[oruwi. (w Till-: wii.n bird iwesticatiox society. 



27 



crop>. II Wf rxaminc ils tolal hulk of food 

 consumed in one year we find it is composed 

 of 37.4 i)er cent, of animal matter antl 62.6 

 ]5er cent, of vegetable malter, of which the 

 \arious items occin- in the following per- 

 centages : — 



Iniurious Insects ... 23-4% > 



Table I. — Showing the lErtCEXTAGES of Aximal and 



Vegetable Food and the Pehckntage op the same 



WHICH IS Beneficial, Injuriocs, or NsnTEAL. 



2-8 \ 



2-4 

 ro 



Slugs 



Cereals 

 Beneficial Insects 



Wild Fruitsct Weed Sards 417 

 McU. Vegetable matter .. 18-5 

 Neutral Insects ... i'5 I 



Earthworms ... ... 8-7 / 



Beneficial 26-2% 



- Injurious 3'4% 



I 



Neutral 70'4°{'i 



t)n examinino- these figures it is at once 

 evideni thai in its relationshi]^ to the farmer 

 the pheasant is a most beneficial bird, for it 

 destroys an enormoii.s nimiber of injurious 

 in.sects and slugs, whilst only 3.4 per cent, of 

 its food constitutes an injury. As we haye 

 el.sewhere slated in connection with this 

 species, " where an excessive number of 

 birds are reared on a small acreage, in short, 

 fell- shooting tenants, who are mainly con- 

 cerned in obtaining their money's worth, then 

 damage is hound to ensue, for the conditions 

 are altogether unnatural." 



In addition lo die abo\-e-mentioned benefits 

 which this bird confers, it also offers a supply 

 of h(ime-gro\\n food of an appreciable yalue. 



An investigation of the food and feeding 

 habiis (if tweniv-two species of our commoner 

 wild birds, (if which specimens were ex- 

 aniined during each month of the year and 

 from all parts of the country, extending now 

 o\-er fifteen years, shows that the sum total 

 fjf their acli\ities is distinctly in fa\'our of the 

 farmer and fruit grower, for the benefits they 

 confer are almost t',\ ice as great as the injuries 

 they infiicl (cf. Table 1.), but if we exclude 

 from this Table such well-known injurious 

 species as die Rook, tha Starling, the House- 

 .Sparrow, die Bullfinch, and the Wood 

 I'igeon, the benefits conferred are o\er four 

 times as great as the injuries. 



As has so frequently been emphasised, the 

 actual injurious wild birds we have in this 

 country are exceedingly few, though the 

 harm the.se do is considerable, but this might 

 be largely counteracted by the institution of 

 wisely administered repressive measures. Any 

 attempt, however, at the destruction of wild 

 birds as a class would be nothing short of a 

 national calamity, and the more carefully one 

 studies their feeding habits, the more clearly 

 does the fact enforce itself that in our avifauna 

 we have a potent factor for good that is of the 

 greatest national importance, especially to 

 the farmer and tho.se who live by the produce 

 of the land. 



If through unwise legislation we permit 

 beneficial species to be destroyed, we are 

 indirectly aiding in the propagation of insect 

 plagues, which already are taking a huge toll 

 of our home-grown food. Or if, on the other 

 hand, we allow known injurious species to 

 increase in numbers, we are again handicap- 



