WATER BIRDS. 211 
directed against parasites, and as being performed for 
the purpose of cleaning the feathers from any clogg 
matter that may be on them, including the effects of 
natural perspiration ; the process of pluming themselves 
being by no means so frequently repeated as in water- 
fowl.” 
lam afraid Mr. Zurhorst has mistaken, as I believe 
has often been done before, the preening which ducks 
give to their feathers for the alleged process of “ oiling.” 
I have made careful observations with an especial refe- 
rence to this question, for the last fifteen years, and I 
never once succeeded in witnessing any duck make 
repeated application to the oil gland; in fact, it was 
from watching domestic ducks that I first became con- 
vinced of what I consider the fallacy of the common 
opinion. I have seen them trim the feathers around the 
glands with as much care as any others, but not more 
so; and, as Mr. Zurhorst says, I have marked them go 
over their feathers “inch by inch.” This assiduous preen- 
ing of the feathers by the domestic duck is greatly sur- 
passed by wild birds, and both have good reason for the 
practice. It is absolutely essential, both for warmth and 
dryness, that their plumage shall lie close and compact— 
a disordered feather is therefore all-important, and, no 
matter how oily the plumage may be, such a feather 
would admit the water, and hence the necessity of care- 
ful preening. Nothing can surpass the trim neatness 
of wild ducks, for instance, and I have been surprised at 
the time spent by them, as well as by widgeon and teal, 
over their toilets. 
Mr. Zurhorst’s Aylesbury ducks are an illustration in 
my favour. All birds thus fed up in confinement are in 
an unnatural condition, and more or less unhealthy— 
P 2 
