44 
THE CONDOR 
Vol. XIV 
In an article entitled “A Series of Eagle 
Tarsi from the Pleistocene of Rancho la Brea” 
(Univ. Calif. Publ. Geol. vi, October 9, 1911, 
pp. 305-316),; Miller describes and figures three 
new raptorial birds: Morphnns ivoodwardi\ 
Geranoaetus grinneUl\\\Ci. G.fragilis. As in 
previous cases, the nearest related species are 
now restricted to South America. Comparison 
is drawn by the author not only with the nearest 
related forms, but with the Golden and Bald 
Eagles. It seems that of the fossil species the 
one bone most often preserved is the tarso- 
metatarsus. Miller points out that ‘‘this bone 
is so characteristic a part of the avian skeleton 
and reflects so readily the characters of the 
species” that in dealing with adequate material 
no hesitation is experienced in making specific 
determinations from this member alone. 
The second paper bears the caption ‘‘Avi- 
fauna of the Pleistocene Cave Deposits of Cali- 
fornia” (Univ. Calif. Publ. Geol. vi, October 
28, 1911, pp. 385-400). Thirty forms are listedt 
a few of these are not yet identified beyond the 
genus, the majority are apparently identical 
with existing species, while three are newly 
named in this paper. The latter are: a black 
vulture {Catharisia shastetisis) , a condor 
{Gyninogyps ampins), and a great horned owl 
(Bubo sinclairi). Associated together in this 
ancient avifauna, as preserved in Potter Creek 
and vSamwel caves, Shasta County, and Plawver 
Cave in Eldorado County, were, besides the 
species just named, a long-legged eagle, the 
turkey vulture, the sharp-shinued, red-tailed, 
Swainson and rough-legged hawks, the pig- 
my, elf, and short-eared owls, ruffed and sooty 
grouses, valley and mountain quails, a species 
of turkey, the crow, Steller jay and Brewer 
blackbird. It is of particular note that the 
little elf owl should have occurred in the Shasta 
region, when it is now restricted to a range far 
to the southward. 
Miller finds that in these cave deposits, 
the remains of ground-dwelling birds predom- 
inate. This suggests ‘‘that their bodies were 
either brought in as the prey of predatory 
forms or else swept in by currents of surface 
drainage.” Owls and vultures, of course, com- 
monly resort to caverns as places of abode, and 
the bodies of those dying could have been car- 
ried into the more remote recesses by preda- 
ceous mammals or currents of water. — G rin- 
NEbL. 
Woodpeckers in Relation to Trees 
AND Wood Products. By W. E. McAtee 
(=U. S. Dept. Agric., Div. Biol. Surv., Bull, 
no. 32, 99 pages, 12 pis., 44 figs, in text; vSept. 
26, 1911). 
This publication of the Biological Survey, 
following closely after the one on the “Food 
of the Woodpeckers of the United States” fur- 
nishes considerable evidence as to the damage 
to trees, lumber, etc., by members of this 
group of birds. The paper is divided into two 
parts, ‘‘damage by woodpeckers in general,” 
and ‘‘damage by sapsuckers”, the latter being 
by far the most comprehensive. Under the 
first head, the kinds of injury to trees caused 
by woodpeckers are treated — holes made in 
digging out insects, excavation of nest and 
shelter cavities, attacks of tree enemies aided 
by woodpeckers, and damage to wooden posts 
and structures. 
This section of the paper closes with a few 
paragraphs on the prevention of damage by 
woodpeckers, attention being called to the 
value of experiment along this line and to the 
use of nesting boxes and of tin as a protective 
covering when practicable. The first sugges- 
tion is an important one. Not long ago the 
statement was made to the reviewer that the 
placing of a newspaper in a hole in a building 
drilled by a flicker was sufficient to drive the 
bird away. The statement has also been made 
that the hanging of a looking glass on a string 
from the gable of a building keeps flickers 
away. Whether these statements be true or 
not they show what two men have found out, 
to their own satisfaction, bj' experimentation. 
Experiments like these need to be tried out; 
for who can tell but that some simple thing 
may prevent some or most of the damage done 
by woodpeckers. 
The greater part of the paper on ‘‘damage 
by sapsuckers,” is given over to an enumeration 
of the trees and shrubs attacked by the differ- 
ent kinds of sapsuckers. The most interesting 
part deals with the effect of sapsucker work 
on the external appearance of trees, on the 
health of trees, and on lumber and finished 
wood products. From the evidence brought 
forward by a separate enumeration of the kinds 
of shrubs and trees attacked, and the type of 
damage done, it is evident that the sapsucker 
damages much valuable timber so that it is 
rendered unfit for use. In conclusion this 
statement is made: ‘‘However, if only one per- 
cent of the number of trees attacked (ten per- 
cent of the whole number) is discarded, the 
annual loss for the whole United States is 
more than a million and a quarter dollars. ” A 
large number of illustrations furnish indisput- 
able evidence as to the effects of sapsuckers. 
The paper is particularly interesting on 
account of the fact that it is one of the first 
of the publications of the Biological Survey 
to bring forth so large an amount of evidence 
against a bird. Heretofore there has been a 
tendency to minimize the harm as compared 
with the good, even with such birds as the lin- 
net and blue jay. Mr. McAtee appears to have 
set forth evidence impartially. * 
One point not emphasized seems worthy 
