I'ika. tyiM' of coiu'ealinj; coluratiuii 



an<l mammals tluT*' arc \crv many spc- 

 cii's where the adiiltf^ ur tlie young, or 

 the adult individuals of one sex, are 

 (•oncealingly colored, this coloration 

 d(>id)t]t'ss being a survival factor, and 

 very many others as to which this is 

 not so : and that among the latter are 

 mimerous animals with a conspicuous 

 or advertising or revealing or directive 

 coloration — I care not which t(>rm is 

 used.i This is the point at issue. 



Professor T.ongley apparently takes 

 the ground that animal conspicuous- 

 ness does not exist in natun'. lie says 

 he is "impressed by the uniform ab- 

 sence of effort to demonstrate that cou- 

 s])icuousness exists." by various ol)serv- 

 crs. including myself, and adds, "tliat 

 the conspicuousness so lightly a>>iinici| 

 is a subjective phenomenon is capal)le 

 i>\' demonstration." and ]>roceeds to 

 "demonstrate" tliat \ am in ermr when 

 I speak of a /iniin/lnirli' as conspicuou.- 



' Tilt-re has. Iiitlicrto tx-fn no snrcossful effort to 

 answer my articles in whirli I discussed Mr. 

 Tlia\er''i sweepiiie theories: Professor I,oii>:ley cer- 

 tainly do<'K not : and if he will turn to Mr. Heelie's 

 l«M)k al.ove mentioned (pp. 104-108). he will find, 

 in a purely incidental allusion to coloration, the 

 kiiid of recorded observation which really does help 

 to throw a little licht on the siilijeit. 



1)V saying that other obxTVer?- have 

 mistakenly thought red fisli to be con- 

 spicuous I I would really like to know 

 just how rrot'essor Longley regards 

 this as a "demonstration." He refuses 

 to "grant that there are conspicuous 

 animals." and "demonstrates" that 

 sucli animals as prongbucks are in- 

 conspicuous by saying that red fishes 

 live in the dark and come to the open 

 surface only by night, having nocturnal 

 feeding habits I Would he regard this 

 statement as to red fishes to be "demon- 

 strated" to be erroneous by my point- 

 ing out that ml liir(]s. such as tanagers, 

 cardinals, tiaiiiingos. and macaws, are 

 diurnal r 



Now. as to the failure to "demon- 

 strate" that "conspicuousness exists,"' 

 as ill the case of the prongbuck : the 

 troiiiilc i- in (lem<mstrat ing the self- 

 ex idcni. ir I were asked to "demon- 

 strate" that a lilack coal scuttle on a 

 white -licet, or ;i crow on a snowbank. 

 is cons|iicU(»us. I sluuild be rather puz- 

 zled to know where to begin; and a 

 Kockv Mountain goat or a cock ostrich 

 is normallv a- conspicuous as (he coal 



•Jl.'i 



