Afar., 1901 I 
THE CONDOR 
53 
Loomis California Water Birds No. V. — 
Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci. 3rd Ser. Zool. Vol. 
II, No. 5, pp. 349-363. Issued Dec. 24, 1900. 
Mr. Loomis’s fifth paper presents the “re- 
sults of a study of the water birds olf Monterey 
from May i to June 12, 1897.’’ Like his prev- 
ious papers this one is carefully composed and 
the various topics are methodically arranged 
under suggestive headings. Under “General 
Observations” are enumerated the 35 species of 
water-birds observed, among which we note 
Larns glaucus. The specimen, on which this 
record is based, does not show the characters 
of L. harroinanus, which is the form we would 
expect to find on this coast. We also note that 
our only record of l.^ria louivia arra for Cali- 
fornia (Cooper, Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci., V. j). 
414) is shown to have been based on an imma- 
ture specimen of the ordinary Ih'ia troile cali- 
fornica. Mr. Loomis sees no obvious reasons 
for rejecting the old record of Ci'eagriis furcat- 
us off Monterey merely on account of the re- 
moteness of the nesting ground. As in his 
last paper the author does not recognize tri- 
nomials. The brief remarks on the “Cause of 
Return Migration” appear to be mainly in the 
nature of emphasis on ideas already stated in 
his former papers. — J. G. 
WWW 
Profes.sor Coi.i.rtt on the Morphoeogv 
OF THE Cr.\NTUM .\ND THE AURICUI..\R OPEN- 
INGS IN THE N0RTH-P;i:R0PR.\N SpECIES OF 
THE F.\MII,Y vSTRIGID.®. 
By R. W. .Shufekit. M. I).. Reprint Ircnn /mint. 
Moyph.. Vol. XVII, No. i., pp. 119-176: plates XV to X.X, 
and numerous text figiire.s. 
This paper is a “full and complete Knglish 
translation” of Prof. Robert Collett’s memoir 
entitled Cranicfs og Oreaabningenies Bygning 
hos tie nordenropcciske After af Fainiiien 
.Sfiigiiiae, with footnotes ami some general 
considerations by Dr. Shufeldt. Prof. Collett, 
in the first part of his work, divides the owls of 
northern Europe into six groups, “based upon 
the morphology of the cranium and upon the 
structure of the external ear-openings and their 
dermal appendages.” Ten species are consid- 
ered and all belong to the s\\hia.n\\\\ Bitboniiice 
“(the other subfamily, which is represented by 
Strix flamvnea does not occur in .Scandinavia).” 
The second part consists of careful descrip- 
tions of the morphology of the crania and ear 
openings of the ten species. In concluding 
the paper. Dr. Shufeldt gives “Opinions upon 
the Position of the .Strigid^ in the .System,’’ 
presenting the views of Huxley, Newton, Max 
Fuerbringer, Hans Gadow, and H. L. Clark. 
He states his own opinion as follows: “Re- 
garding the owls as a whole, they may be con- 
sidered as forming a grou}) of nocturnal birds 
of markedly ra])torial habits. Some of the 
species, however, are largely diurnal in their 
ways. They are not especially related to the 
Accipifres, but are, on the other hand, remote- 
ly allied with the Capriniulgi . What we now 
know of the structure of such forms as Stea- 
tornis and Podargus sufficiently indicates this 
much.” The translation is well presented, 
and is illustrated by six lithographic plates (by 
Prof. Collett) and seven text figures, redrawn 
by Dr. Shufeldt, from plates by Prof. Collett. 
— W. K. F. 
^ ^ ^ 
The Wieson Buleetin No. 33: Sum- 
mer Reconnoissance in the West, by Lynds 
Jones and W. L. Dawson, Oberlin, Ohio, cov- 
ering observations during a 7000 mile trip over 
fourteen states, with notes and ob.servations 
made on the fly is a very readable paper if the 
observations are not taken too seriously. Mr. 
Jones says in his introductory remarks, “The 
only new feature introduced is the keeping of 
horizons for certain places or certain lengths 
of time aboard train or steamer, in the effort 
to more clearly illustrate wdiat one might hope 
to find in retraversing this region.” 
This idea of dividing the trip into bird hori- 
zons when speeding through the country on a 
railway flyer is commendable, but when the 
ob.servations are confined to a small locality 
like the Pacific slope of Los .Lngeles Co., they 
partake of the nature of a local list and it is 
with such lists that we must make our compari- 
son in order to determine if the observations 
are accurate or of a more or less guesswork 
nature. To show how worthless such a list as 
that published by Mr. Jones might be to a 
stranger in the land, I will mention a few in- 
accuracies or cases of mistaken identification. 
We will overlook his discovery of magpies in 
the vicinity of .San Bernardino for that was 
made from the train and of course subject al- 
ways to mental reservation; but when he enters 
the Pacific slope of Los .\ngeles Count}-, the 
home of three-fourths of the inemliers of the 
Southern Division of the Cooper Ornithological 
Club: a .section more carefully and continuous- 
ly observed during the past ten years than any 
other part of California, and then publishes a 
list of birds observed which he commends for 
its accuracy, it is time to turn on the X ray. 
Both the California and the Pasadena Thrasher 
are noted although only one occurs here. 
Samuel’s Song .Sparrow has not been taken in 
the section mentioned. 
The Black-tailed Gnatcatcher although it 
occurs plentifully thirty miles east and half 
that distance west has not been taken here, in 
spite of the fact that for years all our resident 
members have been looking keenly for it. 
Only one specimen of The Prairie Falcon has 
been taken in ten years, although it occurs east 
and west of us. The Green-tailed Towhee, Brew- 
er’s Sparrow and Calliope Hummingbird are 
rare stragglers in the valley during the migra- 
tion but at the time Mr. Jones visited this vi- 
I 
