5 2 
THE CONDOR 
\ Vor,. VII 
compared the three island skins above mentioned with the mainland series, and find several 
counterparts from Palo Alto and Pasadena, which 1 am absolutely and unqualifiedly unable to 
distinguish from them. A conscientious study of Mr. Oberholser’s description leads me to con- 
clude that he was not fortunate in having a sufficient series of mainland breeding birds for com- 
parison . 
As to bionimic reasoning, this flycatcher is migratory everywhere, north of Mexico at least; it 
is not known to occur on any of the Santa Barbara islands, except as a summer visitant; hence it 
is not a resident species there. Therefore we should not expect it to fall under the dominance of 
local environment, at least to such an extent as resident species like the jays, shrikes, song spar- 
rows and wrens. As far as we now know, there is no reason for recognizing “ Einpidonax insu- 
licola" as distinct from E. djffici/is ; therefore I propose that the former name be deposed from 
our lists. — Joseph Grinnell. 
Bohemian W axwings in Utah. — Range of Cliff Swallows. — The long awaited Part 1 1 1, of 
Ridgway’s Birds of North and Middle America came recently to delight my heart, and though a 
formidable pile of examination papers entered a silent protest, I took time to cut the leaves and 
“run through” the volume. In the course of my hasty examination, 1 failed to find any Utah 
record of one of our winter birds, and in another case, I discovered that the range given, can be 
considerably extended in two directions. The species apparently not reported for Utah is the 
Bohemian waxwing (Ampelis garru/us). To my personal knowledge these birds have wintered 
in this part of Utah ( central) for the past seven winters (counting the present) with. one exception, 
that of 1900-1901. They may have been in the state during the winter named, but I did not hap- 
pen to see them. These birds come about the middle of December and remain till the last week 
of March and first week in April. I have in preparation an article for The Condor on the habits 
of these birds, so will not say more now. 
The range of the cliff swallow ( Petroch elido n lunifrons lunifrons ), as given by Ridgway is, 
“mid. and s. Utah.” O11 July 10, 1903, I found these birds nesting well over toward the eastern 
side of Wasatch County. They were making use of a mass of yellow sandstone that had been 
weathered into an arch. In my notes, under the date named, is a rough drawing of this arch and 
the dimensions given are, “twenty feet across the top, while the inside of the span, where the nests 
are suspended, is a little more than ten feet in length and about the same number of feet in width, 
while it is just high enough to admit of my standing erect.” Appearances seemed to indicate 
that a goodly number of nests had been destroyed not long before our visit to the place, and not 
more than two dozen of the birds were seen by us. Two nests were in use; others were in course 
of construction. In three instances new nests were being built on the foundations of old nests, 
and in a single instance the builder was repairing a nest that had the appearance of having been 
in use the year before. We also found these swallows (during the same trip, July 10-30, 1903) 
between Lake Fork and Ft. Duchesne, and between the Fort and Vernal, the county seat of 
Uinta County, thus extending the bounds of their eastern range to within about thirty miles of 
the Colorado line. On May 10, 1903, and May 12, 1904, I found these swallows nesting in the 
cliffs at Echo, in Summit County — about twenty miles west of the southwest corner of Wyoming. 
I am inclined to think that these birds nest throughout Utah, in suitable localities. — S. Ii. Good- 
win, Provo City , Utah. 
Status of the Townsend Warbler in California.— Dendroica townsendi occurs in Cali- 
fornia in two roles, as a regular winter visitant and as a rather late spring migrant.® I have per- 
sonally met with it in both capacities and have secured considerable series of skins. From the 
Santa Cruz District b (Black Mt., King Mt., Woodside, Pescadero Creek, and vicinity of Mon- 
terey) my specimens indicate dates from October 13 through January. In the vicinity of Pasa- 
dena specimens were taken from April 22 to May 13, of various years. These two sets of skins, 
namely, mid-winter visitants from the Santa Cruz District, and late spring migrants from Pasa- 
dena, present slight but significant average differences from one another. The characters con- 
sist in the larger bill, shorter wing and tail, and more rounded wing of the former, as contrasted 
with the smaller bill, longer wing and tail, and more pointed wing of the latter. Such differ- 
ences, we have learned from a study of bird races in general, are apparently correlated with 
lengths of the respective migratory journeys. For while both sets of birds certainly summer 
north of California, one goes no farther south in winter than central California, and the other set 
of individuals traverses the entire length of the state and farther, possibly providing the records 
from southern Mexico and Guatemala. Unfortunately I have no opportunity to examine breed- 
ing birds from the north. But I believe these two sets of individuals represent in reality two 
geographical races, breeding in separate faunal areas, the short-winged birds nesting in the humid 
Sitkan District, of the coast of south-eastern Alaska and British Columbia, the long-winged birds 
a Less in evidence during the southward movement in the fall. b See Map 2 in Pacifiic Coast Avifauna No. 3. 
