THE ROOK SERVICEABLE TO MAN.--PREJUDICE AGAINST IT.

A strong prejudice is felt by many persons against Rooks, on

account of their destroying grain and potatoes, and so far is this

prejudice carried, that I know persons who offer a reward for

every Rook that is killed on their land; yet so mistaken do I deem

them as to consider that no living creature is so serviceable to

the farmer as the Rook, except his own live stock.

In the neighbourhood of my native place is a rookery belonging to

William Vavasour Esq., of Weston in Wharfdale, in which it is

estimated there are 10,000 Rooks, that 1 lb. of food a week is a

very moderate allowance for each bird, and that nine-tenths of

such food consists of worms, insects, and their larvae: for

although they do considerable damage to the crops for a few weeks

in seed-time and harvest, particularly in backward seasons, yet a

very large proportion of their food, even at these times, consists

of insects and worms, which (if we except a few acorns, walnuts,

and potatoes in autumn) at all other times form the whole of their

subsistence.

Here, then, if my data be correct, there is the enormous quantity

of 468,000 lbs., or 209 tons of worms, insects, and their larvae

destroyed by the birds of a single rookery, and to everyone who

knows how very destructive to vegetation are the larvae of the

tribes of insects (as well as worms) fed upon by Rooks, some

slight idea may be formed of the devastation which Rooks are the

means of preventing. I have understood that in Suffolk and in some

of the southern counties, the larvae of the cockchafer are so

exceedingly abundant that the crops of corn are almost destroyed

by them, and that their ravages do not cease even when they have

become perfect insects. Various plans have been proposed to put a

stop to their ravages, but I have little doubt that their

abundance is to be attributed to the scarcity of Rooks, as I have

somewhere seen an account that these birds are not numerous in

those counties (I have never been there), either from the trees

being felled in which they nested, or from their having been

destroyed by the prejudiced farmer. I am the more inclined to be

of this opinion, because we have many Rooks in this neighbourhood

where the cockchafer is not known as a destructive insect, and I

know that insects of that class and their larvae are the most

favourite food of the Rook, which may be seen in the twilight

catching both cockchafers and the large blackbeetles which are

flying at that time in the evening.

I will mention another instance of the utility of the Rook which

occurred in this neighbourhood. Many years ago a flight of locusts

visited Craven, and they were so numerous as to create considerable

alarm among the farmers of the district. They were, however, soon

relieved from their anxiety, for the Rooks flocked in from all

quarters by thousands and tens of thousands, and devoured the

locusts so greedily that they were all destroyed in a short time.

Such, at least, is the account given, and I have heard it repeatedly

mentioned as the reason why the late Lord Ribblesdale was so partial

to Rooks. But I have no means of ascertaining how far this is true.

It was stated in the newspapers a year or two back that there was

such an enormous quantity of caterpillars upon Skiddaw, that they

devoured all the vegetation on the mountain, and people were

apprehensive they would attack the crops in the enclosed lands;

but the Rooks (which are fond of high ground in the summer) having

discovered them, put a stop to their ravages in a very short time.

(June 30th, 1832.)

These remarks are confirmed by a writer in the "Essex Herald" and

by Mr. Waterton. The former says:--"An extensive experiment

appears to have been made in some of the agricultural districts on

the Continent, the result of which has been the opinion that

farmers do wrong in destroying Rooks, Jays, Sparrows, and, indeed,

birds in general on their farms, particularly where there are

orchards."

That birds do mischief occasionally among ripe corn there can be

no doubt; but the harm they do in autumn is amply compensated by

the good they do in spring by the havoc they make among the insect

tribes. The quantity of grubs destroyed by Rooks and of

caterpillars and grubs by the various small birds, must be

annually immense. Other tribes of birds which feed on the wing--as

Swifts, Swallows, and Martins--destroy millions of winged insects

which would otherwise infest the air and become insupportably

troublesome. Even the Titmouse and the Bullfinch, usually supposed

to be so mischievous in gardens, have actually been proved only to

destroy those buds which contain a destructive insect. Ornithologists

have of late determined these facts to be true, and parish officers

would do well to consider them before they waste the public money

in paying rewards to idle boys and girls for the heads of dead birds,

which only encourages children and other idle persons in the

mischievous employment of fowling instead of minding their work or

their schooling. But to return to the experiment alluded to. On some

very large farms in Devonshire the proprietors determined a few

summers ago to try the result of offering a great reward for the

heads of Rooks, but the issue proved destructive to the farms, for

nearly the whole of the crops failed for three succeeding years, and

they have since been forced to import Rooks and other birds wherewith

to re-stock their farms.

Of late years the extensive destruction of the foliage and young

fruit in orchards by a species of caterpillar has excited the

attention of the naturalist, and it has been found to have arisen

from the habit of destroying those small birds about orchards

which if left unmolested would have destroyed or kept down those

rapacious insects.

* * * * *

Essays in Natural History and Agriculture · 第 45 / 65 题