Both as to plumage and notes, this species is very strikingly different from any other Grosbeak, of any age and either s.e.x, 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, Ma.s.s._
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 Va.s.sar 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, Ma.s.s.
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 pa.s.sed 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 j.a.panese 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 Ma.s.sachusetts. 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 gla.s.s instead of a gun.--WINSOR M. TYLER, M. D., _Lexington, Ma.s.s._
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-gla.s.s 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 Woodp.e.c.k.e.rs, 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 Zoology 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 ill.u.s.trated 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 a.s.sistance 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.