THE LITTLE OWL

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21744, 28 March 1936, Page 13

THE LITTLE OWL

REMOVING PROTECTION IN ENGLAND The proposal to * enforce sanctions in England against the little owl .(known in New Zealand as the "German” owl) is an episode in the history of wild birdie protection which will excite mixed feelings, states the "Listener ” As its name— -" Athene noctua” —implies, the little owl has a distinguished place'in history; it was the favourite bird of fee goddess Athena and it is Probable that in early stages of worship it was taken to represent Athena herself. It was introduced into England about 1843, and its numbers have grown rapidly during the. last 40 years. The advance, however, is about to suffer a check. For some time past the little owl has been safeguarded in England.by the . Wild Birds Protection Act. Now, in view of reports that it is preying on song birds and game birds, the Ministry of Agriculture is taking action, and is proposing that any local authority which desires to do so may remove it from the schedule of protected birds for five years. The Ministry’s proposal has been challenged by Dr. W. Collinge, the keeper of fee York Museum, who does not believe in the wickedness of the little owl. After examining the stomach contents of 212 adult birds, and a number of young ones, he has discovered that the bird’s food consists of 30.62 per cent, injurious insects, 17.63 per cent,' neutral insects, 31.05 per cent, voles, mice, etc., 7.88 per cent, earth worms, and only .51 per cent game birds. Prom this he concludes that the bird is definitely beneficial to agriculture. A writer in the "Manchester Guardian,” however, makes, a strong-case against the bird, and says that, in three little owls’ nests, he has found corpses of song-thrush, tree-sparrow, dunnock, or hedge-sparrow, yellow-ham-mer, and starling. This is not the first argument about , the little owl’s diet, and five years ago, in “Nature by Night,” Mr A. R. Thompson observed: "So far as the British Isles are concerned this bird is on probation; we really do not know yet whether it is useful or harmful." *‘At the moment the Ministry of Agriculture appears to consider that the little owl has abused the privileges of its probation period,” states the “Listener.” “In' view of its pleasant appearance and historic associations, it is reasonable to hope that the little owl will survive fee five years’ ‘sanctions’ imposed by the Ministry, and will return to the sphere of protection as a sadder but a wiser bird.”