THE OOLOQIST 



Well, in that contribution I assert- 

 ed tliat the ubiquitous Passer domesti- 

 cus reared "three, occasionally four 

 and frequently five broods of young" 

 a year. A fact I thought well known 

 by all ornithologists, but in the suc- 

 ceeding June OOLOGIST, the late Dr. 

 Morris Gibbs ridiculed my assertion 

 and expressed his opinion that, if un- 

 disturbed, the House Sparrow only 

 rears two broods. Ernest H. Short, 

 then the editor of THE OOLOGIST, 

 backed up Gibbs in his contention, 

 but neither gentleman brought forth 

 any data to prove conclusively that 

 the miscalled "English" Sparrow, dis- 

 turbed or undisturbed, does not rear 

 more than two broods in a year. 



Unmolested, the House Sparrow an- 

 nually rears four or five broods of 

 young, a fact recognized by the lead- 

 ing ornithologists of the world, al- 

 though the majority of the birds prob- 

 .ably never hatch over three or four. 



Jf Short believed this species rear- 

 ed cnly two broods per year, then 

 why did he reprint in THE OOLO- 

 GIST, Eastabrook's article, "The Pres- 

 ent Status of the English Sparrow 

 Problem in America," from The Auk, 

 •without any comment on the asser- 

 tions made therein that "if any are 

 left (speaking of the extermination of 

 the pest), their great ratio of repro- 

 duction, four to five broods of five eggs 

 €ach, each year, would render the 

 work useless," etc? 



Neither Gibbs nor Short, with all 

 their knowledgeC?) of the nidification 

 of the House Sparrow, have contrib- 

 uted anything relevant on this inter- 

 esting subject. Gibbs now being de- 

 ceased, cannot do so, so it behooves 

 Short, or anybody else for that mat- 

 ter, to prove conclusively that this 

 pest only rears two broods of young 

 a year, referring, of course, to undis- 

 turbed birds. When this can be done 

 I will have something more to say on 



the subject. I am convinced, however, 

 from personal observation, that the 

 House Sparrow never raises less than 

 three broods per annum, speaking, of 

 course, of undisturbed birds. 



Richard F. Miller. 

 Philadelphia. 



Fair Play. 



I am glad somebody has the temer- 

 ity to stand up for the English Spar- 

 row, and recognize his good traits, 

 few as they may be. He is a disagree- 

 able fellow, filthy in his habits, and in 

 many ways makes a nuisance of him- 

 self in neighborhoods he frequents. 

 But the important thing is, does he 

 destroy any considerable number of 

 insects. If so, no matter what his dis- 

 agreeable traits are, we should treat 

 him fairly in justice to ourselves. 

 Without quoting hearsay evidence, I 

 am bound to recognize him as an im- 

 portant destroyer of insects of many 

 species during seasons of the year 

 when they can be obtained. 



A few instances that have come un- 

 der my notice may be mentioned. 

 Our town supports an industry in 

 which considerable amounts of hard 

 woods are utilized. It has often been 

 customary to have large quantities of 

 Hickory logs, — cut during the winter, 

 lying in the yards. Along about the 

 last of April or early in May, the Lo- 

 cust borers come around the log pile 

 in great numbers, and deposited their 

 eggs in nests of twenty to thirty each 

 in crevices of the bark, close to the sap 

 wood. In a short time these eggs would 

 hatch, the worms eating their way 

 along the surface of the wood in every 

 direction, and after traveling several 

 inches in this manner, would bore in 

 toward the center of the log, constant- 

 ly increasing in size, and badly damag- 

 ing the lumber. 



A great many years ago the spar- 

 rows became interested in these bugs. 



