Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

and nut bearing trees. It was very urgent to find some means to control it, of course. Now, our men have not only found quite satisfactory means of control, but it has been done with the idea of safeguarding innocent species. I might tell you of one of the procedures gone through with in order to do that: First, we put out what we call clean, that is, unpoisoned bait, and note what kinds of food the various species of birds take. We even make examination of the contents of the birds' stomachs to see what they take, and then try to get a single seed or a combination bait that will be taken only by the birds we are trying to get, so as to save the others so far as possible. We do everything we can do to safeguard the innocent species. In the linnet work we have been able to reduce the damage in many cases locally as much as 90 percent, which means quite a good deal to the orchardists concerned."

A very similar situation exists with reference to the horned lark because of its destruction of vegetable crops. These birds take the little seedlings as they come up, pulling them up by the roots, choosing such crops as lettuce, carrots, and other vegetables.

Mr. SANDLIN. Is that an owl?

Mr. MCATEE. No, sir; this is the horned lark. It has been estimated that this bird has done as much as $300,000 damage in a single year in California.

There are other very serious questions of that same kind, for example, that of the white-necked raven in Texas, and crows, in Oklahoma and Arkansas, or in any other section where they gather in enormous numbers. They often do great damage to the crops before they are taken from the field. We have received many calls for help along that line, and, of course, we try to help as far as possible. In that connection, however our policy has always been to hold bird control to the minimum, never attempting to clear up an entire region at once, and safe-guarding as far as possible innocent species.

I might tell you about some other lines of our work, if you have the time. I have already spoken about the duck-food work, and I will not go further with that now. However, that leads to the subject of the examination of refuge sites to determine whether they are good, or sufficiently good as feeding places for wild fowl. Now, surely, it is a Federal function to make the proper choice of migratory bird refuges, for we do not want to acquire areas unless they are good for that purpose. For that reason they should have a thorough preliminary examination.

Mr. SANDLIN. What funds have been allotted by the C.W.A. and N.R.A. for the purchase of bird refuges?

Mr. HENDERSON. None at all. We requested funds for that purpose, but they were not allowed.

DISAPPEARANCE OF EEL GRASS ALONG ATLANTIC COAST

Mr. MCATEE. Now, I want to mention one more thing bearing upon the wild-fowl situation. Since 1931, there has been a great decrease of eel grass along the Atlantic coast which has seriously affected the food supply of wild fowl. That is especially true in the case of the sea brant which formerly depended on eel grass for about 80 percent of its food. The numbers of the birds have been so reduced that estimates made last year showed that the population

of sea brants was not more than from 5 to 15 percent of the former number. In order to help that situation, a closed season has been put on these birds. There seems to be some improvement in the eel grass situation this year. This is important, not only to the wild. fowl, but to sportsmen and every industry along the coast, including the fish, shellfish, and crabbing undustries.

Mr. CANNON. How do you account for the disappearance of the eel grass?

Mr. MCATEE. It must be a disease, using that term in its broad sense, but the identification of the disease has not been made. We have had experts of the Bureau of Plant Industry at work on it. It is believed to be a bacterial disease, but it has not been positively identified as yet.

Mr. CANNON. What are the characteristics of the plant?

Mr. MCATEE. It has a ribbon-like leaf about a quarter of an inch wide. It comes up to a height of 3 or 4 feet in the water and ordinarily grows in water from that depth up to 2 fathoms.

Mr. CANNON. It grows on the sea bottom?

Mr. MCATEE. It grows in salt water where it is washed by the tide. Such great destruction has never happened to this plant before so far as we know.

Mr. CANNON. Is it known only on the Atlantic coast, or is it found on the Pacific coast also?

Mr. MCATEE. The plant grows on the Pacific coast, but the disease has not affected it there. The disease has wiped the plant out along the western coast of Europe and the northern coast of Australia. There is some indication of the plant coming back in our waters. Mr. CANNON. Does it come back?

Mr. MCATEE. It is coming back in places, and we hope the comeback will be permanent. However, in a number of instances where it has disappeared, and then apparently come back, the plant became diseased again, and died down. Therefore, we hesitate to say in any given case that it is coming back permanently.

Mr. SINCLAIR. Do the birds actually starve for the want of that eel grass?

Mr. MCATEE. They do; yes, sir.

Mr. SINCLAIR. Do they starve, or do they go to some other feeding grounds?

Mr. MCATEE. Brant are likely to starve because of the failure of this eel grass. Under former conditions, when this food was abundant, they did not fly over land, but kept to the sea altogether; with such habits they were unprepared to hunt up other food. They now try to subsist on marine algae, but apparently these are not as nutritious a food as the eel grass. We have records of birds getting down to 11⁄2 pounds in weight, whereas normally they weigh around 6 pounds. Mr. SINCLAIR. Is that the Canadian brant?

Mr. MCATEE. It is not what they call the Canadian goose; the sea brant does not occur in the interior of the country.

Mr. SINCLAIR. There has been a large diminution of what we call the Canadian wild goose, or brant, in the interior of the country up there, as well as down in Texas. You say that is not the same bird? Mr. MCATEE. No, sir.

Mr. CANNON. Is this a migratory bird?

Mr. MCATEE. Yes, sir.

Mr. CANNON. Where does it nest?

Mr. MCATEE. In the Arctic regions, as far north as there is any land.

Mr. SINCLAIR. It nests up on the coast of Labrador, and around in that region.

STUDIES OF UPLAND GAME BIRDS

Mr. SANDLIN. Have you made any investigations in connection with upland game birds?

Mr. MCATEE. The increase of upland game birds by improvement of the environment is a subject that has been effectively studied for many years. Through the Division of Food Habits Research the Biological Survey has aided in all projects of this nature and is now cooperating in seven experimental quail management demonstrations in five States. The cooperative quail investigation carried on in southern Georgia and northern Florida for a period of 5 years was reported on in a 600-page volume, which is the most complete account of a single game bird that has ever been published, the recommendations in which laid the foundation for rational game management in the United States.

IMPORTANCE OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH WORK

Mr. MCATEE. I would like to say a word in regard to the importance of our scientific research work. I have seen the statement in newspapers that scientific research work is something that can be dispensed with in hard times, and built up again in good times. Now, I must differ on this subject. We have been trying to build up a research force in the Bureau that would be equivalent to what we had before the war. They took some of our boys in the war; two of them were killed, and some others did not come back, and for that reason we have not succeeded in building up as good a research force as we had in 1918. A good research force is something that is extremely difficult to build up; it may take a generation to build up such a force, to bring them together and train them to handle this class of work. There is a popular notion about research work that is altogether wrong, and that is that it is some sort of mystical thing that the average man cannot understand. Now, it is only what every man must do in order to make a success in life. He must do some sort of research work, for that means only ascertaining the facts about what we propose to do before taking action. For instance, the lawyer has to perform research work before he tries his case in court.

The only difference between that sort of research work and scientific research work is that in scientific research we must have men who are trained in science, and in legal research we have men who have been trained in the law. The Biological Survey needs men of both types. We need the legal type in connection with the enforcement of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the Migratory Bird Conservation Act, the Lacey Act, and so forth. But we also must have technical information, not only about legal matters, but about the migration paths and seasons and the useful and harmful traits of migratory birds.

Mr. SANDLIN. They must find out those facts, let the public know it, and then let the people do the best they can after that information is given in handling the work.

Mr. MCATEE. Yes, sir.

Mr. HENDERSON. In that connection, I would like to emphasize a point which has been brought out by Mr. McAtee, and which I think will be brought up again by Mr. Lincoln when he discusses the item in reference to the protection of migratory birds. In both of those lines of work, we secure the information that we must have if we are going to administer in any intelligent way the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the Lacey Act, and so forth. We cannot administer these laws for the protection of birds without the necessary basic information, and that means the securing of knowledge regarding conditions as they change from year to year. It would be impossible for us to recommend wisely to the Secretary of Agriculture regulations for the protection of those birds without that sort of information, because conditions are changing from season to season.

Miss SMITH. We also have a group of representative bulletins prepared by Mr. McAtee's division that some Members of the Committee might be interested in. We will leave some for your use.

AMOUNT REQUIRED TO CARRY ON INVESTIGATIONS OF BIRDS AND ANIMALS IN RELATION TO AGRICULTURE

Mr. SINCLAIR. What do you consider the minimum amount required to continue the investigations conducted by your division?

Mr. MCATEE. The amount appropriated for the present fiscal year. Mr. SINCLAIR. That is $50,000.

Mr. MCATEE. Yes, sir. I have two other statements here that I would like to submit.

(The statements referred to are as follows:)

WHY THE SCIENTIFIC AND RESEARCH SECTIONS OF THE BIOLOGICAL SURVEY SHOULD BE RETAINED

1. Because the Biological Survey is the only Federal bureau functioning exclusively in the interest of wild life of the country, a natural resource whose value annually to the Nation exceeds a billion dollars, and the services of technically trained employes are vitally necessary to any Federal participation in the management of wild life. Once dispersed, a staff equal to the present could not be replaced in a generation.

2. Because the protection of wild life is a national and, so far as migratory species are concerned, an international obligation, and the intelligent administration of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the Lacey Act, and the Migratory Bird Conservation Act can only be done on the basis of facts scientifically gathered by the Research Sections of the Biological Survey. Thus dependable information on the ranges and migrations of migratory birds is essential to the definition of closed and open seasons, knowledge of food habits is necessary before permits to control damage by Federally protected birds can be issued, and selection of suitable refuge sites for migratory waterfowl as well as the development, maintenance, and administration of existing refuges can only be adequately and intelligently conducted by the aid of the scientific branches of the service.

3. Because the cooperation of the technical services of the Biological Survey is of great value to State and other projects in wild-life management. The Biological Survey has cooperated through its technical divisions in practically every game management project ever undertaken in this country, and is now cooperating in seven quail-management projects in North Carolina, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Indiana, the Gambel quail investigation in Arizona, the New England grouse investigation, the New York ruffed grouse investigation, and the work of the quail study association in southern Georgia and northern Florida. A 600-page volume on the Bobwhite Quail resulting from our work is the most comprehensive account of an American game bird ever published, and is responsible for placing the study of game management in this country on a firm and rational basis.

4. Because reliable information on the usefulness or harmfulness of wild life in relation to agriculture, horticulture, forestry, and other interests, obtainable only through scientific research, is necessary as a guide to the framing or revision of both Federal and State legislation relative to wild life, and to public policy respecting the encouragement and protection of useful, and the control of injurious, species of birds and other animals.

5. Because the services performed by the scientific divisions of the Biological Survey, yielding exact information on the food of game and other birds, and on that of animals killed as "vermin" and other predatory species, and producing definite information on the migrations of birds, is obtainable from no other source. There are no State organizations doing similar work.

6. Because problems of wild-life management transcend State boundaries and States cannot work beyond their own limits, there must be a Federal agency to handle the broader aspects of wild-life management, and management can be carried on intelligently only by the aid of careful fact finding, or in other words, of scientific research.

INFORMATION FOR THE PRESS

WASHINGTON, D.C., January 25, 1934.

CALL ON FEDERAL EXPERTS FOR AID IN STOPPING BIRD DAMAGE

Damage by crows in almond orchards, by gulls on golf courses, and by horned larks in sugar-beet fields recently caused citizens of four California counties to appeal to the Federal Government for aid, reports the Bureau of Biological Survey, United States Department of Agriculture.

DESTRUCTION OF BEETS BY HORNED LARKS

On a single farm in Riverside County, says the report, horned larks in fields where sugar beets were being grown for seed production caused losses amounting to $1,350. The birds pulled up some of the small seedlings as they came from the ground and even stripped the leaves from growing plants. These beets, it is explained, were of a special curly-top resistant strain, U.S. no. 1, developed by the Federal Bureau of Plant Industry. The loss of the crop in these fields is a backset to the increased propagation of this variety.

Control methods developed by the Biological Survey have made it possible in numerous cases to reduce damage of this type, says W. L. McAtee, in charge of the Division of Food Habits Research. These methods, it is further pointed out, are designed to minimize danger to innocent birds, which often results when specially trained men are not available.

DAMAGE TO GOLF COURSES BY GULLS

Golf-course repairs costing $1,000 per month were reported to the Bureau from a club in San Mateo and San Francisco Counties as a result of damage by gulls. Huge flocks, wrote the club's secretary, settle on a half dozen fairways and do serious damage daily to the course; the birds "with almost human intelligence" remove the replaced divots, and the fairways are commencing to look almost like a ploughed field."

DESTRUCTION OF ALMOND CROP BY CROWS

On one orchard tract in Monterey County crows destroyed about one fifth of the year's almond crop, doing damage amounting to about $1,000, according to an estimate sent to the Biological Survey by the county agricultural commissioner. These complaints, says the Bureau, all made during the last half of December, are typical of demands made for the service of competent experts in controlling injurious birds. Through their knowledge of the food and other habits of the birds, the Bureau's biologists are able to devise control methods that solve the problems without endangering innocent birds, and these services are demanded in cases involving the many birds that are protected by Federal law.

« AnteriorContinuar »