LIVING BIRDS.

Shannon News, 2 June 1924, Page 4

LIVING BIRDS.

THEIR CASJI VALUES. * Mr. lnness Hartley, in >his work, “The Importance .of Bird Urfc,” states: It is difficult, to arrive atl any close estimation .of the cash value of birds to agriculture.! t Many such calculations have been attempted but most of them have a wide margin for ■ argument. Probably the most ■ equitable comes from Mr. M’Atee, of the Biological Survey at Washington. He figures that each bird will destroy each year insects to the value of ten cents.. With a population of more than four billion birds breeding in the United States. their annual- savings to * agriculture woulcl then amount to at least four hundred million dollars. As insects annually damage agricultural crops in the United States to the tune of more than a billion dollars, it can be seen that.-birds have an appreciable cash value.

Added to this is the value rendered in the destruction of weeds and rodents.. The. daily consumption of weed seeds alcsne amount • to thousands of to us. The value of weeds, however, can only be measured by the amount of labour and time it takes the farmer to eradicate them. Tliecash thus, saved must amount to a large total. Useful birds of prey average about two. noxious rodents a 'day as food. If a field mouse is capable of inflicting only one cent’s worth of damage upon farm crops, every mouse-eating bird will consume about seven dollars’ worth of mice a year. Allowing to a hawk a life span of ten years, then each bird must potentially be worth seventy dollars,to the United States. In the north-eastern states there are at a low estimate two ,birds residing on. every acre of land. Wd shall call forty acres the average farm thus allowing eighty birds to eaoh farmer. Every bird, if it lives for five years, is worth, according to Mr. M’Atee’s figures, fifty cents as a destroyer of insects. As a consumer of weed insects let us suppose it is valued at half that. This will jfive the birds an average value of seventy-five cents apiece, or a total of sixty dollars for the farm. On every two farms there should be at least one beneficial bird of prey, a hawk or an owl, whose value alone is seventy dollars, or thirty-five dollars to one farm. Added to the above, this gives Us a total of ninety-five dollars for every forty acres. In other words the presence of birds enhances the yalue of land for the agriculturist, by nearly two dollars and a half an acre! Bird Protection in, New. Zealand.

Australian visitors to New Zealand have frequently remarked on the relatively small number of native birds to be observed there, and on the man-, ner in which imported birds are getting a grip cm the country. I printed some notes a few months ago on this point from Professor .Richards, of' Queensland, who looked in vain for the number of birds that lie is accustomed to see when on geological trips in his own state. It. is cheering, therefore, to receive circulars indicating that public opinion in the Dominion is being aroused in the matter, and that the efforts .of the recently formed New Zealand. Native Bird Protection Society arc. meeting with success. One circular notes that “when the; vital necessity of these birds in relation to our forests, agriculture, etc., is better realised, no doubt all will be in a hurry to right matters, set aside sanctuaries, and the whole thing under sensiblo administrative control.’’ This establishment of sanctuaries is rightly regarded in New Zealand as being of first-rate importance/ If, however, guidance is taken from Australian ex-, pcrieivce, it will be ensured that sanctuaries are not made too large and that they are properly controlled. It is neglect of these „ points, that has made New South Wales„ a laughing stock in natural histonvcircles.— Sydney Daily Telegraph : ___.