lo Bird -Lore 



Ga., were noted at the same spot in the following winter, having spent the 

 summer, as usual with their kind, at some point on our northern border or 

 in Canada. While it is possible that some are diverted from less to more desir- 

 able quarters, this trait of local attachment suggests that by far the greater 

 part responding to the offered hospitality are those which either are making 

 a first selection of a home or have been forced to abandon the old nesting- 

 place. 



It must be remembered, also, that under the human surveillance and pro- 

 tection engendered by the interest underlying the bounty, more birds survive 

 the winter and more are raised to maturity. The casualties due to winter's 

 inclemency and to the dangers that beset growing birds are almost incalcu- 

 lable. Much of the increase in numbers among the species directly benefiting 

 by the new interest is undoubtedly due to this saving of bird-life. 



So far all is well. The movement brings about a substantial increase in 

 our beneficial birds and a healthy growth of human interest in animated nature. 

 The desirability of each of these results cannot be seriously questioned. But 

 in the midst of our felicitations on the rapid spread of the movement there 

 comes a discordant note. From sources too sincere, too intelligent, too friendly 

 to birds to be ignored as born of ignorance or prejudice, comes a warning — 

 "You are doubtless enjoying yourselves, and your intentions are praiseworthy, 

 but you are pauperizing the birds and destroying their usefulness. If you 

 supply them with substitutes for their ordinary insect and weed-seed diet they 

 will give up their foraging habits and will no longer hold the enemies of agri- 

 culture and horticulture in check." 



On its face this is a plausible indictment. A Downy Woodpecker, for 

 example, that obtains all his meals from the suet-basket will be diverted from 

 the insect-infested tree and his service to man and tree will cease. He will be 

 transformed from a very serviceable helper to an idle pensioner, and his 

 practical economic relation to man will be converted to a purely esthetic one. 



But several factors are here ignored that are necessary to a broad and full 

 understanding of the question. In the first place, it is extremely unlikely that 

 any bird will satisfy his appetite only at the ready-spread table. With birds, 

 as with man, the appetite demands diversity of food. Doubtless the Downy 

 Woodpecker invoked as an example will help himself freely to the convenient 

 suet, especially in times of scarcity of his natural food; but he is no more likely 

 to feed on suet alone because of its ready accessibility than is a man to confine 

 his diet to chicken, if chicken be furnished him without cost. If a man were to try 

 such an experiment he would soon find himself loathing the \ery sight of chicken; 

 and it is probable that birds have a similarly discriminative sense, to force 

 them to seek that diversity of food which they need as much as man. Again, 

 one of the best established ornithological facts is the governance of birds almost 

 absolutely by habit. It is the habit of the Downy Woodpecker to dig in the 

 trees for certain insects to be found there. Pecking into suet ma\" form an 



