262 Correspondence. LAnri] 



CORRESPONDENCE. 



Editor of 'The Auk': 



Anent "sight" records, the following has come to my attention and 

 seems to be worthy of presentation. It is not a joke, but we have here 

 the untrained observer who is sure of what he has seen and records the 

 details minutely. I quote the letter verbatim, written under date of 

 December 11, 1917: 



"On the 9th of December between 1:30 and 2 o'clock, under bright 

 sunny conditions and with temperature around 10 or 15 degrees above zero, 



I was taking photographs in the village of Rockland County. 



Mr. , artist, of and Mr. , farmer, of were with 



me at the time and support my statement from their own independent 

 observations. 



"We saw several times, two male scarlet tanagers. They did not seem 

 to be disturbed by the cold but flew around from tree to tree apparently 

 seeking food. There could be absolutely no mistake as it was in an open 

 country with only scattered trees and a fresh fall of snow on the ground 



that brought their bright plumage out in strong contrast I wish to 



emphasize the fact that there could be no doubt as to these birds as I am 

 familiar with the birds, seeing them almost yearly in the woods around 

 in the spring of the year and I saw them several times that morn- 

 ing for a period of twenty minutes to half an hour and at a distance 



varying from fifty to a hundred feet. Mr. and Mr. will be 



very glad to submit statements if you care to have them. You can do 

 what you care to with this statement." 



Comment is almost superfluous. The writer did not know that the 

 Scarlet Tanager in autumn changes his red coat for a yellow-green one so 

 that the birds he saw could not have been of this species. Most of us can 

 guess what he really did see, but that is just what is the matter with so 

 many "sight" records. Truly "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing." 



Yours truly, 



Jonathan Dwight. 

 New York, Feb. 1, 1918. 



[The undersigned has already presented the "sight" record problem to 

 the readers of 'The Auk' (1917, p. 373), and to the members of the A. O. U. 

 at the last stated meeting. He hoped for some suggestions — some 

 approval or criticism of the tentative solution he offered, but no one seems 

 inclined to discuss the question. Even Dr. Dwight in presenting this 

 interesting and instructive example, fails to offer any advice. It should 

 not be difficult for any editor to reject this record but there are others 

 just as erroneous where the fault is by no means so easily detected. — W. S.] 



