OLIVE SPARROW 547 



to the larger green-tailed towhee which sometimes occurs in the same 



range in winter. 



Enemies— Mr. Bent (MS.) writes the olive sparrow "is sometimes 

 imposed upon by the red-eyed cowbhd; there are two eggs of this 

 parasite, said to have been taken from a nest of this sparrow, in 

 the American Museum of Natural History." 



Dean Amadon and Don R. Eckleberry (1955) relate: "On April 15, 

 about 30 miles south of Brownsville, Texas, in Tamaulipas, we were 

 attracted by a protesting pair of Olive Sparrows. A coachwhip 

 snake Coluber (Masticophis) jiagellum, was found with its head m 

 the sparrows' nest, which was about three feet above the ground 

 in the center of a large mass of candelabra cactus. The young 

 (or eggs) had been eaten. This was shortly after noon on a not, 



sunny day." 



Distribution 



2^^y^^g _The olive sparrow is resident from southern Texas (Val 

 Verde, Atascosa, and Nueces counties) south to eastern Coahuila 

 (Sabuias) and central Tamaulipas (Victoria). 



Egg dates.— Tex&s: 50 records, March 16 to September 1; 26 

 records, May 11 to May 31. 



CHLORURA CHLORURA (Audubon) 



Green-tailed Towhee 



PLATES 28 AND 29 



Contributed by Robert A. Norris 



Habits 



In describing the gi^een-tailed towhee as Fringilh chlorura, Audubon 

 (1839) manifestly regarded it as a finch. Since that time the bird 

 has been placed in one genus after another, no less than eight generic 

 names being listed in Ridgway's (1901) synonymy of the species. 

 -It seems absurd to call this bird a Towhee at aU,' wrote W. L. 

 Dawson (1923), whose further, uncritical comment was, lo appear- 

 ance it is, rather, an overgrown Warbler, or a cross, say^ between a 

 Yellow-breasted Chat and a Chippmg Sparrow." While Dawson may 

 have penned these remarks in a spirit of levity, he appears to have 

 noticed in this species' song an unmistakable resemblance to that ot 

 the bona fide towhees. . . t,- •; 



Reasons for considering the green-tailed towhee a species of Pipilo, 

 as set forth by C. G. Sibley (1955) and supported by KG. m-kes 

 (1957), seem to me strong and convmcing, and I would Prefer to 

 include it in this genus rather than in Chlorura, where the 1957 



64&-737— 68— pt. 1 37 



