76 THE KEA. 



Though this record casts very grave suspicion on the 

 Kea, it does not by any means prove that the Kea was the 

 culprit. 



In the tirst instance, the bird is stated to have been seen 

 merely picking at a sore on a sheep's back, just as to-day 

 starlings are commonly seen at the same task ; and to 

 say that this proves that the sheep was being killed by the 

 Keas is putting more weight on the evidence than it 

 will bear. 



In the second instance it is stated that the shepherds saw 

 several Keas "surrounding" (notice, not "attacking" nor 

 "pecking") a wounded sheep, and, with the uncertainty which 

 existed at that time as to the true culprit, it might easily 

 have turned out that some other animal had wounded the 

 sheep and the Keas had only been attracted by its struggles. 



This latter account, and not Mr. McDonald's, was 

 unfortunately the one that was published in standard books 

 on our avifauna ; and it has been partly responsible for many 

 years of arguing and disagreement between the sheep-owners 

 and scientific men. 



However, though nearly fifty years have passed since the 

 record was first published, there has not been one thorough-going 

 attempt to enquire into the case ; and, up to the end of 1905, 

 this is the only definite case recorded where a man actually 

 saw a Kea picking at a live sheep. Of course many articles 

 have been written, both in magazines and scientific works, 

 but I cannot find one writer who says that he ever saw a 

 Kea attack a sheep, nor is the name of any man given who 

 said that he had seen the bird at work. 



It has been since proved that there were, and are at the 

 present time, many men who have been eye-witnesses of the 

 birds' depredations, but from the records available in 1905 

 not one could be found. It seems a great pity that writers 

 should publish on such meagre evidence, as though it were an 

 indisputably proved fact, the statement that the Kea has 

 become not only carnivorous, but also a bird of prey. 



I think I am justified in saying that all the literature 

 published, up to 1905, statmg that the Kea was guilty of the 



