Page:Condor8(6).djvu/25

THE CONDOR Vol,. VIII Because any one person fails to derive pleas- ure from a certain pursuit, it is not incumbent upon him to decry that pu?'snit as followed by anyone else, unless it involves an infringe- ment of the rights of others. Let us be tolerant of one another's peculiarities. We knowof some very despicable cases of egg-hoggishness. .g'ome egg-collecting is ab- solutely useless from any standpoint, and that sort we condemn. No reasonable collector will pursue any of our native animals to the verge of extermination. We believe that mod- erate collecting will not work diminution in the numbers of any of our birds. We believe in the letupcrate collecting of anything which results in added happiness to the individual, just so no one else is directly inconvenienced thereby. Such an occupation becomes all the more commendable when it results in the addition of reliable information to our suni total of scientific knowledge.--J. (;. RECORD In Mr. William Brewster's ad- CRITERIA mirable work just published on "The Birds of the Cambridge Re- gion of Massachusetts," we find in the preface a statement of principles which deserve the widest possible recognition by serious bird stu- dents. We have ourselves intended to ex- press similar views in these columns. But now that we have them from so eminent an authority, and so distinctly stated, we take the liberty of quoting thexn verbatim. These sen- timexits should be taken to lieart by the author of every proposed local list or recc?rd. Publi- cation of any sort of information intended to be of scientific value is a serious step, and is not to be taken lightly. It is very easy to foist upon the science of ornithology undesirable, not to say erroneous, literature. Mr. Brewster says:--"My early training and experience have led me to believe that--with certain exceptions about to be specified--the occurrence of birds in localities or regions ly- ing outside their known habitats should not be regarded as definitely established until act- ual specimens have been taken and afterwards determined by competent authorities. No doubt it is becoming more atul more difficult to live up to this rule becauae of the ever increas- ing and, in the main, wholesome, popular feeling aga:nst the killing of birds for what- ever purpose. Nevertheless I cannot admit that mere observation of living birds met with in localities where they do not properly belong, or where they have not been ascertained to oc- casionallyappear, should often be considered as establishing anything more than possible or probable instances of occurrence--according to the weight and character of the evidence. "Exceptions to the rule may and indeed should be made in the cases of species which, like the Turkey Vulture, the Swallow-tailed Kite, and the Cardinal, are easily recognized at a distance and which are reported by persons known to have had previ- ous familiarity with the birds in life. Sight identifications of species somewhat less dis- tinctly characterized than those jnst mentioned, if made under favorable conditions by observ- ers of long field experience and tried reliabil- ity, may also sometimes be accepted with en- tire confidence. But ou no authority, however good, should a mere field observation of any bird that is really difficult to identify, be taken as establishing an important primal record. "These principles, which, in my opinion, should govern the makers as well as compil- ers of all local records, were formerly en- dorsed, and also followed in the main, by most ornithologists. Of late they have been fre- quently disregarded, especial'Iv by the younger genera'tions of bird lovers and ?tu leats. I have endeavored to apply them consistently and firmly--yet at the same time tolerantly--in dealing with the records considered iu the present paper. If some of my rulings appear arbitrary, it mu.?t be remembered that it is not always possible to explain the reasons which cause one to look askance at the testimony of certain observers while accepting that of ot?ers with entire confidence. It goes without saying that personal considerationg--whether of friend- ship or the reverse--should never be allowed to influence the judgment of auy writer on scien- tific subjects, but his personal knowledge of men and their methods not only does but shinrid exert such influence. Moreover there is often internal evidence in printed testimony --perhaps no more tangible than that to b? gained by what is called 'reading between the lines'--that leads one irresistibly, and, as a rule, quite safely, to adopt conclusions which cannot always be logically justified or consist- ently expla[ned."--J. G. VItV SItOULD IT In number56 of 7'he IFilson HAVE BEEN ,Rulletin (Septe?nber, ?9o6) PRINTED? OCCURS an article entitled "Common Birds of Whittier, California," which excites our severe criticism. In this article appears a half page of introduc- tory matter in which the author states the list following to have been derived lrom notes taken between November 7, z9o5, and May 7, I9o6--a period of seven months. And vet the list is divi&ed into "Residents," "Winter Visi- tants," "Summer Residents," and "Tram sients"! The author, by the way, is very evi- dently an "easterner" visiting southern Cali- fornia for the winter. As far as we know, not a sptcimen was secured to verify the deternil- nations. The list is the main part of the paper, occupying nearly four pages, and embrac- ing no less than ninety-two species. Only one of these, "Nmnenius sp?", is queried, and we are led to believe that there can be absolutely no doubt as to the identity of each of the other ninety-one species enumerated. What galls us mos{t is that the list is couched in full scientificform,containing both scientific and common names and hence each species must be quoted in our synon3. my. These will tax our printer's supply of question marks!. We have qiioted elsewhere Mr. Brewster's remarks regarding records, and these are ex- tremely apropos in the present instance. Thearticle inquestion is poorly edited in sev- eral particulars; foronethiugtherearealtogether too many typographical errors. We would era-