only one of his migration papers which is gen- 
erally accessible to American readers. Dr. Palmén was a pioneer in 
defining the ‘fly lines’ or ‘migration routes’ of birds and the map which 
he published in his ‘Zugstrassen’ showing the principal routes in the 
Palaearctic region has been the cause of some misunderstanding on the 
part of those who have not taken the trouble to ascertain his real views. 
This misunderstanding is explained in his Report of 1891, which is an 
admirable summary of the work on migration done in Europe down to 
that date. 

In honor of his 60th birthday in 1905 a ‘Festschrift’ was published in 
two volumes, containing his portrait and 18 papers and monographs by 
his students and colleagues.—T. 8. P. 


Dr. E. W. Nstson, chief of the U. 8. Biological Survey, announces that 
the Bureau has assumed the work formerly carried on under the auspices of 
the Linnaean Society of New York by the American Bird Banding Associa- 
tion. In taking over this work he says that the Bureau feels that it should 
express the debt that students of ornithology in this country owe to Mr. 
Howard H. Cleaves for the devotion and success with which he has con- 
ducted this investigation up to a point where it has outgrown the possibil- 
ities of his personal supervision. 

Under plans now being formulated this work will result in valuable 
information concerning the migration and distribution of North American 
birds which will be of direct service in the administration of the Migra- 
tory Bird Treaty Act, as well as of general scientific interest. 

It is desired to develop this work along two principal lines:—first, 
the trapping and banding of waterfowl, especially ducks and geese, on 
both their breeding and winter grounds; and secondly, the systematic 
trapping of land birds as initiated by Mr. 8. Prentiss Baldwin, the early 


sol: | Notes and News. als 
results of which have been published by him in the ‘Proceedings’ of the 
Linnaean Society of New York, No. 31, 1919, pp. 23-55. It is planned 
to enlist the interest and services of volunteer workers, who will under- 
take to operate and maintain trapping stations throughout the year, 
banding new birds and recording the data from those previously banded. 
The results from a series of stations thus operated will undoubtedly give 
new insight into migration routes; speed of travel during migration; 
longevity of birds; affinity for the same nesting-site year after year; and, 
in addition, furnish a wealth of information relative to the behavior of 
the individual, heretofore impossible because of the difficulty of keeping 
one particular bird under observation. 

The details of operation are now receiving close attention, and as soon 
as possible the issue of bands will be announced, with full information 
regarding the methods to be followed and the results expected. In the 
meantime, the Biological Survey will be glad to receive communications 
from those sufficiently interested and satisfactorily located to engage in 
this work during their leisure time, for it is obvious that a considerable 
part must be done by volunteer operators. It is hoped that a sufficient 
number will take this up to insure the complete success of the project. 


EveryoONE interested in the protection of birds will rejoice in the opinion 
of the Supreme Court of the United States upholding the legality of the 
Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The action came in connection with an 
appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Western Dis- 
trict of Missouri, in a case already mentioned in these columns and seems 
to settle once for all the right of the United States to supersede the indi- 
vidual States in legislation regarding migratory birds. 

The last paragraph of the opinion is worth quoting: 

“Here a national interest of very nearly the first magnitude is involved. 
It can be protected only by national action in concert with that of another 
power. The subject matter is only transitorily within the State and has 
no permanent habitat therein. But for the treaty and the statute there 
might soon be no birds for any powers to deal with. We see nothing in 
the Constitution that compels the Government to sit by while a food 
supply is cut off and the protectors of our forests and our crops destroyed. 
It is not sufficient to rely upon the States. The reliance is vain, and were 
it otherwise, the question is whether the United States is forbidden to 
act. Weare of opinion that the treaty and statute must be upheld.”’ 


THE PERMANENT FuNps oF THE A. O. U.—From time to time the Union 
has established several permanent funds for special purposes. In every 
case the principle with such contributions as may be received is invested 
so as to remain intact and the interest only is used for furthering the 
objects of the fund. The most important of these funds are: the Brew- 
ster Memorial Fund, the Research Fund, and the Publication Fund. 


514 Notes and News. eae 


Tar Brewster Memorial Fund, the most recent, is the gift of the friends 
of William Brewster to perpetuate the memory of one of the founders 
and former presidents of the Union by establishing a fund to encourage 
research in American ornithology. The sum of $5200 received in 1919, 
has already increased to some extent and the proceeds will be awarded 
biennially in the form of a medal and an honorarium to the author of the 
most important contribution to the ornithology of the Western Hemisphere 
during the two years immediately preceding. This fund administered 
by a special committee and the first award will be made in 1921. 

The Research Fund was established some years ago by a gift from Miss 
Juliette A. Owen of St. Joseph, Mo., one of the Life Associates of the 
Union, to encourage original research in ornithology. It now amounts 
to several hundred dollars but the interest will not be available until the 
total amount reaches $5000. It is highly desirable that this fund should 
be increased at an early date so that the proceeds may become available 
for promoting ornithological work. Already applications have been 
received for assistance in special investigations which would be greatly 
stimulated if small grants could be made from this or some similar fund. 

The Publication Fund comprises receipts from life memberships, be- 
quests and special contributions. In ‘The Auk’ for January, 1920, the 
Editor has called attention to the immediate need of a fund of $25,000 
and in response to this appeal subscriptions of several hundred dollars 
in sums of $100 or less have already been received. These subscriptions 
may be paid in Liberty bonds, or otherwise, in one payment or in several 
annual or semi-annual instalments. Not only is an adequate fund nec- 
essary to place the publication of ‘The Auk’ on a permanent basis and 
to issue check-lists, indexes and special bibliographies, but means should 
be provided also for publishing occasional memoirs, monographs and more 
extensive papers than have hitherto been attempted. At this time when 
the usual channels of publication are becoming restricted on account of 
the high cost of printing it is especially desirable that the A. O. U. should 
be in a position to meet the demands which are made upon it. As its 
permanent funds increase the Union will be able to broaden the scope of 
its work and to make more substantial contributions both to the develop- 
ment and diffusion of knowledge of ornithology.—T. 8. P. 


Tue annual general meeting of the British Ornithologists’ Union was 
held on March 10, 1920. Thirty-eight members were in attendance with 
the President, Dr. W. Eagle Clarke, in the chair. Forty new members 
were elected and Dr. P. R. Lowe was chosen to fill a vacancy in the Com- 
mittee. The officers of the B. O. U. are not elected annually as in the 
A. O. U., so that there was no change. A new rule was adopted whereby 
a committee of nine be elected to report from time to time on the authen- 
ticity of the reports of any rare or hitherto unknown bird visitors to Great 
Britain, and another for the increase of the initiation fee and the price of 
‘The Ibis.’ An amendment to the former proposition to authorize the com- 


Vol. on 
1920 


Notes and News. pl 
mittee to keep the British List up to date, as the A. O. U. Committee is 
supposed to do with the North American List, was voted down. 

The report of the Committee was taken up almost entirely with the 
question of meeting the increased cost of ‘The Ibis’ which now amounts 
to £1000 a year. It is hoped that by the doubling of the initiation fee, 
making it four pounds, increasing the subscription price of the journal 
and materially augmenting the membership to avoid the necessity of 
increasing the annual dues which are now one pound five shillings. The 
question of publication is an international one and the members of the 
A. O. U. will find much food for thought in this report as the same prob- 
lem is constantly before us in regard to ‘The Auk.’ 

In making comparisons it must be borne in mind that while ‘The Ibis’ 
publishes more pages per year, there are more words per page in ‘The Auk,’ 
so that by careful count it will be found that the total amount of reading 
matter for some years back is nearly the same in each and the number 
of plates about equal, although ‘The Ibis’ has many more of its plates 
colored. The price of ‘The Auk,’ however, is less than half that of ‘The 
Ibis.’ Of especial interest to those who have the responsibilities of ‘The 
Auk’ upon them is the statement that|the trustees of the British Museum 
contributed £250 toward the cost of publishing Museum articles in ‘The 
Ibis’ and it is hoped that this contribution will be an annual one. Nota 
few papers appear in ‘The Auk’ which exploit the collections of various 
of our Museums as well as State and National Departments, toward 
which they have contributed nothing. The possibility of assistance along 
this line is well worth considering. 


Tue January number of ‘The Emu’ contains an interesting account 
of the congress of the Royal Australian Ornithologists’ Union, the first 
since 1914, which was held in Queensland and lasted a fortnight from 
September 23 to October 8, 1919. The meeting convened in Brisbane, 
where three days were devoted to the transaction of business, presentation 
of papers, and visits to points of interest in the vicinity. The week-end 
from Friday to Monday was given up to a camp out on Stradbroke Island 
in Moreton Bay, where 75 or more species of birds were observed. On 
September 30 about 40 members of the Union left for Dalby, about 150 
miles west of Brisbane, and the next day went into camp in the Bunya 
Mountains. The camp was located about 30 miles from Dalby at an 
elevation of 3000 feet at the base of Mt. Mowbullan, the highest peak 
in the range. The week from October 1-8 was spent in observing, collect- 
ing, and exploring the neighboring region and in the evening talks were 
given around the camp fire. More than 50 species of birds were observed 
among which Rifle Birds, Regent Birds and Satin Bower Birds were numer- 
ous near camp. A National Park of 13,540 acres has been established in 
the Bunya Range and the R. A. O. U. recommended that the entire range 
be included in the reservation. Immediately following the meeting 
steps were taken to have the National Park proclaimed a refuge for native 


: Aul 
516 Notes and News. [aut 


birds and a ranger appointed to guard the reservation. The congress 
decided to proceed at once with the preparation of a second edition of 
the ‘Check-list of Australian Birds’ and elected a committee of 12 members 
to undertake the work. The officers for the ensuing year include A. F. 
Basset Hull as president, Dr. J. A. Leach and C. A. Barnard as vice presi- 
dents, Z. Gray as hon. treasurer, and W. H. D. Le Souef as hon. general 
secretary. Dr. Leach was reelected editor of ‘The Emu.’ The next 
congress will be held about the first week in October in Western Aus- 
tralia.—T. 8. P. 


Tue Swiss Society for the Study and Protection of Birds held its spring 
meeting on May 8 and 9 in Basel. The program included an afternoon 
in the Zoological Gardens, an address on migration at Basel and a social 
gathering in the evening. An excursion was arranged for the following 
day to take the members through the St. Jacob Reservation to Birsfelden 
on the banks of the Rhine and a tour of inspection of the Berlepsch thicket 
planted for a bird refuge by the Basel Ornithological Society. 

The Swiss Society announces an excursion of a week in July or August 
to the National Park on the lower Engadine. This park established ten 
or twelve years ago is in the extreme eastern part of Switzerland, in the 
Canton of Grisons, and includes several mountain valleys and the inter- 
vening ridges where wild life of all kinds is carefully protected. 


Tue year 1920 may be considered the semi-centennial of the discovery 
of fossil birds in North America since it was in the spring of 1870 that 
the late Prof. O. C. Marsh published his first descriptions of extinct birds. 
It is true that some of the specimens had actually been collected prior 
to 1870, but descriptions of them had not been published except in the 
case of Palewonornis struthionoides Emmons, the avian relationship of which 
is now considered very doubtful. During the past 50 years about 125 
species have been described and most of the type specimens have been 
figured. The types themselves are preserved in widely separated mu- 
seums from New England to California and many of the specimens are 
small and very fragmentary. A suggestion has been made by the Union 
to the authoritiesof several museums that each institution which possesses 
type specimens of fossil birds should make ten sets of casts or plastotypes 
of such types for exchange with other museums so that each may have 
a complete series of type material of the fossil birds of the continent. 
This suggestion has received the approval of several institutions and at 
least one museum has already had casts made of the types in its collec- 
tion. It is hoped that similar action will be taken by the others at an 
early date so that the project may be carried to a successful conclusion.— 
Ateatome 2 


A coLLEectTIoNn which is a combination of autographs and other samples 
of the handwriting of ornithologists, now representing about 450 indivi- 
duals has been brought together by W. L. McAtee with very material aid 


Vol. Peal Notes and News. o17 


from Drs. C. W. Richmond and A. K. Fisher. The use of this collection 
is available to ornithologists visiting Washington and the services of Mr. 
MeAtee to others who may have original labels or other bits of handwriting 
which it is desirable to identify. Contributions to the collection will be 
welcome and exchanges can be arranged with others having similar col- 
lections. 


In a paper published in ‘School Science and Mathematics’ entitled 
‘Bird Study in the Mississippi Valley’ Mr. Horace Gunthorp presents an 
interesting summary of the members of ornithological societies in the 
various states as well as information on the teaching of ornithology in the 
schools of the country. 

We note that in the A. O. U. Massachusetts leads with 204 members 
while New York has 123, Pennsylvania 75, District of Columbia 63, and 
California 50. While in the Cooper Club, California of course leads 
with 278, Massachusetts, 40, New York 33, and District of Columbia 
29. The Wilson Club has its largest membership in Illinois, 66, while 
Iowa has 51, Nebraska 48, Ohio 41 and New York, 23. The computation 
was made from the 1919 lists and have no doubt been changed somewhat 
by those of 1920. 


Dr. W. H. Oscoop returned the last week in May from a brief but suc- 
cessful trip to Venezuela. Several hundred birds and mammals were 
collected chiefly in the vicinity of Lake Maracaibo and in the Sierra de 
Merida. 


Dr. ALEXANDER WETMORE, of the Biological Survey, sailed on May 29 
for Buenos Aires to conduct investigations on the migratory birds which 
winter in southern South America. He expects to visit Argentina, Para- 
guay, Uruguay, and southern Brazil. 


* Mr. James L. Prrers sailed about two weeks earlier, also bound for 
Argentina, on a collecting trip for the interests of the Museum of Com- 
parative Zoology. 


In connection with the meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union 
in Washington, D. C., this year, the Local Committee plans to hold an 
exhibit showing the history and development of zoological illustration as 
applied to birds, including original drawings, paintings and photographs. 
The pictures, which may be mounted in cards, but not framed, will be 
exhibited under glass in the Library of Congress (fireproof structure) where 
in exchange for facilities the exhibit will be held together a month or 
more. So far the consensus of opinion is that to keep the exhibit 
within bounds, each artist shall be limited to 6 original drawings or paint- 
ings and each photographer to 2 prints. This announcement is intended 


518 Notes and News. eres 


as an invitation to all artists and photographers to participate in the ex- 
hibit and it is hoped to have a very general response so that the exhibit 
will worthily represent modern bird portraiture. Pictures need not be 
sent until fall. Transportation and postal or express insurance charges 
both to and from the exhibit will be paid when desired, and the safety of 
the pictures guaranteed while in the hands of the Committee. Communi- 
cations on the subject may be addressed to W. L. McAtee, Biological Sur- 
vey, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C. 


Tuer By-Laws provide that nominations to the classes of Fellows and 
Members shall be made in writing, signed by three Fellows or Members, 
and delivered to the Secretary at least three months prior to the Stated 
Meeting. At present there are no vacancies in the class of Fellows but 
there will be opportunities for the election of 5 Members at the meeting 
in November. Nominations should be in the hands of the Secretary not 
later than August 5 and should be accompanied by a full statement of 
the qualifications of the candidate including a brief summary of his work 
and a list of his publications if any. Nomination blanks will be for- 
warded by the Secretary upon application. 


Tue Committee on Arrangements for the Meeting of 1920, recently 
appointed, includes John H. Sage, chairman; T. 8. Palmer, secretary; 
W. L. McAtee, vice chairman; H. C. Oberholser, Frank Bond, Ned Hol- 
lister and B. H. Swales. 


THE AUK 


A Quarterly Journal of Ornithology 
ORGAN OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION 
Edited by Dr. Witmer Stone 


ACADEMY OF NATURAL ScIENCES, LOGAN SQUARE, 
PHILADELPHIA, Pa. 


To whom all articles and communications intended for publi- 
cation and all books and publications for review should be sent. 

Manuscripts for leading articles must await their turn for publi- 
cation if others are already on file, but they must be in the editor’s 
hands at least six weeks before the date of issue of the number for 
which they are intended, and manuscripts for ‘General Notes,’ 
‘Recent Literature,’ etc., not later than the first of the month 
preceding the date of issue of the number in which it is desired 
they shall appear. 

Twenty-five copies of leading articles are furnished to authors 
- free of charge. Additional copies or reprints from ‘General Notes,’ 
‘Correspondence,’ etc., must be ordered from the editor. 

THE OFFICE OF PUBLICATION 
8 West Kina Street, LANcASTER, Pa. 

Subscriptions may also be sent to Dr. JonatHan Dwicut, 
Business Manager, 43 West 70th St., New York, N. Y. Foreign 
Subscribers may secure ‘The Auk’ through Witherby & Co., 326 
High Holborn, London, W. C. 

Subscription, $3.00 a year. Single numbers, 75 cents. 

Free to-Honorary Fellows, and to Fellows, Members, and Asso- 
ciates of the A. O. U., not in arrears for dues. 


OFFICERS OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION 
President, JOHN Hauu Saas, Portland, Conn. 


Vice-Presidents, W1ITMER STONE, Academy of Natural Sciences, 
Philadelphia. GrorGcE Brrp GRINNELL, 238 E. 15th St., New 
York. 


Secretary, T. S. Paumur, 1939 Biltmore St., Washington, D. C. 
Treasurer, JONATHAN Dwiaut, 43 W. 70th St., New York. 


SEPARATES FOR SALE 


In order to meet a general demand for separates of the leading 
articles published in ‘The Auk’ arrangements have been made to 
furnish copies of any leading article published in the present issue 
and following issues, at 25 cents each, post paid. 


Orders for these separates should be addressed to the editor: 
DR. WITMER STONE, 


ACADEMY OF NATURAL SCIENCES, 
LOGAN SQUARE, PHILADELPHIA, PA. 


PUBLICATIONS OF THE 


American Ornithologists’ Union 


FOR SALE AT THE FOLLOWING PRICES: 


The Auk. Complete set, Volumes I-XXXVI, (1884-1919) in origi- 
nal covers, $120.00. 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. Paper, $3.25. 


Index to The Auk (Vols. XVIII-XXVII, 1901-1910), 8vo, pp. 
Xvili+ 250, 1915. Paper, $2.00. 


Check-List of North American Birds. $3.00. Second edition, — 
revised, 1895. Cloth, 8vo, pp. xi+372. $1.15. Original edition 
1886, and third edition, 1910, 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, 314 x 534 inches. 30 cents. 
‘Ten copies $2.50. 


Code of Nomenclature. Revised edition, 1908. Paper, 8vo, pp. 
Ixxxv. 50 cents. 


Original edition, 1892. Paper, 8vo, pp. iv4-72. 25 cents. 


A. O. U. Official Badge. An attractive gold and blue enamel - 
pin, with Auk design, for use at meetings or on other 
occasions. Post-paid, 50 cents. 


Address JONATHAN DWIGHT 
43 W. 70th STREET NEW YORK, N. Y. 


Al Vol. XLV 


oe oe CONTINUATION OF THE Ney 
Series, BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB ais 


The Auk 


A Quarterly Journal of Ornithology 


Vol. XXXVII OCTOBER, 1920 No. 4 


PUBLISHED BY 


The American Ornithologists’ Union 


LANCASTER, PA. 


Entered as second-class mail matter in the Post Office at Lancaster, Pa. 


CONTENTS 


LiMIcoLINnE Voices. By John Treadwell Nichols . ...... . S519 


Summer Brirp Recorps rrom Lake County, Minnesota. By Charles 
Prugenie; FORMEON sik On PRh ala ue ee Rete 8 Peal oa Ue ae oe 


In THE Haunts oF Catrns’ WARBLER. By C. W.G. Eifrig . . . . 551 
PATTERN DEVELOPMENT IN TEAL. By Glover M. Allen . . .. . . 558 


Notes ON THE BirDs OF SOUTHEASTERN Norts Carouina. By Edward 
PRLCOGRET 88 ssp ad ak cas PRR tae Bene ot Mert a oS eco aes 


MraraTION AND PuysicaL Proportions. A PRELIMINARY Stupy. By 


CORRS Avert Are ee RAEI. GED ed eer ae ee ee 


GrnERAL Nores.—Roseate Tern (Sterna dougalli) Breeding in Virginia, 579; Egret 
in South Orleans, Mass., 579; The Louisiana Heron (Hydranassa tricolor rufi- 
collis) at Cape May, N. J., 580; The Marbled _Godwit (Limosa fedoa) on the 
New Jersey Coast, 580; Marbled Godwit on Long Island, N. Y., 581; The 
Willet (Catoptrophorus semipalmatus semipalmatus) in Nova Scotia, 581; The 
Willet in Nova Scotia, 582; Breeding of the Semipalmated Plover (Aegialitis 
semipalmata) in Yarmouth County, Nova Scotia, 583; The Cowbird’s Whistle, 
584; Dance of the Purple Finch, 584; Breeding of the Evening Grosbeak in 
Manitoba, 585; A Change in the Nesting Habits of the Common House Sparrow 


(Passer domesticus), 586; Notes on the Acadian Sharp-tailed Sparrow (Passer- — 


herbulus nelsoni subvirgatus), 587; Notable Warblers Breeding Near Aiken, 
S. C., 589; The Yeilow-throated Warbler (Dendroica dominica dominica) at 
Cape May, N. J., 591; The Black-poll Warbler and_Bicknell’s Thrush at Yar- 
mouth, Nova Scotia, 591; The Summer Resident Warblers (Mniotiltidae) of 
Northern New Jersey, 592; A Peculiarly Marked Example of Dumetella caro- 
linensis, 593; The Hudsonian Chickadee in New Jersey, 593;:The Plain Tit- 
mouse, a New Bird for Oregon, 594; The Singing of the Ruby-crowned Kinglet 


(Regulus c. calendula), 594; Notes from Seal Island, Nova Scotia, 596; Some | 


Summer Residents of Dutchess County, N. Y., 597; Bird Notes from Collins, 
N. Y., 598; Additions to the ‘Birds of Allegany and Garrett Counties, Mary- 
land, 598; Rare and Unusual Birds in the Chicago Area During the Spring of 
1920, 600; Items Relative to Some Costa Rican Birds, 601; Observations of a 
Remarkable Night Migration, 604. 


Recent LiITERATURE.—Townsend’s ‘Supplement to Birds of Essex County,’ 606; 
Bannerman’s ‘Birds of the Canary Islands,’ 607; Mathews’ ‘The Birds of 
Australia,’ 609; Leavitt’s ‘Bird Study in Elementary Schools,’ 609; Hudson’s 
Recent Bird Books, 610; ‘Aves’ in the Zoological Record for 1917, 611; Strese- 
mann’s ‘Avifauna Macedonica,’ 611; Wood on the Eyes of the Burrowing Owl, 
612; Murphy on the Seacoast and Islands of Peru, 613; Dr. Shufeldt’s- Bibli- 
ography, 613; Birds of the National Parks, 614; Game Laws for 1920, 614; 
Peters on a New Jay, 615; Chapman on Ostinops decumanus, 615; Lonnberg 
on ‘The Birds of the Juan Fernandez and Easter Island,’ 615; Geographical 


Bibliography of British Ornithology, 616; Spring Migration Notes of the Chicago ~ 


Area, 616; Nomenclature of the Birds of Bavaria, 617; Van Cleve’s ‘ Acantho- 


cephala of the Canadian Arctic Expedition,’ 618; Economic Ornithology in~ 


Recent Entomological Publications. 619; The Bird Interest in Iowa Lakes, 
620; Bird Liming in Lower Egypt, 621; The Ornithological Journals, 622; Orni- 


633 


CoRRESPONDENCE.—Popular Bird Names, 634; Baker on the Birds of the Pleistocene, 


634. 


Notes AND News.—Obituary Notices: William Dutcher, 636; Herbert H. Smith, 
637; Nicholas Alexievich Sarudny, 638; Frederick W. Headley, 638; Henry K. 
Oliver, 639; John H. Flanagan, 639; Robert L. Maitland, 640; Note on Biog- 
raphy of Ludwig Kumlein, 640; Government Publications of Birds, 640; Orni- 
thology of the Twentieth Century, 640; Meeting of the Swiss Society for Bird 
Study, 641; Meeting of the Royal Australasian Ornithologists’ Union, 641; 
Gilbert White bicentenary, 641; Rollo H. Beck, personal mention, 641; The 
Washington Meeting of the A. O. U., 641. 


viseye 


thological Articles in Other Journals, 631; Additional] Publications Received, 


ede 


was os 
a) os 


eae tu 


> 


i See 


ee 
pis 
ee ee 


es 


© 


Age 


eho 


ta 


ae Nae ek 


» 


THE AUK: 


A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF 


ORNITHOLOGY. 


Vou. XXXVI. OcToBER, 1920. No. 4 


LIMICOLINE VOICES. 
By JoHn TREADWELL NICHOLS. 


Tue Limicole or Shore Birds appeal to the imagation as do few 
other groups. Their wide migrations, flocking habits, and the 
uncertainty which attends their movements at all times contribute 
to the charm of their pursuit. Their calls, usually short, are 
often ringing and musical, ‘and express well the temper of their 
haunts, marsh and shore, and so forth. These notes are generally 
diagnostic and stick well in the memory. 

With these few introductory words I will say that the voices of 
these birds have been studied from several different view-points. 
The first has been to learn the difference between those of different 
species, as an aid primarily in identifying the species by ear; en- 
tailing a more or less careful study of the range of calls of each 
kind. The investigation with the greatest philosophic possibilities 
has perhaps been to determine, so far as possible, the significance 
of each note of a given species, the circumstances under which 
used, what it meant to the individual using it, and more especially 
to other individuals; in short, to get some idea of the “language”’ 
of the species. These two lines of study have led imperceptibly 
to a comparison of the notes of one species with those of another, 
and speculation on homologies (identification of the note of one 
species with the note of like derivation in a related species) and 

519 


loen : 
Oct. 


520 Nicuots, Limicoline Voices. 
analogies (determining what note of one species has the same 
significance with what note of another which may or may not be its 
homolog). One of the first things apparent is that the notes of 
species with similar habits are analogous, those of allied species 
more or less homologous, but often with very little analogy. 

In view of the philosophic interest of the subject it is surprising 
how few records the literature of ornithology contains of careful 
observations made to interpret the language of birds and to de- 
termine its extent and precision. In Chapman’s Handbook of 
Birds of Eastern North America (1912 ed., p. 60, ete.) we find 
summarized in a few paragraphs the principal facts about this 
language obvious to the field naturalist. Ordinarily no attempt 
is made to go beyond these, indeed to do so involves difficulties 
calling rather for experimentation than for casual observation. 
Most of the writer’s observations on Shore Birds have been made 
under what are almost experimental conditions. More or less 
perfectly concealed in a blind, he has observed the birds, many of 
them in active migration, passing decoys (called “stool” in his 
locality). There are under such circumstances a limited number 
of simple acts open for them to perform, each rather easily in- 
terpreted, and each repeated over and over in the course of time 
by birds of the same and related species. It is conclusions from 
correlation of the birds’ cries with their actions under these 
conditions that he hopes will make a slight step in advance into 
a difficult subject and be of value to later observers. 

The Black-breast, Golden, Kildeer, Ringneck Plover, have each 
a characteristic diagnostic flight-note, respectively “pe-oo-ee,” 
“que-e-e-a,”” “ke-he,” “tyoo-eep.”’ Though different all these 
notes have the same rolling character; in fact, are so much alike 
that they certainly have a common origin, as the birds have,— 
that is, are homologous. Also, they are used by each in the same 
way, have the same significance,—that is, are analogous. 

Migratory Shore Birds in general have each a diagnostic flight- 
note analogous with the flight-notes of these Plovers. The flight- 
note of the Willet (“kiyuk’’) is sufficiently plover-like to be con- 
sidered homologous, were the Willet a Plover. I hesitate to use 
the term “homology” in this case, however, and will therefore 
call it a note of the same group, and the Plover and Willet notes 


viol se val Nicuois, Limicoline Voices. 521 


flight-notes of group A (rolling notes). The Willet also has a note 
of less importance homologous with the “whew whew whew”’ of 
the Greater Yellow-legs, but lower pitched, which is not its flight- 
note. The “whew whew whew” of the Greater Yellow-legs is 
the flight-note of that species, a flight-note of group B (polysyl- 
labic notes). The Greater Yellow-legs also has a more or less 
plover-like rolling note of group A, “toowhee toowhee toowhee.”’ 
The commonest flight-note of the Lesser Yellow-legs, though fre- 
quently monosyllabic, is clearly homologous with that of the 
Greater. This intermediate condition in the Lesser Yellow-legs 
favors consideration of the monosyllabic flight-notes of the Kriek- 
er, etc., as group B rather than group A. 

The Lesser Yellow-legs, Krieker and Semipalmated Sandpiper 
have short, snappy, flocking notes which may be considered of 
group C. There seems to have been an evolutionary tendency for 
notes of less importance to rise into prominence and replace notes 
of a preceding group as the diagnostic flight-note of the various 
species. Before judging of this hypothesis, it will be well to re- 
view the calls of the different species studied, which are taken up 
in the order of the A. O. U. ‘ Check-List.’ 


Northern Phalarope (Lobipes lobatus). On taking wing, this 
species utters a chipping note suggesting somewhat that of the 
Sanderling, either monosyllabic, “tchip”’ or “tchep,” or in two 
or more syllables. 


Woodcock (Philohela minor). This solitary, wood inhabiting 
more or less nocturnal species, is perhaps the most silent. A 
“twittering” as the bird takes wing is produced by the modified 
wing feathers. It is almost invariable as the bird takes wing and 
sometimes heard in full flight, but not as a rule. Species well 
concealed on the ground which trust to their concealment, and 
flush only at close range, throwing concealment to the wind as 
they do so, usually have an analogous striking note at that time, 
doubtless of value as a signal to others that may be near-by. It 
corresponds to the whirr of the Ruffed Grouse or the grunting 
of a startled Bittern, and thus may be mechanical, though usually 
vocal. Such sounds are very serviceable to the observer as identi- 
fication marks. 


lore 
Oct. 


522 Nicuots, Limicoline Voices. 

The Woodcock has a well-known crepuscular song, which 
accompanies the nuptial performance, periodic Night-hawk-like 
“peents” on the ground, followed by rhythmical wing-twittering 
as the bird mounts in spirals into the air, followed by series of 
short, sweet descending whistles as it makes its earthward plunges. 
The Woodcock and Spotted Sandpiper are the only species that 
I know as breeders, and although probably most have something 
analogous with song, I must leave it to other more fortunate ob- 
servers to describe them.* 

Wilson’s Snipe (Gallinago delicata). The Snipe, like the Wood- 
cock, usually flushes at close range. It calls a harsh “scape,” as 
it goes off, and this note is frequently given or repeated by it when 
in full flight. Two birds moving east to west over the meadows 
back of the beach at Mastic, Long Island, on the morning of 
August 23, 1919, were calling in this manner as they stopped to 
circle and then went on. As the bird goes out almost from under 
foot, the “scape” is at times replaced by a series of short hurried 
notes of similar character. Taken together these two notes are 
analogous with the wing “twitter” of the Woodcock. They are 
homologous, on the other hand, with the Woodcock’s nasal 
““peent.” 

It is interesting to find in the Wilson’s Snipe this imperfect 
differentiation of a note uttered at the moment of taking wing 
from one uttered when in or approaching full flight,—as it is a 
condition slightly different from the calls of other more social 
Shore Birds which trust comparatively little to concealment, 
take wing while danger is still at a distance with hurried minor 
notes, so soft as to readily escape notice, and have each a loud 
diagnostic flight-call of much service in their identification. 

The harsh “scape” of the Wilson’s Snipe at one end of our 
series, in keeping with the voices of unrelated marsh birds, frogs, 
etc., and the discords of close-by marsh sounds continually in its 
ears contrasts with the peculiarly clear mellow whistle of the 
Black-breast at the cther end, with carrying power over the open 
distances of that plover’s haunts. The connecting series, through 


*See numerous references to the songs of northern breeding species in the vol- 
umes of ‘The Auk.’ 


ek ri | Nicuots, Limicoline Voices. 523 
reedy calls of marsh loving species and ringing notes of those which 
spend more time in the open, leaves little doubt tbat there is some 
correlation between hakitat and quality cf voice. We will merely 
point cut that carrying power of voice is an asset to the wide- 
ranging species of the open, and call the reader’s attention to the 
interesting, if fanciful, remarks of Rhoads on the mimetic char- 
acter of bird language in ‘The American Naturalist’ for 1889. 


Dowitchers (Macrorhampus griseus griseus and M. g._ scolo- 
paceus). The flight-note of the Dowitcher resembles that of the 
Lesser Yellow-legs but is recognizably different,—less loud and 
more hurried, usually suggesting the bird’s name: “dowitch,”’ 
or “dowitcher,’”’ sometimes of a single syllable. This call is 
subject to considerable variation. When used as a regular flight 
or recognition note I believe it is most frequently two-syllabled, 
clear and full. This at least was true of one or more birds observed 
on the north gulf-coast of Florida, September 6, 1919. One was 
certainly the Long-billed race, but I detected nothing unfamiliar 
in its voice and infer that that of the two races is the same. When 
the call becomes more abrupt and emphatic and the last syllable 
is multiplied it seems to indicate that the bird is excited rather 
than to have especial significance, “ dowicheche.”’ 

A flock mancuevered about the stool with single unloud low- 
pitched “chup’’s (Mastic, Long Island, August 25, 1919). A 
low rattle from this species dropping down to alight (Mastic, May 
18), and a startled “chee” from an extra tame Long-billed Do- 
witcher in Florida flushed by being almost struck with something 
thrown at it, completed, until recently, the writer’s knowledge 
of the Dowitcher’s calls, except that variations of the flight-note 
have not been fully described. 

On September 28, 1919, however, I met with the Long-billed 
Dowitcher for the first time on Long Island. Two birds of this 
race stopping on a meadow where there was favorable feeding 
ground, when coming or going on the wing, when pausing from 
feeding to call to Yellow-legs which decoyed to them readily, or 
when standing alert and suspicious of me before flying, kept 
“pip!” suggestive of one of the calls of the 
Solitary Sandpiper, though less loud and metallic. This note was 


calling a short sharp 


loca 


524 Nicuots, Limicoline Voices. Oct 


modified somewhat, perhaps occasionally to “pup” coming in to 
decoys, or to “peep” at other times. In flushing they sometimes 
had an unloud chuckling call, short or prolonged. 

Except for recent experience with that race in Florida, ineli- 
nation would be to consider these notes characteristic of the 
Long-billed Dowitcher, but the chances are there is no significant 
difference in the calls of the two races. The “pip” note of the 
Dowitcber corresponds, J take it, to the flocking “kip” note of 
the Lesser Yellow-legs. When flocks of Lesser Yellow-legs have 
been present and gone, a few birds still remaining tend to use the 
flocking note more than their numbers would warrant, fer several 
days. The two Long-billed Dowitchers under consideration had 
likely been associated with members of their own kind immediately 
before the migration which brought them to Long Island. Prev- 
ious unfamiliarity with the flocking note in the eastern bird is 
accounted for by its small numbers in recent years; we know it to 
have been highly gregarious when abundant. 


Stilt Sandpiper (Micropalama himantopus). The common 
flight-note of the Stilt Sandpiper is very like the single “whew”’ of 
the Lesser Yellow-leg, but recognizably lower-pitched and hoarser. 
An unloud, reedy “sher’’ has been heard from a pair of birds when 
flushing (Long Island, July 26, 1919). 

The resemblance of flight-notes of Dowitcher and Stilt Sand- 
piper to notes of the Lesser Yellow-legs is too striking to be passed 
without comment. They are species whose habits of flight differ 
least from it, and which are most generally associated with it in 
the same flocks, though their feeding habits are different. The 
resemblance of notes may be explained in several ways. One 
explanation would be of racial homology, that these are special- 
ized descendants of the Lesser Yellow-legs not related to Gallinago 
which they resemble in form and near which they are convention- 
ally placed. It is more reasonable to suppose the notes have been 
to some extent borrowed back and forth between the three. We 
are dealing here with flight notes, which in the two Yellow-legs 
certainly have shown a tendency to deviate rather than to come 
together, but then the flight-habits of those two are more contrast- 
ed. As the matter stands, the notes of the three (Dowitcher, 


Mok aa el Nicnots, Limicoline Voices. 525 


Stilt Sandpiper, Lesser Yellow-legs) are sufficiently different for 
identification and perhaps the very lack of close relationship in 
the birds has facilitated convergence cf their calls. 

The findings of W. E. D. Scott relative to acquisition by imita- 
tion versus inheritance of passerine bird notes has no real bearing 
on the subject matter of the present paper save possibly at this 
point. They make it not unreasonable to suppose an influence 
of the calls of customarily associated species upon one another. 


Knot or Robin Snipe (7ringa canutus). The flight-note of the 
Robin Snipe is a low-pitched whistle, frequently in two parts, 
with a peculiar lisp or buzz in it: “tlu tlu.” 


Krieker or Pectoral Sandpiper (Pisobia maculata). The habits 
of the Krieker are, in a sense, intermediate between those of the 
Wilson’s Snipe and of other species to which it is more closely 
allied and resembles more nearly in habits. On the wing, it assoc- 
iates in flocks which migrate by day, often mixed with other 
species. On the ground it frequently scatters singly among the 
grass, and, trusting to concealment, does not take wing till ap- 
proached very closely. Its notes are neither as hoarse and heron- 
like as the Snipe nor as clear and ringing as those of most other 
species, having a reedy character. 

The flight or identification note analogous with the three ringing 
“whew’’s of the Big Yellow-legs analogous and probably also 
homologous with the “cherk” of the Semipalmated Sandpiper, is 
a loud reedy “kerr,” resembling the latter more than any other 
Shore Bird call. 

In being flushed, the Krieker often has hoarse hurried cheeping 
notes, analogous with similar harsher notes of the Snipe. 

Rarely in flight the “kerr” is varied into or replaced by a diag- 
nostic near-whistled “krru.”’ 

A chorus of short snappy “tchep’’s or “chip’’s has been heard 
from a flock of birds, alert and on the move. This call is probably 
analogous with the short flocking notes of the Lesser Yellow-legs. 
To my ear the Krieker’s flushing note is more or less a combination 
of its flight-note and flocking note, and it is likely a combined 
expression of the mental states most commonly associated with 
these two. The flocking note communicates alertness to near-by 


laze 


526 Nicuors, Limicoline Voices. Oct. 


members of a flock, the flight-note is used most emphatically by 
singles that have become separated from their companions or are 
in active flight and disposed for companionship. On being flushed, 
the bird is signalling to possible companions, but as it has been 
feeding singly, concealed from such others as there may be, by 
the grass, their distance is uncertain. 


White-rumped Sandpiper (Pisobia fuscicollis). The flight- 
note is a squeaky mouse-like “jeet,’’ quite unlike any other Shore 
Bird note. This seems to be its only call in southward migration. 


Least Sandpiper (Pisobia minutilla). The identification flight- 
note of this species is a loud diagnostic “kreep.” It 1s occasion- 
ally varied to resemble somewhat the “weet”’ of the Spotted Sand- 
piper, or the flight-note of the Ring-neck, though it is neither 
whistled nor melodious. It is seldom used on the ground, but on 
August 9, 1919, at Mastic, I made an observation on its use by an 
alighted bird to call in another individual from the air. About 
four Kriekers, a couple of Solitary Sandpipers, and about five 
Least Sandpipers were alighted on a bit of dead meadow. One 
of the latter called repeatedly, a very fine high clear “kreep,”’ 
apparently corresponding with a faint husky “kreep”’ from another 
somewhere in the distance, presumably a bird which presently 
appeared hovering and dropping down to alight with the others. 

In flushing, a Least Sandpiper sometimes utters a string of short 
unloud notes with or without the ee sound, “ quee-quee-quee-que, ” 
or “queque,”’ to be followed almost immediately by a variation of 
the flight call, as it gets more fully underway. 

The flight-note varies down to “che” and “cher,” not readily, 
if at all, distinguishable from similar calls of the Semipalmated 
Sandpiper. 

When a flock are up and wheeling about a feeding spot to alight 
there again almost at once, they have sometimes a confiding little 
note “chu chu chu chu,”’ ete., with variations, which has also 

‘been heard from the first bird of a flock to alight, when already 
on the ground. This is suggestive of the “yu yu” note of the 
Lesser Yellow-legs, analogous with notes No. (6) or (7) of that 


, 


species. 


er Fonte veel NicuHoxs, Limicoline Voices. 527 
The Least Sandpiper has a whinny, a little less clearly enun- 


ciated than that of the Semipalmated, but almost identical with 
the same. 


American Dunlin or Red-backed Sandpiper (Pelidna alpina 
sakhalina). The flight-note is an emphatic near-whistled “chu!”’ 
or “chru!”’ resembling some of the calls of Krieker and Semipal- 
mated Sandpiper. The species very likely has other calls with 
which I am not familiar, as I have had little field experience with 
iit. 

Flushing note, of a single, a fine “chit-l-it”’ (Florida, 1919). 

Semipalmated Sandpiper (Frewnetes pusillus). The Semi- 
palmated and Least Sandpipers, our smallest species, are very 
generally found associated and some of their varied lesser calls 
are almost identical, the more definite ones, however, are absolutely 
distinct. It is noteworthy that the calls of the Least Sandpiper are 
less similar to the Krieker’s than are those of the Semipalmated. 
Such dissimilarity between flight-notes of closely allied species 
seems to be the rule rather than the exception. We may note 
the difference between the calls of the two Yellow-legs, and that 
the note of the White-rumped Sandpiper is entirely different from 
that of allied Krieker and Least Sandpiper. 

The flight-note of the Semipalmated Sandpiper is a rather 
loud “cherk,”’ softer and less reedy than the analogous Krieker 
“Kerr.” It is commonly modified to a softer “cher” or che,” 
which, with much variation, becomes the conversational twitter- 
ing of members of a feeding flock. 

Soft, short, snappy “chip’’s are characteristic of flocks man- 
oeuvering about decoys, and less frequently heard from singles 
or two or three birds together,—analogous and homologous with 
the short flock note of the Krieker. 

Hurried cheeping notes (“ki-i-ip’’) on being flushed, are sug- 
gestive of the same note of the Krieker. This seems to be a varia- 
tion of the short, flocking note; at other times the Semipalmated 
Sandpiper flushes with what appears a variation of the flight-note, 
as “serup cherp cherp,”’ (Mastic, August 23, 1919). I have heard 
the former from a bird on a meadow, loosely associated with 
Kriekers. This suggests the probability that borrowing of notes 


(cn 


528 Nicuots, Limicoline Voices. Oct. 


between species which associate has had some part in the evolution 
of their calls, or that there is a tendency for certain analogous 
notes of such species to approach one another. That the analo- 
gous loud flight or identification note of each is so distinct indi- 
cates that the opposite tendency is at work, which in turn, supports 
the hypothesis that such calls have identification value for the 
birds themselves, as they will soon come to have for any field stu- 
dent who takes up the group. It seems scarcely probable that 
the short flocking note of Krieker and Semipalmated Sandpiper 
have any true homology with the analogous note of un-allied Lesser 
Yellow-legs, but from seeing Lesser Yellow-legs and Kriekers 
flocking together on meadows, equally favorable feeding grounds 
for each, I suspect some such borrowing may have taken place 
between these two. 

A clear ringing whinny, from a bird in a flock or otherwise, on 
the ground or in the air, usually heard in the spring, is probably 
in some manner associated with the breeding season. 


Western Sandpiper (Hrewnetes mauri). Though some of its 
calls seem indistinguishable, in general the notes of this species 
(as studied on the north Gulf Coast of Florida, September 1919) 
are unlike those of pusillus. Its most common loud call is variable 
and may be written “cheé-rp, cheep!” or “chir-eep.” This 
note has the “ee” sound found in the “kreep” of the Least Sand- 
piper, but has a plaintive quality suggestive of the note of the 
Sanderling, and it also suggests the squawk of a young Robin. 
Its closest resemblance to that of other small species is to the un- 
loud “serup” heard from pusillus when flushing, and which varies 
into the regular flight “cherk” of that bird. It seems to be the 
corresponding flight-note of the Western Sandpiper, and is also 
used by a bird on the ground calling to others in air which alight 
with it, just as the flight “whew” of the Lesser Yellow-legs is so 
used. 

Birds in flushing had a second dissimilar note “sirp” or at 
another time, “chir-ir-ip,’’ which heard also in a medley of varia- 
tions from a flock already on the wing, may be more or less anal- 
ogous with the short flocking note of the Semipalmated Sand- 
piper, and suggested the notes of the Horned Lark. 


Vol. ea 


1920 Nicuois, Limicoline Voices. o29 


Surf Snipe or Sanderling (Calidris leucophaea). The note of 
the Surf Snipe is a soft “ket, ket, ket,” uttered singly or in series. 
I have heard it from birds taking wing but am not sure just how 
generally it is used or what its analogies are. This species is 
rather silent at all times. 

The notes of the Shore Birds allied to the Tattlers have no 
apparent homology with those of the species so far treated. The 
Greater and Lesser Yellow-legs are the Tattlers whose voices have 
been most closely studied. A rather careful compilation has been 
made of the notes of these birds as heard in 1918, the same com- 
pared with earlier data, and conclusions checked up by observa- 
tion the present year (1919). 


Greater Yellowlegs (Totanus melanoleucus). The varied notes 
of the Yellow-legs are perhaps the most familiar of any, and fre- 
quent reference is made to them in discussion of other species. 
For convenience they are numbered serially. 

(1) The yodle (a rolling “t6owhee t6owhee”’ etc.) is commonest 
in a flock, from birds remaining in one locality, not travelling. I 
think I have heard it from a single bird in the fog. It is charac- 
teristically given in the air, generally with set wings, by birds 
which seem to contemplate alighting. It advertises birds tarry- 
ing in one general locality, and has probably the function of loca- 
tion notice. It is doubtless homologous with the gather call of 
the Spotted Sandpiper with which it has little analogy. 

(2) Loud ringing 3, “wheu wheu wheu.” The characteristic 
cry of the species, spring and fall. It is commonly given by pass- 
ing or leaving birds. It advertises the species,—and a change of 
policy in the individual according to its loudness. Analogous 
with notes of other species spoken of as flight-notes or identifica- 
tion notes; occasionally heard from an alighted bird. This call 
is subject to considerable variation, when heard from a bird about 
to drop down and join others feeding it is comparatively low- 
pitched and even, leaving or about to leave a feeding ground, 
highly modulated. 

(3) Four “whew’’s, heard as follows, seem to have a rather 
definite significance: Low hurried descending, heard from a bird 
leaving companion. Short clear four, by a following bird. Loud 


530 Nicuots, Limicoline Voices. Och 


four, bird without intention of alighting, trying to flush decoys. 
This may be called a recrwiting call. 

(4) Twos, (“whew whew’’) seem to be characteristic of a re- 
cruit. A “gentle’’ bird which comes nicely to decoys is apt to 
call in twos when approaching and coming in. 

(5) Rarely, in taking wing in the presence of an intruder, a 
single bird utters a string of unmodulated “whew’’s which breaks 
up into threes or fours as it goes off. This is likely a note of pro- 
test, which would be more common in the breeding season. 

(6) Conversational murmuring, from a flock dropping in, ex- 
presses companionship and confidence. 

(7) Conversational “chup”’’ notes from birds about to alight, 
also heard from birds alighted, moving about at ease. The 
alighting note. 

(8) Unloud “chup’s”’ identical with the preceding but more 
hurried, given by a small flock of birds as they take wing. The 
flushing note. 

(9) “Kyow,’’—common in spring, only rarely heard in south- 
ward migration; probably associated with the breeding season; 
seems to express suspicion. 


Lesser Yellow-legs (Tolanus flavipes). When on the ground 
in flocks, the Lesser Yellow-legs is usually silent. The same is true 
frequently of single birds coming in. In the air it is more or less 
noisy and has two common distinct notes:—“ whew” and “kip” 
or “keup,’’ which seem to be used rather indiscriminately on var- 
ious occasions and which vary into one another. Wandering 
‘whew’ more, often 


‘ 


singles and small companies seem to use the 
double. The combination “whew hip” is frequent. From large 
companies, especially in uncertainty, one may hear a chorus of 
ets 

(1) The yodle probably corresponds in significance with that of 
the Greater Yellow-legs—location. It is certainly its homolog 
and scarcely, if at all, distinguishable from it. 

(2) The “whew” is a regular flight-note, likely advertisement. 
Generally silent birds alighted, sometimes call an occasional 
single “whew” (at such times particularly soft and mellow) be- 


fore others drop in to join them, as if in welcome. 


ie 1930 a Nicuoits, Limicoline Voices. 5381 

When double, this note of the lesser Yellow-leg is at times clear 
and full, difficult to differentiate from that of the larger species, 
and apparently likewise characteristic of a “gentle” bird, which 
will join decoys, or others alighted. 

(5) Whereas the “whew”’ note of the Lesser Yellow-leg is most 
frequently single and very seldom more than double, I have 
heard a variation of it in series from one of an alighted flock (Mas- 
tic, July 13, 1919) “hyu-hyu-hyu-hyu-hyu” ete. Presumably 
this was in protest at my presence, corresponding to the similar 
note of the larger species. 

(6) Soft, unloud murmuring of a flock in chorus, “yu yu yu” 
ete., characteristically heard, as on August 10, 1919, from a flock 
moving leisurely over the meadows, after having been flushed, to 
shortly alight again, expressive of companionship and confidence. 

(7) When dropping down to alight, often hovering over decoys, 
a flock of Lesser Yellow-legs has soft short “cup, cup, cup,” ete. 
notes. 

(8) At the instant of flushing almost the identical notes as above 
given hurriedly with more emphasis. This for the Lesser Yellow- 
legs is a rough analog of the cheeping note of the Krieker, but in 
view of the different habits of the two species, can not be said 
to be strictly analogous with same. 

(10) An unloud chuckle or series of short notes suggesting a 
very distant Jack Curlew, heard sometimes, not very frequently, 
when one or more birds take wing. Should probably be considered 
a flushing note or signal to take wing. Seems like the attempt 
of one individual to reproduce the preceding, which is often from 
several birds of a flock. 

(11) The “kip” is likely one bird calling to another close-by. 
It is typically a flocking note, otherwise used almost exactly as is 
note No. (2). A variation,—‘keup,” with broader sound, ap- 
proaching the “whew,”’ expressing attention, is frequent. It has 
been heard from a flock of birds which had been resting and bath- 
ing, just before taking wing (Mastic, September 15, 1918). 

(12) An infrequent note of quite different character from the 
Lesser Yellow-legs’ ordinary calls is very high and clear, “ queep.”’ 
It is subject to much variation, as “peép-quip,” “ 
characterized by the high “ee”’ 


eep!”’ but is 
sound. It has been heard from 


DoZ Nicuots, Limicoline Voices. foen 


birds alighted, more particularly when their companions, alarmed 
or for some other reason, move on, and is thought of as the tarry- 
ing individual’s note. On August 17, 1919, I had picked up decoys 
preparatory to leaving a pool in the meadows when a single Lesser 
Yellow-legs came down to the pool calling a similar “kee-a” on 
the wing, though I was in full view. It went on without alighting 
with “whew” notes characteristic of the species. Probably this 
was an individual which wanted to stay, from a small company 
which had left the meadow. 

(13) Wounded birds, on being pursued and captured, have a 
harsh scream of fear, “cheerp.”” I have noticed this from birds 
of the year in southward migration only, not from adults under 
the same circumstances. 

Thus six of the ten notes assigned to the Lesser Yellow-leg are 
interpreted as analogous with six of the nine of the Greater, 
namely, location, flight, protest, companionship, alighting and flush- 
ing notes. With the exception of the flight-note these seem also 
strictly homologous, and little differentiated intraspecifically. 
The flight or identification note if homologous is divergent, as 
utility requires that it should be. It is homologous with the 
Greater’s flight-note series—Nos. (2), (3), (4), and (5). Setting 
aside note No (9) of the Greater, likely associated with the breed- 
ing season, the two for which nothing to correspond has been found 
in the Lesser are recruiting and recruit calls, Nos. (3) and (4), 
differentiations of the flight-note. As a matter of fact a variation 
of the Lesser’s flight-note is very close to the recruit note, and the 
condition may be summed up by saying that the flight-note of the 
Greater has to a greater extent than that of the Lesser been 
broken up into different notes of specialized application. 

Setting aside No. (13), which the Greater probably also possesses, 
though I have not heard it, there are three notes of the Lesser for 
which nothing to correspond has been found in the Greater. Of 
these the flocking note, No. (11), correlates with its more gregar- 
ious habits. From knowledge of the voices of the two to date 
it seems that the more individualistic, intelligent and wary Greater 
has calls with more precise significance than the more social 
Lesser, something more closely approaching a true language, 
whereas the voice of the Lesser has undergone a longer evolution, 


Neh ris | Nicuots, Limicoline Voices. 533 


and it has acquired greater dissimilarity of calls. The specialized 
notes of the Greater are largely variations of the flight-note stem, 
which occurs in its simplest form in the Lesser, not its primitive 
form, however, if such is as we suppose, polysyllabic. The habits 
of the Lesser are less adaptively specialized in detail than those 
of the Greater, yet more specialized taken as a whole, a condition 
paralleled by the respective notes of the two. 

In the majority of cases there is no difficulty in identifying 
either Yellow-legs with certainty from its ordinary louder notes; 
except that the analogous as well as homologous “whew whew” 
common with both and the rare occasions when the Greater uses 
a single “whew,” require a keen ear to detect the difference in 
quality of voice. Nevertheless, just this last year (1919) there 
have been two instances in the field on Long Island, where with a 
little less training my ear would have assigned Lesser Yellow-legs 
calls to the other species. In both instances, the first in May, 
the second in late September, a small number of the Lesser Yellow- 
legs were associated with a larger number of the Greater, reversing 
the ordinary condition. My suspicions that in default of its own 
kind the Lesser was endeavoring to copy the calls of the other with 
which it was associated, aroused by the first observation, which 
was unsatisfactory, were confirmed by the second, a thoroughly 
satisfactory one. A flock of birds containing a couple of Lesser 
and perhaps five Greater Yellow-legs was flushed by a Marsh 
Hawk from a pool where my decoys were also placed. All went 
off to the north with the exception of one Lesser which promptly 
returned and alighted with the decoys. It called “whew” and 
“eep!’’ repeatedly, and flushed again with an unloud Jack Cur- 
lew-like series, all notes characteristic of the Lesser, and highly 
appropriate to the circumstances, then followed the direction the 
other birds had taken. Its notes now should have been a some- 
what more abrupt “whew” or “whew-hip,” or short “kip’’s, 
had it been recently associating in flocks of its own kind, but to 
my astonishment they were ‘“whew-whew”’ and “whew-whew- 
whew,”’ trisyllabic! not at all abrupt and unusually loud for the 
Lesser; I think it was not my imagination which made them sound 
strained. The situation was not without its humorous side as a 
Greater Yellow-legs under similar circumstances would have been 


534 Nicuots, Limicoline Voices. loge 


apt to use four syllables, and if three, these highly modulated and 
ringing, the Lesser’s three approaching most nearly that of a 
Greater about to alight. 

I think I am correct in homologizing the ringing wnistled voices 
of the Yellow-legs with comparatively sharp piping voices of Soli- 
tary and Spotted Sandpipers. The difference is related to the 
more wide-ranging and flocking habits of the former. 


Solitary Sandpiper (Helodromas solitarius solitarius). The 
flight-note of the Solitary, “peep weep weep,” is often difficult 
to differentiate from notes of the Spotted Sandpiper, but probably 
always differentiable. It is a cleaner-cut sound, less variable, 
more suggestive in accent than are those of the Spotted Sandpiper 
of the whistle of the Greater Yellow-legs. In August, 1919, sev- 
eral Solitarys were living on the meadows at Mastic, Long Island. 
They were frequently found feeding, flushed or observed making 
longer or shorter flights at no great heights. In these cases the 
note was double “peep weep,” rarely single. When a bird is 
changing its grounds the same note is more often three, some- 
times two-syllabled, and so given when definitely leaving a locality 
or by wandering birds which ordinarily fly high. 

A quite dissimilar call, less frequently heard, is a fine “pit,” 
“pit pit,” or “chi-tit.””. This may have no significance other 
than being a reduction of the preceding, when the bird is less de- 
finitely on the wing, but seems to depend on there being another 
individual fairly close by. There is likely homology between it 
and the short flocking call of the Lesser Yellow-leg, and if correctly 
determined, a certain analogy thereto is also established, perhaps 
as much as possible with this non-social species. Of similar 
quality was a peculiar “ kikikiki” from one of two birds in company 
which came to decoys nicely (Mastic, August 10, 1919), as they 
went out past me without alighting. 

A third note, isolated “pip’’s, suggesting the call of the Water- 
thrush, is expressive of excitement when a bird is on the ground, 
as when just alighted. 


Willet (Catoptrophorus semipalmatus races). The identification 
flight-note of the migratory Willet is a far-reaching, gull-hke 
“kiyuk,’’ repeated at intervals. On the breeding grounds in 


Vol. om | 
1920 : 


Nicwors, Limicoline Voices. 5839) 
spring there are several variations of this note, one “ki-yi-yuk,”’ 
much like the loudest, most ringing call of the Greater Yellow-legs. 

A less frequent note resembles the “whew whew whew”’ of the 
Greater Yellow-legs but is much lower pitched, not loud. It is 
homologous but not analogous with this Yellow-legs note. It has 
been heard from a bird hanging about a pool in the meadows. 

“Ply-wly-wip, ply-wly-wip,”’ corresponds to song; it is the 
common loud note on the southern breeding grounds in spring; 
its author most frequently poised on quivering wings above the 
meadow. 

“ Kuk-kuk-kuk-kuk-kuk” ete., in tern-like series from two 
mating birds is probably homologous with the alighting and flush- 
ing notes of the Yellow-legs, Nos. (7) and (8). 

Loud high “kree-uk”’ infrequent in spring on the breeding 
grounds, suggests No. (12) of the Lesser Yellow-legs with which 
it may be homologous. 


Spotted Sandpiper (Actitis macularia). The Spotted Sand- 
piper is the only species of which the calls, while nesting, are thor- 
oughly familiar to the writer, and it should be borne in mind in 
comparing them with those of the others treated that the compari- 
son is not a fair one; these others doubtless have breeding calls 
with which he is unfamiliar. 

“Hoy, hoy, weet, weet, weet, weet weet weet weet” is a pro- 
longed call frequently heard in the early part of the nesting season, 
in toto or in part, suggesting in that respect the songs of the cuck- 
oos. It doubtless has value as advertisement or location notice 
and something the significance of a very generalized song. A 
series of loud “weet’’s, heard also at other times of year, the most 
far-reaching call of the species, doubtless serves as location notice. 
Towards sunset on July 16, 1919, Oyster Bay, N. Y., the weather 
still and foggy, one at the shore was so calling repeatedly, I felt 
sure in an effort to locate another of its kind. 

“Pip! pip! pip!’ is a note heard between adult birds in 
the breeding season which seems to be of polite address, or possibly 
impolite, as it is almost identical in form with a note of protest 
by old birds when nest or young are threatened. This last is 
perhaps shorter and dryer. Something very like the former has 
been heard from an old bird when with her young. 


[oct: 


536 Nicuots, Limicoline Voices. 

A rolling note, “kerrwee, kerrwee, kerrwee,’’ now loud, now very 
low and distant, has been heard from an adult with the evident 
purpose of assembling her young. Though with different, special- 
ized application, it is pretty surely homologous with the location 
notice, No. (1) of the Yellow-legs. 

Young birds that have taken refuge in the grass, presently 
if danger seems passed, begin to call “pip wip,” perhaps the note 
most like that of the Solitary Sandpiper, to advertise to one 
another and their parents what and where they are. The “pit- 
wit-wit”’ frequently heard from adults as a note of departure may 
best be considered a variation of this one as also the “peet weet 
weet” or “weet weet’? most frequent a little later in the season as 
little companies of birds start cut over the water for longer or 
shorter distances. The third variation is the most characteristic 
note of the species, frequently heard from passing birds, and a 
very good analog of the flight-identification notes referred to under 
the transient species. From it is constructed the latter part of 
the scng. The initial notes of same likely have some homology 
with the rolling note compared to No. (1) of the Yellow-legs. 

An old bird, surprised near her brood and fluttering off playing 
wounded called “cheerp cheerp,”’ a sort of scream as of pain and 
fear, doubtless the impression it was intended to convey, and a 
indicative of its dire extrem- 


d 


young bird, captured, cried “ seep,’ 
ity. 


Hudsonian or Jack Curlew (Nwmenius hudsonicus). The 
flight-note of the Jack Curlew resembles that of the Greater 
Yellow-legs from which it is rather easily distinguished, being less 
modulated and usually lower pitched. It commonly consists of 
four short whistles, but is frequently prolonged even into a trill. 
The more prolonged calls are usually the dryer, and seem char- 
acteristic of the noisiest birds, flying highest or with most un- 


certainty. 


Black-bellied or Black-breast Plover (Squatarola squatarola). 
The flight-note of the Black-breast is a clear, ringing “ pe-oo-ee” 
although shortened and otherwise varied at different times, this 
note is the only one ordinarily heard from single individuals or 
small flocks of this species. In general it may be said tbat the 


Vol: oii at Nicuous, Limicoline Voices. 537 


diagnostic flight or identification note of Piovers is used more 
generally than in Yellow-legs and other species, for instance, and 
that they seem to have less variety of calls. 

A second, flocking note, is a soft mellow “quu-hu”’ (from about 
15 birds together, Flcrida, September 6, 1919) heard both in air 
and on the ground, and in chorus when a flock was flushed, cirl- 
ing and hovering in uncertain manner. 

A dissimilar untoud “cuk cuk cuk, cuk, euk, :uk cuk cuk euk”’ 
heard from a single bird alighted with decoys and running about 
(also Florida, September). 


Golden Plover (Charadrius dominicus dominicus). The flight- 
note of the Golden Plover is a ringing “que-e-e-a”’ less clear and 
whistled than that of the Black-breast, with a suggestion of the 
Kildeer in it. 


Kildeer Plover (Oxyechus vociferus vociferus). The common 
note o: the Kildeer used in flight and at other times is a sharp 
“ke-he!.’’ When the bird is flushed it is characteristizally varied 
to “ki-i-he.”” About its breeding grounds, where it is very noisy, 
the note is commonly “ke!” cr “kehe!”’. 


Semipalmated or Ring-necked Plover (Aegialitis semipalmata). 
The flight-note of the Ring-neck is a short, whistled “tyoo-eep.”’ 
The birds have a variety of lesser notes which are not so often 
heard, and mest frequently in the spring. A little company of 
probably wintering birds (Florida, late March) called “kup, kup,” 
as they were flushed and flew a few yards to alight again. The 
flight-note is sometimes replaced by rougher cacking notes in 
small flocks on the wing. 


Piping Plover (Aegialitis meloda). The plaintive piping notes 
of tbis species are so characteristic of its breeding grounds, they are 
evidently associated with the nesting season, and perhaps corre- 
spond to song. At other times the birds are rather silent. 


Wilson’s Plover (Ochthodromus wilsonius wilsonius). The com- 
monest note on the ground and on the wing (Florida, late March, 
apparently on breeding grounds) is a tern-like “ quip,’’ sometimes 
double “qui-pip.”’ Less frequently, on the ground, a surpris- 
° $ “ce s 9 
ingly human whistled “whip. 


[oce: 


538 Nicuots, Limicoline Voices. 

Ruddy Turnstone (Arenaria interpres morinella). The com- 
mon flight-note of the Turnstone is a lew cackle. This note is not 
very broadly used as flight-notes go, being most common from 
birds that are leaving the vicinity. A much rarer loud plover- 
like “kik-kyu”’ I have heard from a bird when coming te decoys 
or flying along the edge of favorable meadows. 


*The above is a pretty comprehensive resumé of the calls of the 
different species as definitely noted to date. Attempts te render 
each call by letters are at best unsatisfactory and prcbably no two 
people would do so in a like manner, but a field student of the birds 
will in most cases have no difficulty in following this classification 
of notes, and it is my only way to give any idea of their variety 
and character. It should be understood that it is only in the 
majority of cases that the calls :orrespond to circumstanzes to 
which they are assigned. No more could be expected in view of 
the doubtless rapidly changing psychic processes of the birds, of 
which we know nothing. The amount to which each note varies, 
and they vary into one another, should not be lost sight of. In 
the writer’s opinion comparatively little of the birds’ “ vocabulary” 
is lost, however, by incomplete knowledge of these variations, 
whereas a great deal is lost by imperfect differentiation of inflec- 
tion and tone His hypothesis is that the form of the call, limited 
by the species to which the bird belongs, is correlated with num- 
bers, environment and behaviour, especially present but also 
past or future; that its quality depends largely on emotion or 
state of mind, as alarm or confidence, restlessness, sociability, ete., 
ete. Less indication than presupposed, has been found of distinct 
and dissimilar calls corresponding to emotional states. A “note 
of alarm” has proved particularly elusive. Alarm, easily intro- 
duced experimentally, shows as determinant of the bird’s actions, 
but the accompanying notes (if any) are such as accompany 
similar actions when it is obviously not alarmed. 

One other thing is very striking; birds in the air are extremely 
sensitive to the calls of others on the ground, and only in a less 
degree to imitations of them. Birds on the ground are equally 
sensitive to the calls of others in the air, but pay astonishingly 
little attention to any imitated notes. 


Nol aoe a Nicuots, Limico.ine Voices. 539 


Whether one calls them language or not, the calls of other 
individuals of each kind of Shore Bird and associated kinds, are 
unquestionably an important part of the life of every member of 
the more social species, and one of the chief factors which direct 
its behaviour. 

In the consideration of obscure details there is danger of omit- 
ting the obvious thing which would be of most interest to some 
readers. It is certain that an individual recognizes the flight- 
note of its own kind as such, as who can doubt who has had a 
Black-bellied Plover, too wary to come to decoys, yet circling 
round and round answering each imitation of its ery? As certainly 
in some cases birds recognize the flight-notes of other species for 
what they are, the Turnstone will decoy particularly well to the 
whistle of the Black-breast, a species of similar habits to its own, 
with which it likes to associate. 

From the point of view of general contour and of habits (and 
taking the characters which separate the Limicolee from other groups 
as criteria) the Plovers are our most generalized end, and that of 
Gallinago the most specialized end of the series here considered. 
Without assuming that this superficial viewpoint corresponds with 
the true philogeny of these birds in any way, it is to be expected 
that the notes, which are intimately related to habit, will be most 
readily classified in a parallel manner. The analogies between 
dissimilar notes and lack of analogy between certain evidently 
homologous notes of related species, implies that these calls are 
not stereotyped for each, but in process of change in a manner 
allied to that cf human language. Studied mostly in migration, 
all species seem to have primarily a flight, identification or adver- 
tisement note, calls less loud and striking, and sometimes still 
louder and more ringing notes, allied to, but with less definite 
application than the identification note. It is my hypothesis 
that there is a more or less definite evolutionary tendency for 
lesser calls to replace the flight-note, which becomes still louder 
and far-reaching as it loses particular value and becomes less 
frequent. 

By this hypothesis, the differing but evidently homologous 
flight-notes of the Plovers (Black-bellied, Ring-necked, Kildeer, 
Golden) correspond to the “kik-kyu” of the Turnstone, which 


540 Nicnots, Limicoline Voices. loon 


they resemble, and which is being replaced in the Turnstone as 
a flight-note by the characteristic rattle of that species. Simi- 
larly the Yellow-legs’ yodle has been derived from a_plover-like 
flight-note, and the Greater Yellow-legs and Jack Curlew flight- 
notes correspond to the Turnstone rattle. 

The flight-note of the Willet seems to correspond rather to those 
of the Plovers than to those of the Yellow-legs. On the other hand 
the single “whew” of the Lesser Yellow-legs is evidently homolo- 
gous with the “whew whew whew” of the Greater, and the flight- 
notes of the Krieker, etc., may as well correspond to it, or to that 
of Willet and Plovers. 


J 


ADDITIONAL Data 1920 


The notes of two Oyster-catchers (Haematopus palliatus), forced 
to take wing: “‘crik, crik, crik,” ete., once a longer ‘‘cle-ar” inter- 
polated, which suggested flight-calls of Willet and Black-breast 
Plover (North Carolina, April). 

A Marbled Godwit (Limosa fedoa), flying towards decoys, gave 
a single unwhistled note, “hank,” likely the flight-note of the 
species in migration. Alighted, it had a short unloud note, a 
goose-like “honk,” especially when other Shore Birds swung by 
it (Long Island, August). 

A single Dowitcher on the ground, when a flock of Lesser Yel- 
lowlegs were flushed a little way off, called a mellow plover-like 
“cluee?,”” and when these departed took wing with more ordinary 
Dowitcher calls and followed after. The peculiar cry |suggested 
the tarrying individual’s note of the Lesser Yellowlegs, with which 
it is likely analogous (Long Island, July). 

When a flock of a half dozen Lesser Yellowlegs came to decoys, 
one bird alighted first, had a low-pitched unfamiliar “ too-dle- 
hoo-hoo, too-dle-hoo-hoo, too-dle-hoo-hoo,”’ before the others, still 
on the wing, came back and alighted with it. Though probably 
of similar derivation, this note was quite different from the yodle 
of the species, and is probably more of a gather call (Long Island, 
August). 

American Museum of Natural History, New York City. 


Vol. Heche 


1920 Jounson, Birds of Lake Co., Minn. 541 


SUMMER BIRD RECORDS FROM LAKE COUNTY, 
| MINNESOTA. 


BY CHARLES EUGENE JOHNSON. 


THE records here presented were obtained chiefly during the 
summers of 1912, 1914 and 1915, while conducting expeditions 
sent out by Mr. James Ford Bell of Minneapolis, for the purpose 
of collecting specimens and obtaining photographic records of 
big game and other mammals in the northeastern wilds of Minne- 
sota. 

In order to accomplish the main objects of the expeditions only 
a small part of the time could be devoted to the bird life of the 
territory visited and therefore the records listed, far from complete, 
are such as were made as opportunity offered in the course of 
other work. 

It had been my intention at another time to make a more thor- 
ough study of the birds of Lake County before submitting my list 
for publication. Because of a number of unforeseen developments, 
however, this plan had to be abandoned and since leaving the Uni- 
versity of Minnesota I have thought it advisable to submit the 
list in its present form in the hope that it may perhaps serve as a 
basis for further work by others who may find opportunity to 
add to it and carry it nearer to completion. 

So far as I am aware no list of birds from the region covered 
by these notes has before been published. 

The territory concerned may be roughly defined as lying be- 
tween White Iron Lake on the west and Perent Lake on the east; 
the Kawishiwi river and its northern fork or North Kawishiwi 
forming the northern and the Isabelle and Island rivers forming 
the southern boundary. The names of lakes, rivers, portages 
and other features are those given on the maps of the Federal 
and the State Forest Service. The Clear Lake mentioned is the 
one found in Township 63 N., and Range 10 W., and not the lake 
of the same name in Township 62 N., and Range 9 W. 

Effort has been made to designate all localities where records 
were made with as much accuracy as brevity of description per- 
mits. 


542 Jounson, Birds of Lake Co., Minn. lore 
Podilymbus podiceps (Linn.). Prep-BiLLED GreBE. The only re- 

cord I have for this species is one for August 18, 1914, when a single in- 

dividual was seen in the Isabelle River about a mile below Rice Lake. 

Gavia immer (Brunn.) Loon. During the month of July Loons 
were occasionally seen or heard in Farm Lake and in Gabro and Bald 
Eagle lakes. During August and early September they were plentiful 
in the Isabelle Lake region, where we were encamped at that season. 

Larus argentatus Pont. Herrinc Guiu. 1912: August 5, a Herring 
Gull was seen at Lake Bald Eagle. 1914: During the first week of July 
a pair of Herring Gulls was daily seen ona flat rock near the south shore 
of Clear Lake. By the time we had made our portage into this lake these 
birds had apparently left the locality, but on the rock was found a large 
nest of mosses, grasses and small twigs, which had the appearance of hav- 
ing been recently abandoned. In the month of August several Herring 
Gulls were seen on one occasion on a small rocky island in Lake Isabelle. 

Mergus americanus (Cass.). AMERICAN MERGANSER. 1912: June 
27, two newly hatched ducklings were taken from among a brood of eight 
or ten, on the North Kawishiwi River at the lower end of the long rapids 
below the fork. July 1, a brood, with the female, was observed near the 
North Kawishiwi-Clear Lake portage; August 29, an adult male and two 
females were shot on the Isabelle river a short distance below Isabelle 
Lake. 1914: One brood of young and several adult birds were seen dur- 
ing the first week of July, near ‘Dead Man’s Rapids”’ on the North Kaw- 
ishiwi; July 28, a female with a large brood of young somewhat more than 
half-grown was observed at the rapids at the upper end of Lake Gabro. 
1915: Two broods of young were seen July 8, on the South Kawishiwi 
opposite Clear Lake. August 30, several small flocks, evidently separate 
broods, were observed on Lake Isabelle. 

Lophodytes cucullatus (Linn.). Hooprp Mercanser. 1912: June 
27, two adult females were shot on the North Kawishiwi near the Clear 
Lake portage trail; August 29, a male and female were shot on the Isabelle 
river midway to Lake Bald Eagle. 1915: August 7, a female with a brood 
of half-grown young was seen on the upper Perent river; August 30, a 
number of flocks of Hooded Mergansers, one of which contained 25 to 30 
birds, were seen on the Isabelle river a short distance below Isabelle Lake. 

Clangula clangula americana Bonap. Go.upEN-ryE. 1912: July 
1, an adult female was shot on the North Kawishiwi river about three 
miles west of the Clear Lake portage; July 17, two females with broods 
were seen at the rapids of the Gabro Lake outlet; July 23, a female with 
a brood of nine young was seen on the South Kawishiwi opposite Clear 
Lake; August 20, an adult male was shot on the Isabelle river near Rice 
Lake, and another near Lake Isabelle. 1914: July 11, an adult female was 
seen at the Gabro Lake outlet; July 20, a young female was shot from 
among a brood of three accompanied by the female, near the long rapids 
of the North Kawishiwi river. 1915: July 9, a female with a small brood 


uel, oriadea| JoHNSON, Birds of Lake Co., Minn. 543 


was seen on the South Kawishiwi river opposite Clear Lake; July 16, a 
female with her brood was seen at the west shore of Lake Bald Eagle. 

Anas platyrhynchos Linn. Matuarp. This species occurred in 
small numbers in all parts of the region visited. Females with broods 
were seen in July, 1914, along the southwest shore of Lake Bald Eagle, 
on a small stream entering this lake from the west, and on the South 
Kawishiwi river near the Clear Lake portage. 1915: July 25, a female 
with five young was seen at the Rice Lake outlet. 

Anas rubripes tristis Brewst. Biack Duck. 1912: August 28, a 
flock of 13 Black Ducks was observed along the east shore of Lake Isa- 
belle. August 7, 1915, a single specimen was seen on the upper sources 
of the Perent river. 

Aix sponsa (Linn.). Woop Duck. A single specimen of this species 
was seen in July, 1915, along the Isabelle river about midway between 
Rice Lake and Lake Bald Eagle. 

Botaurus lentiginosus (Montag.). Brirrern. The only Bitterns 
seen at any time were observed at the mouth of the Isabelle river. One 
was seen in that locality during the first week of August, 1913, another was 
seen July 31, 1914, and two days later, August 2, two Bitterns were seen 
at the same place. 

Ardea herodias herodias Linn. Great Biun Heron. This heron 
was common along the watercourses in all parts of the region visited. 
In 1912, a heronry of about a dozen nests was found on July 5, about 
three hundred yards south of the North Kawishiwi at the upper end of 
the large lake-like expansion occurring some distance above Farm Lake. 
This heronry was visited again, early in July, in 1914 and in 1915. My 
notes under date of July 22, 1914, state that “there is quite certainly 
another heronry located some distance north of the Kawishiwi at a point 
about a mile east of the long rapids; heard squawking and croaking in 
this direction, July 30.”’ 

Porzana carolina (Linn.). Sora. My only records for the Sora 
are for August 16, 1914, when one was seen along the Isabelle river just 
below Rice Lake, and another at a beaver dam on a small stream 
entering the Isabelle about a mile and a half below the lake mentioned. 

Gallinago delicata (Ord.). Wutson’s Snipz. August 12, 1912, a 
single individual of this species was seen along the Isabelle river at the 
second portage above Lake Bald Eagle. 

Pisobia minutilla (Vieill.). Least Sanppiper. August 11, 1914, 
two of this species were shot from among a flock of six on a mud-flat 
along the Isabelle about a mile below Rice Lake. 

Totanus melanoleucus (Gmel.). GREATER YELLOW-LEGS. A single 
individual was seen September 2, 1914, on a small island at the east end of 
Lake Isabelle. 

Totanus flavipes (Gmel.). Yetutow-Lecs. One was shot August 
8, 1914, on the northeast shore of Lake Isabelle; another was seen in this 
locality August 8, 1915. 


544 Jounson, Birds of Lake Co., Minn. fous 


Helodromus solitarius solitarius (Wils.). Sorrrary SANDPIPER. 
During the month of August, 1914, this sandpiper was seen rather fre- 
quently in the region of Rice Lake and Lake Isabelle. August 9, 1915, 
one was seen on the northeast shore of Lake Isabelle and one along the 
lower Perent river. 

Actitis macularia (Linn.). Sporrep Sanpprper. August 20, 1912, 
three specimens were shot along the Isabelle river just above the first 
rapids. 

Canochites canadensis canace (Linn.). CANADA SPRUCE PARTRIDGE. 
1912: August 5, several were seen on the Bald Eagle and Gull Lake Trail. 
1913: In August two young specimens were shot on the trail mentioned; 
they were among a brood of several accompanied by the female. 1914: 
July 14, a female and eight young were seen in a sphagnum bog near the 
South Kawishiwi river just north of the Gabro Lake outlet. 

Bonasa umbellus umbellus (Linn.). Rurrep Grouse. Common 
throughout the region, but during the summer of 1915, it was observed 
that the species was unusually scarce. July 1, 1912, a female with a 
brood of eight or ten young was seen on the north shore of Clear Lake: 
August 5, a number of immature birds were seen in a bog one-half mile 
east of Lake Bald Eagle. 

Cathartes aura septentrionalis Wied. Turkry Vu.tture. A 
single individual of this species was seen July 20, 1914, at the east end 
of the long rapids of the Kawishiwi river. 

Circus hudsonius (Linn.). Marsa Hawk. In July, 1914, two hawks 
of this species were seen in the vicinity of Clear Lake, one at Rice Lake, 
August 22, and one at Lake Isabelle August 24. In 1915 two were seen 
at the month of the Isabelle river, July 14, and one at the west shore of 
Lake Bald Eagle on July 16. 

Accipiter velox (Wils.). SHARP-SHINNED Hawk. Occasionally seen 
along the Isabelle river and adjoining territory. July 2, 1914, a female 
was shot on the North Kawishiwi-Clear Lake portage. 

Accipiter cooperi (Bonap.). Cooprr’s Hawk. August 14, 1914, 
one of this species was seen at Gabro Lake. 

Buteo borealis borealis (Gmel.). Rep-rairep Hawk. July 16, 
1914, a pair of Red-tailed Hawks was found nesting near the Gabro Lake 
outlet. The nest was situated in a tall dead birch, and the young were 
large enough to be plainly visible from the ground. August 4, 1915, two 
red-tailed hawks were seen along the Perent river. 

Buteo platypterus platypterus (Vieill.). Broap-wincep Hawk. 
August 24, 1912, several were seen along the Isabelle river, at the second 
portage above Lake Bald Eagle, and August 4, 1915,.a number were 
observed along the Perent river. 

Falco columbarius columbarius (Linn.). Picron Hawk. August 
19, 1912, a specimen was shot along the Isabelle river above the second 
portage; September 3, another was shot at camp at the first rapids of 
the Isabelle. 


Vol. 27 Jounson, Birds of Lake Co., Minn. 545 


Falco sparverius sparverius Linn. Sparrow Hawk. In 1912, spar- 
row hawks were observed in the following localities: June 29, North 
Kawishiwi-Clear Lake portage; July 13, Gabro Lake portage; July 15, 
South Kawishiwi river; August 27, Lake Isabelle. 

Pandion haliaetus carolinensis (Gmel.). Osprey. July 18, 1912, 
a nest containing young large enough to be seen from the ground was 
found in a tall dead pine about a mile south and the same distance west 
from the forks of the Kawishiwi river. Both parent birds were at the nest. 
Three old nests were seen in the vicinity, the same pair of birds having 
probably nested in the locality for a number of years. On July 2 and 20 
an osprey was seen at the long rapids of the Kawishiwi, and Aug. 14 a 
number were seen at Lake Gabro. In 1915 one was observed on the 
Perent river August 4, and one at the east shore of Lake Isabelle on Aug- 
ust 31. 

Bubo virginianus virginianus (Gmel.). Great Hornep OWL. 
Common. July 1, 1912, an adult female and one of her brood of three 
were shot on the south bank of the North Kawishiwi about two miles west 
of the Clear Lake portage. July 13 and August 3 adult birds were shot 
along the South Kawishiwi opposite Clear Lake and on an island near 
the southeast shore of Lake Bald Eagle, respectively. 

Coccyzus erythrophthalmus (Wils.). Buack-Bintep Cuckoo. One 
was seen on the North Kawishiwi-Clear Lake portage July 10, 1914; 
several had been heard since the first of the month. In 1915 one was 
heard July 3, in the same locality. 

Ceryle alcyon alcyon (Linn.). Betrep Krnerisner. In 1912 many 
Kingfishers were seen June 20, along the North Kawishiwi westward from 
the Clear Lake portage; on August 27 one was seen on the Isabelle at the 
second portage. My notes for August 9, 1915, state that one was seen at 
the east shore of Lake Isabelle, but that prior to that date only an occas- 
ional one had been seen in that region. After August 12, however, this 
species was seen daily up to our departure in September. 

Dryobates villosus villosus (Linn.). Harry WooprrecKker. 1912: 
A specimen was shot June 24, in a mixed woods of spruce, pine and birch 
along the North Kawishiwi river near the long rapids; June 27 another 
was shot on the Clear Lake portage. 1914: A specimen was shot July 
16, in the burnt-over hills bordering the South Kawishiwi near the Gabro 
Lake outlet. 1915: July 3, my notes refer to the hairy wood-pecker as 
numerous in the region of the Clear Lake portage. 

Picoides arcticus (Swains.). Arctic THREE-TOED, WOODPECKER. 
1912: June 19, two specimens were shot among some tamaracs, one on 
the north shore of Clear Lake, the other on the shore of the North Kawish- 
iwi. June 27 and July 26 a specimen was shot in dry open woods respect- 
ively on the North Kawishiwi-Clear Lake portage and on the bank of the 
North Kawishiwi opposite. 1914: July 16 one was taken on the burnt- 
over hills between the South Kawishiwi and the Gabro Lake outlet. 
1915: Two were seen August 1 in open woods on the first portage of the 
Isabelle above Rice Lake. 


546 Jounson, Birds of Lake Co., Minn. roms 

Sphyrapicus varius varius (Linn.). YELLOW-BELLIED SAPSUCKER. 
July 1, 1914, a Yellow-bellied Sapsucker which evidently had nestlings 
was observed making frequent visits to a hole in a dead poplar on the 
east shore of Whitie Iron Lake. July 5, 1915, a nest with young about 
half grown was found in the same locality: 

Phloeotomus pileatus abieticola (Bangs). NorrHerNn PILEATED 
Woovrrcker. June 18, 1912, one was seen on.the North Kawishiwi- 
Clear Lake portage, and June 20 one was observed on the north shore of 
Clear Lake. During the remainder of June the species was seen occas- 
ionally along both the north and south forks of the Kawishiwi. In July, 
1914, a specimen was shot at camp on the south fork near the Gabro 
Lake outlet. 

Colaptes auratus luteus Bangs. Norrupern Friicker. 1912: June 
12 and 22, Flickers were seen in the vicinity of the Clear Lake portage, 
and on the latter date a nest was found in this locality. 1915: July 3, 
two were seen on the Clear Lake portage, and on July 30 and August 4 
several were seen respectively at Rice Lake and at Lake Isabelle. 

Antrostomus vociferus vociferus (Wils.). Wurip-poor-wiLLt. A 
single specimen was seen July 19, 1915, at the first rapids of the Isabelle 
above Rice Lake. 

Chordeiles virginianus virginianus (Gmel.). NigHrTHawk. Abun- 
dant in the latter part of June and in July along the north and south 
forks of the Kawishiwi. July 8, 1914, two well edged young were 
found on the banks of the north fork near ‘‘Dead Man’s Rapids,’ and in 
a nearby locality a third young one of about the same age was found. 
These young lay on a scantily moss-covered and stick-strewn rock out- 
crop in a district that had been burned over some years before. 

Archilochus colubris (Linn.). Rusy-rHroateD Hummincsirp. July 
13, 1914, one was seen at the first rapids of the Isabelle above Rice Lake; 
a number had been seen earlier in the month in the territory bordering 
the north and south forks of the Kawishiwi, August 31, 1915, a humming- 
bird was seen at camp on the east shore of Lake Isabelle. 

Tyrannus tyrannus (Linn.). Kincpirp. Frequently observed in 
June and July along the White Iron and both forks of the Kawishiwi 
rivers. June 20, 1912, a nest with four eggs was found along the North 
Kkawishiwi half a mile east of the Clear Lake portage. July 26, 1915, a 
kingbird was seen along the Isabelle at Rice Lake. 

Sayornis phoebe (Lath.). PHorsr. Frequently seen along the 
South Kawishiwi in July, 1914; a young specimen was shot July 23. 
July 8, 1915, a female with young able to fly was seen on the Gabro Lake 
portage. 

Nuttalornis borealis (Swains.). OLive-stipEp Fiycatcuer. In July, 
1912, and 1914, this flycatcher was frequently seen and heard along the 
north and south forks of the Kawishiwi in the Clear Lake region; a speci- 
men was shot August 8, 1914, on the Isabelle river above the first rapids. 
July 6, 1915, the Olive-sided Flycatcher was again heard in the Clear Lake 
region. 


Mol enti . a Jounson, Birds of Lake Co., Minn. 547 


Myiochanes virens (Linn.). Woop Pewsrr. June 18, 1912, one was 
seen on the Clear Lake portage. In 1914 it was occasionally seen and 
heard along the South Kawishiwi during the month of July; on July 
4 one was shot on the North Kawishiwi. 

Empidonax flaviventris Baird. YELLOW-BELLIED FLycaTcHER. One 
was shot July 15, 1914, along the South Kawishiwi west of the Clear Lake 
portage. 

Empidonax minimus (W. M. & 8. F. Baird). Least Fiycatcuerr. 
Several seen during July, 1914, along the Isabelle between the first and 
second portages. 

Cyanocitta cristata cristata (Linn.). Biurn Jay. Common in all 
parts of the territory visited. 

Perisoreus canadensis canadensis (Linn.). Canapa Jay. 1912: 
One was seen June 23, on the north shore of Clear Lake; August 19 sev- 
eral were seen along the Isabelle above the first portage, and August 24 
two specimens were shot in this locality. 1914: The first specimen seen 
since entering the field July 1, was shot on the 23rd, at camp on the South 
Kawishiwi near the Gabro Lake portage. 1915: A Canada jay appeared 
at camp on the Clear Lake portage July 3; none was seen thereafter until 
August 4, a rainy day, when several of these birds appeared at our camp 
on the east shore of Lake Isabelle. Until we left this region on September 
6, they were now seen frequently. 

Corvus brachyrhynchos brachyrhynchos Brehm. Crow. 1912: 
Several were seen August 14, at Gabro Lake. 1914: July 1, several 
were observed at White Iron Lake and along the White Iron river; further 
east crows were seen only occasionally and in small numbers. 1915: 
July 3, two were seen at Gabro Lake August 1, two were seen near camp 
on the east shore of Lake Isabelle, and on the 5th two adults accompanied 
by young birds were seen in the same locality. 

Agelaius phoeniceus phoeniceus (Linn.). Rep-wincep Buack- 
BIRD. 1914: July 1 and 10, a small number of Red-wings, apparently 
nesting, were observed at some marshy places along the North Kawishiwi 
just above ‘‘Dead Man’s Rapids.’”’ 1915: A few birds were seen in the 
first mentioned locality July 6; adults with young barely able to fly were 
found July 21, on a small creek entering the Isabelle about three-fourths 
of a mile above Lake Bald Eagle; July 26 a brood of young unable to fly 
was found at the outlet of Rice Lake. 

Quiscalus quiscula aeneus Ridgw. Bronzep GRaAcKLE. 1912: 
June 20, a nest with young in pinfeathers was found along the North 
Kawishiwi just below the first rapids. 1914: July 6, small numbers, 
apparently nesting, and July 24 young birds were observed in the same 
locality. 

Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina (W. Coop.). EvEntina Gros- 
BEAK. 1914: A male and female were observed August 3, along the 
Isabelle river about two miles above Lake Bald Eagle; August 13, and 


548 Jounson, Birds of Lake Co., Minn. [cn 


again on the 17, a male was seen near camp on the first portage of the Isa- 
belle above Rice Lake. 1915: July 28 and 30, a male was seen at the 
Rice Lake outlet. 

Carpodocus purpureus purpureus (Gmel.). Purpeite Fincn. 1914: 
In July a young specimen was shot on the South Kawishiwi near the Ga- 
bro Lake outlet: August 4 two of these finches were seen along the Isa- 
belle two miles above Bald Eagle Lake, and on August 8 a specimen was 
taken in the same locality. 

Astragalinus tristis tristis (Linn.). Gotprincn. My only record 
is for July 27, 1914, when a male was observed at the Section 30 Iron Mine. 

Spinus pinus pinus (Wils.). Prine Siskin. In 1912 this species 
was found rather common during July, in the vicinity of Clear Lake, 
and along the South Kawishiwi. 

Pooecetes gramineus gramineus (Gmel.). VESPER SPARROW. 
1915: A Vesper Sparrow was observed July 6 on the northwest shore of 
Clear Lake; July 10, a specimen was shot from among a number seen on 
the north fork of the Kawishiwi near its junction with the south fork. 

Zonotrichia albicollis (Gmel.). WuHitrr-THROATED SPARROW. 1912: 
July 13, common along the South Kawishiwi and on the Gabro Lake port- 
age. 1914: July 3, many observed along the North Kawishiwi and in 
the vicinity of Clear Lake; August 3, a nest containing two eggs and one 
newly hatched young was found on the second portage of the Isabelle 
above Lake Bald Eagle. 1915: July 1 and 3, White-throated Sparrows 
common along the White [ron River. 

Spizella monticola (Gmel.). TREE Sparrow. One was observed 
July 18, 1915, on the west shore of Lake Bald Eagle. 

Spizella passerina passerina (Bech). CuHipprnc Sparrow. One 
observed August 4, 1915, on the east shore of Lake Isabelle. 

Junco hyemalis hyemalis (Linn.). SiarE-coLtorep Junco. 1912: 
July 23, a specimen was shot on the North Kawishiwi-Clear Lake portage. 
1914: Several were seen July 17 and 19 near the Gabro Lake outlet. 

Melospiza melodia melodia (Wils.). Sona Sparrow. 1912: Many 
seen June 18 and 20 in the vicinity of the North Kawishiwi-Clear Lake 
portage. 1914: July 7, a specimen was shot in the same locality. 

Zamelodia ludoviciana (Linn.). Rosr-BREASTED GROSBEAK. 1914: 
A male was seen July 1 at White Iron Bridge; another male was seen 
July 7 on the Clear Lake portage. 1915: A male and female were seen 
in the last named locality July 3, and a male again on July 6. 

Piranga erythromelas Vieill. Scarter Tanacer. 1914: A male 
was seen July 8 at the North Kawishiwi-Clear Lake portage, and another 
at White Iron bridge, July 27. 1915: A male was observed July 4 at 
the North Kawishiwi—Clear Lake portage. 

Iridoprocne bicolor (Vieill.). Trae Swattow. 1912: A nest was 
found June 22 in a hollow tree in the flooded area of the North Kawishiwi 
below the first rapids. The species was abundant along the river men- 


Nol Para val Jounson, Birds of Lake Co., Minn. 549 


tioned, as far as the first rapids which marked the limits of a flooded area 
in which dead timber furnished numerous nesting holes. 1915: July 5 
a nest containing well-fledged young was found near the site of the first 
mentioned nest. July 21 Tree Swallows were observed flying about in 
great numbers over the small tributary of the Isabelle just below the first 
rapids. 

Bombycilla cedrorum Vieill, Crpar Waxwine. 1912: Common 
along the north and south forks of the Kawishiwi and in the vicinity of 
Gabro Lake, during the months of June and July. June 28 a Cedar Wax- 
wing was observed on its nest in a pine near the long rapids of the North 
Kawishiwi. 

Vireosylva olivacea (Linn.). Rep-ryrep Vireo. 1912: June 18 and 
20 many were seen and heard in the Clear Lake region. 1914: Very 
common in the same locality; July 25 a Red-eyed Vireo was found on 
a nest containing three eggs, situated in a young birch tree on the shore 
of the South Kawishiwi near the Clear Lake trail. 1915: During early 
August the Red-eye was heard at intervals along the Isabelle river in the 
Rice Lake region and on the 18 one was seen at Lake Isabelle. 

Lanivireo solitarius solitarius (Wils.). BLuE-HEADED VirEo. July 
24, 1914, a female was shot at camp on the South Kawishiwi below Gabro 
Lake outlet. 

Mniotilta varia (Linn.). Buack anD WHITE WARBLER. 1914: July 
20 a male was shot at camp on the South Kawishiwi. 1915: July 15 one 
was observed near the mouth of the Isabelle river. 

Vermivora peregrina (Wils.). TENNESSEE WARBLER. 1914: One 
was taken July 8 and one July 10 near the Gabro Lake outlet. 

Dendroica caerulescens caerulescens (Gmel.). BLACK-THROATED 
Buiue WarRBLER. July 17 a male specimen was shot from among several 
of this species accompanied by chickadees, in a grove of spruce and pine 
on the north bank of the South Kawishiwi near the Gabro Lake outlet, on 
August 21 another male was taken along the upper course of a small stream 
entering Rice Lake on the east shore. 1915: A male was observed August 
30 on the east shore of Lake Isabelle. 

Dendroica coronata (Linn.). Myrrte Warsier. A young speci- 
men was taken July 16, 1914, on the burnt-over hills bordering the South 
Kawishiwi near the portage to Gabro Lake. 

Dendroica magnolia (Wils). MaGnotia WarBLER. 1914: July 16, 
a male specimen was shot in dense woods along the South Kawishiwi near 
the Gabro Lake outlet; the species had been seen a number of times 
since the first of the month. 1915: A male was observed August 4 on 
the east shore of Lake Isabelle. — 

Dendroica pensylvanica (Linn.). CHESTNUT-SIDED WARBLER. 1914: 
A pair was seen July 1 at White Iron bridge; July 2, the species was 
frequently observed along the North Kawishiwi eastward as far as the 
Clear Lake trail; July 13, this warbler was seen again on the Gabro Lake 
trail. 1915: Several were observed July 5 at White Iron bridge. 


550 Jounson, Birds of Lake Co., Minn. lee 


Dendroica fusca (Mill.). BrackBuRNIAN WARBLER. 1914: Two 
were observed August 15 on the first portage of the Isabelle above Rice 
Lake. 1915: August 17, several were observed in a grove of spruce on 
the east shore of Lake Isabelle. 

Dendroica vigorsi (Aud.). Pins Warpier. A specimen was shot 
August 15 at camp on the Isabelle river portage above Rice Lake. 

Seiurus aurocapillus (Linn.). Oven-pirp. 1914: One was observed 
July 6 on the North Kawishiwi—Clear Lake portage; had been heard 
several times in that locality since the first of the month. 1915: One was 
seen August 16 on the east shore of Lake Isabelle, and September 7 two 
were heard on the Clear Lake portage. 

Seiurus noveboracensis notabilis Ridgw. GRrINNELL’s WATER- 
TurusH. July 4, 1914, a male specimen was shot along the south bank 
of the Kawishiwi about two miles east of Farm Lake. 

Oporornis philadelphia (Wils.). Mourninc WARBLER. One was 
seen July 3 on the north shore of Clear Lake, and July 23 a male specimen 
was shot at camp near the Gabro Lake outlet. 

Geothlypis trichas trichas (Linn.). MAryLAND YELLOW-THROAT. 
1912: June 17 to July 4 several were seen on and about the North Kawish- 
iwi Clear Lake trail. 1914: August 11 a number were seen along the 
Isabelle river above the first portage. 1915: July 21 several were seen 
along the tributary stream near the mouth of the Isabelle; July 26 a male 
was seen at a small stream entering the Isabelle about a mile and a half 
below Rice Lake. 

Setophaga ruticilla (Linn.). Repsrart. July 1, 1914, a male and 
female were seen at White Iron Bridge, and August 15 a female was seen 
near the outlet of Gabro Lake. 

Troglodytes aedon aedon (Vieill.). Houszs Wren. June 20 and 
July 15, 1914, the House Wren was found to be common along the north 
and south forks of the Kawishiwi in the Clear Lake region. 

Nannus hiemalis hiemalis (Vieill.).§ Winrmrr Wren. August 6, 
1914, a specimen was shot at the third portage on the Isabelle above Lake 
Bald Eagle; another was seen in that locality August 14. 

Certhia familiaris americana (Bonap.). BrowN CREEPER. Aug- 
ust 15, 1914, several were seen on the first portage of the Isabelle above 
Rice Lake. 

Sitta canadensis Linn. Rep-sreastep NutuatcH. 1914: July 25 
a female specimen was shot at the narrows of the South Kawishiwi south- 
west of the Clear Lake trail. 1915: August 11 this species was several 
times seen in the region of Lake Isabelle. 

Penthestes atricapillus atricapillus (Linn.). CnHickapEr. Com- 
mon throughout the region. Observed on North Kawishiwi—Clear Lake 
trail, July 5 and 6; one specimen was shot on the Gull Lake trail August 
18, 1914. 

Penthestes hudsonicus hudsonicus (Forst.). Hupsonian Cuick- 
ADEE. 1914: One specimen was shot August 18 midway on,ythe Gull 


Vol. Poe | 


1920 Errric, Haunts of Cairns’ Warbler. 551 


Lake trail, August 21 another was taken from among a flock of several 
along the small stream entering Rice Lake from the east. 

Regulus satrapa satrapa Licht. GoLpEN-cROWNED KINGLET. July 
22, 1914, a male specimen was shot on the east shore of Lake Isabelle. 

Hylocichla ustulata swainsoni (Tschudi.). Otive packEep THRUSH. 
1912: Common in the region about Clear Lake during latter June and 
early July. 1914: Frequently seen and heard again in the first men- 
tioned locality; August 21 an Olive-backed Thrush was caught in a mouse- 
trap set under an old log in deep woods at the first rapids of the Isabelle 
above Rice Lake. The same say another specimen was shot at a small 
lake one mile east of Rice Lake. 

Hylocichla guttata pallasi (Cab.). Hermir Taurus. Common in 
the region about Clear Lake during July, 1914. On the 7th a nest with 
four eggs was found by one of my companions, Prof. N. L. Huff, in a small 
sphagnum bog sprinkled with low spruces and tamaracs, along the old 
unused portage trail around the first two rapids of the North Kawishiwi 
river. July 11, a male bird was shot on the Clear Lake trail opposite these 
rapids. 

University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas. 


IN THE HAUNTS OF CAIRNS’ WARBLER 


BY C. W. G. EIFRIG. 


Every ornithologist, professional or otherwise, knows with what 
joyous anticipation one from time to time returns to the scenes of 
former explorations. There is a halo of romance around the places 
and the time of one’s early efforts in ornithology, where his first 
love and enthusiasm led him forth on many trips, always eager, 
expectant, and on the verge of new discoveries. This was the 
writer’s state of mind, when June 14, 1918, he once again found 
himself at Oakland, near the south-western corner of Maryland, 
in the so-called glade region of the Maryland Alleghanies, his 
ultimate goal being Accident, a quiet hamlet about twenty miles 
north, but still in Garret County. Nature had on her most 
engaging smile as I set out for my destination over the fine new 
state road, that connects Oakland with the Old National Pike 
at Keyser’s Ridge. A walk or drive over this road reveals the 


552 Errric, Haunts of Cairns’ Warbler. Auk 


beauties of this charming region; it winds through fine woods, 
showing quite a different type of vegetation from the prairies 
around Chicago, then it runs along the hillsides giving one glimpses 
of small farms, changing off with tamarack, spruce and alder 
swamps in the valley, and beyond that, line upon line of the 
peculiar long-drawn out hills and mountains of the Alleghanies, 
stretching out to the horizon in bewildering fashion, until lost in 
blue haze. The shallow valleys here are from 2000 to 2400 feet 
above sea-level; the surveyor’s plug before my host’s house at 
Accident shows 2395 feet, while the highest hill nearby, Georges 
Hill, is marked 3004 feet. To a westerner this will seem a negli- 
gible elevation, but it is here enough to produce Canadian condi- 
tions of climate; just a little lower down along the stream valleys 
are of course distinctly southerly conditions, producing an over- 
lapping and odd intermingling of Canadian and Carolinian faunae 
and florae, an eldorado for the nature-lover and naturalist. As 
there is also an abundance of pure, cool air, and a dearth of mos- 
quitoes, it is at the same time an ideal region for the tired vaca- 
tionist from the large cities. 

To see what changes, if any, would be observable here since my 
former rambles over this region, and to add new species, if possible 
to my list of ‘Birds of Allegany and Garret Counties’ (Auk, 
Vol. XXI, pp. 234-250; XXXII, p. 108, etc), the next month 
was spent in tramping over the hills and prowling through the 
ravines and thickets of this section, and through those of the 
neighborhood of Cumberland, Allegany County. In company 
with a friend, who is at once a mountaineer, keen observer and 
student of nature, I would set out early in the morning and return 
in the evening tired and bedraggled, but happy. 

In the cool, dark ravines along the brooks, as well as on the 
mountain tops, where a primeval stand of tall white pine, black 
spruce and hemlock is still found in a few places, and where the 
rhododendron flourishes, is the favcrite habitat of Cairns’ Warbler 
(Dendroica c. cairnsi). In my last communication on this region 
(Auk, XXXII, pp. 108-110), I had expressed my conviction that 
this subspecies should be eliminated from the ‘Check-List’ as 
indistinguishable from D. c. caerulescens, but I am now “fully 
persuaded.’’ The females are more distinguishable than the 


Vigk ao yan Errric, Haunts of Cairns’ Warbler. 55a 


males, although the difference is so slight, that the bird must be 
had in the hand to appreciate it. Here, in the mossy, fern-covered 
banks under the rhododendron, as well as in its almost impenetrable 
thickets the nests are located, and here the song, a rapid, explosive, 
ascending dill dill dree, may be heard on all sides. This song is 
indistinguishable from that of D. c. caerulescens. 

In the same places, but staying higher up in the tall hemlocks 
above the rhododendrons, the Black-throated Green Warbler 
holds forth, here as during migration, a companion of the Black- 
throated Blue. But since subspecies must be made, here it seems 
is where a new one should be introduced. Since my first visits 
to this region about 1900, I was struck by the dingy appearance 
and small size of most of the males, though some were of normal, 
intense coloration. At first, I ascribed it to wear and moult, 
but in June warblers are at their best in appearance, and further- 
more, the olive on the back seems darker, while the song is weaker. 
So here are differences that can be perceived when the bird is in 
bush or tree. 

In the same habitat is found the Magnolia Warbler, only in 
smaller numbers. Its song here as in Canada, sounds to one like 
weelsi weetsi weetsi, accent on the next to last syllable, whereas 
D. virens seems to say dee dee dee ah di, accent on the antepenult. 

Even less abundantly than the Magnolia is found the Black- 
burnian Warbler (D. fusca), in the same habitat. It is especially 
partial to the tops of hemlocks. On the 15th of June. we saw a 
male gathering nesting material on the edge of the much traveled 
state road, at Bear Creek Hollow. We watched it and saw that 
he took it inte a hemlock, about 35 feet up, ten feet out on a large, 
horizontal limb, where with the glasses we could make out the form 
of a tiny nest. A week later we got it down with much labor, 
only to find it empty. It is built of the thinnest dry twigs of 
hemlock, a little bast and fiber, and lined with horse hair; its 
diameter is three and a half inches over all, the cup one and three 
quarter by one and a half inches deep. The song cf the Black- 
burnian is low and remarkable for its nasal and ventriloquial 
quality. One sang a monotonous tsi tse tse tsnnn, another dell dell 
dell tsit tsit tsitnn, sometimes tender then again strangely muffled. 

A distinct surprise among the warblers was furnished by the 
Canada Warbler. Since my last visit four years previously it 


554 . Errric, Haunts of Cairns’ Warbler. laee 


had increased strikingly in numbers. During a brief walk on the 
afternoon of my arrival, we saw and heard about twenty in the 
same habitat as the preceding four species, and everywhere we 
went we found it common, in all kinds of woods, evergreen and 
hardwood, second growth brush, along creeks and on dry moun- 
tain crests. Their coarse, loud, unwarbler-like alarm note was one 
of the commonest sounds heard. Many were carrying food, 
showing that the young were already out of the eggs. The old 
birds would fly closely about one, with their sparrow-like chirp, 
scolding the intruder out of their nesting range. Similarly ob- 
trusive and solicitous were the Ovenbirds, likewise found in all 
kinds of woodland habitat. 

Two warblers had moved in since my last visit, the Yellow- 
breasted Chat, and the Golden-winged Warbler. Two pairs of 
the former had taken up their stand in small brushy second growth, 
where the primeval pine, spruce and hemlock had been cut out, 
moving in from lower down, where it is common. A pair of the 
Golden-wings were observed in Kolb’s Hollow, having also fol- 
lowed the clearings. This is a good instance of how man’s 
interference with and changing of natural conditions promptly 
influences flora and fauna. 

In the fringe of alders along Bear Creek and in swampy corners 
of the farm, the Maryland Yellow-throat can be heard, and along 
the creeks the two Water-Thrushes are found, Seiwrus motacilla, 
and S. n. noveboracensis. One of the former we saw carry food. 
Besides these, the Chestnut-sided Warbler is common, in the same 
places as the Canada and its song wi di di dereea almost becomes 
monotonous. The Yellow Warbler, however, is rare; I noticed 
only one pair and those in my host’s orchard, where one of them 
sang once as late as 9 o’clock in the evening. 

In the same place where the odd notes of the Chat were first 
heard, a Catbird struck up its song and amused us greatly by 
suddenly weaving in the call of the Whip-poor-will. This was the 
only time that I beard the Whip-poor-will song during my stay, 
whereas formerly the hollows and _ hillsides resounded with it 
every evening. There is a sad decrease in the numbers of this 
bird, and I may add, the same holds good for all places where I 
have been of late years in Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois, every- 


ee ed Eirric, Haunts of Cairns’ Warbler. 555 


where a decrease from former numbers. Let us hope that it has 
correspondingly increased elsewhere in its range. The Brown 
Thrasher, Red-eyed Vireo, and Wood Pewee also seemed much 
less common than formerly. 

Prairie Horned Larks are not uncommon breeders here. They 
are absent in summer below 2000 feet. A pair could usually be 
seen at certain places on the roads, always at the same ones. Of 
flyecatchers the Crested is found, the Kingbird more commonly, 
and each orchard generally barbors one pair of the Least, also a 
pair of Baltimore Orioles. Bobolinks are more numerous now 
than formerly, as it is to be expected when agriculture spreads out 
at the expense of the forest. At Thayerville, at the house where 
President Cleveland spent his honeymoon, an Alder Flycatcher 
was seen in the alders lining Deep Creek. The former Lake 
Cleveland has disappeared and is changed into fields. Meadow- 
larks are common, Redwings, less so, because cattail swamps are 
absent; and they have to frequent the alder-bordered natural 
meadows. A nest of a vair was found 20 feet up in an apple tree 
in an orchard adjoining one of these meadows. Nearby the 
call of the Kingfisher could be heard over Bear Creek, as well as 
the song of the Cardinal. 

One of the commonest songs here now is that of the Scarlet 
Tanager. It frequents the tops of wooded ridges, from where its 
strident notes could nearly always be heard, but sometimes is 
found in the woods on the slopes and even in hollows. It is 
decidedly on the increase. 

In the finch and sparrow tribe, the Goldfinches are common, 
Indigo Buntings not rare, Vesper, Song, Field and Chipping 
Sparrows plentiful. With three Vesper Sparrows we had a unique 
experience. Coming home one evening from where I had forgotten 
my glasses under the Blackburnian’s nesting tree, a new song 
made us stop below a Vesper Sparrow on a telephone wire. It 
was loud and musical, entirely different from the usual Vesper 
performance. A day or two later, on the road to Negro Moun- 
tain, I heard the same song from one of the same species, and a 
little farther on another one. I made sure it was the Vesper 
Sparrow but the song was plainly that of Bewick’s Wren! My 
theory is that a family of Vespers was raised near the nest of a 


[oct: 


556 Errric, Haunts of Cairns’ Warbler. 
Bewick’s Wren, where they heard that bird’s song all the time 
and learned it instead of their own. We met with no Bewicks 
this time, but a few are here, at least were until lately. The 
House Wren is increasing in numbers, and very probably Mr. 
Ridgway is correct when he says that the House Wren drives out 
Bewick’s Wren. The colony of Winter Wrens, which we dis- 
covered in 1914 on Negro Mountain, was no longer there. Grass- 
hopper Sparrows are common in alfalfa and timothy fields, as are 
the Towhees in the brushy second growth on the hills. 

The most interesting member of the finch tribe here is the 
Carolina Junco, which also seems to me to be growing less common. 
Still it can not be called rare. It is equally distributed over the 
rocky slopes and tops of mountains, as well as in mossy hemlock 
stands, but not below about 2500 feet. Families of old and young 
were seen, the young being heavily streaked on the breast, some- 
thing like young Chipping Sparrows. While watching the noisy 
antics of a pair of Ovenbirds on the road to Negro Mountain, a 
Junco dropped out of her nest in an invisible pocket in the low 
bank, opposite where a road had been cut along the hillside. 
The nest under overhanging roots and moss contained three eggs 
in the morning, in the afternoon, when I returned, only two, 
so I took it along. The nest, made of moss, lichen and a few 
plant stems on the outside and rootlets and horse hair on the in- 
side, measures five inches in diameter, the cup two and three 
quarter by one and a half inches deep. The eggs are pale bluish, 
with a wreath of pale lavender and brown spots near the thicker 
end, much like those of J. h. hyemalis in Canada. These pockets 
in low or higher banks along wood roads are characteristic nesting 
places, also for the northern form and the nest would rarely be 
found, if the owners would not drop out of them and fly away at 
one’s approach. I never found a nest on the level, chestnut- 
covered tops of the mountains. The song of the southern form is 
more sonorous and alto than that of the northern, it sounds much 
like the second part of the song of the Towhee. They breed twice 
in a season. 

Of the woodpeckers we saw a few Hairy, Downy, and Red- 
headed, also Flickers and Yellow-bellied Sapsuckers. The Pil- 
eated and Redhead are decreasing in numbers. Mr. F. Burk- 


ser jog. et) Errria, Haunts of Cairns’ Warbler. 557 


hard, my companion, told me that during or after a late. snow- 
storm in the previous April, several Flickers had been found dead, 
showing that even such a large and hardy species sometimes 
succumbs to inclement weather. 

Raptores are decidedly rare here, because people shoot all they 
can. We saw only two Redtails in Glotfelty’s primeval piece of 
timber in Negre Mountain, where we have seen them at each 
visit, probably always the same pair. Twice I saw a Sharp- 
shinned Hawk furiously pursued by a Kingbird, — that fairly 
screamed with rage. Turkey Vultures are still common. The 
old hollow logs and the many cavities between the rocks along 
the tops of the mountains offer good nesting sites for them, and 
the sheep, killed by roving dogs, no doubt furnish them with 
sustenance. 

Among gallinaceous birds the Ruffed Grouse is_ still fairly 
common. Once we startled several, together with a Rose-breasted 
Grosbeak, out of a large shadbush, where they had been busily 
feeding on the luscious berries. I was told that foxes are a great 
scourge to the Grouse, killing quite a few on the nests or at least 
destroying the nests. The Bobwhite has sadly dwindled away; 
we heard its call only once, and the Wild Turkey is almost gone. 

Since there are no water bodies here beside the bush-covered 
creeks, there are few water birds to be found. At two small 
artificial ponds I saw a family of Killdeer and a Spotted Sandpiper. 
In the house of the owner of one of the ponds, I saw mounted 
specimens of Pied-billed and Horned Grebes, as well as a Lesser 
Scaup, which occasionally drop into the pond during migration. 

The only addition to the avifauna of the region covered by the 
list in volume XXI of ‘The Auk,’ was made at Cumberland, 
whither I went from Accident. The old trails on Savage Moun- 
tain to Wolf Gap and Finzel, on Will’s Mountain to the Mason and 
Dixon line and others, added the warblers of the lower country 
to the list, such as the Hooded, Worm-eating, Prairie and Pine 
Warblers, and the Redstart, which should have been met with 
in the mountains, also Cooper’s and the Broad-winged Hawk. 
The Swan Ponds—not Swamp Ponds as given in my former list— 
on the West Virginia side of the Potomac, I found ditched and 
drained and turned into corn fields. However, we found a family 


558 ALLEN, Pattern Development in Teal. lage 


of Upland Plovers there. Thus does man’s activities play havoc 
with the finest natural homes of certain species of birds. The 
colony of Ravens, formerly located in the romantic Rocky Gap, 
six miles east of Cumberland, was also no more. As if to miti- 
gate this disappointment, however, I found on July 9, a family 
of Blue Grosbeaks (Guiraca ec. caerulea) on Knobley Mountain, 
making at least one species, and that an interesting one, to be 
added to the birds of western Maryland. 


Oak Park, Illinois. 


, 


PATTERN DEVELOPMENT IN TEAL. 
BY GLOVER M. ALLEN 


AN article by Mr. Frederic H. Kennard in* The Auk’ for October 
1919, describing and naming the Southern Blue-winged Teal 
as a distinct subspecies, brings out a point of considerable evolu- 
tionary interest, which it seems to me is worth emphasizing. The 
chief mark of the newly recognized race is the presence of a white 
superciliary stripe continuing the white crescent between the eye 
and bill, characteristic of the common Blue-winged Teal, and the 
two stripes, one on each side, meet at the back of the head and are 
continued medially to form a white nuchal patch of varying extent. 
This unusual extension of the white crescentic mark is found in 
the adult males only and is characteristic of the completely de- 
veloped nuptial plumage in the Southern birds. A_ similar, 
though often irregular line, is sometimes seen in partially white 
domestic pigeons and ducks. 

The formation of a definite pattern of pigmented (7. e., colored) 
and pigmentless (7. ¢., white) areas, particularly in birds and 
mammals, is a subject which has greatly interested me, and in an 
article in the American Naturalist (vol. 48, p. 385-412, 467-484, 
550-566, 1914) I have endeavored to establish that in these two 
classes of vertebrates, white markings when present tend to occur 
in certain definite places. This is due to the fact that the surface 


pep xx va ALLEN, Pattern Development in Teal. 559 
of the body may be divided into some eleven areas from whose 
individual centers the tendency to produce pigment in the epi- 
dermal structures (hair or feathers) tends to become less and less 
as the periphery of the particular area is reached. These areas 
may bear some as yet unrecognized relation to the distribution 
of nerves. The borders of contiguous areas may overlap, and 
the details of their topography in different mammals and birds may 
vary, but in general their outlines are fairly definable as follows: 

(1) a median crown patch, in birds pigmenting the top of the 
head from base of beak to occiput above the eyes; (2) an ear 
patch on each side covering the side of the head and upper throat 
from the level of the eye to the median line above and _ below; 
(3) a neck patch on each side pigmenting the area from the upper 
throat to the shoulders; (4) a shoulder patch on each side pigment- 
ing the feathers of the wing and a narrow area at its base from 
center of back to center of breast; (5) a side patch on each side of 
the body which includes the area from shoulder to rump; and (6) 
a rump patch on each side which pigments the posterior end of 
the body, the tail, and most or all of the hind leg. These patches 
are outlined in the accompanying diagram (Fig. 1). I have 
called these color areas primary patches. They may break up 
further to form complex patterns. 

The definition of these patches is sometimes complicated by two 
(or three?) other types of pigmentation which in some species 
co-exist with this centripetal type—namely, a diffuse pigmentation 
from many small independent centers, producing the spotted 
effect seen for example in the Dalmatian Coach Dog, and a cen- 
trifugal type, which produces black “points” at tips of nose, ears, 
limbs or tail in certain species. A black median area on the 
spine is perhaps a manifestation of this same type. These three 
types of pigmentation behave differently in heredity and have been 
studied lately by several geneticists. It is likely that the median 
crown patch, very small in mammals, may really consist of two 
bilateral centers, here in close juxtaposition for in birds it is fre- 
quently divided by a white median line, though in the few mammals 
where I have seen it (e. g., dogs) it is not so divided. 

From a study of pied individuals of species which normally 
have complete pigmentation, it is found that the white markings 


laze 
Oct. 


560 ALLEN, Pattern Development in Teal. 
tend to occur at the peripheries of the pigment centers as above 
defined, and result from the failure of pigment to develop at the 
edges of these centers. The more the pigmentation is restricted, 
the greater is the amount of white between the respective centers. 
If each patch or center were to be slightly reduced, a series of five 
pigment spots on each side, and one on the crown would result, 
bounded by white lines—a median white line from the occiput 
to tail, and cross stripes separating the five patches of each side. 
A much greater but regular restriction of each patch would result 
in reducing the pattern to a series of five small spots on each side 
with a single median one on the crown; and still further reduction 
brings about a pure white condition with black eyes—(possibly 


=e 


fa 
w'L 


d 


Figure 1.—Diagram showing chief pigment areas of a bird’s body, from 
above. 


the eyes being in part of ectodermal origin, should themselves be 
regarded as an additional pair of pigment centers). Such white 
animals with black eyes occur as artificial breeds in a number of 
species, and on account of their possessing a potential pigmenta- 
tion, act as pigmented individuals in crosses with true albinos 
which do really lack the pigment-producing factor. Actually 
there is great variation in the amount of reduction, for not only 


Vol Pets ea ALLEN, Pattern Development in Teal. 561 


does each spotted individual differ in the extent of its pigmented 
“areas, but corresponding areas of opposite sides vary in the amount 
of reduction in the same individual, so that often the contiguous 
patches of one side may show a white break between them, while 
those of the opposite side retain contact. 


Figure 2.—Head of Blue-winged Teal, to show pattern. In this and 
the other heads, the approximate outline of crown patch and the boundary 
between ear and neck patches, are shown by a heavier dotted line. 

Figure 3.—Head of Southern Teal, showing extension of white pattern 
through restriction of ear patch dorsally and posteriorly. 

Figure 4.—Andaman Teal (Polionetta albigularis) showing slight re- 
duction of ear patch. 

Figure 5.—White-cheeked Andaman Teal (P. a. leucopareus) showing 
incomplete formation of a white collar by failure of ear patch to meet the 
upper end of neck patch. 


But to return to the Teal, the point of interest is that the white 
crescentic mark of the normal bird is due according to this view, 
to a restriction of the ear patch (whose ultimate center is the aural 
region) at its front end, so that a pigmentless area is left at the 
base of the bill (Fig. 2). The head pattern of the common Blue- 


[oct 


562 ALLEN, Pattern Development in Teal. 
winged Teal has developed no further. In the Southern Teal, 
however, (Fig. 3) a further restriction of the ear patch has taken 
place, producing a complete line of separation between it and the 
crown patch, so that a white superciliary line results from the 
failure of these two patches to develop pigment at their common 
border; and in those individuals that show a white nuchal area, 
this restriction has involved also the posterior extension of the 
ear patches of opposite sides so that a white streak results when 
they fail to meet along the median line of the neck. Obviously 
this condition, with its more complex pattern, represents a more 
highly evolved plumage than that of the Common Blue-winged 
Teal. It is, therefore, not unexpected that it should occur only 
in the most highly developed or nuptial plumage, at the time 
when the bodily vigor is most intense. It may be well to add here 
that the presence of albinistic or white areas does not imply, as 
many suppose, an impaired bodily vigor, but merely a specialized 
condition of the factor producing pigment in the epidermis. The 
fact that the amount of white in the pattern of many natural 
species is very variable, indicates, I presume, that its areal develop- 
ment has not come under a strong selective force so that the bound- 
aries of the white areas have not become fixed. That the white 
head-marking of the Southern Teal is of a fairly definite nature, 
may show, conversely, that it has become a factor in this bird’s 
welfare and is tending to be symmetrically developed as part of 
a definite pattern. For this reason the extension of the usual 
white area is of value as a diagnostic mark of the more southerly 
breeding Teal. 

On my expressing to Mr. Kennard an interest in this bird, he 
has kindly called my attention to an observation of Mr. Stanley 
C. Arthur (since published in ‘The Auk’) who has for three years 
past kept in confinement in the flying cage of the Audubon Park, 
New Orleans, one of these Southern Teal, showing the character- 
istic “necktie” marking. In the spring following its capture, 
this drake molted into the nuptial plumage, but the white super- 
ciliary line and nape patch seemed less definitely white than Mr. 
Arthur’s recollection of them the year before. In the next year, 
however, when the bird again assumed its spring plumage, neither 
the white line nor the white nape patch was apparent. The bird’s 


Vol. rl 
1920 


ALLEN, Pattern Development in Teal. 563 
death occurred shortly after, in April of that year. This interest- 
ing case only serves to emphasize still further that this “necktie” 
pattern is a newly acquired character in the phylogeny of the race, 
and in the growth of the individual is assumed at the time of its 
highest physiological development. The fact that the captive 
bird finally lost this marking may have been due to impaired vigor, 
either as a result of old age or as a result of the abnormal condi- 
tions of captivity, which as is well known, nearly always result 
in interrupting the usual course of physiological processes. If due 
to senescence, it is paralleled by numerous other cases in both 
vertebrates and invertebrates. A familiar one is the “going 
back” of deer antlers in old males. 

The Southern Teal is not the only duck that might be cited as a 
case of formation of a distinct geographical race through the 
differential development of white areas in the plumage by res- 
triction of pigmentation. Mr. Outram Bangs has called my 
attention to the case of the Teals of the Andaman Islands, Pol- 
ionetta albiqularis, in which (Fig. 4) the ventral side of the throat 
and a spot just below the eye are white, showing thus only a shght 
restriction of the ear patches ventrally and about the eye. In one 
of two specimens from the same locality, however, white feathers 
appear at the base of the bill, and the white mark below the eye 
is much larger than in the other, indicating that the pattern is still 
in an unstabilized condition. The development of white areas 
thus begun, is carried still further in the race P. a. lewcopareus 
from North Reef Island, in the same group, in which the restrict- 
ion of the ear patches is so extensive (Fig. 5) that the upper throat 
and side of head to the level of the eye are white as far back as the 
ear opening, and a white collar has resulted through failure of the 
ear patch to reach the upper edge of the neck patch. Behind the 
ear, the crown patch is still united with the ear patch except at 
the occiput, where a very small white spot occurs in one of the 
two specimens seen. One might conceive of a further stage in 
evolution of this pattern, whereby the crown patch would persist 
intact, but the ear patches dwindle perhaps to a very small spot 
over the ear opening. Such a pattern is found in the Old-squaw 
female in winter. A subsequent loss of the crown patch would 
then leave a head pattern similar to the adult male Old-squaw. 


lore 


564 ALLEN, Pattern Development in Teal. Oct. 


Dr. John C. Phillips tells me that the Congo Teal shows very 
beautifully in a series of specimens from the same general region, 
a variation in the degree of restriction of the individual pigment 
centers. The common Mallard as I have shown in the article 
above cited (Am. Nat., 1914, vol. 48, p. 483) frequently shows 
under domestication, the development of white superciliary lines 
that correspond in position with white areas which have in other 
species become a permanent part of the pattern. The normal 
male Mallard has in the fully developed plumage, a white collar 
at a point bounding the upper limit of the wine-colored neck. ‘This 
is merely the development of a white area at the point of contact 
between the ear patches covering the sides of head and upper 
throat, and the neck patches pigmenting the lower throat. (Here 
the two sets of patches are of different colors.) In the domesti- 
cated Black Mallard this white ring is often absent, on account of 
the complete development of the two sets of pigment patches. I 
have also seen a female Mallard in which a white half-ring was 
present as an albinistic spot in just the place where it 1s com- 
pletely developed in the male, showing that this is one of the con- 
tact points between two pigment centers, a place of least color 
formation, where, if restriction of pigment areas takes place, a 
white mark will first result. Indeed the Anatidae seem especially 
favorable for a more intensive study of this method of pattern 
formation, and well merit special investigation as to the develop- 
ment and transmission of partial pigmentation. Already careful 
studies of rats, mice, guinea-pigs and rabbits have been made by 
geneticists on these lines, and it is to be hoped that comparative 
studies on birds will follow. 


Boston Society of Natural History, Boston, Mass. 


vel — Nat) FiersHer, Birds of S. EH. North Carolina. 565 


NOTES ON THE BIRDS OF SOUTHEASTERN NORTH 
CAROLINA. 


BY EDWARD FLEISHER 


DurinG the week beginning April 13, 1919, I visited that section 
of North Carolina lying between Wilmington and the mouth of 
the Cape Fear River, thirty miles to the south. Throughout this 
region the soil is sandy, with here and there muddy bottoms in 
which grow the great bald cypresses and live oaks with their 
draperies of Tillandsia “moss.” The coastal region at the mouth 
of Cape Fear River, and, more particularly, Smith’s Island, 
approach the sub-tropical in both climate and flora. Here such 
trees as the cabbage palmetto, the magnolia and the prickly ash 
are found. Many of the Smith’s Island palmettos, however, 
were killed or injured in the cold winter of 1917-1918. 

Smith’s Island, off the mouth of the Cape Fear River, is roughly 
in the shape of an arrow, the point of which, Cape Fear, is the 
southernmost point of North Carolina and at about the latitude 
of Atlanta, Ga. The flanks of the arrow consist of sandy beaches 
of a total length of about fifteen miles. In the central part are 
extensive grassy marshes bordered by dense woods. One end of 
the beach terminates in a narrow spit of sand separating the ocean 
from Buzzard’s Bay. It is here that the sea birds formerly nested, 
though I doubt whether they still do so in large numbers, as herds 
of semi-wild cattle wander over the island and their tracks can be 
seen in the sand. 

On the east side of Cape Fear the sea is gradually cutting into 
the woods, and the shore presents a wild aspect. The beach is 
covered with a tangled mass of prostrate and semi-prostrate trees, 
and the breakers seethe about those still standing. Here and 
there, lagoons of salt water are bordered and dotted with gaunt 
trees. 

It was on top of one of these trees that I discovered a Roseate 
Spoonbill (Ajaza ajaja), a thorough surprise and the best find of 
the trip. I had the bird under observation for only two or three 
minutes, though of course there was no mistaking him after the 


566 FuieisHer, Birds of S. E. North Carolina. lees 


first glance. I was rounding a “point 0’ woods” on the beach 
early in the morning of April 15 when I caught sight of a great 
pink bird about 100 yards away. I had barely time to feast my 
eyes on him through my 8—power binoculars when he discovered 
me and flapped off, flying directly past me toward the sea, then 
turning and making for another part of the island. According 
to Chapman, these birds in the eastern United States, are “ con- 
fined to the most inaccessible swamps in Florida.’’? However, 
when I told Captain Willis of the Smith’s Island Life Guard Sta- 
tion of my find, he said that he had seen two of these birds “last 
summer.”’ He could not remember just when, but he gave me a 
good description of the birds and a circumstantial account of the 
conditions under which he had seen them. They had impressed 
him as they were the only large pink birds he had ever seen on 
the island. 

The only herons observed on the island were the Great Blue 
Heron (Ardea h. herodias), the Louisiana Heron (Hydranassa t. 
ruficollis) and the Little Blue Heron (Florida caerulea), a few of 
each; and there were no indications that herons had nested there 
recently. Although I saw eleven species of Limicolae, it was 
apparently too early for large flocks like those that occur on 
Long Island, New York, a few weeks later. Nor did I realize 
my expectation of meeting the great north-bound army of warblers 
and other ‘migrants. In fact, with few exceptions the transients 
observed were those that usually occur in the latitude of New 
York during the last week in April, 7. e., about a week later. 

Rivaling Smith’s Island in interest for me was my trip to the 
heronry on Orton Lake. Lying about midway between Wilming- 
ton and the mouth of the Cape Fear River is this beautiful body 
of water with its temples of buttressed cypress trees. The owner 
of the lake, a typical Southern gentleman, takes great pride in his 
herons, and I was not at all offended when he told his colored 
servant, who was to be my guide, not to leave me alone with the 
birds. I must have been rough-looking in my dusty clothes and 
knapsack. Accompanied by two servants and the ubiquitous 
Ford, I was quickly driven to the edge of the lake and then rowed 
and poled between trees. The heronry, or what I saw of it, con- 
sisted of two parts: The Great Blue Herons and some of the 


ee =| FuersHer, Birds of S. E. North Carolina. 567 


Egrets (Herodias egretta) in one place and the smaller herons in 
another. All except the Snowy Egrets (Egretta c. candidissima) 
were busy with nesting. The young of the Great Blue Herons 
could be heard calling from the nest in the tops of the taller trees. 
The Egrets were sitting, and in their part of the lake the little 
Blue and Louisiana Herons left off their nest-building operations 
to scold us at our approach. Some of the nests in the small trees 
about us had their clutches of blue eggs, but as no birds approached 
the nest near us I was unable to determine to which species the 
eggs belonged. A conservative estimate of the number of each 
species seen is the following: Great Blue Heron, 150, Egret, 20, 
Snowy Egret, 8, Louisiana Heron, 50, Little Blue Heron, 75, 
Black-crowned Night Heron (Nycticorax nycticorax naevius), 1. 
The actual number of herons in the lake area was probably much 
greater than these numbers would indicate. 

In answer to a question, I was informed that “ Dey all goes away 
in winter, excuse a few of de big ones.” 

I spent practically all the daylight hours during the week in 
the field. With the exception of a few light showers one day, 
the weather was most favorable, though usually very warm. 

In the annotated list which follows, I give a conservative esti- 
mate of the total number of individuals of each species seen dur- 
ing the week. 

Gavia immer. Loon. One individual seen in Cape Fear River, 
April 15. 

Larus argentatus. Herrinc Guuu. Three, off shore. 

Larus atricilla. Laucguina Guuu. Nine of these birds were seen, 
most of them on the river. 

[Sterna maxima. Royat Tern (?). A large tern seen off shore 
appeared to be of this species. ] 

Sterna antillarum. Least Tern. With the exception of the above, 
these were the only terns observed. There were about 150 of them on 
the beaches of Smith’s Island, April 14 to 16. 

Rynchops nigra. Brack Skimmer. A compact flock of 24 flew to a 


mud flat on my approach and were still there, motionless, when I returned 
an hour later. 
Phalacrocorax auritus, subsp. DouBLE-cRESTED CORMORANT. A 
flock of five in the river on April 14, and another bird on the 17. 
Pelecanus occidentalis. Brown Prrican. The pelicans, I was in- 
formed, occur regularly along the Smith’s Island shore but rarely go much 
further north. I saw three flocks of nine, twenty-seven and four birds 


568 FueisHer, Birds of S. E. North Carolina. love 


respectively. I was talking to Captain Swann of the light house when I 
saw the twenty-seven. He remarked that he had never seen so large a 
flock before. The birds were all flying south, toward the cape. April 
15. 

Mergus serrator. Rep-BREASTED MeprGanser. Three birds, April 
14, one definitely identified as serrator. 

Anas rubripes. Briack Duck. Four. 

Charitonetta albeola. Burriuennap. A female, probably a belated 
migrant, April 15th. 

Oidema americana. American Scorer. Four, April 15. 

Oidema perspicillata. Surr Scorer. One, April 15. 

Ajaia ajaja. RosmaTe SPOONBILL. One. 

Ardea herodias herodias. Great Buur Heron. Besides the 150 
mentioned above, a few individuals were seen on Smith’s Island and 
along the shore of the Cape Fear River. 

Herodias egretta. Earnur. The twenty birds seen were in and about 
their nests and I assumed that the nests contained eggs or young though 
I was unable to verify my belief as my time was limited and the nests 
were difficult of access. 

Egretta candidissima candidissima. Snowy Earer. Only five of 
these beautiful birds were seen. They were apparently not nesting yet. 
They may have been the vanguard of a larger flock. 

Hydranassa tricolor ruficollis. Louistana Hpron. Many of these 
birds and those of the next species seen in Orton Lake on April 17, were 
carrying sticks, and some had completed nests. These were in small 
trees above the water, and a few of those near the row-boat were seen to 
contain four eggs. Lack of time prevented me from ascertaining to which 
species the eggs belonged as the birds kept their distance. The dates 
given by Chapman for the nesting of this species and the next for South 
Carolina are April 20, and 23, respectively. 

Florida caerulea. Lirrie BLur Heron. All the Little Blue Herons 
that I saw at Orton Lake were in the adult plumage, and all appeared to 
be nesting or building. Five of the nine seen at Smith’s Island were 
in the white plumage. 

Nycticorax nycticorax naevius. BLAcK-cROwNED NicHt Heron. 
A single bird in adult plumage flying over Orton Lake. 

Pisobia minutilla. LeasrSanppiper. Three on the beach at Smith’s 
Island, April 15. 

Pelidna alpina sakhalina. Rep-sAackrep SANppipEeR. A flock of 20. 
A few showed traces of reddish in the back and of black on the belly. 
The rest were in winter plumage, April 15. 

Calidris leucophaea. Sanperuina. Hight individuals, a few showing 
the beginnings of the summer plumage. April 15. 

Catoptrophorus semipalmatus semipalmatus. Witter. About 
15 of these handsome but noisy birds were observed along the beech. 
April 15. 


ok ema FueIsHer, birds of S. E. North Carolina. 569 


Actitis macularia. Sporrep SanppiperR, Three, April 15. 

Numenius hudsonicus. Hupsonian Curtew. Seven in all. April 
15. 

Squatarola squatarola. BLAcK-BELLIED Puiover. A single bird. 
April 15. 

Aegialitis semipalmata. SemrpaLMATeD PLover. One lone ring- 
neck was seen with large flocks of the next species. 

Ochthodromus wilsonius. Witson’s PLover. This was by far 
the commonest shorebird, and the chirping, unplover-like note was heard 
everywhere on the beaches. One hundred and fifty is a very modest 
estimate of the number seen. April 15. 

Arenaria interpres morinella. Ruppy Turnstone. A flock of 18 
showing various stages of plumage. April 15. 

Haematopus palliatus. Oyster CarcHrer. These queer birds were 
quite common (50), and the small clumps of oysters on the mud flats 
showed evidence of their work. In most cases, the smaller mollusks on 
the outside of the clumps were the ones that were opened and the larger 
ones were left alone. The natives call them ‘‘Oyster Birds’”’ which is a 
better name than Oyster Catcher, inasmuch as these ‘luscious bivalves” 
are not noted for agility. They, the birds, are said to be permanent 
residents. April 15. 

Colinus virginianus virginianus. Bos-Wuirn. Two coveys of 
about 12 each in Sunset Park near Wilmington. 

[Meleagris gallopavo silvestris. Witp Turxksy. According to all 
accounts these birds are still found in numbers in the unsettled regions 
back of the Cape Fear River. I was not able to locate any.| 

Cathartes aura septentrionalis. Turkey Vuttrure. I found this 
bird much commoner than the Black Vulture. About 18 of the present 
species were noted as compared with 4 of the next. 

Catharista urubu. Brack VULTURE. 

Haliaeetus leucocephalus leucocephalus. Baup Eacur. There 
were 2 Eagles over the Cape Fear River on April 14 and 2, possibly the 
same, on April 17. These were the only Buteonidae observed. 

Pandion haliaetus carolinensis. Osprey. Two pairs of birds with 
nests at Smith’s Island, and about 15 birds at Orton Lake. The nests of 
the latter were on the tops of the tall stumps of cypress trees that rose 
here and there from the waters of the lake. 

Cerylealcyon alcyon. Brutrep KinGrisHer. TwoatSmith’s Island. 

Dryobates pubescens subsp. SouTHERN (?) Downy WooppPEcKER. 
One. 

Dryobates borealis. Rep CockapEp Woopprrecker. Commoner 
than the preceding, but the relative absence of woodpeckers was notice- 
able. I observed a total of 10 birds of four species during the week altho 
the region is generally wooded. 

Centurus carolinus. Rep-BELLIED WooppecKER. ‘Three together 
near Orton. 


570 FieisHer, Birds of S. E. North Carolina. laze 


Colaptes auratus, subsp.? Fricker. Only one bird seen. 

Antrostomus carolinensis. CHucK-WILL’s-Wipow. A note heard 
repeatedly in the night of April 17-18 was undoubtedly that of this species. 
I did not see the bird nor had I heard the note before. 

Antrostomus vociferus vociferus. Wurp-poor-wiLu. I flushed a 
whip-poor-will on April 17 at Southport. 

Chaetura pelagica. CuimNey Swirt. Two at Southport, April 17. 

Archilochus colubris. Rusy-THROATED HuMMINGBIRD. One at 
Wilmington, April 14. 

Tyrannus tyrannus. Kincsirp. Ten at Southport, April 17. 
Eight at Orton, April 18. 

Myiarchus crinitus. Crrestep FiycatcHer. About as common as 
the preceding. This was one of the few passerine birds seen at Smith’s 
Island. I was told, however, that the woods were frequently ‘‘full of 
small birds.” 

Cyanocitta cristata cristata. Buiur Jay. Seen only at Southport. 
(About 15.) 

Corvus brachyrhynchos brachyrhynchos. Crow. This species was 
less common than the next, the ratio being about 1 to 4. Sixty-five crows 
of the two species were noted. 

Corvus ossifragus. FisH Crow. 

Agelaius phoeniceus phoeniceus. Rrp-wINGED BLACKBIRD. One 
seen at Smith’s Island. 

Sturnella magna, subsp.? Mrapowxark. A flock of 10 near Orton. 

Icterus spurius. OrcHARD ORIOLE. Three at Southport, April 17. 

Megaquisculus major major. Boat-TAILED GRACKLE. About 12 
in the salt marshes at Smith’s Island. The notes appeared to me more 
pleasing, or rather less discordant, than those of the Purple Grackle. 

Passer domesticus domesticus. Housr Sparrow. In the towns. 

Passerculus sandwichensis savanna. SAVANNAH SPARROW. One, 
on Smith’s Island. 

Passerherbulus henslowi henslowi. HbrNsLow’s Sparrow. One, 
at Southport. 

Zonotrichia albicollis. Wuitr-THROATED Sparrow. About 50 in 
all. 

Spizella passerina passerina. CHIPPING Sparrow. Saw only 2 
at Wilmington. 

Spizella pusilla pusilla. Fir_tp Sparrow. Only 4 seen. In fact, 
the absence of Fringillidae as compared with the number present at this 
season about New York was apparent. The notes were louder, less 
whistled, more bell-like than those about New York. 

Pipilo erythrophthalmus erythrophthalmus. Towurr. A few. 

Cardinalis cardinalis cardinalis. CarpinaL. Twelve. 

Passerina cyanea. InpiGo BuntTING. A male in transitional plumage 
with a flock of migrating warblers, April 14. 


ver ears vat FueisHer, Birds of S. E. North Carolina. 571 


Piranga erythromelas. Scarter TanaGcer. Wilmington, April 14. 
One. 

Piranga rubra rubra. Summer TanaGer. Three in song, April 17. 
Southport. Three at Orton, April 18. 

Progne subis subis. Purrte Martin. A colony in Southport. 

Hirundo erythrogastra. Barn SwaLLow. Six. 

Iridoprocne bicolor. TREE SwaLtow. Three. 

Stelgidopteryx serripennis. RouGH-wINGED SwALLow. Two. 

Vireosylva olivacea. Rep-EYED Vireo. Not as common as the 
White-eyed. 

Lanivireo solitarius solitarius. BLUnE-HEADED VIREO. Two. 

Vireo griseus griseus. WHuiTn-kYED VirEO. Generally distributed 
throughout this section. About 20 noted. 

Protonotaria citrea. PRorHoNoTARY WARBLER. I had barely re- 
covered from the thrill of my first Egret when I saw one of these gems on 
the swollen base of a cypress tree, not 10 feet from the boat. I still think 
that it was the most beautiful bird I have ever seen. Six in all were noted, 
in swampy sections. 

Compsothlypis americana americana. ParuLA WARBLER. These 
birds and probably also C. a. usneae were common wherever there was 
“Spanish Moss.’’ I saw about 50. 

Dendroica aestiva aestiva. YrLLow WarBLER. Wilmington, April 
14. One. 

Dendroica coronata. Myrtte WarBLER. Ten, Wilmington, April 
14; two, Southport, April 17; eight, Orton, April 18; ten, Wilmington, 
April 19. 

Dendroica dominica dominica. YELLOW-THROATED WARBLER. 
These were somewhat commoner than the Prothonotary Warblers and more 
generally distributed. 

Dendroica virens. BLACK-THROATED GREEN WARBLER. Song heard 
at Orton Lake. 

Dendroica vigorsi. Prine WARBLER. Fairly common in the long-leaf 
pine. Twenty-eight. 

Dendroica discolor. Prartrig WARBLER. Occurred with the pre- 
ceding but not so common. 

Geothlypis trichas, subsp.2 YELLOW-THROAT. One at Wilmington, 
April 19. 

Mimus polyglottos polyglottos. Mocxrna Birp. Not nearly as 
common as I had anticipated. I saw not more than 25 individuals. 

Dumetella carolinensis. Carsirp. Two. 

Toxostoma rufum. Brown THRASHER. Two. 

Thryothorus ludovicianus ludivicianus. CaroLinaA WREN. light. 

Troglodytes aedon aedon. House Wren. One, April 18. 

Sitta canadensis. Rep-sreastep NutuatcH. One bird at Wil- 
mington, April 14, an unexpected find. 


lara 


572 ’  AveriILL, Migration and Physical Proportions. Oct. 


Sitta pusilla. Brown-HEapED NutHatcH. In company with the 
preceding and with Red-cockaded Woodpeckers. Five. 
Baelophus bicolor. Turrep Tirmouse. Fifteen. 


Penthestes carolinensis carolinensis. CAROLINA CHICKADEE. 
Twenty. 

Regulus calendula calendula. Rusy-crowNrep KinGuer. A sing- 
ing male at Orton, April 18. 

Polioptila caerulea caerulea. BLure-GRAY GNATCATCHER. Five. 

Hylocichla mustelina. Woop Turusu. Song heard at Wilmington, 
April 19. 

Silalia sialis sialis. Buursirp. Three. 


Eastern District School, Brooklyn, N.Y. 


MIGRATION AND PHYSICAL PROPORTIONS. A PRE- 
LIMINARY STUDY. 


BY C. K. AVERILL 


Iv is a matter of common observation that birds most capable 
of long sustained flights are long winged. Such are the swallows 
and swifts on land and the terns, plovers and sandpipers along the 
shore. 

A bird flying 35 miles per hour passes through the air at the rate 
of 51 feet per second and the form of the tail evidently has much 
to do with the resistance offered by the air. It is evident that the 
stream lines that pass under the body of the bird will converge 
at the rear of the body, striking against the tail and causing undue 
pressure. In birds of superior power of flight—terns, swallows, 
swifts, gulls, kites, the tail is either forked or it is short, in either 
case there is little tail beyond the end of the under tail coverts 
in the median line.* It is the mechanical function of the under 
tail coverts to fill in the angular space where the tail joins the body 
where without the coverts an area of reduced pressure would be 
formed increasing the resistance. The tail of the barn swallow, 


“In the soaring hawk or eagle the large broad tail forms one of the three planes 
which support the body. 


Nol: oe | AVERILL, Migration and Physical Proportions. Me 


deeply forficate, is part of Nature’s ornamental scheme and such 
tails occur in terns, kites, swallows, where elegance of form and 
beauty and great ease of flight are combined. We shall find that 
among similar birds the species with the longer wings has a shorter 
or more emarginate or forked tail. 

These two points, long wing, and tail of small area we may ob- 
serve in the flying bird, but if we hold our bird in the hand, be it 
swallow or swift, we also notice that it has small feet and legs. 
Apparently Nature takes pains in reducing all superfluous weight 
and carefully considers all trifles. Among the economies the 
elimination of the hind toe appears to be included. Thus in the 
true snipe represented by the woodcock, Wilson’s Snipe and Do- 
witcher the hind toe is present. In the sandpipers which are 
much longer winged it is much smaller and in the Sanderling which 
seems the lightest and best formed of these birds and which makes 
an annual flight of 2000 miles across the ocean to the Sandwich 
Islands, the hind toe vanishes entirely. Again in the plover 
family it is present in the Lapwing and Surf-bird, rudimentary 
in the Black-bellied Plover and is obliterated in the Golden Plover, 
whose migratory flights so astonish us. 

In the petrels, those long winged birds of the sea, the hind toe 
is minute or lacking entirely. Can these instances be regarded 
as fortuitous? 

Along the same line we notice that the bill of our swallow or 
swift is extremely small although we cannot see that a larger bill 
would interfere with the capture of the insects which these birds 
feed upon. What we see is the cutting out of all surplus material. 

In the terns the feet are reduced in size very much as compared 
with the gulls. The bill, however, cannot be reduced and be effect- 
ive in catching fish. Reduction is possible only when not inter- 
fering with the life of the bird. 

We have then four points of a good flier,—long wing, short tail, 
or tail of small area, small bill and small legs as shown by length 
of tarsus. It is one object of this paper to show that the better 
equipped birds in these respects, in any group, have a greater 
migratory range. 

We will tabulate the genus Helminthophila from Ridgway’s 
‘Birds of North and Middle America,’ using measurements of 


574 


lore 


AVERILL, Migration and Physical Proportions. Oct. 


the male bird always. The first column contains the name of 
the bird, the second a brief statement of its range, the third the 
wing length, the fourth the tail length, the fifth column the differ- 
ence between wing and tail lengths. It is this column that shows 
at a glance that the bird making the long migration, is also best 
proportioned for flight. Measurements in millimeters. 


HELMINTHOPHILA. 
Species Range Wing} Tail | Diff. | Cul. |Tars. 
Tennessee Warb./E. N. A. N. E. New York to |64.5)42.5/22.1/9.6 |16.8 
to Alaska. In winter to 
Venezuela 
Bachman’s So. States to Cent. Am. 58 .9/44.2)14.7/11.4/17.3 
Blue-winged S. N. Eng. to Guatemala 60. 2/46.0)14.2)10.7/17.3 
Golden-winged |Mass. to Colombia 62. 2/46. 2)16.0)10.7/17.5 
Nashville Saskatchewan to Colombia 59 .2/43.9)15.3] 9.5)17.0 
Calaveras Brit. Col. to Mexico. 60. 2/45.5/14.7]) 9.6/16.8 
Virginia’s Mt. Dist. Color. to Mexico 61.2/46.0)15.2) 9.4/17.0 
Lucy’s Arizona and Mexico 52.1/38.6)13.5) 8.4/15.5 
Orange crowned |Alaska to Mexico 62.2/50.0/12.2) 9.6/17.8 
Lutescent Pacifie Coast—Alaska to 59.9/47.0)12.9) 9.4/18.0 
Guatemala 
Dusky Calif. Santa Barbara Is. and |59.2/49.8) 9.4)11.4/18.3 
adjoining mainland. 


Here we see 


by the figure opposite the Tennessee Warbler, 


At the 


22.1, that it is the bird making the longest migration. 
end of the list is the Dusky Warbler, 9.4, showing the longest 
tail of all and the shortest wing relatively. 


We notice that it 


carries a larger bill and tarsus than the Tennessee in accordance 
with what we have already said. 

In the same way we may compare the Orange-crowned, Lutes- 
cent and Dusky, three races of the same species and note the better 
flying characteristics of the two birds that reach Alaska. 

Let us in the same way make a table of the genera Oporornis 
and Geothlypis. 

These six birds are arranged in order of their relative wing and 
tail lengths. With the exception of the Kentucky they also come 
in order of the extent of their migratory range. While the tail 
and wing vary greatly the bill and feet remain very much alike 


ae aay vat) AvERILL, Migration and Physical Proportions. 575 


in size. It is evident from this table and the preceding that the 
important features are wing and tail. The increase in wing length 
is mostly in the primaries so that the long wing is a pointed wing 
as in the Connecticut and Kentucky, and the short wing is a round 
wing as in the Yellow-throat. With the round wing goes the 
round tail while the long wing accompanies the even tail. 


OpoRORNIS AND GEOTHLYPIS. 


Wing| Tail | Diff, | Cul. |Tar. 


Connecticut EB. N. A. North Mich. to Bra- |73. 1/49. 8/23.3)/11.9)21.3 
Warb. zil 


Kentucky E. U.S. Hudson Valley to 70. 1/51.0/19.1)11.9)22.3 
Colombia 

Mourning E. N. A. Canad‘an Zone, 61.5/49.0)12.5)11.4/20.8 
winters from Nicaragua to 
Ecuador 


(or) 
op) 
= 
= 
Te 
iw) 
— 
(or) 


Macgillivray’s |W. U.S. Breeds from Brit. |62.2)55.6 

Col. So. to New Mex. In 

winter from Lower Calif. to 

Colombia. 

Northern Yel- |So. Canad. to Costa Rica. 55.1/49.2) 5.9)11.4/20.5 
low-throat. 

Florida Yel. th’t./Gulf States. Winters in W. I.|55.2|53.0| 2.2)11.5!20.7 


Y ELLOW-THROATS. 


Wing| Tail | Diff. | Cul. |Tars. 
Maryland Atlantic Coast districts of {52.9/49.3) 3.6|10.5/20.1 
U.S. Winters in W. I. 
Northern N. E. U.S. and S. E. Brit. 55.1/48.2) 5.9)11.4/20.5 
Provinces. In winter to 
Guatemala. 
Florida Gulf States. Winters in W. 1./55.2/53.0) 2.2)11.5)20.7 
Western Arid regions of U.S. In 57.5/55.8| 1.7/11.3/20.9 
winter to Mexico. 
Pacific Pacific Coast—Brit. Col. to |55.8/52.6} 3.2/10.3/20.4 
Calif. Winters in Cape St. 
Lucas. 
San Blas Mexico only. 55.3/51.1| 4.2/11.4/20.8 
Salt Marsh California 52.6/48.3] 4.3]10.2/19.9 
Japala, Mexico 61.2/60.2} 1.0/11.2/21.0 


576 AVERILL, Migration and Physical Proportions. foot 


Of these eight geographical races the longest migration is made 
by the Northern Yellow-throat which has the shortest tail in re- 
lation to wing. It is important to notice that the southern, 
western and Mexican birds are all longer tailed with the exception 
of the salt marsh race. We often read in the text books that 
western races have longer tails, but it is seen in this table as well 
as in the others that it is the bird of limited range that has this 
characteristic, rather than the bird of any particular region. 

It will be of interest to tabulate the whole genus Dendroica on 
account of the number of species and because we have great dif- 
ferences in length of annual journeys 
each year to zero. 


from thousands of miles 


DenprRoica I. BREEDING IN HUDSONIAN AND CANADIAN ZONES. IN 
WINTER IN SoutH AMERICA. 


W. ibe Diff. Culm. Tars. 


Blackpoll Warbler 74.2 51.3 2.9 10 19.1 
Bay-breasted (3.4 53.1 20.3 ° 10:40 81853 
Blackburnian 67.8 48.3 19.5 929) Bie5 
Yellow 62.5 44.4 18.1 LOS 18.6 

Average 69.5 49.3 20.2 10.1 18.4 


Denproica II. Breepinc IN SouTHERN STATES. WINTER IN S. A. 


W. dhe Diff. Culm. Tars. 
Cerulean 65.5° 45.0) ~2055 9.9 1655 


Denproica III]. Axtaska TO LaBRapor. NOT BREEDING 8. OF 
CANADIAN ZONE. WINTERING U. S. To PANAMA. 


Myrtle (AN 56.27 U729 10. 19.6 


Denproica IV. BREEDING IN CANADIAN ZONE. NOT REACHING SOUTH 
AMERICA IN WINTER. 


Cape May 66.3 47.2 19.1 Serpe bytes 
Yellow Palm 67.1 54,:6°> 12.5 9.9 20.0 
Black-throated Blue 65.2) Die ae 9.45 Siz 
Black-throated Green 63.8 47.8 16:0) * 1020S. 
Magnolia 60.1 48.7 11.4 O20 ves 

Average 64.5 49.9 14.6 953 lsr3 


ae 


I 
JS 
s 
‘ 
' 


Mol: at vate AVERILL, Migration and Physical Proportions. SHLl 


DenpDRoIcCA V. BrREEDINGS. OF CANADIAN ZONE. NOT REACHING 
S. AMERICA IN WINTER. 


Prairie 57.6 47.8 9.8 OFAT alsa 
Kirtland’s Va OSES 12.6 ES 2255) 
Pine W259 54.4 Uf 10.9 18.5 
Yellow-throated 6629) 5087 16.2) 13.8) 14 
Chestnut-sided (Gey | GOs 1 118}, O16, LS 

Averase | 16604. 52:3 14:2 1.1 17.9 


Denproica VI. West Inp1ANn Species. Not MIGRANTS. 
W. Does Dit. se Cul war: 


Jamaica Yellow G5EO ee SOnon 47, 10.6. 22085 
Guadaloupe 5nd 4555) 12,9" WO;4 | 19 
Panama GGnON 4925 1625) LI0F 20: 
Adelaide’s 50. AP ei ONO) 1 As: 6 
Santa Lucia 56. Bill ESO) Ona | aes 
Cuban 58.9 AQ 4 9.5 10.3 16.4 
Vittelline 56.8 51.0 Fe Sie AOR LORS 
Plumbeous G19 5451 (eo lO 20E3 
Streaked S208 olen lee lesa S eS 
Average 59.5 49.4 10.2 10.6 19.1 


Taking the genus Dendroica the difference is almost entirely 
in wing length, the tail does not differ as it does when comparing 
geographical races, nor do the bill and tarsus differ much. 

In this genus as in the others preceding we can certainly “ pick 
the winner” by relative length of wing and tail. The Blackpoll 
is one of the most famous of all passerine birds as a migrant. 
Quoting from Cooke “the shortest journey any blackpoll performs 
is 3500 miles while those that nest in Alaska have 7000 miles to 
travel to their probable winter home in Brazil” and we find it 
showing the maximum difference between length of wing and 
tail 22.9. The Bay-breasted, Blackburnian and Yellow Warbler 
all of which reach South America in their flight show a difference 
of 20.3, 19.5 and 18.1 respectively. 

We note that the Cerulean Warbler although it does not go 
far north is well proportioned for flight (difference 20.5) and it will 
be found that the shorter winged species neither go far north nor 
to South America. 

I have tabulated measurements for birds of other families and 
the same principle seems to hold good in nearly every case, though 


lata 


578 AVERILL, Migration and Physical Proportions. Oct. 


of course in birds such as swallows and swifts and others especially 
adapted for continuous flight the points I have called attention 
to are not noticeable. It would be useless to multiply examples 
as the other tables simply emphasize what I have shown in the 


Warblers. 


SUMMARY. 


We have seen that the longest migrations in any group of simi- 
lar birds are made by those with longer wings, smaller tails, and 
smaller bills and feet, and from observation of birds of highly 
developed powers of flight we conclude that flight is easier for birds 
so proportioned. 

We know that migratory flights are a tax on the strength and 
endurance of birds, that they cross considerable bodies of water 
that in order to arrive in spring with the punctuality which many 
of them attain, they fly under unfavorable conditions, against 
adverse winds, in stormy weather, and are often found exhausted 
by the struggle. Perhaps if we recall some of the cases of warb- 
lers in distress we have witnessed or read of we remember that 
such long winged species, as Blackpolls, Myrtles, Yellows, Oven 
birds, Water-Thrushes, fared better than the shorter winged Yellow 
throats, Parulas, Redstarts. It is logical to conclude that by 
natural selection nature develops the characteristics of good 
flight and the fittest survive. 

If birds extended their range by sudden expeditions to some 
distant point then we might suppose the long winged birds had 
simply beaten the short winged. Perhaps to some extent this has 
happened. We may suppose that the Starling with its excellent 
wing and tail for flight will extend its range more rapidly than some 
bird of poor flight power. But when we look at the table of Yellow 
Warblers or of Parula Warblers the differences in physical propor- 
tions are so slight that it seems they could not be, as they are, 
important factors in acquiring range. They seem rather to be 
incipient developments that will increase with time. 

The forked tail accompanies the longer wing in our North 
American migrants and is an evidence of good power of flight. 

The birds of the west, those of and beyond the Rocky Moun- 
tains, while they may go far north to breed, many of them to 


Nol a | General Notes. 579 


Alaska, do not go far south in winter since the climate of our 
southwestern states and that of Mexico is such that food cannot 
be procured at that season. Their migratory flights are so much 
shorter than those of our eastern birds that they have generally 
poorer proportions for flight these conditions being particularly 
noticeable in the birds of the southwestern states, where so many 
are resident. This region then is the metropolis for long-tailed, 
sbort-winged, large-billed and large-legged birds. The Florida 
races are of the same sort but much fewer in numbers. 

Life for the bird is mainly a struggle for food, and this implies 
a struggle for room, for extension of feeding grounds and breeding 
places. In this struggle those with good flight abilities and vigor 
are found to have the widest distribution for it is written in the 
book of birds that the longed-winged shall inherit the earth. 


406 Stratford Ave., Bridgeport, Conn. 


GENERAL NOTES 


Roseate Tern (Sterna dougalli) Breeding in Virginia.—While 
spending six weeks during the spring of 1920 along the coast of Virginia, 
I visited every island from Cobb’s to Cape Charles, and was surprised and 
gratified to find the Roseate Tern breeding on three of these islands, 
namely, Cobb’s, Wreck and Isaac’s. They were in small groups of three 
or four pairs in company with Common Terns. I found them to be much 
more pugnacious than the Common Tern, and while darting at an intruder, 
would come so close that there was no doubt as to their identity. As 
Bailey, in his ‘Birds of Virginia’ does not mention this as a breeding bird 
of the State, I deem this fact worthy of record.—B. R. Bauss, M.D., 
Circleville, Ohio. 


Egret at South Orleans, Mass.—Mr. E. B. Mecarta, of Harwich, 
has given me the following facts in regard to the capture of an American 
Egret (Herodias egretta) at South Orleans, Mass. On July 26, 1920, Mr. 
John Kendrick saw a large white heron in a small pond near the state road, 
and on July 29 the bird was again noticed in the same pond flapping vio- 
lently as if injured. Upon investigation the heron proved to have had 
one foot nearly severed probably by a snapping turtle, and was captured 
from a boat. Mr. Mecarta amputated the foot, and delivered the bird 
alive to the Curator of the Franklin Park Museum, where it was left in 
apparently good health on August 2. Strong southwest winds which had 


580 General Notes. [oct 


prevailed for ten days may have carried the bird north. About the same 
time four “Portuguese Man-o-War’” were picked up on South Beaches 
near Chatham.—R. Heprer Hows, Jr., Chatham, Mass. 


The Louisiana Heron (Hydranassa tricolor ruficollis) at Cape 
May, N. J.—On August 1, 1920, about a mile west of Cape May, N. J., 
I flushed a small flock of herons containing five individuals of the Little 
Blue Heron (Florida caerulea) and one of the present species. The birds 
settled in a shallow pond and were flushed again at closer range. On 
both occasions the coloration of this bird could be distinctly seen both 
with the naked eye and with the binoculars, and as I am familiar with the 
species in the South I recognized it at once. Messrs. J. Fletcher Street 
and Samuel Scoville, Jr., of the Delaware Valley Ornithological Club, were 
with me at the time and also satisfactorily identified the bird. 

During the rest of the month the Little Blue Herons were seen almost 
daily as well as individuals of the White Egret (Herodias egretta), twenty 
of the former and eleven of the latter being present, but on no occasion did 
the Louisiana Heron again appear. New Jersey has always been in- 
cluded in the range of this heron on the basis of the statements of Audubon 
and Turnbull, that it occasionally migrated that far north, but so far as 
I know there is no specimen extant from the State nor any definite record 
of its occurrence. The above record therefore is of considerable interest 
and is perhaps a further illustration of the benefits to be expected from 
the protection that is being afforded these birds on their breeding grounds 
on the Gulf coast. 

The present summer seems to have been a good one for ‘‘ White Herons,”’ 
as my friend, John Treadwell Nichols, informs me that both the Little’ 
Blue and the Egret reached Long Island during August.—WITMER STONE, 
Academy Natural Sciences, Philadelphia. 


The Marbled Godwit (Limosa fedoa) on the New Jersey Coast.— 
On August 9, 1920, about a mile west of Cape May, N. J., a Marbled 
Godwit flew past me at close range, coming from one of the small ponds 
on the salt meadows and making for the beach. It was disturbed however 
by some people walking there and did not alight, keeping on down the 
coast just inside the surf. About half an hour later it returned and settled 
on the edge of a shallow pond directly before me where I had an excellent 
opportunity of studying its markings. As I can find no recent records of 
its capture or occurrence on the New Jersey coast this observation seems 
worthy of record. Old gunners of twenty-five or thirty years ago speak 
of shooting Godwits, but it is not always clear which of the two species 
they had obtained. We have two specimens of the Marbled Godwit in 
the collection of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia shot 
at Wildwood, N. J., by Dr. W. L. Abbott, September 14, 1880, but several 
more recent Godwit records are all the Hudsonian.—WITMER STONE, 
Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia. 


Vol. Pert | 
1920 


General Notes. 581 

Marbled Godwit on Long Island, N. Y.—On August 14, 1920, we 
had snipe-decoys set in a pool on the mainland marsh bordering Moriches 
Bay at Mastic, Long Island. It was about mid-morning, and hot, with a 
brisk southwest wind. A Marbled Godwit (Limosa fedoa) came in from 
the north, alighted with our decoys, where it spent about ten minutes, 
chiefly preening itself, a stone’s toss in front of us, then took wing and 
went on to the south. 

Its long bill was rose-pink for about the basal half, the rest seeming 
black; its legs were lead-gray in color. Coming in it called a single pecu- 
liar squawk or honk; alighted, and especially when other shore-birds 
flew by, it had an unloud, very goose-like honk. 

In view of the rarity of this bird on Long Island, and the interest as to 
whether some of the extirpated species are again becoming less rare, the 
occurrence seems worth recording.—J. T. Nicnouts anp CHARLES H. 
Roaers, New York City. 


The Willet (Catoptrophorus semipalmatus semipalmatus) in 
Nova Scotia.—Dr. Spencer Trotter recorded (‘Some Nova Scotia Birds,’ 
‘The Auk,’ Vol. XXI, No. 1, pp. 55-64, Jan., 1904) that not long before, 
presumably in the summer of 1903, he had found Willets conspicuous about 
the salt marshes near Barrington, Shelburne County, Nova Scotia, and 
that, although he had found no nests of the species, his son had there 
shot a fully fledged young Willet on the wing early in July. 

In 1910 the 8rd edition of the A. O. U. ‘Check-List’ said of the Willet: 
“Breeds from Virginia (formerly Nova Scotia) south to Florida and the 
Bahamas.” On what evidence it was then supposed that the Willet 
had ceased to breed in Nova Scotia between 1903 and 1910 I do not know. 

E. Chesley Allen, in ‘Annotated List of Birds of Yarmouth and Vicin- 
ity, Southwestern Nova Scotia’ (Trans. N. 8. Inst. of Sci., Vol. XIV, 
Part 1, pp. 67-95, Jan. 5, 1916) states of the Willet: ‘‘Summer resident, 
but more common during the fall migrations. They show all evidence of 
breeding in our locality, though I have not yet found nest or young. 
First appearance (5 years) May 4.” 

Finally, in a list of Migratory Birds Convention Act prosecutions, 
published in ‘The Canadian Field-Naturalist,’ Vol. XXXIV, No. 2, p. 36, 
Feb., 1920, it is stated that two residents of Central Argyle (Yarmouth 
County), Nova Scotia, had been convicted of shooting Willets. 

My own experience with Nova Scotian Willets is practically confined 
to the lower valley of the Chebogue River, in Yarmouth County, where, 
on the extensive salt marshes and the neighboring upland fields and 
swamps, Willets are not uncommon, as I have known since 1911, if not 
earlier. The only Willet which I have seen elsewhere was one observed 
from a train window, June 25, 1913, when it was flying over the salt 
marshes at Pubnico Harbor, Yarmouth County, Nova Scotia. 

I have occasionally searched for the nests or the young of the Willets, 
but without success until June 8, 1920, when I found a nest with four eggs 


582 General Notes. [Set 


of this species, in an open swale in an upland pasture, about a quarter of 
a mile from the nearest salt marsh or salt water, at Arcadia, Yarmouth 
County, Nova Scotia, on the western side of the Chebogue River. The 
nest was near the junction of the River Road with Argyle Street, and 
was about 150 yards from each of those much-travelled highways, which 
were in full view from the nest-site. Several cattle occupied the pasture 
at the time when the nest was found. The swale in which the nest was 
placed was of considerable extent and was of the kind preferred as a breed- 
ing-place by Wilson’s Snipe; in fact, a pair of those birds were evidently 
nesting there. The Willet’s nest was a slight hollow in the damp ground, 
lined with a few dead rushes. It was surrounded by growing rushes, 
cinnamon fern, low blackberry bushes, and wild rose bushes, and was well 
concealed. The eggs agreed with standard descriptions of Willets’ eggs. 
They and the nest were left undisturbed. 

The sitting Willet flushed from the nest at my very feet, and in appear- 
ance and cries was of course unmistakable. So fast did it tear through 
the low growth around the nest that it left me, as further proof of its 
identity, two of its feathers, one of which is being forwarded to the Editor 
of ‘The Auk’ with this note. 

On June 14, 1920, I found another Willet’s nest, containing four eggs, 
at Cook’s Beach, at the mouth of the Chebogue River. This nest was 
scantily lined with dry grass and ‘‘eel-grass’’ and was in a slight hollow 
on top of a dry, grassy knoll, about fifteen feet above high-tide mark, 
which was about fifty feet distant. The sitting bird was surrounded 
by short growing grass and strawberry plants, and by two or three small 
plants of Iris. It flushed from the nest at my feet, and by loud cries at- 
tracted its mate and its neighbors, so that I soon had the pleasure of 
seeing six Willets in the air together near me. I estimate that there were 
about a dozen pairs of Willets breeding along the Chebogue River in 1920, 
and the species is apparently to be considered not uncommon in suitable 
areas in southwestern Nova Scotia. 

When scolding an intruder, Nova Scotian Willets seem to prefer to 
perch on the very top of some spruce or fir tree, where they appear strangely 
out of place. They also perch readily on buildings, telephone poles, and 
fences. For such large game birds they are not very shy, and I have seen 
one perch on top of a telephone pole close beside the road until I, riding 
along the road on a bicycle, was directly opposite it, when it flew. 

Canada is making special efforts, under the provisions of the Migra- 
tory Birds Convention, to give the Nova Scotian Willets such effectual 
protection as shall result in their rapid increase in numbers.—HARRISON F. 
Lewis, Quebec, P. Q. 


The Willet in Nova Scotia.—In the last edition of the ‘Check-List’ 
of the American Ornithologists’ Union, under the head of Willet (Catop- 
trophorus semipalmatus semipalmatus), it is stated that “Breeds from ~ 
Virginia (formerly Nova Scotia) south to Florida and the Bahamas.” 
I am glad to be able to state that this bird still breeds in Nova Scotia. 


Nok iors a General Notes. 583 


On July 6, 1920, I saw a Willet flying over the salt marshes at Pubinco, 
two more on the same day at Wood’s Harbor—these records were made 
from the railway train—and on July 9, one at Barrington Passage, all 
in southern Nova Scotia. On July 18, on the sand flats of Barrington 
Bay, near Coffinscroft, I found a flock of ten Willets, and on July 25, at 
the same place, Dr. Spencer Trotter and I counted twenty-six of these 
birds. 

Dr. 8. K. Palten, of Boston, formerly of Yarmouth, tells me that Willets 
were shot in considerable numbers in the marshes at Comeau Hill, about 
twelve miles southeast of Yarmouth, every year. He heard of twenty- 
two being shot there in 1917. In 1919 some were shot and the offender 
prosecuted and fined at Yarmouth under the Migratory Bird Convention 
Law. 

Mr. Harrison F. Lewis, as will be seen by his note in this number, 
has given the final proof of the Willets’ still breeding in Nova Scotia by 
the discovery of two nests with eggs—Cuartes W. Townsenp, M.D., 
98 Pinckney St., Boston, Mass. 


Breeding of the Semipalmated Plover (Aegialitis semipalmata) in 
Yarmouth County, Nova Scotia.—On June 14, 1920, at Cook’s Beach, 
at the mouth of the Chebogue River, Yarmouth County, Nova Scotia, 
I found a nest and four eggs of the Semipalmated Plover (Aegialitis semi- 
palmata (Bonap.)). The nest was a short distance above ordinary high- 
tide mark, at a point where the beach consisted of smooth gray stones of 
moderate size, among which had lodged enough soil to support a very 
scanty growth of fine, short grass. The four eggs, which corresponded in 
appearance with the description of the eggs of this species contained in 
Chapman’s ‘Handbook of Birds of Eastern North America,” 1912 edi- 
tion, lay, points ‘nward, on a few bits of seaweed, in a slight, circular 
depression, apparently made by the bird. They were wholly without 
shelter, yet so well did they blend in appearance with their surroundings 
that I bad previously searched the beach carefully for three hours without 
finding them. I finally discovered them by seeing the parent Plover run 
to them and incubate them while I sat motionless beside some lobster- 
traps which were piled on the beach a few rods away. After incubating 
for about ten minutes, the Plover became uneasy, left the eggs, and, with 
short runs and frequent pauses, repeatedly approached within eight feet 
of me on the open beach, giving me the best of opportunities to see in 
detail the characteristic markings of the species. I have been familiar 
for many years with the appearance and notes of both the Semipalmated 
Plover and the Piping Plover, and, under the circumstances, could make 
no error in this identification. There were at least five pairs of Semi- 
palmated Plovers at Cook’s Beach on the day of my visit, all apparently 
breeding there, but I found one nest only belonging to that species. The 
nest and eggs were left untouched. 

The 1910 edition of the A. O. U. ‘Check-List’ says that this Plover 
“breeds from Melville Island, Wellington Channel, and Cumberland 


584 General Notes. lace 


Sound to the valley of the Upper Yukon, southern Mackenzie, southern 
Keewatin, and Gulf of St. Lawrence.” The Gulf of St. Lawrence does 
not extend south of latitude 45° 35, N., while Cook’s Beach is in latitude 
43° 44, N., so that it is evident that the breeding-range of this bird extends 


farther south than was supposed.—Harrison F. Lewis, Quebec, P. Q. 


The Cowbird’s Whistle.—During a visit of five days at Jamestown, 
R. L., July 3-7, 1915, I frequently heard a male Cowbird (Molothrus 
ater ater) whistle in the following manner. He gave two long whistles, 
inflected upward, followed by three short, quick whistles on a lower pitch. 
His only variation was to omit one of the long whistles. This bird inter- 
ested me not a little, for in Lexington, Mass., where the Cowbird is com- 
mon—especially in the spring and early summer—I have noted a remark- 
able uniformity in its note. The Lexington birds give one long whistle 
followed by two short ones—never more and never less. 

I should not have ventured to call attention to this Jamestown bird, 
if the matter had not been brought to my memory by another Cowbird 
(presumably another one) at exactly the same spot in Jamestown. On 
May 2, 1919, as I was passing the corner of the road where I had heard 
the bird four years before, a Cowbird uttered a long whistle, then two 
short ones, and concluded the series with another long whistle. This 
performance was not exactly the same, to be sure, as that heard in 1915, 
yet it was similar to it, and, at the same time, very different from our 
Lexington birds. During the spring of 1919 I noticed repeatedly a similar 
extension in the whistling of another Cowbird, two or three miles away 
in Saunderstown, R. L., although other Cowbirds near at hand whistled 
as the Lexington birds do. 

A small matter, all this, perhaps, yet in the light of Mr. Saunders’ il- 
luminating demonstration in his article on Geographical Variation in 
Song (‘The Auk,’ 1919, pp. 525-528) the thought suggests itself that there 
may be many minor variations in bird-songs, slight in direct proportion 
to the distance separating varying birds. Possibly these Rhode Island 
Cowbirds presented a variation of a longer song of which I am ignorant, 
but which may be heard in the southern states—Wrnsor M. Tyter, 
M.D., Lexington, Mass. 


Dance of Purple Finch.—The following description of the ecstatic 
movements of a Purple Finch (Carpodacus purpureus purpureus) is inter- 
esting in the light of recent discussion. At six-fifteen (Eastern Time) 
on the afternoon of May 16, 1920, my wife called my attention to a male 
Purple Finch fluttering among the branches of our cherry tree. A female 
Purple Finch was soon discovered sitting quietly in the same tree. The 
male remained about five feet from the female, taking short, nervous 
flights, raising his crest and softly uttering the call note. In a few mo- 
ments the female flew down to the ground. At once the male followed 
and became violently excited, drawing his quivering wings out in an are 


VO te er General Notes. 585 


until the ends of the primaries swept the ground. For about four or five 
minutes this prancing dance was continued while he drew nearer the 
passive female. And now when he was about two inches from and:in front 
of her he picked up a straw, dropped it and picked up a piece of grass 
which hung from each side of his bill. This seemed to be the signal for 
the greatest agitation on his part; with ecstatic dance, full song and vi- 
brating wings he moved slowly on beating feet, back and forth before 
the female; then he rose six inches in the air, poured forth glorious song 
notes and dropped to the ground at one side of the female. He landed 
on his feet but instantly took a most dramatic pose by holding stiffly 
his spread tail to the ground and tilting back on that support with head 
held high, the raised crest and carmine ruff adding to the effect. Then 
like a little tragedian he rolled over on his side, apparently lifeless; the 
song ceased and the straw fell from bis bill. Up to this time the female 
had remained oblivious as far as outward manifestation showed, but 
now she turned quickly and gave the male as he lay “‘dead”’ a vicious 
peck in the breast, whereat he came to and flew up in the tree, a normal 
bird once more, and was soon singing in the usual deliberate fashion from 
a high perch. The female busied herself about the spot where he had 
just danced and soon finding the straw and grass which he had dropped she 
picked them up in her bill and flew into the tree where she went searching 
from place to place for a spot to start a nest. 

I have had one other similar experience with a Purple Finch which 
included the dance and the straw, but without this dramatic ending. 
The birds which I have described above were already mated. What 
relation does this dance of the straw bear to the starting of the nest? 
At first glance it appears to the reason of man to be an elaobrate attempt 
to stimulate the female to start building the nest.—Gorpon Borr WELL- 
MAN, 4 Dover Road, Wellesley, Mass. 


Breeding of the Evening Grosbeak in Manitoba.—During the 
week-end of May 29-June 1, while collecting at Gimli, Lake Winnipeg, 
I secured several specimens of the Evening Grosbeak. Besides the fact 
that this was a very late date for the birds in this part of the Province, 
I was interested to note that they all appeared to be paired, with the one 
exception of a male which was apparently courting a female Rose-breasted 
Grosbeak. They were present during the whole of the week-end and 
from their behaviour I judged that they were mating and preparing to 
nest. Knowing that I should be unable to visit the locality again before 
August, I mentioned the facts to my friends, Messrs. A. G. Lawrence and 
Harrold, of this city, asking them if they could run up in the meantime 
and keep their eyes open for the birds. Mr. Harrold managed to visit 
Gimli on July 1 and found the:birds there as expected. He tells me they 
were fairly plentiful, but he found no nests as his time was very limited. 
Early in August I was myself back in Gimli, again found the Evening 
Grosbeak plentiful, and on August 9 collected a juvenile bird. There is 
therefore no doubt that they bred here. 


586 General Notes. lon 


Mr. Lawrence visited Pine Lake on the borders of Manitoba and On- 
tario (actually in Ontario) on July 3. He found the Evening Grosbeak 
in some numbers but found no nest. 

Since returning to Winnipeg, Mr. Lawrence tells me that one of the 
orchardists at the Agricultural College told him that he had actually 
found the nest of an Evening Grosbeak near the college grounds. Mr. 
Lawrence promptly went out to see it, but the man was unable to locate 
it again and supposed that it had been destroyed. 

“My own time, from the middle of June to the beginning of August, 
was spent at the Manitoba University Biological Station at Indian Bay, 
Shoal Lake, Lake of the Woods. Indian Bay is in Manitoba, a few miles 
from the Ontario boundary. I saw no signs of Evening Grosbeaks till 
July 23, when I heard the note on one of the islands in the bay. To 
my surprise I found an old bird accompanied by a single young one clam- 
ouring for food. To my great regret I failed to secure either of them, 
as they were almost at once lost to view in the growth and were not seen 
again till leaving the island and out of range. On the 26th, however, 
on the mainland and not far from the Biological Station, I again heard 
the note and this time found a family of three or four being fed by the 
parents. I shot two of the young, but one was lost in the dense growth. 
Later in the day I came across yet another family of young and collected 
one of these. There can be no doubt that these birds were bred in the 
immediate vicinity as the youngest of the two I secured could not have 
been long out of the nest. They may have been reared on one of the is- 
lands, though the forest is so dense that they more probably had their 
homes on the mainland and escaped observation earlier—Wm. Rowan, 
Department of Biology, Alberta University, Edmonton, Alta., Canada. 


A Change in the Nesting Habits of the Common House Sparrow 
(Passer domesticus).—After its introduction into the National Capital, 
the House Sparrow bred the following spring and summer in many places. 
Hundreds of them made their nests in the vines on churches and elsewhere; 
while it was no uncommon thing to observe from three to half a dozen 
of their big, bulky nests in one of the street maples or other trees. They 
were all the more conspicuous for the reason that the birds bred so early 
that their nests were in evidence long before the selected trees had fully 
leafed out. 

Then, in a year or so, followed the ‘“sparrow-war’’—a persecution to 
the death of these birds, carried on in the most merciless manner. Their 
nests were pulled out of trees and other places more rapidly than they 
could build them; great nets were thrown over vines on churches, houses, 
and other buildings after roosting time, and thousands of others fell vic- 
tims to the law ordering their extermination. Various other devices were 
resorted to in order to destroy this poor, little, introduced feathered 
““pest’’; but the House Sparrow had come to stay, and, owing to his long, 
long training in the cities of many countries and among all nations of men, 


Vol. PERV IL General Notes. : 587 


he had learned a whole lot about a good many things—especially about 
the importance of the matter of propagating his own species. Here in 
Washington, only a few years ago, he quit building, communal style, in 
the vines covering such “sacred edifices’ as churches; he also practically 
gave up nesting in trees that lined the streets and avenues in all directions. 
As a matter of fact, the sparrow gave up his housekeeping in any such 
public places. 

Now this year (1920) I have given especial attention to the nesting of 
this species here in this city, and the interesting fact has come to my 
notice that the bird has not built out in plain sight anywhere. I have 
been unable to observe the presence of a nest within the city limits. That 
they are nesting in as great numbers as ever there can be no doubt; for, 
as the weather warms up, one may note the males courting the females 
as usual, and both sexes gathering and flying away with materials for 
nest construction. However, both males and females have become ex- 
tremely secretive; and whatever place a pair selects for a nesting-site, 
they make more than certain that no part of the nest is allowed to stick 
out beyond the entrance. On several occasions I watched a bird with 
some nesting material in its beak, to note where it flew, and thus dis- 
cover where a nest would be later on. Every time I did so, however, the 
bird would drop what it had; in an unconcerned manner take up some- 
thing else, or fly up into a tree until I took my departure. I have not seen 
a House Sparrow’s nest ina tree in Washington this year; while twenty- 
five or thirty years ago one could count as many as half a dozen in a single 
tree, sometimes, on any of the busiest thoroughfares.—Dr. R. W. Suo- 
FELDT, Washington, D. C. 


Notes on the Acadian Sharp-tailed Sparrow (Passerherbulus nel- 
soni subvirgatus).—On June 12, 1920, inasmall salt marsh near Bunker’s 
Island, at the southern end of Yarmouth Harbor, Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, 
I found the occupied nest of a pair of Acadian Sharp-tailed Sparrows. 
The nest proper was a neat, round cup of fine, dry, dead grass, with some 
horsehair in the lining. Its foundation consisted of some small masses 
of “eel-grass” and roots. Its dimensions were: inside diameter, 2.5 in.; 
outside diameter, 4.5 in.; inside depth, 1.5 in.; outside depth, 2.375 in. 
It was elevated above the general surface of the marsh by being placed 
on the top of a low, grassy ridge, about fourteen inches high, formed 
from material thrown up when a ditch was dug across the marsh, many 
years before. During some storm a mat of dead “eel-grass’’ had been 
left on top of this ridge, and this had later been lifted by the growing 
marsh grass, leaving several inches between it and the ground. The nest 
was placed at the northwest edge of this mat, about half of the nest being 
under it, while the other side was sheltered and concealed by grass about 
six Inches high. The nest was not sunk in the ground at all. 

Two young Sharp-tails, partly feathered, and nearly ready to leave 
the nest, were in their snug home, while the dried body of a third young 


5S8 General Notes. lace 


bird, which evidently had died soon after hatching, lay on the front edge 
of the nest. The living birds had their eyes open and feathers partly 
covering the head, back, chin, and the sides of breast and belly. A stripe 
over each eye and one in the center of the crown were buffy; the rest of 
the upper parts were fuscous, the feathers tipped with buffy; the sides of 
the throat were buffy, the sides of the breast whitish, streaked with fus- 
cous, and the sides of the belly whitish. They were still so young that, 
when touched, they would open wide their bright red, yellow-edged 
mouths. 

The nest was found after I had quietly watched the parent Sparrows 
for about an hour, while they were bringing food to their young. Most 
of the food appeared to be obtained on the salt marsh, within a rod or 
two of the nest, but the birds visited also an upland hayfield nearby. 
The old birds never alighted at the nest nor took flight from it, but de- 
scended and arose at various points distant from one to two yards from 
their home. On one occasion one of them was observed to carry off a 
white sack of excrement. The male sang from time to time from a piece 
of driftwood on the marsh about 30 feet distant from the nest. When 
I was examining the nest and the young birds, the parents made no demon- 
stration for some minutes, but later they came near and uttered chip’s, 
much like those of Savannah Sparrows. There was no difficulty in identi- 
fication, as these birds, with which I have been familiar for some ten 
years, differ markedly in appearance and song from Savannah Sparrows 
or any other birds to be found in Nova Scotia. 

On June 17 I again visited this nest, found it empty, and collected it. 
It has since been presented to the Victoria Memorial Museum, Ottawa, 
Ontario. When collected, the nest was thoroughly wet, evidently as a 
result of having been flooded by the high spring tides then occurring, 
there having been a new moon on June 16, for norain had fallenat Yarmouth 
in the interval between my two visits to the nest. There were, of course, 
spring tides about June 1, the date of the previous full moon, when the 
nest probably contained eggs, but these would not be as high as the spring 
tides of the new moon, and may not have reached the nest. There is no 
apparent reason, however, why the spring tides accompanying the new 
moon of May 18 should not have been as high as those of the new moon 
in June and flooded the nest-site. Probably the nest was built immedi- 
ately after those spring tides subsided. It would be interesting to know 
if this was a mere coincidence or if these birds, when nesting in salt marshes, 
take into account the variations in the rise and fall of the tides, and thus, 
indirectly, the phases of the moon! 

Mr. W. H. Moore has described (Cat. of Can. Birds, Macoun & Macoun, 
Ottawa, 1909, pp. 507-508) some nests and eggs of this subspecies from 
fresh-water marshes along the St. John River in New Brunswick, but, 
so far as I have been able to ascertain, the present is the first description 
of a salt marsh nest of this species, and the first definitely identified nest 


Vol. aN) General Notes. 589 


of the species recorded from Nova Scotia, where these birds are common 
in suitable localities in the breeding season. 

On June 12, a fine, bright, windy day, Acadian Sharp-tailed Sparrows 
frequently delivered their flight-songs all about me during the time that 
I remained in their marsh, from 10.060 a. m. to 4.00 p. m. When about 
to sing his flight-song, the male Sharp-tail rises, on fluttering wings, 
diagonally upward from the marsh to a height of 25 or 30 feet, uttering 
meanwhile a slow ser‘es of chip’s. He then spreads his wings and, as he 
sails slowly downward, utters once bis husky sh-sh-sh-ulp, then flutters 
downward a few feet, with frequent chip’s, then sets his wings and sails 
and sings a second time, and finally, with more fluttering and more chip’s, 
descends to his perch, where he continues to sing, but is silent in the inter- 
vals between songs.—Harrison F. Lewis, Quebec, P. Q. 


Notable Warblers Breeding Near Aiken, S. C.—The Swainson’s 
Warbler (Limnothlypsis swainsoni) is known to nest abundantly along 
the swamps of the Savannah River near Augusta, Ga. The hills rise 
steeply on the South Carolina side of the river towards Aiken, eighteen 
miles away and six hundred feet above sea level. The surrounding coun- 
try is rolling, sandy, farming land, with numerous small streams, and d 
few large mill ponds. The creek bottoms are generally heavily woodea 
and contain patches of dense tangled underbrush and cane (Arundinaria 
tecta). 

We found the first Swainson’s Warblers on April 23, 1920, two together 
in open woods near a mill pond. On and after May 7 we always heard 
two birds singing in this particular neighborhood, but were unable to 
find a nest. One of these birds sang continuously in a narrow strip of 
woods between a railroad and a high-road, paying no more attention to 
passing trains or trucks than did the Hooded Warblers or White-eyed 
Vireos. Everywhere the singing birds paid very little attention to oue 
presence. It was our experience in every instance that we could locajr 
and approach a singing bird without much difficulty, and that he would 
continue singing uninterruptedly. 

After May 8 we found one or more Swainson’s Warblers in every suit- 
able locality; that is, in damp woods near running water or ponds where 
there were thick undergrowth and cane. 

On May 23 we found a nest. It was on the side of an embankment, 
ten feet below a carriage road, and the same distance from a small stream. 
We were crossing the stream on a fallen log when we looked down and 
saw the bird sitting on her nest about four feet away. She watched us 
with no sign of fear, and slipped off her nest after we had been moving 
about for several minutes. There were three eggs in the nest, which 
was fastened securely in the tops of several stalks of cane bent over, so 
that the nest was four and a half feet from the ground. We returned the 
following mid-day. One bird was on the nest, and the mate soon ap- 
proached, singing as he hopped leisurely along, and took a bath in the 


590 General Notes. love 


stream. We walked out on the log and took several pictures of the bird 
on the nest. Not even the click of the camera made her move or show 
fear. Unfortunately the pictures were not good. Another day when we 
arrived no bird was on the nest, but while we were watching, about twelve 
feet away, she returned and settled herself on the nest. May 30 two 
eggs were hatched. June 2 three tiny young ones were in the nest. Some 
tragedy occurred that night, for the following morning the nest was empty, 
though apparently undisturbed, and the male was singing in the distance. 

Miss Ford found another nest on July 19, about a quarter of a mile 
away from the first nest. It was in a tangle of cat brier vine and gall 
berry, about three and a half feet from the ground almost on the edge of 
a creek, and close to a big fallen pine, against a bank of kalmia and cane. 
The nest contained three young birds very nearly fledged. Both parents 
were fluttering and chipping nearby, but they went about their business, 
and during the next half hour were seen to feed the young. 

On July 1, Miss Ford also watched two very young birds being fed. 
They were hiding on the ground in very thick underbrush, and were 
fed by both parents. She was attracted to the spot by the singing of 
the parent. 

The fervent singing of Swainson’s Warbler was a constant pleasure this 
spring. As Mr. Wayne says, “Its notes are full of sweetness, and at 
times it is really inspiring.”’ 

A delightful experience was on the evening of June 29. Miss Ford was 
with a party of friends having picnic tea on the banks of a creek, when 
suddenly a Swainson’s Warbler burst into song. He was in plain sight 
about forty feet away, over the high road, on the edge of the woods. He 
started a chorus of song from Prothonotaries, Hooded Warblers, and 
White-eyed Vireos, which lasted for ten minutes, until a passing auto- 
mobile broke up the concert. 

Kentucky Warblers (Oporornis formosa) were found on June 6, and 
again on June 7, while looking for Swainson’s Warblers. They must be 
shy birds, for we had not found them before, nor did we hear their song. 
We found two families, in deep swampy woods, eight miles apart, and in 
each instance we saw the birds at close range, and watched both parents 
feeding young birds. This is unusually far east for the Kentucky Warbler 
to be found nesting. 

Louisiana Water-Thrushes (Seiucrus motacilla) we found to be rather 
abundant. Last year Mr. Wayne recorded our finding a pair breeding at 
Graniteville, S. C., five miles from Aiken. This spring we saw and heard 
them in every suitable locality around Aiken. On April 13 we found a 
pair while on May 23 in exactly the same spot we saw two adults 
feeding and followed by their very young birds. 

On May 9 we found a nest partially completed and watched the bird 
building it, but later visits showed that it had been abandoned. On 
June 1, and on June 4, in different swamps we saw adults followed by young 
birds.—Marion J. PELLEW AND Louiss P. Forp, Aiken, S. C. 


Vol. | General Notes. 591 


The Yellow-throated Warbler (Dendroica dominica dominica) at 
Cape May, N. J.—While examining the Pitch Pine trees in the woods 
at Cape May Point at the southernmost extremity of New Jersey, on July 
13, 1920, in a search for some young of the Pine Warbler (Dendroica vigorsi), 
T noticed the terminal portion of a small branch in violent agitation and 
focusing my binoculars upon it was astonished to see an adult Yellow- 
throated Warbler (D. dominica dominica) emerge from among the needles. 
I watched it feeding in this tree for some little time, hoping that it might 
lead the way to a nest or brood of young, but it seemed concerned entirely 
with obtaining food for itself. Finally it disappeared behind the main 
trunk of the tree and apparently flew off on the far side, as further search 
failed to discover it anywhere in the neighborhood. Two days later a 
careful search was made and after about an hour the bird was seen again 
in the same vicinity and was secured. It was a male with sexual organs 
only moderately developed and as no trace of other individuals of the 
species, either adult or young, could be found during the remainder of the 
summer, it seems probable that this was simply a stray individual that 
had wandered a little north of its regular range. As the Blue Gray Gnat- 
catcher occurs regularly in the same woods and the Mockingbird not in- 
frequently, it would not be surprising if this species occurred there occa- 
sionally as a breeder. 

One specimen of this species was secured somewhere in Cape May 
County by the late Harry Garrett, of West Chester, and was obtained 
from him by Charles J. Pennock. It is now in the collection of the Phila- 
delphia Academy, but I have not been able to learn the exact locality 
of its capture. These constitute, so far as I know, the only specimens 
that have been obtained in the State. My specimen is now also in the 
Collection of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.—WitmreR 
Stone, Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia. 


The Black-poll Warbler and Bicknell’s Thrush at Yarmouth, 
Nova Scotia.—It appears to have escaped general notice that Mr. E. 
Chesley Allen, in a paper entitled ‘Annotated List of Birds of Yarmouth 
and Vicinity, Southwestern Nova Scotia’ (Trans. N. 8. Inst. of Sci., 
Vol. XIV, Part 1, pp. 67-95, Jan. 5, 1916), stated that the Black-poll 
Warbler (Dendroica striata) and Bicknell’s Thrush (Hylocichla aliciae 
bicknelli) are regular summer residents on the West Cape, at the entrance 
to the harbor of Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, and doubtless breed there. The 
West Cape is an island at high tide, but is connected with the mainland 
by a highway bridge. My attention was first called to the presence of 
these birds at this point by Mr. Allen. 

On the afternoon of June 18, 1920, I spent two hours at the West Cape 
and, although a clouded sky and a high, chill easterly gale made con- 
ditions unfavorable for observing song-birds, I noticed six Black-poll 
Warblers and one Bicknell’s Thrush in song. Ihave no doubt that I should 
have found many more of the warblers, which seemed to be plentiful, 


592 General Notes. love 


had I not spent most of my time in a small area of dense spruce woods, 
searcbing for Bicknell’s Thrush, which proved to be extremely shy, al- 
though I finally obtained an excellent view of it—Harrison F. Lewis, 
Quebec, P. Q. 


The Summer Resident Warblers (Mniotiltidae) of Northern New 
Jersey.—The past summer’s field-work has added three northern war- 
blers to the known summer resident avifauna of New Jersey,—the Nash- 
ville (Vermivora ruficapilla), Blackburnian (Dendroica fusca), and Black- 
throated Blue (Dendroica caerulescens). There was already reason to 
suspect the breeding of these species in this region as for two or three 
years past I had observed them the very end of May and, several years 
ago, had seen a male Blackburnian Warbler in June. 

The ten days from June 11-21, as well as June 27-28 were spent in 
the mountains near Moe, west of the southern end of Greenwood Lake. 
Bearfort Mountain and the parallel ridge immediately northwest reach a 
height of 1400 feet, the narrow valley separating them lying about 1100 
feet above sea level. 

The Nashville Warbler is a common bird in this region. Eight indi- 
viduals, mostly singing males, were observed between June 12 and 20, 
and no doubt many more could have been found had special effort been 
made. The white birch (Betula populifolia) groves bordering the heavier 
timber are their chosen haunts. 

A male Black-throated Blue Warbler was seen on June 21, by the road 
up the mountain from Greenwood Lake to Moe. One has been noted 
in the same spot on May 31. This species proved to be fairly common 
in a tract of mixed hemlock and hardwood on the ridge northwest of 
Bearfort Mountain. Here also several male Blackburnian Warblers 
were found in full song and one female was observed. This spot was 
visited on two occasions, the 19th and the 27th. Altho no nests of any 
of these species were found all the circumstances indicate that they breed 
in the region. 

The Chestnut-sided, Golden-winged, Black-throated Green and Can- 
ada Warblers and the Northern Water-Thrush are all common summer 
residents here, though the last named is very local. The species of more 
southern or general distribution are the Black-and-White, Worm-eating, 
Yellow, Hooded and Northern Parula Warblers, the Northern Yellow- 
throat, Redstart, Ovenbird and Louisiana Water-Thrush. As only a 
single Northern Parula was observed (on June 17) the exact status of 
this species js uncertain. A Yellow-breasted Chat was heard singing at 
the southeast foot of Bearfort Mountain near West Milford, on June 28. 

There can be no further doubt that the Northern Water-Thrush (Seturus 
noveboracensis) breeds in New Jersey. This species was common in two 
swamps on the mountain northwest of Bearfort, and a full-grown young 
bird was seen on June 27. The haunts of the two Water-Thrushes are 
distinct, the northern species inhabiting the swamps while its southern 


mel Pri ye General Notes. 593 


relative is found along the rocky mountain brooks. On the other hand 
the Hooded and Canada Warblers are commonly observed together, 
though the latter is largely restricted to the thickets of rhododendron 
which is not the case with its congener. 

The Canada Warbler is now known as a summer resident in three 
widely separated localities in northern New Jersey—Budd’s Lake, Morris 
County (cf. Aux, April, 1917, p. 214), Bear Swamp, Sussex County (cf. 
Auk, Jan., 1920, p. 137) and the region here described in the northwestern 
part of Passaic County. 

Two errors in the note published in ‘The Auk’ for January, 1920, may here 
be corrected. Bear Swamp was stated to be near ‘Crusoe Lake”; — this 
should read ‘Lake Owassa formerly known as Long Lake.’’ In the last 
line of the first paragraph, for “p. 24”, read “p. 214.”—W. DrW. Miter, 
American Museum of Natural History, New York City. 


A Peculiarly Marked Example of Dumetella carolinensis.—In 
speaking of the female Catbird, Mr. Ridgway says (Birds of North and 
Middle America, Vol. IV, p. 218): ‘‘chestnut of under tail-coverts more 
restricted and broken through greater extension of the basal and central 
slate-gray.”’ An extreme case of the restriction of the chestnut of these 
feathers is presented by a specimen recently captured by the writer at 
Washington, D. C. 

At first glance, the bird presented an almost unbroken gray appear- 
ance relieved only by the black cap. This grayness was particularly 
noticeable on the lower tail-coverts, and it was only upon closer scrutiny 
that the fact was revealed that these feathers were not of solid color. 
Basally, there was no trace of chestnut, which was present only in the 
form of a very narrow edging (in no place as much as a sixteenth of an 
inch in width) beginning about midway of the feathers and continuing 
around the tips. 

An examination of the specimens of this bird in the National Museum 
and Biological Survey collections reveals the fact, as noted by Mr. Ridg- 
way, that while “restricted and broken” there is generally at least a ter- 
minal one-third or one-fourth of the characteristic chestnut color. In 
the extensive series examined, no specimen was found that even approached 
the one in question. The bird was otherwise normal.—FrRepERIcK C. 
Lincoun, Biological Survey, Washington, D. C. 


The Hudsonian Chickadee in New Jersey.—The writer has re- 
cently examined a small collection of skins of local birds made by the 
late Charles R. Sleight of Ramsey, New Jersey. The only specimen of 
unusual interest in the collection is a Hudsonian Chickadee (Penthestes 
hudsonicus hudsonicus) taken at Ramsey, on November 1, 1913, and now 
in the collection of the American Museum of Natural History. 

Dr. Charles W. Townsend has examined this specimen and agrees with 
me that it is true hudsonicus. In general coloration it agrees closely with 


594 General Noies. lore 


birds from Homer, Alaska, except that the rump is somewhat less gray. 
It cannot be matched by a single skin of littoralis, of which I have com- 
pared a good series from Maine, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. In 
the majority of these birds the cap and back are conspicuously lighter, 
more buffy, brown. In P. h. nigricans these parts are decidedly darker 
than in the Ramsey specimen. 

It will be recalled that there was a notable southward flight of brown- 
capped Chickadees in the fall of 1913, the first being recorded on October 
29, at South Sudbury, Massachusetts. The species was also observed 
in Connecticut and Rhode Island (cf. Wright, Auk, 1914, p. 236, and 
Griscom, l. c., p. 254). According to Dr. Townsend (Auk, April, 1917, 
p. 160) both of the eastern races of this Chickadee, P. h. littoralis and 
P. h. nigricans, were represented in this migration. 

The specimen here recorded is the first individual of this race ever 
taken or seen in New Jersey, so faras we know. In ‘The Auk’ for April, 
1917, p. 218, the writer recorded a specimen of P. h. nigricans taken near 
Plainfield on December 31, 1916, which at that time was the first record 
of the species from the state. Other individuals observed during the 
same winter at various localities as far south as Princeton, were probably 
of the same race. Incidentally it may be well to note that the tail of the 
Plainfield specimen is very imperfect, and the measurement given by Dr. 
Townsend (Auk, l. c., p. 163) is incorrect. P. h. littoralis is as yet unknown 
from New Jersey.—W. DreW. Mitier, American Museum of Natural 
History, N.Y. 


The Plain Titmouse a New Bird for Oregon.—Among a number 
of bird skins recently presented to me by my friend, Professor W. M. 
Clayton, of Santa Ana, California, who lived at Ashland, Oregon, from 
1899 to 1902, there is a skin of the Plain Titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus), 
a male shot on April 17, 1900, at Ashland, Oregon, in oak scrub. While 
there is really nothing unusual in the fact that the bird should be found 
there, since it is found in Siskiyou County, California, just south of the 
Oregon boundary line, yet so far as I know it has never been recorded from 
Oregon. Neither the A. O. U. ‘Check-List,’ ‘The Auk,’ nor the ‘Birds 
of Oregon’ make mention of it so far as Oregon is concerned. I have 
no access to the last volume of ‘The Condor’ and can not say whether a 
record is there to be found or not. As long, however, as no proof is forth- 
coming to the contrary, I believe I am entitled to hail this species as a 
new bird for Oregon.—W. F. Hennincer, New Bremen, Ohio. 


The Singing of the Ruby-crowned Kinglet (Regulus c. calendula). 
In an interesting paper entitled ‘‘Geographical Variation in the song of 
the Ruby-crowned Kinglet’”’ (‘The Auk,’ Vol. XXXVI, pp. 525-528, 
October, 1919), Mr. Aretas A. Saunders has brought to the attention of 
the readers of this journal a constant difference which he has observed to 
exist between the songs of migrant Ruby-crowned Kinglets in the north- 


Wel Pr aeaa| General Notes. 595 
eastern part of the United States and the songs of individuals of the same 
species breeding in Montana. Mr. Saunders has represented the two 
types of song graphically and has explained that the variation occurs in 
the third, final, and loudest part of the song. He says: “Eastern birds 
sing it as a series of triplets, the notes of each triplet rising in pitch, and 
the last note accented, that is, both loudest and longest in duration. 
Western birds sing a series of double notes, all on the same pitch, the 
first note of each double being the accented one.” 

In many widely-separated localities in the province of Nova Scotia, 
where this Kinglet is on its breeding-grounds, the final part of its song 
invariably, in my experience, corresponds with Mr. Saunders’ description 
of the same part of the song of eastern birds as heard by him in migration 
farther south. Using written syllables in place of Mr. Saunders’ graphs, 
with which I am not familiar, I should give the Nova Scotian type of 
ending, as wud-a-weét, wud-a-weél, wud-a-weél, wud-a-weét. 

About Quebec, P. Q., which is the only place outside of Nova Scotia 
where I have heard the song of this bird, the species is a transient migrant 
only, and the songs differ much in type of ending. My interest having 
been aroused by Mr. Saunders’ paper, I recorded the type of song-ending 
used by each Ruby-crowned Kinglet which I heard singing about Quebec 
during the spring migration of 1920. As the birds were transients, there 
was no way of determining identity of individual birds heard on different 
days, and each bird heard each day was therefore recorded as a unit. The 
first record was made on May 2, the last on May 31. At the close of the 
migration the records were grouped by classes and totalled, with the fol- 
lowing results: 

TyPE OF SONG-ENDING. 


1. wud-a-weél, wud-a-weét, etc. (3 syllables, accent on third).. 1 record 

2. pul-é-cho, pul-é-cho, etc. (3 syllables, accent on second).... 2 record 

3. jim-in-y, jim-in-y, etc. (3 syllables, accent on first)........ iO) 

4. you-eét, you-eét, etc. (2 syllables, accent on second)........ i 

5. pé-to, pé-to, etc. (2 syllables, accent on first).............. OMe 
Total number of singing birds recorded................. Gey 


It will be observed that: 


1. All possible classes of single-accented two-syllable and three-syllable 
phrases, including both of those noted by Mr. Saunders (Nos. 1 and 5,) 
were recorded. 

2. The type of phrase (No. 1) recorded by Mr. Saunders in the eastern 
United States and by myself in Nova Scotia was noted but once at Quebec. 

3. The type of phrase (No. 5) recorded by Mr. Saunders from Mon- 
tana only was the second in frequency of occurrence at Quebec. 

4. The majority of the songs heard at Quebec are of a type (No. 3) 
not noted in Montana, Nova Scotia, or the Atlantic seaboard of the 
United States. 


596 General Notes. love 


Mr. Saunders suggested that the difference in songs noted by him 
might be of subspecific value. The evidence presented above, showing 
five types of song in one northeastern locality, renders doubtful the exis- 
tence of any relationship between these song-types and true subspecific 
characters. 

It is possible, however, that these differences in song may be of use 
in determining the migration routes of the Ruby-crowned Kinglet. Song- 
type No. 1, and no other, has been recorded by Mr. Saunders from “ Ver- 
mont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, 
and Alabama,”’ and by myself from Nova Scotia, but it is very rare at 
Quebec. Apparently, then, few of the Ruby-crowned Kinglets which 
migrate northward in the United States east of the Alleghany Mountains 
pass near Quebec; ’t is probable that nearly or quite all of them breed 
farther eastward, some of them in Nova Scotia. This tends to confirm 
what might be expected, for, although Quebec is about as far east as 
Boston, the breeding-range of the Ruby-crowned Kinglet extends more 
than eight hundred miles to the eastward of Quebec, and this great terri- 
tory should easily accommodate in the breeding season all the individuals 
of the species which have migrated along the narrow Atlantic seaboard 
of the United States. Furthermore, if the birds which pass Quebec have 
not come from the eastern side of the Alleghanies, they must have come 
from the western side. Those who have the opportunity to compare 
songs of the Ruby-crowned Kinglet between the Alleghanies and the 
Mississippi with the records made at Quebec can assist in determining 
this. It seems probable that there can be proven in the case of this species 
a strong northeastward movement from the basin of the Mississ‘pp’ to 
tide-water in the vicinity of Quebec; a movement which I believe to be 
participated in by many other species in whose cases the evidence is not 
yet so clear.—Harrison F. Lewis, Quebec, P. Q. 


Notes from Seal Island, Nova Scotia.—In 1884, in Volume I of 
‘The Auk,’ J. H. Langille published an interesting account of the recently 
described Bicknell’s Thrush as found by him breeding in Seal Island, 
a low, spruce-covered island, twenty miles off the southeastern point of 
Nova Scotia. Since then the island has been visited by Bent, Job (‘ Wild 
Wings, 1905, Chanter X), Bishop, Cleaves and other ornithologists. I 
stayed there from July 10 to 14 of this summer (192C) and have thought 
it worth while to record the present status of the birds of this interesting 
island. 

Black Guillemots, formerly so common, have dwindled to less than a 
dozen pairs and Puffins are entirely extirpated. Fully a thousand Herring 
Gulls nest there and possibly a few Common Terns, while the burrows of 
Leach’s Petrel are everywhere to be seen in the peaty soil of the island. 
Counted twenty-seven Eiders, which we disturbed from under spruce 
bushes and one with a brood of four downy young. Two or three pairs 
of Semipalmated Plover were breeding and the downy young seen. Spotted 
Sandpipers were common. 


Vol. | 
1920 


General Notes. 597 

Of land birds I found the following, all evidently breeding: Kingbird, 
Northern Raven, Crow, Cowbird, Savannah Sparrow, White-throated 
Sparrow, Slate-colored Junco, Song Sparrow, Barn Swallow, Tree Swal- 
low, Yellow, Myrtle and Black-poll Warblers, Maryland Yellow-throat, 
Redstart, Winter Wren, Acadian Chickadee, Bicknell’s and Olive-backed 
Thrushes and Robin. 

Black-poll Warblers were abundant. I found only two Olive-backed 
Thrushes. Bicknell’s Thrush was very common in the low spruce woods 
Its song always suggests to me the song of the Veery but it is more thin and 
wiry, as if it were played on the strings of a zither. I found the bird 
very tame, and I frequently watched it from a distance of five or six 
yards. 

Mr. John Crowell, the keeper of the light for many years, and his elder 
daughter, Mrs. Bernice Meredith, have taken great interest in the birds 
of the island and their conservation, and have made a small collection of 
specimens which they have mounted. Among these the following are 
worthy of record: Purple Gallinule, Saw-whet Owl, Long-eared Owl, 
Mourning Dove, Black-billed Cuckoo, Scarlet Tanager and Summer 
Tanager. It is to be hoped that the island will be made a Bird Reserva- 
tion by the Provincial Government.—CHaARLES W. TowNsEND, 98 Pinck- 
ney St., Boston, Mass. 


Some Summer Residents of Dutchess County, N. Y.—With a 
view to listing the resident species for Dutchess County, N. Y., and with 
the purpose of eventually making a zone map of these birds, the writers 
spent June 12, 25 to 29, and July 11 and 13, 1920, in the eastern part of the 
county and found conditions very different from those existing in the 
lower altitudes along the Hudson River. This was especially true with 
regard to the Mniotiltidae. 

At Whaley’s Lake (altitude 690 feet) in the southeastern part of the 
county and not more than sixty miles from New York City, we found 
two Bald Eagles—one fully mature bird and an immature specimen. They 
were seen several times flying to and from Mulkin’s Hill (1200 feet) but 
a search failed to reveal any nest. Mr. Eaton, in ‘Birds of New York,’ 
mentions the Bald Eagle as breeding at ‘‘Whelby Pond,” and it is thought 
that this place is undoubtedly meant. 

On Niggerbush Mountain (1810 feet), near Mt. Riga Station, lin the 
extreme northeastern corner of the county, another Eagle in dark plumage 
was observed. 

The Warblers were especially numerous about Whaley’s Lake. On 
about one acre of scrubby growth on the easterly slope of Mulkin’s Hill 
at an altitude of about nine hundred feet the following were observed: 
Black and White, Worm-eating, Blue-winged, Golden-winged, Nashville, 
Chestnut-sided, Ovenbird, Maryland Yellow-throat, Canada and Red- 
start. About a hundred feet higher a fine Brewster’s Warbler was dis- 
covered and in a swamp on the summit a Water-Thrush, presumed to be 


598 General Notes. [oee 


the Louisiana, was heard scolding. Near the lake shore, at seven hun- 
dred feet, were the Yellow Warbler and Yellow-breasted Chat. 

On the east side of Whaley’s Lake, opposite Mulkin’s Hill, where a 
number of hemlocks grow, the Black-throated Blue and Black-throated 
Green Warblers were found. These two species were, however, much more 
common in Turkey Hollow, in the north-eastern part of the county, and 
were usually met with at an altitude of about eight hundred to a thousand 
feet, the Black-throated Green only when there were plenty of hemlocks 
about. 

In the Harlem Valley, between Pawling and Wingdale, on the banks 
of Swamp River, less than five hundred feet above sea level, a Brown 
Creeper was found singing both on June 27 and July 11. 

On top of the Niggerbush, mentioned above, no less than five Hermit 
Thrushes were found singing. 

The following species have therefore been added to out list of probable 
breeding species in this county: 

Bald Eagle, one pair and one individual. 

Blue-winged Warbler, one male and one fledged young. 

Brewster’s Warbler, one male. 

Nashville Warbler, four males and one female. 

Black-throated Blue Warbler, fifteen males, several females and young. 

Black-throated Green Warbler, twelve males. 

Canada Warbler, twelve males and several females. 

Brown Creeper, one male. 

Hermit Thrush, five males. 

ALLEN Frost AND MAUNSELL S. CrosBy. Rhinebeck, N. Y. 


Bird Notes from Collins, N. Y.—A male Cerulean Warbler (Den- 
droica cerulea) appeared here on May 16, 1920, the first one to be recorded 
for seven years. 

During February two Northern Pilated Woodpeckers (Phloeotomus 
pileatus abieticola) visited the hospital woods, the first record for the 
species. White-winged Crossbills (Loxia leucoptera) were present during 
February and until March 3. Cardinals (Cardinalis c. cardinalis) con- 
tinue to be seen every year on the Cattaraugus Reservation, seven being 
the greatest number observed in a single season. 

A female Red-bellied Woodpecker (Centurus carolinus) was recorded 
May 9, the first since the winter of 1916-17, when one was reported two 
miles from here. 

There was at no time a great wave of migration during the spring and 
many species usually seen were absent or extremely scarce.—Dr. 
ANNE E. Perkins, Gowanda State Hospital, Collins, N. Y. 


Additions to the ‘‘Birds of Allegany and Garrett Counties, Mary- 
land.’’—In Volume XXI of ‘The Auk,’ pp. 234-250, I published a list of 
birds bearing the above title, adding several species from time to time, 


Hol: vox vet General Notes. 099 


as subsequent visits to this beautiful region or observations of corre- 
spondents enabled me to do. Such added species were the Barn Owl, 
Savannah Sparrow, Mockingbird (X XVI, p. 488), and later the Winter 
Wren as a breeder in the highest parts of Garrett County. My last two 
visits in 1918 and the present year, besides revealing many interesting 
changes, enable me to add the following species to the list: 

Guiraca c. caerulea. Biur Grospeax.—On July 9, 1918, while 
going up the bush-bordered path on one of the hills at Cumberland, I 
saw a family of old and young of this species, which I had never encoun- 
tered in Maryland before. As if to obviate the necessity for me to ex- 
plain away the objection that they might have been Indigo-birds, a fam- 
ily of this species started up at the same place and joined in the commotion 
going on. 

Sturnus vulgaris. Sraritine.—In its westward invasion the Starling 
has now reached Cumberland. Under date of February 27, 1920, my 
friend, Mr. John A. Fulton, of Cumberland, wrote me that he had for sev- 
eral weeks noticed a flock of apparently new and strange birds about 
the city, but since they were silent and always flew high, he could not 
make them out. About this time they commenced to make their head- 
quarters in the court house tower and in the vines on the Episcopal church, 
where they were recognized as Starlings. To make matters certain, the 
janitor of the church knocked one down with a stick, which specimen 
was brought to Mr. Fulton, who in turn was so kind as to send it to me. 
There were about 100 in the flock. Later in the spring they would spend 
the day along the edge of the Potomac, but for the night they would re- 
turn to the above-mentioned buildings. 

Iridoprocne bicolor. Tree Swattow.—During my residence at 
Cumberland with the numerous excursions into various parts of the two 
westernmost counties of the state, together with the several subsequent 
visits I had never once seen this species, not even as a migrant—probably 
an oversight. Therefore I was much surprised to find it this summer 
as a summer resident. J saw three repeatedly at Crellin, near Oakland, 
a mile from the West Virginia line, on June 29 and the following days. 
They entered holes in dead trees, which had been killed by the damming 
of the Youghiogheny River for sawmill purposes, resulting in a pond-like 
widening out of the river, which otherwise here is merely a creek. No 
doubt the mates were in the holes incubating eggs. The Rough-winged 
Swallow, which I had so far only seen in the lower parts of the region, 
nested in the same trees. 

Passerculus sandwichensis savanna. SavaNnNnaH Sparrow.—I was 
surprised to find this bird in numbers at Accident, in the higher parts of 
Garrett County. I had seen it once only, in 1906, near Oakland, and 
here it was this year plentifully. It was not here in 1914 and 1918, be- 
cause I am certain I could not have overlooked it. 

Compsothlypis americana usneae. NorTHERN PARULA WARBLER. 
I had never seen this bird as a summer resident in the higher parts of 


600 General Notes. roe 


the region, but I saw and heard a male at Crellin, June 29, and one at 
Accident, July 8, 1920. 

Melospiga georgiana. Swamp Sparrow.—In a large bog between 
Negro and Meadow Mountains, near Accident, I found a breeding colony 
of Swamp Sparrows and heard their song from a small swamp near Oak- 
land, on June 28 of this year. This extends the breeding range some- 
what from that given in the ‘Check-List,’ where western Maryland is 
not included.—G. E1rria, River Forest (Oak Park P. O.), Ill. 


Rare and Unusual Birds in the Chicago Area During the Spring 
of 1920.—The spring of 1920 has been unusual to say the least. Many 
common birds were unaccountably rare, and many very rare ones were 
observed. The severe winter and heavy snowfall in Canada drove many 
birds such as the American Crossbill (Loxia curvirostra minor), Bohemian 
Waxwing (Bombycilla garrula), Redpoll (Acanthis linaria), ete., down 
from the north. These have been recorded by Mr. Coale and myself. 
Early in March we had some fine weather, and, as a consequence, a large 
migration of about sixty varieties of birds literally poured in from the 
twentieth to the thirtieth of March. Now, however, the weather took 
a sudden turn and we had snow-storms every few days. This of course 
retarded the migration dreadfully. Since the twentieth of April, how- 
ever, the weather has been nice, and the migration more or less regular. 
A list of the rare and unusual birds which I have observed this spring 
follows: 

Aristonetta valisineria. Canvaspack.—On April 10, I saw one male 
of this species on Wolf Lake, about twenty miles south of Chicago. On 
April 24, I saw a flock of six birds of both sexes at the same place, and 
was informed by a farmer that he had seen the same flock there for two 
weeks. This formerly common bird is rapidly becoming rarer in our 
area. 

Grus canadensis. Sanpuitt Crane.—On April 22, while looking 
for birds on the Wooded Island, Jackson Park, Chicago, I saw a large 
bird about fifty feet above my head, attempting to fly west against a 
very strong wind. I immediately looked at the bird through my glasses 
and was able to study it for the space of twenty minutes. It continued 
to struggle against the wind, but to no avail, and at last was blown out of 
sight to the south. The bird came within thirty feet of me at one time, 
and of course its identity was unmistakable. It flew with legs and neck 
outstretched, I was even able to discern the red on the head, and the 
brownish on the wings. This bird is an exceedingly rare and irregular 
migrant. Some weeks after seeing the bird, I met a gentleman who had 
observed and identified the bird on the same day. 

Macroramphus griseus scolopaceus. Lonc-BitLep DowiTcHER.— 
On May 14 I observed several birds of this species flying with a large flock 
of Yellowlegs (Totanus flavipes), at Hyde Lake. I shot into the flock and 
secured a fine adult female Dowitcher, which proved to belong to the 


Vol. | General Notes. 601 


subspecies scolopaceus. Both Dowitchers are rather rare migrants here, 
but I think the Long-billed is the commoner bird. The bird mentioned 
above is now in my collection. 

Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus. YELLOW-HEADED BLACKBIRD.— 
On April 24, I saw a flock of about fifty birds of this species in the rushes 
in Hyde Lake. More arrived later and to a large extent supplanted the 
Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius pheniceus). These birds were at one 
time very abundant in the marshes and sloughes south of Chicago, but 
since the advent of the large factories and chemical plants, many of their 
best nesting grounds have been destroyed. At the present rate, the 
birds will be very rare in a few years. 

Spizella pallida. Criay-cotormEpD Sparrow.—On May §&, several 
friends and I noticed a small sparrow unlike anything else we had ever 
seen, at Wolf Lake. The bird was very tame, and allowed us to study it 
at very close range. Unfortunately I had no gun, but the brown on the 
sides of the head and the markings in general were so well defined and 
distinctive as to leave no room for doubt as to the bird’s identity. This 
bird is an accidental straggler from the west, and has been taken in the 
Dunes by Mr. Stoddard. 

Spiza americana. DicKkcisseL.—This bird breeds locally west of 
Chicago, but I have included it in this list because of the peculiar cir- 
cumstances under which I saw it. On May 10, I was walking along Lake 
Park Ave., on my way to Jackson Park, at about five o’clock in the morn- 
ing, when I noticed a flock of English Sparrows (Passer domesticus) across 
the street, and although one of the birds impressed me as very light, I paid 
no heed and went on. Hardly had I gone twenty yards when the birds 
flew across the street and two of them lit on a small tree. Now to my 
great surprise, one commenced to sing. I immediately retraced my steps 
and saw that the bird which was singing was a male Dickcissel. It seems 
strange to meet this bird of the fields and meadows in the heart of the city. 

Dendroica discolor. Prati WarsLier.—On May 6, I saw one 
male of this species. The Prairie Warbler is always regarded as a rare 
migrant, but I have seen several in the Park.—NartuHan F’. LEopo.p, JR., 
4754 Greenwood Ave., Chicago, Ill. 


Items Relative to Some Costa Rican Birds. Catharista urubu 
braziliensis.—Apropos the articles in recent numbers of ‘The Auk,’ 
bearing on the subject of the power of the various senses of the 
Black Vulture. I may be allowed to record an incident, concerning 
the Central American form of the species, that came under observa- 
tion of the writer and his wife, while located near Juan Vifas, 
Costa Rica, in April, 1920. We occupied a house, which was of con- 
siderable pretensions, and in good repair but had not been occupied, 
other than temporarily, for several years. Soon after settling there, 
we noted a particular Vulture, that came almost daily to the garden, 
surrounding the house, where it was usually to be seen perched on a fence 


[oct 


602 General Notes. 
post, or on the roof-ridge of the house itself. One of the windows of the 
kitchen was usually left open. On two or three occasions the Vulture 
alighted on this window-ledge. but seeing some one within, quickly de- 
parted. When we were away from the house it was our custom to close 
the window. However, one morning, we overlooked doing so. On this 
occasion we left a good fire burning in the cook-stove, on which was placed 
a stew-pan, with cover, containing a piece of meat and portions of several 
kinds of vegetables. 

Returning from our tramp, we were surprised to find that our pro- 
spective dinner had entirely disappeared, even to the liquid; although 
the pan yet remained on the stove. The cover was on the floor nearby. 
The stove-top had not entirely cooled when we reached the house. All 
too reliable evidence as to the identity of the intruder was to be found 
in the droppings deposited on stove and floor. 

After this experience, our precautions were more rigorous, yet this 
bird, on one occasion thereafter, got inside the room, but we were present 
and nothing happened. 

Picolaptes affinis neglectus.—This is one of the commonest Tree- 
Creepers (Dendrocolaptidae) over the wooded uplands of Costa Rica. The 
individuals of the species that came under attention here were found 
on the south slope of the Volcano Irazu, at about 10,000 ft. altitude, 
while camping there during May, 1920. <A pair of birds were seen on the 
11th, both working up the trunk of a large tree that grew in a heavily 
wooded ravine. Owing to this latter fact, I was as near as twenty-five 
feet of their position, before I observed them. I recognized the species 
at once; also noting the abbreviated tail on both, a condition that seemed 
to much impede their progress in climbing. I secured the © of this 
pair. Then it was that I observed that the rectices, except the middle 
pair that were replaced by fresh ones, very short and mostly in the sheath, 
had suffered severance, about one inch from their base, by some sharp 
instrument, and not by reason of wear, because the shafts all showed 
fresh cleavage, and no fraying. Moreover, this trimming was perfectly 
regular, and of the form of an inverted V. The operation therefore 
must have been performed with bill by the bird itself. The fact that 
this mutilation of the tail was seen in both birds, before I had shot, 
eliminated the possibility of that source for a solution; aside from the 
seeming impossibility of shot trimming the feathers, as hasbeen described. 

Gymnostinops montezumae.— While staying at Juan Vifias, I came 
across many nesting colonies of this Oropendola, and with the assistance 
of my wife and a native boy, a small colony of some thirty nests was 
inspected about April 1, 1920. These nests were hung on a medium- 
sized Guava tree that stood at least one hundred feet from any other 
tree. Three limbs were sawed off: one supported seven nests, one 
three, and one but two. During this operation most of the individuals 
of this colony gathered in the nearest available tree, and kept up a great 
clatter, until a hawk (Leptodon uncinatus) made an unsuccessful dash 


pee aa Nol General Notes. 603 


into them. This both dispersed and quieted them. Although all these 
nests were completed, even to the abundant supply of fresh leaves, that new 
nests always contain, no eggs had been laid. So the nests still attached 
to their respective positions were left at the base of the nesting tree. 

A week later we chanced to return to the spot. The colony contained 
about the original number of nests hung in the tree. On the ground 
were the limbs in the place we had deposited them. But the only traces 
of the nests that had been attached were some short strands so inex- 
tricably woven about the leaves and their petioles that they defied un- 
ravelling. 

Junco vulcani.—We were fortunate enough to meet with this snow- 
bird in considerable numbers during our visit to the Volcano Irazu. Our 
observations differed somewhat from those of previous observers inas- 
much that we found them among the oak timber, as low as 10,000 ft. as 
well as above the timber line. What I wish to record is the difference 
in amount of plumage wear this species is subject to under varying degree 
of humidity, at the same relative attitude and within an area of a few 
square miles. 

As is well known, the south slope of the Voleano Irazu, although on 
the Caribbean slope of the continental divide, lies in what is termed the 
“shadow of the Volcano,” and is thus deprived almost entirely, from 
December to May, and to a considerable degree during the balance of 
the year, of the perennial moisture carrying clouds that blow in from 
the East and Northeast. About three miles to the east of the main crater 
of the Voleano is a pass, through which a road passes that leads to the 
Volcano Turrialba. As soon as this pass is reached, the rainfall and 
humidity greatly increase and it is noticeable that pastures and herba- 
ceous vegetation generally do not dry up in the winter and spring months 
as they do south of Irazu. The demarcation line between the wet and 
dry zones is but a couple of bundred feet wide at the pass. 

Such individuals of this Junco as were taken on the slope of Irazu were 
all in very worn plumage, that could not be matched by a single speci- 
men that came under observation taken at the pass or to the eastward. 
For the most part these individuals from the humid zone were in com- 
paratively fresh plumage, such as the species should wear at the begin- 
ning of the nesting season, and from examination of the sexual organs I 
judged that the breeding season was near. While I saw no young of the 
species during my stay (May 3 to 19, 1920) I did shoot a female on the 10th, 
within the dry zone, carrying a crane-fly (Tipula) in her bill; and an- 
other female was taken on the 6th, while I was making the trip to the 
crater that had her bill full of dried grass stems.—AusTIN Pau. Situ, 
Cartago, Costa Rica. 


Observation of a Remarkable Night Migration.—A flock of birds, 
present in such numbers that they were continually passing across the 
field of the theodolite telescope, were noticed in the course of following 


604. General Notes. [dee 


the track of a pilot-balloon released at this station to determine the upper- 
air currents on the afternoon of May 3, 1920. Since the birds appeared 
to be oriented in the same general direction and to be flying in compact 
group formation, I decided to take readings of the positions of the indi- 
viduals which could be “spotted” in the telescope, with a view to deter- 
mining the speed, direction and incidently the altitude of the birds. 

Before giving the details of the observations I may state that no at- 
tempt has been made to come to a conclusion as to the kind of birds noted, 
but my belief is that they were either hawks or ducks, owing to the simi- 
larity of their mode of flight to that of the wild-goose but with more rapid 
beating of the wings than in the wild-goose, with whose flight I am fa- 
miliar. At the distance at which the birds were observed neither color 
nor fine definition of type could be seen, although the spread of a single 
wing of the individuals seemed to approximate the size of the pilot-balloon 
which was last seen at about the same level as the birds were using. 

Conditions were especially propitious for determining the altitude of 
the birds, for the clouds closely beneath which they were winging were 
of the cumulus type, with flat, equally elevated bases and domelike tops. 
Luckily the balloon rose into the base of one of these clouds and was 
lost to view at an altitude of 1700 meters. 

Upon losing the balloon, I turned the theodolite against a background 
of cumulus cloud and awaited the arrival of an individual of the flock to 
come within the field. Some idea of the large numbers of the birds can 
be had from the fact that it was possible to pick up at random a space 
in the sky and promptly find one of the birds winging across it. The 
birds were more than a mile distant and efforts to see them with the naked 
eye were fruitless. 

Both of the individuals sighted were kept in sight for 60 seconds; before 
a second minute-interval elapsed they had become immersed in cloud and 
lost to view. The first bird “‘spotted,’’ whose altitude was assumed to be 
1600 meters by reason of its passage under the cloud base, was picked up 
at azimuth 193.2° (0 equal to North, 90 equal to East), and at elevation 
25.2°. Sixty seconds later it was found at azimuth 198.9°, and elevation 
21.2°. The resulting track shows a ground speed of 13.2 meters per 
second toward azimuth 223° (SW). 

The second bird was picked up at azimuth 182.3°, elevation 36.2°; 
sixty seconds later it was found at azimuth 189.2°, elevation 31.7°. Its 
resulting track shows a ground-speed of 9.3 meters per second toward 
azimuth 221° (SW), when an altitude of 1800 meters is assumed. This 
was arrived at from the fact that this bird flew inte the edge of one cloud 
after passing indistinctly through the extreme lower side of another cu- 
mulus cloud. 

As the first individual was encountering a north wind of 4.5 meters 
per second (as computed from the pilot-balloon run) his wing-speed was 
7 meters per second. The second individual encountered a north-north- 
west wind of 4.0 meters per second at the 1800 meter level, hence its wing 


Yel Corl vIn) General Notes. 605 


speed was 11.5 meters per second. It was quite noticeable that the birds 
were being blown off-course, because of the lack of similarity between the 
direction in which they were headed and the direction in which they were 
progressing. 

Emphasis should be given to the good fortune in having two factors 
known within narrow limits: the altitude of the cloud bases, and the near- 
ness of the birds’ levels to the cloud bases. I may add that on rare occa- 
sions birds pass singly across the field of the theodolite, but no instance 
of such numbers being visible in the field at one time has ever been my 
experience in following balloons during the past two years. 

It should be remarked that there is little by which to identify the kind 
or even the type of bird observed. The mean diameter of the balloon 
was .71 centimeters, and it is estimated that the spread of a single wing 
of one of the birds would have completely covered tbe balloon. There 
seemed to be moderate length of neck, little or no length of tail, and 
no distinguishable trailing legs about these birds. The main point of 
interest probably is the determination beyond question of the rate of 
speed maintained by birds evidently flying with a fixed objective in flock 
or group formation. 

I would add that the further observation of these birds would have 
been carried ovt had time permitted, but as the immediate despatch of 
upper-air data computed from the balloon run is of great urgency it was 
necessary to bring the theodolite sighting to a close. 

The kind assistance of Mr. B. B. Whittier, Observer U. S. Weather 
Bureau, who checked and corroborated the readings is gratefully ac- 
knowledged.—C. G. Anprus, Observer, U. S. Weather Bureau, Lansing, 
Mich. 


606 Recent Literature. [oes 


RECENT LITERATURE 


Townsend’s ‘Supplement to Birds of Essex County.’—In 1905 
the Nuttall Ornithological Club published an admirable volume on the 
birds of Essex County, Mass., by Dr. Charles W. Townsend which has 
ever since been the standard work of reference on the coastwise bird-life 
of Massachusetts. Fifteen years have now elapsed and the Club pre- 
sents a “supplement”? by the same author,! which is rather more than 
half the size of the original. 

Dr. Townsend has gathered together such a vast amount of additional 
information during this period of years that many changes have been 
found necessary in the dates of occurrence and status of the species and 
it was thought best to reprint the entire list with the statements of the 
character of occurrence of each species and under these such new matter 
in regard to habits and life history as had been secured. Sixteen species 
have been added and two dropped bringing the total to 335. The nomen- 
clature has been revised to accord with the 1910 edition of the A. O. U. 
‘Check-List’ although one form, the Labrador Chickadee, has been in- 
eluded which, as explained, has not yet been recognized by the A. O. U. 
committee. There is a bibliography covering the years 1905-1915 and a 
good index. 

The volume is a fitting companion to the earlier list with which it con- 
forms in size, typography and style. The two together form not only 
the up-to-date list of the birds of Essex County which the author aimed 
to present, but a repository of first-hand observation on the habits of 
most of the species mentioned, which must be consulted by anyone who 
may be compiling an exhaustive bird biography or reading up the life 
history of a species for his own edification. 

For the general reader however we think the introductory chapter on 
“Changes in the Bird Life of Essex County since 1905,” will possess a 
peculiar interest, so well does it summarize the changes that we have all 
noticed, even though we but partially appreciated them, in our own 
neighborhoods. There has been the astonishing increase in the interest 
in birds and in the preservation of birds and game; the devastation of 
bird haunts and the driving away of certain species in the zeal of some 
other supposedly worthy activity—the war on the Gypsy moth in the 
case of Essex County, but in other places the war on the mosquito or the 
chestnut blight, etc.—the advent of the Italian pot-hunter; the use of 
the automobile by hunters in covering large areas of country in a single 
day; and the use of the field-glass in bird-study—indispensable in the 


1 Supplement to Birds of Essex County, Massachusetts. By Charles Wendell 
Townsend, M.D. With one Plate and Map. Memoirs of the Nuttall Ornitho- 
logical Club. No. 7. Cambridge, Mass. Published by the Club. August 
[sic] 1920. pp. 1-196 [reviewed from unbound sheets). 


Mie a nan) Recent Literature. 607 


hands of the trained observer, but disastrous in those of the “enthusiastic 
amateur.’ All these and other factors are mentioned and their influence 
upon bird life and bird study discussed. A half-tone plate of the Ipswich 
River in Wenham Swamp forms the frontispiece to the volume and the 
map of the county which appeared in the original list is here reproduced 
for handy reference. 

In the whole plan of the work and its execution the author has been 
peculiarly happy and both he and the Nuttall Club deserve the congratu- 
lations of ornithologists upon the appearance of the volume.—W. 8S. 


Bannerman’s ‘Birds of the Canary Islands.’!—In ‘The Ibis’ for 1919 
and 1920 Mr. David A. Bannerman has been publishing in instalments a 
comprehensive paper on the birds of the Canaries. The seven parts 
have now been issued as a separate comprising 300 pages whcih easily 
takes its place as the authoritative work on the subject. 

It is based primarily upon the author’s field work in the islands, he 
having spent a portion of every year from 1908 to 1913 in the archipelago 
but other material has been examined and all of the literature bearing 
upon the Canary Islands carefully studied. The list includes transient 
species as well as residents and is prepared on a definite plan consistently 
carried out, which materially aids anyone who may make use of it. The 
nomenclature is carefully worked out with a reference to the original 
description of each species, and the type locality. Then follow a concise 
statement of the nature of its occurrence in the Canary Islands; a full 
discussion of specimens and relationship, with pertinent quotations from 
various works on the birds of the Islands and from the author’s personal 
records, all of which go to make up a very full account of the habits and 
distribution of each species, and finally the range is given, which in the 
ease of resident species is divided into two paragraphs, one giving the 
range in the islands, and the other the range beyond the archipelago, if 
the species is not endemic. 

In the introductory pages there is a bibliography and an itinerary of 
those visitors who have done the most important ornithological work on 
the islands. There is likewise a statement by the author of bis methods, 
including an apology for rejecting the “‘nomina conservanda”’ of the 
B. O. U. ‘List.’ In our opinion however he is to be heartily congratulated 
upon his stand in this matter. Uniformity and stability in nomenclature 
can only be obtained by strict adherence to the rules of the International 
Code no matter where they lead us. 

The summary and conclusions which constitute the last part of Mr. 
Bannerman’s paper give the author’s views on many of the general prob- 


1 List of the Birds of the Canary Islands with Detailed Reference to the Migra- 
tory Species and the Accidental Visitors. Parts Ito VII. By David A. Banner- 
man. From ‘The Ibis’, 1919, pp. 84-131; 291-321; 457-495; 708-764; 1920, 97— 
132; 323-360; 519-569. 


608 Recent Literature. Oct 


lems involved in a study of the bird life of the group. We here learn 
that of the 217 species recorded from the islands, 75 are regular breeders, 
while 142 are transients or of casual occurrence. They are further grouped 
(with some duplication) as Residents 61; Partial Residents (i. e., the 
resident population augmented at certain seasons by migrants from else- 
where) 5; Summer Visitors (nesting regularly but not wintering) 9; Winter 
Visitors 15; Birds of Passage 32; Annual Visitors (time of occurrence ir- 
regular) 5; Occasional Visitors 30; Rare Visitors 72. There are also given 
in an appendix 25 species recorded from the islands on evidence insufficient 
to include them in the main list, and 54 which have been recorded as 
Canarian birds froni such unreliable sources that they may be rejected. 

The author’s discussion of the origin and relationship of the Canarian 
fauna and the problem of the origin of island faunas in general is full of 
food for thought. He endorses the theory that the Canary Islands were 
never part of the African mainland, their volcanic origin, deep water 
separation, and absence of terrestrial mammals and reptiles being ample 
evidence in the negative. The resident birds have therefore been de- 
rived from migrants which have been stranded there and remained to 
breed, and which have eventually become modified by the local environ- 
ment. In this connection we find that 41 of the 61 resident forms are 
of northern European affinities and all have closely related races in the 
British Isles. 

The differentiation of races within the Canary group is particularly 
interesting and as a rule we find one race of a species inhabiting the west- 
ern group of islands and a different one in the far more arid eastern islands. 
Here the peculiar desert environment has been active, as it has in produc- 
ing the pale races of birds in the desert areas of western North America. 
The distinct races of a few species, which we find inhabiting different islands 
in the western group, have been attributed by the author to successive 
invasions of the migrating mainland birds at remote periods, but it seems 
to us that this supposition is hardly necessary, since birds introduced 
into two islands simultaneously may select a different sort of food on 
each island even though the range of choice may be exactly the same, and 
make other selections which in course of time would be reflected in their 
color or size. Then too environments which may appear to us precisely 
similar may have elements of difference that will have a marked effect 
upon the birds that are brought under their influence. The most inter- 
esting of the endemic birds of the Canaries are the two forms of the blue 
Chaffinch (Fringilla teydea) which are found in the pine belts of the 
high mountains of Tenerife and Gran Canaria, the low grounds of which 
islands are inhabited by a form of Fringilla coelebs. These birds have no 
close relative anywhere and are probably the oldest species of the endemic 
avifauna. Mr. Bannerman suggests that an ancestral or allied species 
might be logically looked for somewhere in the Atlas mountains of north- 
ern Africa. It is inconceivable that such strikingly different birds could 


Mee 1880 ea Recent Literature. 609 


have been differentiated on the islands from the F’. coelebs stock and the 
only other alternative is that the mainland stock which originally con- 
tributed their ancestors to the islands must have become extinct or is 
now represented by a few lingering individuals in some remote retreat 
not yet discovered. Space forbids further discussion of the interesting 
problems touched upon by the author and his paper should be read in its 
entirity by those who are interested in geographical distribution. 

A map and two colored plates, one of the Chaffinches and one of the 
Titmice, illustrate the paper which is one of the most carefully prepared 
and philosophic that has recently appeared. The author states in his 
closing paragraph that ‘“nine-tenths of the value of a collection of birds 
is to be found in the deductions which we can make from it,” and he is 
to be heartily congratulated upon the excellent way in which he has 
demonstrated the value of his own collection according to this maxim.— 
W.S. 


Mathews’ ‘The Bird of Australia.’!\—The last parts of Mr. Mathews’ 
great work continue the treatment of the Muscicapidae, covering the 
Australian ‘ Robins,” the “Tree Tits,’ ‘‘Fly-eaters,”’ etc. In his system- 
atic consideration of these birds the author follows his usual practice of 
excessive generic subdivision. In the treatment of subspecies he has 
improved very decidedly upon the method followed in some of the earlier 
parts by giving a concise statement of exactly how many races he recog- 
nizes under each species. We notice the following new forms described 
in the present parts, i. e., Smicrornis brevirostris mallee (p. 132), Malee. 
Victoria, and Wilsonavis richmondi gouldiana (p. 148), Gosford, N. 8. 
Wales in Part 2; and Hthelorms cairnensis robini (p. 151) Cape York; EL. 
laevigaster intermissus (p. 160) Melville Isl., EH. 1. perconfusus (p. 161) So. 
N. W. Australia, and EF. cantator weatherelli (p. 164) in Part 3. 


Leavitt’s ‘Bird Study in Elementary Schools.’—Bulletin No. 4 of 
the National Association of Audubon Societies? consists of a concise sum- 
mary of such information as the teacher who desires to introduce bird 
study in some form into the school course, will require. The bulletin is 
by Dr. Robert G. Leavitt of the New Jersey State Normal School and 
seems admirably adapted to its purpose. The economic principle of bird 
protection is outlined as well as the interest, pleasure and moral effect of 
the study. Practical instructions to the teacher follow, methods of form- 
ing Audubon Clubs, school museums, how to attract birds and how and 


1The Birds of Australia by Gregory M. Mathews. Vol. VIII, Part 2. June 
17, 1920, pp. 81-144. Part 3, August 18, 1920, pp. 145-184. London, Witherby 
& Co., 326 High Holborn. 

2 Bird Study in Elementary Schools. Bulletin No. 4. By Robert G Leavitt, 
Ph.D., Head of the Department of Biology, New Jersey State Normal School at 
Trenton. National Association of Audubon Societies, 1974 Broadway, New 
York. Price, twenty-five cents. 192 pp. 44. 


610 Recent Literature. [oct 


where to obtain books, pamphlets, and pictures illustrating bird life, ete. 
There are numerous half-tone illustrations from the Audubon section of 
‘Bird-Lore’. 

As Mr. Pearson states in the foreword, teachers in New York State 
schools are now required by law to give some instruction in bird-study 
and it is likely that this will be a wide spread custom before many years 
pass by. In view of this fact and the extensive voluntary instruction 
now being given in the schools of the country, this little pamphlet of Dr. 
Leggitt’s will be particularly weleome.—W. 8. 


Hudson’s Recent Bird Books.—W. H. Hudson, well known for his 
writings on Patagonia, has recently published what is essentially a new 
edition of his ‘Birds in a Village,’ the first book written after his return 
to England, in 1893. The present volume bearing the title ‘Birds in 
Town and Village’! has been largely rewritten and for portions of the old 
work which have been discarded, a series of new chapters entitled ‘Birds 
in a Cornish Village’ has been added. 

The book deals with the familiar British birds and presents an intimate 
study of most of the species which will prove of value to the ornithologist 
as a work of reference while the enthusiasm of the writer will maintain 
the interest of any reader who may have only a slight interest in the ‘great 
out of doors.” Unfortunately there is no way for one to find again the 
many interesting facts which he has passed in his reading and to which 
he may wish to refer, as no index has been provided by the publishers. 

Another recent work by the same author is entitled ‘Adventures among 
Birds” and consists of a miscellaneous series of essays on birds that have 
appeared in various of the British magazines. Most of them describe 
tramps through various parts of England and no one who loves walking 
and nature can read the author’s descriptions of his searches for the rarer 
species of birds and the aspects of the country through which he passed 
without having his sympathy aroused and wishing that he might follow 
those same paths. 

As in the case of the former volume there are many observations of 
value scattered all through the pages. There is considerable discussion 
of bird song and its origin, the author differimg with Mr. Witchell who 
ascribes the resemblances to human music which we recognize in some 
bird songs to mimetic ability. He considers that the Blackbird’s song 
for instance approaches nearer to our music and that of the Grasshopper 
Warbler and certain other species to insect music, ‘‘simply because it is 
their nature’ to do so. The illustrations to this book are reproductions 
of the Bewick woodcuts; while those of the former volume are in color 


1 Birds in Town and Village. By W. H. Hudson, F.Z.S. With Pictures in 
Colour by E. J. Detmold, New York. E. P. Dutton & Company, 681 Fifth 
Avenue, 1920, pp. 1-323. 8 plates. 

2 Adventures among Birds. By W. H. Hudson, New York. E. P. Dutton & 
Company, 681 Fifth Avenue, 1920, pp. 1-319. 


Fae) 


‘a are Moa Recent Literature. 611 


from paintings by E. J. Detmold and are very pleasing in their delicacy 
although most of them are hardly to be considered seriously as portraits 
of live birds —W. 8. 


‘Aves’ in the Zoological Record for 1917.'—Since 1914 the Royal 
Society of London has been unable to continue the publication of the 
‘International Catalogue of Scientific Literature’ but the Zoological 
Society has continued to publish the ‘Zoological Record’ and has recently 
issued the volume for 1917 which would have been Vol. N, Zoology of 
the ‘International Catalogue.’ The titles on Birds have been arranged 
by Mr. W. L. Sclater, who for several years has edited this subject with 
commendable devotion and skill. The titles number 707 as compared 
with 942 for 1916, the falling off of course being due to the war and its 
many distractions. Nevertheless, under the circumstances the number 
of papers is remarkable and is nearly 50 per cent. greater than those on 
all other vertebrates combined, nearly half as many as those relating to 
insects, and more than those in any group of invertebrates except insects. 

As usual the papers are arranged under three main headings, ‘Titles’, 
‘Subject Index’ and ‘Systematic’. In the ‘Subject Index’ the titles are 
distributed under seven principal divisions: ‘General’, ‘Structure’, ‘Physi- 
ology’, ‘Embryology’, ‘Ethology’, ‘Variation’, and ‘Geography’. As 
might naturally be expected the greater part of the publications are either 
faunal or systematic. The new generic and subgeneric names number 
25, of which twelve were proposed by Mathews, five by Oberholser, two 
by Todd, and one each by Chapman, Chubb, Kuroda, Murphy, Richmond 
and A. Roberts, but very few of them affect North America birds. The 
‘Record’ is indispensable to students who wish to keep in touch with cur- 
rent ornithological literature of the world and those who do not have 
access to the full volume should secure from the publishers a separate 
of the part relating to ‘Aves.’—T. 8. P. 


Stresemann’s ‘Avifauna Macedonica’.—A collection of upwards of 
3000 skins of birds representing 168 species was made in Macedonia by 
Dr. F. Doflein and Pref. L. Muller in 1917 and 1918 and deposited in the 
Zoological Museum at Munich. This collection forms the basis of the 
present exhaustive report? on the birds of that country by Dr. E. Strese- 
mann. 

Under each species there is a complete list of specimens, usually a 
large series, followed by paragraphs on the sequence of plumages, molts, 


1 Zoological Record, Vol. LIV, 1917, Aves. By W. L. Sclater, M.A., pp. 1-62, 
December, 1919. Printed for the Zoological Society of London; sold at their 
House in Regents’ Park, London N.W., 8. Price, six shillings. 

2 Avifauna Macedonica. Die ornithologischen Ergebnisse der Forschungarei- 
sen, unternommen nach Mazedonien durch Prof. Doflein und Prof. L. Muller- 
Mainz in den Jahren 1917 und 1918, von Dr. Erwin-Stresemann. Mit 6 Tafeln, 
Munchen 1920 (July). Verlag von Dultz & Co. S8vo., pp. I-XXIV, 1-270. 
{In German.] 


612 Recent Literature. lee 


geographic variation, individual variation, distribution and _ life-history, 
the last including field notes by Prof. Muller. There are also a bibli- 
ography and a historical introduction, an annotated list of Macedonian 
birds not contained in the collection and finally a nominal list of the 261 
species recorded from the country with page references to the main text. 

The study of the collection has been carried on with great care and a 
vast amount of detailed description and measurements is presented. The 
attention that has been given to the molts and plumages is deserving of 
especial commendation and it will interest American ornithologists to 
know that the comprehensive terminology proposed by Dr. Jonathan 
Dwight in this connection has been largely followed. 

The nomenclature is up to date in every respect and includes references 
to the original description of every species as well as to the subspecies 
where it does not happen to be the “‘typical”’ race. 

We notice only two new names proposed by the author: Galerida cris- 
tata muhlei (p. 62) for Alauda ferruginea Mithle 1844 (nec A. ferruginea 
Smith 1830); and Budytes flavus macronyx (p. 76), a new form from Vladi- 
vostok allied to B. f. thunbergi. 

There are eight excellent views of Macedonia reproduced in half-tone 
and a number of diagrams showing variation in wing length in various 
species. 

Dr. Stresemann is to be congratulated upon producing a report that 
is a model of its kind and in providing us with a thoroughly up to date 
work of reference upon the avifauna of a country about which we knew 
but little —W. S. 


Wood on the Eyes of the Burrowing Owl.—Dr. Casey A. Wood 
has published a valuable paper on the eyes of the Burrowing Owl! with 
a full technical description of their structure compared with that of other 
owls and a plate of the fundus oculi. 

His conclusions are of especial interest to ornithologists. He says: 
“Tn spite of the fact that Bendire and Hudson refer to the animal as a 
diurnal owl, their accounts of its habits really bear out the writer’s con- 
tention of a nocturnal animal with fairly good day vision, yet distinctly 
embarrassed, uncertain, and confused when the eyes are exposed to bright 
sunlight. Stress is laid by a number of observers upon the fact that 
this owl is seen at all times of day standing guard often on a little mound 
of earth in front of his burrow entrance, forgetting that as a much more 
interested householder, he also watches from the same post all hours of 
the night.’”’ Dr. Wood finds the eye structure similar in every respect 
to that of nocturnal animals. 


1 The Eyes of the Burrowing Owl with Special Reference to the Fundus Oculi. 
By Casey A. Wood, M.D., Chicago, Ill. Reprinted from Contributions to 
Medical and Biological Research. Dedicated to Sir William Osler, in Honor of 
his Seventieth Birthday, July 12, 1919, by his Pupils and Co-Workers. 8vo., 
pp. 819-823. 


ee 1920 eel Recent Literature. 613 


Other owls as is well known spend the day at rest on some suitable 
perch and it is probably only the exposed habitat of this species that 
makes it more conspicuous at this time and invites the assumption that 
it is diurnal in habits. The ease with which we make unauthorized as- 
sumptions may be seen at another point in Dr. Wood’s paper where fol- 
lowing the majority of writers he says that these owls mate “probably 
for life’? whereas Mr. Baldwin’s investigations on bird breeding (cf. Auk, 
1920 p.) seem to show that we have no warrant for any such assumption. 

Dr. Wood’s paper is most welcome as we need just such special investi- 
gation into the various organs of birds before we can hope for a proper 
understanding of their systematic relationships.—W. 8. 


Murphy on the Seacoast and Islands of Peru.—Mr. Robert Cush - 
man Murphy has published two papers! descriptive of his recent trip to 
the Peruvian seacoast which give one an interesting account of this country 
and its physical features. Of especial interest to the zoologist is his 
discussion of the ocean currents and their effect upon the distribution of 
life on the Pacific coast of America. Many sketch maps show clearly 
how cold currents, following the coast as far south as Cape San Lucas, 
carry boreal types southward and how similar currents flowing northward 
bring antarctic types as far as northern Peru, while warm ocean streams 
on the west coast of Mexico, Central America and northern South Amer- 
ica delimit the range of the tropical life found on the shores of this area. 
The uniformity of surface temperature on the Peruvian coast as com- 
pared with the western Atlantic and the percentage of salinity are dis- 
cussed with reference to their effect upon animal life, while the climate 
of Lima is graphically described as well as the faunal zones of Peru depen- 
dent, as has been shown by Dr. Chapman in the case of Colombia farther 
north, upon winds and cloud banks quite as much as upon elevation. 

Mr. Murphy’s papers should be read by everyone interested in South 
America and its fauna as well as by students of geographical distribution, 
who will find in this southern continent factors which are entirely absent 
in North America and which are quite novel to one trained to explain 
everything by circumpolar temperature zones and peculiarities of local 
environment.—W. 8. 


Dr. Shufeldt’s Bibliography.—The seventh and eighth installments 
of Dr. Shufeldt’s bibliography’ have appeared which bring the list down 
to 1918, while the introductory pages contain much biographical matter. 
—W.S. 


1 The Seacoast and Islands of Peru. By Robert Cushman Murphy. Parts 1 
and If. The Brooklyn Museum Quarterly, January and April, 1920. 

2 Complete List of My Published Writings with Brief Biographical Notes. By 
R. W. Shufeldt, Medical Review of Reviews, July and August, 1920, pp. 368-377 
and 437-447. 


[oct: 


614 Recent Literature. 

Birds of the National Parks..—Two years ago in referring to the 
Cireulars of Information of the National Parks (The Auk, XXXV, p. 
493, 1918), attention was called to the need of lists of the birds of Crater 
Lake, Mt. Rainier, Rocky Mountain, and Yosemite. Lists for the last 
two parks have now been supplied. In the Rules and Regulations for 
1920 bird lists are included in the circulars for Rocky Mountain, Sequoia, 
Yellowstone, and Yosemite, and notes on twelve characteristic birds in 
that for Mt. Rainier. The Glacier Park list is no longer published in 
the circular but forms part of the special bulletin on ‘Wild Animals of 
Glacier Park’, 1918 (See The Auk, XXXVI, p. 434, 1919). 

Through an unfortunate oversight the names of the authors of the 
Rocky Mountain and Yellowstone lists have been omitted and conse- 
quently the notes lose much of the authority which they should 
have when reduced to the category of brief lists in anonymous official 
publications in which it is impossible to ascertain the responsibility for 
the statements. It is evident however that Dean Babcock is the author 
of the list for the Rocky Mountain Park, and M. P. Skinner of that for 
the Yellowstone. The last mentioned list contains 200 species as com- 
pared with 194 in 1918 while the Sequoia list includes only 168 as com- 
pared with 182 two years ago. It is much to be desired that the notes 
in the anonymous lists should be made at least as full as those in the 
Yosemite list by Grinnell and Storer. Bird lists for Crater Lake, Grand 
Canyon, Lafayette, Mt. Rainier and Wind Cave National Parks, and 
also for the Muir Woods National Monument are still greatly needed.— 
Nay = oa a 


Game Laws for 1920.—The United States Department of Agriculture 
has issued the usual summary of the Federal, State and Provincial game 
laws as Farmers’ Bulletin 1138?, the compilation being the work of George 
A. Lawyer and Frank L. Earnshaw of the Biological Survey. The plan 
follows that of previous years. First is given a synopsis of the open 
seasons in the various States and Territories and the Provinces of Canada 
followed by a summary of the new legislation passed during the year. 

The wide circulation of the information in this pamphlet will do more 
to save wild bird life than anything else and we trust that all who receive 
the pamphlet will follow the request on the inside of the cover and “show 
the bulletin to a neighbor.” 


1Rules and Regulations, Mount Rainier National Park (birds pp. 13-17): 
Ibid. Rocky Mountain National Park (birds pp. 30-36); Ibid. Sequoia and 
General Grant National Parks (birds pp. 26-31); Ibid. Yellowstone National 
Park (birds pp. 80-90); Ibid. Yosemite National Park (birds pp. 50-54). Na- 
tional Park Service, Dept. of the Interior, 1920. Free on application to the 
Director of the National Park Service, Washington, D. C. 

2Game Laws for 1920. Farmers’ Bulletin. 1138, U. S. Department of Agri. 
culture. A summary of the Provision of Federal, State and Provincial Statutes. 
pp. 1-84 To be had on application to the Division of Publications, U. 8. Dept- 
of Agriculture. . 


er 1990" an Recent Literature. 615 


Why cannot every member of the A. O. U. post himself on the laws as 
they affect the birds of his state and make it his business to converse with 
aS many gunners as possible and let them know in the course of conversa- 
tion that he is informed on the law and is on the lookout for violators? 
In the case of boys or ignorant gunners actually engaged in illegal shoot- 
ing or preparing to do so, the law and the penalties could be forcibly ex- 
plained. Educational work of this sort carried on with a little tact will 
do a world of good and exemplify once more the old adage that an ounce 
of prevention is worth a pound of cure.—W. 8. 


Peters on a New Jay.—In this short paper! Mr. Peters describes as 
new the form of the Canada Jay occurring at Red Deer, Alberta, calling 
it Perisoreus canadensis albescens (p. 5). The specimens examined are 
in the Brewster collection, now in the Museum of Comparative Zoology, 
and are paler than any of the other known races.—W. 8. 


Chapman on Ostinops decumanus.*—As a result of a study of a 
large series of this Cacique Dr. Chapman separates the birds from Bolivia, 
Peru and south-western Brazil from the typical form of northern South 
America, as Ostinops decumanus maculosus (p. 26) Yungus, Bolivia, char- 
acterized by a sprinkling of yellow or white feathers over the body and 
wing-coverts The most important part of his paper however is the care- 
ful study of variation which it contains. The author finds variation of 
several kinds represented in this species the most striking being in the 
shape and size of the wings and tail in male birds from the same locality, 
which he attributes partly to age and partly to other factors. Dr. Chap- 
man’s paper should be carefully studied by anyone contemplating further 
subdivision of this or allied species while it is also an important contribu- 
tion to the problem of variation in general.—W. S. 


Lonnberg on ‘The Birds of the Juan Fernandez and Easter 
Islands.’’—The material upon which this paper is based was procured 
on the Swedish Pacific Expedition of 1916-17 by Mr. Kare Backstrém, 
zoologist of the party. From the Juan Fernandez specimens of twenty 
species were obtained which are described in detail by the author, the 
Cinclodes hitherto regarded as C. fuscus being separated under the name 
C. oustaleti baeckstroemii (p. 4). The interesting hummingbird, Eus- 
tephanus fernandensis was taken in various stages of molt, some indi- 


1A New Jay from Alberta. By James Lee Peters. Proc. New England Zool. 
Club, VII, pp. 51-5. May 4, 1920. 

2 Unusual Types of Apparent Geographic Variation in Color and of Individual 
Variation in Size Exhibited by Ostinops decumanus. By Frank M. Chapman. 
Proc. Biol. Society of Washington, Vol. 33, pp. 25-32. July 24, 1920. 

3-The Birds of the Juan Fernandez Islands. 

Notes on Birds from Easter Island. By Einar Lonnberg, pp. 1-24. Extract 
from The Natural History of Juan Fernandez and Easter Island. Edited by 
Dr. Carl Skottsberg. Vol. 1II. 1920. [In English.] 


616 Recent Literature. leek 


viduals having scarcely a metallic feather and it is suggested that the so- 
called EH. leyboldii is merely a seasonal condition of EL. fernandensis. Half- 
tone illustrations of the latter bird and nest from photographs are pre- 
sented. 

A summary of our knowledge of the avifauna of these historic islands 
shows that thirty species are known to have occurred on them. Of these 
twenty-four have been recorded from Masatierra and twelve from Masa- 
fuera. Nine species are indigenous, the two humming birds, the Anaere- 
tes and the Sparrow Hawk being peculiar to the former island and the 
Aphrastura and buzzard to Masafuera, although stragglers of the latter 
species wander across to Masatierra. The thrush and the Cinclodes 
occur on both islands. Five petrels breed on the islands and the Domestic 
Pigeon and California Quail have been introduced. The other birds are 
accidental visitors, five from the South American mainland, five roving 
seabirds and three migrants from the north—the Short-eared Owl, Red 
Phalarope and Buteo obsoletus. 

On Easter Island specimens of six of the twelve species said to inhabit 
the island were obtained, two of which are described as new: Procel- 
sterna caerulea skoltsbergii (p. 20) and Pterodroma heraldica paschae (p. 
23). The nesting habits of the latter species are interesting. The soil 
of the island where this Petrel breeds was so hard that it was impossible 
for the birds to construct burrows and the eggs were therefore laid directly 
upon the ground amongst the grass.—W. 8S. 


Geographical Bibliography of British Ornithology.—Part 5 of 
this valuable reference work! continues the Scottish counties and includes 
the island groups—the Orkneys, Hebrides and Shetlands, the ornithology 
of which is perhaps the most interesting of any part of the British Isles. 
One of the works containing reference to the birds of the Orkneys bears 
date of 1693, while the bibliography of the birds of the Hebrides runs 
back to 1703. Part 6 covers Ireland and brings the work to a close.—W. S. 


Spring Migration Notes of the Chicago Area.—In an attractively 
printed pamphlet? bearing this title Messrs. J. D. Watson, G. P. Lewis 
and N. F. Leopold., Jr., have presented an annotated list of the birds 
observed by themselves and by Messrs. Locke Mackenzie and Sydney 
Stein in the Chicago Area with dates of arrival for the years 1913 to 1920 
inclusive. The main list contains 237 species with five others, the occur- 
rence of which is doubtful. The list seems to be very carefully prepared 


1 Geographical Bibliography of British Ornithology from the earliest Times 
to the end of 1918 Arranged under Counties. By W. H. Mullens, H Kirke 
Swann and Rey. F. R. C. Jourdain. Part 5, pp. 385-480 Part 6, pp. 481-558. 
Witherby & Co, 326 High Holborn, London. 1920. 

2 Spring Migration Notes of the Chicago Area. Compiled by James D. Wat- 
son, George Porter Lewis and Nathan F. Leopold, Jr. Privately printed. pp. 
1-18. [1920.] 


Vol. | Recent Literature. 617 


and should be of much interest to other bird students of the district, 
while it will also furnish a convenient comparative record for those inter- 
ested in the general study of bird migration —W. 8S. 


Nomenclature of the Birds of Bavaria.—In 1916 appeared a list 
of the birds of Bavaria! by C. E. Hellmayr and A. Laubmann, published 
under the authority of the Ornithological Society of Bavaria. It com- 
prises the list proper of 326 species and subspecies and a hypothetical list 
of 14 additional forms, together with a list of the genera with the type 
species and the method of their determination. 

In the list the species are arranged systematically under the families 
with a reference to the original place of publication and the type locality. 
It is interesting in connection with our efforts toward uniformity in nomen- 
clature to compare this list with that of British birds prepared in 1912 
by Dr. Hartert and others (for comparison of this with the A. O. U. List 
and with the subsequent List of British Birds by the B. O. U. Committee. 
See ‘The Auk’ 1912, p. 407). We find that there appear to be 
only thirty cases where the lists differ either in generic or specific names 
and half of these are due to the lumping of genera in the British ‘List’ 
which are usually regarded as distinct, other differences are due to the 
unfortunate obscurity of the International Code as to whether one name 
precludes the use of another if it is spelled in a slightly different manner, 
i. e. the “one letter rule’. 

The general concordance of the two lists is certainly very encouraging 
and it would seem that a nomenclature could soon be drawn up for Europe 
and North America with a few concessions on either side, that would be 
universally acceptable. 

One point in the Hellmayr-Laubniann List upon which the opinion of 
the present reviewer is referred to deserves further consideration, namely 
the fixing of the type of the genus Colymbus Linn. by Gray in 1855. In 
my remarks (Auk, 1918, p. 458) I did not realize that the edition of Lin- 
naeus to which he referred was prior to the starting point of zoological 
nomenclature and we have no right to interpret ‘Linnaeus 1735” as 
“Linnaeus 1758.” I am therefore of opinion that no type was legitimately 
selected for the genus until Baird, Brewer and Ridgway cited C. cristatus 
in the second volume of the ‘Water Birds of North America’ p. 425 in 
1884. This reference is given by Hellmayr and Laubmann and is per- 
fectly correct ahtedating the action of the A. O. U. Committee in 1886 
which is given as the first selection of type in the A. O. U. ‘Check-List.’ 


1 


The name Colymbus must therefore remain for the Grebes.—W. 8. 


1 Nomenclator der Vogel Bayerns. von C. E. Hellmayr und A. Laubmann Im 
Auftrage der Ornithologischen Gesellschaft in Bayern herausgegeben von C. E. 
Hellmayr. Munchen May 30, 1916. pp. 1-68. [In German.] 


618 Recent Literature. lock 


Van Cleave’s ‘‘Acanthocephala of the Canadian Arctic Expedi- 
tion, 1913-1918.’’'—In his paper Dr. Van Cleave states that so far as 
he is aware there are no published records of the occurrence of Acantho- 
cephala in the arctic fauna of North America. ‘Species described by 
some of the early explorers have become the objects of much conjecture 
on the part of present-day investigators. Under the name Sipunculus 
lendix, Phipps (1774) described from an Hider Duck what is obviously a 
species of Acanthocephala. Soon afterward, Goeza (1782: 141) called 
attention to the fact that this species of Phipps is in reality an acantho- 
cephalan. Since that time various investigators have endeavored to 
determine the correct disposition of this species within the group, but all 
of their attempts appear to be mere guesses ostensibly fostered by the 
desire to distribute all of the species names into groups which would at 
least give the appearance of a completely worked out synonymy. 

“Three species of fresh-water fishes, two marine fishes, and one bird 
constitute the entire list of acanthocephalan hosts recorded by the expe- 
dition. . . . A new species of the genus Filicollis [Filicollis arcticus 
Van Cleave, type host, King Eider, Somateria spectabilis (Linnaeus), in 
intestine, collected at Bernard harbour, Dolphin and Union strait, North- 
west Territories, June 16, 1916; cotypes deposited in the Victoria Memor- 
ial Museum, Ottawa, Canada, and in the collection of the author at 
Urbana, Illinois] from the King Eider stands intermediate between the 
European and the North American species of this genus, but in some 
respects shows much closer relationship with the previously described 
American species. . . . A comparison of F. arcticus with other 
known members of the same genus discloses some interesting facts re- 
garding the geographical distribution of the members of this genus. F. 
anatis is the common European representative of Filicollis while FP’. botulus 
occurs in the Eiders in the United States. Flicollis arcticus, n. sp., dif- 
fers in definite manner from both the previously mentioned species but 
shows a distinctly closer relationship to F. botulus. . . . In F. bo- 
tulus there are but sixteen longitudinal rows of hooks (on the proboscis) 
while for F. arcticus the writer has found twenty-two. Both of these 
American species lack the spherical enlargement of the proboscis char- 
acteristic of the European species. 

“The King Hider, the host of F. arcticus, though cireumpolar in its 
distribution, evidently does not carry the same acanthocephalan infesta- 
tion throughout its range. From the West Tajmirland peninsula, von 
Linstow (1905: 3). {Helminthen der Russischen Polar-Expedition 1900— 
1903. Mem. Acad. Imp. Se. St. Petersbourge, Serie 8, Class Physico- 
Math., 18: 1-17] described Echinorhynchus pupa from this same host 


1Report of the Canadian Arctic Expedition, 1913-18, Vol. IX: Annelids, 
Parasitic Worms, Protozoans, etc. Part E: Acanthocephala. By H. J. Van- 
Cleave. Southern Party—1913-16. Ottawa: J. de Labroquerie Tache, Printer 
to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty. 1920. Issued April 7, 1920. pp. 1—11C. 


en 1920 at Recent Literature. 619 


species. Unfortunately his description and his figures of this species 
fail to give a full enough account of the structure to enable anyone to 
place it with certainty in any of the genera recognized in modern tax- 
onomy of the Acanthocephala. . . . No evidence is presented, either 
in his description or in his figure, which would make it seem probable 
that his species belongs to the genus Filicollis. Thus on opposite sides 
of the arctic circle the King Eider apparently is parasitized by Acantho- 
cephala representing two distinct genera.”—R. M. A. 


Economic Ornithology in Recent Entomological Publications.— 
A few recent entomological contributions contain noteworthy references 
to bird enemies; they relate to the following insects: 

Round-headed apple-tree borer (Saperda candida): Losses from this 
insect have increased with the development of apple growing, and at 
present the species is a primary pest throughout the region east of the 
Rocky Mountains. Mr. Fred E. Brooks, author of a comprehensive 
bulletin! on this borer says: ‘‘ Probably no other economic insect of equal 
importance has had so few natural enemies recorded definitely and spe- 
cifically as has the round-headed apple-tree borer,” and that personally 
he has never found any evidence of hymenopterous parasites. However, 
he goes on to say that: 

“While the control effect of parasites and predacious insects on this 
borer is negligible, woodpeckers play an important part in holding it in 
check. Wherever the writer has collected specimens or made observa- 
tions in borer-infested localities the work of these birds has always been 
in evidence. Soon after the borers hatch the woodpeckers begin to find 
them beneath the thin covering of bark and thereafter the birds drill 
for them as long as they are in the tree. In several orchards where counts 
were made from 50 to 75 per cent of the borers had been destroyed in this 
way. 

“During October, 1915, 24 young borers were collected and planted in 
furrows gouged out of the wood beneath loosened tongues of bark on the 
trunk of an apple tree. A week later, when the tree was revisited for 
the purpose of putting a wire screen around the trunk to protect the bor- 
ers from birds, woodpeckers had punctured every tongue of bark and 
removed the borers from beneath. Not one had escaped. In May of 
the same year, while pupae were being collected from an orchard, a total 
of 11 pupal cells were found and from every one the occupant had been 
removed by woodpeckers. In another case 21 pupal cells were found, 19 
of which had been opened by woodpeckers and the insects removed.” 
(pp. 29-30.) 

Ribbed pine-borer (Rhagiwm lineatum): While not a serious insect pest, 
this species materially hastens the death and decay of injured pines. A 


1 Bul. 847, U. S. Dept. Agr. 1920. 


620 Recent Literature. Oct. 


recent writer on the subject notes! that: ‘Birds, chiefly the woodpeckers, 
are the most important of the predatory enemies. It is not uncommon 
to find infested trees where these birds have removed from one-half to 
two-thirds of the larvae and adults during a single winter.” 

Semitropical Army Worm (Xylomyges eridania): This insect has de- 
veloped into a serious enemy of agriculture in Florida within the last few 
years and although complete studies of its habits and enemies have not yet 
been made, it has been learned that birds including the Bobwhite, Boat- 
tailed Grackle, Meadowlark, Bobolink and Loggerhead Shrike feed upon 
it to a very noticeable extent? 

Earwig (Forficula auricularia): This species which has been introduced 
into Rhode Island where it has become numerous, spread and done con- 
siderable damage is treated in an article by an English author who has 
collected’ the records of its capture by British wild birds. Summing 
them up he finds that 13 species of birds are known to have captured 
earwigs, most of them sparingly. Similarly there are only a few records 
of American birds eating these insects but in considering such cases there 
should be kept in mind the proportion these small groups bear to all of 
the food available to birds. The earwigs are a very insignificant part of 
the insect fauna of either England or the United States and no surprise 
should be felt, therefore, that they are not more often eaten by birds.— 
W. L. M. 


The Bird Interest in Iowa Lakes.—A report valuable not only for 
its findings and recommendations, but especially as a voucher of deep 
public interest in the subject, is that upon Iowa Lakes and Lake Beds 
by the State Highway Commission. (250 pp. 1917.) In the first place 
it is most encouraging to note that in nine-tenths or more of the cases 
retention and improvement of the lakes is recommended. The Com- 
mission has wisely resisted clamor by drainage advocates and consider- 
ing the rights of the entire public has in consequence adopted a policy of 
conservation. In nearly every case, the report states, in which the drain- 
age of a lake has been petitioned, the great damage caused to crops by 
blackbirds which congregate in the vicinity of the lake has been set forth 
as one of the principal reasons why drainage was desired. A careful 
field investigation of these depredations was made by the State Agri- 
cultural Experiment Station and the following conclusions reached: (1) 
Slight damage is done to sprouting corn and that in very limited areas 
near nesting colonies of birds; (2) Damage to small grains is confined to 
the season they are in shock, is serious only when the shocks are left ex- 
posed a long time, and is restricted to small areas near groves, sloughs 


1 Hess, Walter N., Mem. 33, Cornell Univ. Agr. Exp. Sta., May, 1920, p. 379. 

2 Berger, E. W. Quart. Bul. State Plant Bd. Fla., Vol. 4, No. 2, Jan. 1920 
pp. 27-28. 

3 Brindley, H. H., Proc. Cambridge Phil. Soc., Vol. 19, 1918, pp. 175-177. 


en 1020" ue Recent Literature. 621 


or patches of sunflowers. Within territory one mile from a lake this 
damage does not average more than one dollar per acre; (3) The amount 
of damage done to corn in the milk varies as the distance of the field from 
a lake, slough or grove. On farms within half of a mile of a lake about 
13 per cent. of the ears were damaged, on farms from a half mile to two 
miles distant, 5 per cent, and on those more than two miles about one and 
a half per cent. The average loss on farms of the first group is about four 
cents per acre. The greatest damage per acre disclosed by the survey was 
$17.00, and this in only one instance. Accompanying the report on field 
investigation is one on the contents of the stomach of 43 Red-winged and 
16 Yellow-headed Blackbirds from analyses made by the Biological 
Survey. Twenty-six per cent of the food of the former birds and 2.7% 
of the latter consisted of corn. In summing up the relations of lakes, 
bird pests and the public it appears highly preferable that direct control 
measures be applied to the injurious species rather than that the lakes be 
drained, for the latter are not only of great value as recreation places, 
but also are the center of abundance of numerous species of wild birds, 
including valuable game birds entirely dependent upon the presence of 
the lakes. 

In general the report reviewed gives proper weight to the hunting in- 
terests, but the suggestion is repeated in many places that water-levels 
must be raised to discourage dense growths of water lilies, of cat-tails, 
rushes and of marsh as a whole. In this connection it should be kept in 
mind that marsh is absolutely necessary for practically all the birds which 
are attracted by the lakes. It is their breeding home and no matter 
how desirable it may be to boating or fishing interests to have more deep, 
clear water, the marsh must not be sacrificed or the whole value of lake 
conservation from the wild life standpoint will be lost. 

The report includes a useful report on the vegetation of the lakes, from 
which a clear idea as to their wildfowl food resources can be drawn. This 
part of the report is unexceptionable except for insistence on the point 
just alluded to, namely suppression of marsh. If the demands for recre- 
ation places cannot be compromised with the necessities of wild lie, it 
would seem necessary to assign the lakes definitely to the one purpose 
or the other and treat them accordingly. While saving lakes from drain- 
age is a conservation measure, wild life will suffer practically as much 
from elimination of marshes as it would from drainage. In view of the 
advanced attitude it has already taken on the subject of lake conserva- 
tion there would seem little doubt but that the State Commission will 
give full weight to the interests of wild life when properly presented.— 
W. L. M. 


Bird Liming in Lower Egypt.—An interesting paper! with this 
title is here somewhat belatedly reviewed and occasion taken to present 


1 Ministry of Public Works, Zoological Service Publ. No. 28, 1919, 9 pp. 


622 Recent Literature. Ge 
a short list of articles on bird lime, a subject concerning which informa- 
tion is not always easily found. The paper reviewed is by John Lewis 
Bonhote and has an introduction on the need for protection of birds in 
Egypt by Major 8. S. Flower, both members of the British Ornithologists’ 
Union. Bird liming has been carried on in Egypt for an indefinite period 
with no attempts at restriction until 1912. The localities where the 
practice is profitable are limited, being open country on the far side of 
bodies of water in the paths of bird migrants. Here bushes are set up 
which are very attractive to the birds as furnishing perches and promis- 
ing food, and in these the limed rods are placed, or V-shaped flyways are 
constructed in tall marsh vegetation with limed sticks at the apex. When 
the bird catchers are undisturbed they get large numbers of birds ranging 
in size up to rollers and turtle doves. The lime is made from pulp of 
the fruit’ of Cordia mixta. On account of cruelty connected with the 
practice of bird-liming, the fact that most of the birds captured are bene- 
ficial, and the illegality of the whole traffic, strenuous efforts have been 
made to break it up. . 

The following references to information on bird lime and its use are 
submitted. Treatments in encyclopedias are not included, but it is 
worth mentioning that the principal works of this class contain a fair 
amount of information on the subject. 

Abbey, George. The Balance of Nature and Modern Conditions of 
Cultivation, 1909, pp. 188-190. 

Anon. Bird-Lime Manufacture in Japan. Chicago Field, Vol. 8, 
No. 16, Dec. 1, 1877, p. 265. 

C., T. Bird-lime. American Sportsman, Vol. 4, No. 16, July 18, 
1874, p. 253. 

Carnegie, W. Practical Trapping of Vermin and Birds. Third Ed. 
pp. 62-65. 

Drieberg, C. Field Rats in Cultivated Land. The Tropical Agri- 
culturist (Ceylon) Vol. 25, 1906, pp. 875-6. 

Phillips, Coleman. Small Bird Nuisance. Conference of New Zea- 
land Fruitgrowers, etc. Dunedin, June 1901. N. Z. Dept. Agr. p. 37. 

The various substances reported to be used in the manufacture of bird- 
lime include; inner bark of European holly and of the mochi tree of 
Japan, presumably the whole plants of mistletoe and distaff thistle, 
fruits of the genus Cordia, wheat flour, linseed and fish oils and Venice 
turpentine.—W. L. M. 


The Ornithological Journals 


Bird-Lore. XXII, No. 4. July-August, 1920. 
Photography of the Scarlet Tanager. By C. W. Leister.—An admir- 
able series of pictures of a very difficult subject. 


90 | Recent Literature. 623 


A Gnateatcher’s Troubles. By R. D. Book—<Account of its nest build- 
ing in Ohio. 

A Curious Nesting Habit of the Tufted Titmouse. By James P. Baker, 
Jr.—Collecting hairs from a man’s head as well as from a dog and a squir- 
rel. The taking of hairs from a live squirrel has been previously de- 
scribed in ‘The Auk’ for 1897, p. 325. 

The Starling and the Bobolink are the species whose migration and 
plumage are discussed in this issue and form the subject of a color plate 
by Fuertes. 

In the Audubon and School Departments is an excellent article on the 
study of birds’ eggs by Dr. Arthur A. Allen and an account of a visit to 
some of the bird refuges of North Carolina, Louisiana and Texas, by T. 
Gilbert Pearson. 


The Condor. XXII, No. 3. May-June, 1920. 

The Home Life of the Western Warbling Vireo. By Henry J. Rust.— 
An admirable account of the nest building and rearing of the young of 
this species in northern Idaho, well illustrated. 

Autobiographical Notes. By Henry W. Henshaw.—This instalment 
brings to a close this notable autobiography which we hope may be instru- 
mental in bringing others of our older ornithologists to record their recol- 
lections in the same delightful way that Mr. Henshaw has done, before 
it is too late. It really seems to us a duty that they owe to American 
ornithology, the record of the development of which can be preserved in 
no other way. 

The Existence of Sea Birds a Relatively Safe One. By Joseph Grin- 
nell. 

A Return to the Dakota Lake Region. By Florence M. Bailey (con- 
cluded). 

The Condor. XXII, No. 4. July-August, 1920. 

In Memorium: Frank Slater Daggett. By Harry 8. Swarth. 

Variations in the Song of the Golden-crowned Sparrow. By Frank N. 
Bassett.—In musical notation carefully tested with a pitch-pipe. 

Additional Notes on the Avifauna of Forrester Island, Alaska. By 
George Willett. 

Observations on the Habits of the White-winged Dove. By Alexander 
Wetmore.—A valuable report on the habits and economic status of the 
species based upon field observations conducted under the auspices of the 
Biological Survey. 

A New Ptarmigan from Mount Rainier. By Walter P. Taylor.— 
Lagepus leucurus rainierensis (p. 146), Mount Rainier, Washington. 

The California Race of the Brewer Blackbird. By J. Grinnell.—Eu- 
phagus cyanocephalus minusculus (p. 153), Palo Alto, California. 

The Oologist. XXXVII, No. 6. June, 1920. 

Annotated List of the Birds of Brooke County, W. Va. Part II. By 
G. M. Sutton, Part III in July issue. 


[oet: 


624 Recent Literature. 

The Oologist. XXXVIJ, No. 8. August, 1920. 

Days with the Cerulean Warbler. By 8. 8. Dickey.—Account of its 
breeding in southwestern Pennsylvania with detailed description of eight 
nests. 

North Dakota Birds of Coulee and Moraine. By P. B. Peabody. 

The Ibis. (II Series.) II, No. 3. July, 1920. 

List of the Birds of the Canary Islands, with detailed references to the 
Migratory Species and the Accidental Visitors. By David A. Banner- 
man. Part VII. Summary and General Conclusions. (See antea p. 607.) 

A Nominal List of the Birds of Siam. By Count Nils Gyldenstolpe. 
(continued). 

Notes on South African Accipitres. By C. G. Finch-Davies (concluded). 
—Tinnunculus rupicolus rhodesi (p. 620), Matope Hills, Rhodesia. 

Notes on the Birds of North-east Chihli, in North China. By J. D. D. 
LaTouche. 

Some Observations on the Birds of Islands of Milos, Lemnos and Im- 
bros, Aegean Sea. By J. H. Stenhouse. 

On Some West Australian Birds collected between the North-West 
Cape and Albany (950 miles apart). By Thomas Carter With Nomen- 
clature and Remarks by G. M. Mathews. 

On a Doubling of the Central Tail-feathers in a Bird-of-Paradise. By 
J. A. Bierens de Haan. 

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. No. CCLI. May 
31, 1920. 

Lord Rothschild exhibited a life size restoration of the Moa, Dinornis 
maximus, and exhibited a specimen of his [frita coronata from New Guinea 
which proves identical with Todopsis kowaldi deVis. He demonstrated 
that the bird had no close relation with Todopsis and that it must there- 
fore be called Ifrita kowaldi. 

Mr. P. A. Buxton presented a revision of the Persian races of Sita 
rupicola and S. neumayer. 

Dr. Hartert described a new woodpecker, Campethera loveridget (p. 139) 
from Morogoro, East Africa. 

Mr. C. W. Mackworth-Praed described five new races of African Franco- 
lins and Mr. N. B. Kinnear, a new nuthatch from Mt. Victoria, Burma.— 
Sitta europaea griseiventris (p. 142). 

Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club. No. CCLII. June 
30, 1920. 

A number of rare books and pictures were exhibited which are listed. 

Dr. Ticehurst described the Egret Farms of Sind about which he had 
gathered much information, but Mr. Stuart Baker said that the number 
of plumes obtained from this source was infinitesimal as compared with 
those from killed birds. 

Mr. Charles Chubb described: Atticora fucata reraimae (p. 155) from 
Mt. Roraima, British Guiana; and Henicorhina leucosticta hauxwelli (p. 
156) from Elvira, east Peru. 


Vol 1920] Recent Literature. 625 


Dr. Ticehurst described Crateropus terricolor sindianus (p. 156) from 
Karachi, Sind, and Prinia flaviventris sindianus (p. 157) from Sukker, 
Sind. 

British Birds. XIV, No. 1. June, 1920. 

Notes on Slavonian Grebe. By A. D. DuBois.—-Reprinted from ‘The 
Auk’ XXXVI. 

Manx Ornithological Notes. By P. G. Ralph. 

Notes on the Harlequin Duck. By Charles E. Alford.—On the coasts 
of British Columbia. 

British Birds. XIV, No. 2. July, 1920. 

Notes on Somersetshire Ravens. By Stanley Lewis.—Detailed obser- 
vations at a nest site on the cliffs of Cheddar. 

British Birds. XIV, No. 3. August, 1920. 

Bird Tracks in the Snow. By Richard Clapham.—With interesting 
photographs. 

Notes on a Pair of Bee-eaters in Scotland. By J. Kirke Nash.—The 
pair actually started nesting when the female was caught by a local gar- 
dener and died in captivity. 

Avicultural Magazine. (III Series) XI, No. 6. June, 1920. 

Birds of Paradise in Captivity. By A. 8. LeSouef.—Six species in the 
Zoological Park at Sydney, Australia. 

Avicultural Magazine. (III series) XI, No.7. July, 1920. 

The Nesting of the Pilot Bird (Pycnoptilus floccosus). By 8. A. Law- 
rence and R. T. Littlejohns.—In Victoria. 

Avicultural Magazine. (III Series) XI, No. 8. August, 1920. 

Buff-backed Herons. By J. L. Bonhote—On Herons in captivity in 
Egypt. 

The Emu. XIX. Part 4. April, 1920. 

The Rufous Scrub-Bird. (Atrichornis rufescens) in Queensland. <A 
New Subspecies. By H. L. White.—A. r. jacksoni (p. 258), Macpherson 
Range. 

Haunts of the Rufous Serub-Bird (Atrichernis rufescens Ramsey)— 
Discovery of the female on the Macpherson Range, 8. E. Queensland. 
By 8. W. Jackson.—This article is a detailed account of the search for 
the bird described in the preceding paper, but curiously enough the new 
name is not employed in the title of either which is to say the least con- 
fusing. No matter what races of the bird may be recognized Mr. Jack- 
son has presented a most valuable contribution to our knowledge of this 
rare type and has illustrated it with some excellent pictures of its wonder- 
ful environment. There are interesting accounts of other species met 
with on the trip. 

New Sub-species of Pachycephala olivacea. By H. L. White.—P. o. 
macphersonianus (p. 273), Macpherson Range, Queensland. 

Field Notes on the Painted Honey-eater. (Hntomophila picta.) By 
J. S. P. Ramsey. 

The Tasmanian and New Zealand Groups. By Robert Hall.—A rather 
elaborate discussion of the faunae of these islands and comparison with 
that of the Australian-Papuan region. 


626 Recent Literature. fare 


Wilson’s Promontory (Victoria) and its Wild Life. By Charles Barrett. 
—This region comprising approximately 100,000 acres is now a National 
Park carefully guarded by competent rangers. A list of the birds so far 
recorded from it is appended. 

Birds of the Mount Compass District, South Australia. By Edwin 
Ashby. 

Notes on Parasitism. By H. Stuart Dove. 

Colour-Sense in Satin Bower-Birds. By H. V. Edwards.—Seem to 
show a marked preference for blue objects when gathering materials for 
their bower. 

Variation in the Albatrosses and Petrels. By Leverett M. Loomis.— 
Consists mainly of a rewriting of matter already published in ‘The Auk’, 
one of the illustrations having already appeared there although the fact 
is not mentioned. 

In ‘Camera Craft Notes’ there are several interesting photographic 
reproductions including one of a young Little Penguin. 

The Austral Avian Record. IV, No. 1. May 27, 1920. 

Dates of Ornithological Works. By G. M. Mathews.—This is a con- 
densed reprint of the author’s valuable article in his Appendix to the 
‘Birds of Australia’, which is now rendered available to all. 

The Austral Avian Record. Vol. IV, No. 2and3. July 28, 1920. 

Avian Taxonomy. By G. M. Mathews and Tom Iredale.—This 
paper consists mainly of a scheme of classification of the birds of the world 
running down to families. The authors give no reasons for their de- 
parture from current systems where they differ from these, though as a 
matter of fact there does not seem to be much that is original in their 
scheme, except in the rank which they give to different groups. One is 
rather surprised to see the list bristling with ‘“suborders” and “super- 
families’? when they refuse to make use of “subgenera”? which, in the 
opinion of many, would so adequately express their ideas on the proper 
grouping of species without completely upsetting our nomenclature. 
The authors are not always very clear in the wording of their introduc- 
tory pages, but they seem to have an ill-concealed contempt for the anato- 
mist, especially if he be not an ornithologist, as they say: “A complica- 
tion has been present in the peculiar usurpation of recent taxonomies 

by individuals ignorant of avian forms. We have been quite unable to 
appreciate the reasons for acquiescence in the unmerited dogmatism of 
such writers, whose inability to understand avian evolution has been dis- 
guised by the usage of barbaric terms.” Following this comes the aston- 
ishing statement that “only three taxonomists have dealt with bird 
classification in a scientific manner, viz., Steineger, Sharpe and Shufeldt, 
and these were more or less confused by the peculiarities proposed by 
their predecessors, and could not deal clearly with the matters in view.” 
With all due respect and admiration for the three gentlemen mentioned 
we can hardly accept this statement of Messrs. Mathews and Iredale and 


—™ — 


—_ = 


Vol. Gt | Recent Literature. 627 


1920 


we think that the chosen three would be the last to ignore the labors of 
the illustrious group who have been denied admission to this inner circle. 

Systematic ornithology so far as it is concerned with the separation of 
species and geographic races and the scouring the literature for the names 
that have been bestowed upon them is one thing; but the working out of 
the evolution of the general groups and their proper relationship is quite 
another. One is as important as the other, but each requires a man 
trained in that particular field and to obtain the most reliable facts in 
the second line of research we must of necessity look for help to the 
zoologist whose knowledge extends beyond the limits of the Aves. 

The same authors have a “name-list’’ of the birds of New Zealand and 
the first instalment of a similar list for those of Australia, which complete 
this issue of the Record. 

The South Australian Ornithologist. V, Part 2. April, 1920. 

The Birds of Rivers Murray and Darling and district of Wentworth. 
By A. Chenery and A. M. Morgan. 

Some Weights and Temperatures of Birds. By A. M. Morgan. 

Eudromias australis. The Australian Dottrel. By J. McNeil Gilp. 

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. No. 133. May, 1920. [In French.] 

Contribution to a Study of the forms of Bubo ascalaphus in North 
Africa. By L. Lavauden. 

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. No. 134. June, 1920. 

An Amateur Bird Guide for One Visiting Africa. By Dr. Millet- 
Horsin. (Continued in the two following numbers.) 

Revue Francaise d’Ornithologie. No. 136. August-September, 
1920. 

A New Subspecies of Accentor from France.—A Reprint of Harper’s 
article on Prunella modularis mabbotti. 

Birds Observed in Tunis, May 8—June 8, 1920. By M. Morgue. 

Destruction and Reaction. By Rene Deschiens.—Killing of Terns 
and Gulls as ‘‘Game”’ and the need of a revision of the legal term. 

L’Oiseau. I, No. 6. June, 1920. [In French.] 

The Oriole (Oriolus galbula) in Captivity. By A. Mercier. 

On Trichoglossus rubritorques. By G. Ollivry and A. Decoux. 

Reprint of Horsfall’s paper on the Sage Grouse. 

L’Oiseau. I, No. 7. July, 1920. 

Rearing of Merula boulboul. By Westley T. Page. 

Notes on Methods of Procuring Insects Necessary for Bird Food. By 
G. Foucher. 

Ornithologische Beobachter. XVII, No. 10. July, 1920. [In 
French and German.] 

The Taxonomic Signification of Qualitative Characters. By E. Stres- 
mann. 

Ornithologische Beobachter. XVII, No. 9. June, 1920. 

Report for the Swiss Central Station for Bird-banding for 1917-1918. 
By A. Hesse. 


628 Recent Literature. [ocr 


Le Gerfaut. X, No. 2. 1920. [In French.] 

The Birds of Devon compared with those of Belgium. By Th. Bis- 
schop. 

Proceedings of the Bavarian Ornithological Society. XII, No. 4. 
May 15, 1916. [In German.] 

On the Nomenclature of Our Kingfisher. (Alcedo ispida.) By A. 
Laubmann.—Gracula atthis Linn. is found to be the Egyptian form of 
Alcedo ispida and having anteriority all of the races become subspecies 
of it and the European bird will be A. atthis ispida. 

Wood Owl Duet. By Carnel Schmitt. 

On the Forms of Corvus coronoides Group. By E.Stresemann. Twenty 
races are recognized of which three are described as new: C. c. connectens 
(p. 281), Loo Choo Islands; C. c. madarazi (p. 285), Colombo, Ceylon; 
C. c. hainanus (p. 286), Hoihow, Hainan. 

Proceedings of the Bavarian Ornithological Society. XIII, No. 
1. February 25, 1917. 

Three Contributions to the Nomenclature of European Birds. By C. 
BK. Hellmayr.—Reviews of the B. O. U. List, Reichenow and Hesse’s New 
List of German Birds, and Studer and von Burg’s Catalogue of the Birds 
of Switzerland. 

A New Name for Alcedo grandis Blyth. By A. Laubmann.—Becomes 
A. hercules (p. 105), the old name antedated by A. grandis Gm. 

Descriptions of Six New Neotropical Birds with Remarks on Ampelion 
cinclus Tsch. By C. E. Hellmayr.—Alteleodacnis speciosa amazonum (p. 
106), Tarapoto, Peru; Cyanolyca viridicyana cyanolaema (p. 107), Chu- 
huasi, Peru; Molothrus badius bolivianus (p. 108), Chuquisaca, Bolivia; 
Philydor ochrogaster (p. 111), Chanchamayo, Peru; Siptornis berlepschi 
(p. 113); Chicani, Bolivia; Grallaricula nana olivascens (p. 117); Galipan, 
Venezuela. Ampelion cinctus Tsch. becomes Ampelioides tschudii (Gray), 
the specific name being invalidated by Ampelis cincta Kuhl while the 
genus now employed is the earliest of several that have been proposed 
for it. 

Proceedings of the Bavarian Ornithological Society. XIII, No. 2. 
September 20, 1917. 

On Mixed Flights of Birds. By E. Stresemann—In the East Indies. 

The Calls of the Swift. By H. Stadler and C. Schmitt. 

Sitta europaea homeyert Hart. and Related Forms. By I. van Do- 
maniewski.—See also XVI, No. 2, p. 139 for other views on its relation- 
ship. 

On the Nomenclature of Palaeactic Crows. By C. E. Hellmayr. 

Miscellanea Ornithologica. By C. E. Hellmayr. 

(V) Two New Neotropical Tracheophones—Hypolophus bernardi 
cajamarcae (p. 188), Cajamarea, Peru, and Sittasomus griseicapillus 
reisert (p. 190), Pedrinha, Brazil. (VI) On Some Types of Coerebidae. 
(VIT) On Synonymy and Nomenclature. Tangara lutleyi (p. 198) pro- 


oe oe 


hs 100, ye] Recent Literature. 629 


posed for Calliste melanolis Scl.; Leptopogon taczanowskii (p. 198) for L. 
rufipectus Tacz.; Euchlornis riefferii signata (p. 199) for Ampelis viridis 
d’Orb. Lafr.; Automolus roraimae (p. 199) for Philydor albigularis, Tsch. 
Accipter guttifer (p. 200) for A. guttatus auct. Also many changes in names. 

A New Raven-Crow from Japan. By A. Laubmann.—Corvus corone 
interpositus (p. 201), Hondo. 

Proceedings of the Bavarian Ornithological Society. XIII, No. 3. 
May 25, 1918. 

Geographic Variation in the forms of Corvus cornix. By A. Laubmann. 
Six races recognized. 

An Analysis of the Song of the Creeper. By H. Stadler and C. Schmitt. 

Miscellanea Ornithologica. By C. E. Hellmayr. (VIII) The Forms of 
Rhodinocichla rosea are recognized, R. r. harterti (p. 304), Bogota, being 
described as new. (IX) A New Tyrant from Bolivia, Leptopogon super- 
ciliaris albidiventer (p. 305) Quebrada, Bolivia. (X) Remarks on the 
type of Pitta angolensis and the Ethiopean Pittas. (XI) Two New Wood- 
peckers from British Guiana. Chloronerpes rubiginosus guianae (p. 314) 
Yuruani River, Venezuela; Veniliornis kirkii monticola (p. 315) Roraima. 

Proceedings of the Bavarian Ornithological Society. XIII, No. 4. 
November 25, 1918. 

On the Wing Sound of the Golden-eye (Glaucionetta c. clangula). By 
H. Mayhoff. 

Proceedings of the Bavarian Ornithological Society. XIV, No. 1. 
June 26, 1919. 

Note on Centropus rectunguis and Related Species. By E. Stresemann. 

On the European Creepers. By E. Stresemann.—An elaborate dis- 
cussion of the relationship and distribution of Certhia familiaris and C. 
brachydactyla. 

A Contribution to Our Knowledge of Molting in Birds. By E. Strese- 
mann. The terminology of Dr. J. Dwight is discussed and explained. 

On Our Knowledge of the Dipper. By H. Sachtleben. 

Observations on Some Hitherto Overlooked Names of C. L. Brehm. 
By A. Laubmann. 

Corvus capensis kordofanensis (p. 103) proposed for C. c. minor Heugl., 
nec Brehm. 

Miscellanea Ornithologica IV. By C. E. Hellmayr. (XII) Four New 
Forms from Tropical America. Catharus melpomene sierrae (p. 126), 
Santa Marta; Planesticus serranus cumanensis (p. 127), Cumana, Vene- 
zuela; (the other two appeared previously in the “Anzeiger Orn. Gesell. 
Bayern” see below). (XIII) Nomenclatorial. Corvus brachycercus (p. 
131) proposed for C. affinis Rupp.; Erythromyias timorensis (p. 133) for 
Sazicola pyrrhonotus S. Muller. Also many changes. 

Proceedings of the Bavarian Ornithological Society. XIV, No. 
2. December 15, 1919. 

The Beginning of Bird Song at Early Dawn. By C. Zimmer. An 
elaborate discussion of this subject and its relation to the rising of the 


636 Recent Literature. lees 


sun, with extended data on the singing of German birds. A more tech- 
nical treatment of a problem that recently interested many American 
bird students. 

A New Woodpecker from Lithuania. By H. Sachtleben. Dryobates 
leucotos stechowi (p. 181). 

Proceedings of the Bavarian Ornithological Society. XIV, No. 
3. April 29, 1920. 

On the European Black-capped Titmice. By E. Stresemann and H. 
Sachtleben.—Seven races recognized with elaborate discussion of varia- 
tion and distribution. 

On Schomburgk’s ‘Birds of British Guiana’. By C. E. Hellmayr. 

Proceedings of the Bavarian Ornithological Society. XIV. 
Special Number. February 20, 1920. 

In memory of Hugo Mayhoff, containing his paper on the Breeding 
Birds of the Lake Region of Moritsburg and critical description of his 
collections of water birds. 

“‘Anzeiger’’. Bavarian Ornithological Society. No. 1. Febru- 
ary 25, 1919. 

Gengler and Stresemann describe Dryobates major balcanicus (p. 2) 
Kaluckowa; Hellmayr describes; Troglodytes musculus bonariae (p. 2) La 
Plata; Pseudocolaptes boissonneautii medianus (p. 3) Leimabamba, Peru. 
Sachtleben describes Carduelis carduelis balcanica (p. 3) WKaluckowa, 
Macedonia. Stresemann describes: Cinclus cinclus orientalis (p. 4), Cettia 
cetti miilleri (p. 5), Picus viridis dofleini (p. 5) all from Macedoniaa nd P. 
v. romaniae from Bucharest. 

““Anzeiger’’. Bavarian Ornithological Society. No. 2. June 
28, 1919. 

Sachtleben describes Sitta ewropaea cisalpina (p. 7) Rome; Stresemann 
describes: Falco moluccensis bernsteini (p. 8) for F. m. orientalis pre- 
occupied; Emberiza schoeniclus volgae (p. 9) South Russia; Dryobates 
major italiae (p. 9) Bologna; and D. m. candidus (p. 10) Bucharest. 

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. 28, No. 1-2. January-Febru- 
ary, 1920. [In German.] 

A New Bradypterus. By H. Grote. B. roehli (p. 7). West Usambara. 

A New Name for Turdus auritus Verr. By A. Laubmann. T. mup- 
inensis (p. 17). 

Ornithologische Monatsberichte. 28, No. 3-4. March-April, 
1920. 

Bird-banding in Sweden. By H. Rendahl. A Fish Hawk and Herring 
Gull banded in Sweden found in Denmark, a Pigeon in Portugal, and a 
Starling in England. . 

Journal fur Ornithologie. 68, No. 2. April, 1920. 

Ornithological Observations in the Southern Ural Region (Orenburg). 
By H. Grote (continued). 


or Pere Sh Recent Literature. 631 


Avifauna of the western Pripjet Swamps. By O. Graf Zedlitz—Bon- 
asia bonasia grassmanni (p. 227) is described as new from East Prussia. 

Journal fur Ornithologie. 68, special number. 

Birds of Egypt. (Insessores, Scansores and Coraces.) By Alexander 
Koenig—A most elaborate treatment going into etymology of names, 
minute description of eggs with weights and measurements, etc. 


Ornithological Articles in Other Journals.! 


Riley, J. H. Four New Birds from the Philippines and Greater Sunda 
Islands. (Proc. Biol. Society of Washington, 33, pp. 55-58. July 24, 
1920.)—Anthreptes malacensis paraguae (p. 55) Palawan; A. m. bornensis 
(p. 55) Po Bui, N. Borneo; Enodes erythrophrys centralis (p. 56) Celebes; 
and Munia punctulata particeps (p. 57) Celebes. 

Oberholser, H. C. Description of a New Clapper Rail from Florida. 
(Ibid. pp. 33-34. July 24, 1920.)—Rallus longirostris helius (p. 38) 
Florida Keys. 

Hartert, E. More Notes on the Crested Larks of the Nile Valley 
(Novotates Zoologicae, XXVI, No. I, pp. 36-40, May, 1919). 

Baker, E. C. Stuart. Further Notes on Some Dicruridae ([bid. pp. 
41-45.) 

Hartert, E. Types of Birds in the Tring Museum. B. Types in the 
General Collection. (bid. pp. 123-178.)—This is only the first install- 
ment, Corvidae-Meliphagidae, and cover 338 types of which only 40 have 
proven to have been already described or otherwise invalid. The types 
in the Brehm collection were listed in Novit. Zool., 1918, pp. 4-63. 

Baker, E. C. Stuart. Some Notes on the Genus Surniculus. (Jbid., 
No. 2. January 20, 1920, pp. 291-294.)—S. lugubris stewarti (p. 293). 
Ceylon is described as new. 

Hartert, E. Explanation of Plates V and VI (Novit. Zool. XVI, No. 
2, p. 358.)—Figuring the following rare species: Sylvietta newmanni, 
Pachycephala moroka, P. tenebrosa. Melipotes, ater Dicaeum nigrilore. 

Hartert, E. The Birds of the Commander Islands. (bid. No. 3, 
June 20, 1920, pp. 128-158.)—Description of a collection of 860 skins 
made by N. Sokolnikoff and now in the Tring Museum. It comprises 
152 species of which Hrolia maritima quarta (p. 137) is described as new. 

Hartert, E. and Gourdain, F. R. C., The Birds of Buckinghamshire 
and the Tring Reservoirs. (Ibid. pp. 171-259, Pl. XII and XIII.)—An 
admirable local avifauna. 


1Some 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. 


632 Recent Literature. [oct 


Collinge, W. E. On the Proposed New Subspecies of the Little Owl. 
(Carine noctua Scopoli.) (Scottish Naturalist, 1920, No. 101-102. May-— 
June, 1920, p. 65.)—Claims that the color difference is individual and not 
racial. 

Evans, Wm. Breeding of the Black-headed Gull in the Forth Area. 
(fbid., pe Tis) 

Rintoul, L. J. and Baxter, E. V. Report on Scottish Ornithology 
in 1919, including Migration. Jbid. No. 103-104. July—August, 1920, 
pp. 99-144. 

Taverner, P. A. The Scoters and Eiders. (Canadian Field Natural- 
ist, XXXIV, No. 3, March, 1920.)—With drawings of the heads of the 
various species by C. E. Johnson 

Wood, A. A. An Annotated List of the Birds of Coldstream Ontario 
Vicinity.” (Ibid.)—194 species listed. 

Hornady, W. T. Alaska Can Save the American Eagle (Natural His- 
tory, XX, No. 2, March-April 1920. See also No. 3 for additional note.) 
—No less than 8356 eagles have been slaughtered and paid for by the 
Alaskan government under the recent bounty act up to May 1, 1920. 
Petitions of scientific and other organizations to the Alaskan Legislature 
for the repeal of this law are solicited and should be forwarded to the 
National Association of Audubon Societies, 1974 Broadway, N. Y. 

Rockwell, R. B. Trials and Tribulations of a Nature Photographer. 
(Ibid.)—Deals with birds in part. 

Bailey, Alfred M. The Brown Pelicans (/bid.)—Excellent photo- 
graphs of the breeding colonies on the Louisiana coast. 

Pearson, T. G. William Dutcher. In Memoriam. (bid. No. 3. 
May-June, 1920.) 

Bailey, Alfred M. ‘The Silver-winged Sea Birds (J/id.)—Terns and 
Gulls of the Louisiana Coast. 

Shufeldt, R. W. Tame Pigeons Alighting in Trees. (Guide to Na- 
ture, XII, No. 2. July, 1920.)—Regarded as very exceptional. 

Shufeldt, R. W. Personal Recollections of Extinct and Nearly 
Extinct Birds. (The Conservationist, Albany, N. Y., III, No. 5, p. 74.)— 
Five ducks seen in the winter of 1867 on Long Island Sound now con- 
sidered to have been Labrador Ducks. A Carolina Parakeet was seen 
from the train at a small station somewhere in Kansas about 1884 and an 
Ivory-billed Woodpecker in southern Alabama in the eighties flying high 
overhead. 

Hall, A. F. Basset. On the Occurrence of the Crested Penguin (Hu- 
dyptes chrysocome) in Australia. (Records of the Australian Museum, 
XII, No. 6. September 23, 1920.) 

Dice, Lee R. The Land Vertebrate Associations of Interior Alaska. 
(Occasional Papers Mus. Zool., Univ. Michigan, No. 85, May 25, 1920.) 
—Extended reference to birds. 

Redington, Paul G. A California Condor seen near Head of Deer 
Creek. (California Fish and Game. July, 1920. p. 133.). 


Vol. toon Recent Literature 633 


Phillips, Charles. A Review of the Winter Visitant Birds in Minne- 
sota for 1919-1920. (Fins, Feathers and Fur, No. 22. June, 1920.) 

Adams, William C. Winter Feeding of Birds. (Bull. Amer. Game. 
Protective Asso. July, 1920.)—With illustrations of ducks making use 
of holes in the ice on Lake Ontario. : 

Brooks, Alan. The Trumpeter Swan in British Columbia. (Lon- 
don Field, July 31, 1920.)—By no means extinct. Has known it for 
thirty years and there has been little change in its numbers, was never 
common nor does it associate large flocks. 

Baker, E. C. Stuart. The Game Birds of India. (Journ. Bombay 
Nat. Hist. Soc., XXVI, No. 4, 1920, pp. 885-906.)—The Tragopans. 

Inglis, C. M. O’Donel, H. V. and Shebbeare, E. D. A Tentative 
List of the Vertebrates of the Jalpaiguri District, Bengal. Part II. 
Birds (Jbid. pp. 988-999.)—An annotated list. 

Donald, C. H. The Birds of Prey of the Punjab. (/bid. pp. 1000—- 
1002.) 

Robinson, H. C. and Kloss, C. Boden. On a Collection of Birds 
from North-eastern Sumatra. (Jour. Straits Branch, Royal Asiatic 
Society, No. 80, May, 1919, pp. 73-133.)—There are described as new: 
Macropygia ruficeps sumatranus (p. 77); Brachylophus chlorolophus van- 
heysti (p. 97); Cyornis vanheysti (p. 104); and Buchanga leucophaea (p. 
125): 

In the same journal and under the same title “‘ Part II’ (No. 81, March, 
1920, pp. 79-115.) is a report on an additional collection from the same 
locality, district of Deli, with the following new forms: Cryptolopha montis 
(p. 99); Pyconotus bimaculatus barat (p. 103); and Tephrodornis pelvica 
(p. 109). 

Laubmann, A. Contribution to our Knowledge of the Forms of 
Alcedo atthis. (Archiv. fur Naturg., 1918 (LX XXIV) Abt. A. heft 7, pp. 
43-82.) [In German.] 


Additional Publications Received. 


Avicultural Magazine. XI, No. 9. September, 1920. 

Bird Notes and News. IX, No. 2. Summer, 1920. 

Bluebird. XII, Nos. 6-8. May-July 1920. 

British Birds. XIV, No. 4. September, 1920. 

Bulletin Charleston Museum. XVI, No. 5. May, 1920. 

Directory of Officials and Organizations Concerned with the Protec- 
tion of Birds and Game, 1920. (U.S. Dept. Agr. Department Circular 
PSs) 

Emu, The. XX, Part 1. July, 1920. 

McClymont, J. R. Essays on Early Ornithology and Kindred Subjects. 
London, B. Quaritch, 1920. 

Records of the Australian Museum. XII, Nos. 1-9; XIII, No. 2. 

South Australian Ornithologist. V, Part 3. July, 1920. 


634 Correspondence eee: 


CORRESPONDENCE 


Popular Bird Names. 


Epitror or ‘THE AUK’: 


The central idea of such of your remarks on pages 503-505 of the cur- 
rent volume of your journal as are in opposition to the propositions sub- 
mitted in my letter of May 21 appears to be contained in your statement 
that ‘‘We cannot enforce upon the public what the public will not have,”’ 
for you admit that the said propositions are ‘all very well in theory.” 
May I say that in your very opposition you are in agreement with me, 
for the intent of my letter, as carefully explained in the third and the last 
paragraphs thereof, was to suggest a way of finding out definitely what, 
in matters of popular bird nomenclature, the public will have, so that it 
might be given them in the next edition of the A. O. U. ‘Check-List.’ 
I did not propose that the A. O. U. Committee on Nomenclature adopt 
forthwith the propositions presented, but merely that they submit them 
to the bird-studying, bird-loving public for their verdict. Have you not, 
in your remarks, given the reasons why you personally would express 
approval or disapproval of the various propositions in such a referendum, 
instead of speaking of the question of the referendum itself? 

Again I respectfully suggest that the A. O. U. Committee on Nomen- 
clature obtain an expression of popular will concerning the points embod- 
ied in the propositions in my former letter, rather than proceed to arrange 
the popular nomenclature of the ‘Check-List’ in accordance with any 
assumption, no matter how well-founded they may consider it. 

Harrison F. Lewis. 

P. O. Box No. 6, Quebee, P. Q., 

August 6, 1920. 


[We regret if we misunderstood or misrepresented Mr. Lewis’s sugges- 
tion. It is quite in order and proper that any suggestions should be made 
to the Committee and they will, we are sure, receive careful consideration. 
It would seem more desirable, however, that they be sent direct to the 
Committee rather than be published in ‘The Auk,’ as the journal is al- 
ready overcrowded.—Ep1rTor. | 


Baker on the Birds of the Pleistocene. 


Epitor oF ‘THE Aux’: 


The University of Illinois has very recently published a sumptous 
monograph entitled ‘The Life of the Pleistocene or Glacial Period’ by 
Mr. Frank Collins Baker, Curator of the Museum of Natural History of 
the University of Illinois. It is a beautifully gotten-up volume of nearly 
500 pages, and illustrated by no fewer than 57 plates. 


Vol. eo | Correspondence 635 


In the absence of a subtitle, the reader would naturally be led to believe 
that the study covered all plants and animals that formed the flora and 
fauna of the Pleistocene or Glacial period throughout the world, in so far 
as it has come to be known, including such other knowledge as may have 
been contributed to the subject in this work. This, however, is by no 
means the case; for, as its author explains (p. iv), “the area selected for 
study includes only that part of the United States and Canada (east of 
the Rocky Mountains) that was covered by the great continental ice 
sheets. Deposits outside of this area, therefore, cannot be included, ex- 
cept for purposes of comparison, as there is no way of deciding just which 
interval they may represent. In fact, many of the records beyond the 
glaciated territory represent deposits which were forming continuously 
throughout the entire time of the Pleistocene, they not being greatly in- 
fluenced by the great ice sheets. With this statement of the purpose of 
the work, it is easily seen that the title ‘Life of the Pleistocene’ is not 
inappropriate.” 

The present writer fails to catch the point of this explanation, inasmuch 
as were only the title of this work at hand, the person considering it would 
surely be led to think that the life of the entire Pleistocene period was to 
be taken into consideration. 

An especially useful and extensive bibliography is found at the end of 
the work (pp. 404-448), and in the main this supports the author’s argu- 
ment with respect to his title, as, with but few exceptions, only such works 
are quoted as refer to the Pleistocene of eastern North America—that 
of the Pacific Coast being entirely ignored. 

Now those who are at all familiar with the fossil birds of the Pleisto- 
cene are well aware of the fact, that quite a number of them have been 
discovered in that area of North America covered by the work under 
consideration. These have been chiefly figured and described by Cope, 
Marsh, Sellards, and the present writer, and are reported from New Jer- 
sey, North Carolina, Maryland, Nebraska, Texas, Florida, and perhaps 
other eastern States, or from localities east of the Rocky Mountains. 
Turning to the bibliography, we are surprised to find that none of Cope’s 
are cited; only one paper of Marsh’s is entered, and that refers to a Mas- 
todon; while the list of Pleistocene birds described and figured by the 
present writer from Vero, Florida, are accredited to Doctor Sellards, or 
the birds are not referred to by name at all, although the mammals are so 
listed. 

As a matter of fact, the present writer has described more Pleistocene 
birds, existing and extinct, from the eastern part of the United States, 
than all other palaeontologists combined up to date. This omission is 
to be greatly deplored, for in such a formal work as the one here con- 
sidered, the ignoring of so important a group of vertebrates as Pleistocene 
birds—the rarest of all fossil vertebrata—casts not a little doubt upon the 
thoroughness of still other subjects treated in this volume. 

R. W. SHUFELDT. 

Washington, D. C., June 25, 1920. 


636 Notes and News. lace 


NOTES AND NEWS 
LPP eter #3] 


Wituram Doutcuer, a Fellow and Councillor of the American Orni- 
thologists’ Union, died at his home in Chevy Chase, Maryland, on July 1, 
1920, in the seventy-fifth year of his age. To him, more than to any one 
individual, is due the present interest in wild bird conservation; the organi- 
zation and development of the National Association of Audubon Societies, 
of which he was president from the time of its conception until his death; 
and the manifold activities that have grown out of this organization. 
His life is an illustration of what can be accomplished by one who is willing 
to devote his entire energy to a cause and to persevere in spite of all ob- 
stacles. Mr. Dutcher had no backing, save such as he provided himself 
when, as chairman of the A. O. U. Committee on Bird Protection, he 
became seriously interested in what was to be his life work, but through 
his earnestness he interested one influential person after another in the 
cause unt'l he had built up the organization which will be his monument 
for all time. 

The last years of his life have been particularly sad, since on October 19, 
1910, on the eve of a testimonial banquet intended to celebrate the achieve- 
ment of his greatest ambition, the establishment of an endowed organi- 
zation for wild bird conservation, he was stricken with paralysis which 
rendered him speechless and made further active work impossible. 
He recovered his physical health to some degree but was unable to move 
about freely, although he did attend the meeting of the Union in New 
York City in 1918 and some of the meetings of the National Association 
of Audubon Societies. His power of speech was never regained. 

Beside the splendid work that he accomplished as Chairman of the 
A. O. U. Committee on Bird Protection, before this was taken over by 
the Audubon Societies, he rendered valuable service as Treasurer of the 
Union from 1887 to 1903, and as a member of the Council. 

In his earlier years he was also an active field student, specializing on 
Long Island, and published many important papers of the birds of this 
region besides forming a valuable collection which is now in the American 
Museum of Natural History. 

In those who, like the writer, were closely associated with him in the 
beginning of his life work, his kindliness, generosity and earnestness of 
purpose inspired a love and admiration that grew stronger as the years 
passed by; while to the world at large so intimately has his name become 
associated with the cause of bird protection, that mention of the one at 
once recalls the other. This in itself is a monument of which one might 
well be proud. 

The president of the A. O. U. has appointed Dr. T. S. Palmer, who was 
closely associated with Mr. Dutcher in his work, to prepare a memorial 
address to be read at the meeting of the Union in November and published 
in ‘The Auk’ for January, 1921.—W. 8. 


isso val Notes and News. 637 


Hersert Hountineton Situ, Curator of the Alabama Museum of 
Natural History, and one of the ablest and most experienced American 
field naturalists, met his death on March 22, 1919, by being run over by a 
freight train at Tuscaloosa, Ala. For some years he had been very deaf 
and while walking on the railroad track he failed to bear the approaching 
locomotive. 

Mr. Smith was born at Manlius, N. Y., January 21, 1851. He gradu- 
ated from Cornell University in the class of 1872, and on October 5, 1880, 
married Miss Amelia Woolworth Smith, of Brooklyn, N. Y. To his 
wife, who was his constant companion in all his field trips and who pre- 
’ pared many of his specimens, especially the birds, was due in large part 
his success as a collector. When only 19 years of age and still a student 
at Cornell, he accompanied his teacher, Prof. C. F. Hartt, to the Amazon 
on what proved to be the first of a series of trips to the tropics. In 1873 
he returned to Brazil to collect along the Amazon, spending about two 
years in the vicinity of Santarem, a year on the northern branches of the 
river and on the Tapajos, and a few months in Rio de Janeiro. Upon his 
return home he was commissioned to write a series of articles on Brazil 
for ‘Scribner’s Magazine,’ and in 1879 appeared his book on ‘Brazil— 
the Amazons and the Coast.’ 

A few months after their marriage, Mr. and Mrs. Smith went to south- 
western Brazil, where most of the time between 1881 and 1886 was spent 
in the vicinity of Chapada and Cuyaba in the Province of Matto Grosso. 
Of the large collections of birds secured in this region about 4000 speci- 
mens were acquired by the American Museum of Natural History and 
538 by the British Museum. In 1889 the Smiths collected in southwestern 
Mexico, chiefly in Guerrero and Oaxaca, for F. D. Godman, who was then 
securing material for the ‘Biologia Centrali-Americana.’ The years from 
1890 to 1895 were spent in the West Indies, in Trinidad and the Windward 
Islands, in the interests of the West Indian Commission of the Royal 
Society. From 1898 to 1902 Mr. Smith was connected with the Carnegie 
Museum and during this time he spent three years in Colombia in the 
Province of Santa Marta. Here he became so seriously ill that for a 
time it was feared he would not recover and this experience put an end 
to further work in the tropics. After a year in the Museum he deter- 
mined to take up his residence in the South at Wetumpka, Ala., where he 
devoted himself largely to collecting and studying freshwater shells. In 
1910 he became curator of the Alabama Museum of Natural History, a 
position which he held until his death. 

He was an accomplished linguist and in addition to his book on Brazil 
he published, in 1886, in Portuguese, ‘De Rio Janeiro a Cuyabd.’ He 
was also the author of ‘His Majesty’s Sloop Diamond Rock’ which ap- 
peared under the name of H. 8. Huntington. He was a tireless collector, 
but in addition he was a true field naturalist, perhaps one of the best 
that America has produced. During his sojourn in Brazil his work at- 


638 Notes and News. [oct. 


tracted the attention of the Emperor Dom Pedro II and some years ago 
Lord Walsingham pronounced him one of the two ablest entomological 
collectors. In a sketch of his life from which these facts are largely de- 
rived (Science, XLIX, pp. 481-483, May 23, 1919), Dr. W. J. Holland 
ranks H. H. Smith with Humboldt and Bonpland, Wallace, Bates, Nat- 
terer, Tschudi, J. B. Hatcher and J. D. Haseman, ‘“‘who courageously 
faced dangers in the wilderness in order to secure information at first 
hand as to the fauna and flora of the great continent where they labored.” 
T.Se2: 


NicHoLaAs ALEXIEVICH SarupDNy (or following the Russian form of his 
name, Nikolai Aleksyevich Zarudnuii), an eminent Russian ornithologist, 
died in March, 1919, at Tashkent in Turkestan, where he was for some 
years curator of the museum. According to ‘The Ibis’ for July, 1920, 
Major F. M. Bailey, of the Indian Political Service, who has recently 
been in Turkestan, found Sarudny and his wife “living in one room of 
his house, all the others having been taken from him by the Bolshevists. 
In this one room was his private collection of birds stored in cardboard 
boxes and filling nearly the whole space up to the ceiling. This valuable 
collection was ‘naturalized’ by the Bolshevists at the time of his death, and 
is now in the museum at Tashkent.” 

Dr. Sarudny was an authority on the birds of certain parts of Russia 
and also on those of Turkestan, Baluchistan, and Persia. He was a care- 
ful field naturalist and collector and published a number of papers es- 
pecially in the ‘Messager Ornithologique’ on the birds of Central Asia. 
His most important works include ‘An Excursion through Northeastern 
Persia’ with an account of the birds of that region, 1900 (262 pages); 
‘Birds of Eastern Persia,’ 1903 (467 pages); ‘Verzeichnis der Végel Per- 
siens,’ 1911; ‘Birds of the Pskov Government,’ 1910; and ‘Birds of the 
Aral Sea,’ 1916 (229 pages). Three of these were published in Russian 
and the ‘Verzeichnis’ in German in the ‘Journal fur Ornithologie,’ 1911, 
pp. 185-241. Sarudny made four expeditions to Persia in 1896, 1898, 
1900-01, and 1903-04, and published several papers on each trip. The 
second and third expeditions were mainly in eastern Persia and the last, 
in western Persia, formed the basis of 29 separate articles, most of which 
were devoted to birds.—T. 8. P. 


FREDERICK WeBB Heaptey, of Hertford, England, a member of the 
British Ornithologists’ Union and a Fellow of the Zoological Society of 
London, died November 25, 1919, after an operation. He was the second 
son of Rev. Henry Headley, of Brinsop Vicarage, Herefordshire, and was 
born April 10, 1856. His education was received at Harrow School and 
the University of Cambridge, from which be graduated in 1878. Two 
years later he became Assistant Master in Haileybury College, Herts, 
where he remained until a few months before his death. 


Ot fone | Notes and News. 639 


According to a sketch of his life in ‘The Ibis’ for July, 1920, it was 
his ambition to take a trip around the world and if he had been able to 
secure passage he would have started in August, 1919. His last work 
was devoted to field observations during a month spent in making notes 
on migration at Bardsey Lighthouse, Wales, just before undergoing his 
operation. 

To American readers he is known chiefly by his admirable books on 
‘The Structure and Life of Birds,’ 1895, and ‘The Flight of Birds,’ 1912. 
He was also author of ‘Fauna and Flora of Haileybury,’ ‘Life and Evo- 
lution,’ ‘Darwinism and Socialism,’ and some short papers.—T. 8. P. 


Dr. Henry Kempe Ourver, an Associate of the American Ornitholo- 
gists’ Union since 1900, and a Life Associate since 1909, died at his apart- 
ment in Boston, on October 25,1919. Dr. Oliver was the son of General 
Henry K. Oliver and was born in Salem, Mass., in 1829. He graduated 
from Harvard in the class of 1852 and from the Harvard Medical School 
in 1855. After two years in Paris and Vienna he entered upon the prac- 
tice of medicine in Boston, where he later became one of the leading 
physicians. During the Civil War he was appointed medical inspector 
of camps in McClellan’s army. 

Dr. Oliver was a philanthropist and one of his principal gifts was a 
donation of several hundred thousand dollars to Harvard University on 
condition that the name of the donor should be kept secret until his death. 
When his health began to fail some years ago, he made over practically 
his entire fortune to the University to found a department of hygiene, 
reserving just enough for his own living and personal needs. At the 
time of his death, which occurred just on the eve of his ninetieth birth- 
day, he was not only the oldest member of the Union but the oldest Amer- 
ican ever associated with the Union.—T. 8. P. 


JoHN Henry FLANAGAN, an Associate of the American Ornithologists’ 
Union since 1898, died of cerebral haemorrhage at his home in Providence, 
R. 1., February 23, 1920, after an illness of three months. At the time 
of his death he was in his 52nd year, having been born at Cranston, R. I., 
July 7, 1868. His early years were passed at Apponaug and his educa- 
tion was received at La Salle, Manhattan College and the Harvard Law 
School, from which he graduated in 1895. He studied law in the office 
of Edwin D. McGuinness, then Mayor of Providence, and his partner, 
John Doran. Upon the death of Mr. McGuinness in 1901 he became a 
member of the firm which was then changed to Doran and Flanagan. 
He was a member of the Rhode Island Bar Association and at one time 
was Solicitor of the town of Warwick. 

Mr. Flanagan was deeply interested in birds and their eggs and had 
one of the best private collections of eggs in the state, but apparently 
published little on ornithology. He was a member of the Providence 


640 Notes and News. Out 


Gun Club and the Providence Fish and Game Association and did good 
work in behalf of the protection of wild life. For several years he served 
as secretary of the Rhode Island Bird Commission and from 1905 to 1908 
was Bird Commissioner for Providence County and Chairman of the 
Board. 

He is survived by a sister, Josephine A., and three brothers, Edward J., 
Thomas L., and Dr. William F. Flanagan.1—T. S. P. 


Rosert Lenox Marrnanp, an Associate of the American Ornitholo- 
gists’ Union since 1889, died at his home in New Rochelle, N. Y., on 
March 11, 1920, in his 66th year. Mr. Maitland was born in New York 
City, December 16, 1854, and was the son of Robert Lenox Maitland, 
a New York merchant, and a nephew of James Lenox, founder of the 
Lenox Library. He entered his father’s office on Broad Street, and later 
became a partner in the commission firm of Robert Maitland & Co. He 
afterwards retired and devoted his entire time to charitable and other 
interests, serving on various boards and committees. Mr. Maitland 
was unusually modest and never sought prominence, but devoted him- 
self earnestly to whatever he was engaged in. Although he does not 
appear to have published on birds his interest in the subject is attested 


by the fact that he maintained his membership in the Union for 30 years.— 
es. P: 


A biography of Thure Ludwig Theodor Kumlien of Wisconsin, who 
died in 1888, is in course of preparation by Mr. Publius V. Lawson of 
Menasha, Wis. The paper will be illustrated and will probably be pub- 
lished by the Wisconsin Academy of Science, Arts and Letters. 


The Government publications on birds now in press, which will prob- 
ably be issued at an early date, include the second part of Bent’s ‘Life 
Histories’ on Gulls and Terns, and a report by H. 8. Swarth on the ‘Birds 
of the Papago Saguaro National Monument, Arizona.’ The former is a 
bulletin of the U. 8S. National Museum and the latter a publication of 
the National Park Service in the Department of the Interior. 


The close of the twentieth year of the new century recalls the fact that 
the 20th Century has already witnessed great progress in ornithology, 
as well as in other branches of science, but it is difficult to determine the 
accomplishments of any particular year. It has been the custom for 
some time for the president of the British Ornithologists’ Club to review 
the events of the preceding year at the annual meeting of the Club 


14 sketch of Mr. Flanagan’s life from which these facts were mainly derived 
appeared in the ‘Providence Evening Bulletin’ of February 24, 1920, and was 
republished with his portrait in ‘The Oologist,’ XX XVII, p. 42, April 1, 1920. 


Vol. oem aa Notes and News. 641 


but these reviews are all too brief. In this country ‘Bird Lore’ has pub- 
lished brief summaries for 1901, 1902, and 1910,! and “The Auk’ one for 
19172, but summaries for the other years are lacking. At recent meet- 
ings of the A. O. U. some time has been devoted to a discussion of orni- 
thological progress during the year and it is hoped that members will 
bear this feature in mind and contribute notes on any work which has 
come under their observation in 1920. 

The excursion of the Swiss Society for Bird Study and Bird Protection 
to the Swiss National Park occupied 9 days from July 20 to 28 inclusive. 
The time was spent in tramps through the region from Scanfs to Zernez 
in the upper Engadine. Scanfs is situated at an elevation of 1670 meters, 
Zernez at 1497, and the highest point reached on the trip was about 3000 
meters. The 57 species of birds observed were all land birds and included 
several of the larger species characteristic of the Alps. 


The annual meeting of the Royal Australasian Ornithologists’ Union 
will be held in October, 1920, in Perth, Western Australia. Reports 
recently received indicate that a good attendance is expected. When it 
is recalled that the journey from Sydney to Perth is comparable to that 
from New York to Denver, the enthusiasm of members of the R. A. O. U. 
in attending distant meetings is worthy of the highest commendation. 


The year 1920 marks the bicentenary of Gilbert White, who was born 
at Selborne, England, July 18, 1720, O. 8. According to the London 
Field of June 26, 1920, p. 945, a memorial window of three lights has 
been placed in the parish church at Selborne to commemorate his service 
to ornithology. The subject of the design is “St. Francis preaching to 
the Birds.” 


Mr. Rollo H. Beck sailed from San Francisco on Sept. 4 for Tahiti, 
where he will begin systematic collecting in the South Pacific in the inter- 
ests of the American Museum of Natural History. 


Members intending to present papers at the next annual meeting to 
be held in Washington, D. C., November 9-11, are requested to notify 
the Secretary, 1939 Biltmore St., N. W., before November as to the titles 
of their communications and the length of time required for their pre- 
sentation. In order to allow time for discussion, which is one of the 
principal objects of the meeting, papers which are not illustrated should 
be limited to 30 minutes or less. As previous experience has shown many 
papers require much more time than has been estimated and authors are 
therefore requested to make actual tests of the time required for the pre- 


1 Bird Lore, III, pp. 215-216, 1901; IV, pp. 204-205, 1902; XITI, pp. 8-11, 
1911. 
2AuK, XXXV, pp. 107-110, 1918. 


642 Notes and News. love 


i] 

sentation of their communications so as to avoid taking up the time of 
others. A special invitation is extended to Associates to present papers and 
take part in the discussions. While all who are associated with the Union 
are earnestly urged to attend the meeting, this request is emphasized in 
the case of Members and Fellows upon whom rest the responsibilities of 
the organization. It is their duty to be present if possible as their coun- 
cil is required in conducting the business of the Society. The business 
meeting and elections will, as usual, be held on the evening of November 
8 preceding the scientific sessions and a full attendance is particularly 
desired. 


INDEX TO VOLUME XXXVII. 


[New generic, specific, and subspecific names are printed in heavy face type.] 


Axsport, Charles Conrad, obituary 
notice of, 183. 
Acanthis, 285. 
linaria linaria, 70, 600. 
Acanthopneuste borealis, 283. 
b. kennicotti, 283. 
Accipiter, 285 
cooperi 66, 293, 398, 4383, 544. 
gularis, 337. 
guttatus, 629. 
guttifer, 629. 
superciliosus, 477. 
s. exitiosus, 477. 
velox, 52, 65, 398, 544. 
Accipitres, 475. 
Actitis macularia, 
544, 569. 
Actochelidon, 440. 
Aechmophorus occidentalis, 63. 
Aegialitis, 444. 
collaris, 105. 
meloda, 537. 
semipalmata, 
583. 
Aegithaliscus annamensis, 170. 
Aegithalos caudatus romanus, 166. 
Aegolius, 447. 
Aegypius, 154. 
Aeronautes melanoleucus, 68, 294, 
400. 
saxatilis, 294. 
Aestrelata, 441, 449. 
diabolica, 284. 
hasitata, 284. 
Aethopyga sanguinipectus johnsi, 
neal 
gouldiae annamensis, 171. 
Africa, birds of, 300. 


65, 396, 535, 


143, 537, 569, 


Agelaius phoeniceus, 52. 
p. fortis, 70. 
p. megapotamus, 280. 
p. neutralis, 404. 
p. phoeniceus, 547, 570. 
p. richmondi, 280. 

Ahea, 446. 

Aimophila ruficeps eremoeca, 54. 

Ajala ajaja, 568. 

Alabama, birds of, 103-104, 127- 
128, 296. 

Alaska, birds of, 150, 248-254. 

Alauda ferruginea, 612. 

Alberta, birds of, 8304-306, 615. 

Alcedo atthis ispida, 625. 

grandis, 628. 
hercules, 628. 

Alcella, 275. 

Alcippe nipalensis annamensis, 170. 

Alexander, E. Gordon, 
fall records of Mourning Warbler 

in western Missouri, 137. 

Allen, Glover M., personal men- 
tion, 185; obituary notice of 
Horace W. Wright, 509; pattern 
development in Teal, 558-564. 

Alseonax murinus roehli, 492. 
slamensis, 332. 

Aluco, 444, 447. 

pratincola, 308, 467. 

Amblycercus holosericeus australis, 
165. 

A. O. U. Check-List of North 
American Birds, list of proposed 
changes in the, 274-285; seven- 
teenth supplement to, 489-449. 

A. O. U. Committee on Classifica- 
tion and Nomenclature of N. A. 
Birds, 186, 346. 


643 


644 


A. O. U., oldest members of, 186; 
permanent funds of the, 513; 
thirty-seventh stated meeting, 
110-125; thirty-eighth stated 
meeting of the, 517-518, 641. 
Ammodramus bairdi, 457. 
savannarum australis, 141. 
s. bimaculatus, 71. 
lecontei, 299. 
nelsoni subvirgatus, 307. 
Ammoperdix heyi nicolli, 328. 
Ampelioides tschudii, 628. 
Ampelion cinctus, 628. 
Ampelis, 448. 
nivea, 489. 
viridis, 629. 

Amphispiza bilineata, 54. 
nevadensis nevadensis, 406. 
Anaeretes, 453. 
agraphia, 315. 
Anairetes, 453. 
Anaplectes jubaensis, 489. 
Anas boschas, 449. 
novimexicana, 273. 
rubripes, 289, 370. 
r. tristis, 289, 548, 568. 
platyrhynchos, 50, 64, 
369, 449, 543. 
platyrhyncha conboschas, 277. 
Andropadus gracilirostris congen- 
SIS) Gooe 
Andrus, C. G., observation of a re- 
markable night migration, 604. 
Anodorhynchus hyacinthus, 293. 
Anser albifrons gambeli, 101. 
Anthreptes longmari numanni, 333. 
malacensis paraguae, 631. 
m. bonensis, 631. 

Anthus leucocraspedon, 331. 
spinoletta japonica, 251, 282. 

Antrostomus carolinensis, 570. 

+ vociferus vociferus, 546. 

Anuropsis malaccensis saturata, 329 

Apalis flavida neumanni, 333. 

Aphantochroa, 295. 


238, 


Index. 


[oce: 


Aphelocoma woodhousei, 69. 
Aplonis kittlitzi kurodai, 490. 
Apterornis solitarius, 337. 
Aquila chrysaetos, 66, 398, 433. 
Archibuteo, 280. 

lagopus sancti-johannisi, 66, 

253. 

Archilochus colubris, 434, 546, 570. 
Arctonetta, fischeri, 251. 
‘Ardea,’ reviewed, 334. 
Ardea goliath, 338. 

herodias, 51, 393. 

h. herodias, 64, 148, 5438, 566, 

568. 

Arenarla, 447. 

interpres interpres, 285. 

i. morinella, 1438, 538. 

i. oahuensis, 285. 
Arenariidae, 279. 
Argentina, birds of, 164, 165. 
Aristonetta, 252, 600. 
Arizona, birds of, 640. 
Armstrong, Edw. E., remarkable 

migration of Robins, 466. 


Arthur, Stanley C., a note on the 
“Southern Teal,” 126. 
Asarcia, 279, 335. 
spinosa gymnostoma, 280. 
s. violacea, 280. 
Asio accipitrinus, 449. 
flammeus, 66, 308, 449. 
wilsonianus, 66, 433. 
Astragalinus psaltria psaltria, 71. 
tristis pallidus, 71. 
t. tristis, 548. 
Astur, 285. 
atricapillus atricapillus, 66. 
a. striatulus, 310. 
Asyndesmus lewisi, 68. 
Atalotriccus griseiceps whitelyanus, 
Vit: 
Ateleodacnis speciosa amazonum, 
628. 
Athene noctua minor, 489. 
Atlapetes canigensis, 165. 


Vol. fon 
1920 


Atrichornis rufescens jacksoni, 625. 
Atticora fucata roraimae, 624. 
Attila cinereus, 175. 

rufus, 175. 

Averill, C. K., migration and phys- 
ical proportions, a preliminary 
study, 572-579. 

‘Avicultural Magazine’, reviewed, 
172, 329, 490, 625. 

Audubon, John W., 372-380. 

Audubon, Lucy Bakewell, 372-380. 

‘Auk, The’, complete sets of, 348— 
352, needs of, 182. 

‘Austral Avian Record’, reviewed, 
330, 626. 

Australia, birds of, 338, 469, 470, 
609. 

Autographs of ornithologists, 516. 

Automolus roraimae, 629. 


Bagouopuus bicolor, 572. 
atricristatus sennetti, 54. 
Inornatus Inornatus, 594. 

Bailey, B. H., review of his ‘The 
Raptorial Birds of Iowa,’ 156. 

Baker, E. C. Stuart, notice of his 
paper on ‘Egg Collecting and 
its Objects,’ 321. 

Baker, F. C., comment on his ‘Life 
of the Pleistocene,’ 634. 

Baldpate, 51, 241, 260, 270, 288, 
S11. 

Baldwin, 8. Prentiss, review of his 
‘Bird-Banding by Means of Sys- 
tematic Trapping,’ 314. 

Bales, B. R., Roseate Tern (Sterna 
dougalli) breeding in Virginia, 
579. 

Bangs, Outram, the Louisiana 
Tanager in Massachusetts, 301; 
notice of his ‘T!'wo New American 
Hawks’, 477. 

Bangs, Outram and Penard, Thom- 
as E., the proper name of the 
West African Serin, 300. 


Index. 


645 


Bannerman, D. A., review of his 
‘Birds of the Canary Islands,’ 607. 

Barber, Geo. W., see Caffrey, D. J. 

Barrows, W. B., obituary notice of 
E. E. Brewster, 184. 

Bartramia longicauda, 65, 140. 

Bartsch, Paul, review of his ‘Bird 
Rookeries of the Dry Tortugas,’ 
476. 

Basileuterus luteoviridis super-cili- 
aris, 315. 

Bavaria, birds of, 617. 

Beck, Herbert H., the occult senses 
in birds, 55-59. 

Beck, Rollo H., personal mention, 
641. 

Belding, Lyman, biographical sketch 
of, 33-45. 

Bent, A. C., a flight of Newfouud- 
land Crossbills, 298; advance 
note on his ‘Life Histories of 
Gulls and Terns,’ 640. 

‘Berajah,’ reviewed, 493. 

Bergtold, W. H., the Crow in Col- 
orado, 134; Clark’s Crow in Den- 
ver, 297. 

Bhringa remifer attenuata, 153. 

Bird Liming, 620. 

‘Bird-Lore,’ reviewed, 
485, 622. 

Bittern, 64, 386, 393, 440, 543. 

Blackbird, Rusty, 70, 305, 412, 436. 

Brewer’s, 52, 70, 405. 

San Diego Redwing, 404. 

Red-winged, 52, 259, 312, 386, 
547, 555, 570. 

Thick-billed Redwinged, 70. 

Yellow-headed, 69, 403, 601. 

Blasipus, 276. 

heermanni, 276. 

Bleda notata pallidior, 333. 

‘Blue Bird,’ noticed, 483. 

Bluebird, 55, 77, 140, 555. 

Chestnut-backed, 77, 310, 411. 
Mountain, 55, 77, 411. 


168, 325, 


646 


Bobolink, 69, 163, 390, 555. 

Bob-white, 65, 557, 569. 

Bolivia, birds of, 165, 615. 

Bombornis, 295. 

cuvierl cuvierli, 295. 
c. saturatior, 295. 
roberti, 295. 
Bombycilla, 448. 
cedrorum, 54, 549. 
garrula, 73, 136, 137, 301, 458, 
460, 461, 600. 

Bonasa umbellus umbellus, 544. 

Bonasia bonasia grassmanni, 631. 

Botaurus lentiginosus, 64, 393, 548. 

Bourne, Thomas L., another record 

of the White Pelican in New 
York, 126. 

Bowen, Grace Young, Evening 
Grosbeak at Valley Falls, N. Y., 
298. 

Brachylophus chlorolophoides, 332. 

chlorolophus vanheysti, 633. 
Brachyramphus marmoratus, 251. 
Bradypterus barakae, 493. 

rochli, 630. 

Brainerd, Barron, obituary notice 
of, 184. 

Brannon, Peter A., notes on some 
Shore Birds of the Alabama 
river, Montgomery County, Ala- 
bama, 127; another occurrence of 
a Starling near Montgomery, 
Alabama, 298; the Purple Grackle 
at Albany, Ga., 454. 

Branta canadensis canadensis, 94, 

268. 

c. hutchinsi, 94, 251, 268. 

c. minima, 96, 268. 

ce. occidentalis, 94, 268. 

Brazil, birds of, 108-109, 167. 

Brewster, Edward Everett, obitu- 
ary notice of, 184. 

Brewster, William, biographical 
sketch of, 1-23; an appreciation 
of, 24-27; resolutions on death 
of, 27-28. 


Index. 


loca 
Oct. 


Brewster Memorial, 29-32. 
Brewsteria, 285. 


‘British Birds,’ reviewed, 171, 
329, 489, 625. 
British Ornithologists’ Club,  re- 


view of ‘Bulletin,’ 328, 488, 624. 

British Ornithologists’ Union, an- 
nual meeting of the, 514. 

Brook, Arthur, review of his ‘The 
Buzzard at Home,’ 475. 

Brooks, Alan, notes on some Ameri- 
can ducks, 353-367. 

Brooks, Earle A., White-winged 
Crossbill (Loxia leucoptera) in 
West Virginia, 457. 

Brooks, Fred E., notice of his papers 
on economic ornithology, 323. 
Brown, Nathan Clifford, Evening 
Grosbeak common at Lakewood, 
New Jersey, 456; a Scarlet Tan- 
ager at Thirty-fourth St., New 
York, 458; autumnal stay of the 
Parula Warbler in Maine, 462. 

Bubo virginianus, 483. 

v. heterocnemis, 285, 434. 
v. lagophonus, 66. 

v. neochorus, 285. 

v. occidentalis, 399, 434. 
v. pallescens, 67. 

Vv. Virginianus, 433, 545. 

Bucephala, 446. 

Buchanga leucophaea, 633. 

Budytes flavus macronyx, 612. 

f. thunbergi, 612. 
Buffle-head, 64, 310, 369, 389, 568. 
Bunting, Indigo, 47, 73, 436, 555, 570. 

Lark, 73. 

Lazuli, 73. 

McKay’s Snow, 254. 

Painted, 300. 

Snow, 383. 

Burns, Frank L., review of his 
‘Ornithology of Chester County, 
Pennsylvania,’ 155. 

Burtch, Verdi, a Loon (Gavia 
immer) caught on a fishing line, 


Vol. | 
1920 


286; maggots in the ears of nest- 
ling Cooper’s Hawks, 293; Even- 
ing Grosbeak at Brantingham, 
N. Y., 299; rare and uncommon 
birds at Branchport, Yates Co., 
N. Y., 307-308; notes on the 
Black-crowned Night Heron in 
western New York, 449. 
Buteo borealis, 52. 

b. borealis, 544. 

b. calurus, 66, 398. 

b. harlani, 130. 

ferrugineus, 280. 

lagopus sanctijohannis, 280. 

lineatus extimus, 320. 

platypterus, 467, 544. 


CALAMOHERPE brehmii, 333. 
Calamospiza melanocorys, 73. 
Calearius lapponicus alascensis, 71. 
ornatus, 53. 
Calidris, 448, 451. 
alba, 278. 
canutus, 452. 
leucophaea, 432, 448, 529, 568. 
l. rubida, 278. 
California, birds of, 156, 158, 478. 
California Fish and Game Commis- 
sion, educational work of, 189, 
483. 
Callene cyornithopsis, 493. 
Calliste melamotis, 629. 
Callocalia uropygialis 
493. 
Calloproenias, 489. 
Campephaga, 333. 
Campethera loveridgei, 624. 
Campothera teniolaema barakae, 
489. 
Canachites canadensis canace, 544. 
Canada, birds of, 147. 
Canary Islands, birds of, 607. 
Canutinae, 442. 
Canutus, 451. 
canutus, 278. 
c. rufus, 278. 


heinrothi, 


Index. 


647 


Canvas-back, 51, 244, 259, 355, 
370, 600. 

Caracara, Audubon’s, 52. 

Cardinal, 141, 144, 436, 598. 

Gray-tailed, 54. 
Cardinalis cardinalis canicaudus, 
54. 
ce. cardinalis 141, 144, 436, 598. 

Carduelis, 285. 
carduelis baleanica, 481, 630. 

Carine brama fryi, 329. 

Carpodacus ecassini, 70, 405. 

mexicanus frontalis, 70, 405. 
purpureus purpureus, 306, 548, 
584. 

Carpospiza brachydactyla psam- 
mochroa, 332. 

Carrfey, D. J., and Barber, Geo. 
W., notice of their papers on 
economic ornithology, 324. 

Carter, C. M., notice of his ‘Shoot- 
ing in Early Days, from 1863- 
1919,’ 482. 

Casmarhynchus 
489. 

Casmerodius, 441. 

albus egretta, 278. 
egretta, 278, 442. 

Catamenis analoides griseiventris, 
315. 

Catbird, 75, 145, 571, 593. 

Catharacta, 440. 

skua, 440. 
Catharista, 154, 338, 444. 
urubu, 51, 569. 
u. brasiliensis, 601. 
Cathartes, 154. 
aura septentrionalis, 51, 397, 
544, 569. 

Catharus melpomene sierrae, 629. 

Catherpes mexicanus conspersus, 
76, 410. 

Catoptrophorus semipalmatus in- 

ornatus, 65, 396, 534. 
s. semipalmatus, 534, 581, 582. 


tricarunculatus, 


648 


Celeus elegans approximans, 316. 
Centronyx, 281. 
bairdi, 281. 
Centropus rectunguis, 629. 
Centurus aurifrons, 52. 
carolinus, 143, 569. 

Cepphus motzfeldi, 275. 

Cercococeyx mechowi wellsi, 328. 

Cercomela turkana, 488. 

Cerconectes, 446. 

Certhia brachydactyla, 629. 

b. lusitanica, 332. 

b. neumanni, 493. 

discolor meridionalis, 171. 

familiaris, 629. 

f. americana, 550. 

f. bachmeisteri, 493. 

f. montana, 76. 
Ceryle, 424, 429. 

aleyon aleyon, 58, 67, 545, 569. 
Cettia cetti mulleri, 630. 
Chaetura pelagica, 132, 570. 

ussheri senegalensis, 332. 

Chalcopsittacus duy venbodei syring- 
anuchalis, 332. 

Chamaepelia, 447. 

passerina passerina, 444. 
p. terrestris, 444. 

Chapman, Frank M., description 
of a proposed new race of the 
Killdeer from the coast of Peru, 
105-108; review of his ‘Descrip- 
tions of Proposed New birds 
from Peru, Bolivia, Argentina 
and Chile,’ 165; review of his 
‘Descriptions of Proposed New 
Birds from Peru, Bolivia, Brazil 
and Columbia,’ 315; review of 
his ‘What Bird is That,’ 473; 
review of his ‘Unusual Types of 
Variation in Ostenops  decu- 
manus,’ 615. 

Charadrius, 285, 443, 444. 

dominicus dominicus, 537. 
dubius, 444. 


Index. 


[oce: 


Charadrius d. curonicus, 279. 
hiaticula, 279, 444. 
h. septentrionalis, 279. 
melodus, 444. 
mongolus, 444. 
nivosus, 444. 
n. nivosus, 279. 
n. tenuirostris, 279. 
semipalmatus, 444. 

Charitillas kavirondensis, 489. 

Charitonetta albeola, 64, 310, 369, 
568. 

Chase, Richard M., Bohemian 
Waxwings at Rochester, N. Y., 
461. 

Chat, Long-tailed, 75. 

Yellow-breasted, 313, 391, 438, 
554, 598. 

Chaulelasmus streperus, 64, 240, 370. 

Chelidon, 448. 

Chen caerulescens, 100, 260, 432, 

468. 
hyperboreus hyperboreus, 251, 
432. 
Chewink, see Towhee. 
Chickadee, 550. 
Acadian, 142, 597. 
Carolina, 258, 572. 
Hudsonian, 306, 463, 550, 593. 
Labrador Brown-capped, 463, 
606. 
Long-tailed, 76. 
Mountain, 76, 411. 
Plumbeous, 54. 

Chile, birds of, 165, 616. 

Chittenden, F. H., notice of his 
writings on economic ornithol- 
ogy, 3238, 324. 

Chlamydera maculata nova, 488. 

Chlidonias, 440. 

leucoptera leucoptera, 440. 
nigra surinamensis, 440. 
Chloephaga dispar, 488. 
inornata, 488. 
magellanica, 488. 


Vol. eT al 
1920 


Chloroceryle, 424-429. 

aenea, 425-428. 

amazona, 425, 428. 

americana, 425-428. 

inda, 425-428. 

Chloronerpes rubiginosus, 320. 

r. guianae, 629. 

r. roraimae, 

Chondestes grammacus  strigatus, 
53, (1, 405. 
Chordeiles virginianus henryi, 68, 

400. 

Vv. virginianus, 434, 546. 
Chotorhea chrysopogon laetus, 153. 
Chroicocephalus, 276. 

atricilla, 276. 

franklinii, 276. 

philadelphia, 276. 
Chrysoptilus melanochlorus juae, 

316. 

m. perplexus, 316. 

punctigula notata, 316. 
Chuck-will’s widow, 

Ciceronia, 275. 
Cichladusa guttata mulleri, 333. 
Cinclodes, 164. 

fuscus, 615. 

oustaleti baeckstroemii, 615. 

tazanowsku, 161. 

tucumanus, 165. 

Cinclus cunclus orientalis, 630. 
Cinnyris habessinicus  turkanae, 
489. 
schillingsi, 332. 
Circus hudsonius, 52, 65, 398, 544. 
Cissa margaritae, 170. 
Cisticola cisticola cisticola, 489. 
c. harterti, 489. 
Clangula, 442, 446. 
clangula americana, 51, 136, 
150, 252, 358, 369, 542. 

hyemalis, 442. 

islandica, 150, 356. 

Cleland, J. B., review of his report 
on the food of Australian birds, 
168. 


Index. 


649 


Coale, Henry K., curious habits of 
the Whip-poor-will, 293; Bo- 
hemian Waxwing in Illinois, 301. 

Cobb, Stanley, midsummer birds in 
the Catskill Mountains, 46-49. 

Coccyzus americanus americanus, 

67. 
a. occidentalis, 67. 
erythrophthalmus, 67, 545. 
minor caymanensis, 316. 

Coker, Robert E., review of his 
‘Habits and Economic Relations 
of the Guiana Birds of Peru’, 160- 
161. 

Colaptes auratus, 52, 570. 

a. luteus, 30S, 546. 
cafer collaris, 52, 68, 400. 

Colinus virginianus virginianus, 65, 
569. 

Collinge, W. E., notice of his con- 
tributions to economic ornithol- 
ogy, 483-485. 

Colombia, birds of, 176. 

Colorado, birds of, 60-77, 130, 131, 
134, 299, 300, 310. 

Columbia livia targia, 332. 

pallida, 332. 
Columbina, 447. 
Colymbus, 445, 617. 

holboelli, 430. 

nigricollis californicus, 63, 231. 
Compsothlypidae, 444, 598. 
Compsothlypis americana ameri- 

cana, 3138. 

a. pusilla, 445. 

a. usneae, 142, 445, 462. 

Comstock, Anna B., notice of her 
‘Suggestions for a Graded Course 
in Bird Study,’ 482. 

‘Condor, The,’ reviewed, 169, 326, 
486, 623. 

Conopoderas atypha, 159. 

a. agassizi, 160. 
a. crypta, 159. 

a. erema, 160. 

a. nesiarcha, 160. 


650 


Conopoderas a. rava, 159. 
percernis, 160. 

Conopophaga melanogaster, 177. 

Coot, 51, 64, 260, 394. 

Copeland, Ada B., Mesa Co., Colo- 
rado, notes, 310. 

Coprotheres pomarinus camtschati- 
cus, 284. 

Coragyps, 444. 
urubu urubu, 444. 

Cormorant, Double-crested, 
567. 

Cory, Charles B., description of a 
new species and subspecies of 
Tyrannidae, 108-109; review of 
his ‘Review of Reichenbach’s 
Genera Siptornis and Cranio- 
leuca,’ 164; review of his ‘Cata- 
logue of Birds of the Americas,’ 
315-816; notice of his ‘Review 
of the Genus Rhynchocyclus,’ 
319. 

Corythornis, 331. 

cristata cristata, 331. 
ce. galerita, 331. 

c. nails, 331. 

c. thomensis, 331. 

Corvus affinis, 629. 
brachycercus, 629. 
brachyrhynchos — brachyrhyn- 

chos, 69, 4385, 547, 570. 
b. hesperis, 134, 401. 
capensis kordofanensis, 629. 
c. minor, 629. 
corax sinuatus, 401, 453. 
corone interpositus, 629. 
coronoides connectens, 628. 
c. hainanus, 628. 
c. madarazi, 628. 
ossifragus, 570. 
pica, 496. 

Costa Rica, birds of, 601-603. 

Cotinga rubra, 468. 
cuprea, 468. 

Cotyle rupestris spatzi, 332. 


209, 


Index. 


(aus 
Oct. 


Cowbird, 52, 69, 305, 402, 584, 597. 
Crandall, Lee S., early Virginia Rail 
in New York, 452. 
Crane, Sandhill, 600. 
Crateropus melanops clamosus, 489. 
terricolor sindianus, 625. 
Creciscus jamaicensis, 128. 
Creeper, Brown, 550, 598. 
Rocky Mountain, 76. 
Crocethia, 448, 452. 
alba, 443. 
Crocomorphus flavus peruvianus, 
316. 
Crosby, M. F., see Frost, Allen. 
Crow, 69, 134, 435, 483, 570, 597. 
Fish, 570. 
Western, 401. 
Cryptoglaux, 447, 449. 
fumerea richardsoni, 447. 
tengmalmi richardsoni, 447. 
Cryptolopha montis, 633. 
Crossbill, Newfoundland, 298, 456. 
Red, 375. 
White-winged, 134, 436, 457. 
Crucirostra, 448. 
Cuba, birds of, 140. 
Cuckoo, 171. 
Black-billed, 67, 545, 597. 
California, 67. 
Yellow-billed, 67. 
Curaeus aterrimus, 175. 
curaeus, 175. 
Curlew, Bristle-thighed, 253. 
Hudsonian, 260, 536. 
Jack, see Hudsonian. 
Cutia nipalensis legalleni, 170. 
Cyanocephalus cyanocephalus, 69, 
402. 
Cyanocitta cristata cristata, 547, 
570. 
stelleri diademata, 69, 401. 
Cyanolyea ciridicyana cyanolaema, 
628. 
Cygnus, 447. 
Cyornis vanheysti, 633. 


Vol. joo | 
1920 


DaBBENE, Roberto, review of his 
‘Species and Subspecies of the 
Genera Cinclodes and Gepsitta,’ 
164. 

Dafila acuta, 51, 370. 

Daggett, Frank Slater, obituary 
notice of, 508. 

Daption, 446. 

Davis, John J., notice of his papers 
on economic ornithology, 324. 

Delaware, birds of, 257. 

Delaware Valley Ornithological 
Club, dinner to W. L. Sclater, 
187. 

DeMeritte, Edwin, peculiar nesting 
of Hermit Thrushes, 138-140. 

Demiegretta greyi, 177. 

Dean, F. Roy, notes from St. Louis, 
Mo., 467. 

Dendragapus obscurus obscurus, 65. 

Dendrocinclopa, 489. 

guianensis, 489. 
Dendrocopos, 448. 
Dendroica, 409. 
aestiva aestiva, 74, 571. 
auduboni auduboni, 409. 
bryanti castaneiceps, 282. 
caerulescens caernsi, 93, 552. 
c. caerulescens, 93, 142, 549, 
» 552, 592. 
castanea, 148, 437. 
cerulea, 4387, 598. 
coronata, 54, 74, 258, 261, 386, 
437, 549, 591. 
discolor, 142, 258, 571, 601. 
dominiea, 571. 591, 
erithachorides castaneiceps, 
282. 
fusca, 142, 438, 550, 592. 
graciae, 409. 
magnolia, 142, 487, 549. 
pennsylvanica, 549. 
striata, 438, 591. 
tigrina, 437. 
townsendi, 75. 


Index. 


651 


Dendroica vigorsi, 438, 550, 571. 
virens, 142. 

Dent, Paul, and Joherst, Dent, 
Bohemian Waxwing at Salem, 
Mo., 460. 

Dicaeum minullum uchidai, 490. 

nigrilore, 631. 

Dichropogon, 177. 

Dickcissel, 601. 

Dicrurus elgonensis, 489. 

Diglossa mystacalis albilinea, 165. 

Dinornis maximus, 624. 

Diomedia irrorata, 161. 

District of Columbia, birds of, 291. 

Dixon, Joseph, review of his ‘Wild 
Ducks in a City Park,’ 158. 

Dodo, 496. 

Dolichonyx oryzivorus, 69. 

Dove, Ground, 376. 

Inca, 51. 

Mourning, 51, 130, 597. 

Western Mourning, 65, 397. 
Dowitcher, 143, 260, 307, 523, 540. 

Long-billed, 501, 523. 
Dryobates borealis, 569. 

leucotos stechowi, 636. 

major balcanicus, 630. 

m. italiae, 630. 

m. candidus, 630. 

pubescens homorus, 67. 

p. medianus, 67. 285, 

p. microleucus, 285. 

p. pubescens, 569. 

scalaris cactophilus, 146. 

s. bairdi, 52, 146. 

s. giraudi, 146. 

villosus, 399. 

v. monticola, 67. 

v. villosus, 545. 

Dryodromus _ rufifrons 
488. 

Duck, Black, 78, 82, 260, 287, 289, 

370, 386, 387, 543, 568. 
Lesser Scaup, 51, 244, 260, 354, 
431. 


turkanae, 


652 


Duck, Red-legged Black, 289. 
Ring-necked, 51, 304, 355, 369, 
431. 
Ruddy, 245, 370. 
Scaup, 260, 354, 370, 387. 
Wood, 5438. 

Dumetella carolinensis, 
571, 593. 

Dunlin, see Sandpiper, Red-backed. 

Dutcher, William, obituary notice 
of, 606. 

Dwight, Jonathan, nomenclatural 
casuistry, 145; the plumages of 
Gulls in relation to age as illus- 
trated by the Herring Gull (Larus 
argentatus) and other species, 
262-268. 


75, 306, 


Eacus, Bald, 375, 569. 597, 
Golden, 66, 398, 483. 
Kamchatkan Sea, 250. 
Northern Bald, 433. 

Earnshaw, F. L., see Lawyer, G. A. 

Easter Island, 616. 

Economic Ornithology in Recent 
Entomological Publications, 322, 
619. 

Edson, Wm. L. G., and Horsey, 
R. E., rare or uncommon birds 
at Rochester, N. Y., 140-142; 
Bohemian Waxwing (Bombycilla 
garrula) at Rochester, N. Y., 
461; Labrador Brown-cap Chick- 
adee at Rochester, Monroe Co., 
N. Y., 463. 

Egretta brevipes, 177. 

candidissima, 398, 568. 
Egret, 260, 432, 568 579,. 
Snowy, 393, 568. 
Egypt, 620. 
Eider, 596. 
Kking, 618. 
Eifrig, C. W. G., in the haunts of 
Cairns’ Warbler, 551-558; addi- 
tions to ‘The Birds of Allegany 


Index. 


Auk 
Oct. 


and Garrett Counties, Md.’ 598- 
600. 
‘El Hornero,’ reviewed, 173. 
Elanus axillaris, 321. 
leucurus majusculus, 477. 
Elaenia flavogaster macconnelli, 
ay are 
cristata whitelyi, 177. 

Elminia, 302. 

Elseya dubia, 279. 

Emberiza schoeniclus volgae, 630. 

Empidonax difficilis, 68. 

griseus, 133. 

flaviventris, 92, 485, 547. 
minimus, 69, 435, 547. 
trailu trailii, 68. 

t. alnorum,{65, 435. 
virescens, 92. 

wrighti, 69, 401. 

Empidonomus varius parvirostris, 
329. 

‘Emu, The,’ reviewed, 172, 330, 625. 

Endomychura, 275. 

England, birds of, 151, 158, 610, 
616. 

Eno, Henry Lane, Evening Gros- 
beaks at Princeton, New Jersey. 
456. 

Enodes erythrophrys centralis, 631. 

Eophona melanura melanura, 320. 

migratoria pulla, 320. 

Eremomela badiceps turneri, 488. 

elegans elgonensis, 488. 
Ereunetes mauri, 528. 

pusillus, 128, 527. 
Erismatura, 446. 

jamaicensis, 245, 370. 

Erithacus rubecula atlas, 328. 

Erolia ferruginea, 284. 

f. chinensis, 284. 
maritima quarta, 631. 
Eroliinae, 442. 
Erranornis, 302. 
albicauda, 302. 
longicauda, 302. 


Vol. To | 
1920 


Erranornis, schwebischi, 302. 
teresita, 302. 
Erratum, 468. 
Erythropygia, 493. 
Erythromyias timorensis, 629. 
Essex County Ornithological Club, 
notice of “Bulletin,’ 318. 
Estrilda astrild litoris, 493. 
niedieki, 333. 
a. adesma, 333. 
ineana hapalochroa, 333. 
Ethelornis, 609. 
Eunetta falcata, 250, 277. 
Euchlornis riefferi signata, 629. 
Euphagus carolinus, 70, 4386. 
eyanocephalus, 52, 70, 405. 
c. minusculus, 623. 
Eupoda asiatica, 279. 
montana, 279. 
Eupsychortyx cristatus cristatus, 
214. 
c. horvathi, 219. 
leucopogon decoratus, 210. 
]. leucopogon, 203. 
1. leucotis, 207. 
1. littoralis, 211. 
sonnini mocquerysi, 201. 
s. sonnini, 194. 
Europe, birds of, 166, 481. 
Eurystomus calonyx, 337. 
Euscarthmus gularis, 175. 
impiger cearae, 109. 
il. impiger, 109. 
i. Inornatus, 109. 
rufilatus, 175. 
Eusiptornoides, 164. 
Eustephanus fernandensis, 616. 
leyboldii, 616. 
Examthemops, 278. 
rossi, 278. 
Fauco aesalon, 447. 


columbarius columbarius, 544. 


mexicanus, 66, 398. 
islandus, 132. 
moluncensis bernsteini, 630. 


Incéex. 


653 


Faleo m. ventralis, 630. 
peregrinus anatum, 310, 398. 
regulus, 447. 
sparverius, 52, 545. 

s. pbalaena, 66, 399. 
S. sparverius, 52, 66, 308. 

‘Falco,’ reviewed, 494. 

Falcon, Prairie, 66, 398. 

Farley, J. A., sandpipers wintering 
at Plymouth, Massachusetts, 78- 
84. 

Farwell, Ellen D., notice of her 
‘Bird Observations near Chicago,’ 
157. 

Finch, Black Rosy, 70. 

Cassin’s Purple, 70, 405. 
Gray-crowned Rosy, 70. 
Hepburn’s Rosy, 70. 
House, 70, 405. 

Purple, 47, 548 584,. 

Figgins, J. D., the status of the sub- 
specific races of Branta canaden- 
sis, 94-102. 

‘Fins, Feather and Fur,’ noticed, 
483. 

Fisher, A. K., In Memoriam: Ly- 
man Belding, 33-45. 

Fleisher, Edward, Notes on the 
birds of southeastern North Caro- 
lina, 565-572. 

Flanagan, J. A., obituary notice cf, 
639. 

Fleming, J. H., and Lloyd, Hoyes, 
Ontario bird notes, 42¢-439. 

Fleming, J. H., see also Saunders, 
W. E. 

Flicker, 52, 387, 392, 570. 
Northern, 309, 546. 
Red-shafted, 52, 68, 400. 

Florida, birds of, 128-130, 142-143, 
258, 261, 476. 

Florida caerulea, 568, 590. 

Floyd, Charles B., Orange-crowned 
Warbler (Vermivora celata celata) 
in Massachusetts, 137; Great 


654 


Crested Flycatcher in Massa- 
chusetts in winter, 295. 

Flycatcher, Acadian, 92. 

Alder, 68, 435, 555. 

Ash-throated, 68, 400. 

Crested, 144, 295, 555, 570. 

Gray, 133. 

‘Green-crested, 92. 

Least, 69, 435, 453, 547, 555. 

Olive-sided, 68, 305, 435, 466, 
546. 

Traill’s, 68. 

Western, 68. 

Wright’s, 69, 401. 
Yellow-bellied, 92, 435, 547. 
Forbush, E. H., notice of his ‘Out- 
door Bird Study’ and ‘Bird 
Houses and Nesting Boxes,’ 159. 

Ford, Louise P., see Pellew, Marion 
Je 

Fossil Birds, semicentennial of the 
discovery of, in North America, 
516. 

Francolinus, 493. 

Frederickena, 177. 

Freeman, Daniel, notice of his ‘A 
Bird Calendar of the Fargo Re- 
gion’, 478. 

Fringilla coelebs, 608. 

teydea, 608. 

Frost, Allen, and Crosby, M. F., 
some summer residents of Dut- 
chess County, N. Y., 597. 

Frugilegus, 176, 280. 

frugilegus, 280. 
Fulica americana, 51, 64, 394. 


GADWALL, 64, 240, 260, 370. 
Galapagos, birds of, 162. 
Galerida cristata muhlei, 612. 
Gallinago delicata, 64, 522, 543. 
Gallinule, Purple, 130, 597. 
Galloperdix spadicea stewarti, 328. 
Gallus gallus bankiva, 320. 

g. ferrugineus, 320. 

g. gallus, 320. 


Index. 


Gannet, 388, 431. 

Garrulax milleti, 170. 

Gavia, 445. 

arctica viridigularis, 275. 
immer, 258, 286. 

Gehring, John George, William 
Brewster: an appreciation, 24-27, 

Gelochelidon anglica, 276. 

nilotica aranea, 276. 

Geocichla, 493. 

Geococcyx californianus, 52. 

Georgia, birds of, 257-258, 454. 

Geositta, 164. 

Geothylpis trichas, 571. 

t. occidentalis, 75, 410. 
t. trichas, 306, 550. 

Germany, birds of, 333. 

Gerygone griseus, 332. 

Gifford, E. W., notice of his ‘Field 
Notes on the Land Birds of the 
Galapagos Islands,’ 162. 

Giraud, J. P., note on, 146. 

Glareola, 493. 

Glaucidium perlatum, 178. 

Glaucion, 446. 

Glaucionetta clangula americana, 

442. 
ec. clangula, 629. 
islandica, 442. 

Globicera oceanica townsendi, 159. 

Gnateatcher, Blue-gray, 55, 144, 
258, 438, 464, 542. 

Golden-eye, 51, 135, 232, 369, 386, 

372, 542. 
Barrow’s, 356. 

Goldfinch, 71, 548, 555. 

Arkansas, 71. 
Goldfinch, European, 481. 
Pale, 71. 
Godwit, Marbled, 142, 304, 540, 
580, 581. 
Hudsonian, 304, 432. 
Goose, Blue, 260, 482, 468. 
Canada, 291. 
Hutchin’s, 251. 
Snow, 251, 4382. 


Vol. Aon | 
1920 


Goshawk, 66. 
Western, 310. 

Grackle, Boat-tailed, 259, 295, 570. 
Bronzed, 70, 387, 547. 
Great-tailed, 53. 

Purple, 454. 

Gracula chrysoptera, 468. 
nobilis, 468. 

Grallaria watkinsi, 315. 
boliviana, 315. 

Graucalus caledonicus thilenii, 332. 
macei andamanus, 332. 

Great Britain, birds of, 151, 158, 

610, 616. 

Grebe, Eared, 62, 231, 304. 

Holboell’s, 304, 430. 

Horned, 557. 

Pied-billed, 50, 63, 235, 304, 
431, 542, 557. 

Western, 63. 

Gregory, Stephen §8., Jr., Harris’s 
Sparrow in northern Michigan, 
135. 

Grinnell, George Bird, recollections 
of Audubon Park, 372-380. 

Grinnell, Joseph, sequestration 
notes, 84-88; review of his “The 
English Sparrow in Death Val- 
ley,’ 478. See also Hall, H. M. 

Griscom, Ludlow, notes on the win- 
ter birds of San Antonio, Texas, 
49-55; see also Miller, W. deW. 

Griscom, Ludlow, and Janvrin, Dr. 
E. R. P., the Black Skimmer on 
Long Island, N. Y., 126. 

Grosbeak, Black-headed, 73, 407. 
Blue, 558, 585. 

Evening, 141, 298, 299, 308, 
436, 455, 456, 547. 

Pine, 305, 308, 436. 

Rose-breasted, 305, 436, 548, 
557. 

Western Evening, 299. 

Grouse, Dusky, 65. 

Ruffed, 392, 544, 557. 
Sage, 474. 


Index. 


655 


Grus canadensis, 600. 
Guillemot, Black, 386, 596. 
Guiraca caerulea caerulea, 558, 598. 
Gull, Bonaparte’s, 259. 
Franklin’s, 237. 
Great Black-backed, 80, 431. 
Herring, 80, 259, 542, 567, 596. 
Iceland, 140. 
Laughing, 259, 567. 
Ring-billed, 63, 237, 259. 
Sabine’s, 311. 
Gymnobucco, 493. 
Gymnoris pyrgita reichenowl, 333. 
Gymnostenops montezumae, 603. 
Gyrfaleon, White, 132. 


Harmatopts bachmani, 253. 
frazari, 279. 
palliatus, 540, 569. 
p. frazari, 279. 

Haliaetus leucocephalus alascanus, 
433. 
1. leucocephalus, 569. 

Hall, H. M. and Grinnell, Joseph, 
review of their ‘Life-Zone Indi- 
eators in California,’ 163. 

Halobaena caerulea, 335, 505. 

Hanna, G. Dallas, additions to the 
avifauna of the Pribilof Islands, 
Alaska, including four species 
new to North America, 248-254. 

Haplornis, 160. 

Harelda, 442. 

hyemalis, 370, 442. 

Harper, Francis, the song of the 
Boat-tailed Grackle, 295-297. 

Harpyhaliaetus coronatus, 154. 

Hartert, E., review of his ‘Vogel der 
palaarktischen Fauna’, 472. 

Hawk, Broad-winged, 467, 544, 557. 

Cooper’s, 66, 293, 398, 433, 
544, 557. 

Desert Sparrow, 66, 399. 

Duck, 310, 398. 

Harlan’s, 130. 

Marsh, 52, 65, 391, 398, 544. 


656 


Hawk, Pigeon, 544. 
Red-shouldered, 48. 
Red-tailed, 48, 52, 544, 557. 
Rough-legged, 66, 253. 
Sharp-shinned, 52, 65, 398, 544, 

557. 
Sparrow, 52, 66, 308, 545. 
Western Red-tailed, 66, 398. 

Headley, F. W., obituary notice of, 
638. 

Hedydipna platura karamojoensis, 
489. 

Hedymeles melanocephalus papago, 

282. 
m. melanocephalus, 282. 

Helinaia, 444. 
swainsonl, 445, 589. 

Hellmayr, C. E., and Laubmann, 
A., review of their, ‘Nomenclator 
der Vogels Bayerns,’ 617. 

Helmuth, W. T., extracts from 
notes made while in naval ser- 
vice, 255-261. 

Helodromas, 443, 451. 

solitarius solitarius, 128, 482, 
534, 544. 
s. cinnamomeus, 64. 

Hemipus hirundinaceus, 335. 
obseurus, 335. 

Hemixus tickelli griseiventer, 170. 

Hen, Heath, 386, 391. 

Henicorhina leucosticta hauxwelli, 
624. 

Henninger, W. F., on the nesting of 
the Black Duck in Ohio, 287; the 
Plain Titmouse, a new bird for 
Oregon, 594. 

Henshaw, Henry W., In Memoriam: 
William Brewster, 1-23. 

Herodias, 441. 
egretta, 432, 568, 579. 

Heron, Black-crowned Night, 64, 
260, 394, 449, 568. 

Great Blue, 51, 64, 148, 260, 
304, 398, 548, 566, 568. 


Index. 


lea 

Oct. 

Heron, Little Blue, 260, 566, 568. 

Louisiana, 260, 261, 566, 568, 

580. 

Yellow-crowned Night, 260. 
Herpornis xantholeuca sordida, 170. 
Hesperiphona vespertina montana, 

299. 

v. vespertina, 141, 308, 406, 

455, 456, 547, 585. 

Heteractitis, 443. 

brevipes, 278. 

Heteromirafra archeri, 329. 

Heteroscelus, 443. 

brevipes, 250. 

incanus, 443. 

Hewitt, Charles Gordon, obituary 
notice of, 511. 

Himantopus, 447. 

mexicanus, 396. 

Hine, John 8., review of his ‘Birds 
of the Katmai Region, Alaska,’ 
150-151. 

Hippolais pallida, 333. 

caligata, 333. 

Hirundo, 448. 

erythrogastra, 73, 407, 571. 
Hoffman, Ralph, a Raven pellet, 

454. 

Holland, birds of, 147, 320. 

Hollister, N., notice of his ‘Report 
of the Superintendent of the 
National Zoological Park,’ 480; 
notice of his ‘The National Zo- 
ological Park’, 319; relative abun- 
dance of wild ducks at Delavan, 
Wisconsin, 367-371. 

Holt, Ernest G., Bachman’s Warb- 
ler breeding in Alabama, 103-104. 

Horsey, R. E., see Edson, Wm. L. 
Gr: 

Horsfall, R. Bruce, review of his 
paper on the habits of the Sage 
Grouse, 474. 

Howe, R. Heber, Jr., Egret at 

South Orleans, Mass., 579. 


Vol. | 
1920 


Howell, A. H., obituary notice of 
Thomas McA. Owen, 510. 

Huber, Wharton, description of a 
new North American duck, 273- 
274. 

Hudson, W. H., notice of his ‘The 
Book of a Naturalist’, 158; re- 
view of his ‘Birds in Town and 
Village,’ 610; review of his ‘Ad- 
ventures among Birds,’ 610. 

Hummingbird, Broad-tailed, 68, 

400. 
Ruby-throated, 258, 305, 454, 
570, 576. 

Hydranassa tricolor ruficollis, 566, 
568, 580. 

Hydrobates, 441. 

pelagicus, 441. 

Hydrochelidon, 440. 

nigra surinamensis, 64, 238. 
Hydrocoloeus, 276. 

minutus, 276. 
Hydroprogne, 440. 

caspia imperator, 276. 
Hylocichla aliciae aliciae, 254, 283. 

a. bicknelli, 284, 591. 

fuscescens fuscescens, 48. 

f. salicicola, 77. 

guttata, 55. 

g. auduboni, 77. 

g. guttata, 77. 

g. pallasi, 551. 

minima aliciae, 283. 

m. bicknelli, 284. 

mustelina, 572. 

ustulata swainsoni, 77, 551. 

u. ustulata, 465. 
Hylocryptus, 315. 

erythrocephalus, 315. 
Hypocnemis poecilonota, 177. 
Hypocentor, 280. 

rusticus, 281. 
Hypolophus, 177. 

bernardi cajamarcae, 628. 
Hypothymis, 160. 


Index. 


657 


Hypsibates, 447. 


IpIpIDAR, 441. 
‘Ibis, The,’ reviewed, 170, 327, 488, 
624. 
Icteria virens longicauda, 75. 
v. virens, 313, 438. 
Icterus bullocki, 70. 
spurius, 570. 
Ichthynomus, 425. 
Ifrita coronata, 624. 
kowaldi, 624. 
Illinois, birds of, 137, 157, 301, 466, 
600, 616. 
Illinois Audubon Society, notice of 
‘Bulletin’, 483. 
International Ornithological Con- 
gress, 179. 
Ionornis martinicus, 130. 
Iowa, birds of, 156, 306-309, 620. 
Iredale, Tom T., Ridgway’s Birds 
of North and Middle America, 
Vol. VIII, 344-345. 
Iridoproene bicolor, 548, 571, 598. 
Ithaginis clarkei, 329. 
Ixobrychus sinensis moorei, 159. 


Jarcer, Long-tailed, 261. 
Parasitic, 261. 
Pomarine, 261. 
Janvrin, Dr. E. R. P., see Griscom, 
Ludlow. 
Japan, birds of, 411, 477. 
Jay, Blue, 547, 570. 
Canada, 134, 547. 
Long-crested, 69, 401. 
Rocky-Mountain, 401. 
Woodhouse’s, 69. 
Pinon, 69, 402. 
Joherst, Dent see Dent, Paul. 
Johnson, Charles Eugene, an occult 
food sense in birds, 339-341; 
summer bird records from Lake 
County, Minnesota, 541-551. 
Jourdain, F. R. C., see Mullens, 
W. H. 


658 


‘Journal fiir Ornithologie,’ reviewed, 
333, 493, 630. 

Juan Fernandez Islands, birds of, 
616. 

Junco, 53, 383. 
Gray-headed, 72. 
Montana, 72. 
Pink-sided, 72. 
Shufeldt’s, 72. 
Slate-colored, 72, 

597. 
White-winged, 72. 

Junco aikeni, 72. 
hyemalis carolinensis, 556. 
h. connectens, 72. 

h. hyemalis, 72, 254, 548. 
h. mearnsi, 72. 

h. montanus, 72. 
insularis, 281. 

mearnsi insularis, 281. 

m. townsendi, 281. 
oreganus townsendi, 281. 
phaeonotus caniceps, 72. 
vuleani, 603. 


254, 548, 


Kansas, birds of, 457. 

Kennard, Fred H., notes on the 
breeding habits of the Rusty 
Blackbird in northern New Eng- 
land, 412-422. 

Kent, Edward G., Pileated Wood- 
pecker in Morris County, N. J., 
182. 

Killdeer, 51, 65, 105, 260, 309, 397, 
537, 557. 

Kingbird, 68, 144, 310, 435, 546, 

555, 570, 597. 
Arkansas, 68, 142. 
Cassin’s, 400. 

Kingfisher, Belted, 52, 67, 261, 545, 
569. 

Kinglet, Golden-crowned, 54, 77, 

dol. 
Ruby-crowned, 55, 76, 85, 
438, 572, 594. 


Index. 


[oct: 


Kite, White-tailed, 321. 

Kittiwake, 80. 

Klamath Lake bird reservation, 
347. 

Kloss, C. Boden, see Robinson, H.C. 

Knestrometopon, 493. 

Knipolegus comatus, 175. 

lophotes, 175. 

Knot, 451, 466, 525. 

Krieker, 304, 525. 

Kumlien, Ludwig, biography of, 
640. 

Kuroda, Nagamichi, some North 
American birds obtained in Ja- 
pan, 311; notice of his ‘Descrip- 
tions of Five New Forms of Jap- 
anese Pheasants’, 477. 


Laconosticra rhodopareia neglecta 
333. 
rubricata, reichenowl, 493. 
Lagopus leucurus rainierensis, 623. 
Lampribis cupreipennis, 328. 
olivacea, 328. 
rothschildi, 328. 
Lamprocolius, 493. 
Lanivireo solitarius plumbeus, 74, 
408. 
s. solitarius, 549, 571. 
Lanius borealis, 74. 
hypoleucus siamensis, 332. 
ludovicianus excubitorides, 54, 
74. 
l. grinnelli, 170, 282. 
l. migrans, 136, 306. 

Lano, Albert, Trumpeter Swan 
(Olor buccinator) in western Min- 
nesota, a correction, 127; Even- 
ing Grosbeak (Hesperiphona v. 
vespertina), in Minnesota in mid- 
summer, 455. 

Lark, Desert Horned, 69. 

Prairie Horned, 555. 
Horned, 81, 390. 
Saskatchewan Horned, 69. 


Vol. ere 
1920 


Larus affinis, 268, 344. 
atricilla, 268, 567. 
a. megalopterus, 276. 
argentatus, 268, 542, 567. 
brachyrhynchus, 268, 276. 
californicus, 268. 
canus, 268, 276. 
delawarensis, 63, 237, 268. 
franklini, 237, 268. 
fulginosus, 331. 
fuscus, 344. 
f. brittanicus, 344. 
glaucescens, 268. 
glaucus, 446. 
heermani, 268. 
hyperboreus, 268, 446. 
h. barrovianus, 166, 284. 
h. hyperboreus, 284. 
kumlieni, 268. 
leucopterus, 140, 208. 
marinus, 268, 431. 
minutus, 268. 
nelsoni, 268. 
occidentalis, 268. 
o. livens, 276. 
philadelphia, 268. 
schistisagus, 268. 
vegae, 268. 

Latham, Roy, unusual habits of 
the Chimney Swift, 132-133; 
birds of irregular occurrence on 
Long Island, N. Y., 306. 

Laubmann, A., see Hellmayr, C. E. 

Lawrence, Newbold T., wild swan 
on Long Island, N. Y., 127. 

Lawyer, Geo. A. and Earnshaw, F. 
L., review of their ‘Game Laws 
for 1920,’ 614. 

Leavitt, Robert G., review of his 
‘Bird Study in Elementary 
Schools,’ 609. 

Legatus albicollis successor, 328. 

variegatus nevagans, 328. 

‘Le Gerfaut’, reviewed, 331, 491, 

628. 


Index. 


659 


‘L’Oiseau,’ reviewed, 491, 627. 
Leptasthenura punctigula, 165. 
andicola peruviana, 165. 
Leptophaethon catesbyi, 277. 
lepturus catesbyi, 277. 
Leptopogon rufipectus, 629. 
superciliaris albidiventer, 629. 
taezanowski, 629. 
Leopold, Nathan F., Jr., Bohemian 
Waxwing at Chicago, Il., 137; 
- rare and unusual birds in the 
Chicago area, during the spring 
of 1920, 600; see also Watson, J. 
1D), 
Leucopolius, 285. 
alexandrinus nivosus, 279. 
Leucosticte atrata, 70. 
tephrocotis littoralis, 70. 
t. tephrocotis, 70. 
Lewis, G. P., see Watson, J. D. 
Lewis, Harrison F., the Blue-gray 
Gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea 
caerulea) at Quebec, P. Q., 464; 
popular nomenclature, 501-503; 
the Willet (Catoptrophorus semi- 
palmatus semipalmatus) in Nova 
Scotia, 581; breeding of the Semi- 
palmated — Plover (Aegialitis 
semipalmata) in Yarmouth Coun- 
ty, Nova Scotia, 581; notes on 
the Acadian Sharp-tailed Spar- 
row (Passerherbulus nelsoni sub- 
virgatus), 587; the Black-poll 
Warbler and Bicknell’s Thrush 
at Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, 591; 
song of the Ruby-crowned King- 
let, 594; popular bird names, 634. 
Limicolae, 519-540. 
Limicola falcinella, 176. 
platyrhyncha, 176. 
Limnocincelus, 284. 
acuminatus, 278. 
Limnodromus, 442. 
griseus griseus, 442. 
g. scolopaceus, 442. 


660 


Limnothlypis, 444. 
swainsoni, 445, 589. 
Limosa, 285. 
fedoa, 142, 551, 580. 
haemastica, 432. 
Linaria, 448. 
caniceps, 300. 

Lincoln, F. C., birds of the Clear 
Creek district, Colorado, 60-77; 
the status of Harlan’s Hawk in 
Colorado, 130-131; Zonothichia 
albicollis again in Colorado, 300; 
a peculiarly marked example of 
Dumetella carolinensis, 593. 

Lloyd, Hoyes, see Fleming, J. H. 

Lobipes lobatus, 258, 521. 

Lochites, 177. 

Lonnberg, Einar, review of his 
‘Birds of the Juan Fernandez and 
Easter Islands,’ 615. 

Longspur, Alaska, 71. 
Chestnut-collared, 53. 

Loomis, Leverett M., on Procellaria 
alba, Gmelin, 88-91. 

Loon, 258, 286, 542, 567. 

Lophodytes cucullatus, 369, 542. 

Louisiana, birds of, 126, 259-260. 

Loxia coccothraustes, 496. 

curvirostra meridionalis, 171. 
c. perena, 298, 456. 
leucoptera, 134, 486, 457, 598. 

Luear, 448. 

Lunda, 446. 

McAteer, W. L., abundance of peri- 
odical cicadas diverting attacks of 
birds from cultivated fruits, 144— 
145; reviews of papers on eco- 
nomic ornithology, 168, 322-325, 
483-485, 619-622; the search for 
food by birds, 341-344; see also 
Oberholser, H. C. 

McCulloch, J. W., notice of his 
papers on economic ornithology, 
Boo. 

McGregor, R. C., review of his 
‘Index to the Genera of Birds,’ 471. 


Index. 


Auk 
Oct. 


Macaw, Hyacinth, 293. 

Macedonia, birds of, 611. 

Mackenziaena, 177. 

Macropygia ruficeps, 633. 

sumatranus, 633. 

Machrorhamphus, 442. 

griseus griseus, 143, 307, 523, 
540. 
scolopaceus, 601, 523. 

Macoun, James Melville, obituary 
notice of, 346. 

Macrosphenus albigula, 492. 

Magee, M. J., Least Flycatcher in 
Michigan in April, 453. 

Magpie, 69, 134, 401. 

Mailliard, Joseph, notice of his 
‘Notes on the Avifauna of the 
Inner Coast Range of California,’ 
156. 

Maine, birds of, 130, 256, 412-422, 
462. 

Maitland, R. L., obituary notice of, 
640. 

Malaconotus, 493. 

Mallard, 50, 64, 238, 259, 369, 387, 
543. 

Manitoba, birds of, 585. 

Mareca americana, 51, 

oll, 370; 
penelope, 288. 


Marila affinis, 51, 244, 277, 354, 
369, 431. 
americana, 51, 248, 277, 354, 
370. 


collaris, 51, 355, 369, 431. 
ferina americana, 277. 
marila, 354, 370. 
m. affinis, 277. 
valisineria, 51, 244, 252, 355, 
370. 
Martin, Purple, 92, 308, 407, 436, 
oils 
Maryland, birds of, 551-558, 598. 
Massachusetts, birds of, 78-84, 137, 
288, 289, 295, 301, 318, 464, 467, 
579, 606. 


Vol. XXXVII 
1920 


Mathews, Gregory M., name of the 
Red-faced Booby, 180; Procellaria 
vittata Forster is not Halobaena 
caerulea Gmelin, 505-507; review 
of his ‘The Birds of Australia,’ 
470, 609; review of his ‘Check 
List of the Birds of Australia,’ 
469. 

Meadowlark, 435, 555, 570. 

Western, 52, 70, 405. 

Mecocerculus subtropicalis, 315. 

Megacephalon maleo, 330. 

Megaceryle aleyon, 424-429. 

guttata, 424-429, 

maxima, 424-429, 

torquata, 424-429. 
Megalopterus minutus kermadeci, 


345. 
m. minutus, 345. 
Megaquiscalus major macrourus, 
53. 


m. major, 295, 570. 
Melanerpes  erythrocephalus, 67, 
145. 
e. erythrophthalmus, 280. 
erythrophthalmus, 145. 
formicivorus formicivorus, 52. 
Melanitta, see Oidemia. 
Melanopica, 496. 
Melanosterna, 284. 
anatheta recognita, 277. 
Meleagris, 440. 
gallopavo silvestris, 569. 
g. merriami, 397. 
Melipotes ater, 631. 
Mellisuga coccinea, 468. 
Melospiza georgiana, 306, 436, 598. 
lincolni lineolni, 72. 
melodia, 54, 548. 
m. melodia, 548. 
m. montana, 72, 406. 
Merganser, 238, 370, 387, 431, 542. 
Hooded, 304, 369, 542. 
Red-breasted, 50, 304, 370, 388, 
431, 568. 


Index. 


661 


Mergus americanus, 238, 277, 431, 
542. 

merganser americanus, 277. 

serrator, 50, 370, 431, 568. 
Merops spiza, 468. 

Merrem, Blasius, note on his ‘Beytr- 
age zur besondern Geschichte 
der Vogel,’ 468. 

Merula, 448. 

Mesia argentauris cunhaci, 170. 

Mesoscolopax, 279. 

borealis, 278. 

Micropalama himantopus, 524. 

Micropus peruvianus, 315. 

Microsittace ferrugineus minor, 165. 

Michigan, birds of, 135, 136, 453, 
463, 572, 604. 

Migration, 604, 616. 

Migratory bird treaty, 513. 

Miller, Waldron DeW., the genera 
of Ceryline Kingfishers, 422-429; 
the summer resident warblers of 
northern New Jersey, 592; the 
Hudsonian Chickadee in New 
Jersey, 593. 

Miller, W. DeW., and Griscom, 
Ludlow, breeding of the Mourn- 
ing Dove in Maine, 130; breeding 
of the Canadian Warbler and 
Northern Water-Thrush in north- 
ern New Jersey, 137; the Blue- 
bird in Cuba, 140. 

Mimus antelius, 175. 

lividus, 175. 

polyglottos leucopterus, 54, 75, 

410. 

p. polyglottos, 93, 571. 
Minnesota, birds of, 127, 134, 137, 
455, 541-551. 

Mionectes striaticollis columbianus, 

alld: 

Missouri, birds of, 309, 460, 467. 

Mniotolta varia, 142, 258, 261, 549. 

Mockingbird, 93, 571. 

Western, 54, 75, 410. 


662 


Molothrus ater, 52, 402. 

a. ater, 69, 306, 584. 
badius bolivianus, 628. 

Montana, birds of, 132, 451. 

Morgan, Brent M., flight of water- 
fowl at Washington, D. C., 291. 

Morinella, 447. 

Moris, 441. 

bassana, 441. 

Morphnus, 154. 

Morris, Robert O., notes from 
Springfield, Mass., 467. 

Motacilla regulus, 496. 

Mullens, W. H., Swann, H. Kirke, 
and Jourdain, F. R. C., review of 
their ‘A Geographical Bibliog- 
raphy of British Ornithology,’ 
152, 317, 475, 616. 

Munia calaminoros, 333. 
punctulata particeps, 631. 
Murie, O. J., appearance of the 
Canada Jay at Moorehead, Minn., 

134. 

Murphy, Robert C., notice of his 
‘Sea Coast and Islands of Peru,’ 
618. 

Murrelet, Marbled, 251. 

Muscicapa cinereiceps, 320. 

ferruginea, 320, 468. 
parulus, 453. 

sibirica cacabata, 320. 
s. fuliginosa, 320. 

Muscylva, 160. 

Museum of Vertebrate Zoology of 
the University of California, en- 
dowment of, 188. 

Myadestes townsendi, 77. 

Myiagra longicauda, 302. 

townsendi, 159. 
Myiarchus crinitus, 144, 295, 570. 
cinerascens cinerascens, 68, 400. 
Myioborus bolivianus, 315. 
Myiochanes virens, 547. 
richardsonirichardsoni, 68, 401. 


Index. 


fees 
Oct. 


Myiodynastes solitarius duneani, 
329. 

Myrmotherula cinereiventris, 177. 

Myzomela rubrata dichromata, 160. 


NaAnnus, 472. 
alascensis, 283. 
meliger, 283. 
hiemalis helleri, 283. 
h. hiemalis, 283, 550. 
h. pacificus, 283. 
h. semidiensis, 283. 
troglodytes alascensis, 283. 
t. helleri, 283. 
. hiemalis, 283. 
. kiskensis, 283. 
. meliger, 283. 
;. pacificus, 283. 
. petrophilus, 283. 
. semidiensis, 283. 
t. tanagensis, 283. 
National Association of Audubon 
Societies, annual report of, 317. 
National Parks, bird lists of, 614. 
Nebraska, birds of, 476. 
Nelson, E. W., report of the chief 
of the Biological Survey, 167. 
Neoglottis, 278. 
flavipes, 278. 
melanoleuca, 278. 
Netta, 284. 
Nettion carolinense, 51, 64, 241, 
284, 306, 307, 369. 
crecca, 252. 
ce. carolinense, 284, 311. 
Nevada, birds of, 133. 
New Hampshire, birds of, 412-422. 
New Jersey, birds of, 132, 137, 162, 
292, 456, 580, 591, 592, 593, 594. 
New Mexico, birds of, 221-247, 273. 
New York, birds of, 46-49, 126, 
127, 140-142, 298, 299, 302, 306, 
307, 449, 452, 456, 461, 466, 581, 
598. 
Newfoundland, birds of, 292, 298. 


ee ict tek for eect 


Vol. | 
1920 


Nichol, M. J., review of his ‘Hand- 
list of the Birds of Egypt,’ 81. 
Nichols, John Treadwell, Limico- 

line voices, 519. 

Nichols, John Treadwell, and Rog- 
ers, Charles H., the Marbled 
Godwiton Long Island, N. Y., 581. 

Nighthawk, 391, 392, 434, 546. 

Western, 68, 400. 

Nomenclature, 145, 147. 

Nonpareil, 300. 

North Carolina, birds of, 130, 149, 
257, 565-572. 

North Dakota, birds of, 132, 136, 
478. 

Notodela diana sumatrana, 153. 

Nova Scotia, birds of, 581, 582, 
583, 587, 591. 

Nucifraga columbiana, 297. 

Numeniinae, 443. 

Numenius hudsonicus, 536. 

tahitiensis, 253. 
Nutcracker, Clarke’s, 297. 
Nuthatch, Brown-headed, 572. 
Red-breasted, 142, 305, 310, 
438, 550, 571. 
Rocky Mountain, 76, 411. 
Pygmy, 76, 310, 411. 

Nuttall Ornithological Club, annual 
meeting of, 185. 

Nuttallornis borealis, 68, 435, 466, 
546. 

Nyctala, 449. 

Nycticorax nycticorax naevius, 64, 
394, 449, 568. 

Nyroca, 284. 

Nystalus maculatus nuchalis, 316. 


OBERHOLSER, H. C., the Hawk Owl 
in North Dakota, 132; Hmpi- 
donax griseus in Nevada, 133; 
Lanius ludovicianus migrans in 
North Dakota, 136; fifth annual 
list of proposed changes in the 
A. O. U. Check-List of North 


Index. 


663 


American Birds, 274-285; Aero- 
nautes melanoleucus (Baird) ver- 
sus Aeronautes saxatilis (Wood- 
house), 294; a new name for 
Phaeochroa Gould, 295; Elminia 
Bonaparte preoccupied, 302; Tox- 
ostoma crissalis versus Toxostoma 
dorsalis, 303; Tringa Auct. versus 
Calidris Anon., 451; a new name 
for Anairetes Reichenbach, 453; 
note on the generic name Schif- 
fornis Bonaparte and Scotothorus 
Oberholser, 454; Penthestes hud- 
sonicus hudsonicus in North Da- 
kota, 463; review of his ‘The 
Status of Larus hyperboreus bar- 
rovianus Ridgway,’ 166. 
Oberholser, H. C., and McAtee, 
W. L., review of their ‘Water- 
fowl and Their Food Plants in 
the Sandhill Region of Nebraska,’ 
476. 
Oberholseria, 444. 
chlorura, 407, 444. 
Ocelletus, 496. 
Ochthodromus, 105. 
wilsonius, 105, 279, 537, 569. 
Oenanthe, 445. 
oenanthe oenanthe, 445. 
o. leucorhoa, 303, 445. 
Ohio, birds of, 287. 
Oidemia americana, 278, 365, 370, 
568. 
deglandi, 252, 
431. 
d. dixoni, 252. 
nigra americana, 278. 
perspicillata, 366, 370, 482, 
568. ; 
Okefinokee swamp, 347. 
Oldsquaw, 370. 
Oliver, H. K., obituary notice, of 639. 
Olor, 447. 
buccinator, 127. 
columbianus, 289, 432, 467. 


310, 366, 370, 


664 


Omaston, A. E., notice of his paper 
on food of Indian birds, 325. 
Ontario, birds of, 429-439. 
Onychognathus, 493. 
Onychoprion, 284. 
fuscatus, 277. 
‘Oologist, The,’ reviewed, 170, 327, 
487, 623. 
Opopsitta nigrifrons ramuensis, 332. 
Oporornis agilis, 339. 
formosus, 93, 590. 
philadelphia, 137, 550. 
tolmiei, 75. 
Oregon, birds of, 594. 
Oreomanes binghami, 165. 
Oreoscoptes, 75, 410. 
montanus, 410. 
Oreospiza, 414. 
chlorura, 73, 407. 
Oriole, Baltimore, 305, 555. 
Bullock’s, 70. 
Orchard, 390, 570. 
Oriolus larvatus reichenowi, 333. 
‘Ornis Germanica,’ reviewed, 494. 
Ornithological Journals, reviewed, 
168-173, 325-3834, 485-494, 
622-631. 
Ornithological Societies, member- 
ship of, 517. 
‘Ornithologische Beobachter,’  re- 
viewed, 172, 330, 492, 627. 
Ornithologische Monatsberichte, re- 
viewed, 331-333, 492, 630. 
‘Ornithologisches Jahrbuch,’  re- 
viewed, 173. 
Osgood, W. H., personal mention, 
517, 
Osprey, 304, 433, 545, 569. 
Ostinops decumanus, 615. 
d. maculosus, 615. 
Otocoris alpestris enthymia, 69. 
a. leucolaema, 69. 
a. praticola, 435. 
Otus asio aikeni, 66. 
a. maxwelliae, 66. 


Index. 


[Occ 


Ovenbird, 390, 438, 550. 
Owen, Thomas McAdory, obituary 
notice of, 510. 
Owl, Aiken’s Screech, 66. 
Barn, 308, 467. 
Barred, 49. 
Burrowing, 67, 612. 
Great Horned, 309, 433, 545. 
Hawk, 132. 
Long-eared, 66, 433, 597. 
Northwestern, Horned, 66. 
Richardson’s, 447. 
Rocky Mountain Sereech, 66. 
Saw-whet, 597. 
Short-eared, 66, 308. 
Western Horned, 67, 399. 
Oxyechus vociferus, 51, 65, 306, 
397, 537. 
v. peruvianus, 106. 
v. rubidus, 106. 
Oxyura, 446. 
Oyster-catcher, 540, 569. 
Black, 253. 


PACHYCEPHALA moroka, 631. 
olivacea macphersonianus, 625. 
tenebrosa, 631. 

Pachyrhamphus albiloris, 329. 
chapmani, 329. 
costaricensis, 329. 
macconnelli, 329. 

Pagolla wilsonia wilsonia, 279. 

w. beldingi, 279. 

Pagophila alba, 268, 335, 446, 275. 
eburnea, 275, 335, 446. 

Paleornis krameri borealis, 332. 

Palmen, Johan Axel, obituary no- 
tice of, 511. 

Palmer, T. 8., the thirty-seventh 
stated meeting of the American 
Ornithologists’ Union, 110-125; 
complete sets of ‘The Auk,’ 348- 
352; obituary notice of Frank 
Slater Daggett, 508; obituary 
notice of Charles G. Hewitt, 511; 


Vol. XXXVII | 
1920 


obituary notice of Johan Axel 
Palmen, 511; permanent funds 
of the A. O. U., 513; annual 
congress of the Royal Australa- 
sian Ornithologists’ Union, 516; 
semicentennial of the discovery 
of fossil birds in’ N. A., 516; 
Swiss Society for the Protection 
of Birds, 516; birds of national 
parks, 614; obituary notices of 
H. H. Smith, 637, N. A. Sarudny, 
638, F. W. Headley, 638, H. K. 
Oliver, 639, J. A. Flanagan, 639, 
R. L. Maitland, 640. 

Pandion haliaetus carolinensis, 433, 
545, 569. 

Parasula, 277. 

Partridge, Canada Spruce, 544. 

Parus ater lusitanicus, 332. 

brunnescens, 332. 

major malayorum, 153. 

palustris balticus, 333. 

Passer domesticus domesticus, 73, 
280, 478, 570, 586. 

d. hostilis, 280. 

Passerculus rostratus, 175. 

r. guttatus, 285. 

r. halophilus, 281. 

r. sanctorum, 285. 

sandwichensis alaudinus, 53, 

71, 405. 

s. savanna, 598, 570. 
Passerella iliaca iliaca, 72. 
Passerherbulus caudacutus, 281. 

henslowi, 458, 570. 

lecontei, 281, 299. 

nelsoni subvirgatus, 307, 587. 
Passerina, 448. 

amoena, 73. 

ciris, 300. 

cyanea, 73, 436. 

Peacock, 385. 

Pearson, T. Gilbert, review of his 
‘Birds of North Carolina,’ 149. 
Pelecanus erythrorhynchus, 126, 

238. 


Index. 


665 


Pelecanus occidentalis, 567. 
thagus, 161. 

Pelican, White, 126, 238, 260. 
Brown, 259, 567. 

Pelidna alpina pacifica, 278. 
sakhalina, 143, 278, 527, 568. 

Pellew, Marion J., and Ford, Louise 
P., notable warblers breeding 
near Aiken, 8S. C., 589. 

Penard, Thomas E.., notice of recent 
papers by, 320; see also Bangs, 
Outram. 

Penguin, King, 336. 

Pennsylvania, birds of, 155, 176, 303. 

Penthestes atricapillus atricapillus, 

550. 
a. septentrionalis, 76. 
carolinensis agilis, 54. 
c. carolinensis, 488, 572. 
gambeli gambeli, 76, 411. 
hudsonicus hudsonicus, 
550, 593. 
h. littoralis, 142, 594. 
h. nigricans, 463, 594. 
Pericrocotus brevirostris, 489. 
p. pallidus, 489. 
p. saturatus, 489. 
p. styani, 489. 
p. vividus, 489. 
peregrinus, 489. 
speciosus fokiensis, 489. 
Perisoreus canadensis albescens, 
615. 
c. canadensis, 134, 547. 
ce. capitalis, 401. 

Perissotriccus ecaudatus miserabi- 
lis; 177. 

Perkins, A. E., notes from Collins, 
N25 598: 

Pernis celebensis steer), 328. 

Peru, birds of, 105-108, 160-161, 
165, 613. 

Peters, James L., notice of his ‘A 
New Jay from Alberta’, 615; obit- 
uary notice of Barron Brainerd; 
184, personal mention, 517. 


463, 


666 


Petrel, Leach’s, 596. 

Petrella, 446. 

Petrochelidon albifrons hypopolia, 

334. 
lunifrons lunifrons, 73, 
254, 407. 
Pewee, Western Wood, 68, 401. 
Wood, 47, 547, 555. 

Pezophaps solitarius, 337. 

Placelodomus striaticeps griseipec- 
tus, 315. 

Phaeocroa, 295. 

Phaeocrous, 295. 

Phalacrocorax auritus auritus, 306, 

567. 
bougainvillei, 161. 
Phalaenoptilus nuttalli nuttalli, 68. 
Phalarope, Northern, 258, 521. 
Red, 156. 
Wilson’s, 396. 
Phasianus soemmerringi interme- 
dius, 477. 
s. subrufus, 477. 
torquatus, 65. 
versicolor kiusiuensis, 477. 
v. robustipes, 477. 
v. tanensis, 477. 

Pheasant, Ring-necked, 65, 392. 

Pheucticus uropygialis terminalis, 
315. 

Phillips, J. C., the American and 
European Widgeons in Massa- 
chusetts, 288; the Whistling Swan 
(Olor columbianus) in Massachu- 
setts, 289; habits of the two 
Black Ducks, Anas rubripes rub- 
ripes and Anas rubripes tristis, 
289. 

Philohela minor, 521. 
Philydor albigularis, 629. 
ochrogaster, 628. 

Phloeotomus _ pileatus 
598, 546. 

Phoebe, 52, 68, 435, 546. 

Say’s, 68, 401. 


143, 


abieticola, 


Index. 


ee 
Oct. 


Phyllastrephus albigularis adamet- 
Zl, 330. 
fischeri cognatus, 492. 
kretzschmari, 493. 
placidus munzneri, 333. 
tephrolaemus usambarae, 492, 
zenkerl, 333. 
Pica pica hudsonia, 69, 134, 401. 
Picoides arcticus, 545. 
Picolaptes affinis neglectus, 602. 
Picrotes, 177. 
Picus bairdi, 146. 
canus hessei, 332. 
viridis dofleni, 630. 
v. romaniae, 630. 
vittatus eisenhoferi, 332. 
Pigeon, Domestic, 392. 
Passenger, 176, 375, 482. 
Pinarolestes nesiotes, 160. 
Pinicola enucleator leucura, 306, 
308, 436. 
Pintail, 51, 259, 370, 387. 
Pipilo erythrophthalmus erythroph- 
thalmus, 309, 570. 
fuscus aripolius, 169, 281. 
f. carolae, 282. 
f. crisalis, 282. 
f. senicula, 282. 
crissalis carolae, 282. 
c. crissalis, 282. 
c. senicula, 282. 
maculatus arcticus, 54, 72. 
m. maculatus, 72, 406. 
Pipit, Japanese, 251. 
Pipromorpha oleaginea chapmani, 
vee 
. hauxwelli, 177. 
. macconnelli, 177. 
. roralmae, 177. 
. tobagensis, 177. 
o. wallacei, 177. 
Piranga erythromelas, 143, 282, 
436, 458, 548, 571. 
hepatica, 282. 
h. oreophasma, 282. 


oo © 6 


Vol. ee 
1920 


Piranga ludoviciana, 73, 301, 407. 
olivacea, 282. 
rubra rubra, 570. 
Piscatrix, 277. 
Pisobia, 284. 
acuminata, 278, 442. 
aurita, 442. 
cooperi, 278. 
fuscicollis, 526. 
maculata, 447, 525, 548, 568. 
minutilla, 128, 1438, 526. 
m. subminuta, 278. 
pectoralis, 447. 
ruficollis, 278. 
subminuta, 278. 
Pithecophaga jeffreyi, 334. 
Pitta angolensis, 629. 
atricapillus, 335. 
brachyura beryllofulgens, 332. 
sorsisus, 335. 
Planesticus migratorius migratorius, 
55, 145, 312, 438, 466. 
m. propinquus, 77, 411. 
serranus cumanensis, 629. 
Planchesia fusea, 320. 
pullata, 320. 
Plectrophenax hyperboreus, 254. 
Ploceus, 493. 
Plover, Black-bellied, 143, 304, 536, 
569. 
Golden, 537. 
Killdeer, see Kildeer. 
Piping, 84, 537. 
Semipalmated, 143, 496, 537, 
569, 583. 
Wilson’s, 53, 537, 569. 
Pluvialis, 443. 
apricaria, 443. 
dominica dominica, 443. 
d. fulva, 448. 
Pnoepyga pusilla annamensis, 170. 
p. harterti, 153. 
Podasocys montanus, 279. 
Podiceps, 445. 
Podilymbus podiceps, 50, 63, 235, 
260, 431, 542. 


Index. 


667 


Poliolaema, 177. 

Poliolimnas cinereus ingrami, 177. 

Polionetta albigularis, 561. 
leucopareus, 561. 

Polioptila caerulea caerulea, 55, 144, 

438, 464, 572. 
Polyborus cheriway, 52. 
Pomatorhinus olivaceus annamen- 
sis, 170. 
tickelli brevirostris, 170. 
Pooecetes gramineus confinis, 53, 
71, 405. 
g. gramineus, 548. 

Poor-will, 68. 

Porzana carolina, 64, 432, 543. 
pusilla, 337. 
tabuensis caledonica, 177. 

Potoptera, 493. 

Prinia flaviventris sindianus, 625. 
mystacea immutabilis, 488. 
sylvatica, 489. 

Prion vittatus, 335, 507. 
forsteri, 335. 

Procellaria alba, 88. 
similis, 507. 
vittata, 505. 

Procelsterna caerulea skottsbergii, 

616. 

Progne subis subis, 92, 308, 436, 571 

Protonotaria citrea, 144, 261. 

Prunella modularis mabbotti, 335. 

Pseudacanthis, 328. 

Pseudochloris uropygialis connec- 

tens, 165. 
olivascens sordida, 165. 
Pseudocolaptes boissonneautii me- 
dianus, 630. 

Pseudoconopophaga, 177. 

Pseudogeranus leucauchen, 338. 

Pseudominla atriceps, 170. 

Pseudosiptornis, 164. 

Pseudospermestes 

333. 

Pseudotadorna cristata, 490. 

Pternistes, 493. 


microrhyncha, 


668 


Pterocles lichtensteini abessinicus, 
332. 
l. targius, 332. 

Pterodroma, 441, 449. 
heraldica paschae, 616. 
rostrata trouessarti, 177. 

Pterythrus oeralatus annamensis, 

170. 

Puffin, 596. 

Puffinus borealis, 149. 
tenuirostris, 251. 

Pycnonotus bimaculatus barat, 633. 
leucotis mesopotamiae, 178. 
xanthopygos palaestinae, 333. 

Pycnorhinus, 496. 

Pyrrhula uchidai, 178. 


QUERQUEDULA cyanoptera, 242. 
discors, 64, 241, 369. 
d. albinucha, 277. 

Quiscalus quiscula aeneus, 70, 547. 
q. ridgwayi, 280. 
q. versicolor, 280. 


Ratt, Black, 128. 
King, 482. 
Virginia, 64, 394, 482, 452. 

Rallus elegans, 306, 432. 

longirostris helius, 631. 
virginianus, 64, 394, 432, 452. 

Raphus cucullatus, 337. 

Rathbun, S. F., White Gyrfalcon 
(Falco islandus) in Montana, 132; 
Bohemian Waxwing at Seattle, 
Washington, during the winter 
of 1919-20, 458-460. 

Raven, 391, 401, 453, 597, 558. 

Redhead, 51, 248, 259, 354, 370. 

Redpoll, 70, 80, 305, 600. 

Redstart, 75, 142, 163, 305, 550, 
557, 597. 

Regillus, 448. 

Regulus, 448. 

calendula, 85. 
c. calendula, 55, 76, 438, 572, 
594. 


Index. 


ee 
Oct. 


Regulus satrapa satrapa, 54, 77, 551. 

‘Revue Francaise ’d Ornithologie,’ 
reviewed, 172, 330, 491, 627. 

Rhipidura lessoni, 160. 

Rhodostethia rosea, 268. 

r. hartlaubi, 629. 
Rhopias fulviventris salmoni, 177. 
Rhynchocyclus 
flaviventris gloriosus, 489. 
f. collingwoodi, 489. 
poliocephalus inquisitor, 489. 
sulphurascens examinatus, 489. 

Ridgway, Robert, comment on his 
‘Birds of North and Middle 
America,’ Vol. VIII, 344-345. 

Rimator danjoui, 170. 

Riparia paludicola chinensis, 335. 

p. sinensis, 335. 
riparia, 73. 
Rissa tridactyla, 268. 

brevirostris, 268. 

Road-runner, 52. 

Roberts, Prewitt, notes on winter 
birds of the Missouri Ozarks, 309. 

Robin, 597. 

Robinson, H. C., and Kloss, C. 
Boden, review of their ‘Birds of 
the Expedition to Korinchi Peak, 
Sumatra,’ 153. 

Rowan, Wm., popular nomencla- 
ture, 499-501; breeding of the 
Evening Grosbeak in Manitoba, 
585. 

Rowan, William, Wolf, E., and 
Sulman, P. L., review of their 
‘On the Nest and Eggs of the 
Common Tern,’ 479. 

Royal Australasian Ornithologists’ 
Union, annual meeting of, 515, 
641. 

Rubecula, 449. 

Rynchops nigra, 335, 567. 


SacTHTLEBEN, H., notice of his 
paper on ‘Geographic Forms of 
Goldfinches,’ 481. 


Vol. ae 
1920 


Sakesphorus, 177. 
Salpinctes guadaloupensis, 282. 
g. proximus, 282. 
obsoletus, 54, 76. 
o. guadeloupensis, 282. 
o. obsoletus, 76, 410. 
oO. proximus, 282. 
Sanderling, 78, 432, 529, 568. 
Sandpiper, Least, 128, 143, 260, 
526, 5438, 568. 
Pectoral, 304, 525. 
Red-backed, 78, 148, 527, 568. 
Semi-palmated, 128, 260, 390, 
Die 
Solitary, 128, 432, 534, 544. 
Spotted, 65, 260, 396, 535, 544, 
557, 569, 596. 
Stilt, 524. 
Western, 528. 
Western Solitary, 64. 
White-rumped, 526. 
Sapsucker, Red-naped, 67. 
Yellow-bellied, 52, 546, 556. 
Williamson’s, 67, 399. 

Sarothrura somereni, 328. 

Sarudny, N. A., obituary notice of, 
638. 

Sathrocercus, 493. 

Saunders, A. A., ornithological pro- 
nunciation, 181; the color of natal 
down in passerine birds, 312; 
birds and tent caterpillars, 312. 

Saunders, W. E., additional notes 
on the birds of Red Deer, Al- 
berta, 304-306. 

Saunders, W. E., and Fleming, 
J. H., A. O. U. luncheons, 498. 

Sauropatis sacra rabulata, 159. 

s. celata, 159. 
Saxicola, 445. 
oenanthe leucorhoa, 303. 
pyrrhonotus, 629. 
Sayornis phoebe, 52, 68, 485, 546. 
sayus, 68, 401. 
Scaeophaethon, 160, 284. 


Index. 


669 


Scaeophaethon rubricatus, 277. 
r. rothschildi, 277. 

Seardafella inea, 51. 

Scaup, see Duck, Scaup. 

Schiffornis, 454. 

Schorger, A. W., bird notes on the 

Wisconsin River, 143-144. 

Sclater, W. L., review of his ‘Aves’ 

in the Zoological Record, 611; 
personal mention, 187. 

Scolopacidae, 442. 

Scolopacinae, 442. 

Scoter, 365, 370, 568. 

Surf, 366, 370, 4382, 568. 

White-winged, 310, 366, 370, 
431. 

Western White-winged, 252. 

Scotothorus, 454. 

Scott, W. E. D., see Sharpe, R. 

Bowdler. 
Scoville, S., Jr., review of his ‘The 
Out-of-Doors Club,’ 162. 
Seiurus aurocapillus, 438, 550. 
motacilla, 93, 554, 590. 
noveboracensis, 98, 554, 592. 
n. notabilis, 75, 93, 409, 550. 
Selasphorus platycercus, 68, 400. 
Serinus caniceps, 300. 
dorsostriatus harterti, 333. 
hartlaubi, 300. 
Serpophaga helenae, 329. 
Setochalcis noctitherus, 334. 
Setophaga ruticilla, 75, 142, 550. 
Sharpe, R. Bowdler, and Scott, 
W. E. D., notice of their ‘Orni- 
thology of the Princeton Pata- 
gonian Expedition,’ 480. 
Shearwater, Slender-billed, 251. 
Sherman, Althea R., notice of her 
‘Historical Sketch of the Park 
Region about McGregor, Iowa, 
and Prairie DuChien, Wiscon- 
sin,’ 482. 

Shoveller, 51, 64, 242, 259, 307, 
369. 


670 


Shrike, Northern, 74. 
Migrant, 136. 
White-rumped, 54, 74. 
Shufeldt, R. W., note on the food 
of the Starling, 135; notice of his 
paper on the ‘Birds of Brazil,’ 
167; notice of his ‘Complete List 
of My Published Writings,’ 321, 
613; a change in the nesting 
habits of the common House 
Sparrow (Passer domesticus), 
586. 

Smicrornis brevirostris mallee, 609. 

Smith, Austin Paul, observations 
relative to some Costa Rican 
birds, 601-603. 

Smith, H. H., obituary notice of, 
637. 

Sialia currucoides, 55, 77, 411. 
mexicana bairdi, 77, 310, 411. 
sialis sialis, 55, 77, 140, 572. 

Sigmodus scopifrons, 493. 

Siptornis, 164. 
anthoides, 164. 
berlepschi, 628. 
flammulata, 164. 
ottonis, 164. 
punensis rufala, 165. 
urubambensis, 165. 

Siptornoides, 164. 

Siskin, Pine, 71, 307, 405, 548. 

Sitta canadensis, 142, 310, 438, 550, 

571. 
carolinensis nelsoni, 76, 411. 
europaea atlas, 328. 
e. cisalpina, 630. 
e. griseiventris, 624. 
pusilla, 571. 


pygmaea pygmaea, 75, 310, 
411. 
Sittasomus griseicapillus __reiseri, 
628. 


Siva sordida orientalis, 170. 
Skimmer, Black, 126, 567. 
Snipe, Robin, see Knot. 


Index. 


[Oct: 


Snipe, Surf, see Sanderling. 
Wilson’s, 64, 392, 522, 543. 
Solitaire, Townsend’s, 77. 
Somateria molissima islandica, 277. 
m. v-nigra, 277. 
spectabilis, 618. 
v-nigra, 277. 
Song, 519, 584. 
Sora, 64, 482, 543. 
Soroplex campestris cearae, 316. 
South African Ornithologists’ Union 
amalgamation with the Transvaal 
Biological Society, 187. 
‘South Australian Ornithologist,’ 
reviewed, 172, 330, 490, 627. 
South Carolina, birds of, 92-94, 
302, 462, 465, 589. 
Sparrow, Acadian Sharp-tailed, 307, 
587. 
Baird’s, 305, 457. 
Black-throated, 54. 
Brewer’s, 72, 406. 
Chipping, 53, 548, 555, 570. 
Clay-colored, 72, 300, 601. 
English, 73, 383. 
Field, 555, 570. 
Fox, 72. 
Gambel’s, 71, 299. 
Grasshopper, 141. 
Harris’s,:53; 71, 135,/086. 
Henslow’s, 251, 393, 458, 570. 
Leconte’s, 299. 
Lincoln’s, 72. 
Mountain Song, 72, 406. 
Rock, 54. 
Sage, 406. 
Savannah, 258, 391, 597, 598, 
570. 
Song, 54, 390, 548, 555. 
Swamp, 305, 436, 598. 
Tree, 467, 548. 
Vesper, 391. 
Western Chipping, 72, 406. 
Western Field, 53. 
Western Grasshopper, 71. 


Vol. At) Index. 671 


Sparrow, Western Lark, 53, 71, 405. 
Western Savannah, 63, 71, 405. 


Western Tree, 71. 
Western Vesper, 53, 71, 405. 


White-crowned, 53, 71, 135, 


299, 406. 


White-throated, 53, 300, 314, 


393, 406, 548, 570, 597. 


Spatula clypeata, 51, 64, 242, 307, 


369. 


Speotyto cunicularia hypogaea, 67. 


Spheniscus humboldti, 161. 


Sphenocercus pseudo-crocopus, 332. 


Sphyrapicus thyroideus, 67, 399. 
varius nuchalis, 67. 
v. varius, 52, 306, 546. 
Spilornis cheela ricketti, 328. 
kinabaluensis, 328. 
palawanensis, 328. 
Spinus, 285. 
pinus, 71, 254, 307, 405, 548. 
Spizaetus africanus, 321. 
batesi, 321. 
napalensis fokiensis, 328. 
Spiza americana, 601. 
Spizella arborea, 175, 281. 
a. ochracea, 281. 
brewer, 72, 406. 
monticola, 281, 548. 
m. monticola, 467. 
m. ochracea, 71. 
passerina, 53. 
p. arizonae, 72, 406. 
p- passerina, 548, 570. 
pallida, 72, 300, 601. 
pusilla arenacea, 53. 
p. pusilla, 570. 
Spizitornis, 453. 
Spoonbill, Roseate, 568. 


Squatarola squatarola, 1438, 279, 


536, 569. 
s. cynosurae, 279. 
Stachyris nigriceps dilutus, 170. 


Stactocichla merulina anamensis, 


170. 


Starling, 135, 298, 598. 

Steganopus tricolor, 396. 

Stelgidopteryx serripennis, 73, 408, 
436, 571. 

Stephenson, Mrs. Jesse, the Even- 
ing Grosbeak in Monte Vista, 
Colo., 299. 

Sterna anaetheta recognita, 277. 

antillarum, 567. 
caspia, 307, 446. 
dougalli, 579. 
fluviatilis, 479. 
forsteri, 63. 
fuscata, 277. 
hirundo, 307. 
maxima, 567. 
tschegrava, 446. 

Sternidae, 276. 

Stipiturus malachurus halmaturina, 
490. 

Stilt, Black-necked, 396. 

Stone, Clarence F., some rare birds 
for Yates Co., N. Y., 466. 

Stone, H. F., Purple Gallinule in 
North Carolina, 130. 

Stone, Witmer, supplementary note 
on J. P. Giraud, 146; age attained 
by the Hyacinth Macaw, 293; 
the Wheatear (Oenanthe oenanthe 
leucorhoa) in eastern Pennsyl- 
vania, 303; Merrem’s ‘ Beytrage,’ 
468; notice of his ‘Ornithology 
of the Princeton Patagonian Ex- 
pedition,’ 480; on A. O. U. lunch- 
eons, 498; popular nomenclature, 
503-505; the Louisiana Heron 
(Hydranassa tricolor ruficollis) at 
Cape May, N. J., 580; the Mar- 
bled Godwit (Limosa fedoa) on 
the New Jersey coast, 580; the 
Yellow-throated Warbler (Den- 
droica dominica dominica) at 
Cape May, N. J., 591. 

Stoner, Dayton, American Golden- 
eye and White-crowned Sparrow 


672 


in northern Michigan in summer, 
135-136; unusual winter bird rec- 
ords for Iowa City, Iowa, 308— 
309. 
Stoparola melanops, 335. 
thalassina, 335. 

Stresemann, Erwin, notice of his 
papers on Aegithalos and Bull- 
finches, 166; review of his ‘Avi- 
fauna Macedonieca,’ 611. 

Stuart, George H., 3rd, nesting of 
the Greater Yellow-legs in New- 
foundland, 292; nesting of the 
Little Black Rail in Atlantic 
County, N. J., 292. 

Sturnella magna magna, 485, 570. 

neglecta, 52, 70, 405. 

Sturnus vulgaris, 135, 298, 598. 

Suaheliornis, 493. 

Sula bassana, 431. 

cyanops, 441. 
dactylatra, 441. 
longipennis, 337. 
sula, 337. 
variegata, 161. 

Sulman, P. L., see Rowan, W. 

Sumatra, birds of, 153. 

Surnia ulula caparoch, 132. 

Surniculus stewarti, 531. 

Swales, Bradshaw H., Hooded War- 
bler (Wilsonia citrina) at Detroit, 
Michigan, 463. 

Swallow, Bank, 73. 

Barn, 73, 163, 407, 571, 597. 
Cliff, 73, 143, 254, 407. 
Northern Violet-green, 73, 407. 
Rough-winged, 73, 408, 436, 


Vale 
Tree, 261, 305, 597, 598, 548, 
571. 
Swan, Trumpeter, 127. 
Whistling, 127, 289, 482, 
467. 


Swann, H. Kirke, review of his ‘A 
Synoptical List of the Accipitres,’ 


Index. 


ees 
Oct. 


154, 321, 475; see also Mullens, 
W. H. 

Swarth, Harry S., races of Branta 
canadensis, 268-272; birds of the 
Papago Saguaro National Monu- 
ment, Arizona, 640. 

Swift, Chimney, 48, 132, 570. 

White-throated, 68, 294, 400. 

Swiss Society for the Study of 
Birds, note on, 641. 

Sylvietta carnapi dilutior, 332. 
isabellina macrorhyncha, 488. 
neumanni, 631. 

Synallaxis stictothorax piurae, 315. 


TACHYCINETA thalassina lepida, 73, 
407. 

Tachyphonus metallicus, 335. 

rufiventris, 335. 

Tachytriorchis, 280. 

albicaudatus sennetti, 280. 
Tanager, Scarlet, 148, 436, 458, 548, 
571, 597. 
Summer, 597, 571. 
Western, 73, 301, 407. 
Tanagra ehrenreichi, 331. 
coelestis, 331. 

Tangara cyanicollis gularis, 165. 
lutleyi, 628. 
violacea rodwayl, 320. 

Tanysiptera nigriceps leucura, 332. 

Tattler, Polynesian, 250. 

Taverner, P. A., review of his 
‘Birds of Eastern Canada,’ 147- 
149; obituary notice of James M. 
Macoun, 346. 

Taylor, Warner, some sparrow notes 
from Madison, Wisconsin, 299. 

Teal, Andaman, 561. 

Blue-winged, 64, 126, 241, 369. 

Cinnamon, 242. 

European, 252. 

Faleated, 250. 

Green-winged, 51, 64, 241, 259, 
307, 311, 369. 

Southern, 558. 


Vol. on 
1920 


Teal, plumage patterns of, 558-564. 
Telmatodytes palustris palustris, 
306. 

p. plesius, 76, 411. 
Tephrodornis pelvica, 633. 

p. annectens, 153. 

Tern, Black, 64, 238. 
Caspian, 260, 307. 
Common, 259, 260, 304, 307, 
479, 596. 

Forster’s, 63, 260. 

Least, 567. 

Roseate, 579. 

Royal, 259, 260, 567. 

Texas, birds of, 49-55. 
Thalasoaetus pelagicus, 250, 280. 
Thalasseus, 440. 

Thalassidroma, 441. 
Thamnophilus leachi, 177. 

viridis, 177. 

Thrasher, Brown, 76, 488, 555, 571. 

Curve-billed, 54. 

Sage, 75, 410. 
Threskiornithidqe, 441. 
Thripobrotus layardi madeirae, 315. 

warscewiczi bolivianus, 315. 
Thrush, Alaskan Hermit, 77. 

Audubon’s Hermit, 77. 

Bicknell’s, 591. 

Gray-cheeked, 156, 254. 

Hermit, 48, 55, 138, 393, 551, 

598. 

Russet-backed, 465. 

Olive-backed, 77, 306, 597, 551. 

Willow, 77. 

Wood, 48, 258, 572. 
Thryomanes, 487. 

albinuchus, 487. 

bewicki ariboreus, 487. 

b. catalinae, 487. 

b. eryptus, 54. 

Thryospiza mirabilis, 281. 

Thryothorus ludovicianus ludovici- 
anus, 54, 144, 488, 571. 

Tinnunculus rupicolus rhodesi, 624. 


Index. 


673 


Titmouse, Plain, 594. 
Sennett’s, 54. 
Tufted, 572. 
Todd, W. E. C., a revision of the 
genus Eupsychortyx, 189-220. 
Todirostrum beckeri, 108. 
sylvia griseolum, 108. 
schistaceiceps, 108. 
Todopsis kowaldi, 624. 
‘Tori,’ reviewed, 490. 
Totanus flavipes, 64, 148, 530, 540, 
453. 
melanoleucus, 64, 
543. 
totanus, 432. 
Towhee, 309, 383, 570. 
Arctic, 54, 72. 
Spurred, 72, 406. 
Green-tailed, 73, 407. 
Townsend, Charles H., and Wet- 
more, Alexander, review of their 
‘Birds of the Albatross Expedi- 
tion, 1899-1900,’ 159-160. 
Townsend, Charles W., courtship 
in birds, 380-393; the Willet in 
Nova Scotia, 582; review of his 
‘Supplement to Birds of Essex 
County, Massachusetts,’ 606. 
Toxostoma crissale, 303. 
curvirostre curvirostre, 54. 
dorsalis, 303. 
redivivum pasadenense, 285. 
r. redivivum, 285. 
rufum, 76, 438, 571. 
Tringa, 448. 
ealidris, 452. 
canutus, 337, 451, 406, 525. 
ocrophus, 448, 447. 
ocropus, 447. 
solitaria cinnamomea, 443. 
s. solitaria, 443. 
Tringinae, 443. 
Trochalopteron yersini, 170. 
Trochilus cuvier, 295. 


292, 529, 


674 


Troglodytes aedon aedon, 550, 571. 
ae. parkmani, 76, 411. 
musculus bonariae, 630. 

Turdinulus epilepidotus clarus, 170. 

Turdus aureus angustirostris, 332. 
auritus, 630. 
citrinus courtoisi, 329. 
iliacus, 449. 
mupinensis, 630. 
musicus, 449. 
sordidus, 335. 

Turkey, Merriam’s, 397. 

Wild, 557, 568. 

Turnstone, Ruddy, 148, 538. 

Turtur turtur hoggara, 332. 

Tyler, Winsor M., the Cowbird’s 

whistle, 584. 
Tympanuchus cupido, 335. 
Tyrannus tyrannus, 68, 144, 310, 
435, 546, 570. 
verticalis, 68, 142. 
vociferus, 400. 
Tyto, 444. 


U. 8. Biological Survey, notice of 
annual report of, 167; notice of 
its migration work, 185; assump- 
tion of bird banding work, 512. 

Upucerthia dabbenei, 165. 

dumetoria hallinani, 165. 

Uria ringvia, 275. 

Urubitornis solitarius, 154. 


Van Creave, H. J., review of his 
‘Acanthocephala of the Canadian 
Arctic Expedition,’ 618. 

Van Oort, E. D., notice of his 
‘Birds of Holland,’ 147, 320. 

Vavasouria, 489. 

Veery, 48. 

Veniliornus kirkii, monticola, 629. 

Vermivora bachmani, 103. 

celata celata, 54, 74, 137, 409. 
c. lutescens, 74, 310. 
chrysoptera, 141. 

peregrina, 437, 549. 


Index. 


Oct. 


Vermivora pinus, 141, 142, 462. 
leucobronchialis, 141. 
rubricapilla, 445. 

r. rubricapilla, 142, 437. 
ruficapilla, 445, 592. 

r. ruficapilla, 445. 

r. gutturalis, 445. 
virginiae, 74, 408. 

Vermont, birds of, 412-422. 

Vetola, 285. 

Vibrissosylvia, 493. 

Victoria Museum, Ottawa, bird col- 

lection of, 186. 
Vireo, Blue-headed, 386, 387, 549, 

571. 

Philadelphia, 437. 

Plumbeous, 74, 408. 

Red-eyed, 74, 258, 549, 555, 
va 

Western Warbling, 74, 408. 

White-eyed, 571. 

Vireo griseus griseus, 571. 
Vireosylva gilva swainsoni, 74, 408. 
olivacea, 74, 258, 549, 571. 

philadelphica, 437. 

Virginia, birds of, 456, 579. 

Vulture, Black, 51, 260. 

Turkey, 51, 56, 397, 544, 557, 
569. 


Wa.uace, J. H., notice of his ‘ Ala- 
bama Bird-day Book,’ 482. 
Warbler, Audubon’s, 75, 85, 409. 
Bachman’s, 108, 574. 
Bay-breasted, 143, 437, 576. 
Black and White, 142, 258, 261. 
Black-poll, 438, 576, 591, 597. 
Black-throated Blue, 93, 142, 
261, 549, 592, 598. 
Black-throated Green, 47, 142, 
576, 598. 
Blackburnian, 142, 438, 550, 
553, 576, 592. 
Blue-winged, 141, 142, 
574, 597. 


462, 


nol Zo alae Index. 675 


Warbler, Brewster’s, 14, 155, 597. Warbler Yellow-throated, 258, 302, 


Cairns’s, 93. 

Canada, 48, 75, 1387, 488, 553, 
593, 597. 

Cape May, 258, 437, 576. 

Calaveras, 574. 

Cerulean, 4387, 576, 598. 

Chestnut-sided, 48, 549, 554, 
577. 

Connecticut, 339, 575. 

Dusky, 574. 

Grace’s, 409. 

Golden-winged, 141, 554, 574. 

Hooded, 142, 463, 557, 590. 

Kentucky, 93, 575, 590. 

Kirtland’s, 577. 

Lawrence’s, 155. 

Lucy’s, 574. 

Lutescent, 74, 310, 574. 

MacGillivray’s, 75, 575. 

Magnolia, 142, 487, 549, 553, 

576. 

Mourning, 137, 550, 575. 

Myrtle, 47, 54, 74, 258, 261, 

386, 437, 549, 571, 576, 597. 

Nashville, 142, 487, 574, 592, 

597. 

Northern Parula, 42, 462, 598. 

Orange-crowned, 54, 74, 131, 
574. 

Parula, 47, 187, 258, 261, 313, 
409. 

Pileolated, 75, 410. 

Pine, 258, 488, 550, 557, 571, 
Die 

Prairie, 141, 258, 601, 571, 557, 
BYU 

Prothonotary, 144, 261, 590. 

Swainson’s, 589. 

Tennessee, 305, 437, 549, 574. 

Townsend’s, 75. 

Virginia’s, 74, 408, 574. 

Worm-eating, 557. 

Wilson’s, 438. 


571, 577, 590. 
Yellow Palm, 258, 576. 
Yellow, 74, 409, 554, 571, 576, 
577, 597, 598. 
Warsanglia, 328. 
johannis, 328. 
Washington, birds of, 459-460. 
Water-Thrush, 137, 554, 592. 
Grinnell’s, 75, 93, 408, 550. 
Louisiana, 93, 302, 590. 
Northern, 137. 

Watson, J. D., Lewis, G. P., and 
Leopold, N. F., Jr., notice of 
their ‘Spring Migration Notes of 
the Chicago Area,’ 616. 

Waxwing, Bohemian, 73, 136, 137, 

301, 458, 460, 461, 600. 
Cedar, 54, 549. 

Wayne, Arthur T., notes on seven 
birds taken near Charleston, S. 
Carolina, 92-94; the Louisiana 
Water-Thrush breeding at Gran- 
iteville, Aiken County, South 
Carolina, 302; the Blue-winged 
Warbler (Vermivora pinus) on 
the coast of South Carolina, 462; 
the Russet-backed Thrush taken 
near Charleston, 8. C., 465; 

Wellman, Gordon Boit, dance of 
the Purple Finch, 584. 

West Virginia, birds of, 457. 

Wetmore, Alexander, observations 
on the habits of birds at Lake 
Burford, New Mexico, 221-247, 
393-412; intestinal cacea in the 
Anhinga, 286; the Knot in Mon- 
tana, 451; the Newfoundland 
Crossbill in the Washington re- 
gion, 456; an erroneous Kansas 
record for Baird’s Sparrow, 457; 
personal mention, 517; see also 
Townsend, C. H. 

Wheatear, 33. 


676 


Whip-poor-will, 293, 546, 554, 570. 

Whistler, see Golden-eye. 

White, F. B., memorial of the 
Nuttall Ornithological on the 
death of William Brewster, 27- 
28. 

White, Gilbert, memorial to, 641. 

Widgeon, European, 288. 

Willet, 581, 582, 534, 568. 

Western, 65, 396. 

Williams, John, the Black Rail at 
St. Marks, Florida, 128-130; 
notes from St. Marks, Florida, 
142-148. 

Wilson, Alexander, 174. 

‘Wilson Bulletin,’ reviewed, 169, 
487. 

Wilson Ornithological Club, annual 
meeting of, 352. 

Wilsonavis richmondi 
609. 

Wilsonia canadensis, 75, 43 
citrina, 142, 463. 
pusilla pileolata, 75, 410. 

p. pusilla, 488. 

Wisconsin, birds of, 143-144, 299, 
367-371. 

Witherby, H. F., review of his 
‘Handbook of British Birds,’ 151- 
152, 316, 472. 

Wolf, E., see Rowan, W. 

Wood, Casey A., review of his 
“The Eyes of the Burrowing Owl,’ 
612. 

Woodcock, 392. 

Woodpecker, Ant-eating, 52. 

Arctic Three-toed, 545. 
Batchelder’s, 67. 

Downy, 67, 556, 569. 
Golden-fronted, 52. 

Hairy, 399, 545, 556. 
Lewis’s, 68. 

Northern Pileated, 546, 598. 
Pileated, 132. 

Red-bellied, 143, 569. 


gouldiana, 


7) 


Index. 


lose 
Oct. 


Woodpecker, Red-cockaded, 569. 
Red-headed, 67, 556. 
Rocky-Mountain Hairy, 67. 
Southern Downy, 569. 

Texas, 52. 

Wren, Alaska, 486. 

Bewick’s, 309, 555. 

Canon, 76, 410. 

Carolina, 54, 144, 488, 571. 
House, 314, 550, 555, 571. 
Long-billed, 308. 

Rock, 54, 76, 410. 

Texas, 54. 

Western House, 76, 411. 
Western Marsh, 76, 411. 
Winter, 550, 597. 

Wright, A. H., the Yellow-throated 
Warbler in central New York, 
302. 

Wright, Horace W., Hermit 
Thrush’s nest in unusual loca- 
tion, 138; Bittern displaying its 
white nuptial plumes, 450; Blue- 
gray Gnatcatcher in the Boston 
Public Garden, 464; obituary no- 
tice of, 509. 


XANTHISCUS flavescens  sordidus, 
170. 

Xanthocephalus  xanthocephalus, 
69, 403, 601. 


Xema sabini, 268, 311. 

Xenops rutilus connectens, 315. 

Xiphorhynchus triangularis bangsi, 
315. 


YELLOWLEGS, 64, 143, 260, 530, 
540, 543. 
Lesser, see Yellow-legs. 
Greater, 64, 260, 292, 529, 543, 
vals 
Yellow-throat, Maryland, 258, 390, 
550, 575 597,. 
Western, 75, 410, 575. 


= 


Florida, 575. 


Vol eel 
1920 


Yellow-throat, Pacific, 575. 
Salt Marsh, 575. 
San Blas, 575. 
Jalapa, 575. 


ZAMELODIA ludoviciana, 436, 548. 
melanocephala, 73, 407. 
m. capitalis, 282. 
m. melanocephala, 282. 


Index. 


677 


Zenaidura m. marginella, 65, 397. 
Zonotrichia albicollis, 53, 300, 406, 
548. 
leucophrys, 299, 406. 
l. gambeli, 71, 299. 
1. leucophrys, 53, 71, 136. 
querula, 53, 71, 135. 
Zosterops bayeri, 496. 
difficilis, 153. 


Zenaidura macroura carolinensis, 
HL; 


ERRATA. 
Page xii, line 33, for VAN OrT read VAN OortT. 
s xl, ‘“ 16, for Lutry read Lutiey. 
“21, “ 5, for McCurop read McLeop. 
«21, “ 7, for FRAzER read FRAzAR. 
“27, “ 13 from bottom, for E. B. Wu1ts read F. B. WuH!Ts. 
“175, “ 10, for June read April. 
“351, “ 3 from bottom, for *Public Library read *H. H. Bailey. 
“471, “ 16 from bottom, for 1865 read 1857. 
‘492, “ 11, for use of and read use of > and <. 
“505, “ 15, for what read that. 
“508, “ 10, for 1895 read 1894. 
“508, “ 12, for 1912 read 1910. 
515, “ 19 from bottom, for Australian read Australasian. 


DATES OF PUBLICATION. 

Vol. XXXVI, No 
“ XXXVII, No 
XXXVII, No 
XXXVII, No 


. 4—October 31, 1919. 
. 1—January 20, 1920. 
. 2—April 15, 1920. 

. 3—July 14, 1920. 


“ce 


cc 


THE AUK 


A Quarterly Journal of Ornithology 
ORGAN OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION 
Edited by Dr. Witmer Stone 


ACADEMY OF NATURAL ScIENCES, LOGAN SQUARE, 
PHILADELPHIA, Pa, 


To whom all articles and communications intended for publi- 
cation and all books and publications for review should be sent. 

Manuscripts for leading articles must await their turn for publi- 
cation if others are already on file, but they must be in the editor’s 
hands at least six weeks before the date of issue of the number for 
which they are intended, and manuscripts for ‘General Notes,’ 
‘Recent Literature,’ etc., not later than the first of the month 
preceding the date of issue of the number in which it is desired 
they shall appear. 

Twenty-five copies of leading articles are furnished to authors 
free of charge. Additional copies or reprints from ‘General Notes,’ 
‘Correspondence,’ etc., must be ordered from the editor. 

THE OFFICE OF PUBLICATION 
8 West Kine STREET, LANCASTER, Pa. 

Subscriptions may also be sent to Dr. JonaTHAN Dwicut, 
Business Manager, 43 West 70th St., New York, N. Y. Foreign 
Subscribers may secure “The Auk’ through Witherby & Co., 326 
High Holborn, London, W. C. 

Subscription, $3.00 a year. Single numbers, 75 cents. 

Free to Honorary Fellows, and to Fellows, Members, and Asso- 
ciates of the A. O. U., not in arrears for dues. 


OFFICERS OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION 
President, JoHN Haut Sace, Portland, Conn. 


Vice-Presidents, WITMER STONE, Academy of Natural Sciences, 
Philadelphia. GrorcE Birp GRINNELL, 238 E. 15th St., New 
York. 


Secretary, T. S. PatmMer, 1939 Biltmore St., Washington, D. C. 
Treasurer, JONATHAN Dwiaut, 43 W. 70th St., New York. 


“SEPARATES FOR SALE 


In order to meet a general demand for separates of the leading 
articles published in ‘The Auk’ arrangements have been made to 
furnish copies of any leading article published in the present issue 
and following issues, at 25 cents each, post paid. 


Orders for these separates should be addressed to the editor: 
DR. WITMER STONE, 


ACADEMY OF NATURAL SCIENCES, 
LOGAN SQUARE, PHILADELPHIA, PA. 


MEETINGS 


OF THE 


American Ornithologists’ Union 


Since its organization in 1883 the American Ornithologists’ Union has 
held one special and 36 annual meetings. 

The number of Fellows (known as Active Members prior to 1902) has 
always been limited to 50 and the number present at any meeting has 
varied from 7 to 28. The attendance of other classes of members in 
recent years averages over 100. 


ton, D.-C., 


1883, Sept. 26-28 


1884, Sept. 30—Oct. 2 


1885, Nov. 17-18 
1886, Nov. 16-18 
1887, Oct. 11-13 
1888, Nov. 13-15 
1889, Nov. 12-15 
1890, Nov. 18-20 
1891, Nov. 17-19 
1892, Nov. 15-17 
1893, Nov. 20-23 
1894, Nov. 12-15 
1895, Nov. 11-14 
1896, Nov. 9-12 

1897, Nov. 8-11 

1898, Nov. 14-17 
1899, Nov. 13-16 
1900, Nov. 12-15 
1901, Nov. 11-14 
1902, Nov. 17-20 
1903, May 15-16 
1903, Nov. 16-19 


1904, Nov. 28—Dee. 1 


1905, Nov. 13-16 
1906, Nov. 12-15- 
1907, Dee. 9-12 
1908, Nov. 16-19 
1909, Dec. 6-9 
1910, Nov. 14-17 
1911, Nov. 138-16 
1912, Nov. 11-14 
1913, Nov. 10-13 
1914, Apr. 6-9 
1915, May 17-20 
1916, Nov. 13-16 
1917, Nov. 12-15 
1918, Nov. 11 
1919, Nov. 10-13 


Ist New York 
2d New York 
3d New York 
1st Washington 
1st Boston 
2d Washington 
4th New York 
3d Washington 
5th New York 
4th Washington 
2d Cambridge 
6th New York 
5th Washington 
3d Cambridge 
7th New York 
6th Washington 
1st Philadelphia 
4th Cambridge 
8th New York 
7th Washington 
Ist San Francisco 
2d Philadelphia 
5th Cambridge 
9th New York 
8th Washington 
3d Philadelphia 
6th Cambridge 
10th New York 
9th Washington 
4th Philadelphia 
7th Cambridge 
11th New York 
10th Washington 
2d San Francisco 
5th Philadelphia 
Sth Cambridge 
12th New York 
13th New York 


Total 
Fellows} Mem- 
Present} bership 


753 


775 
808 
860 
750 
850 
888 
866 
897 
887 
929 
992 
1101 
1156 
830 
891 
953 
1024 


The next regular meeting—the 38th Stated—will be held at Washing- 
November 8-11, 1920. 


ri £8 


aren 
VE ae Me 
i oe \ 
, ie 


a 


iy 


pr Phi, PO Ramen LiL ST TTTATTTT RENE Fre Wainy, te 
he , fag pores Sere yey aS eA Re! 4 


a . 


aus’ “NeAL 
“a nea? 00 Ry 


= ne . ne 

sme, = 7 $ ‘se ma ye f tm fi am, ze, : 

laa TY Bla rrr tt HY DORRTRRLORas lesa. 

he {WAT on hae nS i 3 ge a ees | 2 Baa a98 ol | 

Lb *v ) AeRARER 77 WARA jamane aa, Pa! | pets, 
_ aballul a aenice Suenos 


‘ eee es 


2US & 


SS ee ® 
Meecha cron Hill besos Coa 
aes Bin! || Aa Te a ‘ ae x 2 é 


RAL mama 


~~ 
al 


t al mi ~ ne ASR aw Sha 
ane : ] RRRAR ARS R | eel 7) SpA ~ me ell 4 
alee? ee ~~ ~<a 
wy ores Pe - salt wpa So ol. ON as, Agi 
Be Pettitt yy - a4 


2 gee CS ian iy al PS mee aa akaaen ei 
| & A a: ry « +i itt TI 
. e. $ / ae ee aes ‘AN ay 


Sees 
ape a Meee eo 
“ 


\ sa ; I 


arf AAR « xX > 


: | BeRpo > SAUL A, 
a 1 eae mt A, | Tr 
pe LL HITED 501 iitoone tna ha 7 
fe 1 ~ : A! 4 
| $2 Baars, anh et M2 Ty de Deepa po Fi : a Aw 
s ee ‘ i 


LN = i > ~ 
se BSPAAR\ 2 ae ten 


~ 


he ht SRN mye SOAS oe, ee bee 


eet “2 i oe 
aa ode. ae 


its Ya we \ ree 


sa LILLE 


Pil Pt tek 


yr 
aan 
aa 


a 


QS 


TTT Ty] : 


eel | | RaSh <acanannn nny 
aa ve Raw AR 


aa ‘ 


so ‘ | f ‘ i ; Ahi . 2 ; a tit 

elt LUST) ec Ali, aca. 
oj olor’ 2 nna Ba nf au ef APO ANT ihe » fi BB “NaghaAa, a: 
, | GiGmOReton. a* | OA ‘3 
aay. oY Ore We ogee: sd a BBS oy 


Ebeee 
a am et ora sbi 
a