The mirror. (Stillwater, Minn.) 1894-1925, 1918-01-17
WOULD like to make a
plea for the protection of
the many different kinds
of h;rdo fbof couo tbo

NESS&SlH plea Tor LQ6 prOGocClOn OF
HSfNH the many different kinds
lA-Ag of birds that save the
farmers of this country many thou
sands of dollars every year by the
work they do in destroying insects.
And in making this plea for their
protection, / will confne my paper
more to their relation to agricul-
ture than anything else.
1t is not enough to be told that
birds feed on insects; we must
know the kind they eat. The fact
that the crow sometimes eats corn
is not sufficient evidence upon
which to condemn the bird. We
must learn the nature of it's food at
all times of the year, and then
strike fair balance between it's
good and its bad deeds. Hence,
the absolute necessity for the ex-
animation of the contents of birds
stomachs, by which means may be
accurately determined not only the
kinds of food eaten but their rela-
tive quantities. l This method is
exceedingly slow and laborious and
requires a high order of expert
ability. and moreover, is open to
the very serious objection that it
necessitates the taking of useful
lives. So far as possible, the latter
objection has been minimized by
utilizing the stomachs of birds
killed by naturalists for scientific
purposes. This material, which
otherwise would be lost to science,
renders it unnecessary, except in
special cases, to destroy birds for
the purpose of food examinations.
In the above connection it must
not be forgotten that when thor
Ough examination of the food of
given species is once made and the
results published, the work is done
for all time. The food habits of a
species having been once deter
mined by this method, no possible
excuse exists, so far as food inves-
LEGATIONS 60, for further destruc-
tion Of bird life; and the more so
because the contents of all stom-
achs examined are preserved as
vouchers for further verifcation,
should that be deemed necessary.
Passing to a consideration of
some of the practical problems
presented. it might seem that the
relation of birds to agriculture
were simple, since the question is
chiefly one of food. Do birds de-
stroy crops? Then of course they
are injurious. Do they eat insects?
Then of certainty they must be
beneficial.
But the problems are not to be
settled in this off-hand fashion. In
reality they are extremely COM
plex and are to be understood only
after much painstaking study. 1t
has been found, for instance, that
bird may be injurious at one time
and not another. In one region it
may be pest and in another an
unmixed blessing. Some birds
unfortunately not many-are al
ways beneficial. Others fortu-
nately not many-are always and
everywhere injurious. But the
great bulk of birds are both harm
full and beneficial by turns, accord
ing to age, season of the year, the
presence or absence of their natur-
al food, and variety of circum-
stances.
For present purposes l will
roughly group the bulk of our
small birds into two classes seed.
eaters and insect-eaters.
The seed-eaters, mostly of the
sparrow family, have stout bodies
and strong conical bills, expressly
designed for crushing seeds. Their
name is legion and the family con.
tains more species than any other
group of birds. It is we'll that this
is 30, for the destruction of weed