THE CONDOR 
I voL. vr 
Pass), 1 1 from the Colorado DesertfCohuilla Valley, Walters, New River, Pilot Knob, 
Cameron Lake, Vallecito, and Yuma), 13 from south-eastern Arizona (Tucson, 
Fort Lowell, and the Huachuca, and Santa Rita Mountains), and 2 from Sonora, 
Mexico. Taking these up in regular order we will first consider the birds from 
the coast region of southern California, which should represent the subspecies 
bryanti. In Anthony’s original description of bryanti (Auk XI, 1894, 210) the 
distinguishing features of the race are not made at all clear, but from the accom- 
panying text it is evident that one great point of difference between bryajiti and 
brunneicapilliis is that in the former all the rectrices but the middle pair are more 
or less perfectly barred with white, while in the latter the outer tail feathers only 
are barred on the inner web. Besides this strking feature Dr. Mearns ascribes to 
bryanti a back broadly striped with white. 
In the series of twenty-two southern California skins before me there is just 
one with a perfectly barred tail. This is a juvenile male taken at San Gorgonio 
Pass, the edge of the desert; and I do not think that great importance can be 
attached to it, as the juveniles from all parts show more white markings on the tail 
feathers than do the adults, and in the post-juvenal moult, which takes place in 
September, the rectrices are lost with the rest of the juvenal plumage. Of the 
remainder of the .series there are one or two with not even the outer feathers 
perfectly barred on the inner web; many of them have illy defined spots on the 
second feather and one from San Bernardino has a few irregular white spots on 
all the feathers. 
As to the striped back, supposedl}^ diagnostic of bryanti, I believe it is to some 
extent seasonal, being more apparent in breeding birds in rather worn plumage 
than in autumnal specimens; but it is far more conspicuous in the de.sert birds at 
hand than in any of the California or Arizona specimens. 
Passing on to the Colorado Desert birds I find in the tail feathers exactly the 
same markings as in specimens from the coast region; one with the inner web of 
even the outer feather imperfectly marked, one with some white markings on all 
but the middle pair, and most of them with some slight marks on the second 
feather. As I before remarked the desert birds show a greater tendency to longi- 
tudinal stripes on the back (these markings being more broken up in the coast 
specimens) but the difference is not great nor constant enough to justify any sepa- 
ration of tlie races. One specimen, a male from the Cohuilla Valley (Coll. G. F. 
Morcom, April 15, 1886) is noteworthy as being conspicuously paler than any 
other bird in the entire series. The throat is sparsely marked with black, the 
back has broad longitudinal white stripes and the crown is very light colored, 
almost chestnut, in striking contrast with the dark brown pileum of the rest of the 
specimens. In tail markings, however, it is like many others, the outer feathers 
perfectly barred, one or two white markings on the second, and just a trace of 
white on the third. A female in my collection taken at San Fernando, California 
(No. 2181, October 18, 1901) is very similar to this bird in general appearance, the 
only differences being due to the one being in perfectly acquired autumnal plum- 
age, while the other has the plumage more worn and abraded. 
Of the Arizona specimens, I have some from the extreme southeastern corner 
of the territory that are absolutely indistinguishable from others taken within a 
few miles of the Pacific Ocean. In the tail markings the}^ vary exactly as spec- 
imens from the other localities do. 
There is supposed to be some difference between aiithonyi and bryajitixw the 
character of the markings of the under parts, the spots in the former being smaller, 
more scattered, and linear in shape, while the latter is supposed to be heavily 
