Jan., 1920 
coast ornithology has increased in rate of 
growth markedly with the development of 
this Museum, and we may reasonably expect 
the institution to continue to serve in this 
field usefully throughout the future. A spe- 
cial condition of the endowment is that the 
first attention of the staff must be devoted 
to the proper care of the collections of birds, 
mammals, etc., so as to preserve them safely 
against the numerous dangers which contin- 
ually beset museum materials. Another con- 
dition is that the Museum’s collections be 
made easily available for study by responsi- 
ble investigators, not only in Berkeley, but 
anywhere else. 
Mr. Harry H. Sheldon, for some years con- 
nected with the United States Biological Sur- 
vey, is now back in California, having taken 
up ranching at Carpinteria. 
Mr. Leon L. Gardner, of Claremont, Cali- 
fornia, carried on some interesting experi- 
ments last summer under the direction of 
the United States Biological Survey, in Klick- 
itat County, Washington, in an effort to con- 
tro! the plague of crows which was menacing 
the almond crop of that section. Green al- 
monds poisoned with strychnine were found 
to be a satisfactory bait. 
PUBLICATIONS REVIEWED 
LIFE HISTORIES OF NoRTH AMERICAN DIv- 
ING Brrps—OrRpDER PyGoPopES. By ARTHUR 
CLEVELAND BENT. United States National 
Museum, Bulletin 107, pp. xiii+245, pls. 1- 
55 (12 colored); 1919 (our copy received 
September 2). 
Ever since formal announcement was 
made in 1910 that Mr. A. C. Bent was to 
take up the work left unfinished by Major 
Bendire on the “Life Histories of North Am- 
erican Birds” the ornithological public has 
been waiting the results with keen antici- 
pation. The appearance of the first vol- 
ume, giving the life histories of the Pygo- 
podes, fully justifies the long wait which 
has intervened. 
The present contribution differs from the 
volumes issued under the pen of Major Ben- 
dire in several respects. In place of the 
unwieldy quarto we have the standard gov- 
ernment octavo which lends itself to more 
convenient use, and the data pertaining to 
each species are segregated under subject 
heads, while quoted material is rendered in 
smaller type than the body of the text. 
The account of each species is prefaced by 
a paragraph which introduces the reader by 
way of some striking incident or habitat 
description to the subject of the chapter. 
Then follow, in more formal style, para- 
EDITORIAL NOTES AND NEWS 45 
graphs relating to “habits”, involving dis- 
cussions of spring behavior, courtship, nest- 
ing, eggs, young, plumages, food, and behavi- 
or (excluding courting antics but includ- 
ing voice). Where pertinent, notes on fall 
and winter behavior are given. Under the 
general heading “distribution”, which fol- 
lows the account of habits, are given breed- 
ing range, winter range, spring migration, 
fall migration, casual records and egg dates. 
In endeavoring to make each chapter as 
complete as possible the author has made 
free use of the published writings of other 
observers and in some instances material 
covering one specific point is quoted from 
several sources. But Bent’s own travels and 
field studies have been extensive enough to 
enable him to contribute directly and im- 
portantly to almost every species chapter. 
Two chapters, those on the [Atlantic] Puf- 
fin and Great Auk, are entirely from the pen 
of Dr. Charles W. Townsend. 
The sequence in which the species are 
treated and the nomenclature are both of 
the A. O. U. 1910 Check-list. The artificial- 
ity of the mixed assemblage here dealt with 
(‘““Order’” Pygopodes) is brought out with 
striking clearness in this work where life 
characters are described in detail. But this 
is no criticism of the author’s work; his 
is but another contribution to the already 
large mass of evidence accumulating which 
will eventually force a change in the ar- 
rangement of certain major groups in our 
American check-list. 
It is impossible in the space available 
here to pass judgment upon the merits of 
the individual species chapters and it would 
be presumptuous for any one to attempt such 
an assessment of value without having him- 
self been over much of the ground which 
the author has covered. We restrict our- 
selves therefore to comments upon some of 
the more general features of the work. 
The use of “titles’ in connection with 
authors’ names in the text appeals to us as 
misleading, in that it tends in some cases to 
give greater authority to the items quoted. 
In many instances the authors involved re- 
ceived these ‘‘titles’ long after the accounts 
in question were written. The surname 
alone, with initials only where necessary to 
distinguish between two individuals with 
the same surname, is much to be preferred. 
The term “references to bibliography” on 
page 225 is misleading; “literature cited” 
would be more applicable. And the titles 
are too brief; references to articles in peri- 
odical literature ought to give inclusive page 
