Showing posts with label birding. Show all posts
Showing posts with label birding. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 26, 2025

House Finches and the Prescient Charles Aiken

In a somewhat roundabout fashion, the three House Finches (Haemorhous mexicanus) shown below led me to Charles Edward Howard Aiken (1850-1936), an accomplished practitioner of 19th century ornithology and entrepreneur.  (Seen here are a male at lower right, female center, and a juvenile (?) upper left.  If, by some slim chance I've misidentified the bird, it doesn't really affect the course of this post.)  The spark that prompted my research voyage of discovery was in the species portion of the bird's scientific name:  mexicanus, suggesting what was the animal's original home range.  That I spotted these birds near a pond in Maryland suggested that there was a story to be uncovered here.

The guides I initially consulted to identify these birds offered a tantalizing bit of information in that regard.  Here is part of what David Allen Sibley says about the House Finch in The Sibley Field Guide to Birds of Eastern North America (2001):

Native to western North America; introduced to Long Island in the 1950s and from there colonized all of eastern United States and southern Canada.  (p. 412)

"Introduced to Long Island in the 1950s" - strikingly cryptic.  A later stop on my search was the entry for the House Finch in the Cornell Ornithology Lab's Birds of the World which elaborated a bit and made the bird's story more irresistible (A. Badyaev, et al., House Finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), version 1.0, 2020.  In Birds of the World (A. F. Poole, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA.):

From a few California individuals released from a pet store in New York City in 1939, and through natural expansion of its western range, in just a few decades this species came to occupy one of the widest ecological ranges of any extant bird. Originally a bird of hot deserts and dry open habitats of the southwest, it now occurs in nearly all types of landscapes and climates in North America, from edges of northern taiga to ocean coasts to metropolitan areas.

(Taiga is the boreal forest which, in North America, is the biome of most of inland Canada and some of the northern United States.)

Here is the map of the present range of the House Finch appearing in Birds of the World:



Yes, the two sources just cited differ in terms of the timing of the first appearance of the House Finch in the eastern U.S., and, frankly, neither is as entertaining as the possibly true explanation of how this bird came east.  In brief, that account has New York City pet store owners releasing the birds in 1940 ahead of a crackdown on their illegal trafficking in the animals, which had been sold as "Hollywood Finches" (the new name was a neat PR gimmick) and supplied to them by dealers on the west coast.  This version is described in some detail by Nicholas Lund in his article titled The House Finch (Audobon Magazine, The Sketch, July 15, 2016).  Even more detail, though not always consistent with Lund, is provided by John J. Elliott and Robert A. Arbib, Jr., in their piece titled Origin and Status of the House Finch in the Eastern United States (The Auk, volume 70, Issue 1, 1953, Digital Commons @ University of South Florida, September, 2024).


I searched for early 20th century guides to birds of the southwest U.S. to see what they might say about the House Finch and its range at the time.  Here is the range map that appeared in Field Book of Birds of the Southwestern United States (Luther E. Wyman and Elizabeth R. Burnell, 1925, p. 173.):



Wyman and Burnell noted that the House Finch was "a bird of familiar habits, cursed for the damage he does to fruit, but on the whole probably more beneficial than injurious."  (p. 172)


Comparing the two ranges maps shown above confirms that Badyaev et al., in Birds of the World, captured well the incredible spread of the House Finch across much of the U.S.


Yet, perhaps the most important find from my web search for early guides to southwestern birds was an initially puzzling hit, linking to what turned out to be a fascinating publication from Colorado College in 1937 titled Birds of the Southwest by Charles Edward Howard Aiken.  (Colorado College Publication, General Series No. 212, Studies Series No. 23, March, 1937.  The Aiken material was edited by naturalist Edward Royal Warren.)


This is not a guide to the birds of this region of the country, at least, not in any traditional sense.  Rather, much of it consists of the edited journals Aiken kept during a single trip in 1876 by mule-drawn wagon from Colorado Springs, Colorado, south into New Mexico, west across New Mexico to Arizona, and then south in Arizona.  His trek began on May 8, 1876, and ended with his return to Colorado Springs, probably in late November of that same year.  The objective of his journey:  collect birds and birds' eggs.  So, he shot and skinned birds as he went, and pilfered nests for their eggs.


This was ornithology as it was largely practiced in the 19th century.  Shoot and skin.  The rarer the bird, the more the incentive to collect its carcass.  It wasn't until the early and mid 20th century that the practice of ornithology moved from killing to observation.  Interesting and brief discussions of this change as it was sparked by some leading ornithologists can be found in two articles that appeared recently in Smithsonian Magazine:  The Hero who Convinced His Fellow Ornithologists of the Obvious:  Stop Shooting Rare Birds and Watch Them Instead (Tim Gallagher, Smithsonian Magazine, December, 2024) and How Bird Collecting Evolved Into Bird-Watching (Tim Birkhead, Smithsonian Magazine, August 8, 2022).


Though Aiken's journey undoubtedly fed the fledgling taxidermy business he began in Colorado Springs in 1874, and likely supported some trade in birds' eggs, it also reflected his deep interest in, and knowledge of, birds of the region.  Further, I suspect Aiken had a thirst for adventure, something that had manifested itself in the many birding trips he undertook beginning in1872, trips that built his avian knowledge.  That he was already recognized for this ornithological skills was evident by his work in the summer of 1874 as a naturalist with the Wheeler Survey (1872-1879), a survey organized by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to create topographical maps of the southwestern U.S.  In 1876, Aiken was certainly no birding neophyte.


In addition to his taxidermy business, Aiken was, at various times in his adult life, the owner of a "tannery and wool pulling factory," an employee of a firm selling pianos and sewing machines, the agent booking traveling shows, and a dog breeder.  His collection of some 5,000 bird skins and mounts were purchased and donated to the Colorado College Museum (subsequently donated to the University of Colorado (Boulder) Museum of Natural History).


(The biographical information about Aiken comes from the profile written by Edward Warren and included in Birds of the Southwest, and from the biographical description included in the finding aid to Aiken's collected papers held by the Colorado College.  The finding aid was written by Ginny Kiefer and published in September, 1984.  Her biographical material is based on Aiken's obituary that appeared in the Colorado Springs Gazette, January 16, 1936.)


Aiken is pictured below in 1874 in Pueblo, Colorado, sporting what may well be the equipment favored by 19th century birders.



(The date and identification of the location of this image are those provided in Wikimedia Commons.  The image is in the public domain.  This and other pictures of Aiken can also be found at a digital archive at the Colorado College website.)


His account of his 1876 trip is at times quite compelling for his interest in natural history was broad and, despite that fact that he had no apparent compunction about killing his quarry, he was a perceptive observer of birds.  As a record of what he saw and where, the journal is valuable (Edward Warren provided a catalogue at the end of this volume), though at times, the many names begin to blur.  This is balanced by his descriptions of the behavior of different bird species which are typically detailed and clear (certainly this was knowledge he needed if he wanted to get off a good shot).  Beyond the birds, he had an appreciative eye for the landscape through which he was traveling, noting changes in the vegetation, particularly the mix of trees, that marked differences in altitude and climate.  His prose never quite rises to the lyrical, but is frequently evocative.


The trip was arduous, often over roads that, I suspect, were roads in name only, and through areas with little water or vegetation.  During the summer months, the weather was particularly hot.  At one stage, he was seriously ill for several days.


While on the outward portion of his journey, Aiken entered Albuquerque, New Mexico, and there found a multitude of House Finches.  What he penned in his journal about this encounter is amazingly prescient, reflecting an understanding of the bird and its potential to live outside its native range of "hot deserts and dry open habitats of the southwest."  (As described by Badyaev, et al., in Birds of the World.)

At Albuquerque the Red-breasted Carpodacus (House Finch) was breeding abundantly, placing its nests on the beams of the plaza.  By the kindness of the hotel keeper I was allowed to secure a nest with three eggs from his building.  These birds are very tame, and as they are sweet singers and of bright plumage have quite a cheering effect about one's dooryard.  If they could be induced, as I think they could, to adopt for their homes the parks of our eastern cities they would be far preferable to the pugilistic foreigner (P. domesticus) [House Sparrow].  I think the former possess all the latter's good traits and none of their bad ones, and their pleasant song and bright plumage would make them much more attractive.  (p. 17)

(His disparagement of the House Sparrow is well taken because that bird is relentless in its efforts to control the nesting areas it prefers, driving out and killing members of other species that might attempt to occupy the same niches.  (See, for example, North American Bluebird Society, NABS Factsheet, House Sparrow Control, revised 2018.)  I'm with Aiken in thinking the House Finch is preferable to the little terrorist House Sparrow.)


When I compare the two range maps shown earlier, I wonder if any of the New York City pet store owners in 1940 who, one step ahead of the law, opened the cages and freed their Hollywood Finches, had any inkling of the consequences of what they were doing.  Aiken would have known.

Thursday, January 29, 2009

Squalodon Premolar -- A Life Fossil

Terminology looms large for me and that’s where this post started, with the question: What do I call the first fossil of a species or genus in my personal collection? Through a wonderful confluence of events, this post really has to start elsewhere, in the world of birding and birders.

I am reading Kingbird Highway by Kenn Kaufman, an engrossing and wild book published in 1997. I came upon it only because someone quoted it about what constitutes a species, something I want to write about later, but it turns out to be wonderful for many other reasons. Subtitling his book The Story of a Natural Obsession That Got a Little Out of Hand, Kaufman chronicles his frenetic effort in 1973 to break the standing record for the number of bird species seen (or heard) in North America by a person in a single year – the so-called Big Year record of 626 that had been set in 1971 by Ted Parker.

The world of birding and birders is one that has always intrigued and attracted me, but remains, as of yet, pretty alien. With any new territory, language is a critical hurdle to those who venture into it. And I tripped almost immediately. What are the proper terms – birding and birders, or birdwatching and birdwatchers? I didn’t realize it when I asked it that this isn’t just a prosaic opening question. It turns out to be at the heart of what I took away from this foray to birdland. I consulted with my ambassador from this world about these terms and she told me that she prefers the former to describe what she and others do. On these terms, Kaufman writes,

People always called us “birdwatchers.” But if we had been, there would no story to tell. . . . [I]n the early 1970s, we were not birdwatching. We were birding, and that made all the difference. We were out to seek, to discover, to chase, to learn, to find as many different kinds of birds as possible – and, in friendly competition, to try to find more of them than the next birder.


At its core, Kaufman describes birding as the compilation of lists of bird species seen (or heard), perhaps in different geographical areas, but clearly in many different fragments of time – a day, a month, a year, a lifetime, or even a lunch hour. In this competitive approach to what they are doing, birders are no different from anyone else who focuses on keeping score (though the drive of someone like Kaufman may be pushing the boundaries a bit, no, a whole lot).

We keep score on everything from sports to relationships to political contests. To the issue at hand, I am keeping score on different aspects of my fossil hunting and collecting, including my firsts. For me, coming recently to fossil collecting in a serious way, a new fossil find or acquisition very often constitutes the first example I have from a particular species or genus. If there is specific terminology for such a fossil in a personal collection (other “this is my first [fill in the blank]”), I haven’t discovered it.

Someone suggested to me that the term holotype would apply, but I think not. Holotype is the specimen “which stands alone as name bearer” for a species in the scientific world (Moore et al, Invertebrate Fossils (1952)). I’ll draw the line – the term shouldn't be diminished and applied to something as mundane as a first in my little collection.

So, in my ignorance, I fashioned an idiosyncratic answer to the question that I asked at the outset: What do I call that first fossil of a genus or species in my personal collection? I appropriated and partly modified a couple of terms that birders use in their list making. They often keep meticulous records of where and when they first sight different bird species. These birds are their life birds and they make up a life list. Great terms and I’ve made them mine. I now have life fossils and a life list. To me, life fossil is a double-barreled term, applying not only to a specific fossil, but also to the species or genus it represents.

The picture below captures my first fossil from a Squalodon (a kind of toothed whale) that I found last fall at the Lee Creek Mine (North Carolina) on the last day of a very truncated hunting season. I found the tooth fully exposed, lying on the surface of the gray black phosphate-rich soil that is dredged up in the mining process. Its glossy crown is seemingly still as smooth to the touch as when it was lost some 15 to 20 million years ago. One veteran collector at this site described this premolar with its damaged root as “very pretty.” It is also, using my terminology, my Squalodon life fossil.





Sure, I recognize that this specific terminology doesn’t translate seamlessly to the world of fossil collecting. For one thing, bird and fossil are fundamentally different concepts. Further, the objective of the hunt is very different – birders are collecting the initial sighting of a whole, living creature; in contrast, I’m collecting my initial transformed piece (or trace) of a once living creature and I don’t stop with that initial piece. Despite these differences, I like the idea of a life fossil and, in my book, that means that Squalodon is now on my life list.

And, even if there are terms already established in the fossil collecting lexicon for these things (what are they?), indulge me as I use mine.
 
Nature Blog Network