THE SENSE OF SMELL IN CATHARTES AURA. 
Wabhington, D. C. 
Editor American Field;— Your issue of January 15, 
1887, contained an article from the Auk, under the above 
caption. As the article was, in part, a criticism of my pub- 
lished views on that subject, I wrote the following reply, 
which, I trust, you will also publish : 
In his article, Mr. Ira Sayles has added another instance to 
the already long list of fallacious “proofs” of the remarka- 
ble power of scent in the American vultures. Ignoring the 
fact that there is certainly room for some difference of 
opinion as to what constitutes a remarkable power of smell 
he sets aside as utterly worthless the experiments of 
Audubon, Bachman, and Darwin, and offers his own chance 
observations as proof that these able and careful observers 
were entirely wrong as regards both their methods and 
conclusions. It seems almost superfluous to say that our 
critic can scarcely have read the original accounts of the 
experiments he condemns, or he would neither accuse so 
thoughtlessly nor explain so easily. 
As to the anatomical evidence introduced, it may be re- 
marked that such an argument from structure to function is 
often extremely unsafe, even for the accomplished anato- 
mist, and the danger is greatest jwhere the experience is 
least. True, Owen has shown that the turkey buzzard has 
well-developed olfactory nerves ; but in the same paper 
(P. Z. S., V, 1837, p. 84, 35) where he records this, he states 
that the same nerves were found to be fully as well devel- 
I oped in the goose, while even in the turkey they were fairly 
; developed, although only about one-sixth as large. Further- 
more, this distinguished anatomist, a part of whose testi- 
mony Mr. Sayles finds so “entirely satisfactory.” closes his 
paper with the remark, that “The above notes show that the 
vulture has a well-developed organ of smell, but whether 
he finds his prey by that sense alone, or in what degree it 
assists, anatomy is not so well calculated to explain as ex- 
periment.” Again, according to Owen (Comp. Anat. and 
Phys. Vert., II, 132), the olfactory nerves are relatively 
largest among birds, in the apteryx ; yet this bird appears to 
use its power of smell mainly for the detection of the 
, worms which form its daily food, and for which it probes 
i in the ground, thus apparently using its keen scent only at 
i very short distances,— hardly more indeed than the length 
; of its own bill. 
Turning now to the personal observations of Mr. Sayles, 
let us consider the evidence which he calls “positive,” yet 
which I regard as entirely inconclusive. In the first place, 
I the data given us are very incomplete, and several of the I 
I most important points recorded were observed merely by 
chance, and before any significance was attached to them ; 
and one can scarcely help questioning the accuracy of many 
of the details of such observations, especially when it is re- 
membered that the occurrences narrated took place more 
than a dozen years ago, and we are not informed whether 
the narrator vsrites from memory or from notes taken at the 
time. It is doubtful whether, under the most favorable 
circumstances, the movements of buzzards could be fairly 
watched at a distance of “more than two miles,” and we are 
not even told how this distance was determined. Again, as i 
the observations were simply accidental, it is more than pos- 
sible that single buzzards had already reached the place un- 
observed by, our critic, but not without attracting the atten- 
tion of the distant flock, which responded in the usual man- 
ner. In order to account for the coming of these first few 
individ uals’ we have only to assume ^that the d ogs had car - 
ried out and left exposed a few fragments of offal, which 
would readily be detected by any sharp-sighted buzzard 
which chanced to be passing, or which may have been in 
the habit of visiting the plantation every morning. In 
March, 1886, the writer received from S. E. Cassino & Co., 
the publishers of the Standard Natural History, a lengthy 
criticism of his statements about the power of scent in vult- 
ures. The criticism, which was by Mr. Sayles, embodied 
all the facts since published by him, and much additional 
matter on various subjects. In connection with the partic- 
ular instance cited above, it was there distinctly stated that 
a flock of buzzards was no unusual sight on the plantation, 
and that nothing was thought of it in this case until they 
were seen wheeling about the open wooAshed (the italics are 
mine) where, during the night, the pot of offal had been 
upset by the dogs. 
Finally, the fact that the birds failed to And the source of 
the stench, and “gave up the search” after staying about 
“for an hour or two,” is totally irreconcilable with the pos- 
session of such powers of scent as would enable them to de- 
tect the same odor at a distance of more than two miles. 
If the space can be spared, I should be glad, in a future 
number, to discuss this subject further, and to give a brief 
resume of the evidence on both sides of the question. 
Walter B. Barrows. 
, ,, . BUZZARDS AND CROWS. „ ^ 
Jnn.^ulA. XXVIll.,-Vo-t- l-T 
’ a Port Royal, Tenn. 
Editor American Field : — In the American Field of 
June 4 G-eorge Greene writes: “I discovered two very 
young lambs with their eyes pecked out by some bird ; 
whether it was done by turkey buzzards or crows I was 
never able to tell, but as it was in a place much frequented 
by crows I gave them the credit of doing the deed.” I will 
say the lambs’ eyes were pecked out by buzzards, as I have 
seen them do it. A few years before the late war buzzards 
were very numerous here and became a great nuisance, 
killing lambs and pigs, and the people were compelled to 
organize into regular killing parties to save their stock, the 
effects of which were soon noticeable by the scarcity of 
buzzards. 
There was something strange about the movements of the 
buzzards during the late civil war. When hostilities began 
aJI the bu zzards dis appear ed from this and other Southern 
states. It is supposed that they were frightened away by 
the heavy cannonading. They certainly left plenty of food 
behind, there being so many horses slain in battle. The 
carcasses would soon dry up in the hot rays of a Southern 
sun, and wherever they were within reach of forest fires 
they would burn like tinder, which was fortunate in view 
of the absence of the buzzards. ^ ■ 
