302 CONNECTICUT GEOL. AND NAT. HIST. SURVEY. [BuU. 



but in a milky condition, the destruction of the rice is complete 



— not paying to cut and bring out of the field. We have tried 

 every plan to keep these pests off our crop at less expense and 

 manual labor than we now incur, and have been unsuccessful. 

 Our present mode is expensive, imperfect, and thoroughly un- 

 satisfactory, yet it is the best we can do.' Mr. R. Joseph 

 Lowndes, of Annandale, S. C, in writing of the Bobolink and 

 Redwing says : ' I think I am in bounds when I say that one-fourth, 

 if not one-third of the [rice] crop of this river [the Santee] 

 is destroyed by birds from the time the seed is put into the land 

 till the crops are threshed out and put in the barns. I shoot out 

 about ICO kegs of powder every September, with a fair quantity 

 of shot, say 30 to 50 bags, and have killed as high as 150 dozen 

 a day. In the bird season it takes every man and boy on the 

 plantation to mind these birds. This work has to go on from 

 daylight till dark in any and all weathers, and at great expense, 

 for six weeks in the fall before the rice is ripe enough for the 

 sickle, and then on till we can get it out of the fields. These 

 birds, if not carefully minded, will utterly destroy a crop of rice 

 in two or three days.' Mr. A. X. Lucas, of McClellanville, 

 S. C, says : ' The annual depredations of the birds are in my 

 opinion equal in this section to the value of the rent of the land 



— to say nothing of the expense of minding the birds.' " Pro- 

 fessor Beal concludes, " In the North it does much good and 

 practically no harm; in the South it becomes a veritable pest. 

 To a person born and reared in New England and taught to re- 

 gard this bird somewhat as the Hollanders regard the stork, it 

 is an unwelcome duty to pronounce tipon it a verdict of con- 

 demnation ; but the facts force the belief that until some practical 

 method shall be devised to prevent its ravages upon the rice crop 

 there can be no other conclusion than that the good done by the 

 Bobolink does not in any appreciable measure counterbalance 

 the harm." 



Were the feeding habits alone of the Cowbird (Molothrus 

 ater ater) to be considered in determining its value, it would 

 desen^e protection, as Professor Beal finds that " ( i ) Twenty per 

 cent of the Cowbirds' food consists of insects, which are either 

 harmful or annoying. (2) Sixteen per cent is grain, the con- 

 sumption of which may be considered a loss, though it is prac- 



