Feb. 1885.] 



AND OOLOGIST. 



31 



CORRESPONDENCE. 



The Destruction of Birds for Millin- 

 ery Purposes. 



Editor O. and O.— Let me beg to assure W. W. C, that 

 my silence has not been caused by a desire to "back out," 

 and that Mr. McCormick's letter is not "replying by proxy." 

 Although W. W. C, has confused my statements somewhat 

 and supplied me with several more aflirniations than I 

 made, yet I must confess myself largely to blame for not 

 having more sharply defined the two entirely distinct que.i- 

 tiona at issue. These were— is the destruction of birds 

 more than a purely sentimental grievance ? and— docs man 

 destroy more birds than do the birds of prey ? 



To the first I replied that the grievance was more than 

 sentimental, while in answer to the second I unhesitatingly 

 attirmed that he does. This constitutes the "italicized as- 

 sertions" and various afiirmations W. W. C, credits me 

 with. From the lieading of my letter it is apparent that the 

 phrase "collectors or professional taxidermists" includes all 

 the feather hunters and " bird stutters" who are engaged in 

 sujiplying the millinery trade. 



There is nothing in the second proposition liaxiting it to 

 song or insectivorous birds, as W. W. C, seems to imply. 

 It is simply a question of the comparative destruction of 

 ((// birds by man and birds of prey. 



First, a word regarding the food of the Raptores, a matter 

 which has a most important bearing on the present discus- 

 sion. As a naturalist, W. W. C, must be well aware that 

 birds form but a small portion— an entree so to speak— of 

 the bill of fare of Hawks and Owls. Small mammals, frogs, 

 snakes and insects, — especially grasshoppers, — will be 

 found to preponderate in nearly every crop examined. 



Now for answers to a few of W. W. C.'s questions, some 

 of which have been replied to by Mr. McCormick. Al- 

 though he has touched somewhat on "the boys who are 

 anxious to have collections of eggs," let me add a word of 

 personal reminiscence. In my own class at school were at 

 least eight boys who had pretty good sized collections of 

 eggs. Not one of these boys ever developed into a natural- 

 ist, and the eggs — representing many hundreds of birds — 

 eventually " went to smash." I recall two large nesting 

 places of the Purple Grackle that we broke up completely, 

 and much damage done to the Red-winged Blackbird. 

 Moreover, having been indirectly connected with the "egg 

 business," I can speak positively about hundreds, nay, 

 thtnisands, of eggs being offered for sale by those who have 

 not the slightest interest in them, other than a pecuniary 

 one. It would hardly seem necessary to reply to such a 

 (lucstion as " What insectivorous birds are so largely used 

 for millinery purposes?" since a glance at any millnier's 

 window will ordinarily show the Red-winged Blackbird, 

 Kluebird, Meadow Lark, Barn Swallow, Oriole, Cedar Bird, 

 and nniny well-known species of Flycatchers and Warblers. 

 In fact, an inspection of the shop windows this Fall sliows 

 that no bird is too large or too small, too plain or too pretty 

 to escape being used for decoi-ative (?) purposes. 



But it is not alone insectivorous birds that are beneficial 

 t'l man, many even which are strictly graminivorous render- 

 ing most excellent service by eating the seeds, of harmful 

 weeds, and many birds of prey being valuable from the 

 number of field mice, etc., they destroy. In Great Britain 

 the Gulls are protected on account of the services they ren- 

 der. This must be borne m mind later on, just now the 

 mention of graminivorous birds reminds me that last sea- 

 son one New York dealer had in store 6,000 skins of the 

 Snow Bunting. 

 How long does W. W. C, suppose it would take the birds 



of prey to destroy an equal number ? Owing to the extreme 

 difficulty of obtaining /nc/s-a difficulty of which W. W. C, 

 is doubtless well aware- he must kindly excuse me if I go 

 abroad in quest of them. This he will the more readily do 

 since as a naturalist W. W. C, would not wish to see any 

 species of bird extirpated, a thing which has come to pass 

 in England. 



The same causes which exterminate birds in one country 

 will, if unchecked, do so in another, and our birds are no 

 more limitless than our trees. 



Observation of what has happened elsewhere may serve 

 to guide us here as it is much cheaiier to take experience 

 at second hand. Kev. H. B. Tristram teslilied in 1ST9, be- 

 fore the Committee on W'ild Birds Protection, that /my the 

 species of English Waders had been exterminated, as well 

 as other birds, which, like the Kingfisher were shot for tlic 

 sake of their, feathers. Can W. W. C , instance one species 

 which has been utterly destroyed by birds of prey thrcnigh- 

 outan area as large as Great Britain? Incidentally Mr. 

 Tristram mentioned having seen 200 Redbreasts, {Erythara 

 rnbecula,) in one shop, and a dress trimmed with llie 

 skins of 500. Before this same committee we find Mr. Rim- 

 mer, formerly Justice of the Peace in Canada, testifying 

 that the Orioles and Humming Birds had been nearly ex- 

 terminated in his district by feather hunte:s, but that since 

 the passage of a protective act they were again on the in- 

 crease. This is a case right to the jjoint, and comes very 

 near home. Coming nearer still is the communication to 

 the Washington Star, stating that the celebration of the 

 "Oriole" had caused the extermination of its namesakes 

 around Baltimore. This I give with some hesitancy, the 

 article not being at hand for verification. Prof. Newton 

 states in the (Quarterly Review for January, 1881, that in 

 180S "the Kittiwake Gull at Flamborough was Ihreateucd 

 with speedy destruction * * * one man boasted that he 

 had killed 4,000, while another had taken an order from a 

 London firm for 10,0110. • * • .\n order for 1,000 a week 

 was given and accepted by the lessee of Ailsa Craig." 



True, this happened abroad, but its parallel exists right on 

 our own coast among the Terns on Cobb's Island, where 

 for the past year or two the feather hunters have been hard 

 at work. In 1883 the Caspian Tern was still abundant there, 

 but this year Mr. S. of this city failed to secure a single 

 specimen. The birds, old and young, had been sytematical- 

 ly slain throughout the breeding season, the nestling being 

 left to starve, until the above result was arrived at. As 

 these Terns are retailed mounred for 8.5c— see ad. in Wasli- 

 ington Republican— the first cost can be imagined. In the 

 same ad. I find " handsome wings" ISc. Since then the 

 price has been lowered to 5c. Does this imply any exten- 

 sive destruction of small birds? 



I regret my inability to respond to W. W. C's. challenge 

 and produce the figures that would give some little idea of 

 the number of bird skins used in the trade, but as the deal- 

 ers decline to talk on the subject it is as impossible for me to 

 do so as it would be to tell how many ladies wore hats trimmed 

 with birds. But when a single dealer employs seventeen 

 assist ants to [irepare birds for the trade, it is easy to see that 

 many thousands would be needed to keep them busy. And 

 that they are busy anyone who has seen the heaped np 

 tables of dead birds can testify. The dealer who had the 

 6,000 Snow Buntings bad other birds in proportionate num- 

 bers and if W. W. C. wished to purchase from 10,000 to 

 100,000 birds for millinery purposes, he could readily do so. 

 There is difficulty regarding the decrease of birds in any 

 given locality, this being a question that it requires thor- 

 oughly good testimony to decide. 



The decrease of Gulls and Terns on Ihe New Jersey coast, 

 of Egrets and Pelicans in parts of Florida, of the Swallow- 

 in some portions of Long Island and of the Parrakeet in the 

 southern states generally, are the only cases that I can at this 

 moment lay my finger on. 



