THE HONEY-GUIDES 95 



the all-important recognition factor the sight of and movement of the other bird 

 itself? Its behaviour did illustrate, however, how real and fixed and important 

 the call site is. 



With the object of attracting /. variegatus I uttered the whistle-call wherever 

 I went in the forest this day. With this intent I entered the lower end of the forest 

 dale in which I met the bird on 8 July, uttering the call as I walked up the stream. 

 I had not gone more than 100 yards when a bird appeared, perching over the 

 stream bed. As I advanced it made way but followed me again after I had gone 

 ahead and called it. In responding to my . . . whistle ... it would fly past 

 and ahead of me and settle; and as I approached would move away at right angles 

 to m}' line of progress. Then on my calling ahead, it would reappear flying past 

 and above me. In this way it followed me to the top of the forest dale. At no 

 time did it utter a sound. Within the top of the forest dale I sat down to call 

 the bird who was not in sight. It came and perched near; and for the first time 

 uttered only two or three notes of its call. Now when I walked away in departure, 

 calling, it failed to follow. That ended the occasion. Twice I tried the experi- 

 ment of not calling after I had walked ahead up the stream, sitting down to wait 

 for it, but it failed to follow, doing so only when I called. Distance this bird 

 followed me is about 400 yards. 



It did not appear to me that the bird was leading me on in the forest on 8 July 

 when it went ahead. Nothing suggested that there was the least shade of 'guid- 

 ing' ... It is not my purpose to convey that idea. The occurrences are related 

 as they happened. But is it possible that my behaviour and myself awakened 

 or set in motion some degree of instinctive response in the bird — response related 

 to what we call 'guiding' in /. indicator? Or is the bird's interest merely curiosity 

 in the object with which, or in whom, its call is associated? 



More recently Ranger (in litt., October 1952) described many addi- 

 tional observations and summarized his experience as follows. It 

 appears that the bird maintained an interest of some kind in him as 

 long as he was the source of the whistle-calling, or in face of his 

 repeated whistle-calling, but there were many times when the bird, 

 sensing that these calls came from him and not from another honey- 

 guide, immediately lost interest in him and then disregarded his 

 subsequent whistle-calls. At the same time the fact remains that the 

 only way he was able to engage the attention or interest of the bird was 

 by making the whistle-call, either in response to a bird heard to make 

 it, or initially to cause the bird to respond. The bird was never 

 known to initiate any demonstration of interest in him as another 

 animal in the way Indicator indicator often does. It is also apparent 

 thnt Indicator variegatus shows no selection that may even remotely be 

 called intelligent in its reactions to the human and the whistle-call. 

 Ordinarily the whistle-call is uttered by birds on the move, or b}^ 

 birds going from one part of their range to another, with the result 

 that the individual notes of a series of five or six notes each are spaced 

 by distance as well as by time. There is evidence that this call is 

 sometimes given by call-site males (?) when leaving the call site, and 

 also when coming to it. 



