368 



Bird - Lore 



2^irbHore 



A Bi-Monthly Magazine 

 Devoted to the Study and Protection of Birds 



OFFICIAL ORGAN OF THE AUDUBON SOCIETIES 



Edited by FRANK M. CHAPMAN 



ContributingEditor.MABELOSGOOD ■WRIGHT 



Published by D. APPLETON & CO. 



Vol. XVI Published October 1. 1914 No. 5 



SUBSCRIPTION RATES 



Price in the United States, Canada and Mexico, twenty cents 

 a number, one dollar a year, postage paid. 



COPYRIGHTED, 1914, BY FRANK M. CHAPMAN 



Bird-Lore's Motto: 

 A Bird in the Bush Is Worth Two in the Hand 



When we published, in the last issue of 

 Bird-Lore, Mr. Leo E. Miller's surpris- 

 ing figures concerning the destruction of 

 the Rhea in temperate South America, 

 we were under the impression that, owing 

 to the closing of the American market to 

 the feathers of wild birds, this interesting 

 species would be spared the annihilation, 

 with which, in the light of Mr. Miller's 

 figures, it appeared to be threatened. 



It will be recalled that Mr. Miller saw 

 bales containing sixty tons of feathers 

 taken from killed Rheas stored in the 

 wareroom of but one firm in Buenos 

 Aires, while an official trade bulletin 

 showed that during the first six months of 

 the year 1913, 34,206 kilos (about 34 tons) 

 of Rhea plumes were exported from 

 Buenos Aires alone. Doubtless additional 

 shipments were made from other southern 

 South American ports. 



It seems that these feathers are sold 

 almost wholly in the United States, where 

 they are manufactured into feather 

 dusters! The sixty tons of which Mr. 

 Miller writes had accumulated in the 

 hands of but one importer because of 

 the prohibition at that time (November, 

 1913) of the importation of Rhea feathers, 

 as well as the feathers of other wild birds 

 into the United States. Knowing this, we 

 felt there was especial cause for congratu- 

 lation that a law of the United States 

 should extend its protection to this bird 

 of a foreign land. 



Now, however, we learn that on Jan- 



uary 13, 1914, the Treasury Depart- 

 ment of the United States, acting on what 

 it believed to be adequate authority, 

 declared the Rhea to be an Ostrich, and 

 since the Federal law permits the importa- 

 tion into this country of 'Ostrich' plumes 

 those of the Rhea, under the guise of being 

 Ostrich plumes, are also admitted. 



The correctness of the decision of the 

 Treasury Department evidently depends 

 upon whether a Rhea, even in the broad- 

 est sense, can be properly called an Ostrich. 

 That it has been popularly so called is 

 true; but it is equally true that from the 

 standpoint of actual relationships, it is not 

 an Ostrich. Newton believed that the fun- 

 damental structural differences between 

 the Ostrich and Rhea were important 

 enough to warrant their being classed in 

 separate orders. No one has ever ventured 

 to placed them in the same family. 



Obviously then, they cannot rightly 

 share the same common name. To call 

 a Rhea an Ostrich because it is a large, 

 long-legged, flightless bird does not, of 

 course, make it an Ostrich, any more than 

 calling a Goatsucker a Nighthawk makes it 

 a Hawk, or calling an Ovenbird a Golden- 

 crowned Thrush makes it a Thrush. 



Popular zoological nomenclature abounds 

 in misnomers based on superficial 

 resemblances, but we cannot believe 

 that the government will accept these 

 'nicknames,' rather than those based on 

 actual relationships, in determining a 

 bird's legal status. 



The growing interest in this country in 

 the establishment of priv^ate bird-reserves 

 is one of the most gratifying results of 

 the long-continued effort to arouse in the 

 public an appreciation of the beauty and 

 value of bird-life. The surprising success 

 of Baron von Berlepsch in increasing the 

 bird population of his estate at Seebach, 

 Germany, has supplied an object lesson 

 in wild-bird propagation which has rightly 

 led others to adopt the methods which he 

 has developed. We publish, therefore, 

 with much satisfaction the article by Mr. 

 William P. Wharton, based on his own 

 observations at Seebach. 



