Page:Condor6(3).djvu/21

 74 THE CONDOR VOL. VI twenty or more individuals. They are the house pets of all the inhabitants. They eat crumbs from the kitchen steps, alight on the window frames, and will even enter the houses if a window is left open. The children at many a lonely section house on the railroad beguile the long winter days with feedingthese pets. At Glen Alpine I had good opportunity to observe them, for there the watchman had a tray filled with crumbs, nailed to the window ledge. At this the chickadees would be feeding every hour of the day, sometimes five or six at a time. They were con- tinually uttering their "chick-a-dee, dee, dee." A bit of salt pork hung up by a string furnished an especial relish. Some were clinging to it head downwards, most of the time. They were omnivorous eaters, but seemed to like best soaked cracker crumbs. To this feeding place at Glen Alpine they came from at least half a mile distant. I have watched them fly from tree to tree making directly for the kitchen window. In the woods the chickadees appear to feed upon insect life, but what I do not know. lta, California. Explanatory BY LYMAN BELDING HEN the Land Birds of the Pacific District was published I excluded con- siderable matter that was intended for it. This consisted of notes on the food of birds, so-called correlative phenomena, miscellaneous matter con- tribute d by myself and Signal Service reports I had copied at San Diego, in the Sacrameeto Valley, and at the summit of the Central Pacific R.R. I stated on page 2 that the data on food was meager, and therefore unsatisfactory, and I might have added, somewhat contradictory. The so-called correlative phenomena contained some very interesting items, but was used sparingly.because it related distantly, if at all, to the coming of the birds. The Signal Service reports had apparently no closer connection with migration than the correlative phenomena. Possibly some other person might have considered the excluded matter as having more value than I attached to it. I have been asked why I cited Fort Yuma and Fort Mojave records. It was because I knew that old Fort Yuma was .on the west bank of the Colorado. Fort Mojave was on the east bank but I knew that Dr. Cooper had collected on both sides of the river. I also knew that the early ornithologists were not careful to name the precise locality where they got their specimens. I had seen /Impelis gatrufus in Plumus County, July, 885. Another of Dr. Cooper's Fort Mojave species, Toxostoma crissale, I had taken on the west side of the Colorado River, latitude about thirty degrees, in May of the same year. At several stations there was more than one observer, and this was responsi- ble for my unusual method of giving credit. I placed the manuscript in Mr. Bryant's hands, and expected him to attend to its publication. He did so partly, and during his absence from the Academy of Sciences I was requested to visit San Francisco and fin'ish reading the proofs. I discovered that in the effort to abbreviate, a few errors had crept into the volume, some of which I corrected and others I overlooked, while it was too late to correct a