FOREST AND STREAM 
25 
NATURAL ENEMIES OF BIRD LIFE 
MODERN CONDITIONS HAVE ADDED TO THE 
DIFFICULTY OF SUSTAINING NATURE’S BALANCE 
By G. B. G. 
P ARTLY because of a lack of knowl¬ 
edge on most natural history matters, 
and partly because most of us are 
governed by our emotions rather than by 
common sense, we find it difficult to talk 
and act wisely in matters of conservation. 
Since conservation became fashionable— 
and that is not so very long ago—it has 
been a common practice to declare that 
their natural enemies are the chief cause 
of the decrease of game and of insect¬ 
eating birds. People are disposed to con¬ 
demn and to kill hawks, owls, foxes, 
skunks and weasels, but they are slow to 
put aside their own 
guns, and reluctant 
to kill off or con¬ 
fine the family cat 
and the household 
watchdog. 
The Board of 
Agriculture of the 
Commonwealth of 
Massachusetts r e- 
cently published its 
Bulletin No. 3 of 
Economic Biology, 
on the Natural Ene¬ 
mies of Birds. It 
is written by that 
staunch protector, 
competent ornithol¬ 
ogist and level-head¬ 
ed conservator, Ed¬ 
win Howe Forbush, 
and contains much 
wisdom. It is a 
well-balanced pro¬ 
duction such as 
might be looked for 
from the author of 
“Useful Birds and Their 
“Game Birds, Wild Fowl 
Birds,” the other writings of Mr. Forbush. 
Mr. Forbush takes the obviously reason¬ 
able ground that the natural enemies of 
birds serve a useful purpose in preserving 
the fitness of the animals on which they 
prey. This has long been recognized. A 
bird slow of wit or wing, or weakened by 
disease, is evidently less likely to escape 
capture than the individuals which are 
alert and active. It will be caught, while 
the more fit members of the species will 
survive to reproduce their kind. Many 
of the natural enemies of birds subsist 
largely on other natural enemies of birds, 
and in so far as they do this they are 
friends of the birds. There is always 
danger that the useful species may in¬ 
crease to such a point that they may be¬ 
come harmful. In a given region nature 
produces far more animals than can be 
supported in that region and unless these 
are killed off the food supply may become 
reduced, and the normally useful bird may 
be obliged to turn to some other source 
of subsistence and become harmful. 
Until civilized man appeared on the 
scene the balance of nature was not inter¬ 
rupted. The primitive Indian did not un¬ 
duly destroy the animals among which he 
lived and on which he subsisted. He had 
no reason for doing so. When his needs 
were supplied he was satisfied. So, tradi¬ 
tion tells us that in ancient times the wild 
animals did not greatly fear man, but that 
if he approached them they walked away, 
warblers or song sparrows, woodcock or 
ruffed grouse. In the south the hog, and 
in the west sheep and cattle have in some 
sections absolutely exterminated certain 
forms of useful bird life. 
The natural enemies not fostered by 
man undoubtedly destroy great numbers of 
birds, and the list of these feral enemies 
is a long one. Efforts have long been 
made to exterminate so-called noxious 
species by offering bounties for their de¬ 
struction. The offering of these bounties 
has been worse than ineffective. It has 
caused the waste of great sums of money, 
the corruption of morals of many people, 
and the increase rather than the decrease 
of the animals it was desired to destroy. 
Ruffed Grouse Attempting to Enforce Nature’s Game Law. 
Protection,” 
and Shore 
and sometimes merely hid from him. 
Civilized man is not only the chief agent 
in the destruction of bird life, but he has 
brought with him a horde of domestic 
animals which are equally destructive, and 
which he does not and will not control. 
Forest and Stream long ago pointed out 
the destructiveness of the domestic cat and 
of the self-hunting dog, but as yet little 
or no effort has been made to reduce the 
loss they cause. In the extreme north or 
in the south dogs are turned out to make 
their own living at certain seasons of the 
year, and the Eskimo dogs, or the hounds 
and fices owned by the negroes, subsist by 
hunting for the nests and eggs of birds, 
vast quantities of which they destroy. Nor 
is New England free from the same abuse. 
The farmer’s watch dog, which spends 
much of its time sleeping in the sun, often 
forms the habit of going off and hunting 
along the hedge rows and through the 
woods and swamps, to the destruction of 
all ground nesting birds, whether they be 
IS THE PANTHER COMING BACK? 
Panthers, says a story from Fulton 
county telling of a man lost in the woods, 
are more numerous 
than usual this year, 
and therefore the 
man’s friends fear 
for him. So the 
panther, add s the 
New York Sun, may 
be coming back in 
numbers and repu¬ 
tation. 
He has been 
scarce in the East 
in late years. Now 
and then rumors 
have come from 
the Adirondacks and 
from Maine that 
one or two, “ugly 
beasts” the narrat¬ 
ors usually call 
them, have been 
seen or heard. Of 
course the panther 
is not ugly, any 
more than he is a 
panther. He is a 
puma, and he is 
lithe and graceful as any cat. Of all the 
cats he climbs best, and even in the Bronx 
Zoo he will leap a dozen feet in the air to 
knock down a bird or a butterfly. So far 
as eating the lost man is concerned, not 
if the panther sees him first. The guides 
in the North Woods will tell you how they 
saw a panther’s eyes aglow outside the 
zone of the camp fire and how his scream 
rang through two counties when they fired 
at him, but when it comes to accusing the 
panther of hunting man even a guide fal¬ 
ters, which is considerable hesitation. 
Yet the panther at one time was credited 
with maneating powers and ambitions. 
Fifty years ago it was believed that his 
favorite pastime was crouching on the limb 
of a tree in wait for plump hunters. Tender- 
feet went with apprehension to the places 
“where the red deer leaps and the panther 
creeps,” as Ned Buntline sang. We can¬ 
not deny the statement that the panther has 
trailed man. Occasionally, says Dr. Horn- 
aday, he “follows belated hunters or 
