No. 21. PENNSYLVANIA STATE COLLEGE. 245 
because of the legions of destructive rodents, particularly mice, and 
noxious insects, such as grass-hoppers and beetles which these 
birds of prey devoured, few farmers evince any disposition to protect 
even such hawks and owls as are positively known to live almost 
wholly on mice and injurious forms of insect life. 
While it is beyond dispute that the hawks and owls, collectively 
considered, are of great service to the farmer and fruit grower, il 
is also a fact well known to all who have taken the trouble to look 
into the life history of these birds that the cooper’s and sharp 
shinned hawks and the great horned owl are great destroyers of 
poultry, game of different kinds and many varieties of small, wild 
song birds. 
It is, however, extremely unfortunate that the bad deeds of two or 
three species of the hawk and owl tribe should result in so preju- 
dicing public opinion that all members of the feathered tribe which 
are known as hawks and owls, should be persecuted and slain. 
Gunners, with rare exceptions, kill every hawk or owl they can; 
even the nighthawk, a strictly insectivorous bird, and one which is 
not related to the hawk proper, is frequently destroyed because 
through ignorance it is supposed that every bird with the name of 
“hawk” is capable of doing nothing but mischief. 
Farmers and fruit growers should teach their boys to devote a 
little attention to the study of birds about their homes in preference 
to allowing them to shoulder their guns and destroy a large number 
of species which are commonly considered to be harmful. 
The correspondence of the State Department of Agriculture has 
developed the fact that there is a large number of people in this 
Commonwealth who favor paying bounties for many kinds of birds 
aud mammals. This correspondence shows that a number of birds 
and other animals condemned by certain farmers and sportsmen 
are not, in the majority of cases, guilty of the bad deeds accredited 
to them. Popular sentiment, however, appears to be aroused 
against this abused and persecuted class and they are placed under 
ban without any thought as to the injury which might come to the 
farmer and horticulturist should they be exterminated. 
While it is doubtless true that certain species of birds and mam- 
mals are detrimental and deserve no protection, it is not by any 
means prudent for agriculturists, sportsmen or naturalists to urge 
the passage of bounty laws which would result in the expenditure of 
large sums of money for the killing of animals which, from careful 
investigations in the field and laboratory, have been found to be 
beneficial. 
Although the English sparrow is a great pest and should be de- 
stroyed, it would certainly not be wise, as many of our citizens seem 
to believe, to pay a bounty for his destruction. A premium on the 
