334 
BIRDS OF PENNSYLVANIA 
“ Believing, therefore, that the killing of these birds is detrimental to the interests 
of the agriculturists, they believe that instead of being destroyed they should be 
protected, and they, therefore, recommend the passage of the following resolution : 
“ Resolved by the Microscopical Society of West Chester , That in the opinion of 
the society the act of June 23, 1885, offering a premium for the destruction of hawks 
and owls, is unwise and prejudical to the interest of agriculture, and so far as those 
birds are concerned, ought to be repealed. 
“ Resolved , That the president and secretary of the society be instructed to for¬ 
ward a copy of the above resolution to our members of the legislature, at its next 
session, and request their aid towards the repeal of the act so far as is above stated. 
“All of which is respectfully submitted. *. 
“ B. H. Warren, 
W. Townsend, 
Thos. D. Dunn, 
James C. Sellers, 
Committee. 
“ March 4, 1886.” 
“U. S. Department of Agriculture, 
Washington, D. C., March 2, 1886 . 
“Dr. B. H. Warren, Ornithologist of the Pennsylvania State Board of Agri¬ 
culture : 
“Dear Sir : Your letter of the 18th inst. has just come to hand. I have read 
with surprise and indignation the copy sent of section 1, page 141, of the laws of 
Pennsylvania for 1885, in which a bounty is offered for the destruction of weasels, 
hawks and owls. The clause purports to have been enacted ‘ for the benefit of agri¬ 
culture,’ etc. 
“The possibility of the passage of such an act by any legislative body is a melan¬ 
choly comment on the widespread ignorance that prevails even among intelligent 
persons, concerning the food of our common birds and mammals, and is an evidence 
of the urgent need of just such systematic and comprehensive investigations as this 
department is now making on the subject of the relation of food habits to agricul¬ 
ture. 
“There are two kinds of weasels in the Eastern States. The smaller kind feeds 
chiefly on mice and insects, and is not known to kill poultry. The larger also preys 
mainly upon mice and rats, but in addition sometimes kills rabbits and poultry. 
Both species are friends of the farmer, for the occasional loss of a few chickens is of 
trifling consequence compared with the good that these animals are constantly doing 
in checking the increase of mice. 
“You ask my opinion in regard to the beneficial and injurious qualities of the 
hawks and owls which inhabit Pennsylvania. This question seems almost super¬ 
fluous in view of the fact that your own investigations, more than those of any 
other one person, have led to a better knowledge of the food-habits of these birds, 
and what you have done in the east Prof. Aughey, of Nebraska, has done in the west. 
Many others have added their ‘mites,’till at the present time a sufficient array of 
facts has been accumulated to enable us to state, without fear of contradiction, that 
our hawks and owls must be ranked among the best friends of the farmer. With 
very few exceptions, their food consists of mice and insects, meadow-mice and 
grasshoppers predominating. The exceptions are the fierce Goshawk from the north, 
and two smaller resident hawks, Cooper’s and the Sharp-shinned, which really de¬ 
stroy many wild birds and some poultry. These three hawks have long tails and 
short wings, which serve, among other characters, to distinguish them from the 
beneficial kinds. 
“Strange as it may appear to the average farmer, the largest hawks are the ones 
that do the most good. Foremost among these are the Rough-legged and Marsh 
Hawks, which do not meddle with poultry and rarely prey upon wild birds. 
