58 



Bird -Lore 



The warden should not only be strong 

 and in perfect health but must be possessed 

 of bravery, for he is frequently in danger, 

 especially when trying to arrest aliens. 

 Moreover, he should have such an interest 

 in nature that he will be lifted above the 

 plane of a hired servant and will get some 

 of his compensation in the pure enjoyment 

 of time spent in the field and woods. 

 Political service or affiliations should have 

 no weight in the appointment of wardens, 

 in fact, when a selection is being made, 

 this question should not be asked or con- 

 sidered. To be properly qualified, a 

 warden should be able to identify all of 

 the common birds of his section — the game 

 birds as well as the non-game birds. A 

 carpenter or bricklayer who knew no 

 more of his craft than the ordinary game 

 warden of today knows of birds would 

 never be able to get work. They must be. 

 skilled workmen or they are relegated 

 to the class of laborers. Why should it be 

 otherwise with a game warden? In these 

 days of bird books and leaflets, many of 

 them profusely and correctly illustrated, 

 it should be easy for a warden of ordinary 

 intelligence to qualify by passing an exami- 

 nation showing that he had a knowledge 

 of birds as well as their babits and could 

 make correct identifications in the field 

 and especially when called upon to give 

 expert testimony in courts when the identity 

 of birds was in question. Recently, some 

 aliens were arrested near Jamaica, New 

 York, and a warden was called in to testify 

 in the case. He gave the following testi- 

 testimony, which shows how well qualified 

 he was for the place occupied. Six Hermit 

 Thrushes and a couple of Song Sparrows 

 had been shot. A police officer testified 

 they were 'Brown Thrushes'. The game 

 protector was called as an expert on birds 

 and testified that the larger birds were 

 "Brown Thrushes", sometimes just called 

 "Thrushes" and that the other birds were 

 "Song Sparrows" or "American Gold- 

 finches." There was an amusing cross 

 examination; "What is the difference 



between a Sparkling (probably Star- 

 ling was meant) and a Song Sparrow or 

 American Goldfinch. " The warden re- 

 plied "that a Goldfinch went teet-teet-teetj 

 while a Sparkling had a different call." 

 One of the judges said they wished to know 

 the difference in appearance, to which 

 the expert replied, "Well, ah, ah, ahem, 

 the Goldfinch is like these birds here, 

 (pointing to the smaller ones) while the 

 Sparkling is a little larger and browner." 

 Such a case as the above makes bird 

 protection a farce and the work of the 

 Audubon Societies doubly hard. Perfect 

 service will not be attained until the men 

 employed as state game wardens can in- 

 inform the inquiring citizen of the name of 

 a bird and also what its relations to agri- 

 culture and forestry are, and can talk in- 

 telligently and interestingly on the subject. 

 Such men can be found; one has lately 

 been appointed in Connecticut. 



A Wild Turkey Case 



Our field agent, Mr. Kopman, is not 

 only educating the public about the value 

 of birds, but is demonstrating that the non- 

 sale law in Mississippi must not be vio- 

 lated. He recently preferred charges 

 against a prominent firm of restaura- 

 teurs in Jackson for exposing for sale and 

 advertising that Wild Turkey would be 

 served. At the trial it was impossible to 

 prove that the portion served to Mr. 

 Kopman was from a wild bird. Judge 

 Thompson in acquitting the firm delivered 

 the following charge to the defendants: 

 "While the evidence is unsufficient to 

 warrant a conviction, the phase of the 

 case that perplexes me is that a firm of the 



reputation of could afford 



to advertise the selling of anything they 

 were not prepared to furnish or to admit 

 having furnished." Judge Thompson 

 further added "that the restaurants must 

 comply with the game laws, and that they 

 should not under any circumstances render 

 themselves liable to another affidavit." 



