56 



THE OOLOGIST 



It seems to me that there is a cry- 

 ing need for more complete data, es- 

 pecially for the rarer sets. Some 

 years ago I received several large lots 

 of European eggs, and was quite dis- 

 gusted to find that as a rule the only 

 data consisted of the name of the spe- 

 cies, the date, and the locality. In 

 the majority no reference was made to 

 such obviously important items as the 

 name of the collector, nesting-site, 

 materials of the nest, incubation, etc. 



Fortunately we are considerably in 

 advance of this method in America, 

 but even here there is often much to 

 be desired. Just recently I received 

 a set, the data for which made no 

 mention whatsoever of the locality 

 where the eggs were taken. Such sets 

 are of course of no value as scientific 

 specimens. Some collectors merely 

 sign their initials, or in other instan- 

 ces write — "collected for" — so-and-so. 

 This may be all right where the party 

 for whom the set was taken is very 

 well known but even then I think it 

 would be better to show the full name 

 of the collector proper. 



To write "nest in an oak tree" does 

 not tell us anything. There is no ex- 

 cuse for taking a set of eggs unless 

 something is learned thereby of the 

 nesting habits of the birds. Under 

 the head of "Nest" should be written 

 not only a description of the materials 

 used, but also of the general shape 

 and structure; whether a loosely con- 

 structed platform or a skillfully woven 

 cup, basket or whatever the case may 

 be. The nesting-site itself is fully as 

 important, and the height from the 

 ground, distance out from the trunk, 

 and whether in a fork, saddled on a 

 limb, or suspended among the twigs, 

 should all be given. Also the charac- 

 ter of the country where the set was 

 taken, whether open woods, river bot- 

 tom, brushy hill-side, etc. If of a spe- 

 cies nesting in the mountains the ap- 



proximate elevation above sea-level 

 should be given whenever possible. 

 When the set is a rare one no detail 

 is so small as to be unworthy of rec- 

 ord. 



Another point is the set-mark. Tak- 

 ing the Robin as an example, the first 

 set of three taken in any year will be 

 numbered 1-3, the second 2-3, the third 

 3-3, etc. The following year the same 

 thing occurs again, so that after a 

 time there will be dozens of sets of 

 the same species taken by the same 

 collector, and all bearing the same set- 

 mark. Then when you lose the data 

 for a set and ask the collector for a 

 duplicate he is up against it. A better 

 plan is to write the year in which it 

 was taken on every egg of each set; 

 or better still to give each separate 

 set an individual number in addition 

 to the set-mark. This avoids a great 

 deal of confusion,, especially to those 

 who collect in large series. 



Looking forward to the publication 

 of the promised number from which I 

 am sure we all will glean something 

 of value, I remain. 



Yours very truly, 



D. J. Shepardson. 



Look 'Em Over. 

 Your collection should be looked 

 over at least once a month, to keep 

 watch for signs of deterioration, damp- 

 ness, dust, insects and the like. 



My Way of Caring For Nests. 

 In preparing nests for the cabinet 

 1 mount them on little boards 4^/^x5 

 inches, twenty-four of these just fit a 

 drawer in my cabinet, which is 18 x 30 

 inches inside. Orange box covers 

 make the best as they are about the 

 right width. I cut them to the right 

 size and leave them rough just as they 

 come from the saw and stain them a 

 dark moss green with a stain made of 

 chrome green and drop of black made 



