240 REVIEW—UNITED STATES HAWKS AND OWLS. 
number of their masters, so that the aspect of affairs is becoming 
more hopeful. The question is too delicate and difficult a one to be 
lightly thrown into the arena of party politics, and it is earnestly to 
be hoped that means may be found for the protection and preserva- 
tion, when necessary, of our wild birds and their eggs without 
having recourse to further legislation. 
UNITED STATES HAWKS AND OWLS. 
The Hawks and Owls of the United States in their Relation to 
Agriculture. A. K. FisHer, M.D., U.S. Department of Agriculture, 
Bulletin No. 3. 1893. 
To publish a lengthy article on the misunderstood habits of 
rapacious birds would, if it were likely to come under the observa- 
tion of farmers and gamekeepers, give us an immense amount of 
satisfaction ; we hail therefore with pleasure the appearance of this 
excellent monograph, and cannot do more than hope that it will 
have a large distribution throughout the area of which it treats; if 
_ sO, something at least will be done towards checking the wholesale 
slaughter of these beautiful birds. 
The work which we now notice was compiled several years 
ago, but has been withheld from publication until provision could 
be made for suitable reproduction of the coloured plates, which, 
we may add, are a feature of the book, and without them im 
usefulness would have been much \inepalited. 7 
We find there are so many as 73 species and sub-species of ae 
Hawks and Owls (many of which are solely American) recorded ee 
the district. Some few, however, are identical with species in ourown 
and adjoining countries. The Osprey (Pandion haliaétus), er we 
learn has quite recently been seen in co. Cork, appears toresembDli¢ 
very closely the American Osprey, of which an illustrationis given. cee 
It is clearly stated that out of this large number, only six may ! og 
classed as being positively harmful to the farmer, and of these three 
are so extremely rare that they need not be considered; whilst ome 
(the Fish Hawk) is only indirectly injurious; so that only two oC 
species need be taken into account as enemies to agriculture. Tables 
are given showing the result of critical examination by scientific — Ss 
experts of several hundreds of stomachs, and the author concludes 
that these birds, commonly looked upon by farmers as enemies, ae. 
in fact the reverse. Dr. Fisher says: ‘Owls are the most beneficial — : 
of all birds, and Hawks, with one or two exceptions, are to some 
_ extent beneficial.’ The work is a valuable addition to ornithological 
literature, and we consider it almost hpopeninle to eesangineiee the 
a = must do—L. H 
