_A number of them have taken pains to provide extra long_ OPEN _seasons on this species, usually of five or six months!!_ And this for a bird so exquisitely beautiful that shooting it for the table is like dining on birds of paradise. Here is a partial list of them: * * * * * WOOD-DUCK-EATING STATES (1912) Georgia kills and eats the Wood-duck from Sept. 1, to Feb. 1. Indiana, Iowa and Kansas do so " Sept. 1, to Apr. 15. Kentucky, (extra long!) does so " Aug. 15, to Apr. 1. Louisiana (extra long!) " " " Sept. 1, to Mar. 1. Maryland " " " Nov. 1, to Apr. 1. Michigan " " " Oct. 15, to Jan. 1. Nebraska (extra long!) " " " Sept. 1, to Apr. 1. Ohio " " " Sept. 1, to Jan. 1. Pennsylvania, (extra long!) " " " Sept. 1, to Apr. 11. Rhode Island, " " " " " Aug. 15, to Apr. 1. South Carolina " " " " " Sept. 1, to Mar. 1. South Dakota " " " " " Sept. 10, to Apr. 10. Tennessee " " " " " Aug. 1, to Apr. 15. Virginia " " " Aug. 1, to Jan. 1. Wisconsin " " " Sept. 1, to Jan. 1. The above are the states that really possess the wood-duck and that should give it, one and all, a series of five-year close seasons. Now, is not the record something to blush for? Is there in those fifteen states _nothing_ too beautiful or too good to go into the pot? * * * * * THE WOODCOCK _(Philohela minor)_, is a bird regarding which my bird-hunting friends and I do not agree. I say that as a species it is steadily disappearing, and presently will become extinct, unless it is accorded better protection. They reply: "Well, I can show you where there are woodcock yet!" A few months ago a Nova Scotian writer in _Forest and Stream_ came out with the bold prediction that three more years of the usual annual slaughter of woodcock will bring the species to the verge of extinction in that Province. It is such occurrences as this that bring the end of a species: "Last fall [1911, at Norwalk, Conn.] we had a good flight of woodcock, and it is a shame the way they were slaughtered. I know of a number of cases where twenty were killed by one gun in the day, and heard of one case of fifty. This is all wrong, and means the end of the woodcock, if continued. There is no doubt we need a bag limit on woodcock, as much as on quail or partridge." ("Woodcock" in _Forest and Stream_, Mar. 2, 1912.) As far back as 1901, Dr. A.K. Fisher of the Biological Survey predicted that the woodcock and wood-duck would both become extinct unless better protected. As yet, the better protection demanded has not materialized to any great extent. Says Mr. Forbush, State Ornithologist of Massachusetts, in his admirable "Special Report," p. 45: