CHAPTER V.

FEAR IN BIRDS.

The statement that birds instinctively fear man is frequently met with

in zoological works written since the _Origin of Species_ appeared; but

almost the only reason--absolutely the only plausible reason, all the

rest being mere supposition--given in support of such a notion is that

birds in desert islands show at first no fear of man, but afterwards,

finding him a dangerous neighbour, they become wild; and their young

also grow up wild. It is thus assumed that the habit acquired by the

former has become hereditary in the latter--or, at all events, that in

time it becomes hereditary. Instincts, which are few in number in any

species, and practically endure for ever, are not, presumably, acquired

with such extraordinary facility.

Birds become shy where persecuted, and the young, even when not

disturbed, learn a shy habit from the parents, and from other adults

they associate with. I have found small birds shyer in desert places,

where the human form was altogether strange to them, than in

thickly-settled districts. Large birds are actually shyer than the small

ones, although, to the civilized or shooting man they seem astonishingly

tame where they have never been fired at. I have frequently walked quite

openly to within twenty-five or thirty yards of a flock of flamingoes

without alarming them. This, however, was when they were in the water,

or on the opposite side of a stream. Having no experience of guns, they

fancied themselves secure as long as a strip of water separated them

from the approaching object. When standing on dry land they would not

allow so near an approach. Sparrows in England aro very much tamer than

the sparrows I have observed in desert places, where they seldom see a

human being. Nevertheless young sparrows in England are very much tamer

than old birds, as anyone may see for himself. During the past summer,

while living near Kew Gardens, I watched the sparrows a great deal, and

fed forty or fifty of them every day from a back window. The bread and

seed was thrown on to a low roof just outside the window, and I noticed

that the young birds when first able to fly were always brought by the

parents to this feeding place, and that after two or three visits they

would begin to come of their own accord. At such times they would

venture quite close to me, showing as little suspicion as young

chickens. The adults, however, although so much less shy than birds of

other species, were extremely suspicious, snatching up the bread and

flying away; or, if they remained, hopping about in a startled manner,

craning their necks to view me, and making so many gestures and motions,

and little chirps of alarm, that presently the young would become

infected with fear. The lesson was taught them in a surprisingly short

time; their suspicion was seen to increase day by day, and about a week

later they were scarcely to be distinguished, in behaviour from the

adults. It is plain that, with these little birds, fear of man is an

associate feeling, and that, unless it had been taught them, his

presence would trouble them as little as does that of horse, sheep, or

cow. But how about the larger species, used as food, and which have had

a longer and sadder experience of man's destructive power?

The rhea, or South American ostrich, philosophers tell us, is a very

ancient bird on the earth; and from its great size and inability to

escape by flight, and its excellence as food, especially to savages, who

prefer fat rank-flavoured flesh, it must have been systematically

persecuted by man as long as, or longer than, any bird now existing on

the globe. If fear of man ever becomes hereditary in birds, we ought

certainly to find some trace of such an instinct in this species. I have

been unable to detect any, though I have observed scores of young rheas

in captivity, taken before the parent bird had taught them what to fear.

I also once kept a brood myself, captured just after they had hatched

out. With regard to food they were almost, or perhaps quite,

independent, spending most of the time catching flies, grasshoppers, and

other insects with surprising dexterity; but of the dangers encompassing

the young rhea they knew absolutely frothing. They would follow me about

as if they took me for their parent; and, whenever I imitated the loud

snorting or rasping warning-call emitted the old bird in moments of

danger, they would to me in the greatest terror, though no animal was in

sight, and, squatting at my feet, endeavour to conceal themselves by

thrusting their heads and long necks up my trousers. If I had caused a

person to dress in white or yellow clothes for several consecutive days,

and had then uttered the warning cry each time he showed himself to the

birds, I have no doubt that they would soon have acquired a habit of

running in terror from him, even without the warning cry, and that the

fear of a person in white or yellow would have continued all their

lives. Up to within about twenty years ago, rheas were seldom or never

shot in La Plata and Patagonia, but were always hunted on horseback and

caught with the bolas. The sight of a mounted man would set them off at

once, while a person on foot could walk quite openly to within easy

shooting distance of them; yet their fear of a horseman dates only two

hundred years back--a very short time, when we consider that, before the

Indian borrowed the horse from the invader, he must have systematically

pursued the rhea on foot for centuries. The rhea changed its habits when

the hunter changed his, and now, if an _estanciero_ puts down ostrich

hunting on his estate, in a very few years the birds, although wild

birds still, become as fearless and familiar as domestic animals. I have

known old and ill-tempered males to become a perfect nuisance on some

estancias, running after and attacking every person, whether on foot or

on horseback, that ventured near them. An old instinct of a whole race

could not be thus readily lost here and there on isolated estates

wherever a proprietor chose to protect his birds for half a dozen years.

I suppose the Talegallus--the best-known brush-turkey--must be looked on

as an exception to all other birds with regard to the point I am

considering; for this abnormal form buries its eggs in the huge mound

made by the male, and troubles herself no more about them. When the

young is fully developed it simply kicks the coffin to pieces in which

its mother interred it, and, burrowing its way up to the sunshine,

enters on the pleasures and pains of an independent existence from

earliest infancy--that is, if a species born into the world in full

possession of all the wisdom of the ancients, can be said ever to know

infancy. At all events, from Mr. Bartlett's observations on the young

hatched in the Zoological Gardens, it appears that they took no notice

of the old birds, but lived quite independently from the moment they

came out of the ground, even flying up into a tree and roosting

separately at night. I am not sure, however, that these observations are

quite conclusive; for it is certain that captivity plays strange pranks

with the instincts of some species, and it is just possible that in a

state of nature the old birds exercise at first some slight parental

supervision, and, like all other species, have a peculiar cry to warn

the young of the dangers to be avoided. If this is not so, then the

young Talegallus must fly or hide with instinctive tear from every

living thing that approaches it. I, at any rate, find it hard to believe

that it has a knowledge, independent of experience, of the different

habits of man and kangaroo, and dis-criminates at first sight between

animals that are dangerous to it and those that are not. This

interesting point will probably never be determined, as, most unhappily,

the Australians are just now zealously engaged in exterminating their

most wonderful bird for the sake of its miserable flesh; and with less

excuse than the Maories could plead with regard to the moa, since they

cannot deny that they have mutton and rabbit enough to satisfy hunger.

Whether birds fear or have instinctive knowledge of any of their enemies

is a much larger question. Species that run freely on the ground from

the time of quitting the shell know their proper food, and avoid

whatever is injurious. Have all young birds a similarly discriminating

instinct with regard to their enemies? Darwin says, "Fear of any

particular enemy is certainly an instinctive quality, as may be seen in

nestling birds." Here, even man seems to be included among the enemies

feared instinctively; and in another passage he says, "Young chickens

have lost, wholly from habit, that fear of the dog and cat which, no

doubt, was originally instinctive in them." My own observations point to

a contrary conclusion; and I may say that I have had unrivalled

opportunities for studying the habits of young birds.

Animals of all classes, old and young, shrink with instinctive fear from

any strange object approaching them. A piece of newspaper carried

accidentally by the wind is as great an object of terror to an

inexperienced young bird as a buzzard sweeping down with death in its

talons. Among birds not yet able to fly there are, however, some curious

exceptions; thus the young of most owls and pigeons are excited to anger

rather than fear, and, puffing themselves up, snap and strike at an

intruder with their beaks. Other fledglings simply shrink down in the

nest or squat close on the ground, their fear, apparently, being in

proportion to the suddenness with which the strange animal or object

comes on them; but, if the deadliest enemy approaches with slow caution,

as snakes do--and snakes must be very ancient enemies to birds--there is

no fear or suspicion shown, even when the enemy is in full view and

about to strike. This, it will be understood, is when no warning-cry is

uttered by the parent bird. This shrinking, and, in some cases, hiding

from an object corning swiftly towards them, is the "wildness_"_ of

young birds, which, Darwin says again, is greater in wild than in

domestic species. Of the extreme tameness of the young rhea I have

already spoken; I have also observed young tinamous, plovers, coots,

&c., hatched by fowls, and found them as incapable of distinguishing

friend from foe as the young of domestic birds. The only difference

between the young of wild and tame is that the former are, as a rule,

much more sprightly and active. But there are many exceptions; and if

this greater alertness and activity is what is meant by "wildness," then

the young of some wild birds--rhea, crested screamer, &c.--are actually

much tamer than our newly-hatched chickens and ducklings.

To return to what may be seen in nestling birds, n very young, and

before their education has begun, if quietly approached and touched,

they open their bills and take food as readily from a man as from the

parent bird. But if while being thus fed the parent returns and emits

the warning note, they instantly cease their hunger-cries, close their

gaping mouths, and crouch down frightened in the nest. This fear caused

by the parent bird's warning note begins to manifest itself even before

the young are hatched--and my observations on this point refer to

several species in three widely separated orders. When the little

prisoner is hammering at its shell, and uttering its feeble _peep,_ as

if begging to be let out, if the warning note is uttered, even at a

considerable distance, the strokes and complaining instantly cease, and

the chick will then remain quiescent in the shell for a long time, or

until the parent, by a changed note, conveys to it an intimation that

the danger is over. Another proof that the nestling has absolutely no

instinctive knowledge of particular enemies, but is taught to fear them

by the parents, is to be found in the striking contrast between the

habits of parasitical and genuine young in the nest, and after they have

left it, while still unable to find their own food. I have had no

opportunities of observing the habits of the young cuckoo in England

with regard to this point, and do not know whether other observers have

paid any attention to the matter or not, but I am very familiar with the

manners of the parasitical starling or cow-bird of South America. The

warning cries of the foster parent have no effect on the young cow-bird

at any time. Until they are able to fly they will readily devour worms

from the hand of a man, even when the old birds are hovering close by

and screaming their danger notes, and while their own young, if the

parasite has allowed any to survive in the nest, are crouching down in

the greatest fear. After the cow-bird has left the nest it is still

stupidly tame, and more than once I have seen one carried off from its

elevated perch by a milvago hawk, when, if it had understood the warning

cry of the foster parent, it would have dropped down into the bush or

grass and escaped. But as soon as the young cow-birds are able to shift

for themselves, and begin to associate with their own kind, their habits

change, and they become suspicious and wild like other birds.

On this point--the later period at which the parasitical young bird

acquires fear of man--and also bearing on the whole subject under

discussion, I shall add here some observations I once made on a dove

hatched and reared by a pigeon at my home on the pampas. A very large

ombú tree grew not far from the dove-cote, and some of the pigeons used

to make their nests on the lower horizontal branches. One summer a dove

of the most common species, Zenaida maculata, in size a third less than

the domestic pigeon, chanced to drop an egg in one of these nests, and a

young dove was hatched and reared; and, in due time, when able to fly,

it was brought to the dove-cote. I watched it a great deal, and it was

evident that this foster-young, though' with the pigeons, was not nor

ever would be of them, for it could not take kiudly to their flippant

flirty ways. Whenever a male approached it, and with guttural noises and

strange gestures made a pompous declaration of amorous feelings, the

dove would strike vigorously at its undesirable lover, and drive him

off, big as he was; and, as a rule, it would sit apart, afoot or so,

from the others. The dove was also a male; but its male companions, with

instinct tainted by domestication, were ignorant alike of its sex and

different species. Now, it chanced that my pigeons, never being fed and

always finding their own living on the plain like wild birds, were,

although still domestic, not nearly so tame as pigeons usually are in

England. They would not allow a person to approach within two or three

yards of them without flying, and if grain was thrown to them they would

come to it very suspiciously, or not at all. And, of course, the young

pigeons always acquired the exact degree of suspicion shown by the

adults as soon as they were able to fly and consort with the others. But

the foundling Zenaida did not know what their startled gestures and

notes of fear meant when a person approached too near, and as he saw

none of his own kind, he did not acquire their suspicious habit. On the

contrary, he was perfectly tame, although by parentage a wild bird, and

showed no more fear of a man than of a horse. Throughout the winter it

remained with the pigeons, going afield every day with them, and

returning to the dove-cote; but as spring approached the slight tie

which united him to them began to be loosened; their company grew less

and less congenial, and he began to lead a solitary life. But he did not

go to the trees yet. He came to the house, and his favourite perch was

on the low overhanging roof of a vine-covered porch, just over the main

entrance. Here he would pass several hours every day, taking no notice

of the people passing in and out at all times; and when the weather grew

warm he would swell out his breast and coo mournfully by the hour for

our pleasure.

We can, no doubt, learn best by observing the behaviour of nestlings and

young birds; nevertheless, I find much even in the confirmed habits of

adults to strengthen me in the belief that fear of particular enemies is

in nearly all cases--for I will not say all--the result of experience

and tradition.

Hawks are the most open, violent, and persistent enemies birds have; and

it is really wonderful to see how well the persecuted kinds appear to

know the power for mischief possessed by different raptorial species,

and how exactly the amount of alarm exhibited is in proportion to the

extent of the danger to be apprehended. Some raptors never attack birds,

others only occasionally; still others prey only on the young and

feeble; and, speaking of La Plata district, where I have observed hawks,

from the milvago chimango--chiefly a carrion-eater--to the destructive

peregrine falcon, there is a very great variety of predatory habits, and

all degrees of courage to be found; yet all these raptors are treated

differently by species liable to be preyed on, and have just as much

respect paid them as their strength and daring entitles them to, and no

more, So much discrimination must seem almost incredible to those who

are not very familiar with the manners of wild birds; I do not think it

could exist if the fear shown resulted from instinct or inherited habit.

There would be no end to the blunders of such an instinct as that; and

in regions where hawks are extremely abundant most of the birds would be

in a constant state of trepidation. On the pampas the appearance of the

comparatively harmless chimango excites not the least alarm among small

birds, yet at a distance it closely resembles a henharrier, and it also

readily attacks young, sick, and wounded birds; all others know how

little they have to fear from it. When it appears unexpectedly,

sweeping over a hedge or grove with a rapid flight, it is sometimes

mistaken for a more dangerous species; there is then a little flutter of

alarm, some birds springing into the air, but in two or three seconds of

time they discover their mistake, and settle down quietly again, taking

no further notice of the despised carrion-eater. On the other hand, I

have frequently mistaken a harrier (Circus cinereus, in the brown state

of plumage) for a chimango, and have only discovered my mistake by

seeing the commotion among the small birds. The harrier I have

mentioned, also the C. macropterus, feed partly on small birds, which

they flush from the ground and strike down with their claws. When the

harrier appears moving along with a loitering flight near the surface,

it is everywhere attended by a little whirlwind of alarm, small birds

screaming or chirping excitedly and diving into the grass or bushes; but

the alarm does not spread far, and subsides as soon as the hawk has

passed on its way. Buzzards (Buteo and Urubitinga) are much more feared,

and create a more widespread alarm, and they ars certainly more

destructive to birds than harriers. Another curious instance is that of

the sociable hawk (Rostrhanrus sociabilis). This bird spends the summer

and breeds in marshes in La Plata, and birds pay no attention to it, for

it feeds exclusively on water-snails (Ampullaria). But when it visits

woods and plantations to roost, during migration, its appearance creates

as much alarm as that of a true buzzard, which it closely resembles.

Wood-birds, unaccustomed to see it, do not know its peculiar preying

habits, and how little they need fear its presence. I may also mention

that the birds of La Plata seem to fear the kite-like Elanus less than

other hawks, and I believe that its singular resemblance to the common

gull of the district in its size, snowy-white plumage and manner of

flight, has a deceptive effect on most species, and makes them so little

suspicious of it.

The wide-ranging peregrine falcon is a common species in La Plata,

although, oddly enough, not included in any notice of the avifauna of

that region before 1888. The consternation caused among birds by its

appearance is vastly greater than that produced by any of the raptors I

have mentioned: and it is unquestionably very much more destructive to

birds, since it preys exclusively on them, and, as a rule, merely picks

the flesh from the head and neck, and leaves the untouched body to its

jackal, the carrion-hawk. When the peregrine appears speeding through

the air in a straight line at a great height, the feathered world, as

far as one able to see, is thrown into the greatest commo-tion, all

birds, from the smallest up to species large as duck, ibis, and curlew,

rushing about in the air as if distracted. When the falcon has

disappeared in the sky, and the wave of terror attending its progress

subsides behind it, the birds still continue wild and excited for some

time, showing how deeply they have been moved; for, as a rule, fear is

exceedingly transitory in its effects on animals.

I must, before concluding this part of my subject, mention another

raptor, also a true falcon, but differing from the peregrine in being

exclusively a marsh-hawk. In size it is nearly a third less than the

male peregrine, which it resembles in its sharp wings and manner of

flight, but its flight is much more rapid. The whole plumage, is

uniformly of a dark grey colour. Unfortunately, though I have observed

it not fewer than a hundred times, I have never been able to procure a

specimen, nor do I find that it is like any American falcon already

described; so that for the present it must remain nameless. Judging

solely from the effect produced by the appearance of this hawk, it must

be even more daring and destructive than its larger relation, the

peregrine. It flies at a great height, and sometimes descends vertically

and with extraordinary velocity, the wings producing a sound like a

deep-toned horn. The sound is doubtless produced at will, and is

certainly less advantageous to the hawk than to the birds it pursues. No

doubt it can afford to despise the wing-power of its quarry; and I have

sometimes thought that it takes a tyrannous delight in witnessing the

consternation caused by its hollow trumpeting sound. This may be only a

fancy, but some hawks do certainly take pleasure in pursuing and

striking birds when not seeking prey. The peregrine has been observed,

Baird says, capturing birds, only to kill and drop them. Many of the

Felidae, we know, evince a similar habit; only these prolong their

pleasure by practising a more refined and deliberate cruelty.

The sudden appearance overhead of this hawk produces an effect wonderful

to witness. I have frequently seen all the inhabitants of a marsh struck

with panic, acting as if demented, and suddenly grown careless to all

other dangers; and on such occasions I have looked up confident of

seeing the sharp-winged death, suspended above them in the sky. All

birds that happen to be on the wing drop down as if shot into the reeds

or water; ducks away from the margin stretch out their necks

horizontally and drag their bodies, as if wounded, into closer cover;

not one bird is found bold enough to rise up and wheel about the

marauder--a usual proceeding in the case of other hawks; while, at every

sudden stoop the falcon makes, threatening to dash down on his prey, a

low cry of terror rises from the birds beneath; a sound expressive of an

emotion so contagious that it quickly runs like a murmur all over the

marsh, as if a gust of wind had swept moaning through, the rushes. As

long as the falcon hangs overhead, always at a height of about forty

yards, threatening at intervals to dash down, this murmuring sound, made

up of many hundreds of individual cries, is heard swelling and dying

away, and occasionally, when he drops lower than usual, rising to a

sharp scream of terror.

Sometimes when I have been riding over marshy ground, one of these hawks

has placed himself directly over my head, within fifteen or twenty yards

of me; and it has perhaps acquired the habit of following a horseman in

this way in order to strike at any birds driven up. On one occasion my

horse almost trod on a couple of snipe squatting terrified in the short

grass. The instant they rose the hawk struck at one, the end of his wing

violently smiting my cheek as he stooped, and striking at the snipe on a

level with the knees of my horse. The snipe escaped by diving under the

bridle, and immediately dropped down on the other side of me, and the

hawk, rising up, flew away.

To return. I think I am justified in believing that fear of hawks, like

fear of men, is, in very nearly all cases, the result of experience and

tradition. Nevertheless, I think it probable that in some species which

have always lived in the open, continually exposed to attack, and which

are preferred as food by raptors, such as duck, snipe, and plover, the

fear of the falcon may be an inherited habit. Among passerine birds I am

also inclined to think that swallows show inherited fear of hawks.

Swallows and humming-birds have least to fear from raptors; yet, while

humming-birds readily pursue and tease hawks, thinking as little of them

as of pigeons or herons, swallows everywhere manifest the greatest

terror at the approach of a true falcon; and they also fear other birds

of prey, though in a much less degree. It has been said that the

European hobby occasionally catches swal-lows on the wing, but this

seems a rare and exceptional habit, and in South America I have never

seen any bird of prey attempt the pursuit of a swallow. The question

then arises, how did this unnecessary fear, so universal in swallows,

originate? Can it be a survival of a far past--a time when some

wide-ranging small falcon, aerial in habits as the swallow itself,

preyed by preference on hirundines only?

[NOTE.-Herbert Spencer, who accepts Darwin's inference, explains how the

fear of man, acquired by experience, becomes instinctive in birds, in

the following passage: "It is well known that in newly-discovered lands

not inhabited by man, birds are so devoid of fear as to allow themselves

to be knocked over with sticks; but that, in the course of generations,

they acquire such a dread of man as to fly on his approach: and that

this dread is manifested by young as well as by old. Now unless this

change be ascribed to the killing-off of the least fearful, and the

preservation and multiplication of the most fearful which, considering

the comparatively small number killed by man, is an inadequate cause, it

must be ascribed to accumulated experience; and each experience must be

held to have a share in producing it. We must conclude that in each bird

that escapes with injuries inflicted by man, or is alarmed by the

outcries of other members of the flock (gregarious creatures of any

intelligence being necessarily more or less sympathetic), there is

established an association of ideas between the human aspect and the

pains, direct and in-direct, suffered from human agency. And we must

further con-clude, that the state of consciousness which compels the

bird to take flight, is at first nothing more than an ideal reproduction

of those painful impressions which before followed man's approach; that

such ideal reproduction becomes more vivid and more massive as the

painful experiences, direct or sympathetic, increase; and that thus the

emotion, in its incipient state, is nothing else than an aggregation of

the revived pains before experience.

"As, in the course of generations, the young birds of this race begin to

display a fear of man before yet they have been injured by him, it is an

unavoidable inference that the nervous system of the race has been

organically modified by these experiences, we have no choice but to

conclude, that when a young bird is led to fly, it is because the

impression produced in its senses by the approaching man entails,

through an incipiently reflex action, a partial excitement of all those

nerves which in its ancestors had been excited under the like

conditions; that this partial excitement has its accompanying painful

consciousness, and that the vague painful consciousness thus arising

constitutes emotion proper--_emotion undecomposable into specific

experiences, and, therefore, seemingly homogeneous"_ (Essays, vol. i. p.

320.)]

It is comforting to know that the "unavoidable inference" is, after all,

erroneous, and that the nervous system in birds has not yet been

organically altered as a result of man's persecution; for in that case

it would take long to undo the mischief, and we should be indeed far

from that "better friendship" with the children of the air which many of

us would like to see.

The Naturalist in La Plata · 第 5 / 24 章