Letter | Published:

The Food of the Rook

Nature volume 101, page 304 (20 June 1918) | Download Citation

Subjects

Abstract

Is there not even a fallacy in the argument against this bird which is supported by a note in NATURE of June 6, p. 271? You say that because 52 per cent. of the rook's food is injurious, 19.5 per cent. neutral, and 28.5 per cent. beneficial, therefore “it is impossible to ignore the fact that at present this bird does considerably more harm than good,” even though, as you admit, 23.9 per cent. of the rook's food consists of injurious insects.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Norwich, June 10.

    • SYDNEY H. LONG

Authors

  1. Search for SYDNEY H. LONG in:

About this article

Publication history

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/101304a0

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.