PINTAIL.
Dafila acuta.
FRANK H. SHOEMAKER, HAMPTON, IA.
Paper read before the First Congress of I. O. A.
Under this heading I have considered the species of four orders—Pygopodes, Longipennes, Steganopodes and Anseres. This is indeed an inexact classification of “sea birds,” but will meet the requirements of the subject in this case. The order Anseres is probably as a whole the least entitled to a position under the general heading, but owing to the maritime habits of many of the species the entire order is included.
The following list is essentially a compilation, since my residence within the state has been too far removed from watercourses or lakes to furnish opportunity for personal observation. My chief authority throughout is the Report on Bird Migration in the Mississippi Valley during the years 1884 and 1885. Frequent reference is made also to a list of the birds of Iowa, compiled by J. A. Allen, constituting Appendix B in Vol. II of the State Geological Survey of 1870. No more than a passing mention of species can be made at this time.
The order Pygopodes has five representatives in this state—three grebes and two loons. Holbœll’s Grebe is a species of northern regions, coming south in winter occasionally to the upper portions of the Mississippi Valley. The Horned Grebe is an allied species, more common than the former, though not abundant; it is occasional in Iowa as a migrant, but it is doubtful if it ever winters in any part of the state. The Pied-billed Grebe, popularly known by a more forcible as well as a more fittingly descriptive name, occurs in all parts of the state as a summer resident, nesting quite commonly, though its eggs seldom appear in the cabinets of those who do not know the peculiar nesting habits.
The family Urinatoridæ is represented by two species: the Loon proper, Urinator imber, and its ally, the Red-throated Loon. The former is the more common variety, inasmuch as it nests in the north and appears regularly during migrations, while the latter variety, the Red-throated 32 Loon, is a distinctively northern species, and appears only during the winter, very irregularly. Three years ago I saw a flock of Red-throated Loons on a small lake in Franklin county, and after a long detour and much careful crawling in a layer of snow and mud, succeeded in approaching near enough to secure two of the birds at one shot. This is the only time I have found loons of either variety in a flock; the class is not gregarious and I would not be convinced of the identity until I had the birds where I could compare with description.
The order Longipennes has ten representatives in Iowa, four of the species being gulls and six terns. The Great Black-backed Gull is mentioned by Allen as a rare migrant occurring within our borders. It is probable that none have been seen within recent years. The Herring Gull migrates over nearly all of the Mississippi Valley. Franklin’s Gull breeds from southern Minnesota northward, passing through Iowa during migration, but is not a common variety. Bonaparte’s Gull is strictly northern in its nidification, wintering on the gulf coast and traversing Iowa during migrations. The Gull-billed Tern is chiefly a coast bird breeding on the Gulf of Mexico, but is occasionally reported from the various portions of the Mississippi Valley. The Caspian Tern was taken by J. W. Preston in central Iowa, but should probably be considered as a straggler. It is an irregularly distributed species and is found chiefly along the gulf coast. Forster’s Tern is a common variety in northern Iowa, and is generally distributed over the state as a summer resident, wintering on the coast. The Common Tern, according to Mr. Preston before quoted, has been taken in Central Iowa. The Least Tern, while chiefly coastwise in its habitat, is occasionally found in various parts of the Mississippi Valley. I do not know at what place nor at what season specimens have been taken in Iowa, but Mr. Allen names it in his list. The Black Tern is the most common of the class with us as a summer resident.
Of the Steganopodes there are two species. The Double-crested Cormorant winters south and is common during migrations. I have taken several specimens in Franklin county. The American White Pelican winters in the gulf states and passes through Iowa to its breeding place in the north.
The order Anseres has thirty species which have been taken in Iowa. The fish-eating ducks have three representatives, the American, Red-breasted, and Hooded Mergansers, all of which I have seen in Franklin county. The American Merganser winters south and nests north, passing through Iowa as a migrant, one of the earliest. The Red-breasted Merganser is said to be an occasional winter resident in favored portions of the state, but is more common as a migrant. The Hooded Merganser is a hardier species than the former, wintering further north, though not frequently in Iowa, owing to the freezing of almost all the water courses.
The Mallard is an early and abundant migrant. The Black Duck is chiefly an eastern species, seldom found west of the Mississippi River, but according to the Report on Bird Migration it has been known to breed in Iowa. The Gadwall migrates in great numbers to congregate on the gulf coast, but is said to winter in some parts of Illinois and possibly in Iowa. The Baldpate ranges all over North America, wintering far south. The Green-winged Teal breeds chiefly above the United States border, but is a common migrant. The Blue-winged Teal nests further south, sometimes in this state. The Shoveller breeds from Minnesota northward, migrating commonly through Iowa.
The Pintail, the subject of our frontispiece, is an early migrant, but unlike the greater number of the ducks which migrate first it does not nest exclusively in the far northwest. It is a common breeder at Heron Lake, Minn., and at Spirit Lake, Iowa, and has been known to nest in portions of Illinois. The Wood Duck is a summer resident throughout the Mississippi Valley. The Red-head is a common migrant, its range being almost identical with that of the Pintail. The Canvass-back is known to breed at Heron Lake, but I have seen no Iowa record. The Blue-bill and Lesser Blue-bill, or Scaup, ducks occur chiefly as migrants, but are summer residents in the northern part of Iowa, there being several records of nesting at Clear Lake, in Cerro Gordo county. The Ring-neck also has been found breeding there, this being the most southern record of its nesting. It is, of course, chiefly a migrant. The Golden-eye breeds north of Iowa, our only notes on the species classing 34 it a migrant and rare. The Bufflehead is chiefly a migrant, but is a summer resident in the northern part of the state. The nesting has been noted at Clear and Spirit Lakes. The Harlequin Duck is one concerning which I find no definite Iowa notes, but on the strength of Mr. Allen’s list it may be named as a winter visitor. The Black Scoter is another species concerning which specific notes are wanting, but it is mentioned by the same authority. There is a record of the Surf Scoter at LaPorte, accredited to G. D. Peck in the Report on Bird Migration. The Ruddy Duck is a migrant, according to Allen.
Among the geese, we have the Blue Goose, a regular migrant, which breeds on Hudson’s Bay; the Lesser Snow Goose, a regular migrant, chiefly following the rivers; the White-fronted Goose, which is known as a migrant in all parts of the Mississippi Valley north of southern Illinois, where it has been known to winter; the Canada Goose, the best known of the Anseres; and the Brant, which occurs as a migrant. The last named is so uniformly confounded with the Lesser Snow Goose that reports on the species are very likely to be inaccurate.
The two varieties of Swans, the Whistling and Trumpeter Swans, occur in Iowa. According to the Report on Bird Migration, the Trumpeter Swan has been found nesting near Newton, Iowa. The Whistling Swan is named on the authority of Mr. Allen’s list.
Note—During the discussion which followed the reading of the paper, Mr. Morton E. Peck reported the occurrence of the Ring-billed Gull and the Man-’o-War Bird at LaPorte, his home place. Mention was made also of the Least Tern, the species having been seen in Winnebago county.
WILLIAM W. LOOMIS, CLERMONT, IOWA.
Paper read before the First Congress of I. O. A.
The question how to prevent the depopulation of our feathered friends is beginning to be agitated by many ornithologists and it might be well for us to spend a few moments in discussing the problem. For convenience sake let us consider the subject under three heads: Are birds useful? Is there an unnecessary 35 destruction of them? And if so, how can they be protected?
I am sure that nearly everyone enjoys listening to the song birds, but here in America we often do not consider the beauty of anything or the pleasure it furnishes, as much as the dollars and cents it produces or saves. So the first thing to be decided is, are birds, financially speaking, beneficial? A recent number of the Youth’s Companion had an article on the protection of birds. It says “We have thirty species of insects which subsist on our common garden vegetables and our apple orchards have fifty kinds of insect enemies.” It then names the birds that are making steady warfare against the pests, and adds, “The estimated annual destruction of crops by insects in the United States is more than four hundred millions of dollars.” Now the more birds that are killed, the greater becomes the damage done by vermin, and it is plain to be seen that if the birds were allowed to multiply it would not be long before they would save to the United States this four hundred million dollars. Would not this be a benefit?
Concerning the usefulness of birds many persons, especially culturists, seem to have erroneous ideas. Every farmer keeps one or more cats to rid his buildings of rats and mice, and he willingly compensates them for their services by giving them a liberal supply of food; but many of these estimable men fairly get beside themselves if a hawk robs them of a chicken. Now I claim that the hawks kill enough noxious animals to more than recompense them for the loss of their chickens. To sustain this statement let me refer you to the time when the legislature of Pennsylvania passed the “Scalp Act.” This act placed a bounty of fifty cents on every hawk and owl that was killed. What was the result? Well, in eighteen months the state paid out no less than ninety thousand dollars in cash and saved to the farmers one thousand, eight hundred and seventy-one dollars in chickens.
This made eighteen dollars apiece for every chicken that was saved. Rather expensive poultry. But this was not the worst, for as fast as the hawks and owls decreased, the rodents and other pernicious animals increased, and that year the loss of crops which the department of agriculture attributed to the excessive number of injurious animals was estimated 36 to be about two million dollars. Does this not prove that the raptores as a class are beneficial?
The robin is a bird that has incurred the enmity of gardeners. The horticulturists near Boston sent a petition to the legislature requesting that the robin be taken from the list of protected birds. An investigating committee was appointed who found by examining robins’ stomachs that nine-tenths of its food consists of an injurious larvæ, proving beyond all doubt that the bird was a great benefactor.
A gentleman from Michigan who signs himself “Amicus Avium” has given special attention to the phœbe and has estimated the amount that this bird annually saves the state. One pair of birds from March 15th to October 1st, rears two broods or ten birds. Each bird eats thirty insects an hour eight hours a day. The gentleman then finds the entire number of insects destroyed and estimates that if they were permitted to live, each one would do one-thousandth of a cent damage to fruit, grain or lumber. Allowing one and a half pair of birds for every square mile in the state, would make a saving of over three and one-fourth million dollars.
I have dealt with only a few species, but have tried to select those that deal with the entire feathered tribe.
Now if we grant that birds are useful, let us turn to the second head of our subject.
No one wishes to leave the forests and prairies in their primitive condition for the sake of the birds, even when he knows the progress of civilization has caused and will continue to cause a decrease in American bird population. We know that there were the same avicular cannibals before the advent of the white man, as there are to-day, but it will take a long time before the hawks or blue jays or cow birds can exterminate a single species. It is of greater evil-workers that I wish to speak.
First is the English Sparrow. These disreputable Britons were brought here to destroy the span-worm, and they must be credited with having done their work well. A limited number might be a good thing, but surely their introduction has proved a case where “remedy is worse than disease.” A few years ago these birds were sold for four dollars a pair, and now I do not know but what one could be supplied with them at four cents a pair, so rapidly have 37 they increased. These foreigners are of such a quarrelsome and pugnacious nature that the native songsters have had to retreat from place to place before them. And now our feathered friends are far from their favorite haunts, and greatly reduced in numbers; unless a helping hand is given they will be compelled to follow in the footsteps of the Great Auk. Of course we have no statistics to show the number of birds that the sparrow destroys, but it is evident to the observer that unless war is declared against him, we must say good-bye to many of our native songsters.
Many birds are used every year to supply the demand of fashion. Mr. A. J. Allen claims that there are ten million American women of a “bird wearing age and proclivity,” and that it takes five million perfect birds to supply them. The greater number of these are killed during the breeding season and someone, I do not know who, will have to answer for the hundreds of little birds that are left in the nest and allowed to starve to death. Let us count one little bird for each pair of old ones, this will make two and a half million. (Now some will say that this is too many. Certainly! Not near all are breeding, but all that are, have from one to six to a dozen offspring.) This makes in all seven million, five hundred thousand birds that are annually used to decorate hats and bonnets. Wholesale dealers count one hundred birds to the bushel. This would make seventy-five thousand bushels, or more than enough to fill ninety-three box cars. It is difficult for the mind to conceive of such vast numbers of birds, and to think that they are used for what seems to us, a worse than useless purpose. But what arouses the greatest indignation in the lover of birds, is to see these same feather-bedecked women go to Sunday School, get up before a class of boys or girls and say, “You mustn’t rob birds’ nests, because it is wicked and only bad boys do that.” It is to be hoped that the “New Woman” will bring with her new and better ideas for decorating her head-gear.
Other destroyers of birds are the Great American Egg Hogs—the imitation naturalists who cover up their crimes with a veil they call science. These might be divided into two classes; those who collect for mercenary purposes and those who collect simply to amass a great variety of 38 birds and eggs. Then we find a sub-class, those who are always collecting and have not time to study just then, but expect to do that after awhile. Why it is that these persons collect so many birds and eggs of the same species is a mystery. One complains about his hard luck, saying he got only one hundred eggs all day, one brags about taking one hundred and seventy-five eggs of a rare bird; another boasts about “scooping” as he called it, one hundred and twenty dozen in one day. What is the object of this wholesale destruction?
If it were permissible for me to criticize so eminent a naturalist as Dr. Coues, I would say I do not agree with him. He says in his “Key,” “How many birds of the same kind do you want? All you can get. At least from fifty to one hundred, and more of the commoner varieties.” That is all right for colleges and museums, where there are many persons to examine the specimens, but not for the private collector. I am afraid that the worthy gentleman himself would soon object if each of the several thousand collectors in the United States would follow his advice. It is difficult to see how he expects to advance science so much more by his one hundred stuffed birds than by the student who goes out and takes notes from life. I will quote from Emerson, “The bird is not in its ounces and inches, but in its relation to nature, and the skin or skeleton you show me is no more a heron, than a heap of ashes or a bottle of gases into which his body has been reduced, is Dante or Washington.” We cannot tell about the character or habits of a person by examining his body after he is dead and embalmed, yet it is by preserved specimens of birds that the worthy gentleman attempts to work. What is needed is more students and less collectors.
We all know of the great damage done by the pot hunters and the small boy who robs nests and kills birds “just for fun,” but this can be remedied by proper laws. It is the question of how to protect the birds against other enemies, that we are to discuss.
What is to be done with the English Sparrow? One man suggests that if every collector would invest in an air-rifle and use it on them it would reduce their numbers. This might help, but I am afraid that it would take more air and patience than could be found. Out of the many ways which have been suggested, the 39 only feasible one—at least in my mind—it now employed by a few of the states, paying a bounty on the pests.
To prevent or rather change the fashion for wearing birds, some advocate legislative action against hats trimmed with feathers. It is a question in my mind whether such a course would prove feasible, for the ladies have as much right to use the birds that way as some of our collectors have to hoard them away in their cabinets. It is quite generally agreed that the only way is to appeal to the better nature of the ladies and trust them to put away the fashion and take up something more in keeping with the close of the nineteenth century. Many ways are suggested for bringing the subject before the public. One is by placing placards in street cars, another is by distributing slips in churches, on which are printed a few statistics showing the number of birds that it takes to supply the demand, etc.
The next and most difficult question to solve is how to convince the farmer that he is injuring himself every time he kills an owl or robin or the other birds that he probably believes to be his enemies. Now we all know that there are some “black sheep” among the birds. It seems to me that one of the objects of our association is to point out to the farmer just which these “black sheep” are. It is perfectly natural and right for a man to protect his property, and even if he knows that many of the raptores are beneficial, he does not like to have them take his poultry. I do not know how to prevent the hawks from taking toll for their work, but if the farmers would build respectable chicken-coops, they would not be troubled with owls, for they being nocturnal are not out until the chickens have gone to roost and it is only the farmer who allows his poultry to sleep in trees that suffers, and we might say in the words of the small boy, “It’s just good enough for him.”
Finally, I would say that the only way to preserve our birds is to present facts to the people showing them the true character of each bird. They can then distinguish how the birds should be treated, protecting their friends and destroying their enemies.
Thus by awakening the farmer to his own interests, securing needful laws, and with a never-ceasing warfare against the 40 pseudo-naturalists and English Sparrow, we may in time hope to recall to their own homes, our favorite friends, the pursued and persecuted birds. As they return to our door yards and take up life as in the days of yore, we will become better acquainted and realize more fully their great mission in this world.
This return will serve as a death warrant to the avaricious collector and as an impetus to the student who devotes his life to the exploration of the characters and habits of these, the favorites of nature.
JOHN V. CRONE, MARATHON, IOWA, COMPILER.
The Vireonidæ, our family for special study this quarter, is quite well represented in Iowa, the reports embracing definite notes from sixteen counties, and upon seven different species. No doubt the notes would have been more profuse were it not for the fact that ornithologists are somewhat tardy in becoming acquainted with the different varieties of our smaller birds.
The Red-eyed Greenlet is of wide distribution, not being confined to the U. S.
In Iowa it appears to be quite generally found. However, the notes show a dearth of either the birds or enthusiastic ornithologists in the west and northwest portions of the state, since it is reported from only one county,—Pottawattamie—in that region, while there are profuse notes on the species from fifteen in the eastern and central parts.
It arrives in the state in late April and early May, breeds during late May and all of June and leaves during the latter part of August or September.
It is a more numerous migrant than summer resident; but is not rare by any means during the breeding season, being reported as “common” or “abundant” by nearly all who mention the numbers found through the period of nidification. Assuming all those who reported on the species to be equally versed in our favorite science, the numbers vary considerably with locality. Most likely this is due to the topography of the country in question.
The nest is pensile—a trite statement to most lovers of birds, 41 yet new to some of our readers perhaps—and is a beautiful and interesting structure. The site varies considerably in elevation as will be seen from the following quotations: “under thirty feet in elm and ash trees;” “swung from the low branch of some bush or tree, between five and ten feet from the ground;” “low branches of large trees or near the tops of saplings;” “near ground between five and twenty feet up;” “lowest limb of maple tree, seven feet up;” “suspended from the fork of a slender limb, usually a few feet up; sometimes quite high;” “almost any height from the ground.”
The “little basket” is “deeper and narrower than that of V. gilvus.” It is “built of interwoven vegetable materials, hempen fibers and the soft inner bark of trees,” a preference being noticed by Mr. Shoemaker for the inner bark of the dead elm and ash. Mr. Giddings reports a nest “composed of grass, pieces of hornet’s nests and spider webs. The hornet’s nest had furnished fully one-half of all the nest. It was lined with hair and fine grass.” Another nest described by Mr. D. L. Savage, was “composed of fibers from the milkweed. Grass and cobwebs were profusely used on the outside.” It was “pensile and cup-shaped and lined with reddish fibers.”
The worst that can be gleaned from the reports on our little Greenlet is, that it, innocently and unwittingly no doubt, helps to sustain that despicable pest, the Cowbird.
Mr. D. L. Savage and Mr. Law each report sets of ¼ V. olivaceous and 1-1 Molothrus ater. In the nest before mentioned Mr. Giddings found on June 12, 1895, two eggs of the Vireo, and one of the Cowbird. The next day there were three eggs of the Vireo, and two of the Cowbird. He finds the Vireo much imposed upon by the Cowbird. Mr. C. C. Smith says, “With the exception of the Chipping Sparrow, perhaps no bird is so much imposed upon as this Vireo. I think that the Vireo will desert the nest if the egg of the Cowbird is deposited first because one will often find one or two eggs of the Cowbird in a deserted nest of the Vireo. Two or three eggs of the Vireo with from one, two or three of the Cowbird is the usual number. I have seen the following combinations, 624 1-4 and 495 1-1; 624 1-3 and 495 1-1; 624 1-3 and 495 1-2; 624 1-3 and 495 1-3.”
Evidently the Red-eye is not 42 much in fear of man, since Mr. Heaton finds it a regular resident in his door yard where it is under observation at all times; and Mr. Barstch has found it nesting in the cities of Burlington, Decorah and Iowa City.
The species has a “loud, clear song that can be heard in any woodland.” It is “one of our best and most persistent songsters continuing during its entire stay.” It “may,” says Mr. Smith, “be heard at all hours of the day. Its song is rather monotonous and is uttered as the bird flits about among the foliage. It has also a characteristic alarm note which is uttered when the person gets too near its home; and the note is nearly always a sign of the near proximity of the nest.”
This species is reported from only two counties—Scott and Jackson. Mr. Giddings thinks it may breed in Jackson county, since he has noted it there during the breeding season. He finds it very rare, having seen the bird only a few times. He first saw the species for the season of 1895, on June 1st.
Mr. J. H. Brown finds it not uncommon in Scott county. In some seasons he finds it a quite common migrant. He agrees with Mr. Davie that it is very like V. gilvus, but finds it much more quiet during migrations, “seeming to prefer tree-tops and rural districts.” He finds it rather erratic, being common one year and perhaps rare the next.
Mr. Davie says, in his Nests and Eggs of N. A. Birds, that the species is “not common wherever found;” but that “in portions of the Mississippi valley it is more common than in the eastern states occurring regularly and in considerable numbers during the spring and fall migrations.” The I. O. A. needs to take this species especially in hand and develop information concerning it.
This species does not seem to be so widely and generally distributed as the Red-eye, or else it is not so well known. It is reported from twelve of the sixteen counties heard from. “Common is the word most often used in connection with its numbers. The compiler judges that next to the Red-eye, it is the most numerous species in Iowa. The dates of its occurrence are from April to 43 September. June seems to be almost exclusively its nesting season. Davie reports it as nesting in May and June, but it must nest in May farther south, since none of the notes report it earlier than June 12th. The compiler finds its commonest date of nidification to be about June 20th.
The nesting site is higher than that of the Red-eye, or any other reported. “Frequently nests in tops of maples in door yards as high as forty feet;” “usually thirty or forty feet;” “generally higher than that of the Red-eyed Vireo;” “usually placed at a considerable height;” “high among trees;” “usually in horizontal crotch at greatest possible distance from crotch of tree.”
All that can be gleaned from the reports about the nest itself, is that it is pensile, cup-shaped and lined with fine grass. The nest in the prairie groves of Buena Vista county is generally composed of coarse grass and bark strips, very neat though rather rough on outside, and is lined with down from the seed of the cottonwood tree.
Mr. Brown finds that the species seems to prefer the vicinity of towns in migrations, but of groves and open woods for breeding. Mr. Peck notes that it “nests about houses and along the edges of woods.” With Mr. Smith it “inhabits the shade trees along the street.” Mr. D. L. Savage finds it nesting “near the abode of man.”
Those who are acquainted with the Bronzed Grackle will call to mind how, when one of these is aroused, it will utter its loud and excited cries, soon calling around it others who join in throwing imprecations upon the intruder, and follow him from tree to tree. The compiler has often found the nest of gilvus by thus disturbing the Grackles, who in turn are scolded by the Vireos, if the domain of the latter is intruded upon. The note of the Vireo in such cases when it fears the safety of its nest, somewhat resembles the cry of a cat.
Mr. R. M. Anderson found a nest in much the same way, by climbing to a Robin’s nest which chanced to be near that of the Greenlet.
Reports upon the habits of the species are somewhat meager. Mr. Bartsch refers us to the beautiful lines appended to the description of the species by Coues, but I fear that these same beautiful lines are not accessible unless one is near a college library, 44 or so fortunate as to own a copy of Mr. Coues’ valuable work.
The following from the pen of our honorary member, Mr. William Savage, will be interesting to all. “He seems to be always cheerful if we may judge by his song; but he is not safe from marauders. Snakes, cats, weasels and minks often lay waste his possessions. June 15, 1895, I found a nest containing three eggs. In a few days three little scrawny young birds were wriggling in the nest making fruitless efforts to raise their heads as I approached. The next day one was gone and the day following, the other two had shared the fate of the first. I cut the sprig of hazel off that held the nest and made it a point to pass that way frequently. Soon I discovered the murderer, a beautiful snake, about sixteen inches long—what we term the house snake—suspended in the hazel bush, with his head and neck protruding over the very place where the nest had been. (It is needless to say I slew him.)” The nest which Mr. Savage mentions was four feet up.
Mr. Anderson found a nest five feet up. The bird was a close sitter and allowed herself to be caught in his hand.
It is reported as a lively and pleasant singer almost as much so as the Red-eye but with a sweeter song. Mr. Smith writes that it sings during May and June, then is silent to August 15, when it again sings till its departure. Mr. Bryan notes it as a beautiful singer and interesting species.
Flavifrons is reported as being not so common as the Warbling and Red-eyed species. Probably there would be a contest between it and bellii for third rank in numbers. It is perhaps more evenly distributed than the latter and not quite so plentiful where found.
Like most others of its tribe it reaches the state in late April and early May, but the reports indicate that it is somewhat early in its arrival. Its stay seems to be briefer also, since it is reported as being last seen as early as August 10.
The nesting site is chosen at a considerable elevation, usually, though Mr. Law reports one from Dallas county in a hazel bush one foot up. Others mentioned are “in hickory tree fourteen and one-half feet up;” “an oak, twenty-five feet up;” “near the 45 top of a high tree;” “in burr-oak tree twenty feet from the ground;” “ten to fifteen feet up.” “The nest,” says Mr. Peck, “is a beautiful structure. It is covered with lichens much like a Blue-gray Gnatcatcher’s, and is very hard to find.”
Mr. Anderson mentions a nest composed of dry grass, cottony substances, thin pieces of bark and moss, and almost covered with bits of newspaper in two languages; which latter item leads the analytical mind of our correspondent to inquire whether the bird may not possibly be a linguist. The nest was lined with reddish strips of grape-vine bark. This nest was located in the same tree as those of a Robin and Mourning Dove, and contained four eggs of the Vireo and one of the Cowbird.
A nest reported by Mr. D. L. Savage was outwardly composed of spiders’ webs and fibers of wild grape-vine bark, then a coating of newspaper and a lining of fine grass.
The Yellow-throated is “a large, stout species,” robust built, and “the brightest colored of our Vireos.”
While the song is described as being “slow, almost slovenly,” and “with a peculiar languid drawl,” and lacking the animated delivery of olivaceus and gilvus, yet it is much admired by Mr. Heaton, and the bird is considered a fine songster by Mr. Giddings.
The female is a close sitter, leaving the nest reluctantly and even in some cases requiring to be displaced by the hand. It is not averse to making its home near the abode of man. Mr. Wm. Savage reports one pair, who, when robbed of their treasures, presumably by the Blue Jays, tore the old nest to pieces and rebuilt in a tree only six feet from the door of his office and fifteen feet up. He finds one pair every year breeding in a grove of about two acres near the house. He notes, though, that even so close a proximity to the dwelling of man does not free the species from the “piratical tyranny of the Kingbird.”
Mr. Woods finds “four rosy eggs” to be the usual complement, and that they average larger than those of the Red-eye and Warbling. Mr. Smith reports a set which average 80x59, 82x60, 80x60 and 82x59.
One case is reported where the bird left the nest which was found before the eggs were laid, although it was not in any way 46 disturbed. Mr. Anderson says that “the birds scold with great vehemence when a person comes near the nest and continue as long as he remains in the vicinity even though some distance away.”
Mr. Brown reports solitarius as a not uncommon migrant in Scott county. He says that it is retiring and hurried, there seldom being more than a few days between the first arrival and the departure of the bulk. He finds it usually in large woods.
In Black Hawk Co., Mr. Peck finds it a sometimes abundant, but usually not very common migrant. It appears early in spring, in company with the hardiest of the warblers while on its way to its breeding grounds, chiefly north of the U. S.
Mr. Bartsch has never observed the bird at Burlington but took two specimens at Iowa City on the 6th of May, 1895. In actions he found them quite similar to the Yellow-throated.
Mr. Anderson has taken two females of this migrant species in Winnebago Co.; one May 14, 1892, and one Sept. 18, 1894.
Mr. Bryan has seen this variety of the Greenlets quite common in the edge of the woods along Squaw Creek in Story Co. He also has specimens taken in Mahaska Co.
Mr. Wm. Savage reports it as a resident in VanBuren Co., but not very common.
Mr. Brown says that while not much seen in summer it is a not uncommon summer resident and fairly plentiful in spring.
Mr. Bartsch writes as follows: “Only two of these birds have come under my observation; one at Burlington some years ago, and one at Iowa City last spring. This bird prefers the low, dense willows and especially small trees overgrown by a dense mass of grape-vines. Had it not been for the lively and pleasing manner with which they delivered their clear, ringing song, I should have overlooked them in a tangle of green.”
Mr. D. L. Savage sends the following valuable notes in this connection: “Not common. Have never found a nest, although I have noted the birds in migrations, and also quite late in the spring.” Mr. Walter G. Savage, 47 VanBuren Co., found a nest with two eggs, July 18, 1894. Nest was placed in hazel bush eighteen inches up and composed of pieces of rotten chips—such as the Chickadee pecks out of its hole—moss, small pieces of leaves, cobwebs and lined with very fine grass and inner bark fibers of wild grape-vine.
The notes on this Vireo are not voluminous enough for the compiler to derive from them any general conclusions as to numbers, dates and nesting site.
Mr. Law finds it abundant in Dallas Co., but less so in Winnebago. He has found the species breeding in the former, and Mr. Fred Hamlin took a set of three incubated eggs on June 23, 1894. One of these was situated in a hazel bush one foot up.
Mr. Woods finds it of common occurrence in Fayette Co., but not abundant. “The eggs average a trifle smaller than the other species.”
Mr. Peck, writing from Black Hawk Co., reports it abundant everywhere among thickets and underbrush in summer. The nest, which is small, he finds situated two to six feet from the ground. Noted as a late migrant, breeding far into August. It “is almost as quarrelsome,” he says, “as the Yellow-throated. Its song is lively and shrill and distinguishable at a great distance.”
Mr. D. L. Savage says, “Not uncommon, favorable locations being in bramble bushes and thickets of undergrowth. It has a rollicsome little song which always brings gladness with it. I have never had the good fortune to find a nest, although I have searched repeatedly for it, while the old birds were making quite an ado. It must be well concealed.”
Mr. Bryan writes that he has seen it quite numerous in Mahaska Co., along wood-roads; and has secured one nest in a hazel bush in a river pasture.
Mr. Irons says that the well known voice of this little bird is a familiar sound in the woodlands of Pottawattamie Co.
Mr. Brown finds it a quite common summer resident in Scott Co., nesting in late May and early June, usually at the low elevation of from two and one-half to ten feet. “A quiet, retiring species and much more common in the small brush patches in prairie districts than in the vicinity of water courses or heavy woods.”
Mr. Giddings’ notes from his recent personal experience with the species are in full as follows: “A common summer resident in this (Jackson) Co. Not much known except to the ornithologist and collector. The home of this species is in the thickets of brush and bramble, where it builds its nest unknown to those who pass close by. The nest is suspended from the fork of some small bush within a few feet of the ground, composed of dead leaves, grass and strips of grape-vine bark. Generally somewhat ragged on the outside. Four eggs seem to be the usual number and I never found any other in complete sets. Nests mostly well concealed and hard to find. I have found the best way is to get down and creep on the ground, and by looking up, the nest can often be found quite easily.
“This species is, to me, the most interesting of the Vireos, and I hardly ever tire of listening to its lively song, or watch it flit from bush to bush. Near my place is a thicket of hazel, black-berry, sumach, and a few small oak trees interspersed; just the place for Bell’s Vireo, and I can hear it singing at most any time during the summer from my doorstep.
“June 9, 1895, I started out to find some nests and soon succeeded in finding two. The first was hung from a small hazel bush, four feet above the ground and contained two eggs. Nest measured 3 in. deep; 3 in. in diameter outside; cavity 1¾x1¼. June 11, 4 eggs; they averaged .68x.50, pure white, quite well spotted with red. The second nest was in a place where the bushes were quite low; was hung from fork of hazel bush three feet from ground. The nest was composed of leaves, grass, bark of grape-vine and plant down, lined with fine grass and hair. Measured four inches deep; 2¾ in. in diameter on the outside; 1½ in. deep by 1¾ in. inside. Contained four eggs above the average size and pure white with a very few small red spots. Eggs measured .74x.52 average, with scarcely any difference in them.
“I have not found this bird imposed upon by the Cowbird.”
Our readers will realize that to cultivate the acquaintance of the little Greenlets is to gain health, pleasure and profit—health from walks in the leafy woodlands and exercise in the fragrant air; pleasure from the music of their voices and study of their ways; and profit from health, pleasure and the priceless teachings of Nature.
A Quarterly Magazine Devoted to the Study of Ornithology and Oology.
DAVID L. SAVAGE,
EDITOR AND PUBLISHER.
| SUBSCRIPTION RATES. | |
|---|---|
| One year | 40 cts. |
| Single copy, | 10 cts. |
| ADVERTISING RATES. | |
| 1 inch | $.50 |
| 2 inches | .90 |
| ½ column | 1.70 |
| 1 column | 3.00 |
| 1 page | 5.00 |
Entered as second class mail matter at the Post Office, Salem, Iowa.
Address all communications to David L. Savage, Salem, Iowa.
We have received a very complete list of Iowa birds from J. L. DeVine of Chicago, Ill., formerly from Iowa. Much to our regret, we cannot publish the list in the I. O. for lack of space.
Mr. D. S. Ebersold of Oceanus, Florida, collector of natural history specimens—his ad is on another page of this magazine—was once an Iowa boy. He followed the plow, hoed corn and did other rural work in Butler Co., and has many relatives there now.
The Naturalist and Collector of Abington, Ill., edited by P. Wilber Shoup, has been discontinued as it did not receive sufficient patronage to warrant its continuance.
Mr. Paul Bartsch of Burlington, Iowa, reports the taking of a Barn Owl at that place on Nov. 22, 1895.
The American Ornithologists’ Union held their Thirteenth Congress at Washington, D. C., on Nov. 12-15, 1895, with an average attendance of fifty ornithologists. The officers elected by the Union for the year, were as follows: President, William Brewster; Vice Presidents, Robert Ridgway and C. Hart Merriam; Secretary, John H. Sage; Treasurer, William Dutcher.
Dr. A. E. Foote, the distinguished scientist of Philadelphia, died Oct. 11, 1895, in Atlanta, Ga., to which place he had gone to take charge of the Pennsylvania mineral exhibit.
Dr. Foote was born in Hamilton, N. Y., Feb. 6, 1846. Soon after graduating at the State University of Michigan in 1867, he was appointed assistant professor of chemistry and mineralogy in the Iowa State College, which place he held for five years, 50 being very successful as a teacher. In 1875 he moved to Philadelphia, and began the building up of his now world wide business in minerals and scientific books. He was married in 1872, to Miss Augusta Matthews of Iowa, who, with two sons and a daughter, survives him. His business will be continued by Warren G. Foote, a son of the deceased, as manager.
Mr. J. H. Brown, Iowa City, Ia., writes: “I shot three Greater Redpolls on Jan. 11, and one the 13th inst. They were undoubtedly of the variety Acanthis linaria rostrata (Coues). I have never seen mention of this variety occurring in the state before.”
Mr. John V. Crone has a live Snowy Owl which was wing-tipped and captured near Marathon, Iowa, about Dec. 20. He is thriving on a diet of meat of different kinds, including sparrow, turkey, grouse and pork; diversified by occasional bites from his captor’s fingers.
Prof. Gus. Walters, Cedar Falls, Iowa, writes: “We are taking some interest in birds here. Have captured the Purple Finch and Rusty Grackle. Secured a fine Meadow Lark, Dec. 27—rather late for him.”
The Northwestern Ornithological Association held its second annual meeting at Portland, Ore., Dec. 27, 1895. The forenoon was devoted to business; the afternoon to reading of papers and election of officers. The officers chosen were; Wm. L. Finly, Pres.; Ellis F. Hadley, 1st Vice Pres.; Guy Striker, 2d Vice Pres.; Arthur L. Pope, Sec.; D. C. Bord, Treas.
The N. O. A. is a live association, as is shown by the fact that the past year it has compiled a list of Oregon birds embracing over twice as many as were ever before contained in a list of birds of Oregon. This list is being published in the Association’s official organ, the Oregon Naturalist and will number 254 species and sub-species.
Hereafter the Association will admit associate members from any part of America, and its members expect to have a phenomenal growth during the next few months. For particulars address the secretary at McMinnville, Ore.
A. I. Johnson, DesMoines, Ia., while out collecting Nov. 25, saw two Robins and Dec. 3, secured two Red-winged Blackbirds from a flock of 8.
New Books and other publications will be reviewed in this department. Authors wishing publications reviewed should send them to the Editor, who will examine them personally and give them due consideration.
“A. O. U. Check-list of American Birds.” This book was prepared by a committee appointed by the Union, namely, Elliott Coues, J. A. Allen, Robert Ridgway, William Brewster, and H. W. Henshaw. This is the second and revised edition, the original edition was published in 1885. The new edition includes numerous additions and nomenclatural changes made since the publication of the first, together with a revision of the “habitats” of the species and sub-species, but omitting the Code of Nomenclature, which was published separately in 1892. It is expected that the new Check-list will remain without another edition for at least ten years. It should be in the hands of every ornithologist.
“The Popular Science News” for January is much improved and enlarged. This magazine fills a special field; it seems that it is intended more for the general reader than the specialist, yet neither can afford to be without it. Probably there is no paper in America that is doing more to popularize science and to interest the general public in scientific knowledge, than this journal. We do not hesitate to recommend it to any one who desires to keep abreast with the discoveries and news in the scientific world.
The December, 1895, issue of the “Nidologist” shows a marked improvement by way of illustrations. Among the features above par, the elegant design on the cover presents itself. The view of Heligoland, “the magnetic pole of the bird world,” is of consummate interest. Last, but not of the least value, is the half-tone of the brethren at the A. O. U. Congress at Washington; this illustration alone is worth a year’s subscription.
“The American Zoologist and Journal of Science” made its appearance 52 with the new year. The first issue of Vol. 1, contains thirty-six pages of very interesting and instructive reading matter. It is edited by J. Hobart Egbert of Holyoke, Mass.
Barrows, Walter B., and E. A. Schwarz. “The Common Crow of the United States.” Bull. No. 6, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture, 1895, pp. 1-98, 1 pl. 2 figs.
Beal, F. E. L. “The Crow Blackbirds and Their Food.” Reprinted from the Yearbook of the U. S. Dept. of Agriculture for 1894. Pp. 233-248, figs. 1.
Beal, F. E. L. “Preliminary Report on the Food of Woodpeckers.” Bull. No. 7, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture, 1895, pp. 1-33, 1 pl., 3 figs.
Burns, Frank L. “The American Crow, (Corvus americanus) with special reference to its nest and eggs.” Bull. No. 5, Wilson’s Orn. Chap, of Agassiz Assn., 1895, pp. 1-41.
Fisher, A. K. “Hawks and Owls from the Standpoint of the Farmer.” Reprinted from the Yearbook of the U. S. Dept. of Agriculture for 1894. Pp. 215-232, pl. 3, figs. 3.
Jones, Lynds. “Minotiltidae.” Bull. No. 4, Wilson Orni. Chap. of Agassiz Assn., 1895, pp. 1-22.
Lucas, F. A. “The Tongues of Woodpeckers.” Bull. No. 7, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture, 1895. Pp. 35-41, pl. 3.
“The A. O. U. Check-list of North American Birds.” Second and revised edition. Issued by the American Ornithologists’ Union, 1895. Pp. 1-372, I-XII, 8vo, cloth.
“The Nidologist.” Vol. 3, No. 4. Dec. 1895.
“Popular Science News.” Vol. 30, No. 1. January, 1896.
“The Oologist,” Vol. 12, No. 12. December, 1895.
“Oregon Naturalist.” Vol. 3, No. 1. January, 1896.
“Gameland.” Vol. 8, No. 1. December, 1895.
“The American Zoologist and Home Journal of Science.” Vol. 1, No. 1.
“Game and Shooting.” Vol. 1, No. 11.
“The Linnean Fern Bulletin.” Vol. 4, No. 1, January 1896.
For the lack of space, we cannot give further mention of publications received. In our next issue we shall give more space to this department.
No. 1. Salem, Ia., January, 1896.
We do not desire to expose the private affairs of the I. O. A. to the general public, hence the necessity of the I. O. Supplement. Copies are sent only to the members of the I. O. A.
I desire to extend thanks to those members who have sent in new subscribers. Continue the good work. The Chairman of the Finance Committee says: “Wake up the boys, in your next issue, to secure subscribers and members—we must have them to succeed.”
Always when you write enclose some note on the birds.
Each officer of the I. O. A., and chairman of each committee, is requested at the close of every quarter to send a report of their work. Remember this on April 1st.
Some time ago I forwarded the names of Guy C. Rich, Sioux City, and M. Earl Halvorsen, Forest City, for active membership and W. E. Mulligan, Grand Rapids, Mich., for associate, to the executive council; have not heard from them yet. Please be more prompt.
According to Sec. 8 of the By-Laws, the annual dues of active members are $1.00, payable January 1st of each year. If you have not paid your dues for 1896, this paragraph is marked with a blue pencil. Please do not delay remitting.
Mr. E. B. Webster, Cresco, Ia., is doing the printing of Vol. II for $80.00, same to be made in two payments: first, when second issue is completed, and second, when the fourth issue is printed. We have 500 copies printed of each issue.
From Oct. 1st to Dec. 31st, 1895.
| RECEIPTS. | |
|---|---|
| From members dues | $9.50 |
| Subscriptions to I. O. | 6.85 |
| Total | $16.35 |
| EXPENDITURES. | |
| Postage on I. O. | $ .28 |
| Postage on manuscript and electros to Cresco | .80 |
| Freight on I. O. from Cresco | .78 |
| Postage for Editor-Treasurer | 2.24 |
| Total | $4.10 |
| Amt. on hand for quarter | $12.25 |
| Deficiency Oct. 1st | $12.25 |
| Acc’ts balance Dec. 31st, 1895. | |
DAVID L. SAVAGE, Treas.
The compilation committee appointed at the First Annual Congress of the I. O. A. has begun work and expects, by the time of the Second Congress, to be held next summer, to make a good showing on a report which is to be, if possible, a complete “Annotated List of the Birds of Iowa.” In order to make this list as comprehensive as possible, it is earnestly requested that every member send to the chairman of the compilation committee a marked check list showing every species on which he can furnish original, authentic Iowa notes. These lists will be examined and whenever a species is noted on 55 which the report of the committee is lacking, incomplete or unsatisfactory, the notes on that species will be sent for. The marked check lists should all be in the hands of the undersigned before May 31, 1896. This early notice is given in order that members may observe, with especial caution, during the spring of ’96, for fresh and valuable notes. These notes should bear particularly on the food, breeding habits, abundance of individuals, economic value, and migrations.
Fraternally, Chas. R. Keyes, Chairman Com.
Address until May 31st, Blairstown, Iowa.