dh

"
’
“4
we
4 Pepe,
ty
‘
‘
a
,
-
2 i
rs, ¥

REPORTS

Allicroscopical Society

PV ESL CRESTER,- PENNA;

On the Act of Assembly of said State Award-
ing a Premium for the destruction
of HAWKS, OWLS, MINKS,
WEASELS, etce., cte.,

TAONAL MUSEUM,
AS
s

s
ST. ee ER, PA. : |
“REPUBLICAN” BOOK AND JOB DEPARTMENT,

1887. |

Reports of the West Chester Micro-
| scopical Society,

ON THE ACT OF ASSEMBLY OF SAID STATE, AWARDING
A PREMIUM FOR THE DESTRUCTION OF HAWKS,
OWLS, MINKS, WEASELS, ETC., ETC.

At a meeting of the West Chester Microscopical Society, held
March 4th, 1886, the subject of the killing of hawks and owls and
the premiums paid therefor, being under discussion, Dr. B. H.
Warren, Chairman of the Committee on Protection of Birds of Prey,
appointed at the last meeting of the Suciety, read the following
report :

Report of Committee.

The committee appointed at the last meeting of the Microscopical
Society to take into consideration the Act of Assembly passed the 230
day of June, A. D., 1885,. entitled ‘“‘An act for the destruction of
wolves, wild-cats foxes, minks, hawks, weasels and owls in this Com-
monwealth,’’ and which reads as follows: ‘‘That for the benefit of
agriculture and for the protection of game within this Commonwealth,
there is hereby established the following premiums for the destruction
of certain noxious animals and birds, to be paid by the respective
counties in which the same are slain, namely: For every wild cat two
dollars, for every red or gray fox one dollar, for every mink fifty
cents, for every weasel 50 cents, for every hawk fifty cents and for
every ow] (except the Acadian screech or barn ow), which is hereby
exempted from the provisions of this act) fifty cents,’’ beg leave to
report that tie Chairman of the Committee, Dr. B. H. Warren,
Ornithologist of the Pennsylvania State Board of Agriculture, has
devoted several years of his life to the collection. dissection and
examination of birds, and that all of the committee from observation
and experience have believed that all of the birds denounced in the
law above quoted, with rare exceptions, have been found to be the
best friends of the farmer. Lest, howeve:, any of the committee
might be mistaken they have corresponded with the best ornitholo-
gists in the country, men who have made ornithology a stndy and are
connected with that department in the Smithsonian Institution, ask-

4

ing their opinion as to the. benefits or injury likely to arise from the -
execution of the law against the birds therein named.

They have received answers from Dr. C. Hart Merriam, Ornitholo-
gist of the United States Department of Agriculture; Robert Ridg-
way, Curator of Department of Birds United States National Museum;
Dr. Leonard Stejneger, Assistant Curator of the same department ;
H, W. Henshaw, of the Bureau of Ethnology, also a collector of
birds for the Smithsonian Institution and connected with the late
Wheeler Survey of the Territories, and Lucien M. Turner, a collector
of birds, etc., for the Smithsonian Institution, for the last twelve
years. ‘These answers, wiich are annexed to this report, all bear
testimony that the hawks and owls are of great benefit to the farmer,
and render him far greater service than injury, and that it is unwise
to select any of them for destruction, :

The committee regrets to say that there have been ninety odd
hawks and a dozen or more owls killed since the law was passed June
23d, 1885, at a cost to this county of about $75, and that the slaugh-
ter is still going on.

Believing, therefore, that the killing of these birds is detrimental to
the interests of the agriculturists they believe that instead of being
destroyed they should be protected, and they, therefore, recommend
the passage of the following resolution :

Resolved by the Microscopical Society of West Chester, that in
the opinion of the Society the act of June 23d, 1885, offerng a
premiun for the destruction of hawks and owls, is unwise and preju-
dicial to the interest of agriculture, and so far as those birds are con-
cerned ought to be revealed.

Resolved, That the President and Secretary of the society be in-
structed to forward a copy of the above resolution to our members of
the legislature at its next session and request their aid towards the
repeal of the act so far as is above stated.

All of which is respectfully submitted.

B. H. WARREN,
W. TOWNSEND, Commitee
THOS. D. DUNN, :
JAMES C. SELLERS,

March 4th, 1886.

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, }
Washington, D. C., March 2, 1886,

Dr. B. H. Warren, Ornithologist of the Pennsylvania State Board
of Agriculture—Dear Sir: Your letter of the 18th inst. has just come
to hand. I have read with surprise and indignation the copy sent |
of Section 1, page 141 of the laws of Pennsylvania for 1885, in which
a bounty is offered for the destruction of weasels, hawks and owls.

5

The clause purports to have been enacted ‘‘for the benefit of agricul-
ture;’’ etc.

The possibility of the passage of such an act by any legislative
body is a melancholy comment on the widespread ignorance that pre-
vails even among intelligent persons, concerning the food of our com-
mon birds and mammals, and is an evidence of the urgent need of
_ just such systematic and compreheusive investigations as this depart-
ment is now making on the subject of the relation of food habits to
agriculture.

There are two kinds of weasels in the Eastern States. The smaller
kind feeds chiefly on mice and insects and is not known to kill ponl-
try. The larger also preys mainly upon mice and rats, but in addition
sometimes kills rabbits and poultry. Both species are friends of
the farmer, for the occasional loss of a few chickens is of trifling
consequence compared with the good that these animals are constantly
doing in checking the increase of mice.

You ask my opinion in regard to the beneficial and injurious quali-
ties of the hawks and owls which inhabit Pennsylvania. ‘This ques-
tion seems almost superflous in view of the fact that your own investi-
_ gations, more than those of any other one person, have led to a bet-
ter knowledge of the food-habits of these birds, and what you have
doue in the East Prof. Aughey, of Nebraska, has done in the West.
Many others have added their ‘‘mites,’’ till at the present time a suffi-
cient array of facts has been accumulated to enable us to state, with-
out fear of contradiction, that our hawks and owls must be ranked
among the best friends of the farmer. With very few exceptions
their food consists of mice and insects, meadow-mice and grasshop-
pers predominating. The exceptions are the fierce Goshawk from the
North, and two smaller resident hawks, Cooper’s and the Sharp-
shinned, which realiy destroy many wild birds and some poultry.
These three hawks have long tails and short wings, which serve,
among other characters, to distinguish them from the beneficial kinds.

Strange as it may appear to the average farmer, the largest hawks
are the ones that do the most good. Foremost among these are the
rough-legged and Marsh hawks, which do not meddle with poultry
and rarely prey upon wild birds.

Of hawks and owls collectively, it may safely be said that, except
in rare instances, the loss they occasion by the destruction of poultry
is insignificant in comparison with the benefits derived by the farmer
and fruit grower from their constant vigilance; for when unmolested
the one guards his crop by day and the other by night.

It is earnestly to be hoped that you will succeed not only in causing
the repeal of the ill-advised act which provides a bounty for the kill-
ing of hawks and owls, but that you will go farther, and secure the
~ enactment of a law which will impose a fine for the slaughter of these
useful birds, Very truly yours,

C. HART MERRIAM,
Ornithologist of the Department of Agriculture.

6

UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM,
Under Direction of the Smithsonian Institution,
Washington, March 3, 1886.
Dr. B. H. Warren, West Chester, Pa.

Dear Dr. Warren :—I am just in receipt of your letter of the
rst instant, and therefore fear that my reply cannot reach you in time
for use at the meeting to-morrow evening. It affords me much pleas-
ure, however, to comply with your request for my views concerning
the food-habits of hawks and owls and their relation to man. .

Of all the species which you naine there are only two which,
according to my best judgment, are at all seriously destructive to
game or poultry, these being Cooper’s Hawk and the Great-horned
Owl The rest, with the possible exception of the Sharp-shinned
Hawk, which certainly is destructive to the smal'er birds, my experi-
ence leads me to regard as very decidedly beneficial to man, their food
consisting very largely, if not chiefly, of the smaller rodents, field
mice especially. The Red shouldered and Red tailed Hawks occa:
sionaliy pick up a young chicken or rabbit, but I feel quite sure that
their service to man far outweighs the injury which they thus do.
The little Sparrow Hawk and other smaller species destroy large num— “
bers of grasshoppers, locusts and other large insects.

Very truly 5 ours, ROBERT RIDGWAY,
Curator, Dept. Birds.

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION,
Washington, D C., March 3, 1886. ;

Dr. B. H. Warren, West Chester, Pa.:—Dear Doctor:—In reply to
your letter of the 3d inst. ,asking for my opinion in regard to the food, etc.,
of certain hawks and owls specitied, I would state that I have read Mr.
Robert Ridgway’s answer to a similar request from you and that I
agree with him in every particular. The idea of persecuting the
majority of hawks and owls systematically is simply preposterous, and
any law which has for its object their indiscriminate destruction

should be immediately repealed, since most of the birds alluded to *
are among the very best friends of the farmer. In regard to a few species i
it is well worth while to suspend judgment until a thorough investiga- m3
tion as to their habits and food in your State can be carried out, for, ae
as you are well aware, a species which in some parts of the country &
and at some seasons may be injurious, in other regions and under = » 2
altered circumstances may be chiefly beneficial. I remain, yours

sincerely, LEONARD STEJNEGER,
Assistant Curator, Dept. of Birds, U.S. Nat. Mus.

WASHINGTON, March 3, 1886.

B. H. Warren, M. D., West Chester, Pa.—Dear Sir:—In reply to ~~ Be
your favor of the 1st inst. asking for my opinion with regard to the

4

economic utility of the birds of prey I take pleasure in responding as
follows: To the ornithologist, whose business it is to study the habits
of birds, the widespread ignorance of the habits of the hawk and owl
tribe, and the mistaken idea as to the amouut of injury they do are
almost inconceivable.

So common, however, are these erroneous ideas respecting the birds

of prey and the_r relations to the farmer and agriculturist that it is

not at all surprising that laws similar to the one now in force in
Pennsylvania should be enacted.

Your own investigations into the nature of the food of the birds of
prey of your county might be cited in support of the statement that
such enactments are based upon erroneous conceptions. I may add
that wherever such investigations have been systematically conducted
they have resulted in a verdict favorable to the birds of prey. In
almost every portion of the country I have found the opinions of all
field: ornithologists to be in favor of the preservation of the hawk
and owl tribe. on account of the good they do. I believe the time
will come when the farmers asa class will carefully protect the hawks
and owls on the ground of their beneficent services.

Following is the list of species most numerous in your state :

1. Marsh Hawk Circus cyaneus hudsontus.
Sparrow Hawk. Falco sparverius.
Red-Shouldered Hawk. Suteo lineatus.
Red-Tailed Hawk. Luteo borealis.

Cooper’s Hawk. Accipiter coopert.
Sharp-Shinned Hawk. Accipiter fuscus,
Broad-Winged Hawk. Suteo pennsylvanicus.
Rough-Leggead Hawk. Archibuteo lagopus sancti-johannis.
. Short-Eared Owl. Asto accipitiinus.

10. Screech Owl. Scops aszo

11. Long-Eared Owl. Aszo wilsonianus.

12. Barred Owl. S¢trtx nebulosa

13. Horned Owl. Budo virgtnianus.

Of this list the Marsh Hawk, Red shouldered Hawk, Red-tailed
Hawk, Broad winged Hawk, Rough legged Hawk, Short and Long.
eared Owls, Screech Ow], Barred Owl and Horned Owl are of very
great value to the agriculturist because of the immense numbers of
meadow mice and other smail rodents they annually destroy. The
mice when unchecked increase with amazing rapidity, and the hawks
and owls above named are among the chief natural means for their
destruction, mice and other rodents forming a large percentage of
their food Uhe harm the hawks do in the destruction of small
birds is inconsiderable compared to the benefits derived by the
farmers from the destruction of the four footed pests. |The owls par-
tculary work by night and hence the benefits they confer are easily
overlooked.

The Sparrow Hawk is one of the most harmless of birds and one

SI ANA 9

Ke)

8

of the most beneficial to man. He lives almost exclusively upon
grasshoppers and crickets, and the number of the former destroyed
by these birds is incalculable.

I mention the Cooper’s and Sharp-shinned Hawks last because they
unquestionably kill many small birds and they also commit depreda-
tions upon the poultry yard. I believe, however, they can safely be
left to be dealt with by the class they injure, chiefly poultrymen, To
place all the hawks and owls under ban, and to attempt their exter-
mination simply because one or two species are injurious is certainly
not good policy.

After more than twenty years study of birds I am decidedly of the
opinion that the hawks and owls as a class are of great economic
value, and that no State in which agriculture is pursued to any extent
can afford to dispense with their services. They not only ought not |
to be exterminated, but they should be placed upon the list of buss

protected by law. I.am, very truly yours,
H.W. HENSHAW.

WASHINGTON, D. C., March 3, 1886.

B. H. Warren, M. D., Ornithologist Pennsylvania State Board of
Agriculture, West Chester, Penna.—Dear Sir :—Your letter of recent
date requesting my opinion of the act [No. 109] of the Common-
wealth of Pennsylvania relative to the premiums paid for the destruc-
tion of certain species of birds and mammals, alleged to be
injurious and classed as noxious within the meaning of that act, is at
hand.

I must confess a surprise at the truly lamentable ignorance of the
framer of that act in regard to the supposed noxious character of the
hawks and owls, upon whose lives a premium has been set for their
destruction.

It is well known that no more beneficial bird exists than the bah
whose nocturnal habits render it specially fitted to pursue the smaller
rodents, such as mice, whose ravages upon the field, grain, root and
orchard are so well known that all farmers have from time imme-
morial exclaimed against the destructiveness of those .quadrupeds
whose annual devastation causes the money value of the losses sus-
tained through their ravages to swell into countless thousands of
dollars.

The tender growths of the orchard are decorticated by the mice
and rabbits, which are in turn devoured by the owls sought to be
destroyed simply because some one desires to become notorious as a
law maker, and through utter ignorance of the subject endeavors to
deprive the farmer of his best nocturnal friends, which guard the —
growing crop with zealous care while the owner sleeps to regain a
strength to enable him to continue the daily toil of protecting his
crops from the devastation of his sleek-furred enemies, most insidious
at night. There is not a species of owl but that amply repays for

9

the few incursions made at irregular periods upon isolated hen roosts,
Where a single towl is thus lost, a thousand mice pay the penalty of
their lives to the same owl.

The nocturnal habits of the owls render their services far more
beneficial than may be accurately ascertained.

In regard to the hawks their reputation is much exaggerated so far

“as their injurious propensity is concerned, yet when truthful evidence
is placed in the scales the beneficial services of the hawks will prepon-
derate in a most satisfactory manner.

Certain species of the diurnal birds of prey are well known to feed
almost exclusively upon small rcdents, and in fact differing but little
from the owls in regard to their food. Two or three species of hawks
[those belonging to the genus Archibuteo] are notoriously the best
diurnal mouse-catchers of all birds. Their habits to soar over the
level tracts devoted to grasses and and search for their food are so
well known that further consideration of them is but repetition of
established facts. The bolder species of hawks so rarely commit dep.
redations upon the farm-yard fowls that these instances are, without
doubt, the result of an individual predeliction for which the entire
family should not be branded. The number of rabbits and mice
which the hawks annually destroy is simply incredible, as any really
observant person will admit.

In my own opinion the destruction of the hawks and owls within
the State of Pennsylvania will, ere nany years, result in an incalcula-
ble injury to the farmer, who will be overrun with hordes of mice,
which he will be powerless to limit, as their reproductiveness, when
undisturbed, progresses with astonishing rapidity.

It would, in my opinion, be a wise measure to have the act relating
to the alleged noxious birds totally repealed. Very truly yours,

LUCIEN M. TURNER,

Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. March 3, 1886.

HAWK’S FOOD.

From a report entitled ‘‘Diurnal Rapacious Birds’’ [with special
reference to Chester county, Pa.] prepared by B. H. Warren and
published in the annual report for 1883 of the Pennsylvania State
Board of Agriculiure, is taken the following reference to the stomach
examinations of the species of hawks most commonly found in Penn-
sylvania:

The Red-Tailed Hawk. Buteo borealis. My examination of one
hundred and two birds of this species, revealed in eighty-one chiefly
mice and small quadrupeds, also some few small birds; nine, chick-
ens; three, quail; two, rabbits; one, ham skin; one, part of a
skunk. one, a red squirrel ; one, a gray squirrel ; three, snakes.

The Red-Shouldered Hawk. SButeo fineatus. Of thirty-six exam-
inations which I have made of this species, twenty-three showed mice

10

and small quadrupeds, grasshoppers and coleopterous insects; nine
revealed frogs and some few insects ; in two, snakes and portions of -
frogs were present, and from the remaining two, small birds, particles
of hairand a few orthopertrous insects were taken.

Broad-Winged Hawk. Buteo /atissimus. In twelve specimens
examined by myself, four revealed mice; three, small birds; four,
frogs; one, killed the 22d of May this present year, 1882, was gorged
with cray-fish, with which were traces of insects. [Beetles ] iy

The Sparrow Hawk. alco sparverius. The stomach contents of
twenty-nine of this species, which I have dissected, showed, in fifteen,
principally mice, with frequent traces of various insects; six, grass-
hoppers ; two, coleoptera and grasshoppers ; two, meadow larks ; four,
small birds—sparrows.

Cooper’s Hawk. Accipiter Coopert. Of twenty-seven birds which
I have examined, fourteen showed the food taken to have been chick-
ens ; five revealed small birds—sparrows and warblers; two quail ;
one bull-frogs ; three, mice and iusacts; two, hair and other remains
of small quadrupeds.

Sharp-Shinned Hawk. <Accipiter velox. I have dissected fifteen
of these falcons. Six of this number showed small birds; three,
quail; one, mice; four, 1emains of young chickens; one, grasshop-
pers and beetles.

The Rough-Legged Falcon. Archibuteo lagopus sancti-johannis.
Nine birds all showed their food to be exclusively field-mice.

Marsh Hawk Circus cyaneus hudsonius. Of eleven birds exam-
ined, five revealed mice; two, small birds—Dendreca; three, frogs ;
one, a large number of grasshoppers with a small quantity of hair,
evidently that of a young rabbit.

All the hawks recorded in the following table were taken in Ches-
ter county, Penna.

**Red-tailed Hawk. “Henhawk.’ ‘Big-chicken Hawk.”

Buteo borealis. Gmel.

SEX. DATE. Fieid-mice. Insects. Poultry, Rabbits.
Male, 1d ARE OD ASOG Ooo misc cab acyeaeaiga hs Beetles, etc.

vas March LOP N86, 0225. ee. ee ne: = Be
Femalead |October 11, 1886, .. Eg ji SES tetae a ac 3 Xx

é mf Ug See cic sPaR Seles oo x Beetles, etc.
3 7. bil ON ae eR on x

oe November 13, 1886, ...... q pS Grasshop’rs
Female $8 Aon ere oon d€ | Be

fs December! 4; W886;. 9 2 ieb Becenee \ x {

Hawk.” “‘Big Partridge Hawk.”
Accipiter Cooperi, Bonap.

SEX DATE. FOOD. REMARKS.
Male ad | November 13, 1886, ..... | Small bird, | Song Sparrow (Melospiza fasciata.)
Female yg | e 7 oa a ie |e x | Meadow lark, (Sturnella magna. |

it

Sharp-shinned Hawk. ‘‘Pigeon Hawk” ‘Little Hen
, Hawk.” “Bird Hawk.” Accipiter velox. Wils.

SEX. DATE. Food Material. REMARKS.
Male, yg | October 3, 1886, ........... | Small bird. English sparrow.
Eemale, ad | November 26, 1886,........ x Song sparrow. (M. fasciata)

Sparrow Hawk. “Mouse Hawk.” “Bird Hawk.” “Blue-
backed Hawk.” Falco sparverius. Linn.

SEX. DATE. Field-mice. Insects. Small birds. REMARKS.
Female, ad |Feb. 8, 1886,....)¥ x Sparrow. M. fasciata.
Male, a Cet: 1 ee pa ae se UY stp other orthoptera.
Female, ad se pies = Principally grasshoppers; beetles
ale, ac March 10, “ x Beetles.
Male ad April 3, x Beetles.
Male, ad a4 {to determine.

Female, yg July 14,
Female, ad |Nov: 26,
Male, ad Dec. 1,

Too much dee’mp’d&comminat’ d
Beetles and grasshoppers.
Grasshoppers and larve.

Female, yg |“ 3, SReeS Beetles.
Male, ad July 3, Seer Various species,
Male. ad Dec. 9, SE Ses x Juncothyemazlis (?)

Pa ddd
bard bd bd bd

Vemale, ad Ao ges ce

Red-shouldered Hawk, ‘Winter Falcon.” “Henhawk.”
“Strip-tailed Hawk.” Buteo lineatus. Gmel.

SEX. DATE. Field-mice. Insects. REMARKS.

Female, ad | January 3, 1886, ..........
Male, ad TO gel tg
Female,yg | February 22, 1886, . 5. eee
Female, ad | April 3, 1886, .. .........
yg ovember 23, 1886...
y December ae bf

Principally grasshoppers.
Black colored beetles,

alata ala

Grasshoppers.

MP4

*Hair of mammal.
* ad okember 5, <2

*NOTE.—The gizzard of this bird contained a few hairs of field mouse and some long black
ies omeclecae very much like that of a skunk. The bird on dissection gave a very decided
odor of pole-ca

**The tables giving food materials of different species of hawks refer only to birds on which
bounty has been paid under ‘‘Sealp Act. B. H. WARRE

Sinee the above has been written forty odd hawks and owls on which bounty has been paid have
been examined ; one bird, a Red-!ailed hawk, was found to have fed on chicken only; a second
example of the same species had in its gizzar ‘d remains of a chicken, and portions of a field mouse.
Two ked-tailed hawks had fed on red sau 'rrels, another pair of Red-tailed hawks had taken rab-
bits. peat sparrow hawks, included in this series of forty odd birds, revealed chiefly mice and.

sshoppers.
eTThe remainder of these forty odd birds, ten of which were Screech and Long-eared owls, had in
their viscera chiefly field or meadow mice. The owls, with the exception of one Screech owl that
had in itsstomach an English Sparrow, had all subsisted on mice and ‘insects. principally grass-
hoppers. B. H. WARREN,

Dr. A. K. Fisher, Assistant Ornithologist U, S. Department, of
Agriculture, Washington, D. C., ina letter dated Jan. 15, 1887, ad-
dressed to Dr. B. H.: Warren, says: ‘Wednesday I received eight
adult Red tail’s and two Red-shouldered Hawks frorn a man in Mary-
Jand. * * * I find nothing but mzce and shrews in their crops. and
stomachs [from two to five in eich]. I found two specimens of Sorex
andthe following specimens of mice: Jus musculus, Hesperomys
leucopus, Arvicola riparius and Arvicola pinetorum. ‘The hawks had

been killed because they had ‘killed’ chickens and ‘quails.’ ”’

At a meeting of said Society, held Dec. 9, 1886, the same committee
made the following report :

The Committee appointed to take into consideration an act entit-
led ‘An Act for the destruction of wolves, wild cats, foxes, minks,

12

hawks, weasels and owls, in this Commonwealth’’ approved June 23,
1885, and which made a report to this Society at its meeting held on
March 4, 1886,

Begs leave to make an additional report. That since the said
meeting Dr. B. H. Warren has continued his examination of the
habits of hawks, and finds a full confirmation of his observations of
their habits as set forth in that report, from which it appears that with
rare exceptions the hawks are beneficial rather than prejudical to the
farmer, the small amount of damage done being greatly overpaid by
the destruction they cause of animals and insects injurious to the
farmer.

His observations of the habits of owls, not given in that report, in-
dicate that they are particularly beneficial as the following list of the
examinations made of the contents of their stomachs and _ herein
given will show, viz. :

{tLong-eared Owl. ‘“‘Horned Owl” ‘‘Cedar Owl ”’

Asio wilsonianus. Less.

SEX. DATE. LOCALITY. Field-mice.
Male, ad Novem ber 255 1886; .6 casi. ccleewe ere Chester County, Pa. x
Female, ad Ss 28 Oh : ¥y >.«
Male, ad December 5; oe = =

November 10, 1878, . : ae s oy xX
ES December 30, 1884,.................. ae x
io February 23, 1879,................. eo =
ene oF ‘ CA hes ee : x
Male, ad “ “fia “ x
‘ cat ee “ xX
es December 15, ‘‘ S ox
“ November 22, ** 3224s cS ie x

Short-eared Owl. ‘‘Grass-Owl.” ‘Swamp Owl.”
Asio Accipitrinus. Pall.

SEX. DATE. LOCALITY. Field-mice. Insects.
Female, ad November 21, 1886, Chester County. Pa. =
rn «“ 27, “ “ xX
Male, ad Se 1, 1885, ..... /. he xX Beetles.
Female, ad fe 7, 1883,... ..|Delaware County, Pa. x
Male, ad December 15, ‘“* ... ..|Cecil County, Md. x
Ee ey January 4, 1880,.......... ..{|Delaware County, Pa. x
Re beret WWarchili7; M882) sche es. gen cater Purch’d at Phila. mark’t! x
og se December 8, 1886,............ Chester County, Pa. | x

Screech Owl- :‘‘Red Owl.’. “Grey Owl.” “Sparrow
Owl.”’ ‘‘Mouse Owl.”’ Megascops asio. Linn.

SEX. DATE. LOCALITY. Mice. Insects. Sparrows. REMARKS.
Male, ad November 10, 1s86, ,West Chester, Pa.; X
RS 27, “ ” (Chester Co., Pa. x | A
Female ad ripe as om Field Mouse.
Male ad April 22, 1886,....... oa x X: Beetles.
ys August 20), 1876,..... ‘ x Grasshopp’rs &others
Female ad | December 5, 1879,... ee p.4
Male ad November 26, 1880,. * x x English Sparrow,
a June 2, 1882,........ RS “a
Female ad | June 30, 1883,........ oy D.¢ Beetles.
Male ad December 20, 1884,. . e x English Sparrow.
ss November 1. 1883,. . Ms x Juneo hyemalis,
5 May 1880,..... pe D4 Beetles and others.

13

Great Horned Owl. ‘“‘hoot-owl.’’ Big Owl.’ “Chicken
Ow]l,’’ Bubo Virginianus. Geml.

SEX. DATE. LOCALITY. Poultry. Rabbit. Sm. b’rds. Field-mice. Remarks.
female ad|Feb. 15, 1886,|Chester Co. x Lepus sylvatius
ee April— ‘“ ie ee Chick’n feath’rs
Malead |March —*‘ ¥ x om a
- Female yg|Sept. — 1878 Be x Rem. of chicken
Malead Oct. 20, 1882,|Delaware Co x
Female ye|August 7,°79,| Chester Co. x bl. b’dQ purpur-
“« ad|Feb. 9, 1879, es x feus.

White Owl. ‘“‘Snow Owi.”’ “Arctic Owl.’’

Nyctea nyctea. Linn.

SEX. DATE. LOCALITY. Rabbit. Meat. REMARKS,
Male ad Winter 1879.22. .:....:.. | Chester county, Pa | oe | Lepus sylvaticus.

Female ad | Winter 1879,............ x Apparently beef,

American Barn Owl. ‘“‘Monkey-faced Owl.’
Strix pratincola. Boap.

SEX. | DATE. LOCALITY. Field-mice.
Female ad May 21, 1886. Chester county, Pa. , x "
Female ad November 14, 1880, He ‘ | x
Male ad | September — 1882,... . Philadelphia county, Pa. x

Syrnium nebulosum. Forst.
All the owls in this table were taken in Chester County, Pa.

SEX. DATE. Field-mice. Insects. Poultry. Small birds. REMARKS.
Femat!e ad | Oct 28, 1879) ».¢ x | Beetles.
Male ad |Nov, 17, 79! x | x Beetles & robin. Merula.
ss Jan. 111881 2g x Chicken feathers.
Female ad|Jan 20,1883 x | x Lark. Sturnella magna.
Malead | Jan. 12,1884 x xX Bectles& chicken feathers
Female ad Jan. 1880 x |

7On all the several species of owls recorded in the year 1886 bounty has been paid.

The Committee also made inquiries of the Commissioners of the
different counties as to the numbers of birds and mammals that have
been killed and for which bounties had been paid, and received an-
swers up to July r, iast, from thirty-four counties. The number of
hawks killed and reported up to that date was 9237, at an expense
of &7335.10 and of owls 2499 at an expense of $1303.90.

In many cases, however, the fees of the magistrates were not in-
cluded, but merely the bounties paid on the birds. The bounties
paid for minks, weasels, foxes and wild cats, raised the sums reported
to$15165 95 +

As the time included in the returns does not come down to date,
and as only 34 out of 67 counties made reports, it is believed by the
Committee that the counties pay annua'ly not less than $60,000 under
the law of 1885, of which the largest part is paid for the destruction
of hawks and owls. ‘That they are the best friends of the farmer, and
that their destruction is to him a great disadvantage, the Committee
thinks that it has already shown, by the letters of eminent ornitholo-
gists in its report of March 4th, last.

a

14

In addition, however, to those letters it submits extracts from the
following which are also from men well versed in ornithological
science, all addressed to B. H. Warren, M. D., Chairman of the
Committee, as follows:

PORTLAND, Conn., March 8, ’86.

You were very kind to send me a copy of the ‘‘Daily Local News’?
containing your repoit on the obnoxious laws of your State relative
to the killing of hawks and owls. Having had considerable experi-
ence with our local rapacious birds during the past twenty years, I
consider them decidedly beneficial to the farmer, most of the com-
plaint having reference to Accipiter Cooperi and velox Hope you
will be successful in your effort to get the law repealed.

Respectfully, JOHN H. SAGE,

AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGIST’S UNION t
New York, March 8, ’86.

Thanks for the two copies of the ‘‘Daily Local News.’’ The inat-
ter is first-class and just to the point. I have always advocated the
protection of the birds of prey, Ican use 50 copies of the paper
to advantage, I enclose 50 cents; please have the publisher send
me that number. Very truly yours, . WM. DUTCHER,

AMERICAN ORNITHOLOOISTS’ UNION,
Committee on the Protection of North American Birds.
New York, March 12, 1886.

The A. O. U. Committee on the protection of birds, recognizing
the great importance of the report of your Committee on the vseful-
ness of hawks and owls to the farmer, has instructed me to purchase,
if possible, 100 copies of the paper containing your report, and to
ask if we may have the privilege of re-printing it, either in whole or
in part, in the interest of the cause, if at any time we should find it
convenient todo so. Your report is directly in the line of our work
and could not fail to be a telling influence for good if well circulated.

Very truly yours, EUGENE P. BICKNELL, Sec’y.

From Prof. Samuel Aughey, State Geologist of Nebraska. )
Lincoln, Neb., April 9, 1886.

Every one, however, who will take the pains to dissect such hawks
and owls as the savages kill and leave by the wayside unburied, wiil
find that their food is mainly made up of such animal forms as are
most injurious to the agricultural and horticultural interests of the
land.

I rejoice greatly that you are engaged in these new gospel labors,
which, like the old gospel, require line upon line and precept upon
precept. Yours sincerely, SAMUEL AUGHEY.

From the Vice President of American Ornithologists’ Union.
Washington, D. C., March 31, 1886 ~
Responding to your request for my opinion respecting the useful-

18

ness of hawks and owls, regarded from an agricultural or other
economic standpoint, I beg to say that I consider these birds highly
beneficial and worthy of protective legislation

The number of poultry and of useful insectivorous _ birds.
which hawks and owls destroy is insignificant in comparison
with the quantity of noxious rodents which they con-
‘sume. Owls are particularly serviceable in this respect, and
next after them come the buzzards. Most birds of prey likewise
consume enormous numbers of insects, among which is a large pro-
portion of noxious kinds. Very truly yours,

ELLIOTT, COUES, Va P. A. O.. U.,. etc.

CAMBRIDGE, Mass., March 28, 18386.

Copy of ‘‘Lozal News’’ containing the hawk testimony received.
It came just in time to be used at a hearing before our Mass. Legisla-
tive Committee. I urged the protection of these valuable and much
abused birds [the hawks and owls] very thorougnly, and [ hope with
some success. Yours very truly, WILLIAM BREWSTER.

From Montague Chamberlain, eminent Canadian Natural.st.

ST. JOHNS, New Brunswick, March 22, 1886.

I am exceedingly obliged to you for so kindly sending me the
‘‘clipping’’ of report of your meeting. The letters on destruction
of Owls and Hawks will be very useful to me in Jetters I am writing
on protection of our birds, and I will also use them in lectures I am
preparing. Yours respectfully,

M. CHAMBERLAIN.

BOSTON, Mass , March to, 1886.
I am indebted t> you: courtesy for two copies of the ‘‘Daily Local
_News.’’ Please accept my thanks. Ihave read the proceedings of
the Microscopical Society wit’ much interest and sympathy, and will
hand one copy of the papers to my friend, Mr. H. A. Purdie, who is
just now engaged in defending the birds before a committee of our
Massachusetts Legislature. Wishing you all success in your good
work, I ain cordially yours, BRADFORD TORREY.

BOSTON, Mass., March 8, 1886.

I have just received five copies of the paper with the interesting
matter about hawks and owls. All quite correct. I have just cut out
and pasted onto sheets of paper, acopy which I shali put into the
hands of our Legislature Committee who gave three hearings Jast
week on a revision of the game laws of this State, and are to be con-
tinued this week. Very truly yours. EH. A. PURDITE

From-the Curator of the American Museum of Natural History.

NEW YORK CITY, March 2g, 1886.
The report of the West Chester Mic. Society duly to hand, for
which, cordial thanks. I am very glad to see you working so intelli
gently and earnestly in behalf of a very useful and much persecuted

16

class of birds. Your paper on the food of hawks I took the liberty
of citing quite at length in our articles in ‘‘Science Supplement,’’ your
statistics covering the ground in a very satisfactory manner, and far
more fully than any other published statements known to me. Some-
thing of similar character on the owls would be of great service.

Very truly yours, J. A. ALLEN.

PARIS, France, March 20, 1886.
Your newspaper containing an account of the session of the West
Chester Microscopical Society is just received. ‘Thanks. I am glad
to know that you are making a good fight in behalf of the birds.
There are few States in America where champions of the rapacious
species are not needed. It is my experience that prejudice against

these birds is almost universal. Very truly yours,
NATHAN C. BROWN.

Allow me to thank you for championing the cause of the owl and
hawk. For over twenty years 1 have had congregated in my lawn
from fifty to seventy-five owls. ‘They are peaceable and quiet—only—
on rare occasions would you kuow one was about. On dull days. and
foggy evenings they are flying about in all directions. Never in all
that time have I missed any poultry or have they inflicted any injury
on anything of value.

The first I noticed of their presence was the discovery of quite a
pile of what appeared to be mice hair and bones, and on investiga-
tion found the Norway fir was the roosting place of to me at that time
a vast number of owls. They had ejected the bolus of hair and bones
apparently of an army of tree eating destructive mice, aiding the fruit
grower against one of the worst and most inveterate enemies. * * *
Their merits would fill sheets ; their demerits nil Yours truly,

WM. R. STAVELY, M. D.

Lahaska, Bucks county, Pa.. Nov. 14, 1886.

With the additional information acquired since the last meeting,
the Committee reiterates its opinion that the destruction of hawks and
Owls is prejudical to the interests of agriculture and horticulture, and
that the bounties and fees paid for their destruction are an unnecessary
burden on the several counties of the Commonwealth, and that so
much of the act of 1885 as relatesto the destruction of hawks and
owls ought to be repealed

‘They therefore recommend that our members of the Legislature be
requested to use their efforts towards obtaining the repeal of that por-
tion of the act of 1885 which concerns hawks and owls, and that a
suitable number of copies of the report of the Committee submitted
to the Society at its March meeting and of tnis additional report be
printed and furnished to our members to be laid before the members of
the Legislature at its coming session.

B. H. WARREN, JAMES C. SELLERS, } G.
W. TOWNSEND, “THOMAS D. DUNN, f ~OmmIHEE-

?
hoes lat

, A
bSa5
i

vA

Fam

=
’
rf
i
‘
f
’
DS” ae
,
i
>
4