26 LEGISLATION FOR THE PROTECTION OF BIRDS. 



particularh" the egrets and terns, have been almost exterminated along 

 the southern and eastern coasts of the United States.^ 



The value of herons, terns, and grebes is not generally appreciated, 

 and even the services of the gulls as scavengers are recognized in com- 

 paratively few places. As a result, birds of plume being neither game, 

 song, nor 'insectivorous,' are not protected b}" ordinary game laws 

 unless by chance they happen to be mentioned in the list of protected 

 species. Thus, by a curious perversity of circumstances, the species 

 which are killed most mercilessly and in the greatest numbers are the 

 very ones which are accorded the least protection. 



Plume birds as well as insectivorous birds are protected in States 

 which have comprehensive laws prohibiting the killing of all birds 

 except game birds and certain designated species commonly considered 

 injurious. But those States are few in numl>er, and include only 

 Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts,'-' New York,"' Rhode Island, 

 and Vermont and also the Provinces of Manitoba and Ontario. 



The only States that have special legislation for plume birds arc 

 Florida and Texas. In her law of 1877, Florida prohil)ited the destruc- 

 tion of nests, eggs, or young of any sea V)ird or bird of plume under 

 a tine not exceding $20; two years later she made the killing of anv 

 'birds for the purpose of obtaining plumes' l)v persons who were 

 not citizens of the United States a crime punishable i)V a tine of not 

 more than $100. Later, in 1801, the killing of cranes, egrets, ibises, 

 curlews, or herons for purposes of sale, or the purchasing or trad- 

 ing in such birds, was made a misdemeanor punishable l)y a tine not 

 exceeding $3<M).* The plume-bird law of Texas, enacted April 13, 1891, 

 declares the killing of sea gulls, terns, shearwaters, egrets, herons, 

 and pelicans a misdemeanor. punisha1»le bv a line of from $5 to $25." 



In addition to these two States, Maine 1ms recently enacted a special 

 law protecting terns; Maryland protects both gull^ and terns; New 

 J(>rsey and Pennsylvania protect these and similar birds under the 

 term ' wel)-footed wild fowl:" Michigan, under the term ' wild water- 

 fowl;' Minnesota and Wisconsin, under 'ac^uatic fowl;' while Michigan, 



' For an atrcount of the slaughter of herons in the South, see Scott, Auk, IV, pp. 

 L'i5, 218, 27.S, LS87; Chapman, Han(ll)nok Birds Ea.st. N. Am., p. 1.34, 1895. On tho 

 extennination tif Wrut^, slv ('hai)inan, ihid., \>. 82; Bird Lore, I, pp. 20n-20(), Dccemlx'r, 

 18i»;». On tlie dof^truction of grebes, .-^ee Bailey, Bird Lore, II, p. .S4, February, 1900. 



Mn Mtussachusetts exception.^ are made in the case of gulls and terns, whicli are 

 protected only from ^lay to Septemlwr, inclusive. 



* In New York the protection of gulls and terns is practically reduci'd t< » four months 

 by the clause which prohibits the killing of ' web- footed wild fowl' oidy l)etween 

 the la.st day of April and the last day of August; exceptiuns are also made in tlu' cjise 

 of grebes and bitterns, which are protected only during the same period. 



* Rev. Stat., 1892, sees. 2755-2756; Appendix, cliap. 4050. 

 •'•Kev. Stat., 1895, Penal Code, p. 100. 



