194

One little gleam of comfort Mr. Dixon gives lis, —


" As a set-off against the many interesting (British) species that we

' have lost for ever, it is gratifying to know that the spread of cultivation

' and the improvement of waste land, so disastrous to the larger birds, has

' favoured the increase and dispersal of considerable numbers of the smaller

' species. Many of these latter birds are songsters of varying merit, and

' these have followed the horticulturist and the agriculturist, so that many

' districts are now made glad with song which formerly were silent. The-

' boom of the Bittern has died awa}' with the disappearance of marsh and

' fen ; the song of the Passere is heard in its place. This, in a measure, is-

' some compensation for our loss. In some districts, however, many of the

' smaller birds have been ruthlessly depleted by the gunner and the snarer ;

' and we can name localities where such species as Goldfinches, Bullfinches,

' Hawfinches, Wood Larks, Nuthatches, and Kingiishers are altogether

' exterminated or fast becoming so. Certain intelligently-framed Amend-

' ments to the Acts for the Preservation of Wild Birds, and the establishment

' of proper machinery for the enforcement of the existing law, should

' remedy the evil. The wholesale destruction of the nests and eggs of the

' smaller birds that goes on in most country districts mnst have a most

' injurious effect upon the species, and is even worse than the destruction

' of the birds themselves. Kggs to some extent are now protected, but the

' law in most places is ntterh^ ignored."


Mr. Dixon lays little stress upon the alleged depredations-

of bird-catchers, and we presume that he considers that they are

responsible for only a small fra6lion of the destru(5lion which,

goes on. This coincides with our own views, for we believe that,,

with the exception of the Goldfinches, there is scarcelj^ a British

species whose numbers have been seriously reduced by the

capture of specimens for cage or aviary. We cordially approve

of the policy of the Wild Bird Protedlion Adts, and consider

that indiscriminate bird-catching should be prevented — but we

firmly believe that few, if any, of our British species are in any

danger from bird-catchers alone, and that they are often blamed

for what has really been caused by game-keepers, so-called

" scientific colle(5lors," the more ignorant among the farmers,,

and last, but not least, the village hobbledehoys.


Mr. Dixon is disposed to laugh at the outcry often made

about the slaughter of some very rare bird which has wandered

to our shores, and considers that the killing of such specimens is-

perfedll}' justifiable, as the species would never become indigenous,

and the solitary wanderer would probably perish from hunger

if not shot. This may be all very trvie in theory, but we cannot,

agree with it in practice, for the species is seldom identified

until after the bird has been killed, and a man with a gun in his

hand, on the look out for rare birds, will not stop to consider

whether or not the bird at which he is aiming is sufficiently



