Oology a Science 79 



admirable facilities for the study of bird habits and life-histories, but is 

 not this but a by-product of oology'? Are eggs collected for the sake 

 of the life-history knowledge thus gained, or are habits studied to aid egg- 

 collecting ? In other words, is life-history the end of oology, or is it a 

 means to an end ? If the former is the case, egg-collecting must be looked 

 upon as scientific, but in the latter we can only regard it as in the 

 nature of kindergarten work and as a means of absorbing knowledge in 

 a pleasant way. 



The fact that some of our greatest ornithologists began as collectors 

 of eggs does not alter the question in any way; they began in the kin- 

 dergarten, that is all. The question is, "How many of them kept at it 

 when they grew able to do better ?" This immediately brings to mind the 

 memory of the late Major Bendire, who, perhaps, reached the high-water 

 mark in American oology. But what part of his fame rests upon his oolog- 

 ical work ? If we eliminated the strict oological matter from his 'Life- 

 Histories,' would the latter be seriously damaged ? Reverse this operation 

 and what would be left ? If the pursuit of egg-collections was the only 

 way in which knowledge of the habits of birds could be attained, the ques- 

 tion would have a different aspect, but could not Bendire have learned 

 as much of birds and their ways if he had taken up photography, or 

 had sought to tag nestlings for migrational study, or, in fact, had taken up 

 any one of the many subjects of inquiry that suggest themselves ? Until 

 such is proved to the contrary, the case of Bendire, and others of his class^ 

 cannot go far to substantiate the scientific claims of the oologist. 



Mr. Lucas asks also whether the average skin -collector is any less of a 

 "mere collector" than the average oologist ? I am afraid that he is not, 

 but there is this difference; he is of more use to science than the lat- 

 ter. A skin, with its locality and date, is always of value irrespective of the 

 maker. It bears its own identity upon itself, and at any time may fall into 

 the hands of those who can use it. A properly made skin made by a savage 

 is of as much importance as one made by Mr. Ridgway, except, per- 

 haps, for sentimental reasons. Some of our most valuable data has been 

 gathered from old collections made by "mere collectors." As much cannot 

 be said for egg-collections. Egg-shells can, in the great majority of cases, 

 be only identified by the label and data attached, and this can never, in any 

 case, be any more reliable than the knowledge of the one that wrote 

 it. Their identity is but the opinion of one man, and once the record is 

 made, mistakes can never be corrected. Add to this that, in many 

 cases, absolute identification is impossible to make without taking and pre- 

 serving the parents, and that at all times the utmost care must be taken to 

 make sure that the eggs really belonged to the supposed parents, and 

 we have ample reason for doubting what little value there is in the "mere 

 collector" of eggs. 



