206 The Wilson Bulletin — No. 81. 



alpestris actia, Afjclaitts tricolitr, Petrochelidon lunifrons Imiifrons. 



"The efficiency of the different species, when determined by de- 

 structive capacity, sliowed the burrowing owl to be the ablest 

 destroyer; when determined by the numbers of individual birds 

 in the territory, showed blackbirds, meadowlarks. killdeers, ori- 

 oles, and shrikes to take positions in the order named. 



"Birds cannot be considered a dependable means of control of 

 all grasshopper epidemics, but can be inferred to be efficient in 

 the prevention of many" and "can be depended on to act as de- 

 fenders and protectors of crops because of their warfare against 

 grasshoppers, and their value in this regard can be estimated in 

 dollars and cents." 



"Birds flocked to areas where grasshoppers were abundant" and 

 "changed their feeding habits and fed on grasshoppers, the insect 

 most available in this case.'' 



Mr. Bryant concludes that while birds fail to check an insect 

 outbreak they do constantly act as a regulative agent under ordi- 

 nary circumstances when no artificial means of control are em- 

 ployed ; and that some species which may do some damage to crops 

 at ordinary times will be of great service during an insect epidemic, 

 and thus offset the damage at other times. We welcome papers 

 of this sort, dealing with concrete cases. Such intensive studies 

 should be pressed in every state. l. j. 



A Systematic List of the Birds of California. By Joseph Grin- 

 nell. Cooper Ornithological Club. Pacitic Coast Avifauna Num- 

 ber 8. Contribution- from the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology of 

 the University of California. Hollywood, California. Published 

 by the Club, August 30, 1912. Edited by Joseph Grinnell and 

 Harry S. Swarth at the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, Univei-sity 

 of California. 



The writer does not feel competent to pass judgment upon the 

 scheme of classification here given for the birds which occur lu 

 the state of California. The. task of constructing a classification 

 which represents more nearly what practically all ornithologists 

 the world over consider a more nearly natural arrangement than 

 that adopted and adhered to by the A. O. U., and which must 

 necessarily differ from it, is a somewhat thankless one. Such a 

 classification cannot be adopted and consistently used in one part 

 of the country without throwing into confusion hardly less than 

 the confusion which prevailed before the present A. O. U. arrange- 

 ment was adopted for North America, the work of this continent. 

 If. as we believe, this scheme of classification is put forward as a 

 contribution to the subject of classification and will serve to 

 accelerate the work of the A. O. T^ committee upon classification. 



