No. 4.] KEPOKT OF .STATE OlLN'lTliOLOGlST. 339 



nuiul)er.s of tiscl'iil birds from 200 to 300 per cent. This has 

 been done in this eonntry on a small scale, and in Europe 

 it has sneceeded on a large scale; but it is impossible for 

 the State Ornithologist to attempt this on a scale of any 

 economic importance, because of the extremely limited 

 appropriati(m allotted to his work. If such an attempt is 

 to be made, the means must be furnished by the State su- 

 perintendent of the moth work, and must come from the 

 appropriation for the suppression of these insects. The pos- 

 sibility of success by this method appears to be fully as great 

 as in the case of parasitic insects, but some years will be re- 

 quired to reap the full benefit of these methods. Also, means 

 might be found to protect such useful animals as bats and 

 toads. They should be protected by law, at least, and it 

 should be the duty of every teacher in our public schools to 

 instruct the pu])ils regarding the value of insectivorous birds 

 and animals, and to request them not to kill or molest such 

 creatures. 



^VhlJ Birds do not control the Gypsy Moth. 



It is pertinent to inquire here why birds which are efficient 

 checks on the increase of native insects are not so effective in 

 controlling introduced species. It is evident to all that the 

 birds are too few in numbers to cope with both native and 

 introduced insects. The so-called English sparrow, which 

 drove many of the native birds out of the region where the 

 gypsy and brown-tail moths were introduced, is largely re- 

 sponsible for the reduction in the numbers of native birds, 

 and therefore for the unrestricted increase of the insects. It 

 is peculiarly unfortunate that measures undertaken for the 

 wholesale destruction of the gypsy moth, the brown-tail moth 

 and the elm-leaf beetle result in decreasing rather than in- 

 creasing the number of birds. 



As the moths multiply in numbers, we might expect a 

 corresponding increase of the birds that feed upon them; 

 but spraying with arsenical poisons, cutting away the un- 

 dergrowth and dead limbs and filling up or covering the 

 cavities in trees all operate to reduce the number of birds 

 or to drive them away from infested localities. 



Wherever the moths have become extremely abundant 



