xvn 



m. 



„The Ibis" and Ornithophaenology. 



In series VIII. vol. V. N°. 20. (October 

 1905) pp. 634—36 „The Ibis" honours my 

 work „The Method etc." and „Recensio cri- 

 tica etc." with a criticism that is at the start 

 not devoid of all raucoui-. „The Ibis" is of 

 opinion that I have challenged other countries 

 to follow the example of Hungary in the pursuit 

 of ornithophaenology apparently without at- 

 taching due importance to the work of other 

 countries, e. g. of Great Britain, Danmark 

 and — nearer to me — Saxony ; which 

 work I seemingly consider as „casual". In 

 the main, however „The D)is" agrees with me. 



I would merely remark that I am fuUy 

 acquainted with the work done in Great 

 Britain and have treated of the same in my 

 „Recensio" (p. 13. Dixon „The migration of 

 British bh'ds, 1905": p. 53. „Report on 

 Migration", with references to the work of 

 Haevie-Bkown, Cordeaux, More, Eagle-Clarke 

 and Bakrington) ; that I am peri'ectly well 

 aware of the work done in Danmark and 

 Saxony, as is proved by the annexed list. 

 And in issuing the challenge in spite of 

 aU this I was guided by the following, to 

 my mind powerful reasons. 



Ornithophaenology must namely be ranged 

 into two chief cUvisions, a) Observation, i. e. 

 the collection of data; h) the methodical ela- 

 boration of the same. The collection and 

 elaboration must cover the whole of the known 

 data and the whole range of observation ; 

 otherwise no acceptable conclusions can be 

 obtained. I will make nfi mention here of the 

 simultaneous observations, the old data — 

 which in England begin with Derham, in 

 1707 ; — for that would take me too far 

 afield : I would merely remark that in Hun- 

 gary all our kn()\vn data are elaborated every 

 season and published m two languages in 

 the publications of the Hungarian Central 

 Office of Ornithology, together with meteoro- 

 logical data, i. e. lege artis ornithophaeno- 

 logically. 



Our challenge was merely to follow this 

 process; for it is selfevident that only by so 

 doing- shall we able to make a comparison 

 of the migrations in various districts and to 

 draw conclusions therefrom. The correctness 

 of this process will, I imagine, be admitted 

 by the „Ibis". 



Now, if we examine the condition of the 

 elaborations in England, we are bound to 

 allow that no-one has ever undertaken the 

 elaboration of the totality of EngHsh material. 



Eagle-Claeke, who had been very well fitted 

 to the task, in his „Digest of observations 

 on migration of birds at lighthouses and 

 lightvessels, 1880—1887," (British Associa- 

 tion for the Advancement of Science : Liver- 

 pool meeting 1890), while quite correctly 

 taldng into consideration meteorological phe- 

 nomena, elaborates only strand observations; 

 though he hhnself says that it is merely an 

 extract of his study and in no respect an 

 exhaustive digest. Further on he states that 

 the enormous mass of data requires to be 

 elaliorated statistically : for my ])art I would 

 add that no-one has taken the trouble or is 

 now endeavouring to elaborate the mass of 

 English data which have been collected in- 

 dependently by Harvie-Brown-Cordeaux, and 

 lately by Ogilvie-Grant. 



Consequently, despite the great strides made 

 in ornithology in England, that country can, 

 ornitholophaenologicaliy , only in a slight degree 

 serve as a basis for comparison, and things will 

 not change in this respect until the elabo- 

 rations become more than mere fragments, 

 until we know how the birds of passage 

 settle in England? A preliminary condition 

 to our knowledge of the latter is that we 

 should not merely discover how the bii'ds 

 reach and leave the coasts of England but 

 should be acquainted with their passage 

 through the interior of that country and above 

 all should know how they settle in their 

 breeding-haunts. It is not a question of strand 



* The term „Ornithophaenology" is used in place of ,Aviphaenology' on the suggestion of Prof. Alfred 

 Newton. 0. H. 



Aquüa Xni. 



Ill 



