xlii 
INTRODUCTION 
On the other hand, provision must be made for collecting birds 
for scientific purposes, both for educational institutions and for 
private collections, and also for keeping birds in captivity for study 
or as pets. These requirements can readily be met by having per¬ 
mits issued under the supervision of some state officer to properly 
accredited collectors and students. In case it is desirable to allow 
certain birds to be kept in captivity, sale and shipment out of the 
state should be prohibited in order to avoid abuse of the privilege 
and prevent wholesale bird-trapping for market. 1 
Injurious Species. —In every state there are a few injurious spe¬ 
cies from which protection should be withdrawn. In general these 
species comprise the English sparrow, great horned owl, goshawk, 
duck hawk, sharp-shinned hawk, Cooper hawk, crow, linnet or 
house finch, and occasionally some of the blackbirds. Sweeping 
provisions excluding hawks and owls from protection should be 
carefully avoided, as most of the species are beneficial, and a clause 
covering birds of prey in general without naming the injurious 
species will result chiefly in the destruction of those which are bene¬ 
ficial. It is useless to attempt anything more by legislation than 
simple removal of protection. No means have yet been devised by 
which an injurious species can be legislated out of existence, and the 
various methods which have been advocated have almost uniformly 
resulted in failure. Bounties for birds and eggs have little effect 
except to drain the state or county treasury. The Colorado hawk 
bounty, which was in force from 1877 to 1885, seems to have re¬ 
sulted chiefly in the diminution of the sparrow hawk, one of the 
most useful birds in destroying grasshoppers. The Utah bounty on 
English sparrows, in force since 1888, has not exterminated the spar¬ 
row in the state, and the provision of 1896, offering five cents per 
dozen for eggs, must have resulted disastrously to the native birds, 
for a year or two after it went into effect reports showed that in 
Weber County alone payments had been made on 990 dozen (nearly 
12,000) eggs, while during the same period only 640 sparrows had 
been presented for bounty. The sparrow bounties in Illinois and 
Michigan and the hawk and owl bounty in Pennsylvania all failed 
to accomplish their objects, although each cost the state from 
850,000 to $100,000. The expense attending bounty legislation can 
be readily illustrated by the records of payments for coyotes and 
1 The bill prepared by the Committee on Protection of Birds of the American Orni¬ 
thologists’ Union covers all of these points. See “ Legislation for the Protection of 
Birds other than Game Birds,” Bulletin No. 12, Biological Survey, U. S. Dept. Agricul¬ 
ture, pp. 66-60,1902. 
