REVIEW5 



The Birds of Kent. B7 William J. Davis. Map and one 

 illustration. J. & W. Davis, Dartford. 1907. 6s. net. 



The county of Kent is of such importance ornithologically. tliat 

 it is a subject for wonder and regret that no authoritative history 

 of its avifauna has hitherto been published. Several small works 

 there are, that have appeared at long intervals, dealing with 

 specified areas, but taken together they do not cover more than 

 half the area of the county. 



It was therefore with feelings of eager anticipation that we 

 turned to this volume, the first that purports to deal with the 

 birds of the whole county. Our hopes were, however, soon 

 turned to disappointment, for we found that it consisted almost 

 entirely of the author's previously issued " Birds of the Dart- 

 ford District," with copious extracts from Prentis' " Birds of 

 Eainham," and Dowker's " Birds of East Kent." A few quota- 

 tions fi'om the " Field " and one or two from the " Zoologist" 

 are added, but no systematic attempt has been made to cull 

 the mass of material that is to be found in the pages of these 

 and other publications. Several of the local faunas, too, do 

 not appear to have been consulted, and the county museum 

 collections have hai'dly been mentioned. 



In any book dealing with the Birds of Kent we should expect 

 such species as the Golden Oriole, Dartford Warbler and Kentish 

 Plover to be treated of fairly exhaustively. Turning to the first- 

 named we find that the author mentions two birds that were seen 

 near Dartford, and the rest of the account consists of two short 

 quotations, one from the "Field" and the other from Dowker. 

 The account of the Dai'tford Warbler is substantially the same 

 as that in the " Birds of the Dartford District," and though 

 taking up more than the average amount of space is singularly 

 meagre in information as to this bird's past history and present 

 status in the county. The remarks about the Kentish Plover 

 consist solely of parts of an article in "Country Life" by 

 Mr. Farren, whose observations were founded upon only a day 

 or two's experience, and though accurate are hardly satisfying 

 as a history of such an essentially Kentish species. 



liegarding breeding records of other birds, to take one family 

 alone — the Ducks — we find no mention made of the breeding 

 of the Shoveller, Glarganey, Shieldrake, and Tufted Duck, all 

 well established and authenticated at the present day. Again, 

 the important subject of migration is not touched upon. 



Further details of the author's omissions would only prove 

 wearisome, and, uiifortunately, these are not his only short- 



