This eBook is a reproduction produced by the National Library of New Zealand from source material that we believe has no known copyright. Additional physical and digital editions are available from the National Library of New Zealand.
EPUB ISBN: 978-0-908327-33-1
PDF ISBN: 978-0-908330-29-4
The original publication details are as follows:
Title: Our feathered immigrants : evidence for and against introduced birds in New Zealand, together with notes on the native avifauna
Author: Drummond, James
Published: Govt. Printer, Wellington, N.Z., 1907
Issue, 10,000; February, 1907.
— fefa Xealsnb Sepa flmEn:t of
JOHN D. RITCHIE, Secretary.
DIVISIONS OF BIOLOGY AND HORTICULTURE,
T. W. KIRK, F.L.S., Government Biologist, Chief of Divisions.
BULLETIN No. 18.
OUR FEATHERED IMMIGRANTS:
EVIDENCE FOE AND AGAINST
INTRODUCED BIRDS IN NEW ZEALAND
TOGETHER WITH
NOTES ON THE NATIVE AVIFAUNA.
By JAMES DRUMMOND.
ILLUSTRATED.
The Hon. R. McNAB, Minister for Agriculture,
WELLINGTON.
PY AUTHORITY ; JOHN MACKAY, GOVERNMENT PRINTER.
1907,
PREFACE.
Department of Agriculture
Divisions of Biology, Horticulture, and Publications,
H.M, Customs Building, Wellington, May, 1906.
I had prepared a circular to send to all persons interested in the “ bird nuisance,” the object being to collect information concerning the habits and depredations of the commoner injurious species, together with descriptions of the best methods for checking their increase.
Just as this was ready I received from Mr. Drummond a suggestion that the scope of the inquiry should be widened, and his circular was therefore substituted for mine. As the replies came to hand they were sent to Mr. Drummond, and he thoroughly sifted and arranged the evidence.
My thanks are due to him for so much painstaking work.
T. W. K1KK
INTRODUCTION.
When writing the Introduction to " The Animals of New Zealand " with the late Captain I''. W. Hutton in the early part of 1905, 1 felt that there was a great lack of information in regard to the position occupied by introduced birds in this colony.
Unfortunately, there is not one acclimatisation society in the whole colony that has kept an account even of all the birds introduced, and no attempt has been made to record the success or otherwise of the different species, or the changes that some of them may have made in their habits since they came to the colony.
To help to fill this gap in our knowledge of bird-life I have published this booklet, which I hope will be interesting to naturalists, and useful to farmers in other countries, as well as in New Zealand.
The best plan of operation would have been to visit each district and personally collect the information and make observations. This, however, could not be done without the expenditure of much time and money; so I adopted the plan, used in the United States, of issuing a circular.
I drew up a circular with twenty-nine questions. Mr. T. W. Kirk, Government Biologist, kindly consented to issue it through his branch of the Agricultural Department, and it was sent out to all parts of the colony.
The replies were forwarded to me at Christchurch, and this publication is the result.
The following questions were placed on the circular : —
(1.) What is the name of your district?
(2.) Is it in the suburbs or the country?
(3.) Are any of the introduced birds named in the list given below present in your district?
(i.) If so, name the species and state if possible when they first appeared.
(5.) Are they increasing or decreasing?
(ft.) Have you any recollection of the presence of native birds in your district? If so. what sp<
(7.) Have you noted the effect of the introduced birds on the native birds?
vi
(8.) Have you seen introduced birds attacking native birds?
(9.) Have the native birds resisted the attacks?
(10.) Are the native birds in your district increasing or decreasing?
(11.) If they are decreasing, what, in your opinion, is the cause of the decrease?
(12.) Have the introduced birds helped to bring about the decrease in the numbers of the native birds?
(13.) Have the native birds done any harm to crops, fruit, or gardens?
(14.) Have the introduced birds done any harm to crops, fruit, or gardens?
(15.) If so, give instances, and state the kinds of crops, fruits, vegetables, and seeds attacked.
(Hi.) Have the native birds done good I
(17.) Have the introduced birds done good?
(18.) Generally speaking, have the introduced birds done more g 1 than harm, or more harm than good .'
(19.) What kinds of insects are eaten by introduced birds?
(20.) In what circumstances and at what times of the year do they eat insects ?
(21.) Have they been instrumental in checking the spread of the bot-fly 1
(22.) What steps have been taken ill your district to check the spread of the introduced birds.'
(23.) Have those steps been successful
(24.) Can you suggest any further steps
(25.) Was the introduction of any of the small birds a mistal
(26.) Can you state the number of young birds a pair of sparrows will rear in one season .'
(27.) Do you think that, if the numbers of the sparrows were greatly diminished, the country would be overrun with insects.'
(28.) Do you think that any other English birds oould be introduced advantageously.' tf so. state the species you would favour.
(29.) Can you supply any further information on the subject from your own observations or from statements you have reason to believe are true?
A list of naturalised birds in New Zealand was supplied as follows : —
Sparrow (Passer domesticus).
Hedge-sparrow (Accentor modularis).
Song-thrush (Turdus musicus).
Blackbird {Tardus merida).
Greenfinch (Ligurinus chloris).
UXcclJUUUU yj-Ji/i/ u / umo i yiii/ui iChaffinch (Fringilla cmlehs).
Goldfinch (Carduelis elegant).
Redpoll (Linota rufescens).
Yellowhammer (Emberiza citrinella).
Cirl-bunting (Emberiza cirlus).
Starling (Sti runs vulgaris).
House-mynah i Acridotheres tristis).
Australian magpie (Gymnorhina leuconota).
Skylark (Alauda arv( nsix).
vii
Information was also soughl in regard in tin' acclimatisation of the following birds :
White swan (Cygnus olor).
Black swan (('i/</>iu.< atratus).
Swamp-quail (Syncecus australis).
' • l — r •!""" v :: '"«"";' Californian quail (Callipepla calif ornica).
Pheasant (Phasianus colchicus).
Ring-necked pheasant (Phasianus torquatus).
Lapwing (Vanallus cristatus).
Linnet (Linota cannabina)
Kook (Corvus frugilegus).
I have to thank Mr. Kirk and his staff for the assistance they have given in obtaining the information.
JAMES DRUMMOND.
Sparrow (Passer domesticus). (Myers's British Birds.)
Ybllowhammbh {Emberiza citrinella). (Yakbell's British Birds.)
Feathered Immigrant*
Skylark ( Alauda arvensis). (Yarrell’s British Birds.)
1. Song-thrush (Turdus musicus). 2, Blackbird ( Turdus merula) (Allen’s Naturalists’ Library.)
Feathered Immigrants.]
Greenfinch (Ligurinus chloris). (Myers's British Birds.)
Chaffinch (Fringilla ccelebs). (Cassell's Book of Birds.)
/■'< athi red lutunijrants.']
Lapwing (Vanellus cristatus). (Allen’s Naturalists’ Library.)
Redpoll (Linota rvfescens). (Myers's British Birds.)
I'i athi rt d Immigrants.']
Hedge-sparrow {Accentor modularis). (Myers's British Bums.)
Ctrl Bunting (Emberiza cirlus). (Myers's British Birds.)
Feathered Immigrants.]
Linnet (Linota cannabina). (Yarrell's British Birds.)
Starling (Sturnus vulgaris). (Myers's British Birds )
Feathered Immigrants.']
Kino-necked Pheasant ( Phasianus torquntus). (Allen’s Naturalists’ Library.)
Goldfinch (Carduelis eleyaiis). (Allen’s Naturalists’ Library.)
Feathered Immigrants.]
Common Pheasant (Phasianus colchicus). (Yahkell's Book or Bieds.)
Feathered Immigrants.']
OUR FEATHERED IMMIGRANTS.
Moke than sixty years have passed away since English birds were first introduced into New Zealand. In that time the little immigrants have had plenty of opportunities to show what they can do to help the work of colonisation, and the present is a fitting time to bring them up before the public and try them on the charge that they have been the farmer's, enemies, not his friends.
To make the case for and against them quite clear it is necessary to consider the position of New Zealand before they were invited to join the colonists.
Acclimatisation began when the Maoris brought their dog and their rat from Polynesia. The rat, which is a rather engaging little animalfur a rodent is not plentiful now, and the dog, which was a sorrv specimen of his order, is quite extinct; but for five or six hundred years both thrived exceedingly well, and they stand first on a long list of animals that have been introduced into this country with a success which, in several cases, is far too marked.
The first European animals were introduced by Captain Cook. He let three pigs loose in Queen Charlotte Sound in 1773. He extracted from the Maori to whom he gave them a promise that they would not be killed. He believed that in time they would stock the whole Island. The Maori kept his word, and the navigator’s belief was fulfilled. In later years “ Captain Cooks,” as they were called, afforded splendid diet for the Maoris and early European visitors. It was these “ Captain Cooks,” by the way, that began the disastrous attack on the native fauna. To them is attributed a great deal of the work of banishing the tuatara from the mainland to a few small islands on the sea-coast.
By the time civilisation had sent out its advance guards of pioneersthe pigs had increased so largely as to become a nuisance. They multiplied astonishingly, and enormous numbers assembled in uninhabited valleys far from the settlements. At Wangapeka Valley, in the Nelson Province, Dr. Hochstetter in 1860 saw several miles ploughed up by pigs. Their extermination was sometimes contracted for by experienced hunters, and Dr. Hochstetter states that three men in twenty months, on an area of 250,000 acres, killed no fewer than 25,000 pigs, and pledged themselves to kill 15,000 more.
When civilisation had fairly established itself, bringing many species of its domestic animals and several species of its domestic pests and vermin, there began a short, sharp, but bitter struggle between the new fauna and the old one, which had possessed this country for ages.
The result was never in doubt. The members of the old fauna, which may be regarded as aristocrats of the Animal Kingdom, had absolutely no chance against the shrewd, vulgar, hard-headed, cunning, practical, greedv, and ferocious invaders, who were inured to hardship and had
1—Feathered Immigrant?.
2
walked hand in hand with adversity through many generations. The incident was a specially dramatic one in respect to the avifauna. The native birds were driven completely away —not altogether, or even chiefly, by the new-comers, but by influences that the latter had been taught byexperience to combat.
Sentiment, necessity, and utility played parts in connection with tinacclimatisation of birds, and it was necessity and utility that carried most weight.
About forty years ago this country was smitten with blasting plagues of insects, which crawled over the laud in vast hordes. The gathering of the caterpillars was a sight that caused consternation to agriculturists. They came not in regiments and battalions, but in mighty armies, devouring crops as they passed along and leaving fields as bare as if seed had not been sown.
In the Auckland District one settler kept a paddock closed up for a short time in order to place some young stock in it, but when he completed his purchases he was astonished to find that the grass in the paddock had disappeared. In the same province a settler who was driving his dray along the road drove through a colony of caterpillars which happened to be crossing the road at the time. They were present in such countless numbers that the wheels of his dray ran in a puddle, caused by the crushing of the insects.
A Press Association telegram published in the leading New Zealand newspapers about that time stated that the morning and evening trains between Waverley and Nukumaru, on the way to Wanganui, were brought to a standstill owing to countless thousands of caterpillars being on the rails, which had to be swept and sanded before the trains could continue their journeys.
In the neighbourhood of Turakina, in the Rangitikei district, an army of caterpillars, hundreds of thousands strong, was overtaken by a train as the insects were crossing the rails to reach a field of oats. Thousands were crushed under the wheels of the engine, and the train suddenly stopped. It was found that the wheels had become so greasy that they revolved without advancing, as they could not grasp the rails. The guard and the engine-driver placed sand on the rails, and a start was made. It was found, however, that during the stoppage the cater pillars had crawled in thousands over the engine and all over the carriages, inside and outside.
A Hawke's Bay gentleman who filled in one of the circulars states that caterpillars have covered his paddocks so thickly as to give colon] to the pasture, even from a distance, ami it was considered worth while to drive a mob of sheep backwards and forwards over the insects in order to destroy them.
At Dunsandel, North Canterbury, crops of oats of 60 or TO bushels were completely threshed by caterpillars.
A Dunsandel farmer says : “I have been forty years in Canterbury. I have seen some bad work done by small birds, but I have also seen some bad work done by caterpillars. I once saw caterpillars coming out of one man’s paddock and crossing the road into another man’s paddock, I made all haste to tell the man threatened, and we got 1,600 sheep on the road and killed the insects. The road was black with them, and as the warm weather came on the smell was something awful.”
Testimony is also given by Dr. C. Morton Anderson, of Christchurch, who states that twenty-five years ago an old farmer in the Amberley district, North Canterbury, showed him a splendid crop of wheat, and
3
said that he had seen just as tine a crop twenty years previously destroyed by caterpillars.
The numbers of the insects increased with what they fed upon, and they marched from field to field in grand processions, leaving behind them the abomination of desolation.
It was clear to the settlers that if the disastrous condition of affairs continued it would be useless to attempt to carry on agriculture and horticulture, as operations in that direction would mean that insects, not men and women, would be fed. The.armies of insects had to be fought bach.
In places large ditches were dug to stop the creatures' progress. Some of the native birds performed good service b\ eating the insects Prominent among these birds were gulls, terns.' kingfishers, oystercatchers, native larks, white-eyes, fantails, bell-birds, and grey warblers. At hist the kingfishers seemed to increase rapidly with agriculture, and were regarded for a time as the agriculturists' best friends. The native birds, however, would not dwell with men, and when the native bush was destroyed in the vicinity of settlement they retreated further back. and only visited the insect-laden fields occasionally. As a means of adequately dealing with the insect pest they were nut worth considering.
Why English Bikdk were Introdui i.e.
The settlers then turned their attention to the insect-eating birds they had known in the Old Country. Acclimatisation societies were formed, and steps were taken to introduce English birds. In Europe the insect-eaters have their retreats in the winter; in New Zealand theiv are no winter retreats. It was therefore concluded that the introduced birds would have to possess three qualifications: they woidd have to lie able to eat both insects and seeds, otherwise they would not be able to live in the winter, when the " children of the summer " were absent; they must be non-migratory, otherwise the time and money spent on their acclimatisation would be wasted; and they must be prolific breeders, so that they should multiply rapidly and soon overcome the insect pests.
In weighing the evidence against the small birds it must never be forgotten that rapid increase was one of the principal qualifications sel down by the early colonists as necessary to success.
The sparrow fills all these requirements, and it is not surprising to learn that this bird, which is now heartily cursed in many countries and outlawed in several, with a price upon its head, should te among the first to be introduced to the land of insects and trouble.
As far as I have been able to learn, it was to Canterbury oiat the first sparrows came; but their advent, it is stated, was purely accidental, and their introduction was not contemplated on that occasion. The story is that the Acclimatisation Society ordered twelve dozen hedgesparrows from England. The order was placed with Captain Stevens, of the “ Matoaka,” who submitted it to a bird-fancier at Knightsbridge. Either the fancier or the captain blundered, and the latter took on board thirteen dozen house-sparrows, which are generally known by the common name of “ sparrow.” He was very attentive to them on the voyage out, believing that they were the valuable hedge-sparrows which the colonists were anxious to secure. Most of them died, however, and when he reached Lyttelton in February, 1867, only five were left. The officers of the society, realising that a mistake had been made, refused to accept
1 •
i
the strangers. The captain then took them out of their cage, and, remarking that the poor little beggars had had a bad time, set them at liberty. They flew up into the rigging and remained twittering there for some time. The members of the society went below to look at other -birds. When they reached the deck again the sparrows had flown. The birds stayed about Lyttelton for three weeks. Then they disappeared, and -when next heard of they were at Kaiapoi, about twenty miles •distant, where at the end of 1869 they were reported as being “ particularly numerous.” The Otago Society liberated three sparrows in 1868 and eleven in 1869. Other consignments were brought out later ■on, until the colony was well stocked. Sir Walter Buller frankly pleads guilty to having been accessory to the importation of sparrows to Wanganui. He, on behalf of the Acclimatisation Society there, advertised in London newspapers offering a reward of £100 for 100 pairs of sparrows delivered alive. Both the advertisements and the importations were very successful.
Previous to that, in 1866, the Canterbury Society introduced small numbers of birds, including linnets, skylarks, and goldfinches. In shipping offices in London the society circulated lists of the sums of money it was willing to give for different species of birds, which it was intended should be brought out by emigrants from England; but that system was not successful, and it was not until definite arrangements were made with agents and captains of vessels that any satisfactory results were achieved. It was Captain Stevens who brought the first hedge-sparrow to the colony, and, it is claimed, to the Southern Hemisphere. It came in the “ Matoaka,” together with the first house-sparrows. It was the only' survivor of a consignment. For a long time it was an object of interest in the society’s grounds in Christchurch, many people journeying to the gardens to see the stranger.
The presence of the introduced birds seemed to fall in with the early colonists’ desire to make Canterbury as like England as possible. Their minds were full of the place they had left. The Old Country was their Holy Land, and anything that reminded them of it and its associations was given a hearty welcome.
The blackbird, the skylark, and the song-thrush were introduced for sentimental reasons.
The song of the skylark was listened to witli a delight that ran hardly be expressed in words. It sent a thrill of pleasure through the whole r-settlement. The bird was Shelley's " blithe spirit " which poured, on' *he fulness of its joy. In "profuse strains of unpremeditated art " it showered a " rain of melody " on the toiling colonists, and awakei ed the sweetest thoughts of Home and of childhood's davs.
The colonists had absolutely no suspicion that their charming Utile feathered friend, the gay and debonair "embodiment of joy." the gentle singer of the field, who had come to sing to them the old Merry England, would soon be ranked as a feathered pest, second to no' the sparrow.
The blackbird was another treasured reminder of the Old Country : it is now another " feathered friend " that is heartily cursed up hi down dale.
There is some doubt as to when it was first introduced into Zealand. Old settlers in Otago have an impression that it is indigi and was in the colony before civilisation came. It is probable, however, that early settlers in Otago mistook some of our own dark-plui birds for the English blackbird, and were led into a niisanprehi
.".
A statement has been made that the blackbird came up into Canterbury from Otago, making „s first appearance in the former province in 1856 No Canterbury settler with whom I have spoke, on the subject has boon able to confirm that s atement. The first record in regard to Canterburyis m 1865 when Captain Kose brought a pair to Lyttelton in the " Mermaid. In the same year the Otago Acclimatisation Society liber 1 I ]Tu "' Dl r e ', l, 'i T ° 186T Ca P tain Stevens brought forty-si* to Lyttelton in the Matoaka.' and six more were liberated in Dunedin Others followed, a tew being acclimatised every year for a considerable time, Messrs. R. and C. Bills bringing out quite a large number.
mere was a great rage for blackbirds in Christchurch at one time A single bird kept in a cage by Mr. T. 11. Potts at Governors Bay, in bytteltou Barbour, was the subject of much attention, and extortionate prices were paid for a mate for an odd bird. The blackbird soon became naturalised, and colonists only smiled when it took a little fruit There was plenty of fruit, they said, but there were only a few blackbirds, and they looked upon the bird's depredations as they would look upon the trivial railings of a favourite child. As the years went by and the blackbird increased in numbers it began to take the lion's share of cherries strawberries, pears, apples, and other fruit. Gardeners then began to look upon it as an ugly, sooty intruder, and a greedy nuisance, and its company was found to be not half as desirable as had been anticipated.
The acclimatisation of nearly all the other small birds was the object of the same keen interest. The fact that the familiar shrill note of robin redbreast was hoard in Hagley Park, Christchurch, in 1880 was carefully recorded, and when a single nightingale which had come out with the robins died through an unnatural moult deep regret was felt far and wide. The acclimatisation of both robin redbreast and the nightingale was unsuccessful in Canterbury, but the failure may be attributed to the fact that they were not given a good chance. An attempt to introduce the robin at West Taieri also failed. ,j..,..~ ~c 4-1.„ i •__i- ii>
borne of the birds spread from one district to another. In that way Canterbury got from Otago its cirl-buntings, and some of its starlings', which were rather rare in Canterbury in 1880, but wore very abundant there ten years later. The first were liberated in Dunedin in 1867, and in both Otago and Southland they are present in great numbers. ' The blackbirds and the goldfinches have covered an extraordinarily wide area, having taken up their residence on the lonely Auckland Islands, three hundred miles south of the mainland. The redpoll, on the other hand, is almost confined to North Canterbury and the country along the seacoast of Otago and a few other districts. At first the'song-thrush did not succeed anywhere except at Cheviot, between Christchurch and Kaikoura, but it is now found all over the colony. I have been able to obtain absolutely no trace of the Java sparrow, which was introduced Nelson and Auckland, or the grass - parrakeet. introduced into Canterbury.
The Sparkow
The case against the sparrow has been made out so often and so strongly that it is not necessary for me to state it in general terms here.
The bird’s troubles began about 1730, when Frederick the Great of Prussia caught a few sparrows eating some of his favourite fruit. He immediately placed a price on the head of each sparrow in his kingdom.
6
ordered a crusade against the whole finch family, and set about the work of extermination with the same hearty good-will that he brought to bear upon his troubles with the powers and principalities around him. At the end of two years he found that his trees were bare of either leaves or fruit, but were alive with caterpillars. He retracted his decree, and was glad to pay large sums of money to import consignments of sparrows from other countries. In England in recent years the sparrow has been condemned by Miss E. A. Onnerod and by the English Board of Agriculture. Even at the recent Ornithologists’ Conference in England he was severely dealt with.
Everybody knows that he does great harm to crops and gardens. There are few farmers in New Zealand or any other country that do not regard him as one of their greatest enemies. The reports of his ravages cannot be greatly exaggerated, as plain facts and figures are supplied, and corroborative evidence is not wanting.
In New Zealand, as in England, he refuses to go out into the woods and get an honest living in the straightforward but laborious manner adopted by our own birds. He clings to civilisation and cultivation, and insists on inflicting upon man his most unwelcome company. Whatever changes he has made in his habits since he came to this new land have been for the worse.
One of the inquiries in the circular was made with the object of ascertaining the number of young a pair of sparrow.- will breed in a season. I thought that if I could obtain reliable information in that respect from different people residing in different parts of the colony a rough estimate might be formed of the rate of the sparrow's increi this country.
The question was, " Can you state the number of young birds a of sparrows will rear in one season? "
As might be expected, the replies make a very mixed assortment of statements, observations, conjectures, and guesses. Large number- oi the correspondents admit that they cannot supply the answer. Others put me off with general statements, such as "Their name is Legion,'' "As many as they can," and "Judging from the visible increase in this district, about a million."
I have been supplied, however, with plenty of good evidence, based on careful observation, to show that in this country the sparrow is astonishingly prolific. The number of eggs that may be taken from a female is almost without limit. At one place where an experiment wamade egg after egg was removed until fifty from one bird had been counted.
At Teinuka four broods of young, totalling thirteen birds, have been hatched in one nest, and in quick succession. In the Waikato district four broods of five birds each are quite common, and Mr. W. Hooton, secretary of the Farmers' Union at Rangi-iwi, in the Waikato. states that sparrows there generally breed four times in the season. In North Tauranga, on the east coast of the North Island, three broods of six each are common. At Balcairn, Woodside, and West Taieri. in the South Island, the reports state, there are three broods in the a Mr. W. Harding, chairman of the Ashburton Branch of the Fanner.-' Union, gives the number in his district as thirty-five, which is also the number given by the Ashburton County Council. Mr. A. 11. Shury, oi Ashburton, says that a pair in that part of the colony will rear five broods of five birds each, and the first brood will rear at least one in the sari season.
7
Mi. James Smaill an observer at Inoh-Clutha, in Otago, says that leeihng goes on all through the season, whole nestfuls being killed off y the eold , ni , tl '° severe weather. From twenty-five to thirty are the figures supplied tor West Oxford, and at Riccarton there have been lecorded three broods ot five each.
■ i , a "f* a veranda h unfledged young ones evidently helped the hatching of the eggs, so that the nest was never empty of unfledged .Aoung while fully fledged birds seemed to rise out of the nests uninterruptediy right through the season.
From the nature of the evidence submitted, I should say that twentytwe young is a fair average for one pair in one season If „ • JI e , i ,
If allowance is made for natural decrease, which certainly cannot be rem great in the case of the sparrow, the average might safely be put down at twenty. I feel sure that that is well within the mark If those twenty were equally divided into males and females, and if all of them, together with the original parent birds, lived for five years, the single pair in that time would have increased to no fewer than 322 102 the increase is shown by the following table* :
If the process was continued at the same rate for five more years, and if all the birds lived, the single pair at the end of ten years from the time they started breeding would be represented by 51,874,849,202 sparrows. When figures are placed together in that way, of course, they are absurd : the increase assumed would never be reached even by rapid breeders like sparrows. I may add that an American ornithologist, on whose system the table has been drawn up, states that it is no unusual thing for a pair in the latitude of New York to rear twenty or thirty young in a year, and assuming the annual product of a pair to be twentyfour young, and that they all live, he works out the progeny of that pair for ten years at 275,716,983,698. It is fair to state that he points out that the actual increase must be only a small traction of that total, which is based on assumptions that are never likely to be realised. His investigations show that it is probable that the large colonies at Galveston (Texas), Salt Lake City (Utah), and San Francisco have resulted wholly, or at any rate to a large extent, from the few pairs originally introduced at those places, but he finds that it is impossible to apply the same remark to most of the other centres of abundance in the United States.
The evidence I have been able to gather seems to point to the fact that the five sparrows liberated by Captain Stevens in Lyttelton in 1867 must have been responsible for large numbers of the birds that spread over Canterbury in the following years. If there was only one pair in that little consignment, it must by this time have produced sufficient progeny to stock a large portion of the South Island.
* Kirk. Report Agricultural Department, ]S«I7. p. l-_> 4.
8
I have endeavoured to ascertain whether the rates of increase are affected by the different climatic conditions in this colony, but these birds have such remarkably strong constitutions that they seem to thrive equally well in the cold of Otago and Southland and the warmth of Auckland." All the information supplied points to the fact that they are more numerous in the cold southern provinces than in the northern ones, and breed as rapidly in one as in the other. It is true that they are sometimes found dead in large numbers in the severe winters of the South j but this is more likely to be attributed to lack of food than to the severity of the climate.
Wherever there is close settlement, in fact, sparrows are found in countless numbers and in the enjoyment of the very best of health. It is stated that in America they do not increase as rapidly or as steadily in cold climates as in temperate ones, but I certainly cannot say that that is the case in New Zealand.
It is interesting to note that the first sparrows were tak United States in 1850, sex. irs before Captain Stevens lie the historical live in Lyttelton. The lirsi pairs in America were lib in Brooklyn, but they did net succeed very well, and a second attempt had to be made, a large shipment being sent free Eng] The birds were carefully watched, fed, and protected. districts they were transported: into others they went voluntarily and formed colonies. By 1875 there were many large colonies in different parts of the country, and a bulletin issued by the United States Department of Agriculture says. " From that time to the present the marvellous rapidity of the sparrow's multiplication, the surpassing swiftness of its extension, and the prodigious size of the area it has overspread, are without parallel in the history of any bird. Like a noxious weed transplanted to a fertile soil, it lias taken root ami has become disseminated over half a continent before the significance of its presence has come to be understood.'
Exaggerated reports of 'lie benefit the bird had conferred upon settlers in the districts in the United States into which it had been first introduced helped largely to foster the increase. Many people in the States went to the expense of purchasing and shipping sparrows to considerable distances in the belief that they were purely insectivorous birds and must prove beneficial wherever they could be natu ralised. In this way a sparrow "boom' was started, and the price of sparrows in New York went up to such a point that many people desirous of obtaining the birds found it cheaper to club together ami import them straight from England.
I directed special inquiries to ascertain, if possible, the manner ii. which the sparrow in New Zealand regulates its diet. It would be interesting to know the proportions of grain and insects it consumes. and whether, if a dish of insects ami a dish of grain were placed in front of it, it would take the insects before the grain.
Large numbers of farmers in this country have come to the conclusion that the sparrow has entirely lost its insectivorous habits, and has becomi a grain-eater pure and simple. They say that while there is a spi grain about, or a seed of any kind, the sparrow will not trouble about the insects, unless to feed the young.
Some attempts have been made to put the sparrow's weakness in this respect to an actual test. Our correspondent states that when insects have boon placed round a sparrow's nest the bird has left them alone . and has flown to an idjacent wheat field or a garden of sweet young
9
vegetables, bo far as the replies to my circular are concerned, there has been only one case of this kind, and against it there are the statements of many correspondents that the sparrow still prefers insects, although this is often qualified by another statement, that it does so only when there is little grain available.
A reliable correspondent at Ashburton, Mr. A. H. Shury, estimates that one sparrow will eat 100 grains of wheat in twenty-four hours, and that the progeny of one bird during the three months of harvest will consume three-quarters of a bushel of wheat and will also shake large quantities to the ground. These estimates are not altogether guesses, but are based on intelligent investigations.
A W aikato farmer says, Bother the sparrows, they eat or destroy everything you don’t want them to.”
Another farmer in the Waikato sums up his views by saying, “ If all the sparrows were dead we should never miss them; they are a tax on the farmer to the extent of an extra bushel of seed per acre.”
A member of the I' armors’ Union at Aponga, Whangarei, declares that he doubts if ever the sparrows touch insects, as he has never seen them doing so.
The fifth question in the circular was, “ Do you think that the introilnotion of any of the small birds was a mistake? There are very few correspondents who, in reply to this, have not named the sparrow, and emphasized his inclusion in the condemned list by strong and harsh words.
Mr. A. Burrows, a dairy-farmer, of West Oxford, North Canterbury, says, •“ I once made a small box for sparrows, and placed it in a position where I could watch them. After a week had passed a pair built a nest in the box and reared five young. For the first week they fed them on insects, bringing as many as six moths and ‘ longlegs ’ at a time. A short distance away there was a paddock of wheat getting ripe. Thev started upon that. They made a journey about once in every five minutes, bringing each time a grain of wheat, making, for both birds, twenty-four grains an hour—that is, assuming that they took only one grain at a time. If they worked eight hours a day the total would be 192 grains. I don’t know how long they would have continued, as I killed the young ones before they were ready to fly. There was nothing but wheat in the crops of them all. I sowed 4 lb. of timothy seed on half an acre of land, well worked, to test its capacity. After sowing 1 bush-harrowed it well and rolled it hard. I could not keep the sparrows off. They worked it all up again as though it had never been harrowed, and very little of the seed came up. I shot some of the sparrows, and found that they had as much as half a teaspoonful of seed in their crops. I tried poisoned wheat, but they would not touch it. Last winter I raked the snow off the grass and put poisoned wheat down. The sparrows were plentiful, but did not touch itj but in an hour there were five larks, three chaffinches, one grey linnet, and one thrush dead. Dead gulls, blackbirds, pheasants, and hedge-sparrows, poisoned by wheat, have been brought to me.”
S of the replies give an idea of the intense e itv the sparrow has created for himself in New Zealand. One correspondent refers to trim as "that bird brigand, the sparrow." A resident of Mataura, in Southland, says that he is a greater nuisance than the rabbit. Another farmer says that the man who first introduced the sparrow should lie smitten with all the plagues of Egypt; and another thinks that hanging is th ilv punishment thai will lit the crime of introducing "this
11l
pestiferous little beast, which has done no good to any one and»much harm to everybody.”
The strongest condemnation of the sparrow in New Zealand was made by Mr. T. W. Kirk in a paper he read before the Wellington Philosophical Institute in 1878. It is the result of careful scientific investigations into the subject, and is the best and weightiest contribution to the great controversy made in this colony. By a different method of calculation e arrived at exactly the same result in regard to the probable rate of the bird's increase as is set out in the table published on page 7. He said, —
" Being struck with the spirit of partisanship which pervaded most discussions on the so-called 'sparrow question,' 1, some years ago, decided to collect all the obtainable evidence having any possible bearing on the subject, with the result that a large mass of material has accumulated in my hands. But, on attempting to work it up, I found that much more must be done before the history can be considered complete and a fair and impartial judgment given. For instance, I have the opinions of many persons on the question of whether the sparrow does more harm or good to agriculture; but mere opinions, unless backed by evidence. do not carry much weight, and the point can be settled only by the examination of large numbers of specimens. I have myself dis fifty-three birds, taken at all seasons of the year, and am forced to admit that the remains of insects found in them constituted but a verj small portion of the total food. I may mention that a record has 1.e.-, kept of the sex and contents of each of the birds obtained : but some hundreds, captured systematically at various seasons and at various localities, will be required before a reliable ' food-table ' can be constructed. So with regard to the rate at which they have spread ami are spreading over the country, I find my notes from several districts incomplete. More detailed information is required as to their treatment of fruit.
" The account of the most approved methods adopted in other countries for keeping their numbers somewhat within bounds is. I think. tolerably complete. But further inquiry is necessary as to how far our native birds are injuriously affected by the all-pervading sparrow. 1 have therefore to-night confined myself to one section of the subject; and the statements, though brief, are the result of numerous inquiries and of lengthened personal observations. It is hoped that their publication may induce other persons who have made reliable notes to help by recording their observations and experience.
" T shall assume, for the purpose of the calculation I am about to make, that no extensive action is taken by man for the destruction of his small opponent, if such he is to be called; and. as the natural enemies in this country are hardly worth mentioning, we will allow only for natural and accidental deaths.
" I liave examined a great many nests, but never found less than five eggs under a Bitting bird, more often six. and frequently seven. Thesi ore usually all laid in one week. Incubation occupies thirteen days. The young are fed in the nest for eight or nine days: they then return to the nest for two or three nights, after which they have to feed and Lodge themselves, sometimes assisted by the male bird. In five instances fresh eggs were found in the nest along with partly Hedged young. Both parent birds work in feeding the young till they leave the nest, and al first I was puzzled to account fur the fact that a second laving of eggs
38
was not spoiled during the absence of the mother. From my observations i am convinced that the chief portion of the work of incubation —that is, after the first brood is hatched—is thrown on the young birds; for it must be apparent that the heat arising from the crowding of five or sir young birds into a nest would be sufficient to cause incubation; so that by the time the young birds are finally turned out the earlier-laid of the next batch are within a few days of issuing from their shells. Therefore the mother is confined to the nest for little more than half the time required to hatch the first brood of the season. Then, after a very few days, the process is again repeated.
“ This does not occur in every nest, but it is a very important item to be noted when considering the rate of increase. Moreover, in one instance at least, the young birds belonging to the first brood reared in September were themselves breeding at the end of March. I can speak positively, as, in the hope of proving whether the birds of one brood mated among themselves, I fastened a bit of red stuff round the leg of each. The only one I saw after they were turned out by their parents was a hen, which had mated with a male from another brood, built a nest close to her old home, and actually reared a brood of her own at the time her mother was closing her arduous duties of the season.
'' From two nests I was able to prove that seven broods issued the year before last, but, for the purposes of the calculation I am about to make, we will take it that the average is five broods of six each. This is below the mark. We then allow one-third of the annual increase for deaths. Here are the results :
" First year: 1 pair : 5 broods of 6 each =3O—J 22 + original pair = 22 = 11 pairs.
•• Second year : 11 pairs x 30 = 330 - J = 220 = 110 pairs + original 11 pans = 121 pairs.
" Third year : 121 pairs x3O = 3,630 -$ = 2,420 = 1,210 pairs •4- original 121 pairs = 1,331 pairs.
" Fourth year : 1,331 pairs x 30 = 39,930 -J = 26,620 = 13,310 pairs + original 1,331 pairs = 14,641 pans.
IJILILS ~t~ Ullgllldl J.,(J(JJ. pO.ll O JJO.no. " Fifth year : 14,641 pairs x 30 = 439,230 - i = '292,820 = 146,410 pairs + original 14,641 pairs = 161,051 pairs ; or an actual increase, after allowing for deaths, of 322,100 birds.
" This does not take into account those early broods which are them selves breeding, nor does it allow more than five broods a year, while six and even seven are of common occurrence: further, the clutches of eggs often number more than six, so that we started on a low basis. And the allowance of one-third for death is, 1 think, more than ample."
An interesting discussion followed the reading of the paper.
Mr. W. T. L. Travers, who has written some valuable articles on the sparrow, and was always one of its most ardent champions, said that Mr. Kirk’s views regarding the food of the sparrow did not agree with those of naturalists in other countries. His experience led him to believe that their principal food was insects. The cicadse especially are caught in hundreds by them. It would be difficult to ascertain, as suggested, by dissection whether they contained insect food or grain. If the increase were anything like what Mr, Kirk contends, the air would be full of these birds. The increase really depends upon the amount of food they get. That these birds are useful to the agriculturist is beyond question. The increase in crops is in proportion to the spread of the sparrow. The insects which used to swarm in the plains in the
12
South have now almost disappeared owing to the sparrow, and the has increased. The caterpillars, once so numerous, are now disappearing from the same cause. In Hungary thej made war against the sparrow, but after a time they had to get him back again, so that they might protect the wheat from the insects. The sparrow was also a good scavenger. It was said that the sparrow destroyed the grape, but it turned out to be the zosterops or the mynah. He was an ardent admirer of the sparrow, and he did not think we should grudge the small amount of grain he consumed when he was in other ways so useful.
Sir Walter Buller said he was prepared to accept his full share of the responsibility for the introduction of the sparrow by the Wanganui Acclimatisation Society in 1866. Whilst fully admitting and deploring the depredations committed by this bird to the settlers’ crops at certain seasons of the year, he considered that the sparrow was an insectivorous bird in the strictest sense; and, believing as he did, that the balance of evidence was strongly in his favour, he never lost an opportunity, in public or in private, of putting in a plea for the poor persecuted Passer domesticus. He declared that during the breeding-season the sparrow was the farmers’ best friend, for the young broods were fed entirely on insect food. Mr. Kirk’s observations on the fecundity of this bird in New Zealand would give some idea of the great service he performed. The sparrow had also proved instrumental in exterminating the variegated Scotch thistle — which at one time threatened to overrun this country—by feeding on the seeds and preventing their dissemination.
Mr. Kirk, in reply, said that most of the discussion was on points not raised in his paper. Indeed, he had specially mentioned that there was not yet to hand sufficient reliable evidence on which to found an impartial judgment as to whether the sparrow was more beneficial than hurtful to agriculture and horticulture. As, however, the question had been introduced, he would state that when he entered upon the investigation he was as staunch a supporter of the sparrow as Mr. Travers or Sir Walter Buller. He was afraid, however, that he should now have to modify his views very much. There could be no doubt that the sparrow ate many thousands of insects, and did a vast amount of good. The point to be settled was, Did he exact more grain, fruit, Ac., in payment for those services than those services were worth? He was intimatelv acquainted with Mr. Michelet’s book, “ The Bird,” referred to bv Mr. Travers; but he must draw attention to the fact that the author’s remarks did not apply to New Zealand, where the rate of increase of the sparrow was phenomenal. Exception had been taken to his calculations, and Mr. Travers stated that at the rate mentioned the air would “ be full of sparrows.” He had already stated that the calculation was based upon the assumption that no active agencies were employed by man tor the destruction of the sparrow, but we all know that poisoning to a large scale was indulged in. He was convinced that one-third was ample to allow for accidental and natural deaths. He might mention that the balance of evidence so far was against the sparrow. Miss Ormerod, Consulting Entomologist to the Royal Agricultural Society, a most ardent champion of the sparrow, had investigated the question' in England, and had been obliged to abandon her cause. Professor Riley, Entomologist, and Messrs. Hartman and Barrons, Ornithologists, of the United States Department of Agriculture, had been compelled to cast their votes against the “cussed little Britisher,” It the sparrow had been condemned in England, where, according to Sir Walter Buller, it usually reared but two broods a year, what would be the result in this country, where the
13
output from a single nest was five, sis, and even seven broods a season T The sparrow did good work by eating the seeds of the large thistle, but the goldfinch and green linnet indulged even more in that habit. In conclusion, he would say that he, for one, would be very sorry to see thesparrow exterminated; but he was convinced some systematic steps would have to be taken to restrict the increase. The sparrow was like alcoholicliquor, good in moderation, but decidedly harmful in excess.
Later on, Mr. Kirk made a more extensive investigation of the subject,, with the result that he convicts the sparrow of many crimes besides graineating, and from being a supporter of Passer domeslicus he has become a staunch opponent. The evidence against the bird, he considers, is overwhelming, and would crush as with a weight of shame any less-hardened; criminal.
"The phenomenal rate of increase shown," Mr. Kirk concludes,. " demonstrates the absolute necessity which exists for greater unanimity of action so as to control this rapidly increasing trouble to the farmer. Systematic taking of nests and poisoning of birds should be carried on. If effective measures cannot be secured under present legislation, then further powers should be sought. The present Act is optional, and it rests with the local bodies to put it in force. The opinion is growing, and growing rapidly, amongst settlers that such Acts should be administered by the Central Government, for only in that way can uniform and simultaneous action for the control of farm-pests be secured."
In its Praise.
Of the hundreds of correspondents who have filled in the circular there are only six who raise their voice in the sparrow’s favour. I give their opinions in full.
Mr. G. Wilkinson, Chairman of the North Cape County Council, writing from Mangonui, says “ I feel sure that sparrows do a lot of good, and if their numbers were greatly reduced the country would be overrun with insects again.”
Mr. W. E. Draper, of Waerenga, Waikato, looks upon the sparrow as "the best agricultural scavenger we have." "It is true," he adds. " that he eats a little, but he does not destroy what he will not eat. When 1 watch him and see what quantities of dirty slugs he eats, I am satisfied that I am not paying too high a price for the return made. I am also satisfied that a great deal of the damage attributed to the sparrow is. committed by the lark."
UUIUUiIbLOU »* llic lain. Mr. G. M. Thomson, of Dunedin, says that, though the sparrow is very destructive to grain-crops when they are ripening, it eats a number of insects throughout the year, as well as the seeds of weeds. He also states that "it is a common sight to see sparrows chasing moths and other insects on the wing and lighting down on the road to strip their wings oil. In gardens they destroy germinating seeds, especially peas... disbud gooseberries, and pick the primrose-flowers as they open; but here again they do a lot of good in keeping down insect-life."
Mr? R. H. Shakespere, caretaker of the Bird Sanctuary at LittleBarrier Island, says that sparrows are destructive to a certain extent, but in the winter they destroy a good many insects. He doubts if they are as destructive as they are thought to be, and says that probably onecharacteristic balances the other.
Mr. Shury, of Ashburton, states that a pair of sparrows have beeru observed to feed their young thirty-six times an hour in a fourteen-hour
41
spring and summer day, and he has calculated that they feed their young with 3,400 worms and caterpillars in one week.
Mr. H. A. Nevins, writing from Tinui, Castle Point, says, “ Sparrows do a great deal of good; I hare known them to clear a field of peas of caterpillars, which before the birds became numerous would have destroyed all the peas.”
That is the case for and against the sparrow as far as my inquiries have gone.
The mass of evidence is entirely against the bird, which stands condemned on the almost unanimous vote of the farming community of the colony. It is proclaimed a public nuisance, and the mitigations of its offence are evidently so slight that they are deemed hardly worth considering.
Whatever the sparrow may do in these times, however, there is no doubt that it did good service to the agriculturist and horticulturist of Xew Zealand in former days, when the insects were on the war-path and when the people were liable to be eaten out of house and home. A new generation has arisen, and only the sparrow’s faults are remembered.
The Bi.ackbihij.
The blackbird is a pest of the orchard rather than of the Held. It devours all kinds of fruit, from currants and strawberries to apricot-. apples, cherries, and plums. Its-wholesale depredations in this respect outweigh much of the good it does by eating insects. Its name is ireneraUy linked with that of the sparrow and the skylark in answer to die question as to whether the introduction of any English birds was a mistake. ,1 il ■ J_l Ul
Amongst other things, the blackbird is accused of having been the means of spreading the blackberry throughout the West Oxford (North Canterbury), Mangonui, and other country districts. Mr. J. Speight, of near Christchurch, who was a passenger by the " Matoaka " in 1867, and had blackbirds as his shipmates, says that they are almost useless in Canterbury now, and that they seem to have forgotten the art of breaking snails' shells in order to get at the snails, a practice in whirl they displayed considerable skill in England.
A large' majority of those who replied to my circular are distinctly in favour of banishing the blackbird, if that is possible, as they look upon it as no friend, but an enemy.
One of the correspondents, at Waihou, Piako County, reports that the blackbird, in conjunction with the thrush, has practically put a stop to the growing of grapes, plums, peaches, gooseberries, apples, or pears on a small scale, and this gentleman sees absolutely no good in the bird, a view which is taken by many other people in New Zealand.
The Skylark
I have already classed the skylark, placing it next to the sparrow in respect to destructiveness. It is often seen pulling up springing wheat. and it is specially troublesome in the gardens when early seeds, such as turnips and cabbages, are sown : it pulls the young plants out of the •.'round as they are just shooting above the surface.
The Song-thrush
Very few of the correspondents have a good word to say for the song thrush,' which is placed fairly high in the list of mistakes. An observer
42
at Rissington. Hawke's Bay, however, sends the following story of a song-thrush : " For about 130 days in the year, until well into January, a thrush has come to my farm morning after morning. Over an area of about 300 square yards he collects worms and takes them to his mate, sometimes carrying two or three at a time. I have watched him frequently, and from 7.30 a.m. to 8 a.m. he takes about fifty worms. I think I underestimate it in putting it at two hundred worms a day. He also takes slugs and other insects."
The Greenfinch.
The greenfinch is described sweepingly as the farmers' greatest enemv "hen grain is ripening. It is very plentiful in the open country, where it is seen in large numbers. The first greenfinches of which I have been able to secure any information were liberated in Christchurch in 1863, where a pair were purchased at auction for five guineas. They soon nested, but the only occupant at first was one little greenfinch. Before the warm summer days had passed, however, a second family of five was reared, and in the following winter a flock of eight was seen daily. In ilic next year, late in the autumn, more than twenty were Hushed from a little patch of chickweed, and it was not long before the birds had spread so widely that their note became a well-known sound in Canterbury. The greenfinch has been caught damaging ripening grain-crops and eating young vegetable-plants, as well as fruit. It is stated that in the Central Otago District the greenfinch is the worst offender of all in the orchards, as it attacks the trees while they are still in flower and just as the fruit is forming. In some orchards in that district, it is reported. these birds have taken nine-tenths of the fruit-crop.
The Goldfinch
The goldfinch feeds largely on seeds, and it does not seem to have aroused much enmity. Some fanners say that it does more good than harm, a.- it destroys large quantities of thistle-seeds.
The Redpoll.
The redpoll is regarded as a harmless bird for the most part, but it has not spread very far. In the North it is reported to be destructive on trrass-seed burnings.
The Yellowhammer.
The yellowhammer is classed with the sparrow in descriptions of the damage done to seed in newly sown bush-burns in the North Island.
The House-mtnah.
The house-mynah attacks fruit as well as insects, being specially fond of cherries.
The Chaffinch.
The chaffinch joins other birds in their attacks upon seeds and berries.
The Lapwing
The lapwing seems to have had a hard struggle at first against this climate. It was not tried in the South Island until quite recently, and it was thought that attempts to introduce it into the North Island had failed. The information supplied, however, shows that its acclimatisation has been successful in several northern districts, where it is highly
11l
praised, the experiment of its introduction having given much satisfaction. This bird is credited with having killed large numbers of the wireworms and grubs in the spring, and absolutely no charges are made against it. In January, 1904, thirty lapwings were liberated in the Upper Kokotahi district, Westland, but nothing has been heard of them yet.
The Hedge-sparrow.
Praise of the little hedges]>arrow is alums- unanimous. It is found Sn fairly large numbers in Canterbury and in some districts of Otago It is regarded as a faithful friend of the farmers, who regret that it has pread as rapidlt as its impudent and hardy namesake.
The Cirl-bunting.
The cirl-bunting has established itself in several districts. It seems to have created neither good impressions nor bad ones.
Hooks.
Rooks have been introduced successfully, but thev- generally remain in one district and do not spread far. They are fairly plentiful in -Canterbury and in some districts of the North Island, where, it is said, they do much good and scarcely any harm. Their acclimatisation has aiot been very successful in Hawke’s Bay, although there are several ■colonies of them there. This bird, however, is not without its enemies, and colonial farmers with a Home experience say that its introduction may prove to be one of the mistakes of acclimatisation.
The Australian Magpie
Nothing is said against the Australian magpie, which is sometimes described as a useful immigrant. It has taken up its residence in a siumber of districts, where it seems to thrive very well. Many years ago ca pair of these birds came over to Streamlands, in the Rodney County, from the Island of Kawau, when it was owned by Sir George Grey. They nested in a kauri-tree about a hundred yards from a settler’s house, and irom that spot they spread throughout the whole county. They have enow completely disappeared from Streamlands.
The Starling.
There is hardly any limit to the good words said of the starling. It ■is frequently described as the only introduced bird worth having. It is found in nearly every district, and its arrival in a new district is wel•comed by all engaged in agriculture. Large numbers of farmers erect nesting-boxes in order to encourage it to come about their farms. Besides eating insects, it does a great deal of good by destroying larks’ eggs and eating the “ ticks ” on sheep. Many farmers look upon this bird -as being the only true insectivorous bird introduced into this colony.
Somewhat alarming stories are told by quite a large number of cor respondents, however, about the starling having taken to devouring fruit, and even grain. Mr. Edgar Stead confirms the report in regard to this bird’s fruit-eating proclivities. In a conversation, he predicted that it will become one of the greatest nuisances orchardists and gardeners have •over known. I have had no absolute proof that it has taken to eating k'rain, but this is a phase of the starling’s life that is well worth watching. If even the starling turns from insects to fruit and grain, it may be asked
17
if there are any birds that are likely to remain loyal to their reputations as insect-eaters exclusively.
It may be pointed out here that the starling has given rise to something more substantial than suspicion in Australia, where the gravest possible charges are made against it, and these charges are evidently based upon evidence that cannot be discounted. According to the report of the American Consul at Melbourne, starlings have increased to myriads in Australia, and they have become very injurious to the fruit-crops, so that the regulations passeil for their protection have been repealed, and it is urged that steps should be taken for their systematic destruction. " The fruit destroyed by them," the Consul says, " includes peaches, pears, cherries. apples, tigs, apricots, plums, grapes, and strawberries. Both vine and fruit growing are seriously threatened if the pest is not suppressed. As many as ten cases of apples have been destroyed by this bird in less than half an hour."
Another charge is made against the starling in Australia. It is stated that valuable native insect-eating birds, such as kingfishers, diamond birds, tree-swallows, and tree-creepers, are being turned out of their nesting-places in tree-hollows by swarms of starlings, “ and before long,” the report continues, “ these birds, so useful to the farmers, will be driven out of the country.” The starling in Australia is supposed to raise five broods in the year, and it multiplies with great rapidity—much more rapidly, evidently, than in New Zealand.
Before leaving the starlings I should like to point out that Mr. W. \V Smith, in a letter to the Lyttelton Times a few years ago, reported thai they killed off large numbers of humble-bees, which the birds captured ii order to give to their young. “ Like the native tui,” Mr. Smith writes “the starling now frequents the flax-flats and sucks the honey from tin richly mellifluous flowers of the plant. It is quite probable that th( eating of the bees’ honey-sac by the starling developed a taste for hone,: in these birds. Both the starling and the tui are birds of high intelli gence. Their newly acquired habits are important as illustrating hov the penchant for fresh food is developed in some species.”
These facts point to the great need for caution when fresh importations of birds are being considered.
The Small Birds as a Company
A mass of evidence is brought for and against the company of small birds as a whole, apart from individual species.
Most of the information on this point is supplied in answer to the eighteenth question on the circular, which is as follows : “ Generally speaking, have the introduced birds done more good than harm, or more harm than good 1 ”
A typical reply is from Wairere, Wairarapa North: “As with most aliens, it would be better if they had stayed at home.” The same sentiment is expressed in other words many times. One correspondent says that the introduction of English birds, taking them together, was “ a terrible mistake.” Another says, “ For Goodness’ sake don’t make it worse by importing more of them.” A fruit-grower at Patutahi, Poverty Bay, refuses to give his views, as the space left in the circular for the reply to the question is far too limited to enable him to say all he wants to say.
The Lower Hutt, in the Wellington District, is a market-gardening centre, and the following catalogue of a resident's grievances, together
18
with his general sweeping statement, seems to show that the small birds are particularly numerous there : “ One acre of cabbage and cauliflower plants destroyed entirely last year; vegetable-garden seeds picked out, necessitating netting, currants entirely eaten up; cannot ripen one gooseberry; raspberries saved with the greatest difficulty by picking twice daily; impossible to grow wheat, quarter-acre picked absolutely clean last year; oats pulled out when about 2 in. high, and have to sowdouble quantities to allow for destruction; whole treefuls of the best sorts of plums destroyed. The destruction, in short, is so great as to seriously interfere with cropping arrangements, to bar several valuable lines, and to render gardening, both domestic and market, simply heartbreaking. "
At Ellesmere (Canterbury) and Fendalton (one of the suburbs of Christchurch) it is impossible to grow barley of a good malting sample, as the farmer cannot sow it at the right season, or the birds will take the whole crop.
Farmers in the Lincoln district (North Canterbury) generally agree to sow their wheat at about the same time, so that the birds’ attacks will be fairly divided. “If one of us had an early crop,” a farmer in that district says, “ all the birds would concentrate their efforts upon it, and they would have it eaten up very soon; but when we act in concert the birds bestow their attention over the whole area, and one farmer does not have to bear the whole of the brunt.”
The replies to the eighteenth question, in fact, leave no doubt whatever that a vast majority of the classes of the community most inn i in the doings of the birds firmly believe that their introduction was .. disastrous mistake, that they do immeasurably more harm than good, and that their banishment, if it was possible, would be exceedingly desirable. The consensus of opinion is expressed in too clear, concise. and emphatic a manner to leave any shadow of doubt as to the strong antagonism felt towards English birds.
Many farmers, however, modify their condemnation by expressing an opinion that if the birds could be kept in check they would be converted from enemies to friends.
I cannot help thinking that that is the proper attitude to adopt. The birds are far from being altogether bad. A forgetful generation may have a short memory, but great services given in the past must not be ignored when the birds are on their trial.
Estimated D \m m;e
Attempts have been made to estimate the damage done by the birds and to place a value on it. At a conference ot local bodies held in Christchurch to consider the best means of dealing with the nuisance the damage was set down at ."is. an acre on cultivated land. If the average throughout the colony was only half that sum the total loss must be enormous, as last year the total area under crops in the colony was I . 194,722 acres, 661,926 acres being in grain-crops. Besides that total there were 17,176 ai garden and 27,482 in orchard.
How 10 keep Small Birds in Check
Some of the inquiries were directed towards ascertaining what steps have been taken to keep the birds in check, and what success has been achieved in that direction.
The plan most favoured is the laying of poisoned grain and the pav ment for heads and eggs. This plan seems to have been fairly effective-
19
when combined action is taken, but it has often failed where there is lack of combination. The natural increase is checked by this means, but there are few instances of any material diminution in numbers having been made. In the orchard in the North Island the gun is used. At the Bird Sanctuary on Little Barrier Island the nests of blackbirds, thrushes, sparrows, and finches are destroyed when opportunities occur, and it is thought that this probably keeps the English birds in check on the island.
In several districts heads and eggs are paid for, and poisoned wheat is distributed free by local authorities. In other districts netting is resorted to. Some local bodies pay for heads, the eggs, and young. Mr. J. Wolfe, a Lincoln (North Canterbury) farmer, states that the system of purchase has the desired effect to a great extent. He also informed me that he was the first to use strychnine poison in the district, having commenced to do so twenty-six years ago, and he has been poisoning ever since, with good results.
A very miscellaneous lot of suggestions are offered as to the best means of checking the nuisance. A gentleman in Temuka has prepared a scheme providing for legislation to compel all landowners to produce a certain number of sparrows during the winter months. Several farmers suggest that long nets, such as bird-catchers use, could be brought into requisition by capable men with effect. The Government is recommended to give a bonus for the production of a poison that will be readily eaten by the birds, and one correspondent thinks that a bonus should be given lor ilie best trap. There is a strong feeling in favour of the introduction of English owls, sparrow-hawks, and other birds of prey, and the introduction of English bats, frogs, and toads is also favoured. A practical observation is that the towns ought to be compelled to do more than at present, as they are breeding-places, from which the birds swarm into the country districts. Among the most novel suggestions are the systematic employment of armies of small boys at nesting, and the use of electric wires stretched round fields of crops, the wires to be charged with electricity in order to give the birds severe shocks.
The most practical scheme, and the one that is evidently more acceptable than any other, is thorough and systematic poisoning. The whole operation, it is urged, should be controlled by the Agricultural Departwhich should be armed with compulsory powers, so that it could compel all farmers in one district to act in unison.
This is the plan most favoured by the Department, and I understand that steps will probably be taken to give effect to a scheme of that nature.
By the Birds Nuisance Act of 1902 the Governor in Council may fix a date for every local body in the South Island to take steps to destroy injurious birds. To insure concerted and simultaneous action, he may divide the colony into districts and fix a date for a conference in each district, the conference to make recommendations in regard to a suitable day for the work of destruction in the district and the best methods to adopt. Where the methods decided upon prove to be inadequate the local bodies must adopt other methods, so that the work shall be carried out successfully. The local bodies may appoint inspectors and make by-laws under the Act, and also levy a rate not exceeding in the pound on the capital value. The Minister for Agriculture is also empowered to appoint inspectors if a local body fails to carry out the Act. Although the Act applies to only the South Island — pr Middle Island, as it is officially named —it may be made to apply to any district in the North Island at the request of a local authority.
20
Dhe following is a report prepared by Mr. B. C. Aston, F.C.S., Chief Chemist to the Agricultural Department, on a series of experiments made by him in 1902 with regard to poisons suitable for destroying hard-billed small birds :
“ Wet Methods.
"The first experiments were conducted in the Ashburton district. using grain poisoned by the usual process of steeping it in an aqueous solution of the poison until the grain had absorbed all the liquor, and then drying either in the sun or by artificial heat. These experiments were not at all successful, beyond proving the great superiority of strychnine over arsenic or potassium-cyanide. Phosphorus (as phosphorised fat, phosphorised pollard, or a mixture of both) could not be tried, owing to the danger of stock or dogs eating it. (Inter "In,, preparations were made of grain containing the poison in the proportions mentioned in the Biologist's Report, 1897, page 126.)
" Wheat was the grain used throughout, with one exception—that of hemp-seed soaked in strychnine-solution. In this ease it was found impossible for the poison to penetrate the outer, hard, polished husk of the seed, the kernel remaining untouched by the strychnine-solution, with the result that the birds, chiefly greenfinches or green linnets (Fringilla chloris) —usually erroneously called linnets (Linaria cannabind) —collected in hundreds, shelled the grain, and ate the kernels without hurt. The reason that the wet method gives such comparatively poor results is, I consider, due to the artificial and distorted condition of the wheat after treatment caused by the soaking and subsequent drying. Most samples of commercial poisoned wheat are either sour-smelling, due to incipient germination or fermentation; or alkaline, due to the sodiumcarbonate used in dissolving the arsenious trioxide; or acid, due to the excess of hydrochloric acid used in dissolving the strychnine; or sweet to the taste, due to the addition of sugar or saccharine used to hide tin bitter taste of the strychnine; or have a swollen or wrinkled appearance. In any case they are highly abnormal, and their appearance is not one calculated to give confidence to the suspicious and ever-alert sparrow-. onsequence is that birds, unless driven by extreme hunger, will not swallow grain prepared by the wet method; and it is only by swallowing the whole grain that they may be killed, as the poison is disseminated throughout the grain. On the other hand, by the dry method described below, the grain presents, if recently mixed, no perceptible abnormality in colour, taste (the strychnine being in the insoluble form), or smell. and granivorous birds take it readily, dying almost immediately.
“ Dry Method .
“ The dry method was brought under my notice by Mr. J. Grigg, of Longbeach (to whom my best thanks are due), on whose station it has been used with great success, as many as two thousand birds being killed in a morning. The principle of this method is that the grain is superficially coated with particles of strychnine, which are made to adhere by damping the grain with a little fresh milk. The Government property surrounding the Burnham Industrial School presents unequalled facilities for carrying on experiments of this nature, and the grounds surrounding that institution have accordingly been the site of the latest experiments. The result of these experiments was to demonstrate indisputably that strychnine preparations, mixed dry, were so much more effective than
■.'l
others that I have no hesitation in advising the abandonment of other methods of mixing at present practised in the poisoning of birds in favour of the following : Ten pounds of good sound wheat is thoroughly damped with fresh milk, so that the whole grain is wet, but not dripping with moisture. Five-sixths of an ounce (avoirdupois) of powdered strychnine, not too fine, is then gradually shaken on to the grain, the whole being kept constantly stirred. When all the strychnine is mixed in, the grain may be immediately laid. This is best done by laying a good train of chaff, without any oats, to attract attention. The poisoned grain is then very lightly sprinkled on the chaff. Farmers desiring to follow out this method without assistance are earnestly cautioned to beware of the horribly and intensely poisonous nature of strychnine; they are strongly advised to employ for this work none but picked men. The mixing is best done with the hands. Care should, however, be taken to thoroughly cleanse the hands in running water, so that every particle of strychnine is removed; the finger-nails should be especially looked to. In practice, if the strychnine is bought in 1 oz. bottles, it will be found more convenient to weigh out 12 lb. of wheat, with which the contents of each bottle are to be mixed.
“ The best results were obtained by laying the poisoned grain on roadways near trees. Two precautions are necessary in using the dry method : (1) The grain must be spread as soon after mixing as possible; (2) it must not be spread too thickly.
“ It is claimed that one grain of wheat, treated by the dry method, is sufficient to kill three birds. This is not an unreasonable statement, though difficult to verify. The strychnine is coated over the grain in fairly large particles, and the same grain may be picked up and dropped by two or three sparrows in succession; each time it is taken into the mouth it may leave a small portion of pure strychnine, sufficient to kill, adhering to the tongue of the bird, and, even though the sparrow may be suspicious, seeing so many of its dead kin around, it will always readily pick the grain up and taste it.
“ It sparrows are susceptible to strychnine only in the same ratio as are fowls —the probability is that they are far more so—the f oz. of the poison contained in the 10 lb. of wheat would be sufficient to poison 233,330 sparrows.
" It has been asserted that larks will not take poisoned grain; but in these experiments numbers of dead larks were found soon after laying the grain. Green linnets were also found in great numbers, and a few blackbirds, thrushes, and chaffinches, though the bird killed in the greatest numbers was, of course, the sparrow.
" In view of the opinion held in some quarters that the sparrow dees more good than harm, it is interesting to note that from investigations undertaken by the United States Department of Agriculture the English sparrow is entirely condemned. (U.S.A. Dept. Agr. Bull. No. 15, Div. Biolo. Survey, by Sylvester D. Judd.) The hydrochloride of strychnine has been tried instead of the pure base, using the dry method, but the results given were not so favourable as with the latter; the former being so much more soluble in water, and therefore more readily tasted, perhaps accounts for this fact.
" In conclusion, 1 am certain that the above-recommended method will give better results than any other at present practised, and if applied systematically and simultaneously in different districts, and persevered iii. will exterminate the grain-eating birds. In the area devoted to strychnine poisoning (dry method) altogether 420 birds were picked up
22
within a week at Burnham, with the expenditure of about half-a crown s worth of strychnine. It was found that birds did not get so shy of the poison when prepared by the dry method as they did when the wet method nployed, but continued t" eat the freshly prepared grain from time to time as it was put down."
Pheasants ami Q
The common pheasant (Phasianut colchieus) and the ring-necked pheasant (Phasianus torquatus) have hail a strange and eventful history in this country.
At first their acclimatisation was a notable and almost an unqualified success. They succeeded wherever they were introduced, increasing very rapidly and rearing healthy and hardy broods of young. One of the first successes was achieved by Sir Frederick Weld in 1865, when he established the common pheasant in Canterbury. Other importations into that province followed, the Acclimatisation Society bringing out fairly large numbers. In 1868 it bred forty birds and sold then, to members for £2 a pair. In the tussock-covered land of Canterbury they throve specially well, and the large Cheviot Estate, then held by the Hon. W. Robinson, was soon stocked with them. Mr. Robinson spared no expense in preparing for their reception when lie arranged for a consignment supplied by the society. He erected commodious aviaries. ordered that all the cats on the estate should be killed, nearly extirpated the wckas. and had the hawks destroyed at the rate of six a day. The society continued to import pheasants for a considerable time. It bred about a hundred birds in a year, and obtained a fairly good income by selling them to the owners of large estates. It seemed as if pheasants would in a few years spread throughout both Islands and become thoroughly naturalised. After this had gone on for some time the birds received a decided check. Their numbers neither increased nor decreased Then they began to decrease rapidly, ami apparently almost simultaneously in tiianv districts. Their complete failure, taking the colony as a whole. is now beyond doubt. In Canterbury and other provinces where they were once exceedingly plentiful they are never seen at all. ■the. plentiful, but decreasing or disappeared," are the words generally written against them in the circulars.
This result, which is very regrettable from the sportsman's point of view, is attributed to the laying of poison for rabbits, to the depreda tions of stoats, weasels, and wild cats, to bush-fires, and, in a lesser degree, to the pheasants' food supplies being eaten by tin- smaller introduced birds. It is stated that the wckas, as well as the stoat." weasels, cat pheasants' The birds are decreasing as rapidly in districts where there is plenty of cover as in districts where there is little or none. The destruction done by bush-fires is shown by the following statement from a farmer at Mangahao, Pahiatua, Wellington District : "When sowing grass-seed after bush-fires seven years ago 1 came across thousands of nests with the remains of eggs and the charred bones of tin' pheasants that had been sitting on them. They were very plentiful here once, but now when one is seen half the town and country is after it to shoot it."
SIIOOL 11. In large numbers of cases the decrease lias been almost simultaneous with the arrival of stoats and weasels, which arm to have Be) about tinwork of extirpation without any unnecessary delay. A rather striking remark is made by a farmer at Ruatutiri, who says thai there are only
23
a few pheasants in his district now, and those that are there are “ only old cock birds.”
Ihe reports received show that pheasants now exist in numbers worth counting in only the North Island. The Poverty Bay district, on the east coast of the North Island, is the only district in which they are reported as numerous/ , and there they seem to be working towards the interior. In the few districts where they are at all plentiful they are regarded by agriculturists as a thorough nuisance. A farmer at Parua Bay describes them as “ the greatest curse settlers have to contend against. At Hokianga they are “ruination to the farmer and the gardener. They destroy young grass, pull up maize and eat it, and attack potatoes, carrots, beans, peas, barley, wheat, and many kinds of fruit.
A strong testimony is given against them by Mr. W. E. Draper, of Waerenga, who classes them with both species of introduced quail in the following condemnation : “I am a large grower of fruit, such as strawberries, grapes, peaches, plums, and so on. The ravages committed by the pheasants and quail are a serious matter for me. I cannot offer strawberries for sale with a piece pecked out of one side, nor does it suit me to find the ground between the rows sprinkled with half-ripe berries bitten off. The birds perambulate a row of vines and completely destroy every grape on a row five or six chains long. When I sow a field of clover the soil is scratched and the seed eaten. If a stop is not put to the increase of these pests no man in his sober senses will embark on fruitculture in country districts infested by them. My opinion is that it is little better than criminal folly to keep a close season for these birds. I have counted twenty-five pheasants on about an acre of potatoes on the lake-side, and I have put up nineteen on my own place when traversing a distance of 30 chains. Up to about nine years ago I supplied strawberries up to the middle of June. The berries come now, as before, but they are all destroyed by the pheasants and the quail, especially the latter. In former years I have sold in March, April, and May from 10 cwt. to 15 cwt. of strawberries. Now they are all destroyed.” rPL. _ * _ - £ 1 1 ' i... J J _ • 1 /Cl
The two species of quail introduced, the swamp-quail (Synoseys australis) and the Californian quail (Callipepla calif arnica), have been hardly more successful than the pheasants. They never increased so rapidly, however, and their failure is not so marked. The Californian quail is still plentiful in some of the North Island districts, where farmers write against its name “No good.” At Te Puke, in the Maketu district, quail live largely on clover, taking both the seed and the young plants in the bush-clearings. Stoats and weasels, cats, poison, and bush-fires are their enemies. In regard to the Californian quail, a farmer at Ngatimaru says, “ I have noticed that this bird wants fairly large tracts of land. It is also better if the land is hilly and broken with bush and scrub here and there. It seems to get on very well on land where there is plenty of bush. On other land it does well for a time, and then its numbers are decreased, for what reason I do not know, unless it is on account of the cats, which, I think, are largely to blame.”
A farmer in the Motu district, in the Auckland Province, says that quail need more protection, and he suggests that private owners should proclaim their properties private sanctuaries, and every third year should be a close one.
The Two Swans
There' is a very striking contrast between the white swan and the I.huk swan in respect to their acclimatisation in New Zealand. The
■24
black swan is near the top of the Li while the white swat has increased slowlj and with obvious difficulty, and lias sometimes quite Failed to establish itself. The black swan, in fact, has shown mucn g re ati bility than the other species, whose first attempts at incubation at Christchurch and other places were utterly ineffective.
I null Uttiiun ai v/iuiou/uujvn ~—— I j The black swan settled down at once to its new conditions. It was introduced into Canterbury partly with the object of destroying watercress in the Aron, which runs through Christchurch. In a few years the birds had increased largely, but in 1867 many of them forsook the Avon and made long and rather notable migrations to the wild country on the West Coast, and to Otago, and even Marlborough. Less than twenty were liberated on the Avon at first by the Christchurch City Council. These birds did the work desired from them, as they cleared a pathway through the watercress for the current. In 1880 there were hundreds of black swans on the Avon and Halswell Rivers, as well as the Heathcote, as many as five hundred sometimes being counted on small areas. They achieved the same success in Otago, where about sixty were liberated from 1866 to 1870.
irem icon iu mm. Black swans am now found in thousands on lakes, estuaries lagoons in many parts of the colony, from the extreme north to the far south. They keep much to the wild regions. In some places they wage a deadly war on the native ducks, taking their food-supplies from then' and persecuting them relentlessly.
Otheb Small Birds.
In 161)7 -Mr. Kirk made arrangements to obtain a consignment of the peewees, mud-larks, or magpie-larks, from Australia. The birds arrived in 18118. Some of them were liberated on the west coast of the North Island on property secured by the Wellington Acclimatisation Society as a game reserve. They were subsequently observed nest-building.
In 1900 another consignment was brought to the colony, and the birds were liberated in Auckland. Hawke's Hay, and Wellington. Mr. Kiri. reported that lie had heard of the birds in localities widely separated. and at considerable distances from the places at which they were lib. i Lately, however, nothing has been heard of them, and none of tin coi respondents refers to them in any way. They have proved themselves to be useful birds in Australia, feeding exclusively on insects and small snails.
Fubtheb Introductions suggested
A rather striking aspect of the inquiries is that there is not tin consensus of opinion against the introduction of more KnL'lish birds as there is against those we have already. Further introductions, in fact, are suggested with just as much confidence as characterized the first introductions forty years ago.
The twentv-eighth question on the circular was, " Do you think that any other English birds could be introduced advantageously i If so, state tlie species you favour."
The replies show that only a few of the correspondents are opposed to further introductions, although several express an obvious warning that English birds are liable to change their habits on coming to a new land and living under new conditions.
It is clear that sentiment must still be reckoned with. This is shown bv the fact that many more votes have been cast in favour of robin
26
redbreast than in favour of any other bird that can be thought of. He heads the list of suggested introductions for the future. Jenny wren is not very far down on the list, and this may be taken as further evidence that sentiment in regard to the birds of the Old Country is not dead. It is expected, however, that both the robin and the wren will be useful as well as ornamental.
The following is the list, in the order of preference:
Robin redbreast
Whitethroat
Swallow
Nightingale
Martins i several species?
\\ ater-ousel
Plovers
Storks
Swift
Kingbird
Wagtail
I loatsucker
Wren
(Irouse
Cuckoo
Blackcock
Partridge (English and French)
Stonechat
Shrike
Jackdaw
Snipe
Nightjar
Lapwings (in districts where they have not been liberated)
WOòd pecke
Whinchat
W heatear
Hedge-sparrows (ditto)
Pipit
Wryneck
Rooks (ditto)
Flycatchers
Crow
i i \ i_ an uri Tits
ler-bird.
Titmouse
1 supply tiiis list for what it is worth and in order to give some indication of the feeling on the subject. The advisability of introducing any of the birds named is a matter that should be gone into with care when definite steps in regard to further importations arc contemplated, and it could hardly he discussed satisfactorily here.
Conclusion.
The facts brought to light in regard to acclimatisation in New Zealand are sufficiently striking to guard against thoughtless action in the future. It might even be advisable to forbid the introduction of any more foreign birds without the sanction of a committee of experts, which could be appointed.
The inquiry instituted has not put an end to the small-bird controversy, which is one of those things that will continue as long as small birds and farmers exist. The lines of demarcation are too faint and too hard to define to enable it to be said with any certainty that the introduction of small birds into the colony was altogether a mistake. The question rests largely upon speculative opinion, and absolute settlement need never be looked for.
A great deal of the evidence collected is confusing, and a little of it is obviously the outcome of prejudice and bitter enmity. There is, however, less of this than 1 expected. For the most part the conclusions arrived at by the hundreds of correspondents who have returned th< circulars are based upon actual observations, extending in some cases over thirty or forty years.
26
Many of those who went to the trouble of filling in the circulars have known the small birds both at Home and in the colonies, and they are in a good position to make comparisons and note changes that have taken place in the birds’ habits. In some instances considerable trouble has been taken, the circulars being accompanied by long letters. By the adoption of this system of seeking information men have been reached who would never have imparted their knowledge in any other way. Several of the correspondents have been good enough to commend the system. They have expressed their willingness to supply more detailed information if desired, and they suggest that the system should be extended to other subjects that interest the agriculturist.
The evidence has been weighed carefully, and in forming conclusions 1 have endeavoured to be just to men and birds alike.
The summary of the results, at any rate, is impartial, and I think it may be claimed that on the prominent points of the controversy a consensus of expert opinion throughout the colony is now placed at the disposal of all who wish to have it.
It should be stated that measures have been taken by Parliament to prevent the injudicious introduction of any more birds. The subject is dealt witli by "The Animals Protection Act Amendment Act. 1895," which provides, " From and after the commencement of this Act no society, authority, or person shall introduce or import into the colony, or turn at large for the purposes of sport or acclimatisation, or as game. am animal or bird whatever without the consent in writing of the Minister for the time being in charge of the Department of Agriculture: nor shall anv insect or reptile be introduced or imported into the colony without such consent as aforesaid. Every person who offends against or fails to comply with any of the foregoing provisions of this Act is liable to a penalty of not less than five pounds, and not exceeding fifty pounds."
Small Birds in Hawke’s Bat.
I append in full an interesting communication from Mr, H. GuthrieSmith, Tutira, Hawke’s Bay, in regard to observations made by him. He says,—
“ Tutira Lake is in Hawke’s Bay, and it lies between Napier and Mohaka, and consists of wild, rough country, full of deep creeks, precipices, and thick scrub.
“ The hedge-sparrow and the cirl-bunting I do not see on the run. There is not the kind of cover on the station that the former delights in.
“ The Australian magpie has never bred here, but individuals have passed over the run.
"The chaffinch anil redpoll have appeared within the last two rears on this run. I believe both species came from the north. The former is now nesting, and is everywhere on the run. The redpoll is a much rarer bird. 1 have never found its nest here, though I found a nest once in Argyle, in Scotland.
“ The greenfinch is not a common bird at all, and a valued correspondent in Poverty Bay believes that here the eggs of the native robin (Miro australis) are broken by the tree-climbing rat. The greenfinch chooses often a lawyer-bush to build in.
“ The goldfinch, though common still, is less so than it was eighteen years ago.
“ I saw a pair of bullfinches on one occasion in manuka country. Two friends on whom I can relv have seen bullfinches. Mr. Handv-
27
side, of Akitio, wrote to me six weeks ago that, though the chaffinches were in numbers, he had not yet got a bullfinch for me. 1 may say that 1 know the bullfinch intimately, as when last at Home 1 had a shooting in Argyle, and in the little glens and in the birch scrub there were scores of male bullfinches.
Mr. T. F. Cheeseman, of the Auckland Museum, however, is incredulous about the wild bullfinches, and certainly the birds I saw may have escaped from a cage. I think, myself, that there must be wild birds of this species in New Zealand, but that they are rare and, besides that, very shy.
I have never heard of the lapwing or the white swan, other than domesticated, in Hawke’s Bay.
I am inclined to believe that I have seen the grey linnet here, but would not say so positively.
A colony of rooks has for long existed in Puketapu. In favourable -ears colonies start one, for instance, in Pctam. —but the rook does not do well in this part. Its failure in Auckland was attributed to toe great heat.
The two species of pheasants 1 have always looked upon as one. for I believe they very readily cross, and though a bird may appear without the distinguishing ring, it would be hard to say whether the cock was pure or whether he had thrown back to some ancestor.
" 1 have no doubt at all that, except, perhaps, wekas and pukekos, all species of birds, native and imported, are decreasing, and for the same reason that bees and native bees are decreasing. The English grasses and plants are disappearing, and, generally speaking, the enormous exuberance of life, animal and vegetable, is gone; the soil is becoming exhausted, I have watched this for years, and of late years the white clover has absolutely gone and the Danthonia has increase,!. There is less insect-life and less bird-food. The goldfinch is less common on the run, and the big thistle has almost gone.
I should doubt, myself, if the decrease of New Zealand birds is dinvery largely to the imported species. The starlings, sparrows, and other introduced birds no doubt do eat grubs and other insects that might have gone to natives; mynahs do suck up flax-juice; ami treeholes are used that might have beeu used by parrakeets ami kakas. Against that, however, we must remember the vastly increased herbage for both New Zealand ami imported birds in our crops ami grasses. It is fires, the draining of land, stocking, and bushfelling that do the harm. Vermin, too, are a great cause of loss —weasels to some extent, but the climbing-rat is the worst thief and poacher.
“ I have not enough natives near the garden to say what harm is done by native birds, but on other places I have noticed white-eyes spoiling figs. The only bird that does harm to my small crops of oats is the pukeko.
“ Snipe and woodcock might do well in New Zealand, and as the latter, at any rate, is not always a migrant there is only the difficulty of importing. No grain-eating bird need be thought of now that rabbits have established themselves in Hawke’s Bay.
“ I believe that if the rat—the tree-nesting rat —were kept down many of our native birds would survive and continue to breed.
" Pheasants, by the by, shot by me in New Zealand arc fatter and bigger birds than I have seen at Home, where I have shot in many count ies."
28
NATIVE BIRDS.
Some of the inquiries, as the list of questions shows, were directed towards ascertaining the present position of the native avifauna. The questions dealing with this subject are : “ (6.) Have you any recollection of the presence of native birds in your district? If so, what species? ” ‘(7.) Have you noted the effect of the introduced birds on the native birds? ” “(8.) Have you seen introduced birds attacking native birds? ” “(9.) Have the native birds resisted the attacks?” “(10.) Are the native birds in your district increasing or decreasing? ” “ (11.) If they are decreasing, what, in your opinion, is the cause of the decrease?” “ (12.) Have the introduced birds helped to bring about a decrease in the numbers of the native birds? ” “ (13.) Have the native birds done any harm to crops, fruit, or gardens? ” “ (16.) Have the native birds done good ? ”
Nobody will be surprised to learn that the native birds are reported to be decreasing in nearly every district in the colony. It has been known for years that they have beaten a retreat before civilisation, but few people have realised that the retreat is so rapid and so complete as is now shown to be the case. The birds have disappeared altogether from some districts where they were quite numerous only a few ago.
Most of the replies sent in bear out the theory that the old avifauna will not abide with civilisation and cannot live without the old flora. “Modern civilisation,” “want of food,” “want of concealment for nesting,” “ bush-clearing,” “ rabbits, dogs, guns, cats, and stoats and weasels ” are generally blamed for the decrease.
The inquiries have failed to bring out any evidence of a determined or concerted plan on the part of the introduced birds to attack and drive away the native birds. Sparrows and other introduced birds have been seen attacking natives, but tuis and several other species of native birds have attacked introduced birds on occasions with great ferocity. Dr. Fulton, of Dunedin, says that the long-tailed cuckoo has done good as a “ sparrow-destroyer.” If the introduced birds have had any effect at all on the native birds, it is by taking possession of their food-supplies; but 1 hardly think that even in that direction the effect can be verv marked, as the native birds keep to the bush and the introduced birds to settlement. The native birds, in fact, would have retreated in the same way even if English birds had not been introduced. The crime of having driven off the unfortunate natives, therefore, cannot fairlv be placed at the door of the company of English birds, who have plenty to answer for in other directions.
On the whole, the native birds do very little harm. The worst offender is the white-eye, which, by the way, is not a member of the ancient New Zealand avifauna, as it is an Australian colonist, and first came to this colony about 1856. It is very fond of fruit, but even its offences are readily forgiven. Mr. G. M. Thomson states that in Dunedin the vear before last white-eyes were very destructive to all kinds of fruit in the gardens and orchards, but apparently this w'as due to a shortage of other food, as last year they did not take anything, although thev were
29
nbout the gardens the whole time. The parrakeets have also been known to be very destructive on crops and fruit at certain seasons.
I hi the whole, the evidence shows that of all the native birds the weka is in the best position. Its numbers throughout the whole colony seem to be increasing.
It is very significant that amongst the great mass of information supplied by the correspondents in regard to native birds there is no reference at all to either the North Island or South Island thrush. It is not that these birds are extinct, as they have been reported to be fairly plentiful in several localities where men seldom go. They were among the first to retreat before civilisation, and no doubt they still exist in numbers in the interior of the North Island and on the west and southwest coast of the South Island, Crows, kiwis, and kakapos are seldom mentioned in the returns. The famous wry-bill plover and other plovers, and the turnstone, the knot, the godwit, the stilt, the avocet, and other members of the limicohe are conspicuous by their poor attendance or complete absence. Several correspondents have included the native quail (Coturnix novce-zealanditr) in their lists; but, as it has been generally accepted for many years that this bird is quite extinct, I have omitted it, thinking that the birds seen must have been the imported quail. It would be very interesting, however, to decide this point, and with that object I submit the following description of the native quail : —
" Male: Black, streaked with white, and varied with reddish brown on the back; chin and throat, chestnut: the breast and abdomen spotted witli white. Female: Browner; the chin and throat white. Eye: light hazel. Length of the wing, t '<> in. : of the tarsus (between the drumstick and the foot), 1 in. Egg : Buff, splashed with greenish brown ; length. 1 '2") in."
The table on the following pages shows the position now occupied by * the native avifauna in different districts.
30
31
32
2—Feathered Immigrants.
•ii
34
3B
3G
37
38
39
40
41
4 -i
43
■It
45
K!
NAMES OF NEW ZEALAND BIRDS.
As there is some confusion in regard to the names of New Zealand birds, the following list is supplied. It is arranged in scientific order.
47
75
4!)
By Authority : John Mackav, Government Printer, Wellington.
[10,000/6/06—5652
"> - Feathered Immigrants.
Please return this item to:
Document Supply Services
National Library of New Zealand
PO Box 1467
Wellington
Supplied at no charge from the collections of th
National Library of New Zealand r-\ at: i i c
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/books/ALMA1907-9917502293502836-Our-feathered-immigrants---evide
Bibliographic details
APA: Drummond, James. (1907). Our feathered immigrants : evidence for and against introduced birds in New Zealand, together with notes on the native avifauna. Govt. Printer.
Chicago: Drummond, James. Our feathered immigrants : evidence for and against introduced birds in New Zealand, together with notes on the native avifauna. Wellington, N.Z.: Govt. Printer, 1907.
MLA: Drummond, James. Our feathered immigrants : evidence for and against introduced birds in New Zealand, together with notes on the native avifauna. Govt. Printer, 1907.
Word Count
17,752
Our feathered immigrants : evidence for and against introduced birds in New Zealand, together with notes on the native avifauna Drummond, James, Govt. Printer, Wellington, N.Z., 1907
Using This Item
Out of copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, copyright in this book has expired.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in