2IO CorresJ'ondence. L April 



CORRESPONDENCE. 



The Fauna of Muskeget Island — A Reply. 



Editors of ' The Auk ' : — 



Dear Sirs: — I take it for granted that I shall be allowed, with your 

 accustomed courtesy, a little space in your Journal for the purpose of 

 replying to the author of a letter entitled, 'The Fauna of Muskeget 

 Island — A Protest,' which appeared in the number for January, 1898. 

 This letter, I am free to confess, has given me a genuine surprise. It is 

 only after some hesitation that I have decided to reply to it. I can but 

 regard this ' Protest, ' with its accompanying inferences, as uncalled foi- 

 b}' the facts in the case. I therefore beg your indulgence to take up some 

 of the points in the order that they are presented in Mr. Miller's letter. 



I have shot but one Short-eared Owl for a number of years. I have 

 had, however, in the Legislature for two years past, and again this winter, 

 a bill in which there is a clause giving this Owl full protection. The 

 above mentioned bird is now in Mr. William Brewster's collection, and is 

 in the dark phase of plumage. It was one of a brood hatched on Mus- 

 keget during the summer of 1896. I would have shot the entire family 

 had I been able to accomplish \t at the time, for the reason that I had the 

 interests of the Terns in view; hence all antagonistic elements, whether 

 developed in man, mammals, or birds, were regarded as enemies and so 

 treated. Bird protection is a complicated and difficult problem at best. I 

 see no occasion for making it harder for those engaged in it. When a 

 gentleman of Mr. Miller's ornithological knowledge expresses such senti- 

 ments in print as the following : " But when bird protection results in the 

 destruction of a family of Owls, which, notwithstanding its numerical 

 insignificance, far outweighs in biological interest the largest Tern colony 

 on the entire Atlantic coast," I think that lovers of bird life have a right 

 to 'protest' with more reason than he. When bird protection embraces 

 a remnant of Terns raised from a low ebb through years of tireless pro- 

 tection, as it does in the present case, to colonies, the numbers of which 

 are beyond estimate, I am of the opinion that such a condition outweighs 

 any problematical biological interest likely to arise from Muskeget Island 

 ever becoming a habitat of Short-eared Owls. Mr. Miller states that the 

 vertebrate fauna of Muskeget may be roughly divided into two groups, 

 viz., normal and abnormal. In the latter class he places the Short-eared 

 Owl. From an ornithological standpoint this is surprising, for as far as 

 I know it has no foundation in fact. I was not aware that Muskeget 

 Island had ever produced any form of the Short-eared Owl that is dif- 

 ferent from what is found elsewhere ; neither is there much likelihood 

 of such a race occurring in the future on Muskeget. The conditions 



