The Psychology of Wild Animals

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XLIII, Issue 24, 15 December 1909, Page 42

The Psychology of Wild Animals

>y

WILLIAM T. HORNADAY.

E who enters the field's of wild |A animal psychology, even for a B I brief stroll, should pray to bo y delivered froth the folly of seeing too much and the evil of knowing things that are not true. There is nothing more ruinous to the value of observations and deductions on the mental ■traits of animals than the vaulting imagination that always sees the marvellous and the boundless credulity that believes the incredible. Observations are useful only when they are squared by reason and common sense and grounded on the bed-rock of absolute truth. While a considerable amount of serious study has been bestowed upon the mentality of the dog, the cat, the horse, ttnd a mental and moral moods and tenses- of wild animals are but little known. It is natural for a hunter to 'believe that after meeting an animal twenty times in its own haunts he has acquired a fair •understanding of its moral character. I know this through personal experience [But I have proved to my complete satisfaction that, no matter how well a hunter or field naturalist may learn the mental processes and traits of a free, •wild animal, he cannot possibly measure its intelligence nor sound the depths of its moral possibilities without making it captive and studying it in captivity. The extent of the mental and moral parallelism between man and brute is a source of constant surprise. In a state ■of freedom, ■untrammelled by anything save the fear of death by violence, the deer or the mountain sheep works out in bis own wav his chosen scheme for the survival of the fittest—that is, of himself. In the wilds we see very few manifestations of the unadulterated criminal instinct. A fight between wild elk stags for the supremacy of a herd of hinds is not a manifestation of murder lust, but of the natural instinct to jn iil l iply un m oles led. The killing of natural prey for daily food is not minder. A starving wolf on the desolate barren grounds may even kill and devour a wounded pack-mate without becoming a criminal by that act alone. True, such a manifestation of hard-heartedness and bad taste is very reprehensible; but its rau-e is hunger, not sheer blackness of heart. Among 1 wild animals, the wanton killing of a member of the killer's own species constitutes murder in the first degree. Sec-ond-degree murder is unnecessary and wanton killing outi-ide the killer's own species. • *' >. To many a wild animal there comes nt times the murder-lust which under the spur of opportunity leads to genuine crime. Tn some of the many cases that have come under my notice, the desire to commit murder for the sake of mur<ler has been as sharply defined as tho fangs and horns of the murderers. Of the many emotion's of wild animals which are revealed more sharply in captivity than in a state of nature, the crime producing passions — jealousy, hatred, and the devilish lust for inno-

, Sc.D., Director of the

New York Zoological Park.

cent blood—are most prominent. In the management of large animals in captivity, the criminal instinct is quite as great a trouble-breeder and source of anxiety as are wild-animal diseases and the constant struggle with the elements. In many cases there is not the slightest premonitory manifestation of murderous intent on the part of an impending criminal. Indeed, with most cunning wisdom, a wild-animal murderer will often conceal his purpose until outside interference its an impossibility and the victim is entirely helpless. These mani-

testations of fiendish cunning and premeditation are very exasperating to those responsible for the care of animals in captivity. In the pairing season we expect trouble, and the danger signal is always up. In October a male elk may become ever so savage, and finally develop into a raging demon, dangerous to man and beast; but when he manifests his temper openly and in the broad light of day, we. feel that he is treating fairly both his herd-mates and his keepers. If he gives fair warning to the world about him, we must not class him as a mean criminal, no matter what he may lo later on. It is our duty to corral him according to the violence of his rage. If we separate him from the herd, and lie tears a fence in pieces and kills his rival, that is honest, open warfare, not foul murder. But take the following case. Tn October, 1905, the New York Zoological Park received from the State of Washington a young mule-deer buck and two does. Being conspicuous members of the worst species of “difficult” deer to keep alive at Atlantic tide-water, an 1 being also very thin and weak, it required the combined efforts of several persons to keep them alive. For six months they staggered about their corral, more dead than alive; but at last they began slowly to improve. The oldest doe gave birth to two fawns which actually survived. But, even when the mating season began, the buck continued to be languid and blase. At no time did ho exhibits signs of temper, or even ■suspicious vigour. In the middle of the night of November 6, 1906, without the slightest warning, he decided to commit a murder; and the mother of the two nursing fawns was selected as the victim! Being weak from the rearing of her offspring, she was at his mercy. He gored her most savagely about twenty times and killed her. j . ■ . i That was deliberate, fiendish, and cowardly murder. The killing of any female animal by the male consort is murder; but there are circumstances wherein the plea of temporary insanity is an admis-

sible defence. In the autumn male members of the deer family often become temporarily insane and irresponsible, and should.be judged accordingly. Such distressing eases as the above are so common that whenever I go deerhunting and kill a lusty buck, the thought occurs to me, “Another undeveloped murderer, perhaps!” The most exasperating thing about these corral murders is the cunning tieaehery of the murderers. Take this as a typical ease: For three years a dainty little male Osceola deer from Florida was as gentle as a fawn, and as harmless as a dove. But one crisp morning Keeper Quinn, to whom every doe ini his charge is as dear as a foster-daugh-ter, was horrified at finding blood on the absurd little antlers of the Osceola pet. One of the females lay dead in the dark corner where she had been murdered during the night; and this with another older buck in the same corral, which might fairly have been regarded as an offensive rival. The desire to murder for the sake of killing is born in some carnivorous animals, and by others it is achieved. Among the largest and finest of the felines, the boldly and openly, and we are given a fair chance to prevent fatalities. Among the lions, tigers, leopards, jaguars, and! pumas of the New York Zoological Park, twenty-eight in number, there has been but one murder. That was the crime of Lopez, the big jaguar, who deserved instant death as punishment. It was one of the most cunning crimes I have everseen among wild animals, and is now’ historic.

For a year Lopez pretended ostentatiously to be a good-natured animal. Twenty times at least he acted the part of a playful pet, inviting me to reach in and stroke him. At last we decided to give him a cage-mate, and a fine adult female jaguar was purchased. The animals actually tried to caress each other through the bars, and the big male completely deceived us all.

At the end of two days it was considered safe to permit the female jaguar to enter the cage of Lopez. She was just' as much deceived as we were. An animal that is afraid always leaves; its travelling-

(cage slowly and unwillingly, or not at all. When the two sets of doors were opened, ithe female joyously walked into the cage of her treacherous admirer. In an instant, Lopez rushed upon her, seized her whole neck in his powerful jaws, and crushed her cervical vertebrae by his awful bite. We beat him over the head; we spiked him; we even tried to brain him; but he held her, as a bulldog would (hold a kitten, until she was dead. He had determined to murder her, but had cunningly concealed his purpose until (his victim was fully in his power.

Bears usually fight “on the square,” jcpenly and above board, rarely committing foul murders. If one bear hates another, he attacks at the very first opportunity; he does not cunningly wait to catch the offender at a disadvantage, •when he is beyond the possibility of (rescue. Bears frequently kill one another, and offer maul their keepers, but liot by the sneaking methods of the human assassin who stabs in the dark and runs away. I do not count the bear as a common murderer, even though, at Tare intervals, he kills a cage-mate smaller and weaker than himself. One killing of that kind, done by Cinnamon 'Jim to a small black bear that had annoyed him beyond all endurance, was inflicted as a legitimate punishment, and was so recorded. The attack of two large (bears, a Syrian and a sloth bear, upon a small Japanese black bear, in which the big pair deliberately attempted to disembowel the small victim, biting him only in the abdomen, always has been a puzzle ito me. I eannot fathom the idea which possessed those two ursine minds; but I bave no doubt that some of the many book-making men who read the minds of animals as if they were open books could tell me all about it.

On the ice-pack in front of his stone hut at the north end of the Franz Josef Archipelago Nansen saw an occurrence that was foul murder. A large male polar bear feeding upon a walrus was npproaelkcd across the ice-pack by two Small polar bear cubs. The gorging male immediately stopped feeding, and rushed toward the small intruders. They turned tmd fled wildly, but the villain pursued them far out upon the ice. He overtook them, killed both, and then serenely returned to bis feast.

In February, 1907, a bear tragedy occurred in the Zoological Park, which was a elose parallel of the Lopez murder. It was a case in which my only crumb of satisfaction was in my ability to say, “I told you so,” —that which no triumph can be more barren.

For seven years there lived together an the great polar bears’ den of the Zoological Park two full-grown, very large and fine polar bears. They came from Nova Zembla, and both were males. Their rough-and-tumble wrestling, both in the swimming-pool and out of it, was a sight of almost perennial interest, and while their biting and boxing was of the roughest character and frequently drew blood, they never got angry, and never had a real fight.

In the autumn of 190 G one of the animals sickened and died, and the impression prevailed afterward that the survivor was lonesome. The desirability of introducing a female companion was spoken of, but I was afraid to try the experiment. Finally, however, Mr Karl Hagenbeek, who has handled about forty polar bears to my one, wrote to us offering a fine female polar as a mate to the survivor. She was conceded to be one third smaller than the big male, but was fully adult, and ready to breed- Without loss of time I answered, declining to make the purchase, on the ground that our male bear would kill the female. It was my belief that even if he did not at once deliberately murder her, he would wear her out by his rough play. Mr Hagenbeek replied with the assurance that, in his opinion, all would be well; that, instead of a tragedy taking place, the male would be delighted with a female companion, and that the pair would breed. As convincing proof of the sincerity of his views, Mi - Hagenbeek offered to lose half the purchase price of the female bear in the event of my worst fears being realised. I asked the opinion of our head keeper of bears, and after due reflection he said: “Why, no; I don’t believe he'd kill her. He’s not a bad boar at all. I think wo could work it so that there would bs no great trouble.” Mr Hagenbeck’s son also felt sure there would be no tragedy. Quite against my own judgment of polar bear character, and in deference

to the expert opinion arrayed against mine, 1 finally yielded. Tlie female bear was purchased, and on her arrival she was placed for three weeks in the large shifting cage which connects with the eastern side of the great polar bears’ den. The two animals seemed glad to see each other. At once they fraternised through the bars, lieked each other’s nose, and ate their meals side by side. At night the male always slept as near as possible to his new companion. There was not a sign of ill temper, but, for all that, my doubts were ever present. At last, after three full weeks of doss acquaintance, it was agreed that there was nothing to be gained by longer delay in admitting the female to the large den. But we made preparations for trouble. The door of the sleeping den was oiled and overhauled, and put in thorough working order, so that if the female should dash into it for safety, a keeper could instantly slide the barrier and shut her in. We provided pike-poles, long iron bars, lariats, meat, and long planks a foot wide. Heartily wishing myself a hundred miles away, I summoned all my courage, and gave the order: “Open her door a foot only, and let her put her head out. Keep him away.” The female bear had not the slightest fear or premonition of danger. Thrusting her head through the narrow opening, she looked upon the world and the open sky above, and found that it was good. She struggled to force the door open wider; and the male stood back, waiting. “Let her go!” Forcing the door back with her own eager strength, she joyously dropped the Intervening eighteen inches to the floor of the den, and was free. The next second the male flung his great length upon her. and the tragedy was on. 1 would not for hundreds of dollars—fead I the option—see such a thing again. .A hundred times in the awful half-hour that followed I bitterly regretted my folly in acting contrary to my own carefully drawn conclusions regarding the temper, the strength, and the mental processes of that male bear. He never left her for ten seconds, save Tvhen, at five or six different times, we

beat him off by literally ramming him away. When she first fell, the slope of the floor brought her near the bars, which gave us a chance to fight for her. We beat him over the head; we drove big steel spikes into him; we rammed iiim with planks, not caring how many ribs we broke. But each time we beat him off. and the poor harried female rose to retreat, he flung himself upon her anew, and crushed her down upon the snow. Gallantly the female fought for her life, with six wild men to help her. After a long battle—it seemed like hours, but I suppose it was between twenty and thirty minutes —the male bear recognised the fact that so long as the female lay near the bars his punishment would continue, and the end would be postponed. Forthwith he seized his victim, and dragged her down to the ice that covered the swimming-pool in the centre of the den, beyond our reach. The floor of the den was so slippery from ice and snow that it was unsafe for any of the men to enter and try to approach the now furious animal within striking distance. Very quickly some choice pieces of fresh meat were thrown within six feet of the boars, in the hope that the male would be tempted away from his victim. In vain! Then, with all possible haste. Keeper Mulvehill coiled a lasso, entered the den, and, with the first throw, landed the noose neatly around the neck of the male bear. In a second it was jerked taut, the end passed through the bars, and ten eager arms dragged the big bear close to the bars. Another lariat was put on him to guard against breakages, and no bear ever missed being choked to death by a narrower margin than did that one. The morsel of revenge in it was sweet. While he was held thus, two men wont in and attached a rope to the now dying female, and she was quickly dragged into the shifting-cage. But the rescue came too late. At the last moment, on the ice, the canine teeth of the big bear had severed the jugular vein of the female, and in five minutes after her rescue she was dead. It is my belief that at first the male did not intend to murder the female. 1 think bi- first impulse was to play with her. a- had always done

the male comrade of his own size. But the joy of combtit seized him, and after that his only purpose was to kill, verdict is, not premeditated murder, but murder in the second degree. In the order of carnivorous animals, I think the worst criminals are found in the marten family (Mustelidae); aud, if there is a greater villain than the iniftk, I have yet to find him out. The mink is a midnight assassin who loves slaughter for the joy of murder. The wolverine, marten, mink, and weasel all arc courageous, savage, and merciless. To the •wolverine Western trappers accord the evil distinction 'of being a veritable prince of darkness on four legs. To them he is the arch iiend beyond which animal cunning and depravity cannot go. Excepting the profane history of the pickings and stealings of this “mountain devil” as record'’l by suffering trappers, we know little of it; but if its instincts are not supremely murderous, its reputation is no index of its character. The mink, however, is a creature that we know and fear. Along the rocky shores of the Bronx River, even in the Zoological I’aik. it perversely persists. In spite of traps, guns, and poison, and the killing of from three to live annually in our park, Putorius vison will not down, With us. the only creatures that practise wholesale and unnecessary murder are minks and dogs. The former kill our birds, and during one awful period when a certain fence was being rebuilt the latter destroyed several deer. A mink once visited an open-air yard containing twenty-two pinioned laugh-ing-gulls, and during, that noche trieste killed, all of the ill-fated birds. But it did not devour even one, and it sucked the blood of only two or three. On another tragic occasion a mink ela lightered an entire flock of fifteen gulls; but his joy of killing was shortlived, for he was quickly caught and clubbed to death. A miserable little weasel killed three fine brant-geese purely for the love of murder, and then he departed this life by t.ie powder-and-lead rente. All the rear round buffalo bulls are

much given to fighting, and for one bull to injure or kill another is an occurrence all too common. Even in the great 27-thousand-acre preserve of the Corbin Blue Mountain Forest Association fatal fights sometimes occur. But is was left to a large bull named Black Beauty, in our Zoological Park herd, to reveal the disagreeable fact that under certain circumstances a buffalo may become a cunning and deliberate assassinIn the spring of 1904 a new buffalo bull named Apache, was added to the portion of our herd which up to that time had been dominated by Black Beauty. We expected the usual head-to-head battle for supremacy, succeeded by a period of peace and quiet. It is the law of the herd that after every contest for supremacy the vanquished bull shall accept the situation philosophically and thereafter keep his place. At the end of a half-hour of fierce struggle, head to head, Black Beauty was overpowered by Apache and fled from him into Clio open range. To emphasise his victory, Apache followed him around and around at a quiet walk for several hours; but the beaten bull always kept a margin of safety of about four hundred feet between himself and the master of the herd. Convinced that Black Beauty would no longer dispute his supremacy, Apache at last pronounced for peace and thought no more about the late unpleasantness. His rival seemed to accept the situation, and rejoined the herd on the subdued status of ex-presi-dent. For several days nothing occurred; but all the while Black Beauty was biding his time and watching his opportunity. At last it eame. As Apache lay dozing and ruminating on a sunny slope, his beaten rival quietly drifted around his resting-place, stealthily secured a good position, and, without a second’s warning, plunged his sharp horns deep into the lungs of the reclining bull. With the mad energy of pent-up and superheated fury, the assassin delivered stab after stab into the unprotected side of the helpless victim, and before Apache eould gain his feet he had been gored

many times. He lived only a tew minutes.

It was foul murder, fully premeditated; and, had Black Beauty been my personal property, he would have been executed for the crime, without any objections or motions or appeals or farfetched certificates of unreasonable doubt.

During the past ten years a number of persons have been foully murdered by animals they had fed and protected. The latest and one of the most deplorable of these tragedies occurred late in 1906, near Montclair, New Jersey. Mr. Herbert Bradley was tne victim. While walking through Iris deer park, he was wantonly attacked by a white-tailed buck and murdered on the spot. At Helena, Montana, about five years ago, a strong man armed with a pitchfork was killed by a bull elk. There have been several other fatalities from elk.

The greater number of such crimes as the above have been committed by members of the deer family (deer, elk, moose, and carioou). The hollow-horned ruminants seem to be different. I believe that toward their keepers the bisons, buffaloes, and wild cattle entertain a certain sense of neutrality that in members of the deer family is, about half tire time, totally absent. But there are exceptions; and a very sad and also notable ease was the foul murder of Dick Kock, in 1903 or thereabout. Dick Rock was a stalwart ranchman in the prime of life, who possessed a great fondness for b:’g-game animals. He lived near Henry Lake, Idaho, not far from the western boundary of Yellowstone Bark. He liked to rope elk

and moose in winter, and haul them on sleds to his ranch; to catch mountain goats and mule-deer for exhibition; and to breed buffaloes. His finest bull buffalo, named Indian, was one of his favourites, and was broken to ride. Scores of times Rock rode him around the corral, barebacked and without bridle or halter. Rock felt that he eould confidently trust the animal, and he never dreamed of guarding himself against a possible evil day.

But one day the blood-lust seized the buffalo and he decided to assassinate hia best friend. The next time Dick Rock entered the corral, dosing the gate ani fastening it securely—thus shutting himself in—the big bull attacked him so suddenly and so fiercely that there was not a moment for either escape or rescue. We can easily estimate the suddenness of the attack by the fact that alert and active Dick Rock had not time even to ©limb upon the fence of the corral, whereby his life would have been saved. With a mighty upward thrust, the treacherous bull drove one of his aorns deeply into his master’s body, and impaled him so completely and. so securely that the man hung there and died there! As a crowning horror, the bull was unable to dislodge his victim, and the body of the ranchman was carried about the corral on the horns of his assassin until the horrified wife went a mile and a half and summoned a neighbour, who brought a rifle and executed tire murderer on the spot. Such sudden onslaughts as this make it unsafe to trust implicitly, and without recourse, to the good temper of any animal having dangerous horns. If bird-lovers knew the prevalence of the murder instinct among the feathered folk, no doubt they would be greatly shocked. Many an innocent-looking bird is really a natural villain without opportunity to indulge in crime. It is in captivity that the inherent wickedness of wild creatures eomes to the surface and becomes visible. In the open, the weak ones learn to avoid danger and to escape when threatened; but, with twenty birds in one large cage, escape is not always possible. A ‘‘happy family” of a dozen or twenty different species often harbours a criminal in its midst; and when the criminal cunningly •waits until all possibilities of rescue are eliminated, an assassination is the result.

Here is a partial list of the crimes in our bird collection during 1902: A green jay killed a blue jay. A jayirush and several other small birds were killed by - laughing-thrushes—which simply love to do murder! A nightingale was killed by a catbird and two mock-ing-birds. Two snake-birds killed a> third one —all of them thoroughly depraved villains. Three gulls murdered; another; a brown pelican was killed by trumpeter-swans; and a Canada goose was killed by a gull. All these victims were birds in good health.

Strange as it may seem, among reptiles there is far less of real first-degree murder than among mammals and birds. Twenty rattlesnakes may be crowded together in one eage, without a family jar. Even among cobras, perhaps the most irritable and pugnacious of all serpents, I think one snake never murders another, though they sometimes quarrel, and also try to swallow one another. The ib:g pythons and anaeondas seem to know that good temper and peace promote longevity, and they almost never attack one another. And yet, a twentyfoot regal python with a bad heart—• like Nansen’s polar bear —could easily constrict and kill any snake of smaller

Among sea creatures, the clearly defined criminal instinct, as exhibited aside from the never-ending struggle for existence and the quest of food, is rarely observed —probably because opportunities are so few. The sanguinary exploits of the grampus, or whale-killer, among whales small enough to be killed and eaten, are the onslaughts of a marine glutton in quest of food.

Among the fishes there is one murderer whose evil reputation is well deserved. The common swordfish of the Atlantic, 40 miles or so off Block Islam! or Montauk Point, is not only the most fearless of all fishes, but is also the most dangerous. His fierce attacks upon the boats of men who have harpooned him and seek to kill him are well known, and his unparalleled courage fairly challenges our wonder and admiration. But, unfortunately, the record of the swordfish is stained with crime. When the spirit of murder prompts him to commit a crime in sheer wantonness, he will attack a whale, stab the unfortunate monster again and again, and pursue it until it is dead. This is prompted solely by brutality and murderlust, for the swordfish feeds upon fish, and never attempts to eat any portion of a whale.

Once, in the Zoological Park, I felt compelled to execute an animal as a measure of general safety against its criminal intent. It seemed deliberately to have resolved to do murder. A Japanese wild boar of large size and fierce dis-

position was kept in a corral enclosed by * fence of strong steel wire. At first the animal was just reasonably bad, and his efforts to do mischief were directed chief* ly against his keepers. As time went on, however, and the supply of good food without compensating labour continued, that boar’s moral character broke down completely. Like many human beings, he could not stand prosperity. But his case developed in an acute form; he became an anarchist; and his murderous mind was possessed by a desire to burst out of prescribed bounds, upset the order of things, and slay for the love of slaughter.

As he grew more and more dangerous I watched him closely; and finally it became evident that he had resolved to break out, or die in the attempt. With a long pike-pole from the bear-dens, I stood at the corner he selected for the final breach in the steel wire, and sought to punish him until he would desist. But opposition to his will only angered him the more. With his evil little eyes fixed on me in murderous fury, and the foam churning from his snapping jaws, he charged the fence again and again. Had he broken out, a crazy Malay running amuck would have been a peaceful citizen compared with him. If he should break out among the visitors, into a crowd of helpless women and children! There was but one thing to be done. I sent a messenger at speed to my office, received from him one of my heavy rifles, and a 45-calibre bullet through the brain of the raging boar quickly ended all danger from him. With his death, I think every man in the park experienced a feeling of profound relief. I believe it can be proved that wild animals in a perfect state of nature are not nearly so much given to wanton murder of their own kind as are some races of men. The infrequency of animal murders cannot be due wholly to the many possibilities for the intended victim to escape, nor to the difficulty of killing. In every species murders are easily possible; but it is wholly against the laws of nature for free wild beasts to kill one another in wantonness. It is left to the lower races of men to commit murders without cause, and to devour one another. The family crimes and cruelties of certain Bavages completely eclipse in blackness and in number the doings of the more rerespectable wild beasts.

In wild animals and in men, crime is an index to character. The finest species of animals and the noblest races of men are alike distinguished by their abhorrence of the shedding of innocent blood. The lion, the elephant, the wild horse, the grizzly bear, the orang-utan, the eagle, and the whooping-crane are singularly free from the criminal instinct. On the other hand, even to-day Africa is full of black or half-black tribes whose members are actually fond of practising cruelty and murder. There is to-day in the Dark Continent many a “king” beside whom a hungry lion or a grizzly bear is a noble citizen. The vices and virtues and the criminal propensities of mankind are mirrored in the lower - animals to an astonishing degree. Some of us are entitled to be classed as high as the best of the “lower” animals, but a great many creatures in human form are morally lower than the respectable four-footed beasts.