3o6 The Scottish Naturalist. 



nated 'game,' it may be deemed advisable to pass a law inflicting 

 a heavy penalty for every Woodcock killed between the ist of 

 February and the 12th of August. Were ordinary protection 

 afforded to the bird, I see no reason why it should not become 

 vastly more numerous. Every sportsman is aware that during 

 the last fortnight in January the Woodcocks are found in pairs — 

 mated, in fact, for the coming task of reproduction." Since the 

 time that this was written, the Woodcock has been protected by 

 law, and Mr Gould's prediction verified, as is shown by its great 

 increase during the breeding season ; but, unfortunately, it was 

 not placed, as he suggested, in the Game Act, but inserted in 

 the Wild-Fowl Act, the close time commencing on the 15th of 

 February, which can now, on the decision of the local justices 

 in any district, be extended to the 15th of March, ^ which, as far 

 as the Woodcock is concerned, is a great deal too late. The 

 15th of January would have been better, for it seems to be 

 quite overlooked that they are not only paired in January, but 

 nest in the end of February and beginning of March, even laying 

 their eggs with snow on the ground, thus giving time to rear 

 three broods in the year. Consequently the shooting of a brace 

 of Woodcock in early spring is tantamount to the destruction 

 of fourteen birds. In proof of this, on the i6th of March of 

 this present year, 1880, young Woodcock were seen on the wing 

 in the Scone woods near Perth ; and Mr Butter of Faskally has 

 informed me that in the spring, in the woods about Faskally, 

 where the Woodcock is plentiful in the breeding season, the 

 young birds of the first brood are often seen in company with the 

 old hen while she is hatching a second. It is a common belief 

 that all our home-bred birds leave this country entirely \ and the 

 question has been asked, If so, what is the good of protecting 

 them ? why not shoot them down when we can get them ? I leave 

 that to be answered by those who see no harm in shooting a 

 Partridge or any other bird oft' its nest. But do they all leave 

 us ? I think there is proof to show that they do not ; at least, 

 that a certain proportion remain, and that, though perhaps shift- 

 ing their ground, they do not leave the country altogether. The 

 late Sir Thomas Moncreifte, well known to be a most accurate 

 observer, was of strong opinion that the Woodcocks bred on 

 Moncreiffe Hill never left it; and he fully believed, as he once 



^ This has already been taken advantage of in many districts, and is now 

 in consideration by the Perthshire justices for tlie Tay and Forth. 



