INTRODUCED SPECIES THAT HAVE BEEN BENEFICIAL
Man has made numerous experiments in the transplantation of wild species
of mammals and birds from one country, or continent, to another. About
one-half these efforts have been beneficial, and the other half have
resulted disastrously.
The transplantation of any wild-animal species is a leap in the dark. On
general principles it is dangerous to meddle with the laws of Nature,
and attempt to improve upon the code of the wilderness. Our best wisdom
in such matters may easily prove to be short-sighted folly. The trouble
lies in the fact that concerning transplantation it is _impossible for
us to know beforehand all the conditions that will affect it, or that it
will effect, and how it will work out_. In its own home a species may
_seem_ not only harmless, but actually beneficial to man. We do not
know, and _we can not know_, all the influences that keep it in check,
and that mould its character. We do not know, and we can not know
without a trial, how new environment will affect it, and what new traits
of character it will develop under radically different conditions. The
gentle dove of Europe may become the tyrant dove of Cathay. The
Repressed Rabbit of the Old World becomes in Australia the
Uncontrollable Rabbit, a devastator and a pest of pests.
No wild species should be transplanted and set free in a wild state to
stock new regions without consulting men of wisdom, and following their
advice. It is now against the laws of the United States to introduce and
acclimatize in a wild state, anywhere in the United States, any
wild-bird species without the approval of the Department of Agriculture.
The law is a wise one. Furthermore, the same principle should apply to
birds that it is proposed to transplant from one portion of the United
States into another, especially when the two are widely separated.
On this point, I once learned a valuable lesson, which may well point my
present moral. Incidentally, also, it was a narrow escape for me!
A gentlemen of my acquaintance, who admires the European magpie, and is
well aware of its acceptable residence in various countries in Europe,
once requested my cooperation in securing and acclimatizing at his
country estate a number of birds of that species. As in duty bound, I
laid the matter before our Department of Agriculture, and asked for an
opinion. The Department replied, in effect, "Why import a foreign magpie
when we have in the West a species of our own quite as handsome, and
which could more easily be transplanted?"
The point seemed well taken. Now, I had seen much of the American
magpie in its wild home,--the Rocky Mountains, and the western border
of the Great Plains,--and I _thought_ I was acquainted with it. I knew
that a few complaints against it had been made, but they had seemed to
me very trivial. To me our magpie seemed to have a generally
unobjectionable record.
Fortunately for me, I wrote to Mr. Hershey, Assistant Curator of
Ornithology in the Colorado State Museum, for assistance in procuring
fifty birds, for transplantation to the State of New York. Mr. Hershey
replied that if I really wished the birds for acclimatization, he would
gladly procure them for me; but he said that in the _thickly-settled
farming communities_ of Colorado, the magpie is now regarded as a pest.
It devours the eggs and nestlings of other wild birds, and not only
that, it destroys so many eggs of domestic poultry that many farmers are
compelled to keep their egg-laying hens shut up in wire enclosures!
Now, this condition happened to be entirely unknown to me, because I
never had seen the American magpie in action _in a farming community_!
Of course the proposed experiment was promptly abandoned, but it is
embarrassing to think how near I came to making a mistake. Even if the
magpies had been transplanted and had become a nuisance in this state,
they could easily have been exterminated by shooting; but the memory of
the error would have been humiliating to the party of the first part.
THE OLD WORLD PHEASANTS IN AMERICA.--In 1881 the first Chinese
ring-necked pheasants were introduced into the United States, twelve
miles below Portland, Oregon; twelve males and three females. The next
year, Oregon gave pheasants a five-year close season. A little later,
the golden and silver pheasants of China were introduced, and all three
species throve mightily, on the Pacific Coast, in Oregon, Washington and
western British Columbia. In 1900, the sportsmen of Portland and
Vancouver were shooting cock golden pheasants according to law.
The success of Chinese and Japanese pheasants on the Pacific Coast soon
led to experiments in the more progressive states, at state expense.
State pheasant hatcheries have been established in Massachusetts,
Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Ohio, Illinois, Missouri, Iowa and
California.
In many localities, the old-world pheasants have come to stay. The rise
and progress of the ring-neck in western New York has already been
noted. It came about merely through protection. That protection was
protection in fact, not the false "protection" that shoots on the sly.
It is the irony of fate that full protection should be accorded a
foreign bird, in order that it may multiply and possess the land, while
the same kind of protection is refused the native bob white, and it is
now almost a dead species, so far as this state is concerned.
In looking about for grievances against the ring-necked and English
pheasant, some persons have claimed that in winter these birds are
"budders," which means that they harmfully strip trees and bushes of the
buds that those bushes will surely need in their spring opening. On
that point Dr. Joseph Kalbfus, Secretary of the Pennsylvania Game
Commission, sent out a circular letter of inquiry, in response to which
he received many statements. With but one exception, all the testimony
received was to the effect that pheasants are _not_ bud-eaters, and that
generally the charge is unfounded.
The introduction of old-world pheasants, and the attempted introduction
of the Hungarian partridge, are efforts designed first of all to furnish
sportsmen something to shoot, and incidentally to provide a new food
supply for the table. The people of this country are not starving, nor
are they even very hungry for the meat of strange birds; but as a
food-producer, the pheasant is all right.
It disgusts me to the core, however, to see states that wantonly and
wickedly, through sheer apathy and lack of business enterprise, have
allowed the quail, the heath hen, the pinnated grouse and the ruffed
grouse to become almost exterminated by extravagant and foolish
shooters, now putting forth wonderfully diligent efforts and spending
money without end, in introducing _foreign_ species! Many men actually
take the ground that our game "can't live" in its own country any
longer; but only the ignorant and the unthinking will say so! Give our
game birds decent, sensible, _actual_ protection, stop their being
slaughtered far faster than they breed, and _they will live anywhere in
their own native haunts_! But where is there _one species_ of upland
game bird in America that has been sensibly and adequately protected?
From Portland, Maine, to Portland, Oregon there is _not one,--not a
single locality in which protection from shooting has been sensible, or
just, or adequate_.
We have universally given our American upland game birds an unfair deal,
and now we are adding insult to slaughter by bringing in foreign game
birds to replace them--because our birds "can't live" before five
million shot-guns!
Our American game birds CAN live, anywhere in the haunts where nature
placed them that are not to-day actually occupied by cities and towns!
Give me the making of the laws, and I will make the prairie chicken and
quail as numerous throughout the northern states east of the Great
Plains as domestic chickens are outside the regular poultry farms. There
is only one reason why there are not ten million quail in the state of
New York to-day,--one for each human inhabitant,--and that reason is the
infernal greed and selfishness of the men who have almost exterminated
our quail by over-shooting. Don't talk to me about the "hard winters"
killing off our quail! It is the hard cheek of the men who shoot them
when they ought to let them alone.
The State of Iowa could support 500,000 prairie chickens and never miss
the waste grain that they would glean in the fields; but now the prairie
chicken is practically extinct in Iowa, only a few scattered specimens
remaining as "last survivors" in some of the northern counties. The
migration of those birds that unexpectedly came down from the north last
winter was like the fall of a meteor,--only the birds promptly faded
away again. Why should New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts
exterminate the heath hen and coddle the ring-necked pheasant and the
Hungarian partridge?
The introduction of the old-world pheasants interests me very little.
Every one that I see is a painful reminder of our slaughtered quail and
grouse,--the birds that never have had a square deal from the American
people! Thus far the introduction of the Hungarian partridge has not
been successful, anywhere. Connecticut, Missouri, New Jersey and I think
other states have tried this, and failed. The failure of that species
brings no sorrow to me. I prefer our own game birds; and if the American
people will not conserve those properly and decently they deserve to
have no game birds.
THE EUROPEAN RED DEER IN NEW ZEALAND.--Occasionally a gameless land
makes a ten-strike by introducing a foreign game animal that does no
harm, and becomes of great value. The greatest success ever made in the
transplantation of game animals has been in New Zealand.
Originally, New Zealand possessed no large animals, and no "big-game."
When Nature passed around the deer, antelopes, sheep, goats, wild cattle
and bears, New Zealand failed to receive her share. For centuries her
splendid forests, her grand mountains and picturesque valleys remained
untenanted by big game.
In 1864, the Prince Consort of England caused seven head of European red
deer to be taken from the royal park at Windsor, and sent to
Christchurch, New Zealand. Only three of the animals survived the long
voyage; a buck and two does. For several weeks the two were kept in a
barn in Christchurch, where they served no good purpose, and were not
likely to live long or be happy. Finally some one said, "Let's set them
free in the mountains!"
The idea was adopted. The three animals were hauled an uncertain number
of miles into the interior mountains and set free.
They promptly settled down in their new home. They began to breed, and
now on the North Island there are probably five thousand European red
deer, every one of which has descended directly from the famous three!
And here is the strangest part of the story:
The red deer of the North Island represent the greatest case of
in-and-in breeding of wild animals on record. According to the
experience of the world in the breeding of domestic cattle (_not
horses_), we should expect physical deterioration, the development of
diseases, and disaster. On the contrary, the usual evil results of
in-breeding in domestic cattle have been totally absent. _The red deer
of New Zealand are to-day physically larger and more robust animals,
with longer and heavier antlers, and longer hair, than any of the red
deer of Europe west of Germany_!
Red deer have been introduced practically all over New Zealand, and the
total number now in the Islands must be somewhere near forty thousand.
The sportsmen of that country have grand sport, and take many splendid
trophies. That transplantation has been a very great success.
Incidentally, the case of the in-bred deer of the North Island, taken
along with other cases of which we know, establishes a new and important
principle in evolution. It is this:
_When healthy wild animals are established in a state of nature, either
absolutely free, or confined in preserves so large that they roam at
will, seek the food of nature and take care of themselves, in-and-in
breeding produces no ill effects, and ceases to be a factor. The animals
develop in physical perfection according to the climate and their food
supply; and the introduction of new blood is not necessary_.
THE FALLOW DEER ON THE ISLAND OF LAMBAY.--In the Irish Sea, a few miles
from the southeast coast of Ireland, is the Island of Lambay, owned by
Cecil Baring, Esq. The island is precisely one square mile in area, and
some of its sea frontage terminates in perpendicular cliffs. In many
ways the island is of unusual interest to zoologists, and its fauna has
been well set forth by Mr. Baring.
In the year 1892 three fallow deer (_Dama vulgaris_) a buck and two
does, were transplanted from a park on the Irish mainland to Lambay, and
there set free. From that slender stock has sprung a large herd, which,
but for the many deer that have been purposely shot, and the really
considerable number that have been killed by going over the cliffs in
stormy weather, the progeny of the original three would to-day number
several hundred head. No new blood has been introduced, and _no deer
have died of disease_. Even counting out the losses by the rifle and by
accidental death, the herd to-day numbers more than one hundred head.
Mr. Baring declares that neither he nor his gamekeeper have ever been
able to discover any deterioration in the deer of Lambay, either in
size, weight, size of antlers, fertility or general physical stamina.
The deterioration through disease, especially tuberculosis, that always
is dreaded and often observed in closely in-bred domestic cattle, has
been totally absent.
In looking about for wild species that have been transplanted, and that
have thriven and become beneficial to man, there seems to be mighty
little game in sight! The vast majority belong in the next chapter. We
will venture to mention the bob white quail that were introduced into
Utah in 1871, into Idaho in 1875, and the California valley quail in
Washington in 1857. Wherever these efforts have succeeded, the results
have been beneficial to man.
In 1879 a well-organized effort was made to introduce European quail
into several of the New England and Middle States,--to take the place of
the bob white, we may suppose,--the bird that "can't stand the winters!"
About three thousand birds were distributed and set free,--and went down
and out, just as might have been expected. During the past twenty years
it is safe to say that not less than $500,000 have been expended in the
northern states, and particularly in the northeastern states, in
importing live quail from Kansas, the Indian Territory, Oklahoma, Texas,
the Carolinas and other southern states, for restocking areas from which
the northern bob white had been exterminated by foolish over-shooting! I
think that fully nine-tenths of these efforts have ended in total
failure. The quail could not survive in their strange environment. I
cannot recall a _single instance_ in which restocking northern covers
with southern quail has been a success.
There is no royal road to the restoration of an exterminated bird
species. Where the native seed still exists, by long labor and travail,
thorough protection and a mighty long close season, it can be encouraged
to _breed back and return_; but it is an evolution that can not be
hurried in the least. Protect Nature, and leave the rest to her.
With mammals, the case is different. It is possible to restock depleted
areas, provided Time is recognized as a dominant factor. I can cite two
interesting cases by way of illustration, but this subject will form
another chapter.
In the transplantation of fishes, conditions are widely different, and
many notable successes have been achieved.
One of the greatest hits ever made by the United States Bureau of
Fisheries in the planting of fish in new localities was the
introduction of the striped bass or rock-fish (_Roccus lineatus_) of
our Atlantic coast, into the coast waters of California. In 1879,
135 live fish were deposited in Karquines Strait, at Martinez, and
in 1882, 300 more were planted in Suisun Bay, near the first
locality chosen.
Twelve years after the first planting in San Francisco Bay, the
markets of San Francisco handled 149,997 pounds of striped bass. At
that time the average weight for a whole year was eleven pounds, and
the average price was ten cents per pound. Fish weighing as high as
forty-nine pounds have been taken, and there are reasons for the
belief that eventually the fish of California will attain as great
weight as those of the Atlantic and the Gulf.
The San Francisco markets now sell, annually, about one and one half
million pounds of striped bass. This fish has taken its place among
anglers as one of the game fishes of the California coast, and
affords fine sport. Strange to say, however, it has not yet spread
beyond the shores of California.
Regarding this species, the records of the United States Bureau of
Fisheries are of interest. In 1897, the California markets handled
2,949,642 pounds, worth $225,527.--(American Natural History.)
Nowhere else in the world, we venture to say, were such extensive,
costly and persistent efforts put forth in the transplantation of any
wild foreign species as the old U.S. Fish Commission, under Prof.
Spencer F. Baird, put forth in the introduction of the German carp into
the fresh water ponds, lakes and rivers of the United States. It was
held that because the carp could live and thrive in waters bottomed with
mud, that species would be a boon to all inland regions where bodies of
water, or streams, were scarce and dear. Although the carp is not the
best fish in the world for the table, it seemed that the dwellers in the
prairie and great plains regions would find it far better than
bullheads, or no fish at all,--which are about the same thing.
By means of special fish cars, sent literally all over the United
States, at a great total expense, live carp, hatched in the ponds near
the Washington Monument were distributed to all applicants. The German
carp spread far and wide; but to-day I think the fish has about as many
enemies as friends. In some places, strong objections have been filed to
the manner in which carp stir up the mud at the bottom of ponds and
small lakes, greatly to the detriment of all the native fishes found
therein.
* * * * *