Peon sees OU BOON eB USL. Li bel oEN ele a at 
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS 
One hundred and sixty-two species plus the genus Hmpidonax are re- 
ported. Most of these are land birds. ‘The large number emphasizes 
the fact that the area attracts many migrants. Our records include birds 
of widely diverse habitats, not only edge species. Most outstanding among 
these are the Woodcock, the Whip-poor-will, the various rails, and the 
American Bittern. 
Reference to Fig. 2 shows that more than half of the species pause in 
our area only briefly. Presumably they are either hurrying to nesting 
areas or the area is unsuitable. The omissions are as interesting as the 
inclusions. We have never observed chickadees in the area, for example, 
although they are more or less common in other Chicago parks. Ob- 
servations of nesting bird's are infrequent — largely, we think, because 
of the small size of the area. Starlings, House Sparrows, and pre- 
sumably grackles find suitable nesting sites. 
We are puzzled by the presence of some species in one season and 
not in the other. Golden-crowned Kinglets were observed in the fall, 
for instance, and not in spring. JRose-breasted Grosbeaks were seen 
in spring and not in the fall. This correlates with the observations. of 
Clark and Nice. Perhaps these species have slightly different migration 
routes for each’ season. 
LITERATURE CITED 
CLARK, CHARLES T., AND MARGARET M. NICE: 1950. William 
Dreuth’s Study of Bird Migration in Lincoln Park, Chicago. Chicago 
Acad. Sci. Spec. Pub. No. 8, 43 p. 
FORD, EDWARD R.: 1956. Birds of the Chicago Region. Chicago 
Acad. Sci. Spec. Pub. No. 12, 117 pp. 
MILLAR, ISOBEL S. and ALICE E. HECK: 1949. Birding Bughouse 
Square. Aubudon Bull., No. 69, pp. 8-10. 
LAST CALL FOR WILDERNESS 
By RAYMOND MOSTEK 
“WILDERNESS PRESERVATION is the key element of our conserva- 
tion program.” With these words, President Kennedy called for enact- 
ment at this session of the National Wilderness Preservation Act. After 
five years of debate, the Senate passed the bill, S. 174, by the overwhelm- 
ing margin of 78 to 8, early this spring. Conservation groups like the 
Citizens’ Committee on Natural Resources have warned conservationists 
not to be complacent over such a great victory in the upper house. They 
have warned that powerful and well-financed interests are anxious to 
defeat the bill in the House of Representatives. If it fails there, it will 
have to go through the whole legislative grind again next year. 
Hearings were held by the House Subcommittee on Public Lands in 
May. The Wilderness Bill has been called the most imoprtant conserva- 
tion bill before Congress within the last decade. It has bi-partisan support. 
It has the support of every major conservation group in the nation. But 
it is also opposed by grazing interests, by mining interests, by local com- 
mercial groups, and by some real estate interests. 
In essence, the bill would give Congressional protection to the wild 
areas already existing in our National Parks, National Forests, and 
National Wildlife Refuges. At present, these areas could be wiped out 
by a bureaucratic order. Support by your Congressman is most urgent. 
Expressions of opinion should be sent to your Congressman in care of the 
House Office Building, Washington 25, D.C. There is no time to lose! 
615 Rochdale Circle, Lombard, Illinois 
