Cije Hubulion Societies; 



SCHOOL DEPARTMENT 



Edited by ALICE HALL "WALTER 



Address all communications relative to the work of this depart- 

 ment to the Editor, 67 Oriole Avenue, Providence, R. I. 



A JUSTIFIED CRITICISM? 



FROM time to lime, and from more than a single source, there has come 

 the criticism that bird-study is in danger of being over-popularized. 

 This criticism does not imply that bird-study should be limited either 

 in its scope or to students of mature years and serious purpose. It does imply 

 that there are persons who care to study birds only in a superficial way, that 

 there are others who present lectures of a merely popular and too frequently 

 similar type, and that the somewhat confused methods of bird- and nature- 

 study at present in use sometimes miss the point by reason of uninspired 

 application and lack of personal initiative. 



In order to weigh this criticism justly, it is well to disabuse our minds of 

 prejudice and to examine the evidence at hand with nothing but the plain 

 truth in view. And first, let us establish the standard, or standards, by which 

 we are willing to abide in our conception of the true aim and content of bird- 

 study. 



Reviewing first the work of scientifically trained ornithologists, it is easy 

 to see that it has been along lines of research, discovery, classification, and a 

 general furtherance of knowledge with relation to birds and their environment. 

 Such work is not of a popular nature, but it contains the material upon which 

 popular ornithology should be based, if the latter is not to degenerate into a 

 pastime or fad. The superficial student, interested only in the popular side 

 of ornithology, is apt to shun the trained ornithologist's method, to balk at 

 his standard of thoroughness, and to close the ears as well as the mind to his 

 careful and painstaking work. This is a distinct loss to the student. To be 

 unable to concentrate one's attention upon a simple problem which may be 

 solved by careful observation, to feel indifferent to or afraid of what may be 

 described as "the real thing" in nature, depending instead upon a colored or 

 uncolored picture or some other mental prop, to lack sufficient application 

 to use intelligently a bird-book of the grade of Chapman's or Mrs. Bailey's 

 Handbook — these are serious drawbacks, resulting inevitably in a lowered 

 standard and a circumscribed acquaintance with bird-life. 



That too much of this kind of bird-study is going on is undoubtedly true. 

 In so far as it awakens a love of nature and a real interest in birds, it is good; 

 but whenever it tends to a sentimental, inaccurate and uninspired conception 

 of the place of birds in nature and their value to man, it deserves the criticism 

 of having degenerated into a study which cannot hold a secure place in our 



(327) 



