and observed a Gannet, which passed quite close to the ferry-boat,
winging its way steadily southward toward New York Bay. It is so unusual
and remarkable to find this bird away from the coast as to be worthy of
record.--J. T. NICHOLS, _Englewood, N. J._
Petrels on the Hudson
The preceding note from Mr. Nichols prompts me to add that one afternoon
during the first week in August, 1915 (I failed to record the exact
date), I saw from the Fort Lee (130th Street) Ferry at least a score of
Petrels coursing low over the water and flying down the river. They were
on the east side of the river, from which I had embarked, and as the
boat carried me out of vision, Petrels were still passing. Doubtless
they were Wilson's Petrels which, in their search for food, had gone far
above their usual limits in the lower harbor.--FRANK M. CHAPMAN,
_Englewood, N. J._
Starling in Ohio
On January 8, Walter and Robert Kirk, farmer boys living near here,
captured a Starling which has taken refuge in their barn. I was unable
to identify the bird from their description of it over the telephone,
but when it was brought to me I readily identified it, as I had been
watching its progress west. Needless to say, I was somewhat surprised to
see it here. BIRD-LORE Christmas census for 1914 reports it for West
Chester and White Marsh Valley, Pa.
So far as I know, this is the first record of the Starling for Ohio, and
it may be the first west of the Alleghany Mountains. This seems a long
'jump' westward for any bird in so short a time, especially considering
the mountains it would have to cross.
I have no doubt as to the identity of the bird, but have taken
photographs in case of any question.--SHERIDAN F. WOOD, _West La
Fayette, Ohio_.
Evening Grosbeaks and Cardinals in Southern Wisconsin
About noon on January 22, 1916, as I was returning from a walk in South
Park, a flutter of wings, accompanied by soft whistles and twitters,
caught my attention and, to my surprise and joy, I counted a flock of
nineteen Evening Grosbeaks in the small maple and elm trees bordering
the sidewalk.
The bright sunshine falling on their plumage gave them an extremely
beautiful and gay-colored appearance. The birds seemed to be nearly all
males. They were quite tame, and I was able to approach close under the
trees before they took to their wings, finally disappearing in a
northeasterly direction. Two years ago, on one of the coldest days of
the winter, a flock of about fifty visited Reedsburg and were observed
by a number of our bird-lovers.
I cannot resist giving a brief account of the pair of beautiful
Cardinals that have been staying in Reedsburg for the past two weeks.
Although I did not have the good fortune to observe these rare visitors,
yet their identity was made certain by the authoritative testimony of a
number of bird-lovers who had ample opportunity to watch them closely
from a curtained window, which looked out on the apple-tree and
feeding-station only a few feet from the house; so there was no chance
of an error in their identification. They were first seen on January 5,
in the midst of a driving blizzard, with the mercury dropping to 25 deg.
below zero. The pair remained in the vicinity of the grain-strewn
feeding-station for about half an hour, and have been seen a great many
times since, by a large number of people.--ETHEL A. NOTT, _Reedsburg,
Wisconsin_.
Evening Grosbeaks at Port Henry, N. Y.
On December 17, 1915, I saw a pair of Evening Grosbeaks.
On January 28, 1916, out over an open spot of water in Lake Champlain, I
saw three Canada Geese and the men working near there told me they had
been around there all the morning.
On January 7, 1916, I saw a large flock of Evening Grosbeaks.
The last two weeks I have seen many Crows as many as four in one
flock.--DORA B. HARRIS, _Port Henry, N. Y._
The Evening Grosbeak at Glens Falls, N. Y.
The Bird Club of Glens Falls reports that on January 25, 1916, Miss
Shields saw on one of our streets, seven Evening Grosbeaks, four males
and three females.--C. EVELEEN HATHAWAY, _Secretary, Glens Falls, N. Y._
Evening Grosbeaks at Saratoga Springs, N. Y.
It gives me much pleasure to report to you that on Sunday morning,
January 30, 1916, there was a flock of Evening Grosbeaks feeding in the
open woodland across the street. When first seen, about twenty of the
birds were sitting quietly on the upper branches of a leafless maple,
the balance feeding on exposed ground between snowdrifts under the
trees. There were thirty-seven birds in the flock, of which one-fourth
to one-third were males in the brilliant yellow, white, and brownish
black plumage. They were talking to each other softly, and the low
beaded call was frequent; but I did not hear the males whistle as they
used to in Wisconsin.
I called the attention of Miss Adelaide Denton (the local authority on
bird-life) to the flock, and we watched them for quite some time, before
they rose, took wing, and wheeling, flew to the north, and disappeared.
Miss Denton had never seen Evening Grosbeaks in this territory before,
although she tells me Pine Grosbeaks are fairly common winter visitors.
I have re-opened this letter to add that part of the flock have returned
to this locality. Twenty-five of the Grosbeaks now being in the maples
across the way.
Perhaps I should add that I am quite familiar with the Evening
Grosbeaks, having observed them every winter from 1900 to 1908-9
inclusive, feeding in the box elder trees in Eau Claire,
Wisconsin.--JACOLYN MANNING, M. D., _Saratoga Springs, N. Y._
The Evening Grosbeak at Boston
Any record of the Evening Grosbeak on the Atlantic coast is so very rare
that it may interest the readers of BIRD-LORE to hear of a visit made to
us by one on December 16, 1915.
Our bird was found in the Boston Parkway, close to the city blocks,
flying about, at times rather wildly, at others, feeding tamely on the
ground among the English Sparrows.
By its plumage, of which we give herewith a brief sketch, we judge it to
have been a female or young bird. Head, rather dark gray; nape,
yellowish green; back, pale brownish green; wings, black, interspersed
with large areas of white; tail, black, with broad, white tip; chin and
throat, gray; rest of under-parts pale yellowish or greenish brown;
legs, pink; bill, whitish, or pale horn-color.
When at rest, the bird gave the effect of a huge winter Goldfinch; in
flight, its largely white wings strongly suggested a Snow Bunting.
We heard it utter two distinctly different notes; the first a rather
loud and insistent monosyllable--perhaps nearer _peep_ than any
other--and the second, a peculiar little trilling call, not unlike
certain notes of the Semipalmated Sandpiper.
Both as to plumage and notes, this species is very strikingly different
from any other Grosbeak, of any age and either sex, in this part of the
world. Its whitish beak, the yellowish green tone of its plumage, the
absence of streaks, and the presence of such large areas of white in its
wings and tail--not to mention the notes described above--all serve
easily to distinguish this bird even from the female and young of the
Pine Grosbeak, which, of all our species, most nearly resembles it.
Such other observations of this species as are made, this winter, thus
far east, we hope to see recorded in BIRD-LORE.--E. G. and R. E.
ROBBINS, _Brookline, Mass._
Evening Grosbeaks at Poughkeepsie
On the afternoon of February 17, 1916, I observed seven Evening
Grosbeaks feeding on locust seeds at our farm just outside of
Poughkeepsie. They returned on the morning of the 20th, when they were
also seen by Mr. Allen Frost, Prof. Saunders and Prof. Ellen Freeman,
both of Vassar College, and Miss S. Dean, a student, who confirmed my
identification. As I believe this is a record for Dutchess County, it
seems worth reporting.--GEORGE W. GRAY, _Greenvale, Poughkeepsie, N. Y._
Evening Grosbeaks in Lexington, Mass.
Although Evening Grosbeaks may very probably have visited Lexington
during the flights of 1880-1890 and 1910-1911, there was no satisfactory
record of the bird for the town until Mr. Francis S. Dane saw a bird
near his house on December 31, 1915. This bird proved to be a member of
a flock of eleven Grosbeaks, all in the plumage of the female. For a
week or ten days this company remained in the vicinity of where the
first bird was seen, the number of individuals varying somewhat; the
maximum being eleven. Two fruited box elder trees were the attraction to
the locality. So regular were their visits to these trees that observers
could rely almost with certainty on finding the birds in one or the
other of the trees (they were some two hundred yards apart) at eleven
o'clock in the morning.
At all times, the Grosbeaks showed the fearlessness of man so
characteristic of Pine Grosbeaks and the Crossbills, but their tameness
was especially noticeable when the flock was busily feeding. The birds
then appeared to disregard the presence of a party of observers; we
could approach them closely, and see very satisfactorily their method of
extracting the seeds.
The seeds of the box elder grow in pairs on a single stem, each seed
having a wing. In the winter, however, the seed in its covering with the
attached wing, having broken away from the stem, hangs from it only by a
thread. It is an easy matter, therefore, for the Grosbeak to break off a
single seed. Having detached it from the stem (to do this the bird
merely leans downward and pulls off the husk and its wing), the Grosbeak
cuts through the husk as far as the kernel and allows the wing to drop
to the ground; this it does with a fluttering motion suggestive of a
small moth. The remainder, the whole kernel and perhaps two-thirds of
the husk, the Grosbeak mumbles in his bill, and in an incredibly short
time discards from the sides of his beak the more or less macerated
remains of the husk. Some of these particles fall to the ground, some
cling for a time to the beak. The bird swallows the kernel. Upon
examining the wings which the birds had clipped off, it was apparent
that the birds had bitten directly over the kernel itself at a point
rather nearer the wing than the center of the kernel. But, although by
this incision the kernel was exposed, it was never severed and allowed
to fall with the wing, as would have been the case had the beak been
closed and the bite completed. The cutting process was always arrested
at the point after the casing had been divided, but before the meat has
been severed. All this, although the process involved the nicest
precision, was accomplished with great rapidity,--the wing fluttering to
the ground within a second or two after the fruit was plucked from the
stem.
The big birds are curiously inconspicuous when feeding in a box elder
tree; their color harmonizes very closely with the dull grayish brown of
the faded wings of the fruit, and, as the birds are for the most part
silent, a feeding flock might easily be passed unnoticed. In spite of
their quiet manner, however, the Grosbeaks are ever on the alert, as was
shown when a large bird flew near them. They whirled away, panic
stricken, giving their loud 'kerp' call.
On January 8, the flock of eleven female birds was replaced by a flock
of eight Grosbeaks, two males and six females. These latter were all
distinctly grayer than any of the individuals of the first flock, whose
plumage was washed strongly with yellow. This second flock has remained
to the present time, February 19, feeding first upon the box elder seeds
until the two trees were practically stripped of fruit, then visiting a
Japanese crab-apple tree loaded with minute apples, from which the birds
obtained the seeds by munching off the pulp and discarding it. The flock
has suffered the loss of two female birds (they were probably caught by
a cat); otherwise the company has remained intact for six weeks. As in
the case of the original flock, these birds fed early in the morning,
again at about 11 A. M., and were rarely seen in the afternoon. On one
occasion, they left the feeding-ground by mounting high in the air and
taking a long, direct flight to the westward. Besides the box elder and
crab-apple seeds, the birds have eaten wild-cherry pits, poison-ivy
berries, and gray-birch seeds.
Evening Grosbeaks have been seen this season at several points in
eastern Massachusetts. Mrs. Lidian E. Bridge kindly sent me a report of
a flock which visited her place in West Medford, four birds on February
8 and 9. These birds fed upon the berries of the honeysuckle, mountain
ash, and red cedar.
The large number of observers who came from a radius of ten miles to see
these rare Grosbeaks demonstrated how great the interest in birds is at
the present time. For nearly two months, several visitors came every day
at the appointed time, and on Sundays and holidays the number often
reached thirty or more. The total number of persons who saw the birds
must have been hundreds. And each one, thanks to Audubon Societies and
proper education in out-of-doors studies, came armed with a glass
instead of a gun.--WINSOR M. TYLER, M. D., _Lexington, Mass._
Evening Grosbeaks in Vermont
On February 14, 1916, we were visited by a flock of nine Evening
Grosbeaks, which were feeding on the buds of sugar maple in a grove of
these trees near our place.
These birds were quite tame, allowing me to look at them through my
field-glass at a distance of three rods, making identification positive.
I heard their call note and saw three of these birds at a distance on
January 31.
On December 8, one was seen and heard too far away to note its
markings.--L. H. POTTER, _Clarendon, Vermont_.
Evening Grosbeaks in Connecticut
I wish to report a thrilling experience which I had this morning.
At ten o'clock, I glanced from my window, and saw White-breasted
Nuthatches on the bird-shelf, Chickadees, Hairy Woodpeckers, a Brown
Creeper, and Blue Jays, close by on two maples, a flock of English
Sparrows gleaning on the ground, and two strange birds picking up their
breakfast on the outskirts, but a few feet from the window.
The two rare visitors proved to be Evening Grosbeaks. They came toward
me, went away from me, turned about and displayed themselves in every
light, and finally flew to a spruce tree on the other side of the
house, where for about five minutes they gave every opportunity to study
them at close range.
The large white patches on the wings and white tips on the dark tail
feathers were very prominent.
The yellow forehead with black crown, the heavy bill, and the body of a
soft yellow color, black wings and tail, made identification very easy.
I presume these little strangers will be heard from in other parts of
Connecticut.--MARY HAZEN ARNOLD.
[The context shows that this observation was made in Connecticut, but
the observer does not give her address.--ED.]
Martin Problems
I should like those readers of BIRD-LORE who have accurately observed
the habits of the Purple Martin to tell me if my experience of the past
summer is a common one and what it means. For several years I have had a
Martin house of ten rooms, only one room of which has ever been occupied
and that always the west attic. This year (1915) on May 22, after
visiting a short time several times a day for a week, three Martins, one
male and two females, finally located in the house. June 1 the birds
began carrying nesting material into both west and east attic rooms. The
male seemed to work in the west room only, and one day was seen taking
in green cherry leaves from a nearby tree. Only one male bird was ever
seen about the house, so I concluded that this was a polygamous family.
The east room was not easy of observation, so I could not be sure of all
that took place there, but know that it was occupied by a female all
summer and that a nest was built. The male seemed to sleep in the west
room, both birds going in at dusk. When incubation began, the male
occupied one of the south rooms. July 7, a young Martin was found dead
under the house on the west side.
He was very tiny, and could not have been more than a day old at most.
His neck was as thin as a darning needle but his stomach was as large as
a hickory nut, and just as hard. Thinking the bird abnormal, I opened
the stomach only to find everything right, the abdomen being big and
hard because of the great number of bugs and flies it contained. July 16
I went out of the city, so did not see the young leave the house. For
several days previous to this, a baby Martin was constantly at the door,
and I believe there was only one young bird.
My last year's family consisted of only two young birds, but one of
which lived to fly from the house.
Neither eggs nor birds were found in the east room. Now, was this a
polygamous family, or was it one pair of Martins and a non-mating
female? Might it not have been my family of last year? I will appreciate
answers from readers of BIRD-LORE.--(MRS.) MAY S. DANNER, _Canton,
Ohio_.
A Bold Winter Wren
On November 7, 1908, I had been standing for some time motionless,
watching the antics of a Winter Wren which was foraging in a brush-heap
piled against a fence. The Wren was very much occupied and paid no
attention to me, as I stood about ten feet away. I had on a brown suit,
and was certainly not a very conspicuous object. Suddenly the Wren
appeared in a corner of the fence with a long morsel, the larva of some
insect, in his bill. Evidently this a tid-bit which should be eaten
leisurely for enjoyment. At any rate, after peering about he caught a
glimpse of me standing conveniently near. And much to my surprise, with
no hesitation, he flew straight at me and alighted on the side of my
coat. I could feel his movements through the cloth. He clung there
several seconds. But, in my attempt to get a better look at him, I
doubtless moved. For without a sound or show of alarm he flew back to
the fence and finished his morsel. I do not think the Wren implied that
I was a stick, but he certainly believed me to be a tree!--EDWARD J. F.
MARX, _Easton, Pa._
=Book News and Reviews=
A DISTRIBUTIONAL LIST OF THE BIRDS OF CALIFORNIA. By JOSEPH
GRINNELL. Pacific Coast Avifauna No. 11; Contribution from the
Museum of Vertebrate Zooelogy of the University of California.
Published by the Cooper Ornithological Club, Hollywood, California,
October 21, 1915. Roy. 8vo, 217 pages, 3 plates.
Dr. Grinnell admits to this list 541 species and subspecies as
unquestionably Californian and includes in a Hypothetical List 61
additional species whose standing as Californian is doubtful.
"The systematic order is that of the American Ornithologists' Union
_Check-List_ (1910), except that within groups of species or subspecies
a more natural arrangement is sometimes adopted, for example by
according with geographical sequence. The A. O. U. order is thus
accepted here because of the convenience thereby admittedly secured, in
concording with the bulk of current ornithological literature."
(Page 7.)
The distinctive feature of this paper is its brief but clear
introduction on the life-zones and faunal areas of California with its
comments on the factors governing the distribution of life, and on the
relation of faunas to zones. It is illustrated with plates showing both
zonal and faunal divisions and four profiles across the state.
The terms used for the areas here defined are employed through the list
of birds and with the aid of the maps, convey a maximum of information
with a minimum of words.
Full records and references are given for species of rare or accidental
occurrence in the state as a whole, as well as boundary records for
those forms occupying a portion of the state.
It goes without saying that this list is authoritative and aside from
its purely scientific value it should be of much assistance in at least
the provisional identification in life of forms so closely related that
the locality at which they are seen is their best field character.--F.
M. C.
THE DOUBLE CRESTED CORMORANT (_Phalacrocorax auritus_) and its
Relations to the Salmon Industries on the Gulf of St. Lawrence. By
P. A. TAVERNER. Canadian Geological Survey. Mus. Bull. No. 13,
Biol. Ser. No. 5; April 30, 1915. 8vo., 24 pages, 1 plate.
Complaint having been made that Cormorants were damaging the salmon
fisheries of the Gaspe coast, the Geological Survey of Canada despatched
Mr. Taverner with two assistants to study the food-habits of the
Cormorant in the region where the charges against it originated.
It is not without significance that the Cormorant was accused, not by
those who are dependent on fishing for a living, but by anglers who
having rented certain salmon streams apparently feel that they have also
acquired the power to inflict the death penalty on any form of life
which they believe to interfere with their own interests.
Mr. Taverner was in the field from June 21 to August 23, and during this
time he not only secured data which indicated that the charges against
the Cormorant are unfounded but made an interesting contribution to our
knowledge of the life-history of that bird.
There is more in Mr. Taverner's thoughtful, well-written paper than is
indicated by its title. We trust that it will be read by each of the
complaining anglers!--F. M. C.
The Ornithological Magazines
THE CONDOR.--The opening number of Volume XVIII of 'The Condor,' for
January, 1916, is an unusually interesting one. Under the title
'Philadelphia to the Coast in Early Days,' Dr. Witmer Stone, in a paper
read at the meeting of the American Ornithologists' Union in San
Francisco, last May, outlines the development of western ornithology
prior to 1850. Anyone interested in the history of early work in the
West will find here a clear, compact, and convenient resume of the
contributors to ornithology made by the voyages and expeditions of
Captain Cook, La Perouse, Vancouver, Lewis and Clarke, Major Long,
Captain Wyeth and Captain Beechey, and special reference to the birds
collected by Peale, Say, Townsend, Nuttall, Bell and Heermann.
Mrs. Bailey continues her description of 'The Characteristic Birds of
the Dakota Prairies' with a charming account of the water-birds found
along the sloughs and marshes.
Jewett contributes a brief paper on 'New and Interesting Bird Records,'
concerning thirteen species found in eastern Oregon during the spring
and summer of 1915.
One of the first fruits of the recent publication of Grinnell's
'Distributional List of the Birds of California,' appears in Dawson's
seven-page 'Personal Supplement,' which contains notes and critical
comments on sixty-three species. If other observers would publish such
notes as they have with equal detail, it would no doubt result in a
considerable addition to the wealth of information on the distribution
of California birds which Dr. Grinnell has already so successfully
brought together.
The common names applied to several birds come in for criticism in Notes
from Field and Study. Henderson defends the term 'House Finch,' and
condemns the two synonyms by which the bird is often known. The term
'Linnet' he considers not distinctive and 'California Linnet' as
indefensible. Dawson proposes Auburn Canyon Wren as a preferable name
for the Dotted Canyon Wren and Coues' Petrel instead of Ashy Petrel for
the bird which 'simply isn't ashy.'--T. S. P.
THE AUK.--Readers of the January issue will find therein a good deal
about bird song as it is viewed from different angles by several
contributors. Mr. H. Oldys discusses the 'Rhythmical Singing of Veeries'
from a musician's standpoint, and Mr. A. A. Saunders, in a letter at
page 103, upholds the scientist's belief in the use of a graphic method
while, casually, in no less than three other articles, the writers make
use of conventional human syllables in an effort to express bird-notes.
After all, a person must hear a bird-song to know anything about it, and
the crudest symbols, musical notes or words that he may employ to awaken
his memory of the song mean more to him than any system that has yet
been invented. It is his notation alone that will arouse his memory, for
the science of musical sounds cannot go far in explaining what his ear
has never heard. Mr. H. J. Fry offers 'A Study of the Seasonal Decline
of Bird Song,' painstaking so far as it goes, but limited to a single
season.