338 
BlliDS OF PENNSYLVANIA 
to their food. Two or three species of hawks (those belonging to the genus Archi- 
buteo ) are notoriously the best diurnal mouse-catchers of all birds. Their habits to 
soar over the level tracts devoted to grasses and search for their food are so well 
known that further consideration of them is but repetition of established lacts. The 
bolder species of hawks so rarely commit depredations upon the farm-yard fowls 
that these instances are, without doubt, the result of an individual predilection for 
which the entire family should not be branded. The number of rabbits and mice 
which the hawks annually destroy is simply incredible, as any really observant 
person will admit. 
“In my own opinion, the destruction of the hawks and owls within the State of 
Pennsylvania will, ere many years, result in an incalculable inj ury to the farmer, 
who will be overrun with hordes of mice, which he will be powerless to limit, as 
their reproductiveness, when undisturbed, progresses with astonishing rapidity. 
“It would, in my opinion, be a wise measure to have the act relating to the alleged 
noxious birds totally repealed. 
“ Very truly yours, 
“Lucien M. Turner.” 
“American Ornithologists’ Union, 
• * Committee on the Protection of North American Birds. 
“New York, March 12 , 1886. 
“ Dr. B. H. Warren : 
“Dear Sir: The A. O. U. Committee on the Protection of Birds, recognizing 
the great importance of the report of your Committee on the usefulness of Hawks 
and Owls to the farmer, has instructed me to purchase, if possible, one hundred 
copies of the paper containing your report, and to ask if we may have the privilege 
of reprinting it, either in whole or in part, in the interest of the cause, if at any 
time we should find it convenient to do so. Your report is directly in the line of 
our work and could not fail to be a telling influence for good if well circulated. 
“ Very truly yours, 
“Eugene P. Bicknell, 
“ Secretary." 
“Dr. A. K. Fisher, assistant ornithologist U. S. Department of Agriculture, 
Washington, D. C., in a letter dated January 15, 1887, addressed to Dr. B. H. War¬ 
ren, says: ‘Wednesday 1 received eight adult Red-tails and two Red-shouldered 
Hawks from a man in Maryland. * * * I find nothing but mice and shrews in 
their crops and stomachs (from two to five in each). I found two specimens of 
So rex and the following specimens of mice : Mas musculus , Hesperomys leucopus, 
Arvicola riparius and Arvicola pinetorum. The hawks had been killed because 
they had ‘ killed ’ chickens and quails.” 
“ The committee also made inquiries of the commissioners of the different counties 
as to the numbers of birds and mammals that have been killed and for which 
bounties had been paid, and received answers, up to July 1, 1886, from thirty-four 
counties. The number of hawks killed and reported up to that date was 9,237, at an 
expense of $7,335.10, and of owls 2,499, at an expense of $1,303.90. 
“In many cases, however, the fees of the magistrates were not included, but 
merely the bounties paid on the birds. The bounties paid for minks, weasels, foxes 
and wildcats, raised the sums reported to 115,165.95. 
“As the time included in the returns does not come down to date, and as only 
thirty-four out of sixty-seven counties made reports, it is believed by the committee 
that the counties pay annually not less than 860,000 under the law of 1885, of which 
the largest part is paid for the destruction of hawks and owls. That they are the 
best friends of the farmer, and that their destruction is to him a great disadvantage, 
the committee thinks that it has already shown, by the letters of eminent ornitholo¬ 
gists in its report of March 4 last.” 
