INTRODUCTION. 



BIRD PROTECTION. 



The wild bird is a national asset. It is not and should not 

 be treated as private property, even when it occurs on private 

 land ; the fact that we have Acts of Parliament to protect birds 

 even on private land proves that they are free. They are 

 every one's not any one's property. How far any particular 

 species is of value or inimical to the public weal is a matter of 

 individual opinion and, to a great extent, of sentiment, but in a 

 land ruled by a majority, we, nominally, bow before the opinion 

 of that majority. The laws framed for the protection of birds 

 specify those species which the majority, not the individual, 

 consider worthy of preservation. 



The earliest statutes for the protection of certain birds were 

 tainted with the idea of Royal or private ownership ; they were 

 framed with the limited outlook that anything of value belonged 

 not to the land but to the owner of the land ; the feudal 

 system embraced birds. Restriction of the destruction of birds 

 and their eggs was enforced not for the sake of the bird but to 

 prevent trespass, to safeguard sport and satisfy the appetite of 

 the few. For instance, " An Act to avoide destruction of Wilde 

 Fowle " passed in 1534, protected the Bittern, Bustard, Crane, 

 Heron and Spoonbill, but it was really a Game Law, for these 

 were birds of the chase or table. 



In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the study of birds, 

 or Ornithology, grew in popularity, but it was not until the middle 

 of the last century that public opinion was really roused in favour 

 of our avian fauna. Love of sport and the improvement of the 

 shot-gun, as well as the steadily growing collecting habit, was 

 causing wholesale destruction of certain species, and those who 

 really cared about birds realised that some check must be put 

 upon wholesale slaughter. The matter was brought up in 

 Parliament with entirely fresh ideas, and in 1870 an "Act for 



