310 
PASSERIFORMES 
the next, with suggestions or evidence of Crows about them. A duck or 
Prairie Chicken flushed from the nest in sight of the ever vigilant marauder 
puts him at interested attention immediately, and if watched he will be 
seen to investigate the promising spot as soon as the intruder has left. 
Crows also profit by disturbances in large nesting coummnities, such as of 
gulls or terns, that cause the owners to leave their premises temporarily 
unguarded; later examination generally shows the clean sweep they make 
on the opportunity. During the nesting season they hunt indefat igably for 
eggs and seem to favour them above all other food and the thoroughness 
with which they search all possible grounds only raises wonder that any 
are left to hatch. However good the Crow may be as an insect destroyer, 
it is doubtful if it can, in this direction, replace the birds that it supplants. 
It will certainly take a number of Crows to replace the work of a covey 
of Prairie Chicken that one Crow has destroyed, and when the great number 
of other birds so lost are taken into consideration, it is very questionable 
how far, if at all, the evidence is in its favour. In the case cited by Mr. 
( ’riddle, it may be held that the Crows had already eliminated the majority 
of other grasshopper destroyers before they were themselves killed off. 
Such things as these cannot fail to impress the unprejudiced observer, and 
when he marks the dearth of bird life in situations that seem most favour- 
able, but where Crows and Magpies are numerous, he cannot help but add 
reservations to his acceptance of official findings that do not take them 
into consideration. 
Altogether, in the opinion of the writer, the Crow is pretty nearly as 
black as he is painted. The fact that Mr. Kalmbach rather withholds 
judgment, and gives modified approval when the most adverse factors are 
unrepresented in his evidence, suggests that, when all things are considered, 
the Crow will be placed in the category of the undesirable. Certainly there 
is no call to protect the Crow. It is wary, intelligent, adaptive, and w r el! 
able to survive even if every man’s hand is turned against it. The most 
strenuous efforts practicable will never imperil the species. As for active 
methods of control, probably the least satisfactory and most expensive one 
is the bounty system. From a purely agricultural point of view, the 
status of the Crow in the west is doubtful. At the best, it is mildly bene- 
ficial, at the worst, but neutral. The Crow question becomes, therefore, 
one for the sportsman rather than the farmer. The policy of public boun- 
ties and taxing the general public for the benefit of a particular class is a 
questionable one. Could it be regarded as a permanent investment, if 
the species would stay reduced when once brought to a normal number, 
it might be differently viewed and the expense justified as for the general 
good. But the relief is only temporary and unless continued year after 
year as a running expense is of no permanent benefit. It behooves the 
sportsman to protect his own sport and to take the burden of controlling 
one of the worst game destroyers. 
491. Clarke’s Nutcracker. clarke’s crow, le casse-noix de clarke. Nuci - 
fraga columbiana. L, 12-50. Plate LB. A heavily built jay-like bird without crest, 
uniformly smoky grey body, slightly whitening to face, with black wings and centre tail 
feathers. Extensive white tips to secondaries and white outertail feathers and undertail- 
coverts. 
Distinctions. The slrrikes are the only species this bird resembles in colour, but the 
Nutcracker is much larger and has no black bar through eye (Compare with Plate LXI B). 
Field Marks. A large grey bird, with black wings and much white in tail. Of jay- 
like habits, and very noisy and talkative. 
