9 
result in increasing the numbers of this “ruffian in feathers,” a bird 
“too pestiferous to mention.” It has been computed that in ten years 
a single pair of sparrows might increase to 275,716,983,698. What are 
we to do with this enemy of our valuable native birds? So many dif- 
erences of opinion and so many delicate points of morals and pedagogy 
are involved in answering this question that all we can say is let every 
child study and observe the facts, and with the permission of parents 
do everything possible to exterminate the sparrows about the premises 
and neighborhood. It was a dark day for the birds as well as for the 
people of this country when the English sparrow was introduced. If, 
instead, a general and well concerted movement had been organized to 
protect our native species and give them a fair chance to do the work 
of insect destruction for which our natural conditions had developed 
them, the country might have been a long way on the road to becom¬ 
ing a paradise. 1 
1 Bulletin No. 1, The English Sparrow, U. S. Dep. Agriculture, ought to be 
readily accessible for reference to every class in nature study. Methods of 
destroying sparrows that involve suffering, wounding, etc., should be avoided 
so far as possible. The same is true of methods which advocate destruction of 
“nests, eggs or young, which I regret to find are favored by the Department 
of Agriculture. Among the many arguments against this method we may say 
that a nest is a sacred thing, except to collectors, and its deliberate destruction 
violates our finest sentiments of home and confidence. I know of cases where 
the people advocate the merciful extermination of sparrows out of nesting 
time, but will not allow a nest to be disturbed under their own roof. Recent 
opposition to attempts to rid Boston of the English sparrow by destruc¬ 
tion of “eggs, nest and young” is history in point. I am also obliged, on 
biological grounds, to differ from the Bulletin on the point of protecting car¬ 
nivorous birds, like the sparrow hawk, shrike, and screech owl, because, since 
English sparrows are so shy and cunning, these birds will be feeding largely 
on the more easily caught native birds which we wish to protect. And further, 
if they did kill English sparrows in great numbers, in proportion as these be¬ 
come scarce, more and more of our valuable song birds must be taken, until 
we shall be obliged to make war on the hawks and shrikes. 
Practical directions for poisoning sparrows are given on page 174 of the 
Bulletin, and of the poisons recommended arsenic is least painful as well as 
best adapted on other accounts. “As an early symptom of arsenic poisoning,” 
Dr. Hare says, “all sensation of pain produced by heat or pinching totally 
ceases.” Poisoning is certainly the most humane and effective method at our 
disposal, and by its use any northern town or city can easily rid itself of spar¬ 
rows during a single winter, if a few intelligent friends of our native birds in 
different parts of the city will take the matter in hand. Those who, in spite of 
all the evidence in hand, continue to think the English sparrow worthy of pro¬ 
tection, should keep them in cages in their own houses and be placed under 
heavy bonds never to let them out. 
