1907.] 



Birds and Fruit Growers. 



665 



BIRDS AND FRUIT GROWERS. 



There is general agreement among fruit growers that the num- 

 ber of wild birds has greatly increased in recent years, seriously 

 to their injury. Evidence to this effect was brought before 

 the Departmental Committee on the Fruit Industry, and the 

 Committee, in their Report, state that " there can be no doubt 

 that this grievance is well founded. The destruction of all 

 vermin in country districts, the curtailment of the area of 

 cultivation, and the protection afforded to wild birds by 

 recent legislation, have upset the balance of Nature, so 

 to speak, with the result that they have multiplied to such 

 an extent as to become a positive pest in some places." To 

 these causes may be added a succession of generally mild 

 winters, and the withdrawal from work on farms of boys of 

 school age. 



If the uncompromising apologists for birds were right in 

 declaring that all varieties do more good than harm, a great 

 reduction in the attacks of injurious insects would have resulted 

 from the increase in the number of their feathered destroyers. 

 Unfortunately, this is far from being the case, as insect pests 

 have increased simultaneously with the multiplication of birds, 

 in spite of the growing practice of spraying. 



With respect to the effect of the Wild Birds Protection Acts 

 in preserving birds injurious to fruitgrowers, the Committee give 

 good reasons for concluding that it is indirect rather than direct. 

 It is pointed out that the birds scheduled in the Acts are chiefly 

 rare varieties, not including bullfinches, sparrows, blackbirds, 

 thrushes, and starlings ; and that, according to the general law, 

 owners and occupiers of land may kill all but scheduled birds or 

 take their eggs at any period of the year, although outsiders are 

 prohibited from such action during the close peiiod. But it is 

 further remarked that the Home Secretar}^, on the initiative of a 

 County Council, may extend or vary the close time as to any or 

 all wild birds, and may add to the schedule, thus depriving owners 

 and occupiers of the right to kill destructive birds in the close 

 season. 



It is concluded that the fruit grower has no legitimate griev- 



