254 Coryespondence. [..fXn. 



Mathews had written up tliis family of birds bi-forc my notes 

 reached him. Second, I repeat that the Cormorants are much 

 more valuable to Australia than the imported fish, which give 

 a limited number of people amusement. No, I do not follow the 

 ' art of fly-fishing, nor would I follow any sport that needs the 

 extermination of a useful member of the animal kingdom to supply 

 that sport. Third, Mr. Austin says the Cormorant will treat 

 our indigenous fish in the same manner as it docs the imported 

 fish. AlhDW me to say that Cormorants were here thousands of 

 years before we came, and to ask. Why have they not exterm- 

 inated the fish long ago ? Then your correspondent quotes 

 reports of fishery boards. It is well known that the findings 

 of fishery boards and royal commissions on fisheries have been 

 most misleading and inconsistent, because they have taken most 

 of their evidence from men who know little or nothing of the 

 subject. Fourth, I am sorry your correspondent cannot see 

 anything in my Coorong argument. Most people can, and I 

 think it was rather uncalled for when Mr. Austin wrote — " I 

 cannot see anything to support his argument in that ; in fact, I 

 consider, if it is gone into thoroughly, it is more likely to prove 

 quite the contrary." Now, Mr. Austin lives many hundreds of 

 miles from the locality in question, and quite likely has never 

 visited it. He also must know that when I say that I am a 

 constant visitor to the Coorong that it is a fact, and that I would 

 not have written had I not gone into the subject. Mr. Austin 

 evidently disbelieves my statement, but in the same breath asks 

 you to take his version of the subject as correct when he says : — 

 " The large number of Cormorants which used to be there have 

 eaten all the fish, consequently there was no further food supply 

 for them there. . . So the birds disappeared ; hence the 

 increase of crabs, which are the natural food of the fish." This 

 statement is only worthy of an unobservant fisherman, for, first, 

 let me say that crabs are the enemies of the fish, which is only 

 too well known, and the birds were playing their part in nature 

 in keeping the crabs in check, but were destroyed by the fisher- 

 men. Then, when your correspondent has read that the birds 

 were in great numbers, and the fish likewise, when white men first 

 visited the Coorong, let him put the question to himself : Why did 

 not these birds exterminate the fish or diminish their numbers 

 considerably in the thousands of years during which they had 

 their chance undisturbed ? 



I am afraid there is little good in any argument with your 

 correspondent, for I feel he will not be convinced by any proofs. 

 These concluding lines of his letter show this : — " Articles I have 

 read by authors making an attempt to support them (Cormorants) 

 have been quite inadequate ; consequently, I am very sceptical 

 with regard to their theory — in fad, I consider it all a fallacy ^ 

 How much research work has Mr. Austin done to back up his 

 statements ? Has he ever opened a Cormorant and noted the 

 stomach contents ? He admits in his letter that when he 



