PRESERVATION OF BIRD LIFE

Southland Times, Issue 24830, 24 August 1942, Page 3

PRESERVATION OF BIRD LIFE

Sir, —Having studied native birds all my life, I have read with interest the

letters and articles which have recently appeared in your paper on the subject of protection. It may be assumed that all the writers are desirous of attaining the same end, yet their views in some cases are diametrically opposed. Much discussion has been centred around the question of breeding native birds in captivity, with frequent references to the efforts of Mr King, of Gore. Mr Sanderson maintains that no aviculturalists should be allowed to try to breed native birds; Mr Richdale and others claim that much benefit is to be derived from keeping birds in captivity (with reasonable restrictions), and with this view I fully agree. The saddleback, which, much to his credit, Mr King successfully bred in his aviaries, is at the present time restricted to a few small islands to the south-west of Stewart Island, where it is plentiful. I know the bird well in its island home, and I saw them in Mr King’s aviaries where they were in perfect health and showed every sign of well-being. I, and the friend who - was with me, derived a great deal of interest and pleasure from seeing these birds. My friend, who had travelled New Zealand extensively had never seen them before. It is probable indeed that only about one New Zealander in 10,000 ever has seen a live saddleback, yet if facilities were given for breeding them in captivity they might be known to the majority of the population. The educational value is incalculable. But more than that: the protection of our rare birds depends not only on laws, but also on the sympathetic interest of the public in their enforcement, and people are not going to be as enthusiastic over birds which they know only from pictures, as they are over those which they have seen in the flesh. One reads much sentimental twaddle about birds and their “freedom under the blue skies,” but actually many species of birds are quite happy in aviaries. Moreover, it must not be forgotten that many birds are very definitely circumscribed in nature. Each pair of saddlebacks on Solomon Island, for instance has its own territory—an area just large enough to support the birds and enable them to rear a family —and it has to fight to maintain its rights to it. To go beyond the confines of that territory means a fight with its neighbours—a fight that is often to the death. So their “freedom” even in nature is very restricted. The birds’ requirements are chiefly a sufficient food supply, room for suitable exercise, sufficient shelter, shade and sunlight, and water or dust baths. Part, at least, of the “run” should have an earth floor exposed to the cleansing rain, and preferably grassed. Given these desiderata, many of our bush birds, which are at present never seen by most people, could be readily bred inside our city limits. In the case of gregarious birds, such as the native parrakeets (all of which might be readily bred) a number of pairs can be kept in one enclosure. In the case of “territorial” birds such as tomtits, saddleback, robin and weka, only one pair could be kept in an enclosure, though with some of these, other species might live in harmony. The native pigeon, one of our most beautiful birds, could almost certainly be readily bred in aviaries and subsequently released and treated as the domestic pigeon is treated. Another way in which our birds could be helped is by transferring rare species to suitable islands, and so increasing the stocks of. them. For several years, in conjunction with Mr L. O. H. Tripp and the Wellington Acclimatization Society, I tried unsuccessfully to get birds of different sorts which were rapidly decreasing on the mainland, transferred to islands where they might have been perpetuated. I offered on one occasion to transfer, at my own expense, some saddlebacks from Solomon Island to other suitable islands. The offer was refused, chiefly because of Mr Sanderson’s opposition to the project. If ever there was a case of “fiddling while Rome was burning,” it is in the inexplicable attitude of inactivity of the Department of Internal Affairs and Mr Sanderson. Their idea, apparently, that our birds can best be helped by just leaving them alone exemplifies a defeatist attitude with which I do not for a moment agree.

I firmly believe that with intelligent co-operation between the Department of Internal Affairs the Forest and Bird Protection Society and the aviculturalists, some of our birds could be considerably increased in numbers and be seen by great numbers of the general public who at present never get a chance of viewing them. EDGAR F. STEAD. “Ham,” Christchurch.