There is no one correct "method" in bird-study, any more than there is in learning to play the piano. Our object is to be able to recognize the birds when we see them, to become as familiar as possible with their habits, haunts, and seasons, to find out what and how many species are to be found in a region or locality, and perhaps take photographs of them. So long as we are able to accomplish these results, it makes little difference how we do it; there is no compulsory order or exact program. Nevertheless there are things which sooner or later must be done and must be learned in some way. Suggestions will facilitate progress, and, by avoiding waste of time and through securing greater efficiency from the first, the student will advance more rapidly and avoid becoming discouraged and abandoning the attempt to know the birds.

At the outset, in undertaking to study birds, it will be of great help to have some intelligent idea of the classes or types of birds with which we may become acquainted. Most people know a sparrow, a hawk, or a duck when they see it. There are various kinds or species of sparrows, hawks, and ducks, but the several species in each of these groups have "a family likeness," certain general characteristics in common. Now there are not so many of these groups but that one can give a distinct idea of each without too great effort. Then, when a bird is clearly seen, one will have a pretty good idea as to where it belongs, and will only have to compare descriptions of a few species to find the right one.

There is a great difference in the state of mind of the person equipped with this knowledge who tries to identify birds and that of another who encounters the birds afield without it. I recall most vividly my first meeting, when a boy, with a certain common bird, and how utterly puzzled I was. One day in late autumn, as I passed through a grove in the suburbs of Boston, I came close upon a tiny bird with a small, rather sharp bill, black crown and throat, gray back, and white under parts. It was busily examining the ends of the branches, sometimes hanging head down, uttering a series of animated notes.

The best course for beginning to become familiar with these groups is to find out in the bird-books what are the principal groups represented in the region where one lives. Then, if possible, go to a museum and examine a few of the species in each group. In this way one will get a very vivid idea of family resemblances, and it will be a mighty help afield. If there is no museum near, make the same study from pictures of birds. In case there are none at home, the public library may help out.

In order to be properly equipped for good work it is necessary to secure certain pieces of apparatus,notably a field glass and a handbook of birds. As to the first, I would state emphatically that it is not at all necessary to purchase anything expensive or cumbersome. An ordinary opera glass will do very well. Combine the qualities of a reasonably high power and a light weight. It does not necessarily follow that a glass is so very "strong" because it is heavy. What one wants in a glass is mainly to be able to see birds clearly enough to identify them, and a good ordinary glass of fair size, the best one can get for a moderate expenditure, will suffice for all-round work. Such a glass is as good as any other for work in a swamp, shrubbery, or foliage, where the birds, to be seen at all, are encountered at close range.

Under conditions of this sort a very high-power glass is not only unnecessary, but distinctly not so good, as it is very hard to get the bird in the field of vision and in focus. With the ordinary opera glass one can pick up a bird in the thicket almost instantly, whereas with the other it becomes a vexatious hunt, and by the time one has got the range, the bird may very likely have departed.

More information about studying birds and bird watching.