Page:Condor20(4).djvu/15

July, 1918 PUBLICATIONS REVIEWED 141 Kalmbach has underestimated the economic significance of this corvine trait. The re- viewer was born and raised in Maryland, which is a veritable crow paradise, and he had abundant opportunity of observing the havoc wrought by crows during the nesting season. Lack of space precludes an extend- ed account of this or other interesting points, so suffice it to say that the destruc- tion of only a few insectivorous birds by a crow, means that in order to be beneficial, his crowship would have to spend the bal- ance of his life in pursuing noxious insects! Valuable tables are given, and an inter- esting feature is a chart showing the per- centages of the different classes of foods consumed during all nionths. Specifically distinct items to the number of 656 have been discovered on the crow's menu, which is rather large even for such an omnivorous appetite. In fact, it is well-nigh impossible to recall anything biological to which the crow is not partial. The most serious of- fens'e of which the black robber is guilty, is the destruction of great quantities of corn, especially just after planting, and this grain forms the principle single item of food, amounting to 65 per cent of the stomach contents during December. Other grains are eaten in smaller amounts; and lesser depre- dations, in the way of destruction of fruit and vegetables, poultry, beneficial insects, reptiles, and even small pigs and lambs, are listed. Against this is the consumption of harmful insects (including many grass- hoppers), weed seeds, some small mam- mals, and carrion, In the control of which last the crow is no mean rival of the buzzards. Mr. Kalmbach thinks that the harm which the crow does is almost coun- terbalanced by its good traits, but this seems still to be ?n open question, and one which will be vigorously argued by the farmer who has lost an entire crop of melons or a planting of corn in a short time. Whether we catalogue him as an undesirable or not, the crow is here to stay, for no destructive agency yet devised by man is capable of re- moving him, and the long black ribbon of his followers, from an eastern winter sky.-- A. B. HOWELL. Included in the "SVMMARY REPORT OF THE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DEPARTMENT OF MINES, FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 1916" [Ottawa, Can- ada, 1917] there are several "Divisional Re- ports" treating of collections of birds, by P. A. Taverner or R. M. Anderson. Those by the first mentioned author pertain to collec- tions made near Barkley Sound, Vancouver Island, in midwinter (pp. 355-357), at main- land points in British Columbia during the summer months (pp. 359-368), and in Mani- toba (pp. 371-374). The Barkley Sound list is of especial interest from the time of year at which the collection was made, and doubtless the mainland reports also contain records of value, but the feature of the three papers that calls for special comment is the rather startling innovation in style intro- duced by the author. Subspecies are ignored In all the head- ings. The scientific name of the species is given in binomial form, and the English name is that applied to the whole specific group or else to the eastern race. Thus, al- though the Cassin Vireo is the form of that particular species occurring in British Co- lumbia, it is entered as "Solitary Vireo, Lanivireo solitarius." As, in the present state of our knowledge of the ornithology of the northwest, the value of such a report as this one lies largely in the exact subspecific determination of the various forms at the points at which specimens are taken, .the procedure here followed seems most decid- edly a move in the wrong direction. In nearly every instance the author's com- ments upon the specimens examined treat of the racial peculiarities exhibited, ? and in the many cases where he has evidently made up his n?lnd as to the subspecies rep- resented there seems to be no good reason why the proper subspecific name should not be placed plainly as a heading. There is no evident gain in the procedure he has fol- lowed. but there is, on the contrary, throughout all three reports, an atmosphere of vagueness and uncertainty that detracts greatly from their value. Certainly there are many "records" incorporated therein that can be used by no one else, at least in any study of geographical distribution, without re-examination of the specimens listed. The author seems to be rather pessimistic- ally inclined towards most western subspe- cies, and while no one could criticize him on that score were his objections ?learly stated and his evidence in orderly array, the vague, and in a general way, depreca- tory remarks directed against many sub- species now quite universally recognized by other bird students, are of such unconvinc- ing character that for the most part they were better left unsaid until they could be more logically and strongly presented. They are the "dribbling protests" to which Os- good (CONDOR, X?, 1909, 107) once rightly took exception. As an example in point, the treatment ac- corded the Western Goshawk may be cited. It iS entered as "Goshawk, Astur atricapil- lus", with the following comment: "The fineness of the breast vermiculations seems to be more an indication of age than geog- raphy; younger birds being more coarsely marked than old ones." Now this may be very true, and it is, of course, a point worthy of careful consideration; but one would like to see some supporting evidence for the con- clusion reached. It is an easy matter to make a selection of specimens representing various steps between two extremes, but it does not necessarily follow that any one in-