NATURE-AND MAN

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXIII, Issue 74, 9 March 1933, Page 9

NATURE-AND MAN

MUDDLE OF “WILD LIFE” NEED OF DEFINITE POLICY. (EDITED Bi LEO FANNING.) When will New Zealand have a proper policy in regard to wild life —a policy for the strong protection of beneficial birds, especially native birds, and for the destruction of their enemies? When will a strong, conquering hand be used against deer, wild goats and pigs, which are ravaging some large areas of native forest? Irretrievable damage will be done unless a systematic national compaign is waged on the pests. THE HORRIBLE GERMAN OWL. In several districts friends of the native birds are fighting individually against German owls, which have been found guilty of butchering fantails, warblers, tomtits and other native birds, but. the suppression of the enemy requires more extensive action than private zeal can give here and there. Some folk have an impression that the cost, of a war of extermination against the German owl should be born e by the Native Bird Protection Society, but that kind of opinion lias been formed on a mistaken notion of the society’s finance. Its income amounts to only about £9OO a year, and the bulk of this comes from a Trust lune, established for educational work. In striking contrast with that comparatively small revenue is the big annual income of the Acclimatisation Societies, which exceeded £26,000 for the year 1932 (an average of £5OO a week). it was an Acclimatisation Society (Otago) which introduced the German owl, which has spread to Stewart Island as well as to a number of districts of the South and and North Islands. As the importing of that iestrdyer of native birds was a blunder in acclimatisation, inflicted on New Zealand as a whole, it wot Id be reasonable to place on Acclimatisation Societies the responsibility of wiping out that nuisance. Nearly the vl olc of the revenue from wild life has gone to those societies. None of the money has been available for the protection of native birds or sanctuaries, under the Animals Protection and Game Act, Surely there is something wrong in that lopsided dispensation. New Zealand’s people should insert on having a fair measure of reform in this field. “EDUCATED MAN-POWER” REQUIRED. A similar muddle with wild life has come under keen criticism in the U.S.A. For instance, in a recent issue of “American Game,” Major L. W. Waller states:— “If we accept the scope of game conservation as outlined, it is an easy matter to find many things wrong with its present operation. For the sake of brevity I would classify the most glaring faults under five major headings: “1. The existing lack of understanding of the problem. “2. Lack of adequate research. “3. Lack of educated man power. “4. Lack of an accepted game policy. “5. Lack of co operation.” CRUELTY OF “LONG SHOTS.”

Of course, it is well known that many of the men who go forth in due season to kill game birds act strictly on principles of sport. They do give the birds a chance for their lives, but unhappily there are some pot-hunters who will fir e anyhow at any bird in any position. Even when a bird is out of effective range they blaze way. They know that the further a charge of shot goes the more it spreads and the less penetrating power it. has, bit with careless callousness they “give it a go”—and the result may be a slow and painful death for a -wounded bird, if it manages to escape to cover —or a meal for a hawk, which is thus presented with easy prey. That kind of “long, shooting” happened during a drive of pheasants in a New Zealand district some time ago. Next day the outskirts of the sporting locality were fringed with feathers—evidence that hawks had been feasting on wounded birds. One of the gunmen who saw that spectacle declared that he would never again take a long shot. That kind of unfair firing is not tolerated on English shooting preserves. A LABOUR OF LOVE. Mr H. Guthrie-Smith, author of several books on the bird life of New Zealand, has spent many hours in patient and pleasant observation of birds, particularly at nesting-time. The raising of suitable screens enabled him to keep careful watch and to photograph the nests as well as their occupants. His experience with kingfishers is pleasantly told in his “Birds of the Water, Wood and Waste,” “The kingfisher’s vocabulary does not seem to be voluminous,” he wrote. “A jarring screech, not translatable into human spelling, always greeted my appearance from the tepee, and well expressed terror and rage. ‘ Cli-cli-cli ’ several times repeated, signified ‘safe now,’ and always immediately after this one of the parents would light on the knot, momentarily pause, and then, with a quick little run, enter the hole with supplies for the hungry garrison.

“Then there was the low note of warning already mentioned, and another similar cry to that of rage, only lower in pitch and less harsh. It expressed caution, ‘All right, I think,’ from the male perched high on the broken cabbage tree; ‘All right? All right?’ from the hen to encourage herself. Then the male would call again, ‘All right All right! But you try first!’ (just like a man), and the hen would pitch within a yard of my head right on the log, hesitate, another heart fail, perhaps, at the last moment, or perhaps she would successfully run the blockade; :..i action, when you came to consider it, really appalling to her imagination, for : s these kingfishers always backed out tail foremost, there was the dreadful chance of being caught defenceless by the rump.’’ FRIENDLY' HABITS OF THE PUKEKO. On his station at Tutira, Hawke’s , .Mr Guthrie-Smith successfully n- 1 some chicks of pukeko (the beau's- ■■..- ui’i hen, which is pscsecuted by !:i iduwffi-s) The first one. “quit.. u character,’• named “Budget,”

was a continuous source of interest to the farmer and his family. When “Budget’’ was about eleven weeks old three new pukeko ehicks were brought in. Within a few days “Budget” felt a sense of responsibility towards the newcomers.

“To our amazement, he began to feed them, and ever since he has been a most devoted nurse,” Mr Guthrie-Smith remarks. “His is a labour of love, for when ho is called up and given a caterpillar or other dainty, he runs off at once and presents it to one of the chicks. Should it be too large, his bill is used for its crushing and maceration, or sometimes the morsel is held in his claw and torn up for the little ones. His lonely cry, too, ceased altogether, and was replaced by the gentle feeding note that (.alls up the cheepers. This latter cry, by the way, was not developed at once. At first Budget always carried food to the chicks, but later he expected them to come to him, though such is the <’ jar fellow’s love for his small charges that he can suffer no long delay, and should anything prevent their immediate appearance, will still carry to one of them, the blue hopper moth, the spindley daddy rong-legs, or the slimy, succulent caterpillar. Even when we know him to be hungry, it is never himself who is first fed, and the distribution of the chopped meat pukekos love is a quaint spectacle. “One of us presents it, bit by bit, to Budget, wuo duly passes it on to one or another of his little troop till they are gorged, standing round the' dish replete, like sated cobras, and their small tummies tight as very drums. “ ‘Budget! ’ ‘Budget! ’ will always fetch him running across the lawn with his funny rolling gait; an outstretched palm, he knows, means some dainty fir his little ones, and we are careful never to deceive him.”