THE NATURALIST.

Otago Witness, Issue 3019, 24 January 1912, Page 76

THE NATURALIST.

IN TOUCH WITH NATURE

notes on natural history in

NEW ZEALAND

(Hv James Drummond. F.L.S., F.Z.S.i Mr C. Hutchins, of Omokoroa, Tauranga, who was brought up in a rural district in Essex, England, has sent for publication a flattering commendation of the rook, which now is fairly plentful in several districts in this Dominion. He says ; “ Rooks have a great fascination for me, and when I read your notes on them some time ago I felt tiiat you were writing about old friends of mine. I remember that, many years ago, there was a very severe winter in the place where I was born, and the rooks destroyed eight acres of Swede turnips that gri w close to a large rookery. Do you think that the farmer who owned the turnips declared war on the rooks 7 Not a bit of it. He regarded the affair quite philosophically. ‘ Poor things,’ he said, ‘ they must have something to eat.’ There is no doubt that if the turnips had not been available the birds would have starved, and that would have been a public calamity. The slight damage rooks cause occasionally is far outbalanced by the good they do as insecteaters.”

In another note Mr Hutchins states that in the district m which lie lives song birds arc losing their vocal powers. “We have skylarks in large numbers, also song thrushes, blackbirds, goldfinches, and other English birds but not a song from one of them. The thrush is the only bird that seems to try to sing, and his effort is a miserable failure, ft is only a squeak compared with the loud, clear notes of former years. The skylark here is utterly devoid of song. In these days f never see it soaring aloft to sing. A short time ago 1 watched a skylark sitting on a post. He fluttered Ills wings and tried to sing, but the effort resulted in complete failure. This absence of song amongst the birds has been noticeable here for the past two or throe years at least. I should like to know if the same circumstances have been observed in other districts. ”

The pied fantail of New Zealand, llhipidura flabellifera, has a fairly close ally in tlie black and white fantail of A us. tralia. Rhipidura tricolour, but the habits of these two members of the fantail genus are quite dissimilar. New Zealand fantails love to frequent the banks of forest streams, and to flit in shady glens and retreats, and, although sometimes seen in country and suburban gardens and open spaces, are mostly dwellers amongst the trees. The black and white fantail of Australia is often seen on farms and in gardens, sitting on gates and palings, and it likes the company of domestic animals. M.r H. G. Jarman, writing from one of the. public schools at Broken Hill, New South Wales, gives this bird its popular names —willie wagtail or water wagtail. Ho says that birds are so woefully few in

and near Broken Hill that the cheerful “ You pretty creature.” as the notes are interpreted, sounded unusually sweet when he heard them on August 14 for the first time last spring. The singer was close at hand, flitting amongst the branches of a pepper tree, outside the classroom door, revelling in the bright, glorious sunshine. In a few enthusiastic notes on this Australian’s habits Mr Jarman says :

“ Wherever sheep are found there also is the wagtail. Everybody knows him, and everybody loves him. He is the last bird at, which a boy will throw a stone. Few boys, by the way, throw stones at birds now. A few short years ago, when I was one of them, the boy with the best shanghai by common consent was made chief of a savage crew, who marched forth to slay, and came home with more or less joy as the spoils of the day, in the shape of blood-stained wings proudly displayed in hat and buttonhole,/ were few or many. The boy of _ the present generation knows his bird friends better, and, thanks to modern nature study, he has no inclination to harm them. This, at least, is true of- the Australian boy, and 1 believe that it is true also of the boy of my own New Zealand. 1

“In autumn and winter the wagtail’s only cry is a harsh, quick rattle, resembling the word ‘ chiddy-chiddy !’ This cry is also used in the spring and summer as an alarm note, and also when an attack is made on another bird or when an intruder into the wagtail s special nesting reserve is dealt with. The spring notes are clear and silvery, and as I have stated, resemble the words ‘ you pretty creature,’ and sometime.! ‘ you pretty little creature.’ It Hills at intervals during all hours of the night. If even a slight noise is made its challenge rings out instantly, which is not surprising, out on the lonely plans. ‘ West o’ Darling ’ this cheerful little bird, haunting the camp of drover and shepherd, is known as ‘ the shepherd’s companion.’ It is the friend and companion of sheep and cattle. As one of those animals crop the herbage, a wagtail often flits about its head, devouring 0 the insects disturbed by the large creature’s warm breath. Its flight is short and slow, merely a side-to-side progression from tree to tree. Its back, tail, and head are glossy black, and breast, abdomen, and eyebrows cream. Wings and tail are loosely held, and it does not possess the New Zealand fan tail’s beautiful spread of tail. It is held in high respect by all the inhabitants of the bush. Even the vicious magpie will solemnly (side-step when the wagtail approaches and springs his rattle. The nest, like the New Zealander’s, is cup-shaped. It is made of grass and fibres. The outside tis thickly covered with the web of spiders or grubs. It is usually placed on the upper side of a horizontal branch, close to the ground.. As a rule the branch selected for the nest is quite free from twigs at the place where the nest is made. There are four eggs in a sitting. In colour they are a greenish cream, with a light speckling of greenish-brown spots and a zone of the same colour. The length of the egg is O.lin and thebreadSi O.SSLn. ”

A icorrespondlent, who has taken an active part in the establishment of sanctuaries and reservations in New Zealand, has forwarded a copy of the report of an address by Lieutenant-colonel W. Wood before the Commission on Conservation at Quebec. The principal object of the address was to emphasise the contention that Labrador is the best country in the world for the best kind of sanctuary, but Lieutenant-colonel Wood went into the whole question of animal sanctuaries, and his remarks have an interest to people in New Zealand, where something in this direction has been done, although it may not be as much as some of us wish. He points out that until recently Nature had tier own sanctuaries, where man did not go at all, or went only as a tool-using animal in comparatively small numbers. But now, in this age of machinery, there ia no place where man cannot go with overwhelming forces at his command. To-day he can strangle to death all the nobler wild life in the world, and to-morrow he will have done so unless he exercises foresight and self-control. Lieutenant-colonel Wood states, indeed, that birds and mam. mals are being killed off much faster than thcv can breed, and it is always the largest and noblest forms that suffer most. The whales and elephants, lions, and eagles go. The rats and flies and all mean parasites remain. This, of course, is inevitable in certain cases, but it is the wanton killing that he deplores. Civilised man begins by destroying the very forms of wild life that he learns to appreciate most when he becomes still more civilised.

The obvious remedy, it is pointed out, is to begin conservation at an early stage, when it is easier and better in every way, by enforcing laws for close seasons, game preserves, the selective protection of certain species, and sanctuaries. “ Unless we make these sanctuaries soon,” tlie writer says. “we shall be infamous for ever as the one generation which defrauded posterity of all the preservable wil-1 life that Nature took a million years to evolve into its nresent beautiful perfection.” One of the greatest stumblingblocks he sees in the way of establishing effective sanctuaries is the difficulty of arousing public opinion. That is the principal difficulty scientific societies have experienced in New Zealand. Fairly effective laws have been passed in this Dominion, protecting birds and other animals, but they are largely a dead-letter because the public have not yet realised the necessity for protecting the representatives of the ancient inhabitants of this land. If the public conscience was more sensitive on this point, large numbers of native birds, killed every year, would be spared, and more consideration would be given to the wood, pigeon, the pukeko, the god wit, and other birds whose slaughter the law at present allows.