MIGRATORY HORSEFEATHERS

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 is entirely clear about the possession of a robin’s feather.t ttIt is against the law for those without specific permission “to pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture, or kill, possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to barter, barter, offer to purchase, purchase, deliver for shipment, ship, export, import, cause to be shipped, exported, or imported, deliver for transportation, transport or cause to be transported, carry or cause to be carried, or receive for shipment, transportation, carriage, or export, any migratory bird, any part, nest, or eggs of any such bird …” as described in treaties between the United States and Great Britain, Russia, Japan and Mexico and as further amended in the act.

So no possessing a robin’s feather, and if your child comes home delighted that he or she has found one, the only honest thing to do is hand that child over to federal authorities, who know exactly what to do.

The authorities would – perhaps despite your protests – send your child back home, and might not even charge you either. They would do this because they know the intention of the law isn’t to penalize children who discover the delights of nature but to preserve bird species – in part so that they could be hunted – against extinction.

Last week, two Department of Interior officials informed Johanna Tutone, owner of Cappy’s Chowder House in Camden, that the presence of an antique black-backed gull, stuffed 150 years ago and now adorning her restaurant, was an affront to the 1918 act.

Someone complained, and now the bird, which apparently last flew during the presidency of Franklin Pierce, may soon take flight again – one new perch proposed is the Penobscot Marine Museum in Searsport. There, those who would have seen the display at the restaurant would see it in a more scientific setting and draw precisely the same conclusions – that’s some frame! – as they once did over chowder.

This federal action has been thoroughly criticized, which of itself is not reason enough for the officials to forget about the bird except that the public knows the government does not prosecute all possessors of robin feathers and its choice of targets this time look similarly frivolous.