56 THE SCOTTISH NATURALIST 



contents of 328 adult birds and 94 nestlings were examined, 

 numerous field observations made, and a careful examination 

 of the faeces, I have no hesitation in stating that for some 

 years to come this species annually requires to be drastically 

 reduced in numbers, and that at present it is a source of 

 considerable financial loss to the farmers of this country. 



That gamekeepers, farmers, and others annually destroy 

 large numbers of birds whose food consists largely of voles, 

 mice, rats, and insect larvae, is common knowledge. Such 

 birds as the kestrel and all the species of owls are far too 

 precious to the farmer to permit the ignorance of a game- 

 keeper to continue to destroy them wantonly. When we 

 consider that the brown rat alone is annually exacting 

 food to the value of some millions of pounds sterling, it 

 is surely time that such offences as mentioned above were 

 made punishable by more severe sentences. Another 

 striking instance is the lapwing. The value of this bird to 

 the farmer is universally admitted and cannot be over- 

 estimated, and yet the apathy displayed by agriculturists 

 in reference to it is pitiful. " Long ago the bird and its eggs 

 should have been more strictly protected than game or any 

 other birds. It is the farmer's best friend, and whilst his 

 crops annually suffer more and more from wireworms and 

 surface larvae he stands and watches its gradual reduction 

 with indifference." 



With reference to the majority of species of birds we 

 do not possess any accurate or detailed knowledge as to 

 the nature of their food, and of quite a large number of 

 common species our knowledge is imperfect. 



The need of continued investigation upon a subject so 

 intimately related to our food supply must be patent to even 

 the most casual inquirer, for without a thoroughly reliable 

 and extensive knowledge of the subject it is impossible to 

 frame wise and beneficial laws relating thereto. 



In this country we have five Acts of Parliament affording 

 protection to wild birds or relating thereto. One presumes 

 that the main object of these Acts, and the intentions of 

 their framers, were to protect all species that were non- 

 injurious, and also those that were rare. If this were so, 



