Beitzah 11 - White and black doves

If one wants to slaughter and eat some doves on a Holiday, he must "prepare" them from before by designating the ones he plans to eat. If he designated white ones in a dovecote and in the morning he found black ones or vice versa, they are all forbidden.

This rule, however, is obvious! Since he has designated white birds but found black ones, he has to deduce that the white ones flew away, new ones came in, and they are black, and he has not designated them, so they are muktzeh. Talmud would not teach the obvious. Rabbah explains that we deal with two different dovecots, one with white doves and another with black ones. The rule tells us that he can not just say that the doves exchanged dovecots, but rather that they all flew away, and new ones came in.

Can we clarify an underlying logical principle from here? There are two ways to decide matters: follow the majority (and the majority of doves are not designated for his consumption) or follow the local situation (and locally, we have just two dovecotes, both designated). So could we say that the world majority is more important than the specific local situation? - No, we cannot. Perhaps in our case, there is a platform in front of the dovecote, and birds from other parts of the world constantly roost there. Therefore, the local birds are mixed with the majority of the world's birds - and that's why they are prohibited. But we cannot derive anything about the local vs. majority question.

Art: Still Life Of Cockerels, White Doves, A Jay, Grey And Red-Legged Partridge by (after) Jacomo (or Victor, Jacobus) Victors