534 
Journal of Agricultural Research voi. xxvh, no. & 
problem of mouse control, prevent occasional heavy losses, and add 
considerably to the yearly farm returns. 
USES 
Total extermination of meadow mice, even locally, would be as 
impossible as it would be undesirable. These rodents are firmly intrenched 
in the waste places of the earth where they do no harm and may do some 
good. Then, too, they have a value, even from our narrow and selfish 
point of view. Seton has called them “the boats especially designed to 
bring over food from the Mainland of Grass to the Island of Carnivores,” 
and they certainly are largely instrumental in supporting many of the 
animals that provide us with warm furs. They are also the daily bread 
of numerous birds of prey that agriculture could not well spare without 
great danger from other rodent pests. To some of the native tribes of 
America they still supply an important part of the winter vegetables 
from their winter stores of ground beans, tubers, and roots (5). 
More than any other group of small mammals, meadow mice hold the 
key to the balance of natural adjustment for a large portion of our native 
bird and mammal population. They have also a vivid lesson for us in 
the struggle of life, the surge of dynamic biological force against the 
shores of relentless destruction, a fierce struggle for existence, which, 
through highly perfected adaptation to environment, has won a well- 
balanced coordination of body, mind, and morals that serves the best 
end for the perpetuation of the species. 
LITERATURE CITED 
The following publications on the habits and economic importance of 
meadow mice cited in the foregoing, will be found valuable for reference. 
For accounts of mouse plagues in the Old World, not separately listed, 
see literature cited by Lantz (11, p. 64). . 
(1) Audubqn, John James, and Bachman, John. 
1851. THE quadrupeds OP north America, v. i, illus. New York. 
(а) Bailey, Vernon. 
1900. REVISION OP AMERICAN VOLES OP THE GENUS MICROTUS. IJ. S. Dept. 
Agr., Biol. Surv., North Amer. Fauna no. 17, 88 p., 17 fig., 5 pi. 
1920. identity op the bean mouse of lewis and clark. In Jour. Mam¬ 
malogy, v. 1, p. 70-72. 
(4) Burnett, W. L. 
1916. meadow mice. Circ. 18, Colo. State Entomologist, 11 p., illus. 
(5) Butler, Amos W. 
1892. OUR SMALLER MAMMALS AND THEIR RELATION TO HORTICULTURE. In 
Trans. Ind. Hort. Soc., 31st Ann. Meeting, 1891, p. 117-125. 
(б) Cabot, William B. 
1920. labrador, xiii, 354 p., illus. Boston. 
(7) Fisher, A. K. 
1893. THE HAWKS AND OWLS OP THE UNITED STATES IN THEIR RELATION TO- 
agriculture. U. S. Dept. Agr., Div. Ornithol. and Mammalogy 
Bui. 3, 210 p., 25 pi. 
( 8 ) - 
1895. HAWKS AND OWLS AS RELATED TO THE PARMER. In U. S. Dept. Agr. 
Yearbook 1894, p. 215-232, fig. 21-24, pi. 1-3. 
(9) Kennicott, Robert. 
1857. THE QUADRUPEDS OP ILLINOIS, INJURIOUS AND BENEFICIAL TO THE PARM¬ 
ER. In U. S. ComT. Patents, Rpt. 1856, Agr., p. 52-110, pi. 5-14. 
