160 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



[Aug. 24, 1895. 



sisted of the early gnats which were flying on bright 

 sunny days. In early April they had nearly deserted the 

 meat, although they still frequented the orchard in search 

 of the female canker-worm moths. They seemed to pre- 

 fer animal food to all other, and even in cold weather 

 would hardly notice grain or seeds of any kind, though 

 one individual ate a few oat kernels which were placed 

 near his accustomed feed of meat. 



Toward the last of April the English or house sparrow 

 began to make its appearance in the vicinity and appar- 

 ently drove the chickadees to the woods, as they disap- 

 peared and did not nest in the orchard, but remained in 

 the woods, where they paired and nested. 



I believe that the English sparrow is largely responsible 

 for the fact that chickadees are not now found nesting in 

 our orchards. Though they still nest in the orchards on 

 the remoter farms and in the villages where the English 

 sparrow is not numerous, they seem to have disappeared 

 in summer from orchards near cities. At the time of the 

 advent of the sparrow in this locality, twenty-five years 

 ago, chickadees were often found nesting in old apple 

 trees in the orchards in this region where now scarcely 

 any are to be seen in orchards during the summer. 



In the latter part of April and in early May the tent 

 caterpillars made their appearance on the apple and 

 cherry trees in the neighborhood. Canker-worms were 

 also numerous on the apples and elms and appeared in 

 some of the other trees. It was noticed, however, that 

 while trees in neighboring orchards were seriously in- 

 fested with canker-worms and to a less degree with tent 

 caterpillars, those in the orchard which had been fre- 

 quented by the chickadees during the winter and spring 

 were not seriously infested and that comparatively few 

 of the worms and caterpillars were to be found there. 



With the warm south winds of May many summer 

 birds came and settled in the neighborhood, and prepared 

 to build their nests, among which the following were 

 seen: chickadee, tree sparrow, crow, purple grackle, 

 flicker, red-winged blackbird, robin, chipping sparrow, 

 ovenbird, wood thrush, catbird, brown thrasher, black- 

 billed cuckoo, yellow-billed cuckoo, black and white 

 warbler, yellow warbler, chestnut-sided warbler, black- 

 throated green warbler, pine warbler, house wren, Amer- 

 ican redstart, Nashville warbler, golden-winged warbler, 

 scarlet tanager, rose-breasted grossbeak, Baltimore oriole, 

 bluejay, least fly-catcher, wood pewee, phcebe, kingbird 

 and downy woodpecker. 



It was noticeable that early in the season, when the 

 webs of the tent caterpillar first appeared on the apple 

 and cherry trees, the orioles attacked them and devoured 

 a considerable number of the hairy young larva}. A little 

 later, when the canker-worms became more numerous, it 

 seemed as if all the birds in the neighborhood were intent 

 on eating canker-worms, neglecting to a certain extent 

 the hairy caterpillars. The cuckoos, however, seemed to 

 feed impartially on both the canker-worm and the tent 

 caterpillar. 



Birds from all quarters in the wood and swamp, orchard 

 and field, flocked into the trees infested by canker-worms 

 and there spent a considerable portion of their time. In 

 a short time the few canker-worms remaining in the old 

 orchard were apparently eaten by birds, and the birds 

 then directed their attention to the neighboring orchards, 

 which were swarming with the worms. It soon became 

 evident that these orchards would be entirely stripped of 

 their leaves, while the old orchard retained its full foliage. 

 Thus it was seen that the trees to which the chickadees 

 had been lured during the winter had been so well pro- 

 tected that the summer birds were able to destroy the few 

 remaining larvae, while the trees at a distance from these 

 contained so many larvae that the birds were not numer- 

 ous enough to dispose of them or to make any effective 

 reduction in their numbers. This apparently demon- 

 strated the usefulness of the egg-destroying winter birds, 

 and showed the wisdom of attracting them to the orchard 

 during the winter months. Not only did nearly all 

 species of birds in the neighborhood flock to the trees in- 

 fested by the canker-worms, but the chickadees living in 

 their retirement in the woods came out to the orchards, 

 flying some distance to procure canker-worms with which 

 to feed their young, and making regular trips to the in- 

 fested trees day after day. 



On May 18 Mr. Bailey saw a female chickadee carry 

 twenty larvae to its nest. They were apparently all 

 canker-worms but two, which were tent caterpillars. Of 

 this he is certain, for he was within 3yds. of the nest to 

 which the larva? were taken. Later, on May 31, he 

 noticed the chickadees feeding their young. It was 

 evident that a large portion of the food consisted of 

 canker-worms. The birds each made a trip to the nest 

 about once in twelve minutes. The male and female 

 came at nearly the same time and went away together. 

 They went in the direction of an orchard infested by 

 canker-worms. A few of the larva?, were dropped on the 

 ground at the nest and proved, on examination, to be 

 canker-worms. 



The crow was also observed feeding on the canker- 

 worms. 



On May 22 the birds had nearly all stopped feeding in 

 the neighboring woods and were in the orchards feeding 

 on canker-worms. 



Early in June, when the remaining canker-worms had 

 finished their transformations and retired to the ground, 

 several species of birds were again noticed feeding their 

 young on the tent and other hairy caterpillars. Of these, 

 three species (both cuckoos and the Baltimore oriole) 

 seemed to be the most useful. On May 17 a cuckoo was 

 seen to take eleven caterpillars out" of one nest. Mr. 

 Bailey writes: "On May 10 a black-billed cuckoo came 

 into a tree near me at 3 P. M. and sat there until 4:40 P. 

 M., then he went straight to a tent caterpillars' nest. He 

 looked it over for a short time and then commenced eating 

 the caterpillars. He picked twenty-seven caterpillars out 

 of the nest before he stopped. The bird ate them all and 

 did not drop one. Then he went to the tree in which I 

 believe he remained during the night, for on Saturday, 

 the 11th, I found the bird in the same tree and in almost 

 the same place at 5 A. M." 



The orioles, chickadees and vireos often pecked the 

 caterpillars to pieces and ate portions of them, seemingly 

 feeding to a considerable extent on the internal organs. 

 This being the case, it is quite evident that the stomach 

 contents cannot be depended upon entirely to determine 

 the character of the food of these birds, as no one is 

 expert enough to identify the internal organs of cater- 



pillars with such certainty as to determine the species to 

 which they belong. 



The following is a list of the birds seen feeding on the 

 tent caterpillar: crow, chickadee, oriole, red-eyed vireo, 

 yellow-billed cuckoo, black-billed cuckoo, chipping spar- 

 row, yellow warbler. 



During the month of May an attempt was made to ren- 

 der the place as attractive to birds as possible. The un- 

 dergrowth, which previous to 1894 had been trimmed 

 out, was afterward allowed to grow, and in 1895 several 

 low thickets had been thus formed; the mulberrry trees 

 were stimulated by judicious trimming, and bore a con- 

 siderable crop of early fruit which ripened in advance of 

 the cherries, thus drawing the attention of the fruit eat- 

 ing birds away fram the cherries, and serving to attract 

 them to the vicinity of the orchard. Ten nesting boxes 

 were put up for the wrens and bluebirds, but as the blue- 

 birds were very rare this season, none came to the 

 orchard. Two families of wrens, however, were reared 

 in the boxes in place of one family last year. Nesting 

 materials— strings, hair and straw — were hung in the 

 trees and scattered about. Several marauding cats were 

 killed, and an attempt was made to keep nest hunting 

 boys away from the neighborhood as much as possible. 

 Thirty-six nests of birds were discovered in the neigh Dor- 

 hood, as follows: 3 red-eyed vireos, 10 robins, 4 Baltimore 

 orioles, 3 cuckoos, 5 ohipping sparrows, 3 least fly-catchers, 

 2 redstarts, 2 yellow warblers, 2 chickadees, 2 house 

 wrens. 



Of these all but three were destroyed, probably by boys, 

 the nests being torn down and the eggs missing, The 

 three which escaped destruction were wrens' nests which 

 had been built in boxes upon buildings, and a robin's nest 

 in a maple tree withia 10ft. of a chamber window. This 

 wholesale destruction of nests discouraged several pairs of 

 birds, and they disappeared from the neighborhood. 

 Those remaining built new nests, and after a second or 

 third attempt a few succeeded in rearing young. One 

 nest of orioles escaped the general destruction, and the 

 birds were busy for a long time carrying canker-worms to 

 their young. One of them was noticed to take eleven 

 canker-worms in its beak at one time, and fly with them 

 to the nest. The vireos, warblers, chickadees, cuckoos, 

 orioles and chipping sparrows were particularly active in 

 catching canker-worms, and the English sparrow killed 

 them in considerable numbers. 



If the thirty-six pairs of birds whose nests were found 

 had succeeded in raising their young, it is probable that 

 they would have disposed of most of the canker-worms in 

 the neighborhood. Five thousand of these larvae are suf- 

 ficient to strip a large apple tree. One hundred and eight 

 young would have been reared, had each pair of birds 

 raised three. According to Professor Aughey's experi- 

 ence, sixty insects per day as food for each bird, both 

 young and old, would be a very low estimate. Suppose 

 each of these 108 birds had received its sixty insects per 

 day, there would have been 6,480 caterpillars destroyed 

 daily. The destruction of this number of caterpillars 

 would be enough to save the foliage and fruitage of one 

 apple tree. In thirty days the foliage of thirty apple 

 trees could have been saved, or 194,400 canker-worms de- 

 stroyed. This does not include what the old birds them- 

 selves would have eaten. 



In these observations the influence of insect parasites 

 and predaceous insects has not been entirely ignored. 

 Hymenopterous parasites were not seen to be numerous, 

 and as it wa« a year when canker-worms were on the in- 

 crease, it is not probable that these parasites would have 

 been a prime force in reducing the number of the canker- 

 worms had the birds not been present. Even had they 

 been numerous they would have had little effect in 

 checking the ravages of the canker-worm during the 

 present year, as their interest is identical with that of the 

 canker-worm, and they remain in its body until it has 

 finished feeding, allowing it to defoliate the trees before 

 completing their deadly work upon it. 



We do not know to what extent such parasites are de- 

 voured by birds. This we could not ascertain without 

 shooting the birds, which would have defeated our main 

 object. No parasites of the tent caterpillar or canker- 

 worm were found in the stomachs of the few birds which 

 were examined. It is hardly safe to draw conclusions 

 from observations so limited in their scope, but we may 

 infer from what was observed that the egg-eating birds 

 are of the greatest value to the farmer, as they feed 

 almost entirely on injurious insects and their eggs, and 

 are present all winter when other birds are absent. The 

 summer birds which attack the larva? are valuable also if 

 they can be so protected and fostered as to become suffi- 

 ciently numerous to do the work required. It is evident 

 also that a diversity of plants which encourages diversified 

 insect life, and assures an abundance of fruits and seeds 

 as an attraction to birds, will insure their presence. In 

 this connection I wish particularly to note the fact that 

 the mulberry trees, which ripen their berries in June, 

 proved to be a protection to the cultivated cherries, as the 

 fruit-eating birds seemed to prefer them to the cherries, 

 perhaps because they ripen somewhat earlier. 



I believe it would be wise for the farmer to plant rows 

 of these trees near his orchard, and it is possible that the 

 early June berry or shad berry (Amelanchier canadensis) 

 might also be useful in this respect. It is a handsome 

 shrub or tree, flowering early in the season, and would be 

 attractive at a time when other trees and shrubs are not 

 in bloom. 



At the present time, July 23, 1895, the trees in the 

 orchard appear to be in good condition. They have not 

 suffered from the slight pruning of their foliage which 

 was effected by the few caterpillars and canker-worms 

 which survived. The fruit is well set, and it now remains 

 to be seen whether the birds will have any considerable 

 effect in preventing the ravages of the codling moth. No 

 other orchard in the neighborhood will produce any fruit 

 this season, with one exception. The nearest orchard, 

 situated directly opposite on the estate across the way, has 

 not been ravaged by the canker-worms. This exemption 

 is due principally to the efforts of the owner, who has 

 banded his trees with tarred paper and has used tree ink 

 faithfully and well upon the paper. He has also taken 

 pains to clear the nests of the tent caterpillar from the 

 trees. The orchard, being nearest to the one visited by 

 the chickadees, was also an object of their attention, and 

 this may account somewhat for the reduction of the pests 

 in this place. 



The record of these observations, incomplete as it is is 

 given for what it is worth as a contribution to the liter- 

 ature on this most interesting and important subject. 



ABOUT DEER. 



Mr. Hough's very interesting article concerning the 

 search for the fantail deer prompts me to contribute my ] 

 mite— a very small one — to the consideration of this fas- 

 cinating subject, for I give the gifted special correspond- " 

 ent of Forest and Stream credit for an earnest desire for 

 the truth, regardless of the destruction of all pet theories. 

 I have no fantail deer to offer in evidence, and am very 

 much inclined to skepticism concerning the little sulker, 

 yet I have a few things to offer to the sportsmen of 

 America which may possibly throw a small ray of side- 

 light upon the subject of the wonderful variation of the 

 different specimens of the whitetail deer. 



Hanging on the wall of the room where I write is the 

 dried skin of a deer's tail (whitetail), which has hung 

 there some five years or thereabouts; and although dried 

 up now until it measures only 17in. in length, was, when 

 carefully measured before removal from the dead buck, J 

 a little over half a yard long. Who has found a bigger 

 one, fantail, mule deer or whitetail? 



Next: as I reported in Forest and Stream some years 

 since, there was found in our county of Stevens, State of 

 Washington, by Messrs. E. B. Lane and Robt. Legerwood, i 

 on Nov. 10, a freshly killed doe which was carrying when 

 killed as large and perfectly developed a doe fawn as I 

 ever saw. I examined it two days later. And this, too, 

 in a locality further north than Quebec. 



Again: about two years since I found an antler of a 

 whitetail buck some twenty miles east of the town of 

 Colville, Stevens county, Wash., which, I fancy, is quite 

 as small as the one shown in the illustration given by 

 Mr. Hough. It was an entirely new horn, unbroken at 

 any of the points and unmarred by tooth of rodent, and 

 altogether as pretty a specimen as I ever saw. 



I intended when first I brought it home to mount it for 

 the head of a fine rosewood cane given to my father in 

 Nicaragua nearly forty years since, but upon the first 

 sight of it my little daughter Echo clamored for it to 

 mount a pin-cushion on (and of course she got it); and 

 now when turned with the points downward like a small 

 three-legged stool, and with the curve of the horn rais- < 

 ing the center some 2in. above the table, and with a neat 

 little cushion resting upon its tiny arch, we think it quite 

 pretty. 



Extreme length around the outside of the curve, 

 lOjin.; straight across from butt to tip, 6in. scant; diame- ! 

 ter at butt, fin. ; number of spurs, 2, showing the animal 

 to have been 3^ years old when it was dropped; short 

 spur next the head, If in, long; long spur, 2£in. long. j 

 These of course do not include the tip. 



Although slightly longer than the one shown by Mr. 

 Hough, it is, as I remarked, absolutely unbroken. How 

 long the one shown in the illustration was before the tips ■ 

 were broken is of course impossible to determine. By ' 

 the way, it is to be regretted that a quartering view was 

 not given of the head shown in the illustration, for it i 

 seems difficult to determine from the representation given I 

 whether the point on the left antler next the tip is really ; 

 a genuine prong denoting a year's growth, or a mere 

 bunch-like projection not uncommonly found on the ; 

 antlers of the whitetail deer. No signs of any widening 

 or palmation of this antler appear, the beam, spurs and tip ' 

 being round, smooth and neat. This horn was found on 

 a hillside in the midst of forest-covered mountains which ' 

 stretch for many leagues in each direction from the point 

 named, and the forest entirely unbroken, save by the nar- 

 row open valleys of the mountain streams. 



Again: some years since I killed a fine whitetail buck, 

 the tail of which for half its length was white as a ball 

 of cotton. 



This, now, is all I have to offer. Not much, to be sure, 

 and it is not offered with the wish to discourage any one 

 in the laudable search for the elusive fantail — only with 

 the desire to call attention to the question of the wonder- 

 ful possibilities of variation of type. 



How far some little creature, "born out of due time," 

 —possibly the offspring of a wounded mother — and con- 

 fronted with unusually hard conditions of summer 

 drought and excessive snow of winter, and possibly 

 having been raced to the point of exhaustion by relent- , 

 less wolves, it has taken a last refuge in the icy water of 

 a mountain lake, there to be chilled to the marrow of its i 

 every little bone— how far the development of such a 

 little unfortunate could denote variation from the true 

 type I have not yet learned. 



However, bring on the fantail! If he is in existence, 

 I hope that Forest and Stream will lose a hundred dol- 

 lars on him before snow flies! 



I don't think any man should be afraid or ashamed to 

 express an honest conviction, whether he is in line with 

 the scientists or not. And don't I too believe in Wm. 

 Tell? Didn't he stalk forth, bow in hand, in the pages of 

 the dear old McGuffey's Reader we were all brought up 

 on, and deliver his wonderful oration, which brought 

 tears to many a little pair of eyes: 



"Thou dost not know me, boy; and well for thee 

 Thou dost Dot ! I am the father of a son 

 About thine age; thou, I see, wast born like him 

 Upon the hills," etc., etc. 



And I come pretty near believing in Pocahontas. 



I saw her portrait years ago (when there was money in 

 the country) on the back of a national bank note, and 

 she was pretty enough to believe in any day in the 

 week! 



But I don't agree with Lew Wilmot in his theory of the 

 buck deer shedding the velvet from his antlers without 

 rubbing them on the bushes. 



I hate to disagree with him too. For any correspondent 

 of Forest and Stream showing up within 200 miles of my 

 mountain home seems like a neighbor. 



Although I am not able to give dates when first in the 

 season I have found the bark of young bushes fresh 

 stripped by the horns of deer, I am quite certain that I 

 have so observed (within a very few days of the first shed- 

 ding of velvet), together with the strings of bloody velvet 

 scattered among the fresh tracks which so quickly catch 

 the eye of the hunter. Ortn Belknap. 



The Velvet of the Antler. 



Berlin, Germany. — Editor Forest and Stream: Mr. 

 Lew Wilmot has evidently not had the opportunity to 

 study the life and habits of deer very deeply, or else he 

 would not deny the well-known fact that deer get rid of 

 their velvet on their horns by rubbing the latter against 

 young trees. It can fairly be presumed that the velvet 



