WILLIAM W. LOOMIS, CLERMONT, IOWA.
Paper read before the First Congress of I. O. A.
The question how to prevent the depopulation of our feathered friends is beginning to be agitated by many ornithologists and it might be well for us to spend a few moments in discussing the problem. For convenience sake let us consider the subject under three heads: Are birds useful? Is there an unnecessary destruction of them? And if so, how can they be protected?
I am sure that nearly everyone enjoys listening to the song birds, but here in America we often do not consider the beauty of anything or the pleasure it furnishes, as much as the dollars and cents it produces or saves. So the first thing to be decided is, are birds, financially speaking, beneficial? A recent number of the Youth’s Companion had an article on the protection of birds. It says “We have thirty species of insects which subsist on our common garden vegetables and our apple orchards have fifty kinds of insect enemies.” It then names the birds that are making steady warfare against the pests, and adds, “The estimated annual destruction of crops by insects in the United States is more than four hundred millions of dollars.” Now the more birds that are killed, the greater becomes the damage done by vermin, and it is plain to be seen that if the birds were allowed to multiply it would not be long before they would save to the United States this four hundred million dollars. Would not this be a benefit?
Concerning the usefulness of birds many persons, especially culturists, seem to have erroneous ideas. Every farmer keeps one or more cats to rid his buildings of rats and mice, and he willingly compensates them for their services by giving them a liberal supply of food; but many of these estimable men fairly get beside themselves if a hawk robs them of a chicken. Now I claim that the hawks kill enough noxious animals to more than recompense them for the loss of their chickens. To sustain this statement let me refer you to the time when the legislature of Pennsylvania passed the “Scalp Act.” This act placed a bounty of fifty cents on every hawk and owl that was killed. What was the result? Well, in eighteen months the state paid out no less than ninety thousand dollars in cash and saved to the farmers one thousand, eight hundred and seventy-one dollars in chickens.
This made eighteen dollars apiece for every chicken that was saved. Rather expensive poultry. But this was not the worst, for as fast as the hawks and owls decreased, the rodents and other pernicious animals increased, and that year the loss of crops which the department of agriculture attributed to the excessive number of injurious animals was estimated to be about two million dollars. Does this not prove that the raptores as a class are beneficial?
The robin is a bird that has incurred the enmity of gardeners. The horticulturists near Boston sent a petition to the legislature requesting that the robin be taken from the list of protected birds. An investigating committee was appointed who found by examining robins’ stomachs that nine-tenths of its food consists of an injurious larvæ, proving beyond all doubt that the bird was a great benefactor.
A gentleman from Michigan who signs himself “Amicus Avium” has given special attention to the phœbe and has estimated the amount that this bird annually saves the state. One pair of birds from March 15th to October 1st, rears two broods or ten birds. Each bird eats thirty insects an hour eight hours a day. The gentleman then finds the entire number of insects destroyed and estimates that if they were permitted to live, each one would do one-thousandth of a cent damage to fruit, grain or lumber. Allowing one and a half pair of birds for every square mile in the state, would make a saving of over three and one-fourth million dollars.
I have dealt with only a few species, but have tried to select those that deal with the entire feathered tribe.
Now if we grant that birds are useful, let us turn to the second head of our subject.