Sept., 1910 
FROM FIELD AND STUDY 
175 
until closely prest, when it would fly a short distance. After being chased itp the beach some 
200 yards it would fly out around the pursuer back to its original rendezvous. This procedure 
would be repeated over and over. 
It is thus apparent that the stranger was a beach-comber in habits, just as are the song 
sparrows in the summer home of M. m. caurina , in Alaska, and quite different in habits from 
the resident race of the Humboldt Bay region. I am very much indeted to Mr. Clay for the 
above information, and especially for the privilege of putting his capture on record, it being, as 
far as I know, the first for California. — J. Grinnelu. 
Red Phalarope in Southern California in Winter. — In the May number of The Condor 
II. S. Swarth mentioned the scarcity of winter records for the Red Phalarope (. Phalaropus fulica- 
rius) in California. 
In November and December, 1907, C. B. Linton and myself found this species very abund- 
ant around Anacapa and Santa Cruz Islands. This note was publish! by Mr. Linton and may be 
found in The Condor, Vol. X, 1908, p. 126. This was probably overlook! by Mr. Swarth. 
Many specimens of this Phalarope were taken at this time and are now in the collections of 
Mr. Linton and myself. During the last week of November there were thousands of the 
birds and some remained well into December. I do not believe, however, that they staid thru 
the entire winter. — G. Wild, EXT. 
PUBLICATIONS REVI EWEI) 
The New A. O. U. Cheek List.' — Now that the Third Edition of the Check-List of North 
American Birds has actually appeared the student may at last discard with safety his worn -to- tatters 
1895 copy, interlined, crost-out, emended, and procure for himself a clean new copy. Having 
done so, if he be of progressive tendency, mindful ever of the signs of advance in his field, he 
will at once begin again to interline, erase, re-instate, amplify. And herein lies the enormous 
scientific value of such a periodic compendium as the Check-List: it constitutes a basis for 
departure anew. 
During the fifteen years which have elapst — altogether too long a time to allow between 
revized editions of a work) of this sort — since the publication of the .Second Edition, numerous 
additions and changes in status relative to North American birds have resulted from the constant 
activity in their study. By means of frequent supplements, printed in The Auk , the A. O. U. 
Committee on Nomenclature has kept the public posted on those of the proposed changes of which 
it has approved. To the student who has watch t this series of supplements, therefore, the new 
Check-List offers no startling innovations on this score. Since the classification and sequence 
employed in the Third Edition is practically the same as used in the Second, the only remaining 
really great point of improvement is in the much more full and accurately exprest statements of 
the ranges of species. 
The adoption of the modern method of expressing animal distribution in terms of life zones 
leads to a conciseness of statement not before achieved. Anil the interpolation of a colored map 
of the Zones of North America, compiled by C. Hart Merriam and his assistants of the Biologi- 
cal Survey, gives to the reader unfamiliar with this method an invaluable key to the situation. 
It is a recognized difficulty to bild a statement of range consistent with all known facts and 
yet keep it within the small space necessitated by the practical limits of a hand-book. Loose 
statements in the ranges of species, as given in the Check- List, appear to be relatively rare. A few 
are apparent: The range of Junco hyemalis pi nos us is stated to be “Coast strip of San Mateo and 
northern Monterey counties, California.” There is thus no indication that the species is just as 
well known to occupy suitable ground in the intervening territory (Santa Cruz and Santa Clara 
counties). It is stated that Melospiza lincolni lincolni “winters from San Jacinto Mountains” 
etc. ; we were not aware that the bird wintered in any of our mountains. 
The breeding range of Passer cut us restrains restrains is given as “unknown, but probably 
from about .San Pedro, California, to” etc.; this is most emphatically not probable, as the coastal 
localities of southern California are well known to have been pretty thoroly search! without find- 
ing any conclusive evidence of the breeding of the species within the state. The breeding range 
of a species cannot be considered as establisht by one or two instances of occurrence of individual 
birds in summer. 
(continued on page 177) 
i Check-Irist I of I North American Birds 1 Prepared by a Committee | of the I American Ornithologists’ Union I 
Third edition (Revised) I — I Zoological Nomenclature is a means, not an end, of Zoological Science | — | New York I 
American Ornithologists’ Union | 1910; S vo., pp. 1-430, 2 maps. Price $2.50. 
