INTRODUCTION. 13 
desires to know more birds at sight and to learn more facts with regard to 
those already known. This simple aim may be partly realized through the 
simplest sort of study, commonly known as nature study, in which the 
student, most often but not necessarily a child, learns to look for and find 
and study certain natural objects which have been previously pointed out 
to him, or better still described to him in such a way that with due dil- 
igence he may find and recognize them. No branch of science offers greater 
possibilities for nature study than ornithology, yet as ordinarily taught 
and studied this kind of nature study is not a science and never can become 
one. The great danger lies in the frequent mistakes which beginners in 
bird study are sure to make and the fact that these mistakes often go un- 
corrected through lack of knowledge on the part of guide or teacher. 
The scientific ornithologist on the other hand must deal with facts about 
which there is a minimum of doubt. Conclusions based upon the observa- 
tions of inexperienced people are always open to serious question. The 
scientific bird student must first of all handle actual birds; since, unfortunate 
as it may seem to many nature lovers, accurate, absolute and full knowledge 
of birds can be obtained only by studying them alive, by killing and pre- 
paring them for preservation, and by studying and comparing specimens 
so preserved. As Dr. Elliot Coues, one of America’s foremost scientists, 
truly said forty years ago, “Life, even bird life, is too sacred a thing to be 
needlessly or thoughtlessly sacrificed.”” Yet countless facts of the utmost 
importance in the scientific study of birds can be obtained only through 
the sacrifice of bird life, and an ornithologist who aspires to be an authority 
upon his science must ruthlessly suppress his natural feelings in this respect 
and must procure and make use of such material as is absolutely necessary 
without regard to what are often described as the humane sentiments. This 
does not mean that any untrained boy has the right to take his gun into the 
field and kill birds indiscriminately or even freely under the impression that 
his intention to preserve some as specimens and to study such specimens 
later justify the action. On the contrary the right to collect birds freely 
for scientific purposes should be carefully restricted to such persons as can 
give evidence of a serious purpose to use to advantage the specimens so 
taken. The Michigan law covering this point is clear and strong. 
A moment’s thought will convince any one that the student who searches 
the woods carefully for a bird which he has never seen, who follows up each 
unknown call or song, watches with care each doubtful and illusive form 
which suggests the bird desired, and finally, perhaps after hundreds of dis- 
appointments, kills a specimen of the much coveted species and measures, 
preserves and labels it for his own collection, has gained a knowledge of the 
appearance, habits, notes, size and structure of this species which could be 
obtained in no other possible way. Not only has he gained all this knowledge 
with regard to this particular specimen, but in doing so he has exercised, 
consciously or unconsciously, his powers of observation, comparison and 
discrimination with regard to scores of other birds, so that his experience 
has been broadened and his power and judgment very materially strengthened. 
It may seem to some that essentially the same result could be obtained 
if our student were accompanied to the woods by an instructor who should 
call his attention to the note of the bird sought, point it out and comment 
on its peculiarities and after watching the specimen carefully, perhaps 
through a field glass, record his observations and allow the bird to depart 
unharmed. Such a method of study unquestionably has its advantages, 
especially for the bird, but except in the case of a limited number of species, 
