130 OHIO EXPERIMENT STATION. 
services of the robin may have to the public in general, the tribute that 
he exacts in berries is too great for berry growers to bear alone. 
The capacity of the robin for berries is enormous, and when hundreds 
come at once the grower suffers serious losses. On the Station grounds 
nearly all of the early raspberries and blackberries are taken by robins, and 
only in the height of the season are there enough berries left to give the 
pickers a chance to earn fair wages. If left to themgelves the robins 
would take the greater share of the black raspberries that grow on a plan- 
tation of more than an acre. Growers in other parts of the country have 
complained of losses quite as large. This has turned the sentiment of 
many berry growers against the robin. Many who formerly upheld the 
robin are now forced to admit that the good that he does is paid for ata 
very high price, and not always by those who can afford the tax. 
There is, however, no unanimity of opinion as to what should be 
done. Some would havethe robin no longer protected by law, at least 
allowing every man the right to guard his own premises in the best man- 
ner that he can; others would keep the lew in force and permit no one 
to shoot the robin. The latter class seem to be in the majority, as an 
effort made two years ago to have the law repealed failed because of the 
sentiment in favor of the robin. 
The investigations described in the preceding paper were undertaken 
in order that fruit-growers may act more intelligently, both in regard to 
eecuring proper laws, and in their dealings with the robin on their own 
premises. The literature on the subject was not very full, nor generally 
accessible, and there seemed to be abundant reason for opening up the 
subject again. It was not expected that the matter would be settled pro 
or con—for it was well known that there are two sides to the question— 
but it was hoped that more knowledge of the food habits of the robin, — 
added to what is already known, would serve to show what course of 
action should be taken by those interested. The evidence shows that the 
robin is useful, but his services are not so great that they may not be 
overpaid. When the fruit-grower becomes aware that the robin is over- 
reaching him there ought to be no question as to the legality of defending 
one’s own premises. There is no occasion to attempt the extermination of 
the robin, but there does seem to be good reason for trying to keep it in 
check, even though sentiment pleads the contrary course. If fruit-growers 
choose to secure legislative action favorable to themselves, regarding the 
robin, the facts in the case would seem to bear them out in doing so. 
Mr. Wilcox deserves credit for the painstaking manner in which he 
has carried out the work, and for fairness and clearness in presentation of 
the facts. Errors in determination are, as he states, unavoidable, but 
