ECONOMIC ORNITHOLOGY IN RELATION 

 TO AGRICULTURE, HORTICULTURE, 

 AND FORESTRY 



By FRED V. THEOBALD, M.A. 



Vice-Principal and Zoologist of the S.E. Agricultural College. 



The subject of the economic status of wild birds is one that has 

 to be approached in so many different ways that it is almost 

 impossible to formulate any satisfactory plan of treating this 

 important matter. 



In the conclusion of any remarks on this wide subject one 

 is always led away into one's own opinion. Even after having 

 weighed the evidence for and against the utility or otherwise 

 of birds, the final summing-up is so frequently at variance 

 with that of others — others probably better competent to judge 

 — that one doubts whether this vexed question had not better 

 be left alone as a never-to-be-solved problem. 



There are people who have a sentimental love for birds, and 

 say none should be destroyed ; there are others who have lost, 

 and continue to do so, many pounds, shillings and pence owing 

 to the harm done by birds, and they say destroy them all ; 

 a few more cautious people say keep down any excess of 

 so-and-so, but encourage and protect the rest. It is a question 

 of sentimentalism, or of the stern reality of life — pounds, 

 shillings and pence. 



Any one hearing the sweet call of the Thrush and Blackbird 

 in spring must experience a sensation of joy, and forget their 

 prospective loss of strawberries and apples. The death-like 

 silence of the Norwegian forests would be unbearable but for 

 the plaintive note of the Redwing, which has gained for it the 

 name of the Norwegian Nightingale; the desolation of the snow- 

 covered, frost-bound Canadian prairies is surely made bearable 

 by the occasional " Whiskey Jack " pecking at the frozen meat 

 outside the tent. 



There are other things, it is true, than the mere economy of 



263 



