2C)8 LoOMis, Geographic Variaiioti in Nomenclature. \ W\s 



judgment in dwelling upon minute details, which tend thereby 

 to assume exaggerated importance." 



Dr. Gill reviews the subspecies question as follows : ^ " There 

 is a serious taxonomic problem that will confront us in the treat- 

 ment of North American birds. Our ornithologists very generally 

 have manifested a disposition to study the variations of species 

 and to discriminate the variants as subspecies. There is a ten- 

 dency in the same direction in other branches of zoology and by 

 some it has been called the statistical method. It has been very 

 recently employed in ichthyology. For example, Mr. Walter 

 Garstang, of Plymouth, appears to have shown that there is an 

 average of minor characteristics which differentiate the mackerels 

 of different ranges as distinct races, but he has not deemed it 

 necessary to name such races. Such studies are valuable and 

 should not be decried. Nevertheless an instability is introduced 

 in any group in which undue prominence is given to such varia- 

 tions which is embarrassing. I do not see any end to such split- 

 ting, but an interminable number of subspecies looms threatening 

 in the future. I would suggest that in the new ornithology a very 

 subordinate rank should be given to the subspecies. The species 

 might be described in generalized terms, that is, including all the 

 variants, and the diversification into subspecies indicated in terse 

 phraseology immediately after the diagnosis of the common char- 

 acters." 



Better still, if we treat geographic variation not as subspecies, 

 but as we treat variation in sex, age, season, etc. By pursuing 

 this course we have a stable criterion. It may be rather trying at 

 the outset, arousing in us feelings akin to superstition, to call all 

 Song Sparrows Melospiza c'uierea ; nevertheless the geographic 

 variations ignored " are not greater than the sexual variation in 

 Williamson's Sapsucker and the seasonal variation in the Marbled 

 ^urrelet, once of sufficient import for generic and specific distinc- 

 tion. 



The question is not whether we affirm or deny the existence of 



1 The Osprey, Vol. Ill, p. 92. 



* The variation in size in the Song Sparrow is insignificant compared with 

 the variation in size exhibited in the Canada Goose. 



