A Critique of Barrows' " Michigan Bird Life." 31 



gan Museum. There are but few records for the Great Lakes 

 and these are generally unaccompanied by any convincing- 

 proof. There are no Indiana or Ontario records. In Ohio 

 there is an old and somewhat unsatisfactory record of Wins- 

 low's at Cleveland. In northern Illinois E. W. Nelson records 

 a bird seen and shot at, but not secured, in 1873, which was 

 probably a mistake in identification. 



4. Sterna maxima. Royal Tern. — This tern is included as 

 a Michigan bird on the authority of Stewart E. White, who 

 states that at Mackinac Island " I examined several specimens. 

 Rather more rare than 5". tschcgrai'a." ^ Of 6^. tschegrava 

 (caspia) he writes: "Thousands of large terns accompany 

 the gulls in migration, but are shy. They resemble each 

 other so much that identification on the wing is very uncer- 

 tain. I repeatedly took this tern and should call it common." 

 When one takes into consideration the fact that there are no 

 records whatever for Sterna maxima for Indiana, Illinois, 

 Wisconsin, Ohio, or Ontario, and that the bird has a decided 

 southern range, the above statement may certainly be taken 

 to represent an error in identification. If the Caspian tern 

 is called '' common " and the Royal tern " rather more rare 

 than 5". tschegrava " the latter assuredly would be classed as 

 a fairly abundant bird, which it is not. There is no evidence 

 known to the writer that a Michigan specimen of the Royal 

 tern has ever been examined by an experienced ornithologist. 

 ]\lr. White, at the time of these observations, had only a 

 limited field experience The A. O. U^. Check List, 1910, does 

 not record Sterna maxima as far north as the Great Lakes, 

 and consequently does not accept this record. The species 

 should be eliminated from consideration as a Michigan bird 

 until confirming evidence is at hand. 



5. Sterna paradiscea. Arctic Tern. — The Arctic tern is in- 

 cluded by Barrows on the basis of a statement of A. B. Co- 

 vert that he " secured a male bird at Monroe, Mich., April 

 9, 1875." The writer is not aware of the source of this record 

 as recorded b}^ Barrows, as the species is not included in either 

 iThe Auk, 1893, p. 222. 



