Page:Condor19(5).djvu/24

THE CONDOR Vol. X1X Nesting of the California Brown Towhee in San Francisco.--The limitation of the range of the California Brown Towhee (Pipilo crissalis crissalis) in the San Francisco Bay region is, I think, most remarkable. This bird is comparatively common not only on the Marin and Alameda shores but also some ten or fifeen miles down the peninsula on which San Francisco is situated, yet within the city itself and the directly adjacent countryside, comprising low-lying hills, brushy canyons, farms, parks and gardens, afford- ing identical climatic conditions together with similarity of food, shelter and nesting fa- cilities, pipilo is, or has been in the past, entirely absent. It was therefore with great surprise not unmixed with doubt as to its authenticity that I read in THF. Co.?)oa for No- vember, 1916, the article by Milton S. Ray, in which he stated that a nest containing four eggs had been found in the spring of 1916 by one of the park game wardens. I wrote to Mr. Ray at the time questioning Mr. Klapp's identification, the error of which that gen- tleman later admitted by his renunciation of the record. On May 4, 1917, while walking in Golden Gate Park, I was able to approach and positively identify, much to my astonishment, one of these d?sputed birds. It disap- peared, but later investigation disclosed that it was still in the vicinity, having evidently been attracted by a caged towhee in the aviary, the imprisoned bird making frantic ef- forts to escape and the one in the open endeavoring no less vigorously to enter. XVhether the captive had originally been caged by the park authorities (I had never previously ob- served it) and had allured the passing wild bird from without, or whether it had volun- tarily entered by the same aperture through which it subsequently escaped, is not known. Suffice that within the following week both birds were at liberty among the trees. It was not, however, until July I that the nest was discovered, situated about twelve feet up in an impenetrable tangle of brush, and presumably at that date contain- ing a complete set, as the head of the brooding bird could be plainly seen. Because of their extreme rarity in the locality the birds and nest were allowed to remain undis- turbed. Can anyone suggest a reason why this species, so abundant on adjacent shores, has until recently remained a stranger to the metropolis? The problem is an interesting one.--GuoRcF. W. SC?{USSLF. R, San Francisco, California, July .tt, 1917. Some Further Notes on San Francisco County Birds.--In the excellent artiq]e by Messrs. Squires and Hansen on San Francisco birdlife I note that two records by Mr. Jesse Klapp incorporated in my article are questioned. I may state I admitted these on the statement by Mr. Klapp that he had been afield with Dr. H. C. Bryant of the Univer- sity of California and was well acquainted with the birdlife in Golden Gate Park. (Num- bers following refer to those in my two lists.) 76. Tyrannus verticalis. Western Kingbird. It appears Mr. Klapp was mistaken in his bird and this should stand on my list thus: 76. hruttallornis borealis. Olive-sided Flycatcher. Disregarding Klapp's record altogether I can definitely record this personally, as a bird flew into our garden (near Sutro Forest) on the morning of May 21, 1917. Carriger also informs me he overlooked contributing this species to my list as he has noted it in the county on a number of occa- sions during the summer months. 86. Pipilo crissalis crissalis. California Brown Towhee. Whether Mr. Klapp did or did not find a nest of this species now matters little, as Mr. Geo. W. Schussler tele- l)honed me he had observed the bird in Golden Gate Park on May 20, 1917, and other dates, and since then Mr. Henry W. Cartiger informs me Mr. Schussler has found it nest- ing. 5. Elanus leucurus. White-tailed Kite. Undoubtedly the most important recent find for the county was the locating of a nest of this bird in the Lake Merced region by Mr. Henry W. Carriger. As this, I believe, will be treated in an extended article by Messrs. Squires and Hansen I omit further reference, only stating that on the morning of June 5 (1917) as Carriger and I approached the above nest the young birds were Just leaving in their initial flight. Since I first recorded this species for the county, in May, 1900, including the above pair I have seen in all but five individuals here and their nest- ing is surely of exceptional interest. 28. Zonotrichia leucophrys nuttalli. Nuttall Sparrow. Cartiger and I collected an unusual set of four well-incubated eggs at Lake Merced on June 5, 1917. They are of characteristic coloration but are remarkable for their small size, measuring in inches only .74x.55, .75x.56, .76x.55, .76x.56. 38. ?Vilsonia pusilla chryseola. Golden Pileolated Warbler. Carriger and I located a nest of this bird at Lake Merced on June 5, 1917, placed on the ground amid weeds and vines at the foot of a large pine. It held three small young.--M?.TO? S. R?Y, Son Fran- cisco, California, July 11, 1917.