SHALL WE HAVE -BIRD DAYS?" 



G. A. MACK. 



Well-meaning but misguided people are 

 pleading for the observance in our schools of 

 what they would like to call " bird days." 

 They think it would teach the dear children 

 to love the birds. Whether it would also 

 teach the sweet birds to nest out of reach of 

 the dear children, they omit to state. They 

 do say. however, that bird day would be as 

 gloriously beneficial to all concerned as is 

 arbor day. Trees may be grown from seeds 

 and slips; and when birds can be raised by 

 planting egg-shells and feathers I, too, will 

 voice a stentorian howl for bird days and 

 plenty of them. 



In the meantime I might, were I in a 

 carping mood, question if arbor day exer- 

 cises are really a boon to a deforested world. 

 As conducted hereabouts they consist in 

 setting out a tree of some indeterminate 

 species in a dry hole on an appropriate sand 

 bank or clay mound. Whereupon the school 

 children gather around the arboreal victim 

 and declaim maudlin poetry, under the 

 blighting effect of which the poor tree vis- 

 ibly wilts. What benefit arboriculture is 

 likely to derive from this annual farce I can- 

 not imagine, unless it is calculated to en- 

 courage the raising of trees on which to 

 hang arbor day poets. 



Either the bird day enthusiasts were never 

 young, or they have forgotten the fact. I 

 was once a boy. I now have boys of my own 

 and I have studied the animal. You may 

 cite it as an axiom, that for each boy whom 

 you interest in ornithology you make an egg 

 collector. Boys have no use for abstract 

 science. Tell one that birds' eggs are beau- 

 tiful and may be preserved, and he will im- 

 mediately go and get some. 



Years ago an aged minister endeavored to 

 wean my infant mind from the sinful frivoli- 

 ties of marbles, peg tops and shinny, by 

 showing me his collection of eggs. I told 

 him my mother thought it wicked to take 

 birds' eggs. He admitted it might be wrong 

 to do so indiscriminately and without a good 

 object, but said if I would take but one egg 

 from a nest the harm done would be slight 

 and more than counterbalanced by the 

 'knowledge of and love for nature I would 

 •acquire. At that time I lived in God's coun- 

 try, and his feathered creatures had not then 

 all been swept into the pot or frying pan, 

 nor stuffed for the edification of unfeathered 

 bipeds. Eggs were everywhere to be had, 

 and I took them with a boy's prodigality, 

 though conscientiously stealing but one egg 

 from a nest; little dreaming I could do no 

 more harm had I taken all. I, as well as the 

 dominie, had still to learn that few birds will 

 return to a nest profaned by human touch. 



Recently a well known naturalist, whose 

 love for the birds no one doubts, made an 



appeal, on behalf of a public school, for or- 

 nithological specimens to be exhibited to 

 the scholars. I forget how many nests, eggs 

 and skins were in response sent to that 

 school, but the number ran well up into 

 hundreds. How many birds would be left 

 if similar collections were given each school 

 in the country? Why this anxiety to inter- 

 est youth in the birds? What end will it 

 serve but to hasten the end of our avifauna? 

 And, by the way. what vast benefit to man- 

 kind has ornithological science bestowed, to 

 justify its barbarities? Has it added one 

 bird to those God made? True some re- 

 spectable men and women make a good liv- 

 ing by writing and talking about birds with- 

 out so much as turning a hand over to try 

 to save them. Many worthless vagabonds 

 eke out an existence by supplying those men 

 and women and their imitators with eggs 

 and skins to write and talk about. True, 

 also, that the learned men and women have 

 given marketmen and plume hunters much 

 valuable information regarding the location 

 of pigeon roosts and heronries. But what of 

 it? Is the millennium hastened thereby? 



If you want to know what science is doing 

 for the birds themselves, beyond giving them 

 jawbreaking names, read the " Osprey " or 

 any one of a half dozen similar publications 

 for the encouragement of the destruction of 

 birds. In a recent Osprey, some youth tells 

 of finding a clutch of wild turkey eggs. He 

 says: " I joyfully transferred them to my 

 box and carried them home to add to my 

 collection." Think of it, ye thousands who 

 have never seen a live wild turkey! How 

 much more wisely would a skunk have 

 acted? She would have joyfully transferred 

 the eggs to her belly, or carried them home 

 to her hungry kittens: and the eggs would 

 have served a nobler use than being exhib- 

 ited by a fool boy to his fatuous friends. 



Will giving a bird a 3-barreled name 

 treble the service he can render the bug- 

 bothered agriculturist? Give the bird 3 

 stomachs or even a mild tonic to sharpen 

 his appetite, and you will be doing some- 

 thing. If you cannot do that, let him alone 

 to multiply stomachs and increase appetites 

 in his own way. Did the early birds gobble 

 the bugs in Noah's vineyard with any less 

 avidity because there were no ornithologists 

 saved on the ark to chronicle their proceed- 

 ings? 



Make laws to protect birds and enforce 

 those laws: then if children and wiseacres 

 must study an 'ology let it be geology, theol- 

 ogy, the Spanish language or some other 

 dead and useless thing. I cannot phoneticize 

 the songs of birds: but to me they sing, 

 " Look at us, listen to us, love us and let us 

 alone." 



85 



