224 THE ZOOLOGIST. 



Moult of the Facial Feathers in the Rook. — Mr. E. T. Booth is, 

 I believe, the latest authority who has directed attention to this subject, 

 and, in his ' Rough Notes on British Birds,' vol. i. (Rook), he expresses his 

 opinion that the statement that young Rooks lose the feathers over the 

 base of the beak at the first moult can scarcely be correct, or that there 

 must be not infrequent exceptions. The results of repeated experiments 

 with birds reared from the nest, and of his observation of wild birds, are 

 given as reasons for coming to this conclusion. The following facts support 

 Mr. Booth's views. In a tame male Rook, reared in 1885, a bare patch on 

 the chin and upper portion of the throat appeared at the first autumn 

 moult, the upper mandible being completely covered until the autumn of 

 1886, when all but two or three bristles disappeared ; in the spring of 1887 

 the facial aspect of this bird differed in no respect from that of adult wild 

 Rooks. Since he was able to fly the freedom of this bird has been 

 complete, while the abundance of food he has enjoyed would probably 

 rather have advanced than retarded maturity. On March 30th last my 

 brother observed near here a small flock of twelve black-faced Rooks, several 

 of which he heard " caw." April 1st last, fifteen Rooks with black beaks 

 seen by myself in the same locality, and successfully stalked. These birds, 

 into whose midst I almost walked, might, but for their cries of alarm, have 

 been mistaken for gregarious Crows, as they flew off turning their heads 

 from side to side, as is the manner of Rooks when thoroughly frightened. 

 April 7th last, eleven black-beaked Rooks (with oue bare-beaked bird) 

 observed by me through binoculars, and April 26 th fifteen or so, both flocks 

 being seen in the same district. Thus there is, or was, a small flock of 

 fifteen Rooks near here whose plumage is immature, and which probably 

 are not breeding-birds. On April 2nd last, a black-beaked Rook was seen 

 by me, feeding on the lawn here with other bare-beaked birds belonging 

 to our home rookery ; this or another similar bird has been repeatedly 

 seen by my brother carrying sticks and endeavouring to build, but, so far 

 as we know, unsuccessfully. Lastly, on April 20th, a poisoned Rook was 

 brought to me which had the upper mandible completely feathered, but the 

 lower mandible and skin beneath, with the upper throat and lower part of 

 the lores, bare or nearly so. I have preserved the head of this bird. On 

 dissection it proved to be a male, with testes about the size of Linnets' 

 eggs ; but its plumage lacked the bright blue tinge of the adult Rook, and 

 its stomach was gorged with food, which is also against its having been a 

 breeding-bird. Even admitting that the Rooks meutioued above were late- 

 hatched birds of last year, it seems evident that there must be many 

 exceptions to the generally-accepted statement as to the moult of the 

 Rook's facial feathers. Figures, relatively so small as those given by 

 Mr. Booth, by Mr. Stevenson ('Birds cf Norfolk,' i. 275), and above, are 

 easily under-estimated, for it should not be overlooked that, in this country, 



