14 STATE HORTICULTUKAL SOCIETY. 



QUESTIOX BOX. 



The Secretary said that a request had been sent to the desk that the balance 

 of the evening be given up to the question box. There being no objections, 

 the box was opened, and the first one drawn read as follows: 



Section seven of the new game law reads like this: "Aiij' person wlio shall at any- 

 time, within this State, kill any robin, night-hawk, whippoorwill, finch, thrush, lark, 

 sparrow, cherry bird, swallow, yellow bird, blue bird, brown thrasher, wren, martin, 

 oriole, woodpecker, bobolink, or anj^ song bird, except for taxidermal purposes, or 

 rob the nests of such birds, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and on convic- 

 tion thereof shall be fined five dollars for each bird so killed and for each nest so 

 robbed, or confined in the county jail for ten days, or both such fine and imprisonment 

 in the discretion of the court." My query is, Can this law be enforced in the lake 

 shore fruit region? 



Mr. Launin, South Haven : The question all turns upon how broad a term 

 the expression, 'Haxidernial purposes," is. I have seen all sorts of birds killed 

 and their nests robbed with impunity in oar vicinity, on the plea that they 

 were to be used for scientific jiurposes. Now, I am not certain but we could 

 clean out the feathered tribes entirely under this exception. In our vicinity 

 we are, as fruit-growers, exceedingly tender of the birds; we recognize in them 

 our warm friends, and could enforce tlie law as read, if the exception were not 

 there. We have often discussed this subject in our local society, and in every 

 instance the birds have the best of it. Although certain individuals take ex- 

 ceptions to certain birds, still there are so many earnest friends for them all 

 that they have a fair chance for long life with us. 



K. 0. Tate, St. Joseph : I am a friend to birds in general, but I will not let 

 sentiment so far overrule my judgment as to prevent my making exceptions. 

 There are two species that I make war upon, and shall continue to do so, no 

 matter what laws may be written upon our statute books. I refer to the wax 

 wing and blue jay. The former is the more important of the two, because it 

 comes in such numbers as to jeopardize our cherry crop. We shoot them by 

 hundreds every year on my jjremises, and still they seem to be but little les- 

 sened in numbers. They come in great flocks, and shooting is the only way to 

 preserve our cherries. Tiie blue jay is the destroyer of the nests of beneficial 

 birds, and this is reason enough for its destruction. There is nothing about 

 the bird that is winsome, so we need waste no sentiment upon it. 



S. H. Comings, St. Joseph: I think this law should be supplemented by 

 one for the extermination of cats. They are greater enemies to the feathered 

 tribe tlian the shot-gun. 



President Lyon : My motto is to save the birds by the enforcement of the 

 law. We cannot afford to kill them. I refer to the ordinary Michigan birds. 

 I will admit tliat there may be some question about our imported noisy 

 English sparrow, but as to other sorts we had better plant cherries for them 

 and for us than to lessen their numbers. 



Wm. Rowe, Grand Kapids: It seems to me that observation and experience 

 can lead us to but one conclusion concerning the English sparrow. It is an 

 unmitigated nuisance, and it were well if we Avere well rid of it. 



W.A.Brown, Stevensville : The wax-wing or cedar bird eats no animal 

 food, living upon cedar berries in winter and in summer preying upon our 

 fruits the entire season. Most birds named in the law are useful, but I doubt 

 its enforcement with regard to the cedar bird. 



H. J. Edgell: My opinion is if we were to refrain entirely from the 



