The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1924-04-26


their rivals trying other bats.
needed control measures and an in
discriminate campaign against a
bird that under some conditions is
known to be distinctly beneficial.
The statement of the head If
the Biological Survey Bureau fol-
lows:
There is no question but that
under certain circumstances con-
troll measures for a bird like the
crow which has certain objection
able traits are justified and fee
quently necessary. We have met
the situation by giving advice along
this line and even gone so far as
to conduct experiments in control
in several localities where an un
usual concentration of the birds
had produced a situation detri.
mental to agriculture.
"There is q, wide difference,
however, between the recommend
ing OF control measures i'm cases
where they are actually needed
and the urging Of an indiscrim.
mate nationwide campaign against
bird that under some cOndi-
lions is known to be distinctly
beneficial. Aside from the fact
that il would mean the killing
Of birds that may be engaged in
activities decidedly beneficial to
the farmer, the nationwide anti.
crow campaign presents other OBJ
fnnHInVN0 hsn av4w
Gus consideration.
"One Of the outstanding objec
tons to such a procedure is the
fact that it would place in the
fields a large number of gunners
during the spring, and summer
months when all shooting. should
cease. There is every reason to
believe that many of these hunters.
falling to secure a reasonable mum
Der OF crows, will turn their atten
lions to other bird life. This is
inseparable from human nature and
has even been recognized in the
laws of some of our States which
prohibit the carrying of firearms
afield outside of the hunting sea-
son. To carry out such a cam
paign during the spring and sum-
mer months, / believe, would be
the greatest reactionary step in
game conservation since the migra-
tory bird treaty act put a gtop
to spring shooting.
"A few months ago articles al.
most identical in context appeared
In number of sportsmen's and
other periodicals as well as news.
papers, purporting to present new
evidence against the cannibalistic
and misunderstanding habits of the
| crow. The basis of information for
these articles was secured by an
expedition headed by DR.. B. H
warren, Of Pennsylvania. This ex.
petition visited a number of the
islands off the coast of Virginia
where the fish crow, a distinctly
different species from the common
FORM, occurs inagreat numbers. The
flsh crow has habits quite differen.
from the common species and is
much more destructive to other
! bird life. Furthermore, the cond;.
tons on the Virginia islands
/. are peculiar to an extreme and
! represent fish crow vandalism in
! its most acute form. The data
here secured were given wide pub
licity, and, although occasional ref
erences were made to the fish
crow, the general impression gained
from these articles publishei
throughout the country was that
these activities were characteristic
OF the common species which should
therefore be destroyed on each and
every occasion.
You may be interested to know
that in your State of Massachusetts
the Department of Agriculture AMI
conservation commission have taken
an emphatic stand against this
campaign. In Maine, also, Gov. Per.
cival, p. Baxter has taken a strong
personal stand against it. Further.
more, In some of the States where
the crow Is less common, 1t is even
afforded complete protection. Such
Tor instance, is the case in Cali
fornia.
| Il trust that this letter will ex
plain fully our position on this
anti.crow campaign.
Very truly yours
"a. K. FISHER,
HArtin0 Cntae 90 YD...~.. ,