14 BULLETIN No. 34. 



come in for praise, it is with regard to the former production 

 tliat 1 desire more particularly to speak. 



Tills BulL'tin having met with such a reception and gener- 

 ous appreciation on the part of ornithologists and bird-students 

 in general, would it therefore not seem like a timely sugges- 

 tion for the members of this chapter — (and others if they should 

 so desire) — to bestir themselves a trifle with the direct purpose 

 in view of rounding out more completely the life-history of this 

 interesting bird ? 



Tlie writer feels very sure that its author would gladly 

 assent to such an idea and readily contribute his valuable aid 

 in making a supplementary report possible, which could be 

 treated to required length in a future number of our Bulletin, 

 and perhaps without incurringthe additional expenses of produc- 

 ing it separately as in the case of the original report. 



Many of us no doubt liave notes and items of interest, as 

 yet unpublished, which if brought together under the respec- 

 tive headings, as arranged by Mr. Burns, would furnish a paper 

 of no little importance. The writer has managed to pick up a 

 few such items, originally overlooked, and has heard of others 

 who have forwarded notes of similar character on the Flicker 

 to Mr. Burns. A mr.tual helpfulness in this respect should ac- 

 complish much; and in this connection, it might be worthy of 

 remark in saying that co-operative monographic studies of our 

 birds will constitute in the m.ain a very great incentive to future 

 ornithological worlc, and, further, it would not seem like an al- 

 together vague idea to even suggest that every resolute worker 

 of to-day should select his bird. 



To get our bird-mattt-rs into more tangible shape is really 

 v\hat we should now strive for without requiring the necessity, 

 as at present, of reading through an entire library for the pur- 

 pose of imforming ourselves more particulary with regard to a 

 single species. Mr. Chapman has thus similarly expressed 

 himself in a recent review of Mr._ Burns' work — a statement 

 which many of us will readily concede as true. 



There are some of course who may object to such a pro- 

 position on the ground of narrow specialism, yet it should not 

 be so understood that our aim is to simply study one bird, but 



