xxii INTRODUCTORY 



tendency which is working out. Many a man who has be- 

 gun the propagation of " game-birds " with the idea of se- 

 curing better shooting has found so much satisfaction in 

 such work, and has become so much attached to his 

 " feathered children" that he becomes disinclined to shoot 

 them. Humane sentiment is spreading wonderfully, and 

 we can well afford to leave it to the individual what he will 

 do with the birds which he raises. At any rate, the result 

 is bound to be the increase of bird life. 



I shall be very glad if applied ornithology serves to 

 broaden popular sentiment in all classes of bird life. It has 

 always seemed illogical to me that so many people should 

 take no interest in any but the common local " song-birds," 

 and know nothing about others. The fact that it has now 

 become possible to breed certain species of gallinaceous 

 birds, and of wild ducks and geese, and have them free on 

 one's own premises under easy observation, should tend to 

 arouse general interest in them and make them almost as 

 familiar as robins and swallows. 



I cannot help feeling that the term " game-bird" is often 

 overworked and made to imply too much, as if such birds 

 as quails and grouse, lawfully regarded as game, were owned 

 only by those who shoot, whereas they are property of all 

 the people, and there are other legitimate uses for them than 

 for shooting. 



The term " game-birds," moreover, is loose and unscien- 

 tific. What birds are game-birds changes from time to time 

 under varying laws. The mourning dove, for instance, for- 

 merly legal game in all States, is now protected by law almost 

 everywhere. Likewise the wood duck, and many kinds of 

 shore birds, now protected by Federal enactment, are no 

 longer " game-birds." Even the crow is known to be eaten 

 in construction camps. The term is convenient where refer- 



