SHOOTING BIRDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF IDENTIFICATION 227 



method of identification, and perhaps the most unfortunate result 

 of this method of teaching lies in the belief which gradually grows 

 up in the pupil's mind that he can identify birds just as well by 

 eye and ear as the professional with his gun. 



"At the present time current literature abounds in more or less 

 accurate and beautiful descriptions of birds end bird life, and much 

 of this materia] has not only high literary meiit but considerable 

 scientific vsltte. Nevertheless the trained ornithologist rarely 

 reads such an article without detecting here and there evidences of 

 ignorance or at least inaccuracy, which though not always 

 glaring are nevertheless much to be regretted. It is perfectly true 

 that an average keen-eyed boy or girl can read ily learn to know most of 

 the commoner kinds of birds in the vicinity without the use of the 

 gun provided he have the instruction of a competent teacher and 

 in addition have access to a suitable collection of specimens. 



"But it is equally certain that no boy so taught, or for that matter 

 any older person, can ever learn to know all the birds of his vicinity 

 or even all the plumages of the common species, male and female, 

 old and young, spring and autumn, through such a method of 

 teaching. 



"Hence careful ornithologists throughout the country have been 

 led more and more to lay down the rule that the "record" of any 

 species for a given locality should rest upon an actual specimen 

 taken in that locality and either preserved for examination of any 

 one interested or at least examined and identified by a competent 

 authority before being destroyed. Our state lists, as well as our 

 local lists, contain too many records of rare birds which do not 

 come up to these requirements. True, there are cases in which the 

 most fleeting glimpse of a bird is sufficient for its identification by a 

 good observer, yet the best of us make mistakes, just as the best 

 marksman has his "off days," and it is a good rule not to accept as a 

 true record the mere observation of even the best ornithologist, 

 unsupported by a specimen, unTess at least there is no improbability 

 in the occurrence of the bird at such a time and place." 



In these paragraphs the author contends that it is practically 

 impossible for any person to identify aU of the birds in his vicinity, 

 even with the assistance of a competent ornithologist, if specimens 

 of certain species are not taken by shooting them. I wish to offer 

 some reflections on this subject to see if this contention is not 

 somewhat beyond the truth. First of all 1 shall draw on my own 



