No. 4.] BIRD PROTECTION. 397 



standing the noticeable decrease they were never protected by law, but 

 were killed off rapidly, and the last bird of the last flock recorded in 

 Massachusetts was killed on Mount Tom in 1851. Evidently pro- 

 tective laws were not the cause of the extirpation of the wild turkey. 

 Like the great auk, it was the victim of unrestricted persecution by 

 man at all seasons. 



It will be impossible, within the limits of this paper, to give even 

 the briefest abstract of the bird laws passed by this Commonwealth 

 since 1818; therefore no attempt will be made to show more than 

 their general purpose and effect. For the convenience of the reader, 

 the legislation for each group of birds will be treated separately. 



Waterfowl. 



After the re-enacted province law of 1710 finally lapsed, soon after 

 the revolutionary period, the protection of waterfowl was not taken 

 up again in a general way until 18S6. During the latter part of the 

 eighteenth century and the earlier part of the nineteenth these birds 

 had no protection at any time of the year, except a law passed in 1821 

 protecting birds on salt marshes between March 1 and September 1. 

 Landowners, however, were allowed to shoot on their own land, and 

 towns had local option regarding the acceptance of the law. No 

 doubt its provisions were nullified by towns in some cases. At that 

 time (1821) Dwight wrote that waterfowl still existed in great abun- 

 dance. Even then, however, they had decreased in numbers in the 

 waters of the most populous maritime towns, and their flocks con- 

 tinued to diminish, particularly in the interior, for Sylvester Judd 

 in his "History of Hadley," published in 1863, says, "wild ducks 

 were formerly abundant. Now but few alight about our ponds and 

 streams." ' 



By 1865 the decrease of wild fowl, even on the remoter coastwise 

 feeding grounds of the State, had become noticeable, and the people 

 of certain towns began to call loudly for special local protection 

 for the birds. In 1865 the worrying and pursuing of birds by boats 

 on Popponessett and Waquoit bays was prohibited. This was fol- 

 lowed in 1867 and 1868 by similar acts for the protection of sea fowl 

 in the waters of Edgartown, Tisbury and Barnstable. Section 6, 

 chapter 246 of the Acts of 1869, was designed to give wild fowl some 

 protection, as it forbade shooting or pursuing fresh-water fowl or sea 

 fowl from, or by means of, boats or vessels of any kind in any of the 

 waters of the State. It also prohibited the killing of sea fowl or fresh- 

 water fowl on the feeding or roosting grounds; but this was repealed 

 the next year, and the use of batteries and swivel guns was forbidden. 



By that time, however, the decrease of the more common river ducks, 

 which are in most demand for food, had become so marked that a 



' Sylvester Judd, "History of Hadley," p. 354. 



