8o 
THE CONDOR 
VOL. VI 
relation between these pugnacious flycatchers and their more timid friends. On many occasions, 
in seasons following, I found nests of various warblers, vireos, tanagers, and other birds in close 
])roximity to nests of the Coues flycatcher. Once, by using a small cloth scoop on the end of a 
pole I took a set each of Coues flycatcher and a black-fronted warbler, without changing my 
position in the tree. Another time I took a set of olive warbler and a set of black-fronted war- 
bler from the same tree, and a set of Coues flycatcher from a tree not more than fifteen feet dis- 
tant. In these, as well as in many other instances, I had the opportunity to learn the reason for 
these faniih- gatherings. In the locality where my observations have been made, the smaller and 
more peaceable birds suffer great loss from snakes, scpiirrels, and jays. Probably the most bitter 
enemy of the smaller birds is the long crested ja^-, who is continuallv in search of their nests. 
When the jay locates a nest, his call-note brings as many as half a dozen of his hungry comrades 
to the scene, and under a feeble attack from the parent birds, the eggs or young, as the case may 
be, are carried off or devoured on the spot. Many times, even, the nest is torn into shreds. All 
this, however, does not occur when there is a nest of the Coues flN-catcher in the vicinity, for 
upon the first alarm, the fl3'catcher conies to the rescue, and the would, be assailant is forced to 
leave. This wholesale slaughter seems to teach these much imposed upon species to seek the 
protection of the more independent fl\’catcher. — O. W. How.akd. 
Road-runners Eat Young Mockingbirds.— Mr. Leroy Abrams of the department of 
botan\', .Stanford Universit}’, states that while he was collecting plants in the INIission Valle}- near 
San Diego, California, between May i and lo, 1903, his assistant observed a road-runner {Geo- 
lorcy.r california)iHs) remove from a nest a \-oung mockingbird and devour it. Both road-runners 
and mockingbirds are common at this localit}-. It is kncwn that road-runners eat eggs, but I 
have never heard of their killing A-oung birds. How general is this habit? Have our readers anv 
observations on this point? — W.\i/niK K. P'l.suiiR. 
the: i:ditor’s booh sheilf 
Bird.s OF THE Hf.A.CHUC'A Moux'iAi N.s, Arizon.a.. By H.arrv S. Sw.arTh. Pacific Coast 
Avifauna No. 4, pp. 1-70, April 15, 1904. 
It affords us great pleasure to call attention to this interesting contribution to the ornithologv 
of southeastern Arizona, and to commend the thoroughness of the work. It is based, with the 
exception of a few scattered records, on observations made and specimens collected by the author, 
W. B. Judson, H. G. Rising and O. W. Howard during three visits to the region in 1896, ig02, 
and 1903. It certainl}’ is refreshing to find a paper entirelv- devoted to the life histories of birds — 
a subject of absorbing interest — and not given over to descriptions of closely split subspecies, the 
principal function of which is to burden the already plethoric pages of sj-nonj-mj-. The arbitrary 
limiting of the list to such species as occur in the mountains proper, above the surrounding plains 
nui}- be in some respects a good plan, though bj- its adoption certain vallej- forms noted near the 
canvon openings are included, while others of similar distribution are omitted. Moreover, inter- 
esting information relating to the migration and distribution of water-fowl and waders in the San 
Pedro and Barbocomari valle^-s is necessaril}- left out. Although the author has had phenomenal 
success in securing a large amount of material, it may not be out of place to make the list more 
complete by adding the following species which have come direct!}- or indirectly under the ob- 
servation of the reviewer. 
Loplwrty.r gantbeli. Examples of this quail were shot by one of the officers at Fort Hua- 
chuca near the post in January, 1895. Scardafclla iuca. Mr. R. D. Lusk secured two specimens 
in Ramsay Canyon, one in 1891, and the other on Sept. 15, 1894. Uriibitinga anthraciua. Dur- 
ing May and early June, 1892, this species was seen on several occasions near P'ort Huachuca. 
Although no specimens were secured the broad white single band on the tail served to identify 
them. ^ Isio ivilsonianiis. A sjiecinien of this owl was secured near Fort Huachuca April 28, 
1892. Micropal/as whit?tcyi. On Alay 7, 1892, my lamented friend Major J. L. Fowler found 
one of these little owls in a clump of oak leaves where it was secured. A month later Mr. Fred- 
erick H. Fowler discovered a female and three eggs in an old woodpecker’s hole, in the canyon 
above the F'ort. Calypte anna. Air. Fowler took two specimens of this hummer at the F'ort, 
Oct. 12, 1892, and Mr. H. Kimball one, .Sept, ii, 189,3. Otocoris alpesiris actia. Three specimens 
were taken by Mr. P'owler Jan. 10, 1893. Xanihoctphalus xanthoccphalHS. This blackbird is 
considered a common winter resident about the Fort. One was seen there May 4, 1892, and 
others in the valley below fully three weeks later. Ainp/ii.'ipiza belli nevadensis. Secured by 
