STUDY OF FOOD OF WILD DUCKS

One phase of this matter of attracting birds is based on our study of the food of wild ducks, which has been carried on since 1905. This project has embraced not only the study of the stomachs of the birds but of marshy and aquatic areas over the whole United States-studies which are practically complete for some States.

Studies of the food of wildfowl have made possible publication of recommendations for the improvement of feeding grounds for these birds which have resulted in the establishment of a considerable busimess of dealing in wild duck food plants and in improvement of areas which has considerably increased property values, in some cases as much as tenfold.

For the benefit of correspondents we maintain a directory of dealers in wild duck food plants, also one of dealers in quail food plants. Other businesses which have been assisted by investigations in the relation of birds and animals to agriculture include that of propagating game, ornamental, and cage birds, and the business of building bird houses and other apparatus for attracting birds.

CONTROL STUDIES OF INJURIOUS BIRDS

As to the control of injurious birds, that involves mostly local activities to control species which may be beneficial or harmless elsewhere. A few birds are on the blacklist, but they usually are not protected either by Federal or State law, so there is nothing standing in the way of controlling them.

Birds protected by Federal law (the Migratory Bird Treaty Act) sometimes become destructive and the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to modify the protected status of the species concerned after investigation has revealed serious damage to agriculture or other interests. Relief may be granted to farmers and others suffering such damage only under this arrangement, and the necessary investigations must be made by persons trained in food habits research. This function has been performed. by our investigators of the relation of birds and animals to agriculture ever since the Migratory Bird Treaty Act was enacted. In performing this service we go into the field and see what is happening; whether it is really a serious matter so that the protected status of the bird should be modified, and what can be done about it.

This work has made possible reduction of damage by certain species, especially of fish-eating birds on the grounds of fish hatcheries and similar establishments and on trout streams, by robins in relation to small fruits, and by gulls, coots, and other species polluting reservoirs. This activity certainly is a Federal obligation. The birds that are protected by Federal law sometimes become injurious and some relief should be afforded, but it ought not to be done in any haphazard way, but as a result of investigation by people who know that line of work.

Mr. SINCLAIR. Along what line are these birds beneficial to agriculture? How is the farmer benefited?

Mr. MCATEE. Primarily through the destruction of insects in general, including especially the injurious species. Of course not all insects are injurious, but we do think that we can count on a ma

jority of them being either injurious or neutral, so that eating them would not result in harm, and therefore birds which have a tendency to prey upon the whole group of insects are doing good from the very facts of the case. We have investigated many cases so as to inform the public about them.

In relation to the boll weevil, for instance, we found that 66 species of birds feed on boll weevils, and that some of them are quite important, like the orioles, swallows, wrens, and so forth. We found the high number of 47 boll weevils in one orchard oriole's stomach. That is just a sample. I have investigated the relation of birds to the green bug or wheat louse that comes early in the spring. On one farm in North Carolina I found that the early migrant birds were eating this wheat louse to the extent of a million a day. That was good work, because that louse comes along early in the spring, before the parasites are active. In other words, at that time the birds were the only natural agency cutting down the numbers of these lice. Later the parasites would come in and restore the balance.

Mr. SINCLAIR. Bird life, then, is helpful in keeping down insect pests?

Mr. MCATEE. Absolutely. And it is not only from general evidence that we so conclude, but we know it from the results obtained in places where people have made efforts to attract birds by putting up bird houses and bird baths and to encourage them to increase, which can be readily done. We have testimony from those people that there has been a great decrease of insect pests on their premises.

Mr. SANDLIN. What are some of the birds that are on the blacklist?

Mr. MCATEE. They are chiefly a few species of hawks and owls. The sharp-shinned and Cooper's hawks, the goshawk, and the great horned owl. These, we think are generally so injurious that they may need control.

Mr. SANDLIN. What about the crow?

Mr. MCATEE. We regard the crow, in small numbers, as about a 50-50 proposition.

Mr. SANDLIN. What good does the crow do?

Mr. MCATEE. They are great enemies of white grubs, cutworms, and wireworms, for instance. These pests eat the roots of plants, not only in lawns, where they would be commonly observed, but also in the case of crop plants, including corn.

Mr. SANDLIN. The crows are very injurious to corn, too.

Mr. MCATEE. Yes, sir. They pull corn, and I would not deny that the old crow likes the germinating grain of corn, because it improves in flavor, even from our point of view, in germination. It gets a sweetish taste.

Mr. SANDLIN. He eats the bug with the corn?

Mr. MCATEE. Yes, sir. The crow illustrates one point; that is that any bird when it becomes too numerous is apt to cause trouble in certain ways; your starlings here, for instance.

INTRODUCTION OF STARLINGS AND SPARROWS

Mr. SINCLAIR. This bureau is not responsible for the starlings? Mr. MCATEE. No; we did not introduce them. The only birds that have been introduced into the country were brought in by

private effort, by people who liked to have the birds around them that they had been familiar with from childhood.

Mr. SANDLIN. When was the English sparrow brought here?

Mr. MCATEE. As long ago as the seventies. The starling came in the nineties. They took quite a while to get started, but when they did, they spread with amazing rapidity.

Mr. SINCLAIR. Where did they come from?

Mr. MCATEE. Both were introduced largely from Great Britain; came from Germany. People even went to the length in Washington, when they first brought them in, of putting up cages for the sparrows in the parks and feeding them; but afterward they changed their minds about the matter.

Mr. SANDLIN. The sparrows are not such a serious problem as they were?

Mr. MCATEE. The bird has subsided a great deal; and that is another result of changes in numbers. It is not nearly as objectionable a bird as it was a few years ago, especially in cities, where the decrease undoubtedly has been largely due to the increase of automobiles and the corresponding decrease of horses.

Mr. REDINGTON. I think, Mr. McAtee, you might explain the situation in California with the cooperation there. Mr. MCATEE. I will do that.

PRINCIPAL BIRD ALLIES OF AMERICAN FARMERS

Mr. HENDERSON. I might remind you, Mr. Chairman, that a year ago Mr. Buchanan was interested in the same question, and at his request we put into the record a list that Mr. McAtee had prepareda very long list of the birds that are beneficial to agriculture, showing their food habits. That took quite a number of pages in the record last year.

Mr. SANDLIN. We will not put it in again, then. We can go to that record.

Mr. HENDERSON. Yes. You will find a very full exposition there of the birds which are beneficial to agriculture.

Mr. SANDLIN. If you will furnish a reference to the pages of last year's record on which that list appears, I think it will be helpful to the members.

(The information referred to is as follows:)

A list of the American farmer's principal bird allies and of the agricultural pests upon which they feed will be found on pages 647-656 of the "Hearing before the Subcommittee of House Committee on Appropriations on the Agricultural Department appropriation bill for 1934.”

CONTROL OF THE "LINNET OR HOUSE FINCH" IN CALIFORNIA

Mr. MCATEE. With reference to the subject suggested by Mr. Redington, namely, the control of certain injurious birds, it can best be illustrated by the work that is being done in California. Recently, or within the last 3 or 4 years, in response to repeated requests from the State horticultural commission and the State department of agriculture, our men have studied the situation, and have developed control methods. In some years the bird called the linnet or house finch, in California, has done as much as $1,000,000 of damage in the State in a year chiefly through the destruction of buds of fruit

and nut bearing trees. It was very urgent to find some means to control it, of course. Now, our men have not only found quite satisfactory means of control, but it has been done with the idea of safeguarding innocent species. I might tell you of one of the procedures gone through with in order to do that: First, we put out what we call clean, that is, unpoisoned bait, and note what kinds of food the various species of birds take. We even make examination of the contents of the birds' stomachs to see what they take, and then try to get a single seed or a combination bait that will be taken only by the birds we are trying to get, so as to save the others so far as possible. We do everything we can do to safeguard the innocent species. In the linnet work we have been able to reduce the damage in many cases locally as much as 90 percent, which means quite a good deal to the orchardists concerned."

A very similar situation exists with reference to the horned lark because of its destruction of vegetable crops. These birds take the little seedlings as they come up, pulling them up by the roots, choosing such crops as lettuce, carrots, and other vegetables.

Mr. SANDLIN. Is that an owl?

Mr. MCATEE. No, sir; this is the horned lark. It has been estimated that this bird has done as much as $300,000 damage in a single year in California.

There are other very serious questions of that same kind, for example, that of the white-necked raven in Texas, and crows, in Oklahoma and Arkansas, or in any other section where they gather in enormous numbers. They often do great damage to the crops before they are taken from the field. We have received many calls for help along that line, and, of course, we try to help as far as possible. In that connection, however our policy has always been to hold bird control to the minimum, never attempting to clear up an entire region at once, and safe-guarding as far as possible innocent species.

I might tell you about some other lines of our work, if you have the time. I have already spoken about the duck-food work, and I will not go further with that now. However, that leads to the subject of the examination of refuge sites to determine whether they are good, or sufficiently good as feeding places for wild fowl. Now, surely, it is a Federal function to make the proper choice of migratory bird refuges, for we do not want to acquire areas unless they are good for that purpose. For that reason they should have a thorough preliminary examination.

Mr. SANDLIN. What funds have been allotted by the C.W.A. and N.R.A. for the purchase of bird refuges?

Mr. HENDERSON. None at all. We requested funds for that purpose, but they were not allowed.

DISAPPEARANCE OF EEL GRASS ALONG ATLANTIC COAST

Mr. MCATEE. Now, I want to mention one more thing bearing upon the wild-fowl situation. Since 1931, there has been a great decrease of eel grass along the Atlantic coast which has seriously affected the food supply of wild fowl. That is especially true in the case of the sea brant which formerly depended on eel grass for about 80 percent of its food. The numbers of the birds have been so reduced that estimates made last year showed that the population

of sea brants was not more than from 5 to 15 percent of the former number. In order to help that situation, a closed season has been put on these birds. There seems to be some improvement in the eel grass situation this year. This is important, not only to the wild. fowl, but to sportsmen and every industry along the coast, including the fish, shellfish, and crabbing undustries.

Mr. CANNON. How do you account for the disappearance of the eel grass?

Mr. MCATEE. It must be a disease, using that term in its broad sense, but the identification of the disease has not been made. We have had experts of the Bureau of Plant Industry at work on it. It is believed to be a bacterial disease, but it has not been positively identified as yet.

Mr. CANNON. What are the characteristics of the plant?

Mr. MCATEE. It has a ribbon-like leaf about a quarter of an inch wide. It comes up to a height of 3 or 4 feet in the water and ordinarily grows in water from that depth up to 2 fathoms.

Mr. CANNON. It grows on the sea bottom?

Mr. MCATEE. It grows in salt water where it is washed by the tide. Such great destruction has never happened to this plant before so far as we know.

Mr. CANNON. Is it known only on the Atlantic coast, or is it found on the Pacific coast also?

Mr. MCATEE. The plant grows on the Pacific coast, but the disease has not affected it there. The disease has wiped the plant out along the western coast of Europe and the northern coast of Australia. There is some indication of the plant coming back in our waters. Mr. CANNON. Does it come back?

Mr. MCATEE. It is coming back in places, and we hope the comeback will be permanent. However, in a number of instances where it has disappeared, and then apparently come back, the plant became diseased again, and died down. Therefore, we hesitate to say in any given case that it is coming back permanently.

Mr. SINCLAIR. Do the birds actually starve for the want of that eel grass?

Mr. MCATEE. They do; yes, sir.

Mr. SINCLAIR. Do they starve, or do they go to some other feeding grounds?

Mr. MCATEE. Brant are likely to starve because of the failure of this eel grass. Under former conditions, when this food was abundant, they did not fly over land, but kept to the sea altogether; with such habits they were unprepared to hunt up other food. They now try to subsist on marine algae, but apparently these are not as nutritious a food as the eel grass. We have records of birds getting down to 11⁄2 pounds in weight, whereas normally they weigh around 6 pounds. Mr. SINCLAIR. Is that the Canadian brant?

Mr. MCATEE. It is not what they call the Canadian goose; the sea brant does not occur in the interior of the country.

Mr. SINCLAIR. There has been a large diminution of what we call the Canadian wild goose, or brant, in the interior of the country up there, as well as down in Texas. You say that is not the same bird? Mr. MCATEE. No, sir.

Mr. CANNON. Is this a migratory bird?

Mr. MCATEE. Yes, sir.