Search

The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) provides habitat for grassland birds, but as contracts expire, some CRP fields might be returned to rowerop production. One alternative to returning CRP fields to rowcrops is to produce switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) for use as a biomass fuel. Because the biomass is harvested during the fall and winter, breeding birds would not be directly affected by mowing the fields but might be influenced by changes in vegetation structure resulting from the harvest. We evaluated bird abundances and nest success in totally harvested, partially harvested (alternating cut and uncut strips), and nonharvested CRP switchgrass fields in southern Iowa, USA, in 1999 and 2000. Species richness did not differ among harvest treatments. Abmidances of most species (16 of 18) were not affected by the harvesting of switchgrass fields, and strip width did not affect bird numbers in strip-harvested fields. Grasshopper sparrows (Ammodramus savannarum) were mole abundant in barvested portions of fields, and more sedge wrens (Cistothorus platensis) were recorded in nonharvested areas. The residual vegetation in nonharvested areas provided nest cover for species that begin nesting early in the season (e.g., northern harrier [Circus cyaneus] and ring-necked pheasant [Phasianus colchicus]). Nest success rates of grasshopper sparrows and common yellowthroats (Geothlypis trichas) were similar to those reported by other studies in switchgrass fields and might be sufficient to maintain stable populations. In general, switchgrass biomass fields create breeding habitat for some grassland birds, and a mixture of harvested and nonharvested fields would be more beneficial to grassland birds than totally harvesting or partially harvesting all switchgrass fields.

We evaluated the relationship between the number of grit particles in gizzards and the grit consumption rate. House sparrows (Passer domesticus) were given, via oral gavage, doses of 9, 18, 36, 72, 144, 288, or 576 particles/day, and northern bobwhites (Colinus virginianus) were given 9, 18, 36, 72, 144, or 288 particles/day. Test birds were fed either a hard food (wild bird seed mix) or soft food (canned dog food) diet and were given equal numbers of grit particles from 3 different size classes (house sparrows: 0.2-0.4, 0.6-0.8, and 1.2-1.4 mm; northern bobwhites: 0.6-0.8, 1.4-1.7, and 2.4-2.8 mm). For both species, the number of grit particles in gizzards increased as dose increased, but the percentage that the gizzard grit count constituted of the daily grit dose decreased at higher doses. The fact that the birds eliminated large amounts of grit at the higher dose levels but retained most of the grit at lower levels suggests that birds need a certain target amount of grit in their gizzards. As daily grit dose increased, house sparrows on a hard diet had more small and medium-size grit in their gizzards than did house sparrows on a soft diet; the amount of large grit was similar between diets. As the daily grit dose increased, northern bobwhites had more small and medium-size grit in their gizzards than large grit. The high grit counts for some northern bobwhites may have resulted from incomplete flushing of the gizzard grit before dosing began. Our study improved upon previous efforts to evaluate the relationship between gizzard grit counts and grit consumption rates and provides information useful in assessing the potential for avian exposure to granular pesticides.

We evaluated the influence of landscape composition on bird use of rowcrop (corn and soybean) fields in 6 watersheds in Iowa from mid-May to late July 1993 and 1994. We counted birds within 50-m-radius circular plots positioned randomly within rowcrop fields and determined coverages for 21 habitats within 800-m-radius circles centered on each bird census plot. We evaluated the relationships between bird abundances in rowcrop fields and the habitat coverages in the landscape by using 2 multivariate procedures. We derived 3 landscape scenarios from a cluster analysis of the original habitat variables; the abundances of 7 bird species differed significantly among the 3 scenarios. Species abundances in rowcrop fields were greater in landscapes with more grassland block-cover and/or more wooded block-cover and strip-cover. Principal component analysis illustrated the responses of bird species to landscape composition; species responses depended upon the relative use (ranging from resident to occasional) that the birds made of the rowcrop fields. Habitat selection and use in birds is a multiscale phenomenon, and the landscape context should be considered when evaluating bird use of rowcrops.

Granule color may be an important factor influencing avian exposure to granular pesticides when they are mistakenly picked up as grit, and is clone of the most easily altered characteristics of pesticide granules. We studied colored grit use by house sparrows (Passer domesticus) and northern bobwhites (Colinus virginianus) by offering captive birds a grit mixture consisting of equal amounts of 8 colors (red, brown, yellow, green, blue, black, white, clear), either on a light-brown or a dark-brown soil background. After 7 days, gizzards of both species consistently contained more yellow and white particles and fewer black and blue particles than expected by chance (sparrows: P < 0.025; bobwhites: P < 0.001). Soil background color was not an important influence on grit color selection by either species. To examine the influence of food color on grit color selection, we repeated the experiments (on dark soil only), using birds maintained on food dyed to match 3 of the 8 grit colors (red, yellow, blue). Grit color use again was nonrandom (P < 0.001). Overall, house sparrows preferred brown, yellow, and white grit, and northern bobwhites preferred yellow and green house sparrows preferred brown, yellow, and white grit, and northern bobwhites preferred yellow and green grit. Black again received little use by both species. Food color did not influence grit color selection by house sparrows, but was associated with small but statistically significant differences in the use of black and clear grit by northern bobwhites. Our results suggest that the colors black andd blue should be tested further if the goal is to design pesticide granules in colors unattractive to birds. On the other hand, if the goal is to deter avian consumption of pesticide-treated granules by applying a mixture of unattractively-colores, treated particles and attractively-colored, untreated ones, then yellow (and perhaps white and green) should receive further study as colors likely to attract birds.

Avian use of an experimental strip intercropping system was evaluated in 1992-93 by censusing birds along transects, observing birds from tower blinds, and monitoring the outcome of nests. Thirty-five bird species were observed using the strips, with brown-headed cowbirds (Molothrus ater) and vesper sparrows (Pooecetes gramineus) most abundant. Feeding was the most common behavior, and corn and soybean strips were used most by birds. Four species of birds nested in the strip intercropping system, although only vesper sparrows nested in 1992. One vesper sparrow nest successfully fledged young. The 40 remaining nests were lost because of desertion (5% of all nests) or destruction by farm implements (39%), predators (29%), brood parasitism (12%), weather (5%), or observor (3%). Corn and soybean strips were preferred for nesting by birds. Bird abundance was higher in the strip intercropping system than in conventional row crop fields, suggesting better foraging habitat in the strips. This system, however, may function as an ecological trap for birds by attracting them to nest in an area with high risk of nest failure.

Small-mammal use of an experimental strip intercropping system was studied fromJune through August in 1992 and 1993. Three species of small mammals were captured in the strips in 1992, and six species were captured in 1993. The deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus) was the most abundant species (97% of captures) and the only permanent resident. More small mammals were captured in 1993, a flood year, than in 1992. Deer mice were captured most frequently in the strip type with the most cover. They occurred most frequently in oat strips in June before oat harvest and in corn and soybean strips in August after oat harvest. Concerns over crop damage by small mammals in this strip intercropping system are not warranted.

Existing information on bird species composition, abundance and nesting sta- tus during the breeding season (May through July) was compiled for habitats characteristic of the agricultural landscapes of Iowa. Data were derived from 60 sources for 144 bird species in 20 habitats. Total numbers of breeding bird species were highest in floodplain forest (107 species) and upland forest (85), and lowest in small grains (31) and herbaceous fencerows (27). Species abundances were standardized and categorized on a scale from 0 (absent) through 5 (very abundant with >250 individual birds/census count/100 ha). Bird species abundances are lowest in some agricultural habitats (e.g., tilled row crops and small grains) and highest in narrow, strip-cover habitats (e.g., railroad rights-of-way, wooded fencerows and farmstead shelterbelts). Species abundance patterns in natural habitats (forest, marsh and prairie) are intermediate between those in agricultural and strip-cover habitats. Twenty-five species occurred only in forest habitats and 14 only in marshes. Other species selectively (through not exclusively) use tilled row crop, grassland or wooded habitats. Principal com- ponents analysis was used to assess the relative similarities in use of the 20 habitats by the assemblage of breeding birds in Iowa. Predicted numbers of nesting species increased from 18 to 93 over four landscape scenarios representing a progression from an intensively farmed row-crop monoculture to a diverse mosaic of crop and noncrop habitats. Although laborious, the approach developed in our study has been useful for standardizing and synthesizing a diverse literature in efforts to conduct ecological risk assessments for farmland birds. It can also provide valuable baseline data for landscape-level research.

Effects of seasonal changes in the plant and animal communities of cropland on foraging patterns of vesper sparrows (Pooecetes gramineus) were studied during AprilAugust in 1979 and 1980. Individuals breeding in cornfields and soybean fields were observed from elevated blinds situated in fencerows to determine where they foraged. Vesper sparrows foraged primarily in or near uncropped areas (e.g., fencerows) or weedy areas within cropped fields throughout the season, but proportionately more foraging occurred away from these areas as the season progressed. Where vesper sparrow territories included part of both a cornfield and a soybean field, the sparrows preferred to forage in the field with the most crop residue, usually a soybean field with corn residue from the previous season. These results suggest (1) that vesper sparrows can be protected, in part, from the harmful effects of pesticides by limiting pesticide use in areas where foraging is concentrated, and (2) that foraging opportunities for this species may be enhanced by reduced tillage farming methods.

Grassed waterways have been used for decades to prevent soil erosion in agricultural cropland, but their benefits to wildlife had not been evaluated prior to our study. We documented bird species composition and relative abundance during the breeding season in 44 grassed waterways in central Iowa. The waterways were planted predominately to smooth brome (Bromus inermis) and were in cornfields and soybean fields. Forty-eight bird species were observed in waterways, compared with only 14 in the surrounding crop fields. Red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus), dickcissels (Spiza americana), barn swallows (Hirundo rustica), western meadowlarks (Sturnella neglecta), brown-headed cowbirds (Molothrus ater), grasshopper sparrows (Ammodramus savannarum) and song sparrows (Melospiza melodia) were the most abundant bird species in the grassed waterways. Total bird abundance in the grassed waterways averaged 2198 birds observed/census/100 ha compared with 682 in crop fields. Temporal patterns in bird abundance were attributed primarily to aspects of the waterways and surrounding cropland that changed over time, such as vegetation height. Because most (53%) of the bird species were at peak abundance in the waterways during 4-22 July, grassed waterways should not be mowed until the end of August or early

Birds were censused in the center and perimeter of cornfields and in adjacent edge habitats to assess how edge habitat affected cornfield use by birds during the breeding season. Cornfields were bounded either by predominantly herbaceous vegetation or by woodland. Fifty bird species were observed in woodland edges compared with 23 in herbaceous edges; bird abundance in woodland edges was more than seven times that in herbaceous edges. Although the number of bird species and the number of birds were less in cornfields than in adjacent edge habitats, neither bird species richness nor total bird abundance in cornfields was influenced significantly by the type of edge habitat (herbaceous vs. woodland). In contrast, bird species composition within cornfields bordered by herbaceous habitat differed from that in cornfields adjacent to woodland habitat. More bird species and about five times more birds used the perimeters of cornfields than the centers, demonstrating a significant edge effect. Consequently, bird abundance in cornfields decreases logarithmically as field size increases. Most of the bird species that used cornfields regularly or occasionally are ground-feeding omnivores during the breeding season, whereas the species that rarely or never frequented cornfields are mainly insectivores that forage on woody vegetation. Continuing land-use practices that increase crop field size and eliminate woody vegetation from edge habitats will affect both the species richness and abundance of the avifauna associated with cornfields.

F ALL political dogmas, the one that Americans have clung to s..J with the greatest tenacity and the least success is the doctrine of isolation from international entanglements and responsibility. For more than a century and a half, we have encouraged the expansion of foreign trade and simultaneously proclaimed our resolute determination to stay clear of political and military involvement overseas-an understandable but naive desire to have our cake and eat it too. We have demanded law and order and peace, that men might pursue the ends of commerce, but as a nation we have been averse to assuming our share of responsibility in maintaining the rights of peaceful pursuits. Not until flagrant encroachments reach our very doorsteps are we willing to bestir ourselves and to admit that we are a part of a complex and mutually dependent world. Almost invariably the United States finds itself embroiled in the major conflagrations of Europe, and always the nation is unready-woefully unprepared in mind and matter. And afterward we are shamefully eager to shirk any responsibility to prevent the recurrence of general war. We cherish the illusion that we can live apart, hide our heads in the sand, and forget the unpleasant existence of Europe and Asia when that existence proves unprofitable or dangerous. When the present war is over, many Americans will want to follow the same fatal course that we have taken after other wars. Deep-rooted is the belief that we have no responsibility to the rest of the world. The plans and efforts of statesmen like Woodrow Wilson are readily dismissed as academic idealism, not practicable and not acceptable to common-sense, rule-of-thumb politicians who presume to understand the realities of international affairs. The so-called practical politicians traditionally demand a return to "normalcy," a withdrawal from the vexing business of trying to manage

N0 UNIVERSITY has grown great without a worthy library, and no university library has attained importance without the help and personal interest of loyal and wise friends. Even the oldest and richest universities have not exclusively depended, for their most valuable book collections, upon purchases authorized by trustees. If we should survey the best university libraries, we would quickly learn that they have been built up by discriminating gifts, great and small, of intelligent friends. Some of the most enduring monuments that men have erected to themselves have been libraries, for a peculiar immortality attaches to books, as every Renaissance writer was quick to point out. The memory of many a man is preserved solely because he once owned a rare and valuable book, or because he set up a foundation in his name to buy books for his favorite library. If it is good to lay up treasure in heaven where moth and rust do not corrupt, it is also an excellent thing to lay up literary treasures in libraries where bookworms and careless relatives will not despoil them. The greatest university library in the world is the Bodleian at Oxford-a monument that will keep the memory of Sir Thomas Bodley green so long as English civilization survives. Since Bodley hit upon a successful plan to develop his library by the help of generous friends, it is fitting that similar benefactors in a later day should spend a few minutes in the contemplation of Bodley's wise methods. In a very true sense the organized benefactors of modern libraries are the spiritual descendants of the first "Friends of the Bodleian Library' Thomas Bodley was an extraordinary man-a scholar and diplomat of distinction, as well as a philanthropist. Born in 1545 and

1R7I ILLIAM BYRD I, one of the great planters of colonial Virginia, VV owed his prosperity to his shrewdness in trade. During the last quarter of the seventeenth century, in addition to an extensive traffic with the Indians, he was a heavy importer of rum and slaves, which he sold at a handsome profit to his fellow planters.' During most of this period, he bought slaves through his agents in London, the merchant house of Perry and Lane; but when an act of Parliament in I 6972 restricted the monopoly of the Royal African Company and permitted private dealers to employ their own ships in the slave trade, subject to a license from the English company, Byrd jumped at the chance to increase his profits by importing Negroes in his own vessels directly from the coast of Africa. Byrd had partners in his slaving ventures, but he seems to have been the principal owner of at least one ship, the "William and Jane," which was captured by a French privateer flying an English flag off the coast of West Africa on March I, I699. As a result of that seizure, and Byrd's complaints to the English government, we have a fairly detailed account of an episode which throws light on his slave-trading activities. The document is preserved by the Huntington Library in a little notebook3 kept by William Byrd II, in which he copied several official memorials presented to the Board of Trade and other authorities, between the years I697 and

THE LITERATURE produced in the southern colonies was, for the 1 most part, descriptive and factual, concerned in some fashion with the land itself. Less introspective than the Puritans of New England, the writers of the agrarian South turned their attention to the world outside their doors. Though verse-writers frequently were imitators of conventional themes in poetry, a few devoted their efforts to describing their own milieu, sometimes satirically, but with attention to external life in the colonies. Southern writers of prose and poetry rarely, if ever, wrestled with their souls in the manner of Cotton Mather; to most of them, the exposure of one's innermost thoughts and feelings would have seemed indecent. Even when they kept diaries, as in the case of William Byrd of Westover, they were more reticent about their thoughts than their behavior. That is not to say that they were devoid of reflection, but they were prone to spend their meditations upon politics and social relations rather than upon metaphysics, and their writings display this, trend. The Reverend Alexander Whitaker, one of the early propagandists, wrote an appealing description of his new habitat and published it in London as Good News from Virginia (I 613). To readers in the crowded city, his words echoed tales of the earthly paradise, for in Virginia everything appeared beneficent. There men might live in ease supported by the fruitfulness of the soil and take their pleasure in sport which the Creator provided, for the woods abounded in wild turkeys, swift as greyhounds, and with pigeons, duck, geese, partridges, and other game birds, and the rivers teemed with the finest fish: "Shads of a great bigness, and rockfish . . . trouts, bass, flounders, and other dainty fish ... [and] multitudes of great sturgeons, whereof we catch many."' The author vouches

URING the first century of settlement in British America, our ancestors held a beachhead which averaged hardly a hundred miles in depth along the Atlantic seaboard. This was a thin line indeed and often a precarious foothold. Curving around the north and northwest was the French colonial empire which gradually pushed its borders down the Ohio and Mississippi valleys to join with the Spanish colonial empire extending in an arc around the southern and southwestern periphery of the English territory. Squeezed between France and Spain, and frequently threatened by hostile Indians within the area of settlements, the English occupation of the Atlantic region looked theoretically hopeless. A modern disciple of geopolitics would have denied them any chance for survival, much less for expansion. But the English have never been a people to surrender to a theory of extinction. During their first century, the English colonists consolidated their gains, gave heed to a doctrine that God had especially reserved a portion of the American continent for them, and began a westward thrust up the inland waterways. They also welcomed a polyglot assortment of non-English immigrants who would help in the conquest of the West, and, ironically, would become inveterate enemies of England. By the time this movement was completed, the westward-moving Americans, as we must now call them, had overcome every handicap interposed by man or nature and had at last managed to make a garden even out of the desert of southern California. We are the inheritors of a doctrine and a movement which began before the middle of the seventeenth century. For a century after Captain John Smith first explored the James River, Englishmen dreamed of discovering a water route through the American continent to the South Sea and thence to Asia. The many fruitless voyages in search of the Northwest Passage are too

IX7ILLIAM EATON, the New England adventurer who played a VV brief but dramatic part in the United States' early relations with the Barbary States,1 enjoyed the confidence of Timothy Pickering, who was appointed Secretary of War on January 2, 1795 and a little later, on August 20, became Secretary of State. Pickering continued to perform the duties of Secretary of War until a successor was appointed on February 6, 1796. The Eaton Papers in the Huntington Library throw light on the Indian policy fostered by Pickering and describe Eaton's somewhat tempestuous career on the Georgia frontier, where he served as Pickering's personal intelligence officer. Ever since the colonies had declared their independence in 1776, the new nation had been trying to work out a modus vivendi with the various Indian tribes and confederations on its borders. Timiothy Pickering had gained useful experience in these negotiations. In September, 1790, President Washington appointed him a delegate to treat with Seneca chiefs in a local controversy, and thereafter he was frequently concerned in Indian problems.2 He was instrumental in persuading the Six Nations in 1792 to intercede with the hostile Indians of the Northwest. Although the Six Nations pleaded with the western tribes to keep the peace, they remained belligerent until after their disastrous defeat at the Battle of Fallen Timbers on August 20, 1794. When Pickering became Secretary of War, relations with the

ARDLY was the ink on the Declaration of Independence dry 11 before the youngest of nations found its commerce menaced by predatory corsairs from the oldest region of western civilization-the Mediterranean. Out of the coves and creeks of the north coast of Africa, the fast-sailing ships of Morocco, Algiers, Tunis, and Tripoli swooped down upon vessels flying a flag never before seen in those latitudes and forced American ships to take refuge in Italian harbors. On the Atlantic, American sailors had to run the gauntlet of British men-of-war, and in the Mediterranean they risked their lives and liberties on approaching the haunts of the fierce Moslem pirates of Africa. In the face of these twin perils, commerce with southern Europe came to a standstill as vessels which reached the safety of Genoa, Naples, and Palermo rotted in port. So long as the colonies had remained a part of the British imperial system, American ships engaged in the Mediterranean trade enjoyed such immunities as the British government bought from the Barbary pirates by the customary payment of tribute to the rulers of those separate states. Once the colonies had declared their independence, however, this protection was withdrawn, and the pirates proved useful to Britain in throttling the commerce of the rebellious colonies. For exactly forty years after the Declaration of Independence the United States engaged in a tortuous series of negotiations with the piratical despots of North Africa and at last learned that the only effective argument with a buccaneer was force. In the end