Consequently two spocms only, tbo sli.-irii-shiunpd aud 



COOpPl s liaw'ns ( \,,/l,/fn nl„ fi 1 Ul ill tint oui 



farmeis md s|H,itM,i, ,i ix . I look upm, „ith ',usp,ciou 

 Sm,ill iiKl, nts line n.i. . md i .plv is) and msrot^ fmrn 

 a larfi-e pro]i()rti,>n ol tliH fond r.f ;dl the uther species ; 

 poultry mid nfiuvc Imds. a vei v sm.-ill proportion. Owls 

 render as vaJuable service by ni-ht as hawks do by day— 

 probably ewn uivater— f.tr most sroall mammals are more or 

 leas nocturnal and hence are abroad in i^reati-r nnmbers dur- 

 ing the owls humins hours. Ihe (IreatdLorned owl 

 lre(|Uently does kill poultry, but the lo.ss thus occa.sioned is 

 offset by the good it doos in ilestroying injurious rodents 



The investigation.? ot i)r. K Harry Warreu, who has ex- 

 amined a greater number ot hawks' and owls' stomachs 

 than any other person, prove that a very small proportion 

 of these birds prey upon poultry or game, thus substantiat- 

 ing thi- experience of ornithrdocists at lar?e. Our own in- 

 vestigations lien- i,t th.- I)op;i:fnioi,i of Agriculture, show 

 that over uiaely per cent, of their food con.sists of mice and 

 insects; and if we could eliminate the bird-eating hawks 

 (tlie sharp-shinned and cooper's) the percentage would be 

 still greater. Why not with ecpial pertinence ofEer a bounty 

 on mocking-birds 5 They undoubtedly do some harm, 

 though who would advocate their destruction ? If sports- 

 men's :..:t;,,, i.id private individuals would use their 

 influoi, : iH passage of laws prohibiting Spring 



sh"'"' l uigin early Fall, when birds are too 



young to (ly, an.i. ivouid reduce the number of vagrant cats, 

 then birds would be so plenty that the few caught by hawlcs 

 and owls would be unworthy of notice. 



Du. A. K. FiSHEB, 

 Assistant Ornithologist. 



HAWKS AND OWLS. ^ 



'''^ Editor Amebican Field : — I read with a good deal of 

 interest Dr. A. K. Fisher's reply to Quail, in your issue of 

 March 13, in which he strongly condemns the killing of our 

 birds of prey. I trust you will kindly pardon this somewhat 

 late reply as I must plead as an excuse, therefor, an urgent 

 press of business. To begin, I wish to say that I do not 

 claim to be an ornithologist by any means, but my power of 

 observation is fairly good, and I do not know that our 

 horned owl (Bubo virgimanus), such as is common in East- 

 ern Ohio, not only kills poultry "frequently," as the Dr. 

 puts it, but do it every time they can possibly get a chance. 

 That more poultry is not killed by them is simply due to 

 the fact that they are relentlessly destroyed by the farmers 

 and sportsmen whenever the opportunity oilers, and the re- 

 sult now is that they are very scarce and proportionately 

 shy of their deadly enemy, man. Such being the case one 

 would suppose from the Doctor's reply that our farmers are 

 about to abandon their farms to the vast army of small 

 vermin which are here as a natural consequence of the 

 practical extermination of the owl. I trust the Doctor will 

 not be surprised, however, when I say that there is less 

 small vermin to-day than there was twenty years ago, or at 

 least no more. I do not deny, however, that our owls, to 

 some extant, do subsist on the small vermin, but I venture 

 the assertion, the Doctor to the contrary notwithstanding, 

 that they find their chief subsistence on birds— game and 

 otherwise ; and I have not the slightest doubt but that a 

 great many of the readers of your valuable paper will bear 

 me out in this assertion. Did I not so greatly fear the 

 anathemas of the Doctor, 1 would say that our polecat (Putor- 

 ius fatidus), raccoon (Procyou lotor), and opossum (Didel- 

 phys mrginiana), had more to do with the keeping down of 

 the smaller vermin, than all the hawks and owls in existence. 



It seems to me the Doctor advances an argument in his 

 communication that works similar to a boomerang in the 

 hands of a novice. He says : "Owls render as valuable 

 service by night as hawks do by day, probably more so, for 

 most small mampaals are more or less nocturnal, and hence 

 are abroad in greater nrimbers during the owl's hunting 

 hours." 



Let us see what is in this argument. Owls are nocturnal 

 in their habits ; so are the greater portion of our small ver- 

 min, and both are abroad in search of prey. Now, did it 

 ever strike our worthy Doctor that these small mammals are 

 just as competent to take care of themselves after night as 

 the owl is to catch them ? There is not a more awkward 

 bird on earth than our horned owl while on the ground, 

 while his awkwardness is only equaled by agility of most 

 of our small mammals. Such being the case, is it likely 

 that the owl is going to exert himself very much in efiect- 

 ing their capture, when, from darkness until daylight, the 

 greater part of the feathered tribe is completely at his 

 mercy ? 



The Doctor in one breath admits they frequently kill 

 poultry, while in another he claims they are the "farmer's 

 friend." I am unable to see how he can i-econcile these 

 statements, unless it would be on the principle, that if a 

 farmer was to kill a wolf while in the act of carrying off a 

 lamb from his neighbor's flock, he would be justified in 

 appropriating to his own use the mother of the lamb as a 

 compensation for his services to his neighbor. 



To show that even eminent authors differ from the Doc- 

 tor in his views I quote from "Wood's Natural History" the 

 following, relative to this species of owls: "The Virgin- 

 ian eared-owl is found spread over the greater portion of 

 North America, and in former days did great damage among 

 the poultry of the agriculturists, being a bold as well as a 

 voracious bird. Now, however, the ever ready rifle of the 

 farmer has thinned its numbers greatly. It is a terrible 

 destroyer of game, snatching up grouse, partridges, hares, 

 ducks, sparrows, squirrels and many other furred and feath- 

 ered creatures, and not unfrequently striving after larger 

 quarry." 



In conclusion would say that I shall have nothing to say 

 in this article relative to hawks, except that I shall still cul- 

 tivate the habit of shooting them as the opportunity offers. 



H. L. A. 



