10 
THE CONDOR 
Vol. XV 
perhaps feathers, the colors serve no known useful purpose, so far as the inani- 
mate possessor is concerned. Many vegetable colors are surely not for conceal- 
ment, though some may be for protection from light or temperature, and in case 
of flowers, possibly for the purpose of attracting insects, which would mean 
revealing, not concealing, coloration. Many leaves are countershaded, but not 
for concealment, surely. Internal organs, muscles and tendons of animals differ 
in color, but certainly not for concealment from enemies. Are not the beautiful 
yellow and black abdominal colors of the ring-necked snakes (Diadophis, spp.), 
under almost all circumstances, concealed, not concealing? Many heavy shelled 
mollusks which lie buried in mud and have practically no enemies except para- 
sites and boring mollusks, and certainly have no need of concealment, are strongly 
lined with different colors. The species differ in color, surely not for conceal- 
ment, as in many cases the colors are most emphatically not concealing when 
the animal lies on the beach sands unburied. Compare also the inside of the 
])early fresh-water mussels, some species with chocolate-colored nacre, some rose- 
colored and some pure white, surely none for concealment. Innumerable other 
examples will occur to naturalists. 
If no animal were in need of concealment, if coloration were purely haphaz- 
ard, it is possible or even likely that the majority of them would be in a large 
measure concealingly colored. There are more neutral or dull colors, than bright 
and conspicuous colors. While bright colors do not always mean conspicuoiis- 
ness, yet a very brightly colored animal is quite apt to be conspicuous under a 
great many circumstances, while a dull-colored one is quite apt to escape observa- 
tion in almo.st any habitat, if it remains quiet. 
In the varying colors, lights, shades, and details of form of a forest, a small 
animal of almost anv color or color pattern easily escapes observation while quiet, 
not because it is concealingly colored, but because it is only one in the great nia.^^s 
of detail, and the eye sees but a few out of the thousands of details. A black- 
crow, a white heron and a scarlet ibis, all fairly large birds, .standing side by 
side, could escape observation under many circumstances. Furthermore, in for- 
est and brush patches, animals are almost always partly concealed or their out- 
lines broken up by intervening twigs, leaves, etc. Even then it is noticeable that 
many birds which are good examples of concealing coloration take the precau- 
tion to keep a tree or bush between them and their enemies, a fact probably fa- 
miliar to every ornithologist. 
It has been argued that if concealing coloration is quite general, then we arc 
warranted in assuming that it is universal, and that the apparent exceptions are 
exceptions simply because we do not know all the facts. That argument is quite 
unsound, and the acceptance of the doctrine of evolution, recently offered as an 
illustration supporting the argument, is not only not strictly parallel, but not in 
any way or in the slightest degree parallel. Naturalists will generally agree that 
the American bison and muskox in their native haunts are not concealingly col- 
ored and have no need for concealment from natural enemies armed only with 
nature’s weapons. They are vegetarians and well able to protect themselves, ex- 
cept as against the artificial weapons of the human race, especially the death- 
dealing rifles of modern civilization. The same is true of many other animals. If 
this be admitted, then it follows that even though three-fom*ths of all animals are 
to an astonishing degree concealingly colored, the remaining fourth might be re- 
vealingly colored, because fully able to take care of themselves and perpetuate 
their kind, because of greater fecundity, intelligence, activity, strength, or other 
protective character or device. 
