Nov., 1911 PUBLICATIONS REVIEWED 213 of California Museum of Vertebrate Zoology Arrangement, typography, and proofreading presents this liberal measure of results for a?[; above reproach, but the fastidious might single seasoWs work. The author, with one for a more dignified abbreviation than assistant, Mr. A. E. Hasselborg, spent the six months from April to October in visiting six- teeu islands and six mainland localities in southeastern Alaska, reaching practically all important points not covered by the previous expeditiou of 1907. Somewhat more than 1000 specimeus of birds and mammals were collected auda great amount of trustworthy information obtained. The list of birds totals 137 forms of which the 31 not attested by spec- imens are mostly included upon the careful observation and competent authority of the author himself. The extended critical and ecological notes bristle with facts new, inter- estiug, and pertinent to particular ?,prob- lems. The notes on spring migration are pecially welcome as very few observations have been made in this region earlier than May and June. In spite of the evideut active field work done, one notes with no surprise' that but little is recorded of nesting habits and the more intimate features of the bird life. Such' matters must be left to local observers, for the itinerant collector in virgin fields can never spare the time for them. The critical notes are rather too numerous for specific mcntion, but it may be said that they carry a spirit of fairness and in a number of cases matters are presented in a new light or with additional and highly pertinent material tending to elu- cidate the status of various species and sub- species. Among the forms touched upo n in this manner are ]}[acrorhamphus griseus scolopaceus, Buteo b. alascensis, Picoides a.fumi- pectus, Dryobates v. harrisi, D. p. glacialis, ?asserculus ?. savanna, Junco oreganus, mi- rundo e. palmeri and 19endroica c. hooveri. No new forms were discovered, and in view of the large collections and their careful study, this seems to indicate that possibilities in this direction are well nigh exhausted in a long productive region. A very luteresting section of the report, de- voted to "Distributional Considerations," is all too short, although the modest statements of facts and conditions which it includes are perhaps better without ingenious elaboration of the theories to which they might lend themselves. In finding no faunal relation- ship between Prince of Wales Island and the Queen Charlotte group, the author is at vari- ance with former writers who had the advan- tage of the possession of extensive material from both localities. Doubtless he is right as to the reference of specimens, but we venture the belief that the Queen Charlotte forms are approached more closely by specimens from Prince of Wales Island and nearby islets than from elsewhere. Grin. for Grinnell, especially as we do not find on the same page, correspondiug abridg- ments to Les., Lin., Nut., and Pal.--W. H. OSGOOD. THE WARD-MCILHENN WILDFOWL REF- tJOE. By CHARLES WILLIS WARD [?Forest and Stream, vol. LXXVII, no. 5, Jllly, 1911, pp. 167-170, 5 ills.] It is hard to overestimate the practical value of such game protection as is here described. To set aside large tracts of suitable land (there are 13,000 acres in this refuge) on which abso- lutely no shooting is allowed, will most assur- edly protect the game thereon, while, as the writer says, "laws limiting their killing, pro- hibitions of the sale of game, societies for the protection of game, all seem inadequate to pre- vent the steady destruction of wild life". Of game laws, supposedly protective, but too often juggled with and adjusted to benefit various coteries of shooters, rather than the game, we have a superabundance, frequently so complicated and contradictory iu different parts of the same state that it is hard for the conscientious sportsmau to obey, aud frequeutly easy for the unscrnpnlous to evade them..After years of experimentation along the same gen- eral lines we are forced to admit that our present system of game preservatiou is a failure, and that unless some radical chauges are made, many of our game birds and mam- mals, and many non-game birds as well, are certain to disappear. Some have already gone. The "game refuge" idea holds out a gleam of hope. It looks practical aud reasonable, and, linked with sensible restrictive laws covering the country at large, should do much to arrest the deplorable decrease of animal life. It is an undertaking that should be carried out by the various state governments, but the states are slow to move in such matters, and any private individuals stepping in meanwhile and doing as Messrs. Moilbenny and Ward have done deserve the fullest measure of praise and credit for their work. They seem to be going ahead in an emiuently practical aud un- sentimental way. Sportsmeu themselves, and fond of shooting, they are attacking the problem from the staudpoint not that it is
wrong to kill for sport but that it is eminently
foolish and unsportsmanlike to utterly destroy so valuable au asset as the game of a country, and leave nothing for the morrow. We wish them the fullest measure of success Their efforts should be given the widest publicity, and the results studied carefully. Would that other wealthy men .could be found to attempt the same thing elsewhere; such refuges are badly needed in our own state, and could prob-
