THE OOLOGIST. 



31"J 



Oology is a branch of oniitliology and 

 nothing more, anil the man who pre- 

 sumes to elevate it above the study of 

 birds is as foolish as those who profess 

 to be good ornithologists without 

 knowing anything about the nesting 

 habits of the common birds they study. 



As I understand it, a capable orni- 

 thologist must understand the nidihca- 

 tion of the birds he linds in his section 

 while the oologist shoultl be fully able 

 to identify the owners of the nests he 

 visits. 



Then too, to follow back a little fur- 

 ther, we may say that ornithology is 

 simply a branch of zoology. Any stud- 

 ent of one or many branches of zoiilogy 

 is a naturalist — therefore, an ocHogist is 

 a naturalist. However, we cannot al- 

 low that every boy who sticks pins 

 through butterliies and other insects, 

 and spreads them in a case, is an en- 

 tomologist, and neither does the act of 

 preserving eggs, however well it is 

 done, entire a boy or man, to the dis- 

 tinction of an oologist. To Webster's 

 dictionary', it may seem sutKcient to 

 note the accomplishments of an egg- 

 crank lightly, i)ut to the increasing num- 

 ber of capable naturalists in our-couutry, 

 the i-equirements are drawn much finer. 



In other words, the province of the 

 egg-collector, or crank, as we may call 

 him, in order to be well up in the slang 

 of the times, is just as wide as we wish 

 to make it. We can collect a lot of 

 two-holed eggs, string them and hang 

 the festoon on the wall— or we can 

 study the habits of the birds— take 

 notes and gather a great stock of in- 

 formation that will be an evjirlasting 

 source of pleasure to us. 



The boy who takes notes and studies 

 intelligjntly, even if he does not col- 

 lect eggs, is far superior to the one who 

 gathers a mass of any kind of .speci- 

 mens without any knowledge of the 

 subject. 



It is my advice to l)uy l)ooks; study 

 in the wooils and fields, and keep the 

 pursuit up from year to yt^ar. 



EUGKNK VkHULKH. 



Not a Criticism. 



In tlie April Mo. of the Oi")Looi.ST 

 there appeared an article under the 

 head of "A Criticism," which in part, 

 as far as the Barn Owl is concerned, is 

 an unjust criticism; and I. like the au- 

 thor, have only foregone a replj- from 

 the fact that I do not care to get into an 

 extended discussion, nor do I feel like 

 contradicting a fellow oologist who has 

 outlived te7i generations of our oiilogi- 

 cal friends, but he should rememl)er 

 that this is a progressive age and that 

 the birds and animals that a./bw gener- 

 ations ago inhabited tliis country' have 

 disappeared and been replaceil l)y 

 others of ditferent varieties. and in some 

 cases by entirelj^ dtlVerent species 



His criticism reminds me of "The 

 Owl Critic" and "The Barber," where- 

 in the critic implored the barber to 

 "Take that Owl down." Supposing it 

 to V)e a mounted i)ird, he said. "I have 

 studied for years the posture of Owls 

 and there is nothing life-like about it;" 

 but when the Owl opened his eyes and 

 said, ''IIoo! Hoo!" the author says: 

 "The barber kept on shaving." I liavr 

 kept on collecting. 



Now, Mr. Etiitor, I don't want free 

 use of your columns for a discussion on 

 Barn Owls, for with the information at 

 hand I could write a volume on it, l)ut 

 I would like to vindicate myself by 

 (juoting from such autliority as. K. M. 

 Noe, who says that he has uu)unted no 

 less than thirty that were killed in 

 Hendricks Co., Indiana. The Indiana 

 State Ta.\i<lermist has a .set of Barn 

 Owl's eggs taken in the State. The 

 State Ri'port of Indiana states that the 

 "Barn Owl" is generally di.stril)uted 

 over the .state. Mr. A. Butler .say.s the 

 Barn Owl is frerim-ntly met with in In 

 (liana. Mr. .1. W. Hitt of Indianaiiolis 

 writes me that he "has investigated the 

 Barn Owl in Indiana, since he n-ad 

 Mr. Sirrom's article, and ulthongh Mr. 

 S. has liv('d a long time he is off on the 



