Reprinted from THE CONDOR, Vol. XXXVIII, November-December, 1936, pp. 250-251

Opinions Aroused by Pettingill's Monograph on the American Woodcock.-One
by one 
and at an accelerated rate our North American birds are being studied for
the purpose of writing 
exhaustive accounts of their lives. On April 30, 1936, the Boston Society
of Natural History pub- 
lished as volume 9, number 2, of its memoirs the final report based on a
five year study of the 
American Woodcock by 0. S. Pettingill, Jr. The volume contains 223 pages
and 10 plates; it sells 
for $3.50 in paper covers. 
Dr. Pettingill's patient industry in preparing this book will be appreciated
by those bird 
students of the future who will have to come to it for an acquaintance with
this reclusive bird, 
especially if the whims of civilization completely exterminate it. He has
made a better than 
average report upon a difficult topic. It is obvious, even from casual examination,
that the aim 
primarily was to provide an instructive book, not one that would be merely
pleasing to the 
reader. It is fair, then, to consider the work as a pattern for other serious
studies of single species 
and to see if any improvements in method be desirable. Persons intending
to prepare monographs 
on single species can learn much by thus analyzing the reports already in
print. In the following 
paragraphs are indicated several opinions on the preparation of a report
on the life of a given 
bird, along with examples, from Pettingill, which do not agree with them.
According to these 
opinions a writer should observe especially the following rules: 
Discard any part of an original outline for which materials do not become
available. 
"Defense of Nesting Territory" (p. 287) is discussed without any
supporting evidence. The 
third major division of the book, "The Struggle for Existence",
is so far below the standard of 
the rest as to indicate that it should have been eliminated and the usable
facts placed in other 
sections. 
Give full details where required for clear indication of significance. 
Usefulness of the list of vernacular names (pp. 187-188) would be enhanced
if we knew 
something about each one-the time, place, and frequency of application. Surely
the most im- 
portant parts of such a list would be citations to authorities. 
Base general statements on evidence presented, not on some generally accepted
theory or 
supposition. 
It is demonstrated (p. 278) that woodcock sometimes "travel at a low
level", but where is 
the evidence that they "generally" do? Uncertainty in treatment
of the topic "Breeding Territory" 
is indicated (p. 280) first by declaring that the "rule" implied
in the concept is in the wood- 
cock "subject to great variation," and second by defining, in the
first three paragraphs, five 
separate kinds of territory-breeding territory, wooded territory, open-country
territory, diurnal 
territory, and nesting territory. Considerable influence of a traditional
theory of territory is shown. 
Is there evidence (p. 305) that polygamy actually occurs in this bird? The
explanation of injury 
feigning (p. 332) seems not to follow the evidence or even to agree with
it. There is probably 
as much volition involved here as in the mating flight or any other type
of motion. It may be 
doubted that the bird consciously plans any of its activities. The discussion
of migration (p. 277) 
seems to say that migration in the woodcock results from influence of the
gonads and is controlled 
by weather conditions, but surely this is not the correct interpretation
of the "recently advanced 
theories" alluded to. 
Condense such items as those dealing with occurrence. 
The forty-five pages of material on distribution and abundance could easily
have been tabu- 
lated in much smaller space. The half page devoted to California could be
replaced with the state- 
ment that there is no satisfactory record of the species for this state.
Ten degrees of abundance 
require too fine discernments to be appreciated by the reader; anyway it
is doubtful if the in- 
formation justifies more than five such adjectives. 
Verify the spellings of names of persons. 
Names like Hoffmann, Oldys, Ridgway, Saunders, and Seebohm (each misspelled)
can be 
found with very little search. 
Make the printed report compact. 
A book more than nine inches wide and twelve inches high is too cumbersome
for ready 
handling in reading or storing; not many book shelves will accommodate it.
The wide type bed 
(6Y inches) makes reading tiresome and wastes paper where short lines occur,
as in tables and 
in the bibliography. The colored plate could have gone in a seven-inch book
without reduction. 
Place photographs with the text. 
The increased value of illustrations near the discussion rather than collected
in plates at the 
end of the volume is surely worth the possible greater cost. Also, it more
than balances the loss 
of detail which may result if they are printed on text paper. 
Use terms in their generally accepted meanings, or else define them. 
It is misleading to describe bill, eye, and feet under "fleshy parts"
(p. 188). In the diagram 
and discussion of flight song the term vertically is used in a sense opposite
its usual meaning. The 
reader is likely to wonder what is meant by "level apex" (p. 288).
It is not quite clear what is 
meant by the term "successful species" (p. 245). Can any species
exist at all that is not successful 
according to the definition given? 
Make the summary an abstract rather than a list of contents. 
A large number of important facts could be recounted within the two pages
devoted to a 
bare listing of the topics treated.-JEAN M. LNSDALE, Museum of Vertebrate
Zoology, University 
of California, Berkeley, August 7, 1936.