HELMUT K. BUECHN

andJIMMIE H. BUECHNE,

BD1TO

The Avifauna

of Northern

^^W Latin America:

A Symposium

Held at the

Smithsonian Institution

13-15 April 1966

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY • 1970 NUMBER 26



SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO

ZOOLOGY

NUMBER 26

Helmut K. Buechner Th e Avifaun a of

and Jimmie H. Buechner TVT ^I T . • A

EDITORS Northern Latin America

A Symposium Held at the

Smithsonian Institution

13-15 April 1966

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION PRESS

CITY OF WASHINGTON

1970
SERIAL PUBLICATIONS OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

The emphasis upon publications as a means of diffusing knowledge was expressed

by the first Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. In his formal plan for the Institution, Joseph Henry articulated a program that included the following statement:

"It is proposed to publish a series of reports, giving an account of the new discoveries

in science, and of the changes made from year to year in all branches of knowledge

not strictly professional." This keynote of basic research has been adhered to over the

years in the issuance of thousands of titles in serial publications under the Smithsonian

imprint, commencing with Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge in 1848 and continuing

with the following active series:

Smithsonian Annals of Flight

Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology

Smithsonian Contributions to Astrophysics

Smithsonian Contributions to Botany

Smithsonian Contributions to the Earth Sciences

Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology

Smithsonian Contributions to Z°°l°iy

Smithsonian Studies in History and Technology

In these series, the Institution publishes original articles and monographs dealing

with the research and collections of its several museums and offices and of professional

colleagues at other institutions of learning. These papers report newly acquired facts,

synoptic interpretations of data, or original theory in specialized fields. Each publication is distributed by mailing lists to libraries, laboratories, institutes, and interested

specialists throughout the world. Individual copies may be obtained from the Smithsonian Institution Press as long as stocks are available.

S. DILLON RIPLEY

Secretary

Smithsonian Institution

Official publication date is handstamped in a limited number of initial copies and is recorded in

the Institution's annual report, Smithsonian Year.

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 1970

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $3.25
Foreword

This conference was conceived by William Vogt, who is well known for his early

concern with the ecological consequences of the human population explosion, as

expressed in his book Road to Survival (New York: William Sloane Associates, 1948).

Over three decades of field observation in Latin America have provided him with

a view of environmental changes, particularly the destruction of forest vegetation, that

few other scholars have experienced. The conference was convened to determine,

through an exchange of information, whether the drastic modification and elimination of the wintering habitat of many breeding birds of North America may be

responsible for depressed levels of populations.

The assemblage of most of the outstanding scholars of bird life in Central

America, Colombia, and Venezuela at the Smithsonian Institution resulted in a

remarkable accumulation of information and exchange of ideas. Fourteen individual

papers were presented, each of which was followed by discussion. Further discussion

took place in a plenary session after the papers on the individual countries. In lieu

of resolutions the conferees agreed on a series of suggestions which are presented

in tiese proceedings.

The conference was organized by the Smithsonian Office of Ecology, and made

possible by a generous grant from the Conservation Foundation.

We would like to express our gratitude to Paul Slud, Associate Curator, Division

of Birds, National Museum of Natural History, for verifying the spelling of scientific

names and for his considerable assistance with the final editing.

T H E EDITORS

m

Contents

Page

Foreword iii

List of Participants vii

Prefatory Statement, S. Dillon Ripley 1

The Meaning of Environment, Marston Bates 3

The Avifauna in a Changing Ecosystem, William Vogt 8

Discussion 13

Changing Abundance of Migratory Birds in North America, John W. Aldrich

and Chandler S. Robbins 17

Discussion 25

Natural Vegetation and Reservation Prospects in Northern Latin America,

L. R. Holdridge 27

Discussion 30

The Future of Avifauna in Guatemala and Its Relation to Tourism, Jorge A.

Ibarra 34

Discussion 37

Effects of Habitat Changes on Population Levels of the Avifauna in Honduras,

Burt L. Monroe, Jr 38

Discussion 41

Avifauna in British Honduras, Stephen M. Russell 45

Discussion 48

Avifauna in Panama, Eugene Eisenmann 50

Discussion 55

Avifauna in Nicaragua, Thomas R. Howell 58

Discussion 61

Mexico: Avifauna and Modification of Habitat, Rodolfo Herndndez Corzo. . . 63

Discussion 67

Avifauna in Mexico, Allan Phillips 69

Discussion 72

Avifauna in Venezuela, William H. Phelps, Jr 75

Discussion 76

Effects of the Environmental Changes on the Avifauna of the Republic of

Colombia, Antonio Olivares, O.F.M 77

Discussion 84

Avifauna in Colombia, F. C. Lehmann 88

Discussion 90
Page

Closing Plenary Session 93

Suggestions Emanating from the Conference on Avifauna of Northern Latin

America 108

Appendix (1969) Ill

Index 113
List of Participants

MARSTON BATES

Department of Zoology

University of Michigan

Ann Arbor, Mich. 48104

JAMES BOND

Department of Ornithology

Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia

Philadelphia, Pa. 19103

MARIA BUCHINGER

Latin American Natural Area Programs

Nature Conservancy

1701 18thSt.N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20009

HELMUT K. BUECHNER

Office of Ecology

Smithsonian Institution

Washington, D.C. 20560

VICTOR H. CAHALANE

Route 1, Box 234C

Alexandria, Va. 22313

ROLAND C. CLEMENT

National Audubon Society

1130 5th Ave.

New York, N.Y. 10028

HAROLD J. COOLIDGE

National Academy of Sciences

National Research Council

Pacific Science Board

Washington, D.C. 20008

RODOLFO HERNANDEZ CORZO

Direccion General de Caza

Aquiles Serdan 28, 70 Piso

Mexico 3, D.F. Mexico

ROBERT S. DORNEY

Department of Geography and Planning

University of Waterloo

Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

ARMANDO DUGAND

Institute of Scientific Investigation

Apartado Arereo

1890Baranquilla

Colombia, S.A.

EUGENE EISENMANN

Department of Ornithology

American Museum of Natural History

New York, N.Y. 10024

F. RAYMOND FOSBERG

Director's Office

Museum of Natural History

Smithsonian Institution

Washington, D.C. 20560

IRA GABRIELSON

World Wildlife Fund

710 17th St. N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20006

EDWARD H. GRAHAM (deceased)

Commission on Ecology of the International Union for

Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources

Washington, D.C. 20036

JAMES C. GREENWAY, JR.

Mead's Point

Greenwich, Conn. 06830

LESLIE R. HOLDRIDGE

Tropical Science Center

San Jose, Costa Rica

THOMAS R. HOWELL

Department of Zoology

University of California

Los Angeles, Calif. 90024

PHILIP S. HUMPHREY

Director

Museum of Natural History

University of Kansas

Lawrence, Kansas 60644
Vlll

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

JORGE A. IBARRA

Museo Nacional de Historia Natural

Guatemala City, Guatemala

HUGH G. LAND

Department of Biological Sciences

Northwestern State College of Louisiana

Natchitoches, La. 71457

CARLOS LEHMANN

Museo Departmental de Historia Natural

Cali, Colombia

BURT L. MONROE, Jr.

Department of Zoology

University of Louisville

Louisville Ky. 40508

MARTIN H. MOYNIHAN

Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute

P.O. Box 2072

Balboa, C.Z.

ANTONIO OLIVARES, O.F.M.

Department of Ornithology

Instituto de Ciencias Naturales

Bogota, Colombia

ROGER T. PETERSON

Neck Road

OldLyme, Conn. 06371

WILLIAM H. PHELPS, JR.

Coleccion Ornithologica Phelps

Apartada 2009

Caracas, Venezuela

ALLAN PHILLIPS

Mexico D.F., Mexico

S. DILLON RIPLEY

Secretary

Smithsonian Institution

Washington, D.C. 20560

PHILIP RITTERBUSH

Office of Academic Programs

Smithsonian Institution

Washington, D.C. 20560

STEPHEN M. RUSSELL

Department of Zoology

University of Arizona

Tucson, Ariz. 85721

LESTER L. SHORT

Department of Ornithology

American Museum of Natural History

New York, N.Y. 10024

PAUL SLUD

Division of Birds

Museum of Natural History

Smithsonian Institution

Washington, D.C. 20560

ALEXANDER SPRUNT IV

National Audubon Society

Box 231

Tavernier, Florida 33070

LLOYD W. SWIFT

3432 Greentree Drive

Falls Church, Va. 22041

LEE M. TALBOT

Office of Ecology

Smithsonian Institution

Washington, D.C. 20560

WILLIAM VOGT (deceased)

The Conservation Foundation

1250 Conn. Ave.N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036

WILLIAM W. WARNER

Office of International Activities

Smithsonian Institution

Washington, D.C. 20560

GEORGE E. WATSON

Division of Birds

Museum of Natural History

Smithsonian Institution

Washington, D.C. 20560

ALEXANDER WETMORE

Division of Birds

Museum of Natural History

Smithsonian Institution

Washington, D.C. 20560

DAVID B. WINGATE

GPO Box 437

Hamilton, Bermuda

RICHARD L. ZUSI

Division of Birds

Museum of Natural History

Smithsonian Institution

Washington, D.C. 20560
Prefatory Statement

S. Dillon Ripley

The idea for this conference to assess the conservation of avifauna of northern Latin America sprang

from the fertile mind of William Vogt, who questioned

what happens to North American migrating birds on

their winter ranges in various habitats in Central America and the northern countries of South America. Controlling factors on the winter ranges, about which we

have little knowledge at the present time, may be as

important, if not more so, in inhibiting the population

growth of these species of birds as any of the factors

known to us on the summer ranges, such as the destruction of initial habitats, vast changes in secondary habitats, and intensive spraying of insecticides. Our concerns with migratory species on their north temperate

ranges perhaps tend to cloud the total issue because,

obviously, the birds spend a good part of their time in

habitats alien to us about which we know relatively

little from a biological point of view. The results of this

conference help us to envision the changes occurring in

Latin American habitats and to prepare our thoughts

and considerations for the future.

The subject is a difficult one, but one which has been

alluded to a number of times in recent literature. I remember a paper of Dean Amadon's discussing the Kirtland warbler in which he said that perhaps the limiting factor in that population was more surely its winter range, and the oceanographic and geological

changes associated with that winter range, than was

its summer range. I remember also discussions with

Robert MacArthur, who attempted to assess the winter ranges of warblers in which he was interested, and I

remember descriptive and agonizing portrayals of the

trials and tribulations of migrating warblers which

Raymond A. Paynter, Jr., showed when he studied the

Chinchorro and related banks off the coast of Yucatan

and Quintana Roo.

When we first suggested this meeting, I think many

of us who are ornithologists were rather skeptical and

thought that there was not enough information, that

it was premature, and that it would perhaps not be

significantly helpful to have a discussion at all. The

American Ornithologists Union (AOU) came to our

rescue at its meeting in the summer of 1965 by adopting a resolution urging us to have such a conference,

and it is partly on basis of this that we took heart and

proceeded. This resolution was introduced by Victor

Cahalane, and we are most grateful to him for starting

this wave of positive thinking. I think that the environmental changes in northern Latin America are little

realized in this country. They have been dramatic—

and these changes are burned into the memories of the

participants in this conference. Their impressions are

recorded as the basis for ascertaining the state of our

knowledge at this time. I hope that the recommendations emerging from this conference may have farreaching influences on the conservation of avifauna in

the Western Hemisphere.

The Meaning of Environment

Marston Bates

I find this a rather odd role; I never knew I would

be among the birds. I have, as some of you know, spent

most of my life with mosquitoes, and they are rather

different. But I was thinking that I know of no kind of

mosquito that would bite a man if he could find anything else, believe it or not; whereas a great many mosquitoes prefer birds, so that clearly birds deserve a good

deal of respect. Anyway, when Dr. Buechner asked me

to come here, I told him that I would be delighted,

because at this late stage in my life I have become fascinated with birds. I solved the problem of living through

winter in Ann Arbor, Michigan, a couple of years ago

by building a greenhouse in which I now have a fairly

good collection of hummingbirds and honeycreepers—

mostly from Ecuador. You would be surprised how

much better Ann Arbor looks in January when you

can spend the early evening by a hibiscus bush watching an emerald hummingbird.

But obviously today I can't talk to you about birds.

There is no point either in my talking about conservation—the need to preserve the diversity of the world

in which we live is nowhere better appreciated than

here at the Smithsonian. But what I thought might

possibly be of some use is to talk about the environment in general terms, and especially to talk about

some of the ways in which I have lately come to think

about it. After all, what we are dealing with when we

look at the avifauna—or at any other part of the living

world around us—is one aspect of the environment in

which our species lives.

The environment can be analyzed in all sorts of

ways—the living environment, the physical environment, topographic setting, etc. But there it is—the

world in which we live. "Environment"—it seems a

very simple idea. It's the surroundings, the outside

world. Here am I, appearing in this room. There are

all of you, forming for me the present environment.

There is the individual, and there is the setting. Yet the

more I have thought about this the more confused I

have become, and I have now reached the stage where

I really no longer know what is environment and what

is not.

In part it is a problem of definition, of limits. Suppose I had an apple here and started to chew on it.

When does the apple stop being in the environment

and start being in me? Is it as soon as you start getting

it chewed up, or is it when the biochemical processes

involved in digesting the apple set in? This can, of

course, be decided arbitrarily. I suspect that if you got

a stomach ache from eating a green apple, even though

it occurred some time later, you would still call it an

environmental effect. But, as I said, this is an arbitrary

matter.

Once, many years ago, I was collecting butterflies

(not birds) in the Sierra Maestra mountains of Cuba

when I gave birth to a large ascaris. It scared me as I

hadn't known they infected people. Fortunately, I had

the proper collecting equipment, so I carried the ascaris

back to the Harvard Medical School. They reassured

me that the ascaris had probably left because it was

lonely and that I didn't need to worry. But they added

further that, anyway, if you had worms, you were

entitled to use the editorial "we." Even though the

worm is way down inside you, it still isn't you; it's part

of the environment.

Environment, then, is at least partly a matter of

source—effects depending on forces arising outside the

individual are environmental. In terms of the old

"nature versus nurture" controversy over the determinants of human behavior, "nurture" is environment.

When you start analyzing this situation, you soon

realize that you are dealing with an interacting system.

In general, the ecological vocabulary seems to me not

only useless, but a positive nuisance. Its chief value is

for testing the memory of students on examinations.

But I do like the word "ecosystem," because it covers

nicely the series of transactions, of interactions, that

occur between organisms and their setting. We now

know that instead of biological communities in physical

and climatic and other settings, we're dealing with

3
SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

ecosystems. The kind of forest growing in a particular

place is partly a consequence of the soil of that region,

but the soil in turn is a consequence of the kind of

forest. That is, whether the forest is pine, hardwood, or

what, influences the nature of the soil. And, of course,

a forest influences many details of the climate, and,

the climate determines whether or not a forest can

grow. So we oughtn't to talk so much about man as

distinct from his environment as we are prone to do.

We should think in terms of the human ecosystem—

of man-environment interactions.

I sometimes get the impression that the whole world

is suddenly discovering the environment and beginning

to get worried about it. It may be partly Rachel Carson's fault. She was responding in Silent Spring to a

general fear that the things we're doing to the world

around us may be very bad for us in the long run—

and it's no wonder that we worry about it. But I am

frequently surprised at the way in which all sorts of

people have become concerned with the environment.

Within recent months I have been asked to talk about

the environment to such diverse people as architects,

city planners, and public health groups, as well as

groups concerned with resources and conservation.

Medicine has become very preoccupied with environmental problems. Well, we should be talking, not about

the environment, but about the human ecosystem:

about the interactions of people with their surroundings. But it is still convenient to try to analyze the

nature of the surroundings.

Seeing Ray Fosberg in the audience reminds me of

the first time I began to think like this, at another

meeting in which we were discussing resources. I had

been asked to talk about ways of analyzing the environment. I started out with my usual song and dance

about the nature of the environment. We have, in the

first place, the problem of what is total reality—what

is the complete environment in which we are, say here

in this room. We think we can describe it: it has lights

with eggshell grills under them; walls of a certain color;

soundproofing, which I see works quite well; a particular kind of seats—and we think such observations

add up to a description of our surroundings. But if we

had a Geiger counter here, it would go clicking away,

or flashing lights, depending on what kind of counter

it was, in response to shortwave parts or the electromagnetic spectrum that was hitting it. Even though we

can't perceive this except by translating with an instrument, it's still here. At the other end of the spectrum, if we had a radio here it would be squawking—

partly with sounds manufactured here in Washington, but partly also with noises from the stars or electric

storms somewhere on earth. That is, these longwave

parts of the electromagnetic spectrum are just as much

part of the reality of this room as the narrow range

that we perceive as light. This brings up the question

of what parts of the total reality around us we have

not found a way of translating yet. The things we know

about are the things we can translate, and I wonder

about what is left that we still can't translate, but that

perhaps other organisms can.

This gets us to the question of the perceptual environment, that is, of the environment that the sense

organs can directly intercept. I like to think about

how different this is for each kind of organism; and,

for that matter, how different it is for each one of us—

that is, what you see, what you smell, what you hear

may be quite different from my perception in the same

setting. Biologists worry a good deal about anthropomorphism. But it seems to me that even more serious,

from behavioral points of view at any rate, is the habit

of thinking when we go into a forest, for instance, that

the forest of our perceptual environment is the real

forest. All you have to do is go out with your dog to get

some idea of what a different forest it is for him.

There are all of those delightful smells that don't mean

a thing to you. Whereas, on the other hand, all the

nice bright colors apparently don't mean anything to

the dog. And try to imagine what the forest is to a

butterfly or a squirrel. In short, the perceptual world is

distinctive for each kind of organism.

There are many parts of the environment that affect

us that we don't perceive. All of the outside forces that

influence our behavior, perceived or not, could be

grouped as the "operational environment." This room,

I'm sure, is full of viruses—I brought a lot of them

with me. We cannot perceive them, yet they may affect

us markedly; and there are many things of that sort.

Thus we have the question of total reality, the question

of the things out of the total reality that have some

effect on us, and then the question of things out of

that complex than can be perceived.

As I have said, I was talking like this at that meeting

with Ray Fosberg. There was an anthropologist there,

Peter Smerdock, whom many of you may know. Pete

said, "Hey Bates, have you forgot the supernatural

environment?" I got to thinking back to my time in

Micronesia, where there are spirits under every bush.
NUMBER 26

The spirits are terribly important because, after all,

a spirit can cause a typhoon, which can wreck the

whole place, whereas all a shark does, for instance, is

to bite an individual—so that compared with sharks

the spirits are really powerful aspects of the environment. On Ifaluk, a particular Micronesian atoll, whenever it looked as though a typhoon were blowing up,

Maroligar, the number two chief, always went down

to the shore and spent all day honking on a conch

shell. I'm not quite sure of the theory, but I think it

was to advise the spirits that we were prepared, or worried about it, or something. Whatever the theory, it

always worked. No typhoons developed during the

summer, and nobody but a fool would stop honking on

a conch shell as long it worked like that. I often thought

it was a fine example of the scientific method.

But the supernatural environment is everywhere.

From our highfalutin Western point of view we can

say what are the Micronesians fussing about when

these spirits are something they made? Why are they

scared of spirits? They have no reality. But what's

reality anyway? And when you think about it, we can't

talk. We may not have spirits, but we are full of ideas.

They govern many of our actions—the way we live, the

things we do. I think it was Ray who said, "Maybe

instead of the 'supernatural environment' we ought

to talk about the 'conceptual environment.' " It was

Ray, I am pretty sure, who came up with that phrase

first. I have been fussing around with conceptual environment ever since, and I am still very fond of the

idea. I think that it illuminates what we are and

what we do to a considerable degree.

We all live in a world of ideas, just as much as in

a world of physical and perceptible forces. As a matter

of fact, the world of ideas is often the one that controls us rather than the practicality of what we do.

Look how it affects our physical relations with our

surroundings. Consider this thing around my neck,

my necktie, which I hate—I always feel as though

I were about to be choked. Wearing this funny apparatus is a very physical fact of the immediate part of

my environment—not quite so silly in Washington as

it would be in the South Pacific, but still I think we

could design better clothing from the point of view

of comfort, if we put our minds to it. But this physical

fact, this necktie, is the consequence of an idea, a

consequence of our conceptual environment.

Clothing makes for particularly good illustrations;

but so does housing. The other day someone—an

amputee—was fussing about why we always build

houses with steps. An architect explained to me that

it was a Roman tradition that still carries on. We

could just as well have the doorway level—and if you

had lost a leg you would appreciate this—or if we need

the house raised for drainage we could have a ramp.

But this very physical fact of architectural construction is a consequence of our ideas. We all know a house

is supposed to have a front stoop and some steps. Or

consider the use of Swiss-style steeply sloping roofs in

areas where there isn't any snow to collect on the roof.

In fact, the whole problem of house design is very

much complicated by our ideas—many of them not

rationally related to our spatial or climatic needs at all.

A few years ago I was asked to talk to the Architectural Association at Hollywood Beach, Florida. Somebody had read my book on the tropics and wanted me

to discuss tropical architecture, about which, of course,

I know less than I know about birds, which is little

enough. Here we were, put up in the Hollywood Beach

Hotel. I was taken to a very nice room overlooking the

beach. But it was all sealed off. I got the bellboy to

help me, and we managed to unnail the transom. He

was worried about what the management and the

lady at the desk were going to say. But here we were

on a lovely beach, in a hotel that had been airconditioned. They had sealed it off from the outside

so you couldn't hear the surf. You couldn't have the

sea breeze blowing through your room any more. You

had turned your back on the environment that you

had gone south to live in. It gave me a beautiful

theme to talk about. There it is—the conceptual environment again. It's easier to change the ecoclimate,

to change the temperature with air-conditioning, than

to get people to take off their coats and ties. It turned

out, by the way, that the Hollywood Beach Hotel had a

rule that you had to wear your coat and tie in the

dining room. The cool-climate idea of respectability

could thus be maintained in Florida.

Conceptual mechanisms of this sort, of course, also

affect our attitudes toward the living world around us.

Our methods of farming are largely a consequence of

our conceptual environment. I'm probably a crackpot

in lots of ways. Certainly one of the ways is in being

irritated about imposing our Western European style

of agriculture on other parts of the world. That is,

we send a lot of experts from Wisconsin to Colombia

or Ecuador or somewhere, and their idea is to clear off

the forests and plant maize or some such kind of crop.
SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

Then they come back and tell us how poor tropical

soils are because they wash away next week. Yet this

is the substrate that supports the richest, heaviest vegetation that we know of on land—that is, the rain

forest. To call tropical soils poor because they do not

respond to Northern agricultural techniques seems to

me a prime example of a misplaced conceptual environment. The future in these rain-forest regions

probably lies in tree farming. The most successful forms

of tropical agriculture now are coffee plantations,

banana plantations, cacao, rubber, and the like. If we

can learn to use cellulose as a basic raw material for

organic compounds, the rain-forest environment may

prove to be the richest we have.

The conceptual environment, then, widely affects

and frequently controls our relations with other organisms. And this goes a long way back into prehistory.

Someone has remarked that one of the troubles with

the human species is that it never solved any of the

problems raised by the Neolithic revolution. With the

discovery of agriculture, with the replacement of vegetation, with the beginning of man's modern role as an

ecological dominant, we started to become a geological force acting on the rest of nature. We can look at

food-gathering peoples essentially as part of a particular biological community; whereas we have become

something that is superimposed on a community, depending on a great many differing communities for

our daily needs of food and materials. In pre-Neolithic

times I think man and nature were very closely related. Anthropologists tell me that in many cultures,

when an animal is killed because it is needed for food,

the killer apologizes for the need. It seems to me that

such so-called primitive peoples are acting in ways

which, though perhaps based on mythology, are still

not destructive to the human ecosystem itself.

Here we are interested in the problem of man as a

hunter, as an agent of extermination. That is another

fascinating game—to try to classify man's relations

with other organisms. There is a whole group of organisms that I would call "opportunists." I would put

robins there, thistles, quite a few things—animals and

plants that adapt beautifully to the human environment. Squirrels—squirrels ought to be extremely grateful for people who leave breadcrumbs out during the

winter. Such organisms rejoice in the open habitat that

man has created. Then there is a whole class of animals

that I would call "irreconcilabies," that, no matter

what is done, can't get along with the human ecosystem—here belongs the wolverine, as a classical

example, and I suspect the passenger pigeon.

Most important here is the question of our attitudes:

the kinds of organisms we regard as pests, the kinds of

organisms we like to eat, the kinds of organisms we

think of as repulsive, the kinds of organisms we think

are cute. All of us know people who want to kill every

snake they see. You can argue that this is a perfectly

harmless snake that is doing a lot of good by eating

rats or something, but it doesn't help; when these

people see a snake they think it ought to be killed. This

reaction occurs with the whole class of animals that

we call "varmints." The results are equally odd if one

starts to analyze what is cute. In this respect I rather

like pigeons. I think pigeons are a much neglected

group of animals. Here they are right under our noses,

and yet just try to get a good photograph of a pigeon

for a book! Aardvarks and whooping cranes and

ivory-billed woodpeckers are generally easy enough,

but to get a decent picture of a pigeon from our photographers is extremely difficult. If we took a census

among our citizenry, we would find a division between

the people who hate pigeons, like the janitors who have

to clean up after them, and the people who love

pigeons and feed them every day on the steps of the

public library. Thus there are subgroupings in attitudes

about what's repulsive and what's cute. I don't need

to underline here my point that underneath all the

things we will be talking about are attitudes not only

toward particular species, but toward nature in general,

and these attitudes are created by the conceptual

environment in which we live.

When we talk about conceptual environment, we

are talking about culture in the anthropological sense

of the word; this in turn seems to be similar to the

super-ego of the clinical psychologists though my

knowledge of the clinical vocabulary is not very profound. There are, then, considerable national differences as a consequence of the differing histories of the

peoples concerned. In the case of Latin America we

are dealing essentially with Spanish culture, variously

modified by the circumstances of the New World. It

was Jaime Benitez, chancellor of the University of

Puerto Rico, who first pointed out to me how much the

Spanish attitude toward nature differs from that of

most other European peoples. Spanish culture is essentially man-centered. This can be seen in all sorts of

ways—in the lack of any great development of landscape painting, in the tendency toward formal garden
NUMBER 2 6

arrangement, in the relative neglect of nature reserves

and parks.

A Spanish friend once told me that he thought this

was because the French Enlightenment, which had so

much influence on British and German thinking, had

never crossed the Pyrenees. Rousseau and the other

French admirers of nature and of natural man had

little influence on Spanish thinking. The explanation,

whatever it is, is undoubtedly complex. But my point

here is to remind us that, in talking about conservation

problems in Latin America, we are concerned with a

conceptual environment rather different from that

found in countries with Anglo-Saxon or Germanic

traditions.

Jaime Benitez thought that it was important to get

nature study into the primary schools in Puerto Rico

so that children would get an appreciation of the natural world early in their careers. Certainly there is

considerably more emphasis on nature in schools in the

United States than there is in the countries to the

south, though I am not at all sure how much influence

this has on attitudes. It would at least be interesting

to try to get ecological thinking into the schools, and

to make attractive books on nature easily available.

Of course we in the United States are in no position

to look down our noses at anyone else. I wish somehow that Latin America could learn from our mistakes,

but nations, like people, seem to have to learn by making their own mistakes. How nice it would be if we

had saved some of the great forest that once covered

Ohio. There is still a chance to save some of the great

forest of the Amazon and Orinoco regions, and I hope

that somehow the South American nations act effectively and in time.

But there are many problems, and they are far from

peculiar to the Spanish tradition. Everywhere we have

the processes of urbanization and industrialization and

the overwhelming problem of rapid population growth

with its pressures on the world around us. It is very

difficult to be cheerful, looking at the present operation

of the human ecosystem and at the deterioration of

the environment. But I get some faint glimmer of hope

from the idea of the conceptual environment and its

importance in influencing our actions. If what we do

to the environment is the consequence of our ideas,

the solution of the problems is quite simple—just

change our ideas. That is what all of us involved in

the conservation movement are trying to do; it is what

we have to do if our ecosystem is to survive. We have

to be missionaries for ecological thinking. I like to go

back to that old remark of Sir Francis Bacon (who

seems to have said everything) that we cannot command nature except by obeying her. All we have to

do is learn to live with nature instead of destroying it,

lest in the process we destroy ourselves.
The Avifauna in a Changing Ecosystem

William Vogt

The squeaking wheel gets the grease and it is the

large, spectacular bird—the California condor and the

whooping crane—that attracts the concern of the

conservationists. A rather nondescript bird like the seaside sparrow worries few people, although it has probably lost as high a percentage of its habitat during the

past 25 years as any North American species. It has a

range some hundreds of miles long, from Massachusetts to northern Florida, and along the Gulf Coast

from Texas to peninsular Florida. At least over the

northern part of its range its habitat is rarely more than

a few hundred feet wide, in Spartina that is washed by

high tides. Marinas, subdivisions, drainage ditches—the

usual side effects of "progress"—are encroaching on

its habitat at an increasing rate.

Many bird watchers have noted an apparent shrinkage in numbers of a variety of more familar species

and inquiries on such conspicuous birds as the bald

eagle and peregrine falcon have substantiated the impression. Many of us have a feeling of a general

diminution in populations of other less striking birds,

based on a variety of criteria.

A neighbor of mine who spent summers for more

than 50 years in the same place in the northern Catskills remembers that, as a child, she and her sister disliked whippoorwills because the beginning of their

evening chorus was always a signal for the children to

go to bed. During only one of the last 8 years has there

been more than one pair resident within earshot of her

cottage, and most years the birds have been heard only

on migration.

For many years, and until at least 1939 when I left

the city, nighthawks were an established part of the

summer skyscape above Brooklyn and parts of Manhattan; now they are almost unknown as residents.

In a hodgepodge area of well-watered, abandoned

farms, second growth oak-hickory-ash-hemlock hillside,

along roughly 4 miles of lane and country road in

Greene County, N.Y., in the Hudson Valley, such birds

8

as least flycatchers, wood pewees, yellow-throated

vireos, black-and-white warblers, black-throated green

warblers, chestnut-sides, Louisiana waterthrushes,

yellow warblers, redstarts, and indigo buntings seem

uncommon, scarce or, during many recent summers,

nonexistent. These are birds that 40 years ago, just

across the Hudson River, I should have taken for

granted in comparable vegetation. These recent observations include periods from mid May to October and,

since I often work outdoors, total many hundred

hours. Local populations of human beings probably

do not account for the scarcity of these birds: there

were fewer people in Greene County in 1960 than in

1900.

These birds are all insectivores and may well have

suffered, either directly or through reduction of their

food supplies, because of the pesticides that have come

into increasingly wider use though there has been little

local spraying.

But they are also migratory birds that spend substantial parts of the year south of the border of the United

States where, with very rare exceptions, they do not

receive even nominal protection. The nonmigratory

cardinal population has expanded rapidly during the

past 20 years.

There are over 200 species of birds that nest in the

United States and migrate through Mexico, Central

America, and the Carribbean. We have extraordinarily

few data on their life histories during 6 or more months

of the year, and fewer vital statistics. Natural selection

was shaping their requirements and behavior long before Asiatic man began his limited disturbance of their

habitat.

Mexico gives some protection to game birds and one

can no longer buy wildfowl on the streets of the capital.

The batteries or armadas, capable of killing dozens of

waterfowl at one blast, seem to have been cleaned up,

at least around Mexico City. Wild duck is no longer

commonly sold in restaurants as it was in the 1940s.
NUMBER 26

Mexico has been united with Canada and our country

in a migratory bird treaty and this convention, unlike

many others, has to some extent been operative. Protection is reliably reported to be quite inadequate along

the extensive coastal lagoons, a matter of increasing

concern as roads make these more accessible and as

highland lakes and marshes are drained.

On a low-altitude flight of some 150 kilometers in

El Salvador, in early October 1965, most of it near the

coast and part over river mouths, I saw only three

flocks of birds, two of egrets and one that seemed to be

ibises. During an ensuing drive of about 500 kilometers,

between San Miguel, El Salvador, and Guatemala City,

birds were once more notably scarce. Even the large

flycatchers one expects to find along telephone wires

were seen only 39 times in 70 kilometers.

In the 20 odd years since I had last visited this part

of El Salvador there has been extensive felling of trees

and an eightfold expansion of cotton production,

chiefly in the area near the coast, along with a large

increase in cocoanut and banana trees. One of the

most striking phenomena during our flight was the

number of small planes spraying insecticides. A significant side effect of this spraying is reported in connection with malaria control:

The geographical location of high levels of persistent

malaria transmission and high DDT resistance are almost

identical ... .

They are, with few exceptions, located in the low terrain

on the Pacific slope of the Isthmus of Central America. Almost without exception, they are precisely the same areas

where cotton cultivation is carried on intensively, or has been

at some time recently. . . . from the first of August to the

end of February or even March, the cotton fields are sprayed

at least once a week by aircraft using various insecticidal mixtures. DDT is one of the most common ingredients of the

cocktail used . . . the larvae also live in DDT contaminated

water. . . .

Resistance to DDT has appeared in A. albimanus in ricegrowing areas in Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic

where aircraft dispersal .. . is used. . . .

Subsequent visits to the Guatemalan coast near

Escuintla were also notable for the apparent scarcity

of birds in areas of excellent habitat such as the wellwatered bird sanctuary on the finca El Salto. These

low populations reinforced the concern that had led me

to bring these possible scarcities to the attention of the

AOU bird protection committee.

I shall try to confine my remarks to aspects of the

problem of numbers and distribution of birds that will

not anticipate better-founded reports of other participants in this conference. My observations will be largely

limited to some profound and extensive ecological

changes that have affected avian habitats and that

should be obvious but that are often disregarded or

forgotten.

Birds long antedate man, who probably did not arrive in the Americas before perhaps 20 or 30 thousand

years ago. Except in areas of human concentration that

must have had narrow ecological impact, such as central Mexico and the Mayan "empires," the habitats in

which most of the birds evolved were probably little

disturbed until well into the 19th century.

Concentrated human populations were never widely

spread over the respective landscapes, nor are they now

in most of tropical America. Soils, rainfall pattern, access to trading routes, slope and water supplies all exerted a distributive influence. As Tosi and Voertman

point out, "Two formations—tropical moist and subtropical wet forest—occupy approximately 54 percent

of the land area of Central America yet contain only

about 10 percent of the population."

Budowski, however, observes in a later paper that

"Shifting cultivation, formerly restricted to drier or

colder areas, is moving into this area because of increasing population pressure."

Primitive tools were often inadequate for clearing

primeval forest. Where this was sufficiently dry, fire

was used—and misused. In some areas it was limited

by the brief dry season. Over the region under discussion there was no destruction of the environment, except on the Mexican tableland, to parallel that around

the Mediterranean, until European man arrived. The

invasion of European man had an almost immediate

impact. And 20th-century man can only be considered

as having created an ecological upheaval.

One of the first results of European invasion was a

sharp drop in the indigenous human populations.

Baron Castro estimates this for El Salvador as 54 percent in 27 years. The central Mexican population,

according to Cook and Simpson, probably decreased

from over 10 million to 2.5 million betwen 1519 and

1600.

At the same time, however, as the Spaniards were

reducing human competition with wildlife, chiefly

through the medium of epidemics, they were introducing two changes that, today, would probably be classified as technological "progress": cattle, sheep, and

goats, and the ox-drawn plow. Both the grazing animals and the tool produced permanent and degenera336-550 O—70 2
10 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

tive changes in the biological productivity of thousands

of square miles, by erosion, accelerated destruction of

cover, and siltation. At the same time they may have

widened areas of alluvial soil and mangrove swamps

and created deltas. One has only to travel through

Latin America to see vast areas, once covered with

vegetation, that are now essentially desert. This is not

comparable to changing climax to subclimax in the

Northern Hemisphere; it is virtual sterilization.

The estimates of Salgado Perez for Mexico are comparably applicable to parts of Guatemala, El Salvador,

Venezuela, and perhaps Colombia and Ecuador:

Acres Percent

1. Uneroded soils such as are found in

commercial forests 35,693,215 10

2. Soils with incipient erosion, such as

are found in humid zones, noncommercial forests, crop-bearing trees 65, 115, 375 18

3. Moderately eroded soils such as those

under irrigation and level pastures.. 76,297,225 21

4. Accelerated erosion, found on mountainous grazing land that is subject to

seasonal rainfall, and uncultivated

farmland. 157,694,530 43

5. Totally eroded soils, made up of land

now uncultivated or nonproductive. 28, 992, 015 8

Total 363,792,360 100

In 1948 I quoted, without naming him, the late

Franz Blom, an extraordinarily competent field anthropologist, to the effect that "Oaxaca will be a desert

within 50 years." I see no reason to challenge his opinion today when, for the entire state, some 100,000

square kilometers (38,000 square miles), there are

three soil conservationists. Mexico, the world's 11th

largest country, with 761,000 square miles, budgets

less than $350,000 for erosion control. It may well be,

however, for the region under discussion, the largest

appropriation on an areal basis.

Postconquest deforestation in Mexico destroyed

great stands of trees that primitive tools had been unable to injure or low population densities made

unnecessary to attack. This became a serious problem,

especially in mining regions, as early as 1550. Dust

storms were reported as early as 1586. Humboldt, in the

early 19th century, compared the "tableland of

Mexico" to the "saline steppes of Asia." During this

long period, however, human populations remained

low, latifundios, or great estates, protected much land,

and the destruction was probably relatively contained.

An important survey of Mexican forestry law was published in 1962. It discusses both defects in old laws and

makes suggestions for new.

Reliable data on human populations are not available but again Baron Castro is probably as trustworthy

as anyone. He estimates that not until about 1770 did

El Salvador return to its primitive population level of

130,000, or 6 per square kilometer. This population

doubled once more by about 1821, and reached 500,000

in about another 50 years. Since then the rate of increase has been climbing rapidly as in all Latin American countries except Uruguay and possibly Argentina.

El Salvador now has 127 human inhabitants per square

kilometer. Mexico and the Central American countries are doubling their populations in 15 to 22 years.

The four Central American countries for which figures

are available—Panama, Costa Rica, El Salvador, and

Guatemala—have climbed from 3,308,000 in 1920 to

9,294,000 in 1962 and 1963. Total Central American

population is over 13 million and within 25 years

should exceed 30 million. At its present growth rate

Mexico will jump from its current 40 million to 125

million by the end of the century.

Puerto Rico had a human population in 1765 of

about 45,000 and a density of 5.2 per square kilometer.

In 1964 there were over 2.5 million Puertorriquefios

or 283 per square kilometer.

Haiti, on the direct migration route of American

birds, is alleged to have 160 human inhabitants per

square kilometer, and Barbados the fantastic density

of 555! (The United States has about 20.)

Obviously these swelling human populations must

be fed. They have few natural resources except those

of the land, the exploitation of which will bring them

more and more into conflict with plants and animals

long established. At the present time, in the five countries that are included in the Central American Common Market, as I have pointed out elsewhere, "man

requires for simple nutrition . . . some 30 billion kilocalories every day. By .. . 1990, a mere 25 years hence,

some 65 billion calories" will be required. This does not

take into account the need for extra protein from the

scarcity of which much of the population of Central

America already suffers severely. Malnutrition is probably the chief form of morbidity in these countries and

production of food per capita and per hectare are both

diminishing. This results from population increase,

soil exhaustion and erosion, and, as was suggested by

Budowski, increasing invasion of marginal lands. In

view of certain population increases for some years to
NUMBER 26

come, we may expect the environmental deterioration

to continue.

Governments are seemingly unconcerned with this

process, since they do little or nothing to halt it; indeed,

their "colonization" plans to cope with growing populations often envisage large-scale settlement on land

that is highly vulnerable. Economists do most of the

planning without the advice of ecologists and often

without consulting soils specialists. The Alliance for

Progress has acted virtually as if no such problem

existed.

The destruction of habitat has been further exacerbated by a combination of land tenure that forces the

small farmer onto marginal land, and by the shortening of rotational fallows as a result of population

growth. Obviously, when there were only six people

per square kilometer there was more land per capita

than there is with 127.

Dr. Jorge Arias, President of the University of San

Carlos, Guatemala, adds some significant calculations:

Inhabitants per square

kilometer of cultivated

land (plowed permanent crops meadows and

pastures)

Country:

Guatemala 135.9

El Salvador 148.6

Honduras 79.6

Nicaragua 88. 1

Costa Rica 81. 7

Prof. C. A. Donis, out of a wealth of experience in

Africa, recently stated: "Safe estimates, provided

shag is practiced in a regular diffused pattern, should

fix the cultivable percentage at rarely above 75 percent and the minimum length of fallow rarely shorter

than 12 years. Above 25 persons per square kilometer

degradation of soils and vegetation should occur." He

also notes, "When the slope of the ground is anything

but gentle, and some authors note that the process starts

with 3-percent slope, surface erosion of a more serious

type sets in, silting up the valleys, soil fertility is gone

and grass savanna installed."

There is little land of less than 3-percent slope in the

area under discussion, and the poor farmers—who in

Central America make up about two thirds of the

total—are almost restricted to slopes that often exceed

100 percent! Bare rock is visible over large areas that

formerly supported forest; where small corn patches

11

in others—such as hydrocarbon poisons—it may be indefensible from both the human and wildlife point

The long fallows empirically arrived at before the

European imported his culture and agriculture, fallows

that were possible before reduced death rates pyramided human populations upon highly vulnerable

land, more or less restricted disturbances to limited

zones such as tropical dry forest and subtropical

moist forest. Tosi and Voertman catalogue only 250,-

000 square kilometers in six out of 13 natural life

zones that include 434,000 square kilometers, with a

low enough human density to satisfy the Donis criterion. Of course, not all agriculture here is of the

shifting type, but even coffee plantations and the recently cleared cotton fields are affected by erosion and

loss of fertility and increased use of insecticides.

Difficult geography, population imbalance, and

primitive agriculture have been synergised into possibly nonviable dynamic process by the introduction

of modern technology that is, in some ways, well fitted

to the north temperate zones from which it came, while

in others—such as hydrocarbon poisons—it may be indefensible from both the human and the wildlife point

of view.

The ruminant and the ox-drawn plow have already

been mentioned. Recently we have added the power

saw, the bulldozer, insecticides and herbicides, and

economic formulations that have gained considerable

vogue in the "developed" countries. These last have

developed a highly complex system of symbol manipulations such as paper profits, trade balances, etc., that

give no weight to maintenance of productive capacity

of the environment. The gross national product never

includes measurements of soil fertility. The symbol

manipulators, the economists, have come to have a

power and influence much like that of Mayan and

Aztec priests.

In one way or another they contribute to processes

that destroy habitat. Some of the most devastating effects such as the drying up of marshes have a direct,

disastrous impact on birds, especially stenoecious species. Euryecious species such as most of the wood

warblers (vide Skutch) may not have suffered.

What ecological changes are doing to Kirtland's

warbler on its wintering grounds in the Bahamas,

where human populations are doubling in less than 20

years, should be a matter of grave concern to those

concerned with perpetuation of the species.
12

It was reported at the recent Conference on Human

Conservation in Central America that 60 percent of

the energy needs of the five Common Market countries

is satisfied through the use of firewood and charcoal;

in El Salvador even mangrove thickets are being exploited for fuel. Unfortunately, deforestation is not

only destroying wildlife habitat—it is also reducing hydroelectric potential through the erosion of watersheds

and siltation of none-too-available damsites, thus

helping to perpetuate the need for wood. Human population increases, obviously, tend to exaggerate this

trend, especially since new technologies constantly

increase their impact. There has probably never been

a destructive force in Central America comparable to

the Interamerican Highway.

The situation is made more difficult for many species

by the fact that for the masses of the people in Latin

America birds have no value except in cages or the

pot. Migrants apparently contribute little to the cagebird trade, though this has made serious inroads into

the numbers of some Latin American species, such as

the clarin Myadestes sp.); the quetzal, to some extent

taken for its feathers, has probably gained no advantage by being the national bird of Guatemala.

A few years ago the president of a Central American

republic was infamous, among the few local conservationists, for his predilection for dynamiting fish. He

is, in a sense, the prototype of the rising middle class

that does not necessarily become civilized as it accumulates even modest wealth and mobility. There

has been a proliferation of small arms that are used

indiscriminately for target practice as well as meat

hunting. The latter pastime has long been popular,

with some justification in a protein-short area, but

is probably taking a significant toll. Slingshots are

wielded with deadly accuracy, but whether or not they

have a serious impact on bird populations I do not

know. Certainly as human populations increase and

more country is opened up, the pressure on birds increases. Game birds (broadly defined), both migratory and nonmigratory, and a few taken for their

feathers, have been the species that have suffered most

from hunting. Fortunately netting has not become

widely established as it has in Italy; this is something

that needs to be watched and guarded against.

The future of bird life between the Rio Bravo and

Central South America is definitely dark. It is virtually certain that at no period in history have human

populations been expanding with such speed and with

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

such a destructive technology. To continue ignoring

the situation is virtually to condemn to near or complete extinction a number of species that depend on

the tropical American habitats. It seems most unlikely

that they can be saved without vigorous and effective

effort.

It is important to remember that words themselves

will not do anything effective. The Nature Protection

Treaty of 1940 has been almost completely ignored.

For example, though it sets park standards and provides that the boundaries of national parks are not

to be altered except with legislative approval, these

clauses have constantly been violated. Hundreds of

thousands of acres have been turned over to squatters,

lumbermen, and cattlemen. Not a single signatory has

protested.

International meetings and resolutions, in themselves, have little actual effect on environments. The

Interamerican Conference of the Conservation of Renewable Natural Resources of 1948 was largely worthless except to the extent that it helped to educate a

few—a very few—people. Its usefulness might have

been enlarged, at least as an educational tool, had

the U.S. State Department kept its promise to publish

its proceedings in Spanish.

It may well be too late to save some species. Without

vigorous, intelligent, and informed effort many will

probably be lost. If the great resources of the hemisphere—indeed, of the world, since this must also concern the IUCN and such organizations as the World

Wildlife Fund—are applied it should be possible to

save many species despite the apparent intention of

humanity to commit suicide by overbreeding and habitat destruction. Education is critically needed and

would, I am confident, be welcome.

There is room here for government negotiation and,

in view of what we have tried to do to aid underdeveloped countries, here would be a relatively easy

way for them to exchange the quo, if you will forgive

the pun, for the millions of quid we have lent and

given them. It would be little enough to ask of them,

and there are various ways we might make such requests palatable, especially since it is in their own

interest.

A scientific reexamination of the metabolism of pesticides in the ecosystem is obviously needed at the international level. It should probably be regionalized and

not so international or technical that it will disappear

into the stratosphere.
NUMBER 2 6

It is almost, but not quite, too late to set up national

parks as part of an environmental preservation effort.

They can help enormously with colonial species and

perhaps with certain others permanently or seasonally sedentary, such as the quetzal and Kirtland's warbler—if the parks are large enough. They have many

other justifications I need not point out to this group.

But paper parks are worse than worthless.

Our government, at long last, gives some evidence

that it has stopped being frightened by contraceptives,

and Honduras has taken the lead among Latin American nations in beginning a national program. Some

people may think there is no relationship between

the condom and the cotinga; ecologists will recognize

that the latter may depend on the former or an

effective substitute for it. Population control should

be of equal concern to conservationists as erosion control. We all have our spheres of influence and should

recognize, if anyone does, that we cannot hope to save

the ecosystem if we fail to control the most dynamic

member of it.

There are signs that the economists have begun to

acquire humility, although within the past year I have

heard one exclaim he was not worried about population : the problem would be solved if left to the economists. Others, however, are seeing population growth

as an economic stumbling block. Within the past year

they have even begun to recognize the importance of

producing enough to eat. Perhaps we can get the

people who formulate policy to use real criteria such as

soil fertility, healthy forests, water retention, and production of the biomass, instead of symbols that have

as little relationship to the world of atoms-moleculesorganisms-associations-ecosystems as the mind of the

schizophrenic has to the troubling world about him.

Our way is often blocked by veritable Grand

Canyons of ignorance. It should not be too difficult,

given the importance of healthy ecosystems, to shift

some of the men and millions from moon-doggling and

National Science Foundation programs that may, of

themselves, be worth fostering as a sort of intellectual

caviar, but that we can ill afford, in my opinion, to a

more and more crowded world that is literally melting away from beneath our feet.

Pierre Gourou makes the sage observation that

"Man has interpreted the environment in terms of his

techniques." Ecological understanding is showing

man, everywhere, that his techniques must follow the

13

land, not be forced upon it. This may be beginning of

wisdom that will save ecosystems and the birds that are

part of it.

Discussion

ALDRICH. I am interested in the comments that once

the habitat is destroyed in areas of Latin America it

does not initiate a new series of ecological successional

stages but rather becomes sterile. I did not get the reason for that. Why should these habitats not begin to

develop another series of ecological successional stages?

VOGT. Well, I was referring to the central plateau,

the parkland areas in Mexico particularly, and some

areas farther south. They just seem to wash down to

a sort of concrete surface—the tepetate. Certainly for

a couple hundred years there has been no significant invasion of plants. These areas are bare, almost as bare

as table tops. This hardpan is especially inhospitable

where there are long dry seasons.

PETERSON. I might give my impressions of the

northern Andes. Not long ago I was in Colombia with

Carlos Lehmann. One can look at the bare slopes of

the Andes and, if you do not have things explained to

you, perhaps not realize (as visitors to the Hebrides

in Scotland may not realize) that you are looking at

landscape that probably is as modified, indeed

destroyed by humans, as any landscape could be.

The main difference between an Andean forest and

a forest here in the temperate zone is that when we

cut down a temperate forest it eventually grows back

to essentially the same kind of forest that was there

before. There are a great many individual trees of

relatively few species per acre in such a forest. In a

tropical forest it is the reverse—there are extremely

few individuals of a species per acre, but many species.

Each tree has a great but shallow root system, taking

trace elements from an extremely thin skin of top soil.

Each tree suports a great many parasitic plants. The

birds that live in such forests are numerous as to species

but sparse in individuals. They must have a considerable block of forest to range about in for their survival.

Their requirements are apparently just as subtle as

those of the forest trees. When such a forest is cut or

burned it takes an extremely long time before it comes

back into the same sort of climax environment, and

the birds that live there are simply knocked out. Our

North American migrants, which are marginal when

in the tropics, are probably not affected as much as the

endemics. The endemics are the ones we must worry
14 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

about. In one concentrated week of birding in Colombia

with Dr. Lehmann I saw but 1 pair of trogons, 1 pair

of toucanets, and extremely few parrots—and this in

a country known for its great variety in these three

groups. There still are primeval areas in Colombia, but

they are being destroyed with appalling rapidity. No

other area on earth is experiencing quite the rapid

destruction of environment that we are now witnessing

in tropical America.

HOWELL. I would like to ask if there are any indigenous organizations in northern Latin America that

are dedicated to the purpose of saving natural areas

such as those that we have been discussing. It appears

that one of the chief problems, if not the chief problem,

is of course destruction of habitat. And I would like

to know if there is any kind of organized movement

that arises within these areas and which may or may

not be supported by outside sources that might do

something about this problem.

VOGT. I know of none. There is an organization

called "Amigos de la Tierra" in El Salvador which has

done some good work on controlling soil erosion, but

it has not concerned itself with natural habitats. The

only well preserved natural habitat that I know between the United States and Colombia is Barro Colorado Island, but there may be others. There may be

some new organizations that I have not heard of. Mr.

Phelps might know something about what is being

done in Venezuela. I know they have made some progress there.

PHILLIPS. There has been an institution in Mexico

for a good many years, entitled Instituto Mexicano de

Recursos Naturales Renovables, which should be mentioned, although they are more concerned with educational matters such as books than with direct action.

The following statement was submitted by JAMES

BOND in lieu of his verbal comments.

General Status of the Antillean Avifauna.

Early impact of human "civilization" on the avifauna of the Antilles was serious, but almost all species

of birds have become adapted to changed conditions.

Destruction of habitat has been an unimportant factor

in respect to bird life on the volcanic islands, except in

Haiti. Approximately three times as many birds became

extinct from 1850 to 1920 as from 1920 to 1967, viz.:

extinct between 1850-1920 Amaurolimnas c. concolor

(Jamaica), Amazona vittala (Culebra), Ara tricolor

(Cuba), Aratinga chloroptera maugei (Mona), Speotyto cunicularia amaura (St. Kitts, Nevis, Antigua),

S. c. guadeloupensis (Marie Galante), Siphonorhis

americanus (Jamaica), Troglodytes aedon martinicensis (Martinique), Loxigilla portoricensis grandis (St.

Kitts). Extinct between 1920-1967, Empidonax euleri johnstonei (Grenada), Troglodytes aedon mesoleucus (St. Lucia), T. a. guadeloupensis (Guadeloupe) .

However, numerous Antillean forms that still exist

are excessively rare, and some will surely become extinct within the next hundred years, viz. Pterodroma

hasitata caribbaea (Jamaica). There are recent unverified reports of this petrel. If nesting on precipitous

cliffs of the Blue and John Crow Mountains, caribbaea may survive for many years. Chondrohierax uncinatus mirus (Grenada) : very few still present due

to hawk shooting and, in particular, increasing scarcity

of mollusks on which this kite feeds. Amazona versicolor (St. Lucia): range much more restricted than

in 1930 due mainly to shooting and taking of nestlings.

Opening of the new road between Soufriere and Micoud will enable hunters to reach the habitat of this

parrot more easily. Amazona vittata (Puerto Rico):

confined to the Luquillo National Forest. The limited

population is being reduced by predation—brown rats

(Rattus norvegicus) and pearly-eyed thrashers (Margarops fuscatus). Asio flammeus portoricensis (Puerto

Rico): threatened by continued loss of suitable habitat. Centurus superciliaris bahamensis (Grand Bahama) and C. s. nyeanus (Watling's Island): have

become increasingly scarce for no apparent reason.

Ramphocinclus b. brachyurus (Martinique) : apparently confined to the Presqu'ile de la Caravelle. I

suspect predation by Ratius. Mimocichla ravida

(Grand Cayman): has for some unknown reason been

excessively rare for over 50 years. Dendroica p. petechia

(Barbados) : has been almost exterminated during the

past 50 years doubtless due to parasitism by cowbirds

(Molothrus). Leucopeza semperi: has been steadily

on the decrease and may be extinct before the end of

the century. Probably nests on or near the ground and

thus suffers predation by mongooses and rats.

Shooting

For the most part there are no bag limits set for

game in most of the West Indies, and where these have

been imposed they are often ignored. Almost all ducks

shot are North American species, but resident Dendrocygna arborea, Anas bahamensis and Oxyura jamaicensis have greatly decreased, particularly in the Lesser

Antilles where most of the shooting is now of shore-
NUMBER 2 6 15

birds, a practice that cannot well be stopped since there

is little other "game" available. No West Indian columbid is in danger of extinction from overshooting, although several species have become rare or extirpated

locally.

Introduction of Exotic Species

Birds have been introduced on a number of islands,

for the most part unintentionally. For example, destruction of an aviary on Tobago as a result of the

1963 hurricane has brought about the apparent establishment of at least one species (Sicalis flaveola)

on that island. Introduction of birds on any island is

apt to have a detrimental effect on native species.

GREENWAY. There is a very good organization which

Ibarra runs in Guatemala. My Spanish is not good

enough to pronounce it, but the Association for Protection of Nature runs a very effective organization in

Guatemala for conservation.

IBARRA. Thank you, thank you indeed for your opinion about my country, Dr. Greenway. Guatemala has

a few organizations concerned with fauna—protection and conservation—among them there are the

Natural History Association and the lately founded

Guatemalan Association for the Conservation of Nature. Of course, what we need most is a program of

publicity among the scholars. We must educate in the

schools in order that people have better knowledge of

why we create such an organization for protecting

fauna. We think that in the near future this organization will render a very good service to protect nature.

LEHMANN. I think I should state here that I completely agree with Dr. Vogt's point of view. I myself

have seen many local species disappear from vast areas

over the last 30 years because of the destruction of the

habitat and the extensive use of pesticides through airplane spraying. Roger Peterson and I visited some

areas of the Andes where very steep mountainsides

have little topsoil. Farmers cut the beautiful oak woods

of the forest to plant a very poor quality of corn that

takes 11 months to harvest. Seemingly, the energy spent

cutting the forest outweighs the value of the corn.

Rains wash out the soil and leave bare rock—no succession follows. Sometimes small brush appears and

crops are planted the next year. Of course in areas that

are not so steep-sided other thing come out—small

growths of pasture and other things—but for every

one of the new species that invade these areas there

is an open grassland.

As for conservation, I can report that there is an

international organization called Latin American Committee on National Parks that is doing extensive work

in all Latin America to protect areas, and we have a

big campaign with Dr. Maria Buchinger, our active

executive secretary, who is working hard and helping

everyone of us in our countries. In some areas, some

countries are doing some work. Dr. Buchinger can give

you more information about what has been done in

Peru and other countries south. In Colombia we have

established within the last 12 years the first reserve

act of Congress, called "La Reserva de la Macarena."

Two large areas are about to be established, one in the

central Andes and the other one in the western Andes

in Colombia called Parque Nacional de Los Farallones de Cali, that will be about 1,000 square kilometers. There is an organization called CIBITEM in

Colombia, more or less like the TVA in the United

States, that has charge of the development of the

Magdalena and Sinu valleys. CIBITEM has selected

three areas for national parks and reserves. Two are

in Sierra Madre and one is on Santa Marta, which is

a very important mountain in the northern part of

Colombia. Another reserve is an island between the

Cienaga Grande and the Caribbean. These areas are

refuges for both local and migrant birds. So something has been done. But of course I think that the

main trouble is lack of education. We need more education. Dr. Vogt helped me last year in obtaining some

educational films that have been of help in this

program.

VOGT. I wonder what kind of budgets are provided

to go with these national parks to protect them. Now

Mexico has done a superb job in developing its hydroelectric and irrigation resources, but for the whole

country of 761,000 square miles it has only about 1,400

forest guards, many of them without any means of

transport. And the watersheds above these enormously

expensive developments are just being torn down for

lack of protection. I know parks in other parts of

Latin America where the appropriation for protection

amounts to something like 2 cents per square mile.

They are paper parks; and in comparing the list of

1942 with current lists, some of the national parks just

seem to have disappeared. I cannot take too much

comfort at the "establishment" of these areas until I

know something about the administrative facilities for

protecting them and the budgets the people have to

work with. And I am hoping that somehow out of
16

this meeting we can develop ways of stimulating that

kind of support.

FOSBERG. I have been for some years rather closely

associated with the Nature Conservancy in this country.

I have been able to watch a phenomenon that, frankly,

15 years ago I did not anticipate at all. That has been

the development of public consciousness of the idea of

natural areas, in fact, public consciousness of the whole

idea of ecology. Fifteen years ago the matter of natural

areas seemed a completely hopeless struggle. Some of

us kept at it because our conscience would not let us

quit. We would not have been able to live with ourselves if we had given up. We had no idea that anything

was really going to take place; but the Nature Conservancy, which then had a budget of $500 a year and

an unpaid secretary, now has many times that much. It

has preserved 158 areas, ranging in size from 1 to 9,000

acres. I think that is the largest. And this is something

that has recognition even at the cabinet level in the

United States. Now within the last 2 or 3 years the

same thing has started to happen to Latin America.

I would like to hear more directly about this from Dr.

Buchinger. The thing now, of course, is the urgency,

since everything is happening faster than it was even

15 years ago in this country. I have the hope that this

will also be true of the Nature Conservancy movement

in Latin America—that will have the same acceleration that everything else seems to be governed by. I

would like to hear what Dr. Buchinger has to say on

this.

BUCHINGER. I would not like to speak of the things

which are not yet accomplished, so perhaps I will just

mention two or three of our programs which are already successfully under way. I was astonished that

Carlos Lehmann did not mention one of them, but

perhaps he was too modest to do so. When I came with

a Guggenheim fellowship to the United States, I was

studying the existing conservation organizations and

realized how little was known about most of them in

Latin America, and how many of them would be good

examples to follow. For example, the Nature Conservancy type of organizations, which have only one objective—saving natural areas—can ask the governSMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

ments to set up parks. When we established our Latin

American Desk in the Nature Conservancy in the

United States, we got in contact with some of our

friends who we knew might be interested in establishing similar nonprofit national organizations within

their countries—naturally without being branches of

the Nature Conservancy in the United States. During

a visit to Colombia, Carlos Lehmann showed me an

area which was the last remnant of an extensive forest

on the highway between Cali and Popayan. We

thought that we might use this area as an example of

what can be done in the way of preservation. Carlos

Lehmann encouraged his friends to form a Nature

Conservancy type of organization. Then we helped the

Colombians get some money for the first purchase. It

was not a big sum, somewhere about $2,000; but

thanks to the World Wildlife Fund and Dr. Chapman's

donation a small area could be saved. It is the last

refuge of about 147 species of birds. The new Nature

Conservancy group got so enthusiastic about their

project that within a year they doubled the terrain.

The Cali group got such good publicity in the press

that others followed their example. Actually, similar

land-saving projects are going on in three other cities.

Dr. Ibarra does similar work in Guatemala. Practically

in each Latin American country a Nature Conservancy

organization is already formed, or at least there are

some projects on which interested conservationists are

working.

As for Chile, I think you will be very pleased to hear

that as of 7 months ago Chile has a minister of agriculture who is one of the greatest conservationists on the

continent—he is more of a "doer" than a talker. He

is trying not only to get the squatters out of the national parks but also to establish a suitable budget to

train and employ wardens. Adequately trained wardens are essential; such work cannot be left to other

agencies. The third interesting program is in cooperation with the National Geographic Magazine. Laurance Rockefeller is going to write about this new

conservation movement in our hemisphere, which we

hope is only a beginning for better accomplishments to

follow.
Changing Abundance of Migratory Birds in

North America

John W. Aldrich and Chandler S. Robbins

It is a well-known fact that many species of migratory birds have increased or decreased over the years

and that many of the changes in abundance are the

direct results of human activities. We wish to summarize the principal factors that contribute to these

changes and to discuss briefly the means we have of

detecting changes when they occur. About 400 species

which breed in North America migrate to Latin

America for the winter.

Since first settlement of the country by Europeans,

changes in habitats of North American birds obviously

have been profound. It is certain that these changes

have had a very great effect on the abundance of many

species of birds which nested in these habitats. Some

increased, others decreased, probably largely as a result

of these habitat changes. Contributing also to the drastic change in bird life in the earlier history of North

American settlement was excessive exploitation of

numerous species for meat and feathers. These extreme

and uncontrolled causes of mortality have been greatly

reduced, and managed killing for recreation and for

depredation control has taken their place.

Another important factor in changing populations is

competition with other species of birds, including

parasitism by cowbirds. During the past two decades

there has been a considerable increase in the breeding

range of the brown-headed cowbird in several portions

of the United States and Canada; and since this species

lays its eggs in the nests of other birds, it is bound to

have a significant effect on many of the small migratory

species. To cite one example, Mayfield (1960), in his

intensive study of the Kirtland's warbler in Michigan,

found that 55 percent of the nests of this rare species

are parasitized by cowbirds. He concludes that "Kirtland's warblers would produce 60 percent more fledglings if there were no cowbird interference." The

cowbird was believed originally to have been a bird of

the prairies, where it was associated with the bison, and

apparently it did not occur in the breeding range of

the Kirtland's warbler until about 100 years ago.

The introduced starling, which has now spread all

the way across the North American continent, has been

an important factor in the decrease of several cavitynesting species, such as the flickers, great crested flycatcher, and bluebirds. The introduced house sparrow,

which is one of the most abundant birds over a large

portion of the United States, must compete directly

with many seed-eating species at times of food shortage, and it also competes for nesting sites with some of

the cavity-nesting species.

Man also has changed the environment of birds quite

drastically by pollution of streams, soil, and air. Efforts

are being made to control this pollution. In order

to rid farmlands and forests of insect pests and to protect humans from diseases and discomfort, tremendous

quantities of various pesticides are used annually.

Studies of the effects of a few pesticides such as DDT

have been made in various parts of the country, but

many wildlife losses caused by pesticides still have not

been measured or evaluated.

We feel certain that great changes in abundance

of birds have taken place in the past as a result of

environmental changes, but until recently we have

had very little documentary evidence of the magnitude

of these changes. Probably no facet of the knowledge

of our avifauna has been the subject of so much

speculation and supported by so few facts as its numerical status. Except for a few species of game birds,

there is very little usable information on the changing

status of any species which breeds in North America

and winters south of the United States border.

Although the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife

has been gathering information on the distribution and

migration of North American birds for the past 80

years, much of the earlier information related only to

time of arrival and departure and to presence or ab17
18

sense of a species rather than to its abundance. It is

only in the past 30 years that there has been an organized effort to record the abundance of migratory birds

other than waterfowl.

Starting in 1937 the National Audubon Society,

with the cooperation of the Bureau of Sport Fisheries

and Wildlife, encouraged ornithologists to establish

study plots of from 15 to 100 acres and to determine

the actual number of breeding birds in each of these

study plots. In order to permit comparison between

areas it was stipulated that each study plot should be of

uniform habitat throughout—that is, either all pine

woods, all salt marsh, or all cornfield, so that the

density of each species of bird in this particular habitat

could be determined. Attempts have been made to

standardize procedures by use of the "Spot Mapping

Method" (Williams, 1936).

When the same area is covered for a series of years

it is possible to determine changes in abundance from

year to year. A few areas have been covered for a

decade or more and these give us information on

population trends for these specific areas.

If hundreds of areas representing all of our major

habitats had been censused periodically over a long

period of years we would now have considerable information on population trends. Unfortunately, only

40 to 70 areas are censused in any given year and only

12 were censused both at the beginning and the end

of the decade for which land-use figures were assembled. When we wish to check on changes in abundance of any given species we often find that the species

for which we want information nested on only a very

few of the study plots that were censused, and that our

sample is so small that it is impossible to know whether

a species that has decreased on the study plots has

actually decreased in numbers in its overall geographic

range. Generally, when an area of woodland is subsequently converted into house lots the census taker discontinues his studies and no record of the drastic

change in birdlife is maintained.

The progress of bird habitat changes has been

largely associated with the history of agricultural development. With the settlement of the country more

and more land was cleared and planted to crops. This

resulted in a decline in habitat first of forest species

and then of prairie inhabitants as settlement moved

westward.

The total land used for crops in the 48 contiguous

states peaked at 387 million acres in 1949, but then the

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

trend seemed to change and by 1961 cultivated acreage had fallen off to 340 million. This decline in cultivation, of course, means that the land released from

this use was converted into other types of habitat. For

the most part, it would appear that this change was

back to woody growth, since the acreage of forest and

woodland in the 48 contiguous states of the United

States increased from about 606 million in 1950 to

around 640 million in 1959 (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1953, and Wooten and Pendleton, 1962). In

the eastern United States alone there was an increase

in this type of land use of over 2 million acres between

1950 and 1963.

This increase in acreage of forest land becomes more

significant if we break it down into the major ecological

units which we are calling Life Areas, the boundaries

of which are determined largely by their climax vegetation. In this way we can interpret the increase in

forest in terms of its probable effect on certain species

of forest-inhabiting birds, and such species make up a

large majority of the land birds which migrate to Latin

America.

Our best information on changing abundance of

North American land birds comes from three of the

principal Life Areas of North America where breeding bird censuses have been conducted over periods of

years long enough to show trends. The map (fig. 1)

shows the location of these Life Areas which we are

calling the Eastern Deciduous Forest, the Northern

Hardwood-Conifer, and the Oak-Savannah Life

Areas.

The Eastern Deciduous Forest Life Area makes up

all or part of 28 states in the eastern United States

and a very small part of southern Ontario in Canada.

It harbors such inter-American migrants as the redeyed vireo, ovenbird, great crested flycatcher, eastern

wood pewee, wood thrush, scarlet tanager, summer

tanager, and hooded warbler. In 1950 there were 148,-

728,000 acres of wooded habitat in the U.S. portion

of the Eastern Deciduous Forest Area. By 1963 this

had increased to 157,861,000 (over 9 million acres).

The Northern Hardwood-Conifer Life Area comprises parts of 14 states in the eastern United States

and five provinces of eastern Canada. In 1950 there

were 72,741,000 acres of forest in this Life Area within

the United States. By 1963 this had increased to 75,-

850,000 acres (over 3 million acres). It is unfortunate

that no figures are available for Canada, because a very

large part of the life area is in that country. Character-
NUMBER 2 6 19

\J

LIFE AREAS OF NORTH A:MERICA '

•n^ 2

FIGURE 1.—Life areas of North America (revised from Aldrich, 1963).
20

istic species of birds that breed in this area and winter

in Latin America are blackburnian, black-throated

green, Canada, magnolia, and black-throated blue

warblers, solitary vireo, veery, and least flycatcher.

The Oak-Savannah Life Area is confined to parts of

10 states in the mid western section of the United

States. It is characterized by, in addition to grassland

inhabitants, such woodland types as house wren,

indigo bunting, great crested flycatcher, eastern wood

pewee, and yellow-billed cuckoo. In 1950 there were

55,302,000 acres of woodland in this life area and by

1963 this had decreased almost 10 million acres to 45,-

915,000. This decrease was largely in two states, Texas

and Oklahoma, where the clearing of woody growth

evidently far exceeded its increase during that period.

As noted above, despite the decrease of wooded habitat in the southern portion of the Oak-Savannah, the

overall increase in forest in the eastern United States

was about 2 million acres. It should be realized however, that these figures can be misleading, because at

the same time the overall amount of wooded acreage

was increasing, the type of growth was being changed

from more mature to younger types as a result of selecting the more mature forests for cutting. This means

that the abundance of breeding birds adapted to woodland types was changing. With the decrease in mature

forest the abundance of most species decreases,

although there is relatively little difference in the

species present.

To add further to the difficulty of interpreting the

effect of habitat change on birds which migrate to

Latin America, there appears to have been an actual

change in abundance of a few forest species unassociated with habitat change. This is indicated from analysis of the Audubon Field Notes "breeding bird census"

data for the past 15 years. These suggest that in the

relatively limited areas for which usable samples were

available (12 areas totaling 375 acres) the following

inter-American migrants showed a marked decrease:

in the Oak-Savannah, indigo bunting; in the Eastern

Deciduous Forest, ovenbird, yellowthroat, black-andwhite warbler, and ruby-throated hummingbird; in the

Northern Hardwood-Conifer, magnolia warbler, blackthroated blue warbler, and solitary vireo. On the other

hand, many more species showed no marked change

and a few even slight increases. Indications of abundance considered were both numbers of areas in which

increases and decreases were shown and number of individual birds involved each year. Since the total numSMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

ber of census areas that contained these species was so

small (11 for the red-eyed vireo and fewer for all the

other species), and since there was no consistent trend

in populations of these species, we can only conclude

that these may be indications of actual population

changes.

Using quite a different census technique, Graber and

Graber (1963), in a 50-year comparison of abundance

of birdlife on transects covered in Illinois in 1907-9 and

1957-58, found among the woodland and wood-margin species a decrease in indigo buntings, great crested

flycatchers, wood thrushes, yellowthroats, and yellowbreasted chats. It is interesting to note that indigo buntings and yellowthroats also showed a decrease in the

Audubon Field Notes breeding bird censuses previously

mentioned, whereas wood thrushes showed a slight

increase.

Among the birds which breed in North America and

migrate into Latin America there are a few species

which have received individual and intensive study.

These include the Kirtland's warbler, the goldencheeked warbler, and the peregrine falcon. No marked

decrease in either Kirtland's warbler or golden-cheeked

warbler has been documented, but the potentials for

a serious decrease are present on their breeding

grounds. The active brush removal campaign in the

Edwards Plateau region of Texas, stronghold of the

golden-cheek, could result in a serious setback for this

species. Fortunately, present land management seems

to favor the Kirtland's warbler, which is still classed

as an endangered species. Both the U.S. Forest Service

and the Michigan State Department of Conservation have set aside refuge areas where the habitat is

being managed specifically for optimum habitat of the

Kirtland's warbler.

The peregrine falcon has shown a shocking decline

in population in the more southern portions of North

America, but there is no evidence that this is a result of

conditions on the wintering grounds. In fact, the most

migratory populations of the peregrine, those which

nest in the Arctic, have shown little or no decrease in

their populations. Several factors are responsible for the

decline of the more southern breeding peregrines, although the relative importance of these various factors

is not known. There is strong suspicion that pesticide

residues in prey species have a cumulative effect on

the health of adult peregrines and on hatchability of

the eggs. Falconers and egg collectors made periodic

raids on many of the eastern eyries and still take scores
NUMBER 26 21

of Arctic transients at places where they concentrate

during migration. And peregrines, like most other

birds of prey, continue to be shot and trapped by some

farmers, hunters, and other citizens. During the past

two decades there has also been a corresponding sharp

decrease in many other birds of prey. No birds of prey

except eagles are protected by federal law in the

United States, and many states give no protection to

hawks and owls.

Migratory game birds that are managed for hunting

hy the Canadian, Mexican, and United States governments, under terms of the migratory bird treaties

between these countries, comprise a number of important inter-American migrants. These include bluewinged teal, lesser scaup, pintail, shoveler, and whitefronted goose, among the waterfowl, and also the

white-winged and mourning doves and band-tailed

pigeon. Although the numbers of the waterfowl vary

considerably from year to year, students of their populations believe these changes can be explained almost

entirely by environmental conditions on the breeding

grounds. There is no indication at present that winter

habitat conditions, either in the United States or south

of the border, have contributed to these fluctuations.

The same is true of the doves and pigeons, although

less is known about the effect of winter environment,

including hunting, on these species.

There are many examples of species that have disappeared from portions of their range. The cliff swallow has become very scarce east of the Appalachians.

The bank swallow has almost disappeared as a breeding bird in the Central Atlantic States. The yellowthroated vireo can no longer be found in places where

it used to nest in New England. Whether there has

been a corresponding increase elsewhere in the breeding ranges of these species has not been documented.

As a result of stopping the killing of herons and

egrets, which formerly were slaughtered in large numbers for the millinery trade, most heron species have

shown a marked increase in the past few decades.

Some illegal killing of both game and nongame

species continues, but efforts are continually being

made to educate our citizens regarding the laws that

protect our migratory birds.

As we have mentioned, a few studies have been made

of total populations of individual species. For the great

majority of migratory species, however, it is very difficult to find enough population data to determine trends

in abundance.

The Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife is presently embarking on an extensive program to detect and

measure changes in abundance of almost all species of

North American birds. This breeding bird survey was

tested in the states of Maryland and Delaware in the

summer of 1965 and a summary of the Maryland

results (Robbins, 1965) was distributed to the delegates of this conference. In June 1966 it is planned to

expand this survey to include most of the eastern

United States and eastern Canada. In the next 2 or 3

years the objective is to sample all of the central and

western states as well.

This survey is taken primarily by qualified amateur

ornithologists, who follow strict uniform rules that

have been established by the Bureau of Sport Fisheries

and Wildlife after several years of research on census

methods. Routes are selected at random. Each route

has 50 stops, one-half mile apart. The observer stops 3

minutes at each stop and counts all birds seen within

one-quarter mile and all birds heard during the 3

minutes. Figure 2 shows the sheet used for recording

data in the field. Starting time is standardized at onehalf hour before sunrise, and it takes about 4 hours to

complete coverage of a route. Except for certain check

routes, each is covered only once each season. On the

Maryland and Delaware routes an average of 20 birds

were identified and recorded at each stop, or about

1,000 birds for each 50-stop route.

Figure 3 shows the summary sheet from which the

records are put on punchcards. The first column gives

the combined totals for the first 10 stops, the second

column the next 10, etc. The final two columns give

the total number of birds of each species and the number of stops at which the species was recorded.

Since these transects sample all important habitats,

including urban and suburban areas, they should provide an estimate of the actual change in abundance of

almost all species whose breeding ranges they

encompass.

In addition to showing change in abundance over

a period of years, this survey will permit mapping of

the relative abundance of a species throughout its

range and the determination of those areas of maximum abundance where preservation of habitat for a

given species is most desirable. Figure 4 shows the

relative abundance of the bobwhite in Maryland and

Delaware based on the 1965 breeding bird survey.

Although this species is nonmigratory, it will illustrate

how relative abundance can be mapped throughout
22

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

Bureau of Sport Fisherie s and Wildlif e BREEDING BIRD SURVEY

State Route Name] J? £ LT~ J V > L L £" Route No.l

Stop No.

Starting Time

HERON

HERON

DUCK

TURKE Y VULTURE

BLAC K VULTUR E

HAWK

HAWK

OSPREY

3O8WHITE

RAIL

KILLDEER

PLOVE R

STTTE^VN'DP'PER"

SANDPIPE R

GULL

TERN

MOURNING DOVE

YELLOW-BIL L CUCKOO.

BLACK-BILLE O CUCKOO

OWL

CHUCK-WILL'S W100W.

COMMON NIGHTHAWK.. .

CHIMNEY SWIFT

RUBY- T HimiNGBIRO.

BELTED KINGFISHER..

YELLOW-SHAFT FL ICKR

REO-BELLIE O WOODP'R

HAIR Y WOODPECKER.. .

OOWNY WOODPECKER.. .

I. KINGBIRD

GT CREST FLYCATCHER

HORNED LARK

SWALLOW

PURPLE MARTI N

BLUE JAY

BLACK-CAP CHICKAOEE

CADOLINA CHICKADEE .

WHITE-BR . NUTHATCH.

BROWN-HD. NUTHATCH .

HOUSE WREN

CAROLINA WREN

WREN

1OCKINGBIR0

CATBIRO

BROWN THRASHER

01

•T--

13

\

1

/

2

17-

11

1

If

3

2.Z

II

1

till

II

h

\

5

11

1

I

b

\

- j11

II

Y

1

1

I

i

1

1

8

f-T

1

1

II

\

1

9

5-0

1

1

1

10

n

II

i

i

II

Stop No.

Starting Time

ROBIN

HERMI T THRUSH

VEER *

E. BLUEBIR D

BLUE-GR GKATCATCHER

CEDAR WAXWING

STARLING

WHITE-EYE D VIREO.. .

SOLITAR Y VIRE O

RED-EYE O VIRE O

WARBLIN G VIRE O

BLK-ANO-WH T WARBLER

GOLOEN-WING WARBLER

YELLOW WARBLER

MAGNOLIA WARBLER.. .

BLK-THR . GREEN WARB

CERULEAN WARBLER.. .

BLACKBURNIAN WARB. .

YELLOW-THRTO . WARB .

PIN E WARBLER

PRAIRI E WARBLER... .

OVENBIR O

L A . WATERTHRUSH... .

YELLOW-BR . CHAT... .

HOODED WARBLER

CANADA WARBLER

HOUSE SPARROW

BOBOLINK

E. MEADOWLARK

ORCHARD ORIOLE

BALTIMORE ORIOLE.. .

COMMON GRACKLE

BROWN-HEAO COWBIRO .

•SCARLET TANHGER

SUMMER TANAGER

CARDINAL

ROSE-BR . GROSBEAK. .

BLUE GROSBEAK

INDIG O BUNTING

RUFOUS-SIOE O TOWHEE

SAVANNAH SPARROW.. .

GRASSHOPPER SPARROW

VESPER SPARROW

CHIPPIN G SPARROW.. .

FIEL D SPARROW

SWAMP SPARROW

SONG SPARROW

SPARROW

—L-l

III

J_ 1

1

|

1 1

n—

i

i

i

N

3

m

W

i

it

i

1"

il

\

1

II

1

1

I

II

•i

i

b

1

II

I

1

1

1

—

1

H

1

1

1

| -

b

1

II

II

\

1

1

I

I

9

t

1

III

1

i

i

MM

1

1

FIGURE 2.—Field record sheet for breeding bird survey.
NUMBER 26

Bureau of Sport Fisherie s and Wildlife SUMMARY SHEET', BREEDING BIRD SURVEY

23

Stat e 1MJ>.| Route No.jp- 11 Startin g Locality | Q EL.TS VtLU g | Lat.-Long. fri'ol- 7<

Counties (Stop numbers in each) Priwc t Gvorjes f*l-lg ) H »w*»^ (* Zl-so)

Observer (Last name, then initials) ! R O g g INS. C. S.

Mailing Address Mi »>Ar y Bird. PopuUtioi / St«h'on, Lgur*l,

Weather (start & finish): Temp. |jr7° - 7i° | Wind Speed, Eeaufort | 0 - 2.| Sky Code |0-o l

Date [ 6/ 7/6^] Total Species S~^ Name of Assistant, if any w*wt

SPECIE S AOU

GREEN HERON 201

Wooo PUCK... . ......14 4

TURKEY VULTURE 325

BLACK VULTUR E 326

REO-TAUEO HAWK.... 337

RED-bMC U O f RED HAWK33 9

BROAO-WINGEO HAW. 343

OSPREY 364

SPARROW HAWK...... 360

BOBWHITE -.289

RmG->ECK PHEASANT309I

KIUOEER 273

WOODCOCK......••...228

SPOTTEO SANOPIPER. 263

WilLET 258

LAUGHIN G GULL.... - 058

MOURNING DOVE.....31 6

YEILOW-BILI CUCKOO. 387

BLACK-BILLE O CUCKCC38 8

SCREECH CWL 373

GREAT HORNED OWL. ..37 5

BARRED OWL 368

CHUCK-WILL'S-WIOOW.446

WH IP-POOR-W:<.L 417

COMMON NIGHTI-AWK, ..420

CHIMNEN SWIFT 423

RuBY-T HLM1INGBIRD.428

BELTED KINGFISHER..390

YELLOW-SHAFT FUCKR4C

PlLEATEO WOO0PECKR.405

RtO-BE'. LIED W0PKR..409

HAIRY WOODPECKER...393

DOWNY WOODPECKER .394

E- KINGBIRD. 444

GT CREST FLYCAICHER452

E. PHOEBE 456

ACADIAN FLYCATCHER.465

THAILI' S FI.YCATCHER466

LEAST FLYCATCHER. .46'

E. WOOD PEWEE ..461

HORNEO LARK.,.. .....474

TREE SWALLOW. .....614

BANK SWALLOW. .-616

ROUGH-WI

BARN SWA

CLIFF SW

PURPLE M

I 2 3 '

TO-A .

K o i -•

iO OF

JTOPSI

SPECIES ACU

e SWALLOW.617

LOW .613

LLOW... .612

RT III 611

BLUE JAY...........47 7

COMMON CROW....... .48 8

FISH CROW... ...490

BLACK-CAP CHICKADEE735

CAROLINA CH ICKADEE.736

TUFTEO TITMOUSE. ...73 1

WHITE-BR. NUTHATCH.727

BROWN-HEAOED NUT...729

HOUSE WREN.........72I

CAROLINA WREN. .....71 8

LONG-BIL MARSH WREN725

MOCKINGBIRD-. •• 703

CATS IPD. ...........70 4

BROWN THRASHER.. ...

7

0 5

ROBIN .761

WOOD THPUSH. ...755

HERMIT THRUSH 759

VEERY ......75 6

E. BLUEBIRD ...766

BLUE-GR GNATCAJCHER75I

H.

it

z<\

12.

15

JJ»

CEDAR WAXWING. -S19

LOGGERHEAD SHRIKE-622

STARLING ....493

WH.^E-EYE D VIREO 631

YELlOW-ThR. ViREO 628

SOLITAR Y VIREO. . ...629

REO-EYE D VIRE O . .624

WARBLIN G V<REO -.62 '

BLK-AND-WH - WARB. 636

PROTHONOTARY WARB.63 7

WDRM-EA-II G WARBLR63 9

GOLCEN-WIN G WARB. 64 2

BLUE-WIIGEO WAR8-.64I

PiFu.l WARB'. E4....648

YELLOW WARBLER 652

MAGNOLIA WARBLER. 65"

BLK-TH«.. B' UE WARB654

B.K-THR.GREEN WARB667

CERULEAN WARB!.ER..658

BLA:-.BURNIAN WARB.662

YE.^OW-THR . W«RB..663

CHESVNU'-S:DE: W..659

PiNE WARBIER . -671

PRA:RIE WARBLER...673

OVENBIRJ.- ...674

No- WATERTHRUSH .6:5

L A. WATERTHRUSh- ..6T6

KENTUCKY WARC.EP

YELLOWHROAT. .. .

YELLOW-BR. CHAT.

HOOOEO W«RP;.E« .

CANAOA WA»FIER-.

. ..6' 7

.681

.683

.684

.686

AMFRICtN RE0START.687

HOUSE SPARROW 6882

BOBOLINK.......... 494

E- MEAOOW.A^ x...... 501

REO-W.NGLO BLIBRO 498

ORCHARD ORIOLE.....506

BALTIMORE ORIOIE..50 "

BOA'-TAIL GRACK^E-513

COMMON SHACKLE..••511

BROWN-HO. COWBIRO-495

S-AR.E TANAGER .608

SUMMER TANAGER. -.610

CARDINAL 593

ROSE-BR. GROSBEAK 595

B'.UE GROSBEAK ,. .,.597

I HO i GO BUN: '»G- ..598

AMEn ::AN GOLDF :NCH529

RjfOUS-SIOEO TOWHE587

SAVANNAH SFARROW. 542

GRASSHOPPER SPIP.--546

HENSLOW'S SPARROW-54''

SHARP-TA ILED S°AR 549

SEASIDE SPARROW-..550

VESPER S^AR^OW . 540

SLA^E-COL JUNCO .56"

CH IPPING SPARROW 560

FIELD SPARROW.....563

SU»MP SPAR'OW -584

SONG S?ARROW- • -58 I

JJL

f

JLk

12

FIGURE 3.—Summary sheet of records taken from field sheets for breeding bird survey.
24 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

FIGURE 4.—Relative abundance of the bobwhite quail in Maryland from the 1965 breeding bird

survey.

a state, a nation, or a continent. The actual mapping

will be programed through a UNIVAC computer in

such a way that the totals for a given species for each

route will be printed in their proper places on a large

map of the North American continent.

The breeding bird survey does not measure the

actual population; it merely samples it. Nor does it

compare the abundance of one species with the abundance of another species. A large or a noisy species is

more easily noticed by the observer than is a small or

quiet species. In time, correction factors can be worked

out to adjust for the differences in conspicuousness.

However, the principal objectives of detecting changes

in abundance and of mapping relative abundance can

be accomplished without these correction factors.

The greatest variable factor on the breeding bird

survey is the observer. This variable was checked on the

Maryland and Delaware counts by requiring each participant to cover one check route in addition to the

other routes covered. All check routes were also run b

the same Bureau employee, so the performance of each

observer could be compared with the performance of

every other observer. Daily changes over the same

route when covered by the same observer also were

studied.

We believe that this survey will be a big step forward in documenting population changes of our migratory birds. Only by recognizing changes as they occur

can we take the necessary steps to provide protectior

at the times and places where it is most needed.

Literature Cited

Aldrich, J. W.

1963. Geographic Orientation of American Tetraonidae.

Journal of Wildlife Management, 27:528-545.

Graber, R. R., and J. W. Graber

1963. A Comparative Study of Bird Populations in Illinois, 1906-1909 and 1956-1958. Illinois Natural

History Survey Bulletin, 28(3):377-528.
NUMBER 26 25

Mayfield, H.

1960. The Kirtland's Warbler. Cranbrook Institute of

Science, Bloomfield Hills, Mich. 242 pages.

Robbins, C. S.

1965. Fifty Thousand Birds Recorded on Breeding Bird

Survey. Maryland Birdlife, 21(3): 73-79.

U.S. Department of Agriculture.

1953. Supplement to Major Uses of Land in the United

States, Basic Land-Use Statistics 1950. U.S. Department of Agriculture Technical Bulletin, 1082:

1-78.

Williams, A. B.

1936. The Composition and Dynamics of a Beech-Maple

Climax Community. Ecological Monographs, 6:

318-408.

Wooten, K. G., and W. C. Pendleton

1962. Major Uses of Land and Water in the United

States, Summary for 1959. U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Agriculture Economic Report, 13:

1-54.

Discussion

PETERSON. HOW far apart are the check points on

the census?

ROBBINS. One-half mile.

PETERSON. That I find about right. I have been

using that on woodcock surveys at night and you can

be about sure you are not duplicating the same birds.

Of course your (Chan Robbins) ears are particularly

sharp. You would assume that half a mile is about

right, wouldn't you?

ROBBINS. Well, of course, certain species you can

hear a long distance. You take something like a pheasant or a bobwhite and you will hear it beyond the limit.

That is true—but each species will be sampled

uniformly.

PETERSON. There is certainly an enormous difference between your ears and most ears, and even those

of the best birdwatchers.

ROBBINS. YOU would be surprised how closely these

counts agree when you get a lot of people covering

the same area. There are certain standard differences;

but as far as recording species is concerned, on a route

where the average is about 60 species, you will find that

almost everyone of the people we used on the survey

fou,nd between 55 and 65 species. You have differences

in the concentration of different observers. I may rely

more on my ears, while somebody else who does not

hear quite as much or as far may be recording more

birds he has seen. While I am missing chimney swifts,

I will be picking up distant red-eyed vireos or something like that.

PETERSON. Then, of course, there is the difference

in ears with age. After 15 years an observer's blackburnian warbler's voice may drop out of his register.

What do you do about that?

ROBBINS. That is one reason we have to select our

observers carefully, Roger. We know that this is going

to happen. We, of course, want to keep the same observers to reduce the variability and yet it is very true

that with most people the high frequency calls are

going to drop out. I think that over a period of years

the inevitable turnover in observers is going to be sufficient so that the number of blackburnian warblers

recorded will not decrease seriously as a result of inability to hear the song.

PETERSON. I think it is a wonderful project—one

that will give us some of the data we need. We need

such data before we really can talk with authority

about some of these things.

PHILLIPS. YOU do not want to forget from that map

that you put up on the board there, that this technique

is very fine when applied to a level area with very

little ecological variability like Maryland. But when

you start to apply it to Arizona, or any other mountainous western state, your results are going to depend

entirely on what particular type of habitat you happen

to get going in.

ROBBINS. This is very true. But, of course, all of our

starting points are determined at random. I ran routes

last summer in the Rockies west of Denver up to Loveland Pass in the high country above timber line.

My randomly selected route just happened to go

through the pass. We do have difficulty in finding

roads in certain places, but it is still possible to get a

sample which is much more representative than anything that we have been able to achieve in the past.

And while we do have problems with availability of

roads, and problems with traffic, we have certain rules

whereby we try to avoid being near the main highways.

There are no habitats that potentially could not be

sampled by this method. On the Loveland Pass route

we turned up a white-tailed ptarmigan. So you cannot

say we do not sample a particular habitat. Theoretically, we can sample everything. It is only the habitats

that are very local and very poorly distributed that

will be poorly sampled.

PETERSON. DO you have a timespan within the days

when you are to do it? Because that could be critical.

ROBBINS. Coverage of each route starts exactly onehalf hour before sunrise. It takes approximately 4 hours

336-550 0^-7
26 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

to complete the 50 stops. This gets most of the routes

covered before there is a very big drop in the singing

of the birds; and if there is a drop this shows up on

our summary sheets where we report everything by

series of 10 stops. Birds such as the wood thrush will

show up high in the first 10 stops then drop down

low for the others. So if we want to compare only the

first 10 stops we can do this. It is very easy to do.

SHOUT. I noticed that the species which seem to

show a decrease are edge species like the indigo bunting

and the yellowthroat. I suspect that this is true. The

reasons for it are probably to be found in the agricultural history of farm abandonment earlier in the century, and the subsequent growing up of woodlands.

Agricultural land which is used, say in central New

York with which I am familiar, is used more intensively. The land released from use has grown up into

woodland, thus diminishing edge habitat for these

birds. Also the draining of swamps and the resultant

decrease in edge habitat around such wet areas may be

a factor in their decline.
Natural Vegetation and Reservation Prospects in

Northern Latin America

L. R. Holdridge

Because of a broad diversity in climate, physiography, and soils, northern Latin America, comprising Middle America, Colombia, and Venezuela, is one

of the richest biological regions on our planet. Coincidentally, it is predominantly a sector of small nations

and of rapid demographic growth. Truly, within this

region we face an immediate and severe challenge to

find effective ways and means to maintain an adequate

sample of this rich biological heritage for the future.

Within northern Latin America, the true tropical

region extends northwards to mid-Nicaragua on the

mainland and to the passage between Martinique and

Dominica in the Windward Islands. The subtropical

region, characterized by a significantly wider annual

range of temperatures as well as by less complex and

less exuberant vegetative growth, continuous northward to include the southern tip of Florida, the Bahamas, and the Bermudas, while on the continent it

gives way to the warm temperate region in northern

Mexico. As the latter region extends into the southern

United States, it will not be mentioned further in the

present paper.

Complete sets of altitudinal belts from sea level to

perpetual snow and ice may be found in both the tropical and subtropical regions of the area, comprising

seven belts in both Colombia and Venezuela in the

former region and six belts in Mexico in the latter.

Mean annual precipitation covers a wide range in

both regions. As an example, in Colombia alone, rainfall averages vary from about 200 mm. to over 10,000.

By subdivision of the precipitation ranges in the altitudinal belts of each region into natural life zone units,

one obtains a rough estimate of the relative diversity

of the flora and fauna in each nation. As a few examples, Colombia has 23 life zones, Costa Rica 12,

Guatemala about nine, and Puerto Rico five.

Each life zone may comprise several distinct associations due to edaphic and local climatic or atmospheric

factors. Edaphic conditions which produce different

associations range from waterlogged swamps or highly

fertile alluvial and recent volcanic soils to excessively

drained terrain of shallow soils over limestone or

infertile pumice or laterite soils. Local subclimatic or

atmospheric conditions such as the monsoonal Pacific

coastal region of Central America or cloud belts give

rise to other distinctive associations.

This brief sketch of the ecological diversity in northern Latin America has been presented to provide a

basis for an understanding of the changes in natural

conditions effected by man's activities in the past and

of those to be expected with the rapidly increasing

population pressure.

Man has found and still finds the most suitable conditions for agriculture and habitation along or close

to the unity line of potential evapotranspiration ratio.

The unity line corresponds to where the precipitation

which enters the earth is equal in quantity to the water

which moves upward in the soil for evaporation and

transpiration. In essence, permanent agriculture is

most feasible near the unity line because soil fertility

is not excessively leached downward into streams nor

concentrated at the surface in saline soils. Also, living

is more pleasant due to the absence of excessive humidity or drought.

Thus, the natural vegetation in the moist and dryhumidity provinces bordering the unity line is the first

to be removed by man in any region. In northern

Latin America, it is now very difficult to find any appreciable natural mature forests on fertile lands of

gentle or flat terrain within these two rows of life

zones. Even on poorer soils or broken topography, land

use within these climates has been heavy in grazing

or shifting agriculture. Furthermore, these life zones

with sufficient humidity for considerable herbaceous

growth together with generally severe dry seasons con27
28

stitute the areas where fire causes heavy damage to

vegetation and wildlife.

Toward drier conditions, agriculture becomes more

difficult and precarious except on irrigated areas. Although agricultural use is generally lighter on sloping

lands, the vegetation is less complex and slower growing, so that the effects of any disturbance are long

enduring. Due to the predominance of hard, dense

woods, such forests in northern Latin America have

been heavily exploited for firewood, posts, and railway ties over a long period. The net result today in

areas drier than the subhumid is an almost complete

lack of mature or virgin vegetation, but, at the same

time, a persistence of considerable areas of heavily

disturbed natural vegetation. Fires have been a less

destructive factor in the semiarid and drier areas due

to the greater scarcity of combustible ground vegetation.

Until recently, disturbance of the natural vegetation in the provinces of the Wet and Rain Forest life

zones has been much less severe. The major portion of

our remaining virgin or mature natural forests is to

be found in these climates. Only in the last decade or

two has there been a significant movement to convert

these less desirable zones to agricultural use. Experience to date indicates that man can develop permanent

prosperous agricultural settlements within these life

zones only on alluvial plains and recent volcanic soils.

Because sloping lands in these areas lose their fertility

rapidly, early attempts at land use are often those of

temporary shifting cultivation with the areas being

invaded rapidly with second-growth stands. On steep

slopes where high rainfall is normal, however, longterm damage or site destruction may occur, as these

photographs taken by Dr. J. A. Tosi in Costa Rica

show so clearly [not reproduced]. Fires, with the exception of monsoonal associations, are ordinarily not

a severe problem.

By this subdivision of the regions and altitudinal

belts into three broad groupings of humidity provinces

one can more readily visualize the future changes to

be effected by man and better orient any program

of preservation of natural areas.

In the Wet and Rain Forest life zones, there still remain extensive areas of natural vegetation with its

associated fauna. Population pressure is being directed

increasingly into such regions. However, if effective

action is taken within the next few years tracts of appreciable size may still be preserved.

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

In semiarid and drier life zones the existing status

of considerable acreage in heavily disturbed natural

vegetation should not change appreciably for several

decades. Good-sized tracts can still be acquired which,

with adequate protection, would slowly return to their

original natural condition.

Heaviest pressure has been and will continue to be

exerted in the intermediate moist and dry life zones.

Within these two humidity provinces, attempts to preserve any remaining natural areas must be carried out

immediately. Herein we must accept areas of poorer

soils with even, perhaps, considerable past degradation

of the natural vegetation and corresponding reduction

in numbers of the remnant birds.

The situation in northern Latin America is essentially only an ecological repetition of the land-use picture by humidity provinces in the United States. Large

areas of good forest cover still persist in the Wet and

Rain Forest life zones in the Northeast, Appalachia, the

Pacific Northwest, and in the higher portions of some

of the western sierras. Likewise in the semiarid Southwest, there has been much disturbance, but extensive

areas of natural vegetation persist. It is only in the

intermediate and extensive humid and subhumid provinces where natural vegetation has been heavily

reduced.

The preceding general discussion indicates that the

present situation in northern Latin America is still not

too serious with respect to the actual preservation of

existing forms of biological life. Because of the geometrically rising population, however, we will very soon

be confronted with a situation wherein the major part

of our natural vegetation with its resident avifauna and

other forms of life will be seriously threatened. There

is no doubt that we are swinging beyond an optimum

man-area relationship, so that if man does not learn

to control his own population growth, then impartial

ecological forces will bring about disastrous reductions

in the human species.

The main question now, I believe, is how much of

the natural environment, including species, will man

destroy before he brings himself or is forcibly brought

back to a more equitable balance with area. Although

we cannot arrest the tremendous destruction in progress, we can possibly conserve enough judiciously

selected samples of vegetation with its animal life to

avoid any appreciable extinction of species and to

serve as sources for expansion when human population

pressure on the land swings downward or at least stops
NUMBER 2 6 29

expanding. My impression is that it is too late to worry

now about population levels of wildlife. We will be

fortunate if man can save adequate samples of the

originally rich biological life.

The problem boils down to how many samples are

needed, their location and areal extension, and how to

establish and maintain such preserves during the coming 25 to 50 years, or even longer, before the prospect

of a steady-state population becomes firm.

Although minimum numbers for species survival

and the area needed for avifauna are higher than for

plant species, a greater number of sites is more essential to include all the plant species than for birds. Considering trees alone, over a period of time one may

count dozens of species of birds which visit one tree.

On the La Selva tract, Dr. Slud recorded well over

300 species of the avifauna, whereas it is doubtful

that the tree species reach 200. But in the 50,000 K2

of Costa Rica, tree species comprise from two to three

times the number of bird species. This implies that

fewer preserves would be needed to include associations with all of the avifauna of the country than to

be all-inclusive for tree species.

The number of life zones gives only a rough estimate and is below the minimum number of reserves

needed, although it should be possible many times to

include portions of two or more life zones within one

preserve. In Central America, where a part of a life

zone is monsoonal, tracts on both the Caribbean and

Pacific sides of the divide are needed. In general, there

is a wider range or number of associations in the lower

elevation life zones than at higher elevations.

The areal extension of reserves is in part a technical

question of desirable space, but it must also be politically defensible. Perhaps Mexico, Colombia, and Venezuela can justify extensive parks, but within the

countries of Central America and Panama, we may

have to lower our sights to units of rather small acreage, especially so in the more favorable climates. Large

areas of natural reserves within small nations with high

population pressure appear to be impractical.

Specific locations for reserves should be selected on

the basis of highly technical considerations. They

should comprise as great a diversity of natural associations as possible, be relatively accessible, and selected

as those geographically and politically easiest to protect. Priority must be given to selecting and establishing areas in the intermediate humidity zones.

Use of these reserves must be restricted to observation and study. Zoological collections within them

should be definitely prohibited, even for scientific

study. Protection from poaching will be difficult

enough per se without adding the onus of an apparent

reservation for hunting by foreigners alone. Scientific

collections should be carried on only in those areas

rapidly being changed by agricultural invasion.

The most interesting problem at the moment is how

to establish and maintain such reserves. Those who

have lived in advanced nations with their high level

of living are normally imbued with a false general

sense of the effectiveness of legislation and government

control in protecting natural reserves. In the small

tropical and subtropical nations, beset with multitudes

of subsistence agriculturists and rapid demographic

growth, we are faced with a very different situation.

Those governments are now literally overwhelmed

with severe economic pressures, so that their major

efforts must be exerted on finding the means to maintain even a minimum of the basic necessities of social

organization, such as schools, water supplies, electricity,

hospitals, and roads. They can pay no more than lip

service to the concept of effective natural reserves.

When this is understood, one realizes that public

opinion favorable to reserves and organized through

committees cannot be effective either because, in the

first place, such groups represent only a minority of

the public, and secondly, they can do no more than

appeal to the government, which itself cannot move

effectively in that realm.

Clear thinking and new approaches are surely in

order if we are to find a satisfactory solution in the

small nations. We at the Tropical Science Center believe that a local nonprofit scientific organization

might possibly be used as a device to procure and

maintain a series of reserves during the approaching

period of heavy population pressure. This would require international assistance and backing together

with local government acquiescence and support.

However, timing is of extreme importance. For effective results, any program must be initiated right

away. Immediate action is needed to save even small

portions of the natural habitats in the intermediate

climates. It is there also, where population pressure

may already be high, that the techniques of maintenance, including primarily the securement of the respect and support of the surrounding inhabitants, must

be worked out. They obviously would require facing up
30 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

to difficult problems immediately. If the easy route is

taken, however, that of establishing parks located only

in presently isolated areas, then we may not know

how to save these when population pressure reaches

their borders.

We must make our foreign aid more than just a

fostering of temporary production and of keeping the

growth of population at a high level. The myth of

being able to step up food production as fast as population is growing in many of the already overdeveloped

poor nations can only lead to further destruction of

natural resources and more serious problems when we

are finally forced to face up to the increasing ecological

imbalance. Knowing that life for man must be broader

than food securement alone, we must somehow assure

the preservation of the birds, other animal life, and

samples of natural vegetation through the coming period of great pressures on the land. Somehow all people must be induced, even if through indirect channels

at present, to maintain a significant portion of their

rich natural heritage for future generations to know at

first hand and to enjoy. To do this we have to do more

than continue to say some nice words for conservation

or create parks on paper.

Discussion

VOGT. Would Dr. Holdridge hazard a guess on the

extent to which these governments would welcome the

preservation of such land and honor a commitment,

provided funds are available to purchase the lands and

administer them?

HOLDRIDGE. In speaking mainly of the governments

of smaller nations, I think they would welcome it, but

in actuality do not want to accept the responsibility.

VOGT. Or the cost.

HOLDRIDGE. Or the cost, right. We do borrow money

for almost everything today, but there are strong political pressures from the subsistence agriculturalists. We

cannot expect or ask the governments of small countries

to take care of conservation adequately on their own.

It is too optimistic to expect that by their establishing

a law or a park, we are going to have a natural reserve.

We have to face this right now—that it does not follow. This is an extremely tough economic situation to

face and the preservation of something for the scientist

for the future is one of the easiest things to put off until

tomorrow.

FOSBERG. Les, how easy is it for a private owner to

protect an area in Costa Rica in its natural condition?

Is this sufficiently within the pattern of what is accepted so that you do not get impossible pressures?

HOLDRIDGE. Up to the present time, this has been

very effective. Within the more favorable climates, the

only natural areas left are on big farms. But remember

that the pressures are now building up against the

"latifundios." High taxes are being placed on those

natural areas to force their conversion into colonies

of small agriculturalists. The landowners have held

them about as long as they can.

LEHMANN. In my country many large landowners

keep large lots of forest for their future heirs. But now

the agrarian reform is being imposed on all of us in

order to get money from international sources.

EISENMANN. This agrarian reform code is a matter

for which the United States may have some responsibility. It was understood in some Latin American

countries that obtaining financial benefits of the Alliance for Progress was more or less conditioned on

adoption of certain agrarian reforms. The effect of

these agrarian reform laws is materially to reduce the

control a landowner has over his own property and

subject him to expropriation if rural land is not actively employed in a manner considered socially useful. I have read only the Panamanian Agrarian Reform Code, and I must say that some of the language

suggests translation from English law. It is not a translation of a U.S. law. Let me make clear that in the

United States we nowhere have land laws which so

strongly reduce the powers of landowners over private

property. The Agrarian Code in clear terms does expressly acknowledge the value of forest preservation

for purposes of watershed protection, prevention of

soil erosion, wildlife maintenance, and tourism. However, some landowners interpret the law as not allowing the maintenance of land in forest unless the government has declared the area as dedicated to forest,

or something of that sort. The most difficult problem

relates to areas of what Dr. Holdridge calls "dry forest," which were cleared generations ago, but which

now, in the landowner's opinion, were best allowed to

revert to forest. As I read the law, it is risky for a landowner to use his own judgment, unless he has governmental approval. I wish to raise a question about the

doubt expressed by Dr. Holdridge as to the value of

the governments setting up parks and reserves. It may

be that in some parts of Latin America it is harder to

protect government property from infringement by

squatters and timber cutting than private property.
NUMBER 2 6 31

Nevertheless, once the law creates the public reserve

it gives some assurance that the land will not be permanently alienated for other purposes. And it is certainly easier and cheaper to do now than it will be

when the population has increased.

BUCHINGER. I do not think that there is any point

in discussing which is better. I believe each country

should have both national parks and privately sponsored natural areas. The discussion we are having

proves the need of saving natural areas. We also agree

that there are some conflicts in governmental circles

about the best way of land use and land saving. Public

pressure is needed to guide and fortify the governments; even those which are willing to set up and

maintain park systems need the public awareness, and

they welcome pressure groups to maintain the continuity when a new government is elected. The establishment of national parks is most important; but as

I was pointing out earlier, a network of natural areas

owned and protected by nonprofit Nature Conservancy

types of organizations is also very good. I do not think

we should be discussing what is better. I believe the

governmental and private efforts must complement

each other.

HOLDRIDGE. I would like to add just one thing to

your comment, even if it is a bit pessimistic. If national

parks are set up in isolated areas they may be held.

Why can they be held? Because no one is in those

areas yet. Where there are many inhabitants the results are quite different. We had a government reserve set up along the highway in southwestern Costa

Rica encompassing a stretch of beautiful forest. But

when the loggers had finished the surrounding areas,

what did they do? They went right to the top man of

the nation with their stories of idle machinery and men

out of work. The reserve was soon finished.

I would agree with you that we must keep trying

through legal channels, but obviously we must develop

a more effective system for holding reserves.

VOGT. I was particularly interested in Dr. Holdridge's suggestion that these things might be put under control of something like the Tropical Science

Center. I remember, back in 1942, going into a national park in Mexico with government employees and

having about eight men with .30-.30 caliber rifles

stand behind trees and watch us come. They were bootlegging timber off the national park. And at that time

this was a payoff to a "politico" who had been made

head of national parks. He was allowed to take out

the timber.

Now that has been changed a great deal in Mexico.

But in these other countries the government cannot

stand the pressure. Mexico just lost 25 percent of one

of its parks to occupation by squatters. The local politicians came to the minister of agriculture and said,

"Look, how can we get rid of these people? Where can

they go?" And literally there was no place, no local

land. But I just wonder if such areas could not be set

up as private property? I should like to modify that

term because in Mexico, for example, foreigners are

not allowed to own land within a certain distance of

the border. There are other places where the private

owner will be sold out for bonds or through agrarian reform, as Les says. But if something like the Tropical

Science Center could be financed to buy these lands,

they would be under the control of an educational

institution. It would be impersonal, it would be nonprofit, and I think it could demonstrate the usefulness

of what it is doing, not only in saving species, but as

research areas, and so on. I wondered for a long while

if this might not be the answer in some of these very

poor countries, and whether it would not be possible

to get together a consortium of foundations. I do not

think we should ask any single foundation to do it, but

there are a few in Latin America, including one or two

in Venezuela. There are one or two in Argentina, and

one that I know in Central America. Ford, Rockefeller,

Nuffield, and Wenner-Gren might come in on this,

and perhaps set up a $100 million revolving fund over

10 years for the purchase and administration of this

land. It can be bought very cheaply, at perhaps a

dollar or two an acre—much of it because it is so remote. Then it could be put into the hands of an independent international organization. I wonder if

something like this might not provide the mechanism

for saving these habitats.

BUCHINGER. I just wanted to comment on this. I

do not believe this to be the right solution. Something

very similar was set up some 20 years ago and failed

because it was an international organization. In

Argentina it ended with Peron's government. Most

governments resent foreign interference. Even where

they are willing to cooperate, they prefer to set up

national parks on both sides of the border and to maintain their independence. Such examples exist with

Chile and Argentina. When making propaganda for

the ideas the Nature Conservancy stands for, people
32 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

were most interested in the fact that, in spite of trying to help, the Latin American Desk does not want to

have branches or chapters in other countries. We believe the only way to save an area is to leave it

absolutely in the hands of a local, private, nonprofit

organization. The moment international involvement

is present the danger of losing the land again is great.

Deunler de la Tour was setting up his Pro-Natura as

an international agency and failed. Whenever land

holdings and other assets are under foreign control

there are many problems.

I think the best way to help in Costa Rica is for

Dr. Holdridge to take over the organization of such

a watchdog group. This should be a Costa Rican, private, nonprofit organization, and everybody could help

them, but I would not put the matter into the hands of

any international agency.

ALDRICH. I am impressed by the importance of having a reserve which is representative of the different

natural ecological types throughout the world. And,

therefore, I am impressed by the life-zone concept presented by Dr. Holdridge. If I interpret this correctly it

shows the importance of having more parks, more

areas at least, in the tropical portions of America than

in the temperate portions. Therefore, I would assume

that we should strive for many more areas in tropical

America than in North America.

PETERSON. Does not the designation of an area as

a national park sometimes work against it? I recall Dr.

Lehmann, when I was with you in Colombia and we

witnessed fires and cords of wood within a certain park,

I asked about it and you said, "Well, some of the local

people feel that now that it is a national park it is

theirs to exploit and to burn." Is that attitude frequent? How do we get around that difficulty?

LEHMANN. That is because of the lack of education.

In Sierra de la Macarena a natural reserve was started,

as I mentioned before this morning, by a law of the

Congress in 1948. Recently, through a government decree, it became a national park. We trained 25 people

to control this area in the beginning; and just before

it happened, certain parties placed some signs properly instructed to educate the people who were actually living in the area. Among the things we would say

to the people is that they will never get a title to the

property inside the park area. But if they move to just

ouside the park area they can get a title to land like

that within the park. And people are moving out. Last

year one of our people from the Ministerio de Agricultura took the course in national park administration at

the University of Michigan, and this man is now instructing these people in the region of the national

park. As I told you this morning, I think our main

problem is lack of education, and I always ask for help

to educate our people through movies, through TV, or

any other means by which we can reach the people.

In our museum in Cali, thanks to the generosity of the

Conservation Foundation, we have some nice films of

conservation. One of my students, who is a nature

warden in the state of Mague, brought to the museum

80 squatters from one of the areas near Paco Forall,

Farellones. These are people who would say, "I will kill

you," if a policeman or a park warden should tell them

they will be put in jail for cutting a tree. To these

people I showed the film by Dr. Vogt and also a film

that I have made myself of our problems of erosion,

river destruction, fish dying in the river, and other

things. They understood the problem through these

visual aids. I said, "you are destroying the food of your

children tomorrow." I used many arguments and they

just came out and said, "Why do not people who go

there to the farms, to our properties, to our plots, talk

to us like you are doing here? Where can we go and

get seeds to plant trees to replant the forests?" This

proves that we can educate the people.

RITTERBUSH. I would just like to ask Dr. Holdridge

a question which will be very vague. What Mr. Phelps

said about men with machetes making their way into

the wild areas reminded me of a very provocative

passage in one of your own articles in which you say

that these people appear in the guise of pioneers

but that they may unwittingly be destroying their

own future. Without its biological endowment the

cleared land may be valueless. There may be a yet

unacknowledged obligation for tropical scientists to

discover relationships within tropical plant and animal

communities which could be translated more readily

through applied science into economically significant

technologies. Physics is so readily translated into electronics technology, for example. It seems to me that

the kinds of studies you conduct are helping to establish ways to use modified environments in ways that

might be profitable, without hoping for automatic

transmission of temperate-region technologies. Will the

tropics ever be able to prosper under economic rules

which are generated in temperate areas? Might we not

aim to foster natural-resources-based technologies

which are in some sense indigenous? Then the pres-
NUMBER 26 33

ervation of wild areas and the research associated with

these areas might be a basis for the development in

many tropical countries of new kinds of technology

which may even involve different economic patterns

from temperate regions. I wonder if there might be

any point in trying to interest industry and other

sources of credit—international development agencies

such as the World Bank. Such processes would require

that wild areas be maintained as experimental and

study preserves, upon whose continued existence the

economic well-being of the developing countries would

depend.

HOLDRIDGE. Although it has been written out

previously, man does not know what potentialities exist

within tropical areas or associations that have not yet

been studied. Who could have dreamed of how important little Drosophila was to be to genetic research.

There may be much in the unexplored gene pool of

potential value to man. But, of course, these arguments

are not effective on the small farmer who wants to

grow enough corn or other food for his family this

year and the next.

LEHMANN. This is a question posed by the Alliance

for Progress. The president of my country now is

having to split the state-owned lands.

HOLDRIDGE. We are borrowing or being given money

to fell forests and make new pastures, even though most

such areas are not going to be permanent pasture. We

are talking here of establishing reserves, while other

people in this nation are sending money to fell forests.

Somehow or other we should get together and work

out a program that is compatible and in the best interests of the tropical countries.

EISENMANN. We were talking about misuse of land

for agricultural purposes, although obviously best

fitted for maintaining forest. Has any extensive research been done on tree crops as food crops? I do

not mean coffee, which is a kind of stimulant, not

really food. Growing of tree crops might provide food

in the tropics, and still preserve a good deal of land

from erosion.

HOLDRIDGE. This is a good point. When we have a

geneticist, he may wish to work only on corn because

he studied corn genetics. In the case of the pejibaye

palm, which the indigenous people used as a main

supply of food in the wet, high-rainfall areas, there

are no geneticists working on the plant.

BUCHINGER. In Misiones geneticists are working on

the yerba mate and have collected sample materials

from different stocks.
The Future of Avifauna in Guatemala and

Its Relation to Tourism

Jorge A. Ibarra

Because of its diverse climate, which results from

an interesting and complex topography, Guatemala

contains a unique avifauna that has aroused the interest of ornithologists for many years. They have, in

turn, influenced the "bird watchers" with their publications and attracted tourists to Guatemala.

Scientists have greatly increased biological knowledge through investigations carried out in Guatemala.

Biologia Centrali-Americana, written by Osbert Salvin

and published by him and Frederick Ducane Godman

in England, is one publication that should be mentioned. Salvin first visited Guatemala about 1857. He

was fascinated by the luxuriant vegetation which provided a safe refuge for a great number of species of

avifauna.

Salvin made other trips to Guatemala accompanied

by Godman and both found an abundance of birds in

their travels. The splendid quetzal probably did not

escape the keen sight of the investigators when they

visited the cities of Quezaltenango, located in the western part of the country, and Coban, in the north. It

is likely that Salvin admired the "trogonido" that

nested near the cities. He probably experienced the

same reaction to the ocellated turkey (Agriocharis

ocellata), as its color and form give rise to admiration.

The naturalists watched interesting species of avifauna near the city of Salama in northern Guatemala.

It was in this province that Salvin discovered one of

the most notable "vencejos" (black martin) of the

continent, and which he named Panyptila sanctihieronymi in homage to the municipe of San Jeronimo where these birds were found.

Ludlow Griscom, author of The Distribution of Birdlife in Guatemala, wrote in the 1932 Bulletin of the

American Museum of Natural History that 90 percent of what we know about the ornithology of Guatemala is due to the explorations of Salvin and Godman

34

and numerous collectors whom they have trained.

These works are still furnishing valuable information

to naturalists.

Ornithologists wishing information about the places

of origin of some species consult Biologia CentraliAmericana and are often disappointed because many

of the species mentioned there are not found in abundance or have disappeared from the places mentioned.

The quetzal (Pharomachrus mocinno), for example,

found in the municipe of Chiantla, has hidden itself in

the wild forests or has succumbed as a result of the

advance of the population and the practices of those

who ignore the wise use of natural resources.

Griscom tells why the Guatemalan national bird,

the quetzal, is not as common as one would imagine:

"Formerly a common bird in the cloud forest throughout the mountains of Guatemala. These forests have

been greatly reduced in the last 50 years by clearing

for coffee plantations, and the Quetzal retires as soon

as primeval conditions are destroyed. It has also been

unmercifully persecuted for its plumes, and untold

thousands were exported for decades. It is now protected by law, and a genuine effort is made to prevent

its exportation." In 1915 A. W. Anthony expressed

the opinion that the quetzal, despite legal protection,

was no longer common. There were a few localities

where it was sometimes seen, but as a result of the

constant persecution the number was notably reduced

in places where formerly it had been seen regularly.

Griscom writes that one can still see some examples

in the Alta Verapaz, but in this place they were confined to wild forests and sought high trees in order to

defend themselves from the weapons used by the natives. Further on he mentions that in the municipe

of Nebaj, west of the department of Quiche, he was

assured that the species was abundant, but he never

saw a single one. Great must have been his surprise
NUMBER 26 35

when, in the municipio, the natives brought him several quetzals killed with blowguns. He was even more

surprised to find that the Indians were wearing hats

adorned with long supercaudate plumes. After traveling in the municipio and adjacent country in 1959 I

never failed to marvel at the presence of this heraldic

bird. One of the fundamental reasons for the scarcity

of the quetzal, as I have mentioned, is that many forests where this species nests, have been cleared of trees

for coffee plantations. Forest fires and native hunters

are others.

It is not surprising that the naturalist who visited

20 years ago would today find some great changes in

the vegetation of Central America. Referring to this

vital theme on the occasion of a conference in Guatemala, William Vogt said: "Guatemala is undoubtedly

one of the most beautiful countries in the world. One

always renews the spirit upon returning here, but the

natural beauties are disappearing. Forests that should

be protected in national parks are being destroyed for

growing corn. The flora and fauna which attract the

scientists or amateurs are disappearing. How many

tourists have had the privilege of seeing the quetzal?

In reality, how many Guatemalans know this bird of

extraordinary beauty?" Vogt recalls his trip to Guatemala 20 years ago with emphasis on the rich vegetation that has now disappeared along the road extending from the capital city to the picturesque municipe

of Chichicastenango, and he reiterates that the misuse

of natural resources is not confined to Guatemala but

is also found in other Latin American countries.

Logically, fauna decreases as forest cover deteriorates. Inadequate laws that do not prohibit out-ofseason capture—especially popular among waterfowl

hunters—contribute to this decrease. Undoubtedly the

so-called "game birds" have suffered most from persecutors who use .22 caliber rifles (which cause much

damage to fauna in general as great numbers are

wounded and left to die) up to shotguns of high caliber

which kill innumerable quantities of species in our

forests, jungles, and on lakes and rivers.

Directors of tourist centers are now specializing in

bringing to Guatemala groups of people who look

forward to hunting with binoculars. Russell Mason,

director of the Florida Audubon Society, has contributed greatly to the growing number of tourists who are

delighted with the varied and beautiful fauna that

inhabits our mountains.

As previously mentioned, the large wild game birds

are the most persecuted and for this reason will disappear first from the areas inhabited by men. In 1931,

the ornithologist J. Van Tyne, author of The Birds of

Northern Peten, seems to have found in the municipe

of Uaxactun, an important archeological center in the

north, the following species in abundance: ocellated

turkey, or turkey of Peten (Agriocharis ocellata),

cojolita {Penelope purpurascens), paujil (Crax

rubra), chachalaca (Ortalis vetula intermedia), mancolola (Tinamus major percautus), and other birds of

less importance. They are now extremely scarce.

The ornithologist Alulah M. Taibel, author of

Uccelli del Guatemala, did not have to go far from

Ciudad de Flores, the county seat of the department

of Peten, to enrich his collection. A short distance from

Ciudad de Flores, which is surrounded by water, he

captured chicks of the ocellated turkey which he took

to Italy together with several species of Tinamus major

and Crax globicera. The progeny of these birds are

presently exhibited in the experimental station of

Aviculture Rovigo, as professor A. Ghigi recently

affirmed.

Rodolphe Meyer de Schauensee, the ornithologist,

visited my country in 1935 and remained most of the

time in the western mountains. There he obtained one

of the most notable birds of the continent, Oreophasis

derbianus, known by the natives as pavo de cacho

(horned turkey) and faisan de cuerno (horned pheasant). This took place in Chichoy, a village of the

municipe of Tecpan, department of Chimaltenango.

He wrote that the natives assured him that such birds

were common. Nevertheless, he got no more specimens

and was told that it was a difficult bird to hunt because

of the "deforestation" and native hunters. At the

present time this beautiful bird does not exist in Chichoy, but it still inhabits remote areas of the mountains

where Homo sapiens has not yet reached with his destructive weapons.

We believe the most endangered species is the

Burhinus bistriatus, which is indigenous to the arid and

tropical areas. Although this species was found in the

markets of the capital several years ago, it has not been

seen recently any place in Guatemala, and the possibility exists that it is in danger in other countries where

it once was fairly common.

Another bird which is of concern to ornithologists

as it seems to be disappearing is the Atitlan grebe, or

zambullidor (diver), indigenous to and found only at
36

Lake Atitlan (first cited as a new species by Wetmore

in his ''Notes on Birds of the Guatemalan Highlands").

GriscoP1 wrote that one reason which compelled him

to stay ^n Guatemala was to study the zambullidor

(Podil¥mb

us g*gas) • During the nine days he was at

Lake Atitlan he observed 200 individuals. Had not an

order peen issued by the government in 1959 prohibiting the hunting of aquatic birds in Lake Atitlan, the

100 zambullidors that

 nest

 in the lake would not exist

today.

At tne time this order was issued, it was not known

that irianv years ago the black bass, an alien fish of the

genus Micropterus, had been introduced. These voracious ?pecimens fed on the fish the zambullidor used

as food- This was mentioned in June 1962 during a

conference at the American Museum of Natural History of New York and at the congress on ornithology

which took place at Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.

At th>s time * expressed concern about the practice

of introducing alien fish in the rivers and lakes of Central America. Subsequent observations have confirmed

that tPe black bass has effectively interfered with the

nature^ balance of Lake Atitlan, since it not only feeds

on smaU fisn Du t chases the young of Podilymbus gigas.

portunately the World Wildlife Fund has cooperated

with v

is an d at the present time is doing an excellent

job helpm£ to preserve this notable species which contributes so much to the beauty of Lake Atitlan.

Another valuable contribution was made by Frank B.

Smiths

 a n

 ornithologist and author of "Birds of Tikal,

Guatemal

a

5" written for tourists visiting the Tikal National Park. Smithe started collecting in 1956 and continued h*s

 studies in Tikal National Park in cooperation

with Raymond A. Paynter and Jorge A. Ibarra. Tikal

is ackrlowledged to be important not only for its archeologica

l value but also for the fact that a considerable

quantity °f

 ne w

 botanical species were discovered there

which C. L. Lundell used in his book "The Vegetation

of PetPnj"

 a s weU as in

 other publications issued by the

Field Museum of Natural History of Chicago. Smithe

refers

 t o

 Tikal in the first work as follows: "Tikal is the

biggest

 an d most antique ceremonial center or city of

the May

an

 civilization known." Its archeological development *s

 due to the "Tikal Project" carried on by the

Museiim °f

 tn e University of Pennsylvania. The government OI>

 Guatemala recognized the value of this

famous Mayan site and declared it a national park. The

park £Te* is 572 square kilometers. Both the Guatemalan government and the University of Pennsylvania

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

have stimulated biological investigation, making it

possible for Smithe to publish the list of birds of Tikal.

We think it is urgent to establish national parks and

equivalent reserves to avoid the extinction of endangered species, especially with the quick and uncontrollable rise in population. There are governmental agreements which prohibit hunting the quetzal and the

zambullidor, and it is clear that the laws help to protect species in general, but we believe that it is necessary to enlist the cooperation of the newspapers,

magazines, and other information media to illustrate

the necessity of protecting and conserving nature and

its resources for the well being of future generations.

The establishment of museums of natural history

in the countries which do not already have them is an

effective way to illustrate to the thousands of visitors

the themes of conservation. Two museums of natural

history have been organized, and conservationists communicate with the public in the magazine Historia Natural Y Pro-Natura, edited by me, which started in

1964.

In these publications I refer continually to the practice of immoderate hunting. In his lack of understanding the hunter has selected owls, falcons, eagles, and

so forth as his prey. Insectivorous birds are captured by

natives ignorant of the consequences of their actions.

The publications also contain articles concerned with

those who make excessive use of insecticides. On these

and similar themes I have written many articles for

the newspapers of my country.

These publications may contribute to the cause of

conservation and the establishment of national parks.

On the other hand, if adequate measures are not taken

we shall witness with regret the extinction of several

species. In his outstanding work, "Extinct and Vanishing Birds of the World," James Greenway expresses

this idea in an effective way: "As far as extinct birds

are concerned, we can only express deep regret that

measures had not been taken in time to save their

existence, thus avoiding an appalling impoverishment

of life on earth. But when it comes to threatened

species, we face a different problem. Can they be saved,

and how? The answer varies according to species and

circumstances. In many cases it will be possible to save

them through appropriate protective measures the success of which entirely depends upon the wisdom and

the good will of men. It is only a matter of stopping

destruction."
NUMBER 2 6 37

Discussion

FOSBERG. Dr. Ibarra's mention of Lake Atitlan

brought an idea to my mind that perhaps is worth

following up in this matter of the means of protecting

areas. This certainly does not apply to all areas, but

nothing you can do will apply to all areas. I think the

appreciation of natural beauty, especially in spectacular forms such as we have at Lake Atitlan, is something

that is perhaps more widespread in the public consciousness than appreciation of birds. At least some of

the areas that we like to protect are ones that are of

spectacular natural beauty. If we could combine these

two things and emphasize the fact that agriculture and

engineering works in these areas do destroy something

that not only is of value to the people who live in the

country but is of tremendous attraction to tourists,

more effective protection might be afforded to some of

these areas. Of course, the immediate response is that

if we bring in tourists it will result in deterioration of

the areas. This is right. But I have one place in mind

that might be an illustration of the opposite of this.

One of the most beautiful single scenic spots that I

have seen in the whole world is a place in Mexico

called El Sal to del Rio Naranja. I saw this in 1947 and

it was practically an untouched place, a magnificent

series of waterfalls. I was greatly distressed when I

heard that a hotel was to be built there some years

after that. This upset me no end, because it would

spoil it. I mentioned this when the subject came up a

couple of weeks ago in England to someone who had

been there. I said, "What a great pity it is that a hotel

was built for tourists." He said, "Well, you don't know

what you are talking about. If it had only been the

hotel which was built for tourists we would still have

a beautiful place even though there were some tourists

there. But now they are building a hydroelectric plant,

and this is going to destroy the whole thing." Well, if

the Mexican public had been sufficiently enlightened

to appreciate what they had in the beautiful spot we

are speaking of, they could have prevented the building of this hydroelectric plant, at least. They would

have had a slight modification as the result of the

tourists, but I am sure that the birds and almost everything else would have survived. But nothing can

survive inundation.

BUCHINGER. Speaking of tourism, yesterday in the

Pan American Union we were preparing a proposal

for the next tourist conference, which is going to be

in Madrid. This is on international tourism in general,

and at the meeting the General Secretary is going to

propose that in the Latin American countries a survey should be made to find out which areas would be

suitable for parks. In the same recommendation it will

also be very strongly stressed that all the tourist facilities have to be maintained in the zone outside the park,

in a sort of buffer zone, so as not to spoil the natural

values. A director from each Latin American country

is going to be present at the meeting in Madrid, so we

are very hopeful that through this conference we can

call the attention of the public to our problems. This

is a way of educating those responsible for tourism. I

would also emphasize a point which Dr. Phelps made,

namely that it is good to have national parks even

if they are only on paper! There are two reasons for

this. One is especially valid now because it is essential

to have the land declared a national park to save it

from being divided by agrarian reform. I mean, if you

have declared an area as valuable, it cannot be divided.

Secondly, as in the case of Chile, where so often the

land is mistreated, it helps when, as is now the case,

a minister who is really concerned about conservation

matters does not have to go to the president and ask

Congress to establish a reserve. He can work according to preexisting laws. He can get rid of the squatters

by paying them some indemnification for houses or

whatever they have in their fields.

VOGT. May I express the pious hope that this international parks meetings will recommend to our own

National Park Service that the development take place

outside of the park areas?

BUCHINGER. Dr. Vogt, it is funny that you should

mention it, because I have already been receiving protests from U.S. offices for what our Latin American

countries are doing. For example, we are also proposing (and we got this recommendation approved)

that along the Pan American highways they should

try to reestablish natural areas, or at least where they

are not yet destroyed they should save them. Somebody from the highway department here in the

United States came to my office and told me that I

should not be making such proposals, because being

a Pan American congress its recommendations are

also binding for the United States, and he pointed out

how much money this would cost. I told him, "I am

sorry the Latin American Committee on National

Parks only represents the Latin American point of
Effects of Habitat Changes on Population Levels

of the Avifauna in Honduras

Burt L. Monroe, Jr.

The republic of Honduras, with an area of slightly

more than 43,000 square miles, is a close second to

Nicaragua in size among Central American countries.

As is the case in most areas of Latin America, human

population is rapidly on the upswing, with a concomitant effect, often drastic, on natural habitats and communities operating therein. Although there have been

changes with respect to virtually all types of habitats

in recent years, certain ones are more critically affected

than others. Certainly the disappearance of the broadleaved evergreen forests in the tropics must be rated

as the most noticeable change, and the one about

which something must be done in the immediate

future.

In this paper I shall refer to broad-leaved evergreen

forests in Honduras as "rain forests" if they occur below 1,250 meters (about 4,000 feet) and "cloud forests" if they range above this level. Thus rain forest

is generally comparable to the forested regions of the

humid lower tropical zone or to the Tropical Moist

Forest Life-Zone (Formation) of Holdridge. Cloud

forest may be roughly equated to the subtropical or

humid upper tropical zone or to the Lower Montane

Moist and Wet Forest life zones (formations).

Although there have been no quantitative studies

of bird populations conducted in Honduras, a look

at changes in the forest habitats and a comparison of

observations and collections made since 1850 will give

an indication as to the effect the forest reduction has

had on the avifauna.

In the winter of 1857-58, George Cavendish Taylor

traveled across Honduras along the route of the proposed interoceanic railway. From his accounts we have

some of the earliest data concerning avifaunal records

from the Republic. On January 7 he left Taulabe for

Lake Yojoa, arriving there about dawn on the 8th;

this distance of less than 10 miles required a day and

38

night's journey. His accounts of the birds include observations of many rain forest species, including Electron carinatum, a relatively rare forest motmot. The

area from Taulabe to the lake was, in Taylor's time,

a very dense rain forest. Today there are only scattered

trees along the Rio Jaitique, vast regions of rain forest

having been turned into areas of long grass and scrubby

second growth. From 1962 to 1964 I personally witnessed the destruction of two of the finest remaining

small forested areas on the eastern side of the lake.

There is still a large, untouched rain forest on the

western side of Lake Yojoa, presently privately owned,

but the pressure of governmental land reform will probably result in this region being opened up to clearing

and settlement in the near future.

While on the subject of the region around Lake

Yojoa, I should like to mention Cerro Santa Barbara,

the second largest mountain in Honduras, with a maximum elevation of 2,835 meters (about 9,300 feet).

Although there are no endemic forms of birds found

on the mountain, a number of plants are known only

from its slopes, and the remaining cloud forest supports a sizable population of several species of birds

that are rapidly becoming rare, such as Pharomachrus

mocinno, the quetzal. At the present time, the mountain forest is severely dissected up to an elevation of

about 6,600 feet and more is disappearing every year.

The mountain is literally "on fire" each year during the

driest months (March and April).

In the lower Sula Valley around the large town of

San Pedro Sula the forest has been reduced to one

drainage area along the mountain base to the west of

the town; this is maintained in an untouched state in

order to preserve the watershed for San Pedro's water

supply. Collecting the records of Joseph Leyland in

1855-56, George M. Whitely in 1869-70, and Erich

Wittkiigel from 1889 to 1893 indicates a wide area of
NUMBER 26 39

rain forest in the valley during the last century. Even

as late as the 1930s, there must have been relatively

vast forest on the north and south sides of the town,

judging from the birds obtained by C. F. Underwood

during this period.

Much of the lower Sula Valley has been planted in

bananas at one time or another. During the 1950s,

these banana lands were flooded annually as a means

of controlling Panama disease; the flood-fallow lakes

thus created formed a haven for migratory waterfowl

and shorebirds, as evidenced by data recorded by

Mark Trafton, former assistant director of research

at the La Lima office of the United Fruit Co. However, severe flooding of the Rio Ulua in the late 1950s

destroyed most of the dike system and the artificial

flooding was discontinued. More will be said later

concerning this matter.

Along the north coast from Tela west to Trujillo,

most of the forest on the level coastal plain has been

destroyed or reduced to small, isolated patches. Forests

are maintained by the fruit companies, however, at

San Alejo, Tela, and La Ceiba as watersheds for the

areas in question. A special effort should be made to

insure preservation of as much forest as possible in this

region since there are a few endemic bird forms there

(e.g., Odontophorus erythrops verecundus and Piculus

simplex allophyeus).

The largest remaining area of rain forest, the Olancho, is found in southeastern Honduras. Mostly uninhabited, the forest is relatively undisturbed except

along its periphery. Man has begun to make inroads

into the Olancho from the western side. In a flight over

the region in 1964, I noticed clearing under way several miles farther to the east than in the previous year.

Although the region does not contain any endemic

forms, it is one of the largest, virtually untouched expanses of rain forest anywhere in northern Central

America. At least 46 species of birds have their northern range limits in this region, either in Honduras or

just across the border in Nicaragua.

Cloud forest is presently distributed in Honduras

in the form of scattered, isolated patches. This distribution appears to be due primarily to natural, climatic change since Pleistocene times rather than to

man's direct interference. Man has severely reduced

these remaining patches. As mentioned previously,

areas such as Cerro Santa Barbara have been partially

or wholly cleared, even at the higher elevations in

some cases. The avifauna characteristic of this habitat

(77 species in Honduras) is in decided peril in many

places. Honduras today has perhaps the largest population of quetzals north of Costa Rica; but with the

decrease in the forest, the quetzal is sure to go unless

cloud-forest regions are set aside in the near future.

There are quite a few endemic species or subspecies

of birds in the cloud-forest areas of the Honduran region (including small areas in northern El Salvador

and northern Nicaragua). These include three races

of Dactylortyx thoracicus (singing quail), each of

which is known from a single restricted patch of forest; four hummingbirds (Abeillia abeillei aurea, Lampornis amethystinus nobilis, L. sybillae, and Lamprolaima rhami saturatior); two jays (Cyanolyca cucullata

hondurensis and Aphelocoma unicolor griscomi); and

three other passerines (Troglodytes rufociliatus rehni,

Basileuterus belli subobscurior, and Atlapetes brunneinucha alleni). The fate of these races is tied to the

future of cloud forest.

Pine and pine-oak associations in Honduras are generally found in highland regions not occupied by cloud

forest. Highland pine is widely distributed and the

avifauna in it appears to be in no danger. I have no

indication that population levels have been affected

at all by man's interference. Pine habitat replaces itself in a relatively short time. The biggest problem is

that certain logging interests obtain rights to a large

tract and completely level the whole thing, with no

replanting program or effort of some sort to maintain at least part of the habitat intact. While a few

companies are conscientious and do practice good cutting procedures, most of those in the tropics (at least

in Honduras) do not. But, for the moment anyway,

there seems to be no major problem with this habitat.

The lowland pine savanna of the Mosquitia is a

somewhat different matter. This habitat, restricted

to roughly equal areas in eastern Honduras and northern Nicaragua, is apparently fire disclimax and is

maintained (at least on the Nicaraguan side) by artificial burning. The habitat is present in a region that

should be expected to have rain forest (i.e., tropical

moist forest on the basis of temperature and rainfall)

and is apparently being gradually replaced by rain

forest in areas where burning is not practiced. The

fires not only aid in maintaining a pine savanna

through prevention of encroachment by rain-forest

flora along the periphery but also preserve a continuing short-grass habitat for the savanna element of the

avifauna. No less than seven races of birds are endemic
40 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

to the pine savanna of the Mosquitia: Falco sparverius

nicaraguensis, Amazilia cyanocephala chlorostephana,

Pyrocephalus rubinus pinicola, Sialia sialis caribaea,

Piranga flava savannarum, Aimophila petenica spadiconigrescens, and Colinus nigrogularis segoviensis. All

except the last were described recently by Howell from

the Nicaraguan Mosquitia. These are mentioned here

because, in this case, if man's influence by burning this

region is removed, it is possible that the pine savanna

could eventually be obliterated by encroaching rain

forest. Also some control will eventually be necessary

if excessive logging of the pine ever becomes a problem. At present there is no logging on the Honduran

side.

A brief mention of the Bay Islands at this point

might be in order. These islands, a small group of three

main and a number of small islands, are located just

off the north coast. There are seven endemic races of

birds in the islands. Only one, Ortalis vetula deschauenseei, confined to Tuila, appears to be in any danger.

The present population I estimate to be about 50-75

individuals. Being a game bird also has placed some

added pressure on this species. Since all of the islands

are relatively small (only one is larger than 9 miles

in diameter), bird populations are correspondingly

small. Forested regions in the islands are of a scrubby

type and, at present, man has not disturbed the vegetation to the point of disrupting normal avifaunal population levels. Because of the inherent size of the populations involved, however, and the special case of

Ortalis, these areas should be considered for possible

conservation measures.

Looking at the situation from the standpoint of migratory species from North America, I can see no

problem from the habitat end. Although I have not

studied the situation in detail, my general impression

is that the vast majority of migratory passerines utilize

secondary forest or more open situations, a habitat

avoided by many of the resident rain-forest species.

With the clearing of forest that is presently going on,

the total area of second growth is on the increase.

Thus, if anything, man is probably creating some additional habitat for the migratory forms. In the case

of the flood-fallow lakes mentioned earlier, man certainly is creating suitable habitat not otherwise available to migrating waterfowl and shorebirds. There

has been some recent speculation that perhaps population limits of both migratory and resident passerines

might be affected or even controlled by competition

arising on the wintering grounds, at which time huge

numbers of migratory individuals occur in the same

area with the resident forms. Once again, although I

have not looked into this matter in detail, my impression in Honduras is that there is a minimum of competition due to the utilization of secondary forest by

the majority of migratory forms. Regardless of the

true situation in this respect. I feel that man's effect

on habitat in Honduras has not hurt the outlook of

migratory passerines.

Turning now to a more direct effect of man on the

avifauna, I would like to mention the results of hunting pressures in Honduras. At the present time, hunting

of game is more or less restricted to the wealthy class

and to "norteamericans" present there for various

reasons. Guns are very expensive, as is ammunition,

and only a very small portion of the people possesses

them. They are not attuned, so to speak, to the eating

of wild game—as is the case in much of Africa where

the populace goes to extreme lengths to devise ways

and means of obtaining game, even to the construction

of small snares to trap weaver finches and other passerines. With the exception of the use of slingshots by a

few individuals, I saw very little sign of this in

Honduras.

Honduras is a little far south for the main wintering

populations of most northern species of waterfowl; 95

percent of migratory ducks are blue-winged teal {Anas

discors) and lesser scaup (Aythya affinis). Hunting

pressure on waterfowl is certainly not great and probably not even significant, despite the lack of game laws.

There probably has been some effect on the resident

ducks (Dendrocygna autumnalis, D. bicolor, and Cairina moschata), especially the latter, which seems to

have declined in recent years. I am not sure whether

this is due to habitat change or actual hunting pressures, but it is probably a result of both.

There has been a marked decrease in recent years

of the larger galliform species (Crax rubra, Penelope

purpurascens, and Ortalis vetula) that is apparently

due primarily to hunting. Colinus cristatus is also frequently hunted, but there has been no noticeable

effect on this common species.

Pigeons and doves are also shot, especially the palevented pigeon (Columba cayennensis) and the whitewinged dove (Zenaida asiatica), the latter being present in great numbers in winter. However, I do not

think there has been any significant decrease in either

species in recent years.
NUMBER 26 41

Thus the overall effect of hunting seems to have

caused little change in present populations of game

birds, with the possible exceptions of Cairina moschata

and the larger galliform birds.

At present pesticides are not widely used in Honduras. Only in the restricted south coast region, where

cotton is grown, is aerial spraying in operation. The

problem here is much more acute in the neighboring

countries of El Salvador and Nicaragua.

The long-range avifaunal outlook, barring some

definite conservation action in the very near future,

is rather dismal in some quarters. Forest destruction

is, of course, the biggest and most pressing problem.

In the way of specific action that might be taken

right now, there are a few situations that require action

before it is too late. In one case, that of the Lake

Yojoa-Cerro Santa Barbara region, there is one strong

economic reason for immediate action. It is always

nice to be able to hit a government in the economic

pocketbook, so to speak, when trying to find a reason

for some necessary conservation action, rather than

just saying it is necessary to save some of the wildlife.

In 1964, a massive hydroelectric project, supported almost entirely by U.S. funds, was completed at the

north end of Lake Yojoa. This power plant now

supplies most of Honduras, including the two largest

cities, Tegucigalpa and San Pedro Sula. The lake

now drains artificially by the plant at the north end

into the Rio Blanco as well as naturally by the Rio

Jaitique at the south end. In order to maintain a satisfactory free drainage through the power plant, an extensive watershed must be retained. Already heavy

silting at the north end of the lake may be seen. This

situation could be used as an economic wedge for urging immediate cessation of destruction of the remaining

rain and cloud forests in this drainage system.

At the present time watersheds of rain forest are

maintained for several large towns, as mentioned

earlier. Whenever the water supply is involved, this

might also be used as an economic reason for maintaining the forest intact.

It will eventually be necessary to set aside forest

regions (as national forests, perhaps) and keep them

free of human interference, if these areas and their

faunas are to be preserved. Just how this can be managed in areas where population growth is expanding

so rapidly is a touchy problem, to say the least. This

step in conservation is probably still well in the future.

Other possible measures include some sort of control

of logging enterprises, where needed, and the eventual establishment of game laws. A return to floodfallow procedures in the Sula Valley would be an aid

to migratory waterfowl and shorebirds.

Let me emphasize again, however, that the major

problem of the immediate future lies in the area of

habitat preservation. All efforts for conservation on

Honduras in the next few years should be channeled

in this direction.

Discussion

BOND. I was interested in the preservation of pine

hawks, which have been destroyed at a great rate. They

still live in the central mountains and there are no

pines within miles of the type locality at the present

moment. Pines are being cut at a great rate on La

Bandera, which was formerly known as Lomatina. In

Haiti there is the same problem on the Morne La Selle

where the La Selle thrush lives—the thrush Dr. Wetmore discovered. The pines have been destroyed and

this may cause extermination of this very interesting

thrush.

MONROE. At the present time there does not seem

to be any problem on the Honduran side of the Rio

Coco; and I would like to pass this on to Dr. Howell,

because I do know that in the past there has been logging in Nicaraguan Mosquitia. I do not know what

the current status of this is. Perhaps he can tell you

what they are doing on the Nicaraguan side.

HOWELL. I will show a few slides of this and discuss

it in a little more detail tomorrow, but there has been

logging for many years both in the highland pine areas

and in the lowland pine savanna. In the highland

region it looks as you might expect. There is strong

evidence of overcutting but there is still a great deal of

pine left. The country is sparsely inhabited in many

of the areas where there is such pine, and I would say

that the situation is somewhat similar to that in Honduras—that there is no immediate danger that the

pines will disappear. In the lowland pine savanna most

of the big pines have been cut and this was done many

years ago. At present it is widely forested with these

rather slender trees that are probably 50 to 65 feet

high, and our estimate from looking at the rings on

cut stumps is that most of these are probably about

70 years old. This savanna is fairly extensive, occupying about the same area as it does in Honduras. There

336-550 O—7C
42 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

is a passive reforestation program being conducted by

the Nicaraguan government at the present time and

there is difficulty in enforcing the provisions of the law

against burning of the savanna during the dry season,

because this is used to remove the coarse dry grass to

stimulate new green growth that is used by cattle. They

are rather scarce anyway, and also rather scrawny in

this area, so that the problem does exist, but fortunately at the present time I don't think there is any

immediate danger to the species involved. In fact, as

you pointed out, some of these may require at least a

certain amount of burning to be maintained at all.

IBARRA. Certainly I have said that you are very well

acquainted with these Honduran birds, and I am also

very pleased to hear that you saw some numbers of the

quetzal, the Guatemalan national bird. You also said

there is not much hunting in Honduras, although people of Central America are accustomed to use slingshots and occasionally .22 rifles. Do you know of a

project, law, or action to provide these birds protection within the borders of Honduras, especially the

quetzal, which is so precious to Guatemala? I ground

this question on your previous statement about the

existence of some endemic species in Honduras.

MONROE. Well, there is one. The only species that

is completely endemic is a hummingbird. Nobody

knows anything about it except that apparently it is

widespread. I do not think it is in any danger from a

hunting standpoint. Now, the quetzal very definitely

might be in danger, particularly if hunting by firearms

becomes more common in the future, and I suppose

progress is pointing toward that end. I imagine in the

next few years it will be much easier to get firearms,

particularly if the economic level is raised in the country. Then hunting certainly will be a problem. When

I was there I did not notice any sign of anyone killing

quetzals for any reason in the Cerro Santa Barbara

region. Perhaps this has gone on in the past; I do not

know. Certainly I would like to see the birds protected.

Definitely, particular birds, including the quetzal,

should be placed on a protected list. But what good this

would do without proper law enforcement I really

do not know.

IBARRA. I think that perhaps it should be recommended in the near future. Laws forbidding the capture and the killing of the quetzal are very necessary,

not only because it is the Guatemalan national bird, but

also because it is one of the most outstanding birds of

the Aztecs and the Mayas. Such laws should exist

in Mexico and Central America where the quetzals

live.

MONROE. I would like to mention that my whole

point about the quetzal was that if we do not preserve

the forest now, we will not need game laws or any protection for it in the near future. We must ask for the

critical things first; that is, to get extensive habitat areas

(or as much as possible) preserved in some places, and

then we will need game laws protecting what there is.

WINGATE. Dr. Howell, I am particularly interested

in your comments on the wintering passerines, because

it is my own impression, gleaned from observations on

Bermuda, that North American passerines that winter

in the tropics, rather than being affected in a detrimental way by habitat changes there, may actually be

increasing. Bermuda provides a unique opportunity for

measuring changes in species abundance over a long

period because there are remarkedly comprehensive

accounts of migratory species and their abundance

going back more than a hundred years, the earliest

compiled by officers of the British garrison at the height

of the British colonial empire. One of the most notable

changes over this period concerns the wood warbler

family. A hundred years ago only half a dozen species

were recorded from the island, and all but one or two

were rare. Yet I now annually record over 25 species

and many like the redstart can be described as common or abundant at the height of migration. We might

argue that small birds were largely overlooked by the

earlier naturalists, but the fact remains that they recorded may obscure passerines which are hard to find

on Bermuda even today. How then can we account

for the complete absence of redstart records, unless

this species was actually less abundant at that time?

The only other possible explanations are: 1. Weather

patterns causing the occurrence of these small passerines on Bermuda have changed drastically, and I

think this highly unlikely. 2. The migrant passerines

were more thinly dispersed and harder to find owing to

a greater extent of suitable habitat for them. In fact,

old photographs and other records indicate that Bermuda had just about the same extent of forest cover as

at present. I can only conclude, therefore, that some

passerine species with wintering ranges in Central and

South America have actually increased in abundance.

This certainly seems to be the case for most of the wood

warblers and perhaps a few other species like the indigo

bunting.
NUMBER 26 43

MONROE. YOU may be right on this, I do not know;

but I did not mean to imply in my statement that the

increase in the secondary forest is causing an increase in

the populations in North American birds. I am just

saying that the wintering ground habitat is apparently

not a major limiting factor, at least in my estimation,

as compared to breeding areas.

HOWELL. This is true for many species. In some

cases, such as that of the Kirkland's warbler, I do not

think there is any doubt. But I think the increase in

man's effect on the habitat has not in the slightest hurt

any of the migratory passerine birds in Central

America.

BOND. May I ask a question? You mentioned that

in Honduras they usually have a built-in forest watershed above the towns. Is that preserved well?

MONROE. Yes, it is, as for example the case of San

Pedro Sula. They have the watershed well guarded.

They pay a local guard, and he is armed and permits

no cutting and no habitation by squatters. They are

very adamant about that, which is fortunate because

the only forested area around San Pedro is up there

on that one slope of that mountain range where they

maintain the watershed. The United Fruit Co. maintains a watershed for all their stations. It seems to be

standard also for towns along the north coast.

VOGT. I was quite impressed, as apparently Mr.

Eisenmann was, by this preservation of watersheds, because it is fairly rare throughout Latin America. I

should like to inject another bit of optimism—just a

very little bit, maybe one-tenth of a milligram—into

this situation, in that Honduras has organized the first

national birth control program. They are beginning

to establish clinics about the country. They are having a Pan American birth control meeting there within the next few weeks. They really are, it seems, tackling the population problem, and they may possibly

be able to do something about it.

The question of land reform has come up a good

deal, and that is a knotty one because of the amount

of downright hunger, malnutrition, and scarcity of

land for the small farmers. I wonder if it would be possible to get the Alliance for Progress to foster a land

reform program, based on land-use capabilities, instead of on economics and politics? At the present

time the politicians hand out land to the peasants to

get them off their necks, and the chances are it has

a 100-percent slope that won't last very many years.

Could we recommend through this congress a definite

reconsideration of land reform policies and a limitation of agriculture to the areas that will sustain it?

WETMORE. May I say a word regarding this. Bill's

suggestion of a land reform program is an excellent

one. At the present moment I believe a plan is under

development, at least in Panama, that will bring this

to pass to some extent. Possibly the statements I am

about to make may anticipate something that my good

friend Eugene Eisenmann plans to say tomorrow.

About 3 weeks ago I had occasion to call on the head of

the Agrarian Reform in Panama City, where I was

interested to find the very definite action program that

is in process of development there. The plan is to take

the squatters off the private lands. These individuals

for years have preempted land for a little farm on some

hacienda, have lived there for a while, and then have

moved to another location. In Panama landowners are

now aware of developing pressure for land and are trying to clean up their boundaries. The more foresighted

are paying squatters to move and are assisting them to

settle somewhere else, usually near the main highways.

The government also, under the Agrarian Reform, is

buying up tracts of land presumably suitable for agriculture and is arranging to give these former squatters

title to small parcels that they may own and farm. I am

not certain of details of the arrangement but believe

that it is on some long-time basis. Some months ago

a great deal of publicity was given to a program of this

sort at the time of the national agricultural fair in

David in Chiriqui. In this, as part of the public ceremonies, 77 landowners were presented with titles to the

bits of land on which they had been settled. There have

been other programs of the same kind. In the office

of Agrarian Reform they showed me, with great pride,

a plaque indicating aerial mapping of the lowland area

along the Pacific side from Chiriqui across to eastern

Panama. With this survey they are planning on a program of land acquisition in various places through

the whole area in an attempt to clean up this system

of squatters. What this will mean is destruction of a

good many forest areas. The ordinary practice of clearing is the usual slash and burn where the undergrowth

is cleared, all the trees cut down and burned, and then

the area is planted to rice, corn, and what have you.

This is now a definite program in Panama, and I

gather in other tropical countries as well.
44 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

VOGT. Is this done on the basis of land-use capabilities? In many places they just take a hunk of land and

turn people loose, and they ruin it.

WETMORE. It is supposed to be on land that is

suitable. Whether the soil is always good or not I do

not know. At any rate there is an attempt to take some

of these people off the steep hillsides which are utterly

useless after 2 or 3 years of cultivation, and put them

somewhere else. On a recent journey I was down in the

Burica peninsula, where in one area the Chiriqui Land

Co., a subsidiary of United Fruit, has its main holdings

inland. There is, however, an area toward the coast

that is also owned by the Chiriqui Land Co., but which

they were not using, in which squatters were coming

by the dozens to make their little farms and sow their

crops.
Avifauna in British Honduras

Stephen M. Russell

British Honduras differs in a number of ways from

other regions that are being discussed at this conference. It is very small—the total land area is only 8,600

square miles. It is relatively low—the highest elevations

are only 3,700 feet. The avifauna of the country is

known from 460 or so species of birds, so it does not

compare with the other central and northern Latin

American areas in the number of species.

It is worthy of consideration because it is on the

route of many North American migrants. Numerous

birds remain there throughout the winter. It shares

with Mexico the second longest barrier reef in the

world. The barrier reef extends north and south off

the east coast and is shared with Quintana Roo and

Yucatan. Finally, British Honduras retains many original habitats in a somewhat undisturbed state. This is

only because the population is about 100,000 individuals. Half of these people live in the principal town,

Belize. So in many respects it is still in the same state

that other Latin American countries were in quite a

number of years ago.

The geographic position of British Honduras is oriented north and south. It is 150 miles from north to

south and 50 to 60 miles from east to west. Guatemala

borders it on the west and south and Mexico on the

north. A series of islands along the Caribbean coast

constitutes the large barrier reef.

The main habitats or vegetational types in British

Honduras are not really different from those in other

parts of Latin America and include tall humid forest

which we generally call rain forest. In some places in

British Honduras these are undisturbed forests and

have not been logged at all. There are the usual secondgrowth types of vegetation ranging from that which

follows the slash-and-burn type of agriculture practiced

in the colony up to those at the point where you draw

the line between second growth and true tall forest.

There are pinelands of the same sort that occur in

Honduras and Nicaragua. These are lowland pine

areas. There are extensive savannas. There are keys,

some of them planted in coconut palms and others

supporting mangrove swamps. Then there are the

minor vegetational types.

The annual rainfall varies from about 50 to 200

inches, but the area with 200 inches of rainfall is very

limited in size. The southern part of the colony is wet

and the northern part is dry (about 50 inches, as opposed to 150 inches).

The history of British Honduras with respect to its

vegetation is somewhat different from many other

areas under consideration at this conference. The

Mayan empire included probably all of what is now

British Honduras, so at one time or another the entire country was under cultivation. The Mayan type

of agriculture was relatively advanced. They built terraces and they presumably cultivated the land successfully despite years of use. After the decline of the

Mayan empire the country reverted to the tall rainforest type of vegetation, and for all practical purposes the rain forest that occurs there now would be

considered "virgin" forest It is old enough so that it

has certainly reached climax form.

Today the situation is again such that the increase in

known population is depleting the forests. Most farmers of the country practice slash-and-burn or milpa

type of agriculture. The land that is cultivated is not

very good to begin with. Therefore, it is possible to

raise only one or two crops on an area before it is

abandoned and second growth takes over. It is probable that, as the country develops, the use of fertilizers

and mechanized equipment would allow British Honduras to produce more food per unit of area; but, of

course, this is a long way off.

Land use in British Honduras began with the exportation of logwood, which grew profusely along the

lowland streams. Then logging of mahogany followed,

but at first only very large trees were cut so that perhaps only one tree per acre would be extracted. A bulldozer pulled out the felled tree. There would be one

small trail to the tree and the forest, and the plants

45
46 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

and the animals in the forest were not really disturbed

by this type of logging. Within a year or two even the

tractor trails were obliterated. During the past ten

years the situation has changed somewhat. Instead of

only mahogany, other trees are being taken. Instead

of only large mahogany, small mahogany are cut as

well. After a forest area has been logged today, it

shows. There is a definite effect on the birds.

It might be worth pointing out that many species of

birds are characteristic of the tall humid forest (or

rain forest) and also occur in tall second growth. Second growth will replace the plantation type agricultural farms within a few years. About 40 species of

birds occur almost exclusively in the so-called rain

forest, and these 40 species will be the ones most drastically affected by the clearing of the land on a large

scale. Several times that number would do quite well

in second-growth situations. Since we had a discussion

earlier about the succession that follows a slash-andburn type of agriculture, it is worth noting that in

British Honduras new vegetation follows the planting

of corn in such a plantation almost immediately.

Pineland areas perhaps owe their existence to periodic burning and constitute about 14 to 15 percent

of the total land area. They are all lowland pine areas.

Pines are harvested for lumber. The pineland areas

are not devastated by the logging operation, however;

the pine logging industry is highly selective. The forest

department regulates the logging procedure quite

closely and I would say, in general, the value of the

pine logging industry is appreciated. The forestry department does attempt to restock areas that need it.

In British Honduras the pineland avifauna is unlikely

to change in future years because of any change in

habitat.

One additional point about pinelands: The forest

department has been extremely effective in preventing

fires in pinelands, to the extent that in some areas the

pinelands are being crowded out by the adjacent rain

forests. Monroe mentioned that perhaps natural causes

may be important in maintaining pinelands. I have

had personal experience with some of these natural

causes. In 1963 I established a study area in a lowland

pine region in southern British Honduras. I surveyed

my study area and marked off grid lines and proceeded

to do census work for 2 days, I thought I had picked

an excellent location. It was adjacent to the district

forest department headquarters. There was a fire lookout tower on the study plot. To make a long story

short, I left that study area and went south a few miles;

2 days later the message reached me that a bolt of

lightning had hit a pine tree in the middle of the

study area and had burned something like 32 of its

37 acres in spite of the adjacent fire-fighting equipment and fire lookout tower. So lightning is definitely

involved in the control of pinelands.

We have not had much discussion of birds that nest

on off-shore islands. Birds nesting on the keys have

undergone the most serious depletions in numbers and

species of any of the birds in British Honduras. Salvin

visited these keys in 1862 and his record of the birds

that were present and nesting is the only one we have

that dates back very far. Of the species reported by

Salvin in 1862, nine are no longer breeding birds in

British Honduras. The species are the double-crested

cormorant {Phalacrocorax auritus), snowy egret

(Egretta thula), Wilson's plover (Charadrius wilsonia), Roseate tern (Sterna dougallii), bridled tern

(Sterna anaethetus), least tern (Sterna albifrons),

sandwich tern (Thalasseus sandvicensis), and the

black noddy (Anous tenuirostris). I think it is quite

probable that humans have had a lot to do with the

disappearance of these birds in British Honduras, as in

other places. Eggers have taken their toll of nesting sea

birds, and have taken not only eggs but also adults. For

a number of years, the red-footed booby (Sula sula)

was in considerable danger in the colony. Some time

ago the government established a refuge which included Half Moon Key, which is the only area in the

western part of the Caribbean where the red-footed

booby nests. As a result of the protection extended the

bird, the red-footed booby is today in good shape. I

think probably part of the success of this refuge has

been the fact that there has been a lighthouse on the

island, therefore there has been someone there all the

time. Also, almost everyone in the colony knows about

the booby and seems very pleased that he has a bird

that other areas do not. In other words, there seems to

be a considerable amount of personal interest and pride

in the bird that they have protected. I know of no

adverse human effects on the booby now. There is certainly no egging or taking of adult birds. Many of the

keys today have been planted with coconut palms. People live on the keys, fish, and harvest coconuts—settlements are springing up on quite a number of the

islands.

British Honduras is occasionally in the path of hurricanes, but, although it is struck by hurricanes every
NUMBER 26 47

few years, extreme damage is rare. On October 31,

1961, Hurricane Hattie swept the coast of British Honduras with winds of 200 miles an hour and coastal tides

of 15 feet. The tides actually flowed inland for several

miles in the lowlands. It appears that tall forest suffered most. I was there in 1963, a year and a half after

the storm, and my impression was that the large forest

trees were not flexible (i.e., not limber enough) and

therefore large limbs broke off, or the entire tree

snapped like a match stick. The destruction to the

forests (the type of habitat that is disappearing now)

was extremely great. The second-growth vegetation

was more flexible and, although the leaves and twigs

may have been blown off, I think that the overall

damage was not so considerable.

I have some data indicating the effects of the storm.

Walter Nickell banded birds in British Honduras in the

spring of the 2 years preceding the storm, and then also

in the spring following the storm. He noticed in 1962

a reduction in every species that he had banded in the

2 preceding years except one, and that was a little

seed finch, Sporophila torqueola, which increased, as

you might expect, with the increase in open vegetation.

He also noted certain reductions in the numbers of

North American migrants. He has good evidence indicating that the orchard oriole {Icterus spurius) was

down 90 percent in 1963 over 1961 and 1962. I think

his data are useful because he did have his nets suspended in exactly the same areas each year. The data

might be misleading, however, because perhaps the

birds were not killed but were just dispersed by the

winds. Perhaps the ones that survived moved out of

the devastated area after the storm. In any event, in

that one area, there was a considerable reduction of

this particular North American bird. The foresters in

British Honduras estimate that it will require at least

50 and perhaps 100 years for the forest to really overcome the damage that was done by Hurricane Hattie.

The tall rain forest areas today are almost impenetrable masses of vegetation. There are many large trees

and limbs down on the ground and, with an open canopy, second growth has taken over and it is almost

impossible td get through it. I spent 4 hours penetrating 200 yards of this type of destruction.

I have a little information that suggests that the

composition of the rain forest avifauna was also altered.

I made censuses in 1957 in rain forest areas and then

again in 1963 after the storm. Of the 40 species that

I mentioned which are more or less restricted to tall

rain forests, my censuses involved 20 species. Of these

20 species of the tall forests, two increased in number,

eight stayed about the same, and 10 declined more or

less drastically. Birds of open areas increased rather

spectacularly in this same region. At this stage, there

is nothing that man can really do about hurricanes or

the effects of hurricanes on wooded areas of this sort;

but I think in British Honduras, at least, hurricanes

are a major factor in determining the structure of the

vegetation.

With regard to the effects of hunting in British Honduras, it has been the custom, probably for generations,

to obtain as much fresh meat as possible from the

forest. In fact, logging camps employ men to go out

into the bush and obtain deer and larger birds. There

are three large game birds which are frequently taken.

These three are the ocellated turkey (Agriocharis ocellata), the great curassow (Crax rubra), and the crested

guan {Penelope purpurascens). Although these birds

have been extensively hunted for a great number of

years, I do not believe that they have been reduced in

numbers appreciably. The smaller game birds, such as

tinamous and chachalacas, were and still are somewhat infrequently taken because, as in other areas in

Latin America, the cost of the shotgun shell must be

weighed against the quantity of meat that the hunter

would obtain from the potential game bird. So anything smaller than Tinamus major or a chachalaca

would be ignored entirely. There has been little shooting of pigeons and doves. I did not mention the ocellated turkey because I think it is in danger of extinction

or severe depletion. The ocellated turkey does quite

well in certain places. In fact, in areas that have been

logged or cleared, it tends to increase in numbers. I

think that the time may come eventually when the

ocellated turkey may be in danger, because as the number of people increase so will the number of firearms

and the number of hunters; and in a long-term vision,

it would probably be a good idea to leam more about

the biology of this bird in order to anticipate proper

management in the future.

North American waterfowl pass through British

Honduras in fair numbers, but they are not hunted

appreciably. Probably like many of the other areas under consideration, there are perfectly adequate game

laws. There are laws which prescribe hunting seasons

and the bag limits, but the problem is the universal

one—how to enforce them. There are not enough

wardens.
48 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

There are about 128 North American birds that occur in British Honduras at one time or another. On

the winter range most of these North American birds

are not restricted to a single habitat. There are exceptions, of course. Shore birds would be somewhat restricted. The yellow-throated warbler (Dendroica

dominica) prefers the pine forest in British Honduras

as does the black-throated green warbler {Dendroica

virens), but in most species there is no particular

preference for a single type of habitat.

In conclusion, agricultural practices, logging techniques, and hurricanes are the most important factors

in altering the habitats in British Honduras. The areas

of tall forests are the ones that have suffered most.

These are the ones that are disappearing most rapidly.

Fires are not often of considerable significance, although they may sometimes escape from the slash-andburn areas during the dry season and cause some destruction. Second-growth areas in British Honduras are

increasing in extent and probably will continue to do

so for some time, and this includes growth of trees up

to 50 and 60 feet high. Pesticides or herbicides are not

a problem in British Honduras at this point, as there

is practically no mechanized agriculture. Many nesting

sea birds have disappeared from the keys.

It may be redundant to mention possible cures for

these problems because I think that the solutions are

very much the same in all areas under consideration.

In British Honduras many of the remaining rain forest

areas are government-owned, so it would probably be

a relatively simple matter to set some of these tracts

aside as preserves. I think if this were done with the intention of prohibiting logging, the benefits would be

great and a minimum amount of enforcement would

be required. I do not think there would be cause for

concern at all about hunting if areas could be set aside

and logging prevented. Probably some additional help

for the nesting sea birds would be desirable, of the

same type that has aided the red-footed booby. If only

two or three of the islands that still retain colonies of

sea birds were given refuge status, this would probably

help the situation. It would be more difficult to educate the people about six or eight or 10 different

endangered species.

It has been my impression that there are at least

three basic problems. One involves the protection of

individual species that may be vanishing or in need of

some help. In other words, what can be done to help

species A, B, or C survive. A second problem would be

the preservation of wild areas. This would involve the

protection of all the species characteristic of the given

habitat type. I think the third problem, and a more difficult one to solve, is the one of the overall ecological

picture. If we set aside areas as preserves, certainly the

birds that occur there and other animals that occur

there would be protected over a long period of time. I

somehow have the feeling that there are going to be

crises of another sort before the birds are gone. For

example, as areas are cleared, we have the problem of

soil conservation, and I just wonder if the problems of

watershed management and the problems of soil conservation are not going to be "snowballing" at perhaps

a more rapid extent that some of the other things. I

am not implying that we should forget about setting

areas aside as preserves. Certainly, we should think

strongly about education and some reforms in land use

as well.

Discussion

IBARRA. Dr. Russell, knowing that British Honduras

avifauna is quite interesting; knowing that the most

outstanding and beautiful bird in that region is the

ocellated turkey, whose beauty, man, 1,000 years ago,

tried to capture in figurines, pottery, and sculptures;

knowing for many years that the British are well known

as conservationists, I would like to know if they have

any law to protect such a bird, and tinamous and other

game birds as well, for I understand that the populations of these small colonies of birds should increase.

And, I take liberty to ask you a question: do you know

about the existence of a protectionist law?

RUSSELL. The ocellated turkey is protected by law,

but in practice this means practically nothing. If a

hunter has the opportunity to take an ocellated turkey,

he takes it and it's eaten. This is also true of other large

game birds. I noticed no reduction in turkey numbers,

even though they were hunted. I think that many of

the natives, even people who live far back in the bush,

are aware of the ocellated turkey and probably practice some sort of conservation without realizing, of

course, that it is protected. They do not shoot every one

that they can. There is a considerable amount of personal pride among British Hondurans over their unique

birds. They realize that the red-footed booby is unique.

They realize that the ocellated turkey is somewhat unusual. However, in the specific case of the ocellated

turkey, I think it is in good shape because it prefers
NUMBER 26 49

second-growth situations. When rain forests are opened

up, turkeys move into areas where they did not occur

before, and the rain forest is certainly being cleared

and opened now.

Tinamous are occasionally taken, but few hunters

are expert enough to get them. I do not feel that there

will be any reduction in numbers of these large game

birds in the next few years. The guan is really the

scarcest of the large game birds, but I think that it's

holding its own.

As far as the human population is concerned, it is

increasing steadily. The population in 1955 was about

65,000 and it is now about 100,000. I think that it is

of great concern that most of the agriculture is still

of the milpa or slash-and-burn variety and most people

are dependent upon this type of agriculture. Thus tall

forests are rapidly being cleared. Mechanized agriculture hasn't really gotten started there.

IBARRA. I agree that conservation laws should exist

in British Honduras. I have found some books printed

in 1932 referring with interest to this matter. These

books were written by the famous Dr. C. L. Lundell,

a scientist, and in the opinion of many one of the best

botanists in America. He published a study on the

Peten region vegetation, north of Guatemala, as well

as Belize vegetation. He discovered many new plants

and added a number of "belicensis" to the species.

Going back to the problem of the ocellated turkey,

I must say that there is an urgent necessity to decree

enforcing laws for the conservation of the occelated

turkey and other species. All this must be done before

the situation becomes worse in the future, although

you said something about measures being taken now.

RUSSELL. They have the laws but lack the means to

enforce them.

IBARRA. The trouble seems to be that there is not

enough authority to enforce the word of the law.

EISENMANN. Do they require the lumber companies

to reforest? Do they have the usual Latin American

laws? What plants of the same kind replace the ones

that were cut?

RUSSELL. In the last year or two, the big mahogany

exporters have been required to replant mahogany

after logging. This is the only tree, other than pine,

which is at all replanted. The forest department handles the pine reforestation and apparently the logging

companies replant mahogany.

PETERSON. HOW often do major storms occur?

RUSSELL. They are frequent. Probably every 3 or

4 years a minor storm kicks up winds of 100 miles an

hour and brushes along the coast somewhere. I did not

really give you a good estimate of the total extent of

the damage of Hurricane Hattie, but probably half

of the rain forest area in the country was at least partially damaged by the storm.

PETERSON. SO this force of destruction is part of the

natural quality then.

RUSSELL. Right.

HOWELL. I would like to know what ten species

declined with the destruction of the rain forest.

RUSSELL. Let me point out again that my data

are really inadequate for any major conclusions on this

matter. The ten species that declined are: Elanoides

jorficatus, Micrastur ruficollis, Amazona farinosa,

Pipra mentalis, Rhytipterna holerythra, Lipaugus unirufus, Myiobius sulphureipygius, Turdus albicollis,

Chlorophanes spiza, and Lanio aurantius. The two

species that increased were Formicarius analis and

Leptopogon amaurocephalus, which surprised me.

WETMORE. What was the period of time of the

hurricane?

RUSSELL. October 31, 1961, which was after most

of the wintering birds had arrived and while some

migrants were still passing through. I am not convinced that Nickell's data indicated great destruction

of orchard orioles. It probably indicates a great dispersion of them.

The local people reported great mortality among

conspicuous birds such as toucans and parrots. All of

the large birds that are well known received some comment. They found them dead along the roadsides or

in towns.

ALDRICH. IS there mention of Tinamus major among

the rain forest species?

RUSSELL. Yes, but it was not one of the ones that

I really had data to indicate change one way or

another.

ALDRICH. DO you think that species would do all

right in second growth?

RUSSELL. Yes. It would do fairly well in very tall

second growth.

WETMORE. This species ranges in second growth that

is several years old.

NOTE: Evidence of the return of northern migrants to

identical winter quarters is provided in Walter P. Nickell,

Return of Northern Migrants to Tropical Winter Quarters

and Banded Birds Recovered in the United States. Bird-Banding, 39(2):107-116. 1968.
Avifauna in Panama

Eugene Eisenmann

It is with some hesitancy that I speak about birds

in Panama. Although I was born and spent the early

part of my life there, I have lived in New York for

many years, and my visits to Panama, while frequent,

have been for relatively short periods. The leading

ornithologist working on the avifauna of Panama is

right here in Washington, Dr. Alexander Wetmore.

For those who do not know, let me say that he has

just published the first of several volumes of his The

Birds of The Republic of Panama, a work of enormous

usefulness to anyone interested in neotropical birds,

for it attempts to summarize what is known of the

biology of each species.

While Panama is a small country of some 32,000

square miles, its avifauna is enormously rich, exceeding in variety what is found in all the vast area of

North America north of Mexico. As I figure it, the

presently known bird species from Panama run to between 800 and 850, depending on whether you are a

taxonomic lumper or splitter. Regardless of the canal,

Panama has reason to consider itself one of the major

crossroads of the world. The great variety of birds is

less the result of dramatic differences in climate and

more the consequence of a geographic position, where

North America joins South America and where the

Pacific Ocean almost meets the Atlantic. In discussing

bird distribution in Panama, it is well first to glance at

the map, for owing to the bend in the continent, western Panama is adjacent to Costa Rica (and mainly

Central American in its avifauna), and eastern Panama is adjacent to Colombia (and predominantly

South American). The zoogeographical separation is

emphasized by the absence of connecting high mountains (there are plenty of hills) in central Panama—

which is what facilitated the building of the canal.

A large number of migratory species pass through

or winter in Panama. The overwhelming majority of

these are derived from temperate North America,

Canada, and the United States; a few come regularly

from southern South America. I shall not speak at

50

length about the migrant birds. As other speakers have

suggested, compared with most resident species, the

long-distance migrant birds tend to be more flexible

in their habitat requirements, at least during the nonbreeding period. The North American land birds

regularly reaching Panama on migration are derived,

with only a couple of exceptions, from east of the

Rocky Mountains. A good proportion of these species

favor coniferous forest as their breeding grounds. There

are, I believe, no natural growths of conifers south of

Nicaragua in the regions where these birds winter.

Even on migration through North America such eastern land birds have to adapt to feeding in environments very different from their nesting areas. With

certain exceptions, these migrants are less immediately

vulnerable to the effect of human activities. Most of

the smaller migrants can feed in border growth or

partly cleared woodland. But it would be short-sighted

to suppose that the extensive destruction of forest has

no detrimental consequences to migrants. A number of

migrant wood warblers (Parulidae), thrushes (Turdidae), and flycatchers (Tyrannidae), are definitely

forest birds. Further, the sort of brushy growth with

low trees that succeeds clearing on the Pacific slope

provides little food for birds, either in the form of insects or fruit—which in the tropics many North American insectivorous species utilize extensively. Certain

larger migrants, such as ducks, definitely have been

harmfully affected by unrestricted hunting. The bluewinged teal and lesser scaup winter in good numbers in

Panama. Data by the La Jagua Hunt Club, mentioned

in Dr. Wetmore's book, plainly show a great falling

off in numbers. The drop in native species of duck is

even greater. This is the result, beyond question, of unrestricted hunting. Although the agricultural resources

of Panama are smaller than in many of the Latin

American countries represented here, as a consequence

of the canal and the attraction of many North Americans, and of international capital, the standard of

living is relatively high, especially about the more popu-
NUMBER 2 6 51

lated areas, enabling a great many country people to

afford a gun and to buy Shot. I do not want to suggest

that Panamanians are bird killers. Generally what they

shoot are birds they regard as edible game. To be sure,

many small birds are captured for caging, but this (it

seems to me) is an indication of a liking for birds.

Boys do kill some birds with slingshots, but this is an

educational problem rather than one really affecting

bird preservation.

Generally speaking, I would say that at present the

problem of bird preservation in Panama is mainly a

problem of habitat preservation—and more specifically

of forest preservation. Before turning to this problem, it

is well to call attention to a few groups of birds that

are endangered by direct action against them, rather

than merely from the destruction of the essential environment. I have already mentioned the ducks. The

cracids, magnificent game birds, are greatly reduced

even in areas where suitable habitat survives near

inhabited areas. I am speaking particularly of the

great curassow (Crax rubra), the crested guan (Penelope purpurascens), and the black guan (Chamaepetes

unicolor), a species found only in the mountains of

Costa Rica and western Panama. In the reduction in

numbers of other game birds, the two large tinamous

(Tinamus and Nothocercus) and the wood quails

(Odontophorus), destruction of the forest, I suspect,

is playing a more important part than hunting pressure, for though the species are vocally conspicuous

they are extremely furtive. The disappearance of macaws from most of Panama may be a consequence in

part of capture for caging and in part of the removal

of the forest trees on which they depended for food

and nesting sites. Many of the eagles and larger hawks,

notably the splendid harpy eagle, most powerful of all

birds of prey, have been wantonly shot as easy targets;

but again reduction of forest has greatly limited the

habitat they require. The famous quetzal (Pharomachrus mocinno) still survives in the mountains of western Panama, and once its calls are recognized it is not

too hard to find. The quetzal is steadily disappearing,

partly because its resplendent plumage makes it a temptation, but chiefly because of the steady removal of the

cloud forest on which it depends.

So we get back to what has been mentioned by

previous speakers as the basic threat to bird life in the

entire region under discussion—the rapid and widespread destruction of forest. Now, of necessity, man

must cut down trees in order to grow the food to

which he is accustomed and to develop his culture. He

did so in Europe rather gradually, in North America

more rapidly; he is doing so in tropical America at

present with extreme acceleration. The speed of forest

destruction makes a great difference. It makes a difference to wildlife which is given no time to adapt to

changing conditions. It makes a difference to the plant

community by reducing the ability to regenerate. It

makes a great difference in the destruction of the soil

and the reduction of the water table, in promoting

floods, and in creating practical deserts. Thus it affects

man not only in reducing the attractiveness and variety

of his environment but in the essentials of life.

From the viewpoint of birds the destruction of forest

is much more serious in the neotropical region than in

the temperate climates. Many forest birds are extremely

local. One of the puzzles of neotropical ornithology is

the fact that coupled with the enormous variety of

species is the small number of individuals of many

species. This is paralleled in the flora of the humid

forest. Doubtless many tropical forms have a very restricted microhabitat, but in few cases do we know

yet what that is. Rarely do we have the faintest notion

of the limiting factors. The tropical forest is a manytiered natural laboratory. Its thoughtless destruction

means depriving man of a great opportunity to learn

about his own environment, by studying the effect of

seemingly minor variations on his fellow creatures. He

may be exterminating plants that could be of inestimable value to his future well being.

One of the major conservation problems in Panama

is this: as soon as a road is opened, squatters settle and

cut down or burn all trees near the road. Within a very

few years one must go a considerable distance to find

forest. Owing to the nature of the tropical soil, the

torrential downpours during the rainy season, the hilly

topography, and the wasteful method of agriculture

prevailing, the cultivated area is soon abandoned and

a new area treated in the same destructive way. In

Panama any unfenced and unguarded land is treated

by the campesino as subject to clearing by him, whether

it be public or private property. His ancestors have long

practiced the same sort of agriculture, but the damage

was less, for methods of destruction were primitive and

only relatively small areas could remain cleared under

then existing conditions. What Dr. Holdridge designates lowland "dry forest" on the ecological map of

Panama is today not a forested region at all, whatever

its climatic potentialities. In the lowlands of the Pa-
52 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

cific slope, except for the extreme east in Darien and

the western part of the Azuero Peninsula, where roads

have not yet penetrated, the countryside consists today

largely of pastures or of scrub growth in overgrown

clearings, interspersed with small subsistence farms

and patches of woods along streams and steep hillsides

or swampy hollows. The abandoned clearings doubtless

represent areas where the soil is at present too depleted

for the customary farming methods. If left unmolested,

the land might recover its forest cover. But the traditional agricultural practice prevents a long enough rest

for real enrichment of the land, and before long the

brushy growth is burned and short-term planting is

once more attempted. Unfortunately, the Agrarian Reform Code has unintentionally tended to reinforce uneconomic land-use methods.

A few comments on the Agrarian Reform Code

seem in order, because essentially the same provisions

appear to have been adopted in so many Latin American countries. I have here the code adopted in Panama; my comments refer specifically to that. The talk

in Panama is that the main provisions were drafted

in Washington and that their adoption was strongly

urged by the Kennedy administration. Let me hasten

to say that the spirit underlying the Agrarian Reform

Code is commendable. The idea is to prevent monopolization of agricultural land, to promote ownership

by the poor peasant, and to stimulate agriculture.

Doubtless the preparation of the code was based on

a belief that arable land was being kept from useful

employment because owned by a few rich families.

This was certainly not the case in Panama, where

laws had long facilitated acquisition of ownership by

the country farmer of the very extensive public lands,

but where the nature of the soil and the traditional

easy-going land and agricultural practices made it

less arduous for the small farmer to move about than

to cultivate intensively his own small plot. The Agrarian Code requires that landowners devote their lands

to socially useful purposes. Expressly recognized is

the value of forest conservation to preserve water sources, to prevent soil erosion, and for recreational and

scenic purposes, including conservation of wildlife and

stimulation of tourism. Seemingly, the code requires

governmental approval to justify keeping private lands

in forest. The language of the code, although not clear,

is subject to the unfortunate interpretation that until

the government has defined the forest preservation

regions after agrological studies, a landowner is risking expropriation if he fails to employ rural land for

such "active" uses as cattle raising, cultivation, or lumbering. Allowing "fincas" to remain uncultivated and

unworked is explicitly condemned. Yet most of the

land on the Pacific slope whose most economic use

would be reversion to "dry forest" has at one time or

another been cultivated, hence might be called a "finca." Moreover, sound policy should encourage landowners to adopt forest preservation and restoration

without waiting for, or being dependent upon, governmental action. It is to be hoped that in Panama,

and elsewhere, the Agrarian Reform Code will not be

interpreted to discourage natural regrowth of forest,

on the theory that this involves leaving land unused.

Under tropical soil conditions, especially in hilly terrain, reestablishment of forest is often the highest

social use.

Even in the tropics regrowth takes a long time. But

it has occurred in the past. Dr. C. F. Bennett, of the

University of California in Los Angeles, has expressed

the stimulating opinion that much of Panama which

25 or more years ago was forested, and some still forested today, was in Indian farm clearings when the

Spaniards arrived in the 16th century; the conquest

destroyed most of the Indian population and the

country reverted to forest. I can say that bird distribution does give support to the view that at some

stage in the Recent or late Pleistocene periods more

unforested areas existed in Panama than say 50 or

100 years ago. There are a number of bird species

found in open or semiopen country from Mexico to

Honduras, sometimes to northwestern Costa Rica,

which are wholly absent from Panama and most of

Costa Rica, yet reappear in northern Colombia. Today

the extensively cleared Pacific slope of Panama provides what looks like suitable habitat. It seems to

me that at some not too distant period these birds

must have had a fairly continuous range through semiopen country in Costa Rica and Panama, but that

regrowth of forest later extirpated them locally. I

doubt, however, that this distribution reflects simply

the development and destruction of the primitive Indian culture. Rather, I am inclined to think, there was

a cycle of drier climate followed by a cycle of wet.

The drier climate facilitated the spread both of opencountry birds and of Indian agriculture; the wetter

climate made conditions disadvantageous for both.

But whatever the extent of the aboriginal clearings in

Panama, forested areas must have always remained
NUMBER 26 53

near, permitting rapid regrowth. The type of subsistence farming, the hilly terrain and heavy rainfall, and

the lack of steel tools precluded too widespread and

complete forest removal. It is modern equipment, modern transportation facilities, modern health and sanitation measures that have resulted in the very recent

population expansion with all its new problems. Fortunately for Panama, while its land is subject to the

special hazards of tropical soils on steep slopes subjected to heavy seasonal rainfall, there is yet no land

shortage. Opportunities for agricultural expansion

exist, provided cultivation methods are adapted to

the environment. It is a pity that more research has

not been devoted to the development of food from

tree crops, for trees are the natural form of vegetation

in this climate, and they tend to protect and enrich

the soil, whereas the opposite tends to be the case of

open cultivation of most herbaceous plants unless careful precautions are employed. Considering the abundant rainfall on an annual basis, it is a reflection of

poor land use that in some rural areas there is now

a water shortage during the dry season; even deep wells

go dry. This is surely a consequence of permitting the

hillsides to be divested of their forest cover, thus

producing too rapid runoff and the lowering of watertables. This excessive runoff has also produced destructive floods, not to mention the permanent

economic loss from soil erosion. Many responsible Panamanians, including some political leaders, are aware

of the value of forest; but in a democratic country it is

hard to enforce effective conservation laws until the

ordinary country people are educated to some appreciation of their necessity.

The situation should not be regarded as wholly

pessimistic. True, the tradition brought from Spain

favored an open landscape and showed less appreciation for forest than did the attitude of northern Europeans. But let us not forget that any new settlers in

forested "virgin" country must clear very considerable

areas of woodland to introduce the customary agriculture. We know, for example, that this occurred in

the United States, and that even in the eastern, heavily

populated states much acreage now regrown in forest

was in cultivation a hundred or more years ago. To be

sure, convincing the populace that certain lands are

economically better maintained in woodland than in

cultivation requires some education. But just as today

we can destroy much more rapidly and extensively

than formerly, we can also educate much more quickly

and widely.

Panama is a small country, and even the campesino

reads the newspapers and listens to radio broadcasts

issuing from the capital. Propaganda can be used to

educate for conservation purposes as well as for political and merchandising reasons. In Panama everyone,

even the remaining tribal Indians, is aware that this

is a period of ferment and change. Everyone is receptive to learning and wishes to share in the benefits of

the modern world. Science has enormous prestige.

Hence even the common people are willing to accept

ideas of land use that were unknown to their ancestors.

Most of us here are ornithologists interested in bird

preservation. Our wish to preserve birds is a wish to

maintain values we regard as important to ourselves as

men. Our discussion has made it plain that preserving

the marvelously varied avifauna of tropical America

is mainly a problem of preserving varied habitats, particularly the exceedingly complex, and as yet little understood, forest environments. The preservation of

large samples of natural forest areas means preserving

an untapped resource of man whose potential values

are as yet only faintly indicated or surmised. Regardless of the effect on the birds, man has a vital, longrange interest in not destroying the manifold resources

that nature has provided.

Let me now discuss a few specific suggestions.

Propaganda and publicity are not my field. I can only

draw from my own experience. I believe that one of

the most effective ways to create a public opinion in

favor of habitat preservation is through the encouragement of an interest in birds. More people react with

favorable emotions to birds than to forest, particularly the dark, humid, mysterious tropical forest. In the

United States bird watchers have played a major role

in conservation. Desiring to see a variety of birds, even

the young "birder" soon becomes aware that this requires preserving a variety of natural habitats. Many

of the professionals here assembled started in their

youth as amateur bird watchers. This applies not only

to the ornithologists, but to professionals in such fields

as conservation, ecology, other branches of zoology,

and botany, and even to the study of human populations (as I think Dr. Vogt can testify). Two of the

presidents of the United States most active in creating

national parks and wildlife reserves and in promoting

conservation were active amateur bird students in their

youth. The same has been true of many leaders in the
54 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

continuous battle to preserve natural environments

throughout the country. Let me therefore urge the importance of bird identification books for Latin America. Until one can identify the commoner birds—give

them a name—a serious amateur interest (much less

a professional one) cannot even start. The Bible recognized that naming the animals was the first step to

knowledge. Here in the United States we are so accustomed to our superb bird identification manuals

that we take them for granted. These guides, and their

predecessors used by the past generation, have been

enormously influential in creating and maintaining a

widespread interest in birds and an even wider public

attitude that they merit protection. Such books are

not yet generally available in Latin America. Printing

of well-illustrated bird guides is expensive, and commercial publishers are disinclined to take risks unless

wide sales seem assured. If bird preservation is of international concern, as we evidently believe, and is

intimately tied to habitat preservation, then there is a

real international interest in aiding the publication of

good bird books for Latin America. Supporting this

view, the International Council for Bird Preservation

(Pan American Section) gave a modest subvention to

the Instituto Miguel Lillo to aid publication of a very

inexpensive Argentine bird guide by C. G. Olrog. That

book has completely sold out. Olrog now has about

ready to go to press the first volume of a general South

American bird guide in Spanish, similarly assisted.

This is only a modest start. What are most needed are

inexpensive guides for individual countries or regions,

so priced that they can be purchased by young people.

Judging by experience in the United States, if many

youngsters are exposed to bird identification activities

a general atmosphere favorable to conservation will be

developed and a certain number of ardent leaders will

arise.

Conservation education should be provided in

schools as part of courses in general biology and, at a

more elementary level, in teaching understanding of

the environment. The use of the radio, television, newspapers, and magazines to spread an appreciation and

respect for "natural" environments goes without saying. The element of national pride in preserving unique

or rare animals should not be overlooked. For those

who are more responsive to economic considerations

the touristic aspects should also be emphasized. Dr.

Lehmann mentioned that he knew of some 30 or 40

North Americans who had traveled to Colombia this

past year simply to look at birds. Few of these people

would have gone to Colombia had not de Schauensee's

recent book on the birds of Colombia given promise

that identification would be possible. The number of

bird-watching tours to Latin America and elsewhere is

constantly growing. One need only check such a journal as Audubon Magazine to be struck by the variety

of such tours and of hotels and inns in tropical America

advertising how many different kinds of birds will be

observed by their guests. In that connection let me say

that we should not be afraid of a little laughter when

asked what we are doing with binoculars. A few years

ago a group of Western bird conservationists visited

Japan. Dr. Yamashina (who is a grandson of the Emperor Meiji) was the leader. At almost every town we

were met by journalists and welcomed with speeches

in Japanese by the local mayor or the provincial governor. These activities after a time might have become

a little wearing, had not Dr. Yamashina explained that

the publicity provided was a way of advancing conservation in Japan.

Now, let me turn to the question of nature reserves

and legislation. I believe it is highly desirable that all

the Latin American countries presently set aside substantial areas as national and provincial parks and

nature reserves. I realize that in some countries effective protection may not yet be feasible because budgets cannot support a force of wardens. Doubtless

squatters may invade some areas and commercial lumbering outfits may disregard the public rights. But at

least the land will be there, reserved for public recreational and wildlife and forest protection purposes. A

future generation, perhaps the next, may be more able

to enforce its rights. If we wait, the land may have

been cut over and appropriated for other purposes,

so that it will be more expensive, or at least more difficult, to turn over for nature preserves. In Panama

most of the land that should be set aside is government

owned. Unless soon reserved, it may be taken by settlers under the homestead laws. For with every mile

of road built, the destruction of many square miles of

woodland near the road almost immediately follows.

The question of reserves set up by other organizations

has been raised. Usually it may be best to place such

private reserves in the hands of local or international

organizations. But I feel sure that no reasonable Panamanian objects to financing from the United States.

Panama is accustomed to this; and people do not ordi-
NUMBER 26

narily turn down financial assistance for a good cause

when it costs them nothing.

Conservation laws and regulations regarding hunting, forest destruction on slopes, water sources, and

roadsides are urgently needed. Again, I realize that

the laws may not be adequately enforced at first, but

if they are reasonable, in time they will be enforced.

And the very existence of the law has some educational

effect. Let me say for Panama that it is one of the few

countries that in its national constitution expressly recognizes the importance of conserving its native flora

and fauna.

Finally we should aid and encourage the development in Latin America of native biologists, ecologists,

and conservationists. Their number is growing, but in

some countries they work alone. They deserve help.

Things are not so hopeless as some might suggest. A

good cause is never lost until we cease to fight.

Discussion

IBARRA. We have mentioned the word "education"

several times now. Since 1964 my country has had a

television program on conservation. This program has

been successful in educating people. I wonder if similar programs, helped by articles published in newspapers and magazines, would not have the same results

in Panama as well.

EISENMANN. There are individuals who write occasionally on conservation, but there is no regular conservation or natural history publication in Panama.

The Agrarian Reform administration has published

occasionally in the field of forestry, soils, and land and

water conservation. Panama has been fortunate in attracting foreign scientists. It has the Canal Zone Biological Area operating the world-famous Barro Colorado Island. Dr. Moynihan, who is in charge is at this

meeting. He has a staff of biologists. The presence of

this and other institutions, financed in the United

States, attracts many scientists. There is a constant influx to Panama of biologists, and amateur bird students, too, from many nations. I regret that this has not

been publicized in Panama as much as is desirable. It

would be useful if the people of Panama were frequently told that the natural flora and fauna of the

country was an attraction to visitors. The newspapers

are glad to publish information on visiting scientists,

but visiting scientists are understandably reluctant to

take the initiative to publicize themselves. Panama does

benefit because of the constant stimulation of visiting

55

scientists. I should guess that, relative to its population,

a larger proportion of Panamanians has received advanced education in biology and allied disciplines than

the people in other Latin American countries. For example, at the Gorgas Memorial Laboratory in Panama

there are several native Panamanian scientists working

in a field that at least impinges on bird conservation.

Several have become, partly through the guidance of

Dr. Wetmore, quite competent ornithologists. In the

field of medicine Panamanians are internationally

known.

BUCHINGER. I was just wondering about what was

just stated. Perhaps as an example, we can mention

that there is a forester in the ministry of agriculture

in Panama who was sent to IICA (Inter-American

Institute of Agricultural Sciences) in Turrialba to

study. His thesis was naturally related to his home

country: he was asked to work on an ecological

survey of Panama and to point out which areas would

be most suitable for national parks. After he finished

his study and submitted it to his office last year, Dr.

Lehmann as president of CLAPN (Committee of Latin

American National Parks) received a letter from the

Minister of Agriculture in which he stated that Panama

is planning a new forest law. The FAO has sent a

specialist to advise them and now it is planned to include in the forest law references to national park

legislation based on the ecological survey which was

made by Ing. Gutierrez. I think this is a good step in

the right direction and proves that the governments in

Latin America are interested in and willing to work for

conservation matters.

EISENMANN. Maybe Dr. Holdridge could tell us,

because a lot of the forest ecologists working down

there are working with his methods. Do you know

what the situation is?

HOLDRIDGE. My brother wrote me that a forest law

has been planned.

BUCHINGER. When the forest law project was

finished it was not sent to congress, because at that

time the government had become convinced that the

legislation had to deal at the same time with all natural resources. Water, soil, and park legislation will

have to be considered at the same time.

The Minister of Agriculture encouraged Ing. Gutierrez to study conservation in Turrialba and also to take

a short course for park administrators in 1965 in Michigan. His excellency Dr. Carles has also officially asked

three times for a forest ranger training course. If na-
56 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

tional parks are established, there must be people to

guard them, and also interpreters to explain to visitors

the importance of the parks. The minister would even

be able to budget a warden system, since he thinks that

what it costs to maintain those wardens would come

into the budget through the promotion of tourism,

or at least it would be possible to train otherwise

unemployable natives.

The conservation movement development can be

compared to the planting of the seeds—you do not

see the fruit of the tree next day. We have not only

to be patient but very much aware of those good

things which are happening in Panama. A pat on the

shoulder of the authorities is also needed since, as

the minister is a politician, as you know, if he does

something which is good and he gets publicity, it enhances his public image and makes it worthwhile for

others to follow the trend.

But, as you remember, Porfirio Gomez, the late director of the Agrarian Reform, was very much worried

about what is going to happen to the forests in the

Canal Zone, and he said it would be a great help for

the Panamanians if those forests could be protected

while they are under U.S. ownership. So we visited

with Governor Fleming to discuss the matter. As a general rule politicians are rather negative about interfering with what should happen to natural resources. Not

so Governor Fleming, because he is also a conservationist and a dedicated bird watcher. He promised that

if he receives a proposal defining why this area would

be worth saving, he would forward the memorandum

to Dean Rusk. A map and a description of the areas

worth saving was needed. We then went to the Smithsonian and asked that this proposal should be written up because, naturally, such a memorandum to the

U.S. governor has to come from a U.S. office, it cannot come from the outside. As you know, along the

pipelines and on the higher slopes there are some

beautiful forest stands worth saving and I do not think

it was such a big thing we were asking for. For different

reasons, evidently, nothing was done in this matter, and

this was worrying the employees of the Agrarian Reform in Panama since some Panamanians are already

asking for this land when it is returned to Panama to

use the timber. Naturally it would take money to buy

lumbering equipment, but U.S. businessmen promised

the funds, especially a New York company which is

backing the Panamanians' request to deforest the land

after the return of the Canal Zone. One consequence

of the deforestation would be a water shortage in

Panama City. And obviously the birds' habitat would

be endangered. Scientific pressure to point out these

possible losses would be most welcome. If not the

Smithsonian, perhaps you could suggest another U.S.

group which might ask the governor of the Canal Zone

if he could not consider putting those areas under special protection and declaring them as national forests.

When this area is turned over to Panama nobody

should have to feel that a good thing had been wasted.

I mean the Agrarian Reform of Panama could refer

to the importance the United States gave to the lands

and be in a better position to save the forest and not

to divide the land.

EISENMANN. There is one thing that should be

mentioned in regard to Panama. Today if you drive

on a road in the lowlands of Panama, about the only

area where you get forest adjacent to the road is in certain parts of the Canal Zone. In several reserves within

the Canal Zone the forest is definitely protected. During the past few years the talk has been that the present

U.S. administration is negotiating with Panama for

cession of those parts of the Canal Zone not required

for canal operation or direct military security. For the

benefit of the people of Panama it is most desirable

that some areas of the Canal Zone still in forest should

be maintained as nature reserves. Arrangement prior

to cession should be made with the Panamanian government on this question. Once cession has been effected, the government of Panama will be under great

internal political pressure to turn all accessible areas

into private hands for more immediately obvious economic uses. There is no national park in this part of

Panama, nor any large park at all anywhere in or near

the cities of Panama and Colon, where much of the

population of the country is concentrated. Even Barro

Colorado may be endangered, for it is an island in an

artificial lake. If a sea-level canal is built in the present

Canal Zone area, the lake may be drained and protection of Barro Colorado would then be difficult and its

attractiveness destroyed. There are other wooded areas

in the Canal Zone, now military reserves, that actually

are superior to Barro Colorado from the viewpoint of

the variety of animals. I therefore hope that arrangements with Panama will ensure protection of forest,

and thus of the wildlife, in these areas.

MOYNIHAN. Could I just add a few words about the

local situation? Of course, political relations are a little

tense at the moment. We hope that we will be able
NUMBER 26 57

to maintain the reserves we have now. I am afraid,

however, that we may lose everything if we ask for

too much more.

BUCHINGER. I do not think that you should ask for

them to have them in the ownership of an Institute. If

the area is declared a national forest it does not mean

that it is going to remain under your control. We ask

you only to evaluate them. Just survey those areas, the

same as you describe herbarium samples. For example,

many of our nature conservancy projects here in the

United States are now being declared national historical monuments. And nobody wants the Smithsonian

to manage the forest in the Canal Zone; this would be

a very unpolitical action. All that is needed is a declaration that those areas are interesting scientifically, so

much so that the U.S. military and the Armed Forces

in the Canal Zone are not using them as they are declared to be national forests. There would not be anything for the Smithsonian to worry about. It would be

just good scientific testimony that the lands are worthwhile saving. Latin American countries accept the

value judgment of developed countries and at the same

time they are somewhat skeptical about international

laws because everybody knows that it is impossible to

implement them without an international law enforcement agency. We therefore only ask U.S. agencies to

truthfully state the values of the forests and, as mentioned before, I feel it is even much better if the United

States agency does not handle the land—it should not

have anything to do with the Smithsonian. At this

point, it is sufficient to state that the area is interesting

for bird refuges and national forests. Then give the

Panamanians a chance to continue your work. You are

not telling the Panamanians what they should do with

the forests after they have them under their jurisdiction; this indeed would be interference. You are only

doing your best to state the value of the area and point

out the disastrous consequences of deforestation.

WETMORE. May I say first that I think my good

friend Dr. Eisenmann was more than a little complimentary to me. I know of no one who has more detailed knowledge of the bird life of Panama and of its

distribution than he has. This is witnessed by his publications. I have found these highly useful in my own

work and studies. What Dr. Moynihan has just said

is very much to the point. It is inopportune, in my

opinion, at the present time to try to make additional

reserves in the Canal Zone area, as this would be completely misinterpreted in the republic. I do not have

any real fear for the future of Barro Colorado Island.

I believe that it will be preserved. And I believe that

some other areas that are valuable for the conservation

of wildlife will be held by the military in such a way

that they will remain as reserves. Certainly whatever

treaties are made, and rumor is that there are to be

three, one of them will concern the military establishments in the present Canal Zone. Certainly the military

are not going to give up territory necessary for protection against any outside aggression.

The other thing that has been mentioned is the boy

with the slingshot. The accuracy of aim in many of

them is fantastic. The slingshot really became common

when castoff inner tubes of automobile tires became

available. This was a source of rubber, but it was not

too widespread. I mentioned earlier in this meeting

that I have recently returned from a winter in Panama. I was intrigued to note that every small boy that

I saw along the road, from the towns to the remote

areas out among the squatters, carried a slingshot. I

found to my surprise that enterprising manufacturers

now are furnishing rubbers, already prepared, to make

slingshots. They are on sale in the little stores all

through the country for five cents a pair. These boys

are killing many small birds. I was amazed at how

accurate they were. I recall very well one boy who

joined me casually when I was occupied in collecting

birds for scientific specimens. This youngster killed

at least one bird for every two shots, from hummingbirds to small pigeons.

What Dr. Eisenmann has said about education in

Panama is very much to the point. Among the squatters on the small farms, it was usual to find a man

who was barefoot, dressed only in a shirt and a pair of

trousers, but able to read and write. Those of middle

age especially were thinking individually. As Gene just

said, individually they are friendly, but as a nation they

do not care for us. I really think that, as Gene has said,

there is a great deal that can be done in Panama in

education in conservation matters. He has made an

important statement.

336-550 O—7C
Avifauna in Nicaragua

Thomas R. How ell

Nicaragua is bordered on the south by Costa Rica

and on the north by Honduras and El Salvador, and

it extends from the Pacific Ocean to the Caribbean

Sea. It is the largest of the Central American republics,

but I am uncertain of the exact area, as the World

Court decision of 1960 recognized the line proposed by

King Alfonso XIII as the boundary between Honduras and Nicaragua. This put some areas claimed and

occupied by Nicaragua into Honduras. (As Monroe

never tires of reminding me, this transferred some of

my best specimen records from what used to be northern Nicaragua into his domain.)

Nicaragua may be divided, geographically and ecologically, into two slopes and several divisions. There

is a relatively arid Pacific slope and a wet Caribbean

or Atlantic slope. There are highlands in the northcentral area that extend from the northern boundary

south to the valley of the Rio Grande de Matagalpa,

and there are isolated volcanic peaks in some otherwise lowland regions. Elsewhere, the country is of low

relief, and there are two large lakes in the southwestern

sector. For purposes of this presentation, I will designate habitats in general and popularly used terms. The

categories of the Holdridge system of vegetation classification into which these Nicaraguan areas best fit are

given in parentheses.

Most of the Pacific slope lowlands were originally

covered with broad-leaved forest (much of it deciduous) in more humid situations, thorn scrub in the more

arid localities (roughly, tropical dry forest and tropical very dry forest, respectively). At higher elevations,

up to about 4,000 feet, there is either broad-leafed

forest or, in the north-central highlands, pine forest

(mostly Pinus oocarpa). This pine forest seldom extends below 3,000 feet. Above 4,000 feet there is usually

cloud forest (premontane wet forest). The Caribbean

slope lowlands are largely covered by evergreen rain

forest (tropical moist forest and wet forest), but the

equal humid northeast corner of Nicaragua includes a

lowland pine savanna in which the elevation seldom

58

exceeds 400 feet and where only one species of pine,

Pinus caribaea, is present. There are interdigitations

and islands of rain forest along watercourses and in

low, wet areas within the savanna.

The two great lakes, Lake Managua and Lake

Nicaragua, are large but relatively shallow and likely

to be rough as they are almost constantly swept by

winds. This turbulence, plus the silt washed into them

from many small streams, means that the lakes are

always turbid or muddy. They lie almost entirely within

the more arid Pacific slope except for the southeast

section of Lake Nicaragua, which drains to the Caribbean by way of the Rio San Juan. There are no extensive marshy areas around most of the lake shores.

This provides a brief outline of the major kinds of

habitats that are found in Nicaragua. Now let us examine the effects of human activity on both the migrant

and resident species of birds in each of these habitats.

On the Pacific slope one finds certain migrant species

that breed in the western part of North America. For

instance, around the city of Managua one of the most

abundant birds in the winter is the scissor-tailed flycatcher. It is present in enormous numbers and the air

over the city is virtually filled with these birds at sundown as they go to their roosting places. Other winter

residents include the western tanager, which is numerous in the lowlands of western Nicaragua. In the northcentral highlands, one may find the Townsend warbler

and hermit warbler occupying the pines of that region.

On the Caribbean or Atlantic slope one finds wintering birds which breed in eastern North America, such

as many of the warblers, for example, hooded, Kentucky, chestnut-sided, and magnolia warblers. Some of

these are also found on the Pacific slope. As a rule, one

does not find birds of western North America on the

Caribbean slope of Nicaragua, but some breeding

species of eastern North America are found as migrants or winter residents over both slopes of the country. Migratory waterfowl are present in moderate

numbers at the appropriate season on numerous small
NUMBER 2 6 59

lakes, ponds, and lagoons throughout the country. The

two great lakes do not support large populations of

waterfowl, possibly because conditions on and around

the lakes, as described previously, are not especially

favorable.

The Pacific slope has been very much affected by

agriculture, in particular since the late 1940's. Following the end of World War II, two North Americans

came to Nicaragua and planted cotton. This was a

tremendous financial success and, needless to say, encouraged a great boom in cotton planting which had

not existed before. A great many areas were cleared

for planting of cotton and much of the forest that persisted into the 1950's is no longer present. Almost every

wooded section of western Nicaragua that would be

suitable for cotton growing has been or is in danger

of being converted to this purpose. With the sudden

advent of a new crop of this kind the characteristic

insect pests did not make their effect obvious immediately, but after a few years the boll weevil was present

in destructive numbers along with other kinds of injurious insects. As a result, as Vogt has pointed out in

reference to other countries, tons of insecticides are

sprayed every year over the cotton fields of western

Nicaragua. The effects of this are difficult to assess

because we do not have any accurate figures or estimates on the numbers of birds that were originally present or how many there are now. It certainly seems

obvious that this constitutes a very clear and present

danger, not only because the quantity of insecticide

sprayed over this region is enormous, but because it

filters into streams that drain into the two great lakes

where the effects may be felt for a great many years

to come.

In the city of Managua there is a small museum,

the Museo Nacional, founded by Diocletiano Chavez,

which includes many mounted specimens of birds that

he collected in the vicinity of Managua about half

a century ago. On looking at this collection one is

stru/ck by the great number of large raptorial birds

which used to occur but are no longer found in this

region. This is a result of clearing of the forest, first for

planting of coffee in the moderately high elevations

and later for planting of cotton in the lowlands. It also

goes without saying that the large galliform birds have

disappeared from most of this area as well. Such species

as the great curassow (Crax rubra), the crested guan

{Penelope pur pur asc ens), and to some extent the chacalacas {Ortails) are greatly reduced, although the

chacalacas are rather a resilient group and seem to do

rather well in second-growth areas even under fairly

heavy pressure. Apart from large-scale coffee and

cotton growing, there has been long-term destruction

of the original Pacific slope forest for small-scale farming and for extensive cattle grazing. Thorn scrub is

most likely to become established in overgrazed areas,

and this type of vegetation has doubtlessly increased

and extended into places where there was once broadleaved forest.

The pine-forest birds of the north-central highlands

have probably not been very much reduced by the presence of humans in this area. However, logging has

certainly had effects on the habitat as has fire, but I

think it is reasonably safe to say that the existence of

these birds is not seriously threatened by the effects of

human habitation and use of this region. The cloud

forest is another matter, of course. This habitat disappears as rapidly as it can be cut for the planting of

coffee, which is a very important cash crop in the

economy of Nicaragua. Since there are not too many

areas in Nicaragua of high enough elevation to support

cloud forest, this does represent a serious problem and

I need hardly emphasize again the fact that what is

needed is the preservation of the habitat. If the habitat

is preserved then the characteristic avian species such

as the quetzal {Pharomachrus mocinno), the threewattled bellbird {Procnias tricarunculata), and various

others that are found in this region stand a chance.

Without the habitat they stand no chance whatsoever.

The Caribbean slope rain forest has been cut very

extensively where it is accessible. Until very recently,

however, there was no communication except by airplane and by dugout canoe or mule trail from the

Pacific slope to the Caribbean slope. A road has recently been completed after many years of work which

connects the western part of Nicaragua with part of

the Caribbean slope along the Rio Escondido, and this

will inevitably open up more of the country. As one

flies across from one coast to the other, one is impressed

by the frequent patches that have been cleared along

the rivers for planting of bananas, corn, and beans.

There is no question that the disappearance of the

forest will continue and will be accelerated as time

proceeds.

The lowland pine savanna has been extensively lumbered for the last 40 years, and most of the trees that

remain are small ones, perhaps about 70 years old.

Also, the area is subjected to periodic burning. Every

dry season the local people set fire to the grass in order

to clear away the coarse dry growth and allow tender
60 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

new shoots to come up and thus provide some food for

cattle. Some of the fires may begin through natural

causes such as lightning; in any case there is extensive

destruction of seedlings. The seedling pines grow up

in great numbers if they are not destroyed by burning,

and a very dense growth of small pines quickly appears.

A certain amount of burning may be desirable, because

in areas protected from fire one finds a very dense cluster of exceedingly spindly seedlings; a healthier, more

vigorous forest would probably result if there were

some thinning out at an earlier time. Characteristic

ground-dwelling savanna birds such as the blackthroated bobwhite (Colinus nigrogularis) and common

meadowlark (Sturnella magma) are very abundant despite burning, and these species could not exist in thick

forest.

The sum total of the effect of human activity on bird

populations in Nicaragua is not very different (if at

all) from that mentioned for Honduras and British

Honduras and undoubtedly for other regions. My impression is that the migrant passerines have not been

affected detrimentally by the kinds of human activity

that we have discussed here. Certainly they do utilize

primeval forest, but without the primeval forest the

migrants seem to be equally abundant, and it would not

appear that destruction of the habitat on the wintering

grounds is anything remotely approaching a limiting

factor in the populations of these birds. The migratory

waterfowl are hunted very little in Nicaragua, and in

fact there is little sport hunting of any avian species.

Very few Nicaraguans use shotguns, and only those

with shotguns hunt quail, which are very abundant

both on the Pacific slope and in the pine savanna

region. Most hunting is done with a rifle by pot hunters, and a rifle is not a very effective weapon for hunting birds other than the largest game species. As mentioned yesterday in one of the talks, many of the lumber

camps and mining communities employ local hunters

whose job is to go out and secure meat for the camp.

These men are mostly after deer and other large edible

mammals, but naturally they take any of the large

game birds, such as the curassow, the guan, and perhaps chacalacas and pigeons. In Nicaragua there is no

extensive shooting of just any bird that happens to be

big enough to use in the cook pot, as there is in many

other parts of the world and some other parts of Latin

America for that matter. Thus, the results of shooting

are not serious as compared to the destruction of habitat, but shooting does have local effects on the populations of the large edible species and possibly the large

raptors. Among those who make shooting a conservation problem are some North Americans who come to

work in Nicaragua. These people are often rugged outdoorsmen who like to use a gun and regard freedom

from hunting and shooting regulations as one of the

fringe benefits of their jobs. Some are real sportsmen,

but others are inclined to take shots at any large or

colorful bird just for target practice. Although this

may not have serious effects on the total population of

any species, it is a distressing thing and does nothing

to aid the cause of conservation in these areas.

What about the species that might be endangered

in Nicaragua? There are only three species of birds

that are more or less confined to this country. These

are the little pearl kite (Gampsonyx swainsonii),

which inhabits the western part of Nicaragua, the

Nicaraguan grackle (Cassidix nicaraguensis), found

around the vicinity of the great lakes, and the littleknown Nicaraguan seed finch (Oryzoborus nuttingi)

which is found only on the Caribbean slope in wet

meadows. The pearl kite is apparently the same subspecies as that found in northern South America, but

the other two are usually considered distinct endemic

species, although some authorities feel that the seed

finch is conspecific with O. crassirostris of South America. The pearl kite, I would guess (and this is only a

guess), is in danger of being affected by the spraying

of large quantities of insecticides over the cotton fields

of western Nicaragua. Since it feeds largely on insects

and very-small vertebrates—organisms in which these

insecticides tend to accumulate—the kite would be a

likely victim of any deleterious effects. The seed finch is

a little known form, and I would only be guessing if I

said anything about the effects of human activity on its

numbers and its range. These might even be increased

by human activity, since the bird is an inhabitant of

open areas and not forest. The Nicaraguan grackle, the

only unquestioned endemic species, is abundant and

has probably increased its range as a result of human

activity. It associates very closely with cattle, and

wherever one finds cattle around the two great lakes

one usually finds this grackle. As certain areas around

the lakes have been cleared for pastures, the grackles

have extended their range and will undoubtedly be

found in northern Costa Rica before very long. In

brief, the grackle is certainly in no danger at the present time.

Now, I would like to say something about the prospect for preservation of habitat and animal life in

Nicaragua. The problems are very similar to those
NUMBER 26 61

that the other speakers have discussed—land is cleared

for agricultural or commercial purposes at an accelerating rate, with generally predictable effects on the

fauna. Political and economic conditions are of paramount importance in this situation. In Nicaragua,

which lacks most of the resources necessary for industrial development, most of the real wealth is ultimately

derived from agricultural and forest products. This

means, inevitably, that those individuals and families

with large holdings of land play key roles in the economic, political, and social life of the country, and

these people are naturally extremely influential in matters of public policy. I believe I would be justified in

saying that whether or not areas representing different

kinds of habitat are preserved depends largely on the

position of these influential groups. If preservation of

certain natural areas has the support of particular

Nicaraguan leaders, this can be done. Without their

support it will not be accomplished. The question becomes, then, how can those in critical positions of authority best be appealed to for the cause of

conservation? I think that the most hopeful prospect

is an appeal to national pride. Nicaraguans in all walks

of life, irrespective of their political affiliation, are intensely patriotic and proud of their country. By way of

illustration I would like to mention the poet Ruben

Dario. He was born in Nicaragua in a little village

since renamed for him, and although he lived most of

his life abroad he returned to his native land to die

and is buried in the city of Leon. This man of letters

is unquestionably Nicaragua's greatest national hero;

there are statues and portraits of him everywhere and

his name appears wherever printed words are found.

All this points up the fact that when there is something

or someone for whom national pride can be aroused,

a great deal of popular and powerful support can be

developed. If there is some way that national pride

could be associated with the establishment of national

parks or preserves of some kind, I think that much

could be accomplished. This will require at the very

least the active support of the leaders mentioned previously as well as the cooperation of the citizenry at

large.

Discussion

ALDRICH. It had been mentioned several times now

that in different countries there does not appear to be

the likelihood of an effect of habitat change on migratory birds of North America because of their tolerance

for varieties of habitat. We have not distinguished, as

I recall, between birds which are actually in progress

of migration and those which have reached their wintering grounds and have become fairly static as winter

residents. We are beginning to hear more and more

about territorialism in birds on their wintering grounds,

similar to that on their breeding grounds. I am wondering, in true wintering habitat due to this business of

territorialism, whether there would be more restriction

of tolerance of habitat than when the birds are

migrating. Maybe that situation would be obscured

by the movement of migrants through wintering areas

of the same species.

HOWELL. I would say certainly this is a possibility.

In Nicaragua at least there are very few resident species of warblers that would seem to be competitive

with the North American migrants. About the only

specific instance of competition that I can think of is

in the pine areas where the Grace warbler shows very

distinct aggressiveness toward the wintering species.

Those found in Nicaragua do not seem to have any

competitors among the resident species that would appear to affect their numbers to any great degree. In

other areas farther north and perhaps farther south

this may not be the case. As pointed out, scissor-tailed

flycatchers are extraordinarily abundant as a wintering

species in western Nicaragua, and they are, in contrast

to their activity on the breeding grounds, extremely

social. As I think everyone here knows, the scissor-tails

will, on their breeding territory, sometimes fight to the

death, whereas in the wintering area one can see trees

with large numbers of scissor-tailed flycatchers and

tropical kingbirds roosting next to one another, and

the situation is very markedly different from what we

are accustomed to on the breeding grounds.

ALDRICH. I was not talking so much about competition among species for territory but, rather, the selection of habitat for territory.

EISENMANN. The fact was mentioned, and it is certainly true, that the winter range of the migrant western birds usually ends around Nicaragua. Is that not,

perhaps, in part a consequence of the presence of

pines? Most of the western birds, except for the open

country birds, follow the pines, which range south only

to Nicaragua. Now, if you cut down the pines, is not

that going to affect the winter habitat?

HOWELL. What I intended to say was not that the

western forms are necessarily limited to Nicaragua and
62 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

extend no farther, but that there are certain species

which are migrants from western North America that

are found only on the Pacific slope in Nicaragua. None

of these characteristically western species also occupies the Caribbean slope, whereas a number of the

forms from eastern North America that winter on the

Caribbean slope also flow over and occupy the western

part of Nicaragua as well. Now as for the cutting of the

pines, in this region the larger pines are already cut,

but there is not much interest in the small ones and

these are left alone. Those that are too small to cut

for lumber are, nevertheless, quite adequate for the

needs of the wintering warblers and other pine-forest

species. For example, in the savanna and also in the

montane pine forests in the south-central highlands,

which have been pretty extensively cut, one still finds

species such as the red crossbill and a number of very

characteristic pine-forest birds. The Grace warbler,

Which never goes out of the pine trees, is very abundant

in these regions and there is, it seems to be, little

danger that the pines will disappear. Rather, the pines

seem to do very well when everything else is gone.

They will grow on soils that have been eroded or depleted and will not support some of the other kinds of

forests; and again, as has been previously mentioned,

there is a body of opinion among plant geographers

and ecologists that the pines, both in the highlands

and especially in the savanna, owe their existence to

human disturbance, to cutting and burning by aboriginal Indians. I think this is more likely to be the

case in the savanna than in the highlands, but nevertheless the extent of the pine forest in northern Nicaragua does correspond quite closely to the historical

records of habitation by the Spaniards in earlier periods, and also where they found Indians occupying

this region. Now, whether they were there because the

pines were there or whether they are responsible for

the presence of the pines, I could not say on the basis

of what evidence there is. But the point is that, at

least in Nicaragua, pine forest and human habitation

do not seem to be at all incompatible, and there is at

least some interest in preserving the pines as a resource.

This one of the very few conservation activities that

is going on—protection of pine areas from burning to

allow seedlings to come up and renew the crop of

trees.
Mexico: Avifauna and Modification of Habitat

Rodolfo Hernandez Corzo

The General Development of the Country

Mexico is now undergoing a very dynamic transformation ; and, of course, not one following a uniform

pattern. Its rate of demographic growth (3.3 percent

per year) is certainly among the highest of the world,

and probably the highest for Latin America and the

continent. As seems to be the general trend, population, and especially redundant population, tends to concentrate in a few very large cities, notably in the capital of the country. Mexico City has now more than 6

million inhabitants, and cities like Guadalajara,

Monterrey, Morelia, or Merida, all of them state capitals, are really large by any standards. Mexico City,

however, monopolizes about one third of the general

social, economic, financial, and cultural resources of

the country.

Parallel with population growth, industrialization

and technicalization of agriculture is rapidly extending. Most large cities are industrial centers, and they

act as centripetal forces, attracting people looking for

jobs or opportunities for a better life. Simultaneously,

mass production in agriculture due to the application

of new technology and, also, certain deficiencies in the

implementation of the principles of the agrarian revolution are causing a gradual depauperization of the

peasants, which accelerates the continuous flow from

the country to the main urban centers.

On the other hand, the close contact with the United

States produces a strong "demonstration effect." Mexican people become every day more aware, and ambitious, with regard to modern technological conveniences, even in the country. They look for radio and

television sets, washing machines, and automobiles.

They look for more education, social, and health services. It is enough to remind you that the National University in Mexico City is already an impressive center,

bursting with 80,000 students, and the National Polytechnic concentrates 65,000, also in the capital. There

are 24 state universities and more than 30 technical

schools of different sizes and academic standards, but

the pressure of the demand for scientific and technical

preparation is constantly mounting.

Industrial production is growing at an average of

7 percent per year, and agricultural production at 4

percent. These rates fluctuate from year to year, but

a very notable consistency is appreciated in the late

and more stable years. Productivity is also in the ascent, more rapidly for industry than for agriculture,

but it is still low for the needs of the country. Average

personal income was calculated at 370 U.S. dollars per

year in 1964, but this average comes between extremes

widely apart. This is why we can see very large modern

cities like the capital and others, along with hundreds

of poor small country villages, where people of very

low productivity try to make a living. There are families for which the per capita income is comparable to,

or even better than the U.S. averages, and there are

other people scarcely making $100 per year. Highly

educated scholars on the one extreme, and still about

30 percent of the population not reading and not using

electricity or newspapers on the other side.

This is the general picture. A panorama of contrasts.

In some regions, sharp contrasts indeed. And this is the

background which has to be considered, and clearly

understood, to judge the present style and methods for

the utilization of the resources of the country. Nevertheless, under the forces of this active transformation,

it may be advanced that the general trend is positive,

although local or regional situations may arise.

Conservation in Mexico

The country is now much more aware of the meaning of its natural resources and the need for a wise

utilization of them than it was a generation ago. This

is especially true of renewable resources. Mexico no

longer rests on a few mineral products (for almost raw

63
64

exportation) as was the case in the last century. Production diversification is the general trend now, as

well as industrial transformation to raise standards

of living.

The wise use of land, water, and forests has been

the subject of strong official concern; but we are still

learning and trying to adapt scientific techniques of

resource management to the mounting pressures of

such a rapidly growing population. It is said now that

there are three phases in resource utilization: (1) Total harvesting or exploitation, as though the products

of the land were to last forever; (2) the reactions of

conservationism and preservation of resources, trying

to protect what is left from the phase of destructive

use; and (3) scientific management, to obtain the best

of all available resources for the better satisfaction of

human needs. Mexico, generally speaking, is still coming out of the first and into the second phase. Conservationism may still be judged, in certain quarters, as

a romantic movement, of more academic significance

than practical results. A strong battle is fought between

vested interests and the ideas, and ideals, of our more

renowned conservationists. Tom Gill and William Vogt

know this very well, and have written books and

spoken frequently in wide circles to warn Mexican people against the rapid destruction of the natural resources of the country which threatens, perhaps, its

own self-destruction. Their educational results, along

with those of the Mexican conservationists like Beltran, are very valuable. They have produced a wise

and well-prepared generation of scientists and engineers strongly convinced of their professional role.

But what they are doing, highly significant as it is,

is not enough. In a country with the demographic pressure that Mexico undergoes now, where the rural population is the more rapidly growing sector, the efforts

to open new land for agricultural use and to raise

productivity are confronted with the reality that productive lands are more and more scarce. If rural

populations still represent 47 percent of the total—42

million people—with a very low level of living, and

looking for jobs on the other side of the border, it is

clear that any conservation movement will have to

fight against apparently insurmountable problems.

On the other hand, we have the effects of urbanism

and technicalization, the continuous opening of new

roads (between six and eight hundred miles per year

of first class, and a considerable mileage of local

roads), the growing application of machinery, pestiSMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

cides, and other chemicals to the land, and other

similar signs of a progressive civilization. The conclusion is rather simple. The available natural resources,

especially the renewable resources, have been used,

and, in some places, abused at a rate higher than the

natural restoration capability. It looks as if land,

streams and lakes, forests, and even vegetation of marginal value, are shrinking before our eyes. The natural

foundation of the country is rapidly deteriorating. The

environment for human life is no longer the land of

great green mountains everywhere, clear lakes swarming with wildlife, beautiful skies, and jungle-like tropical forests. Today, along with economic development, many cities of Mexico partake with other great

cities of the world the privilege of smog, pollution of air

and streams, dust storms, and mounting deterioration

of the general environment.

It is thus clear that the solution cannot be found

only in the ideas and techniques of conservationism as

it used to be understood. These cannot be easily taught

to hungry peasants or progressive and aggressive industrial entrepreneurs, both profoundly ignorant of the

natural values and interactions of living things. Perhaps, since time is short and needs are growing, the

more effective solution could be found in skipping the

second phase and going right to the third: scientific

management to obtain the best economic and social

benefit for the largest number of people, including

those to be born in the future.

Wildlife (avifauna)

If what has been said describes the general situation about renewable resources, the picture of wildlife

conditions is now clear: it is similar to that of the

lands, water, and forests—only showing a higher

degree of deterioration.

It is not difficult for people to realize the value of

agricultural land, of water for irrigation and energy,

or of the industrial use of forests. But this is not the

case with wildlife. By strong tradition wild species

are thought to belong to whoever can kill them and

take advantage of their products. The situation is

changing, and (as was once the case in the United

States) we are passing now through a period of rapid

legal, but rather slow actual, progress.

Of course, present conditions of avifauna are only

part of the general situation of wildlife. Migratory

waterfowl may be taken as an illustration. As is well
NUMBER 26

known, not very long ago the Central Plateau was

dotted with lakes (large and small) where hundreds of

thousands of ducks, geese, and other species used to

find wintering refuge and resting waters in their periodical migrations. The picture is greatly changed now.

Texcoco Lake, and the other five lakes to the north

and east of the beautiful Valley of Mexico, have disappeared for all practical purposes. Not only are they

considerably reduced as natural water deposits, but

water and habitat are also not the same. Industrial

and general pollution prevails, and surrounding towns

and opening of lands to agriculture by drainage of natural lakes have completely modified the habitat. The

migratory routes still go over the Valley, but the number of birds stopping there is practically nil around

Mexico City.

Similar observations can be made about Lake Chapala and, as a matter of fact, about all the lakes in

the highlands. We only have to remember the words

of Leopold (Wildlife of Mexico) in quoting Nordhoff

in 1922: "The fresh water marshes of Lake Chapala

. . . form another haven for waterfowl. . . . The far

interior of this swampy paradise .. . is a vast sanctuary for wildfowl. .. . I saw as many geese, White

fronted and Snow, as I have ever seen in the Sacramento Valley, and the number of ducks was past belief,

with some interesting species, like the Masked and

Florida Black .. . to lend variety." Today, the waters

of the lake, with the broad fluctuations of levels produced by heavy utilization, are constantly pumped for

irrigation of land, used for the production of electricity, or as a summer resort for rapidly growing industrial Guadalajara, already with more than a million

inhabitants.

Water plants on which the birds used to feed have

been greatly reduced by the fluctuations of levels produced by pumping and drainage. Industrial pollution

and contamination by the increasing use of chemicals

for agriculture in the surrounding land and the invasion of hyacinth and water lilies have also done their

work.

And in the region where Tecocomulco Lake, Apan

Lake, and other small lagoons formed large wintering areas for waterfowl, the greatly important "industrial combine" of Ciudad Sahagiin has been developed,

with four huge different factories and an entirely new

population emerging in the middle of the production

center. Naturally Apan Lake is now a mere seasonal

pool, and Tecocomulco and the others have been

greatly changed as waterfowl habitat.

65

Along the Gulf coast, the transformation of the

great Laguna de Tamiahua, extending from Tampico

almost to Tuxpan, is also well known. In this case,

massive pollution subsequent to the development of

Tampico as a great oil center, has reached, at times,

to the almost complete covering of the Laguna with a

film of oil. "Hundreds of thousands of dead ducks"

were reported once by J. L. Friedman of Texas by the

oil contamination. And, although this situation is not

so serious today, the progress of the area is based in

the oil industry, developing now in Mexico at a rapid

pace, and oil pollution of the Laguna is permanent

and the danger of its accidental increase is a potential

menace.

Considering other migratory birds, perhaps the species which has been most punished is the whitewing

dove in northeastern Mexico along the border. The

destruction of the brush cover, particularly "ebano,"

"mezquite," and other thorny species where the whitewing doves used to nest from April to August every

year, has caused an unfortunate decrease in its concentrations. Opening of new lands for agriculture (i.e.,

the extensive use of the bulldozer) and disregard of

wildlife were the prime causes. But one more unfortunate thing has to be added. A "cotton boom" prevails now in Tamaulipas, over the large coastal plains

extending from Soto la Marina down to Tampico.

Hundreds of thousands of acres of brushland are being

opened for cotton growing. Along the road from El

Mante to Tampico more than 20 new cotton gins can

be counted now; and, of course, several posts for pest

control by airplane spraying are in active business.

The effect of pesticides on the white-winged doves,

mourning doves, several species of quail, and even wild

turkey, is already quite apparent. Even hawks are

disappearing from the area.

A similar situation is contemplated over the Yucatan peninsula, where an accelerated (and, no doubt,

strongly needed) plan for diversification of agriculture

is now under way. Forest cover and brush, considered

of no commercial value, are cleared by machines and

fire, to plant corn and beans, in an attempt to have

Yucatan produce other things than "henequen." The

peninsula, as is well known, has been notable for its

diversified avifauna, especially song birds, the ocellated turkey, and a large variety of wild "faisanes" and

quail (Penelope purpurascens, Crax rubra, Tinamus

major, Oreophasis derbianus, and Colinus nigrogularis). These, along with deer, javelina, and doves will
66 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

greatly suffer since the opening of the land is being

done without consideration of wild species.

Finally, a very important program of developing

the coasts, both the Gulf and the Pacific, is under way

now as part of official programs. Several ports will be

opened or enlarged to improve the fishing industry,

commercial movement, and the benefits of tourism.

All this is important for the country, but we will have

to see that the development of coastal cities and contamination of marshes by industrial wastes do not result in a new attack to the migratory waterfowl. The

extended marsh regions along both coasts, up to now

considered among the best wintering grounds, will be

transformed by draining, or polluted and changed in

different ways.

Present-Day Situation and Perspectives

In brief, the present situation in Mexico in regard

to avifauna and wildlife in general can be summed up

by saying that the dynamics of a very rapidly growing

population, together with industrial development and

technicalization of agricultural practices and, in addition, the opening of new lands for agriculture and the

intense development of the road system, have certainly

imposed great and profound modifications of the

habitat all over the country. The average yield in

agricultural production, for instance, is growing at a

rate of 4 percent per year, and land which used to be

destined for corn or covered with brush is now used

for intensive cultivation of wheat, sorghum, or cotton.

This means a continuous increase in the application of

chemicals, and systematic and highly efficient destruction of natural habitat. The rural population is also

increasing rapidly, at a rate of a million more persons

per year, and this explains the increased pressure on

the available land and the need of new land for

agricultural development.

Judging by all this, one might think that conditions

and prospects for the future of Mexican avifauna look

really sad. And, as a matter of fact, right now they are

perhaps in the lowest point of the curve. However, as

I said before, the general trend is positive. Economic

development of the country and industrialization and

technicalization of agriculture mean active progress for

Mexicans and a rising level of living. The cultural and

social level in general is also on the rise. People are

becoming more aware every day of the value of natural

resources and, since the number of illiterates is decreasing, the diffusion of official regulations and the indoctrination of people in the country becomes easier. On

the other hand, at the high levels of public administration, government officials are now people with university degrees, technically qualified for their jobs.

Consequently, in connection with the protection of

avifauna, we would like to present briefly now a few

cases which we believe justify our opinion of a

generally positive outlook.

Since 1963, in response to the propositions of the

Audubon Society of the United States and in accordance with the international agreement for the protection of migratory birds, Isla Rasa in the Gulf of California was declared a nesting refuge for the Heermann

gull and the elegant tern (Larus heermanni and

Thalasseus elegans). A house has been built on the

island for two special wardens with a boat, especially

appointed to stop the stealing of the eggs that was

traditional every spring. For a second year the refuge

has been protected, this time from March 15 to August 31, and a special budget has been allocated to

complete the installations for the wardens, one of

which is a biologist, to study the habits of the birds.

The money for the operation of the refuge, as has been

said, is raised as a fine example of collaboration between the Mexican government and the Audubon

Society of Washington. A movie film about the island

has also been prepared and is continuously used for

educational purposes in schools, scientific institutions,

and television.

A second and, from our point of view, very important project, is the work now under way at the small

lake of Atenco, close to Mexico City. This is an official

project, in the future development of which we hope

to find help from Ducks Unlimited or other institutions. Atenco is practically all that remains of the old

and very large Texcoco Lake. As has been explained

already, the lakes of the Valley of Mexico were among

the best wintering places for migratory waterfowl coming through the Central and Mississippi flyways. Drainage of the lakes, a couple of generations ago, entirely

changed the picture. Since last year, however, a special

line of our official budget is used by a group of one

biologist and two wardens for the study and protection

of Atenco and two other smaller lakes in the area. Our

biologist already has presented a technical report with

recommendations for the restoration of the habitat, in

order to have the lake officially declared a wintering
NUMBER 26 67

refuge by the president of the republic. This report

is available for consultation.

As a third example of protection of the avifauna

we are pleased to refer here to a project developing in

the main nesting zone of the white-winged dove, in

northeastern Tamaulipas from Matamoros and Reynosa down to El Mante and Victoria. The special type

of vegetation of this area makes it highly adequate for

the reproduction of the doves, a valuable game species.

The clearing of the brush in opening lands for cultivation in the Rio Grande Valley, on the other side of the

border, has so deteriorated the nesting grounds of the

dove that populations were brought to critical conditions and the hunting season was closed in Texas. Since

last year, with money raised by the Mexican government in collaboration with the Wildlife Management

Institute of Washington, a special patrol and one biologist were sent to cover the area from May to August

(i.e., during the nesting season). In this connection, it

is very important to say that this area was heavily

visited by American hunters at the invitation of Mexican ranchers, since the latter consider the dove as a

predator of sorghum fields. Consequently, it is not an

easy job and, since the area is also under heavy pressure as a result of the cotton and sorghum booms, we

will eventually have to resort to the buying of special

tracts of land in which clearing of the brush will be

prohibited. This is, perhaps, the only solution for the

problems of habitat preservation in cases like this.

And finally, beginning this year, a special committee

has been appointed in the state of Sonora, for the administration and protection of the Wildlife Refuge of

Tiburon Island, also in the Gulf of California. Tiburon

is the largest island of the country, with an area of 1,200

square kilometers of desert land. Since water is very

scarce, the island cannot be used for agriculture or

cattle raising. On the other hand, it is a natural refuge

for mule deer and other species. White-winged dove,

mourning dove, Gambel's quail, and a great variety of

song birds are among the avifauna of the island. It is

also a wintering place for several species of ducks. Since

the area was practically considered as no man's land,

hunters and the Seri Indians used to raid the mountains and valleys after deer and game birds with nobody

to stop them. Now the protection of the island is enforced by two wardens, a special road for patrolling and

houses for the wardens will soon be built, and a biologist

has been appointed to take care of the habitat preservation of the island. Consequently, protection and preservation will soon be more effective.

Incidentally, the island is so important from the point

of view of ecology that the University of Arizona has

already expressed desire to participate in the studies

and protection of Tiburon.

These examples, and the ample diffusion of technical

information and regulations that is now under way—

reaching parts of the country that were practically

abandoned before—make us believe that, as we said,

we are now in the turning point of the curve.

Our main problems are the establishment of more

wildlife refuges, wintering areas, and wilderness zones

for the reproduction of wildlife in general and, particularly, migratory and resident avifauna, in which

the territory of Mexico is so rich. That is, rich in the

variety of species, although several of them are in

critical condition due to some negative aspects of the

development of the country. In order to reconcile conflicting interests we will have to start a strong educational campaign directed to the general population,

and make our farmers aware of the economic and cultural value of wildlife and the preservation of habitat

as routine cultural practice. With the help of some

outside institutions for a start we sincerely hope to find

the way and means to succeed.

A few final words of explanation. The present report is intended as a broad and panoramic view of the

status of avifauna in Mexico. It does not follow the

usual presentation by the specialist, who would probably concentrate on purely ornithological considerations. A broader view has been preferred to make room

for sociological and economic information, very important since the background is the development of

Mexico in our day. After all, if living things constitute

the most important part of man's environment, human

populations and cities and all kinds of works of science

and technology form the most effective and influential

area of the environment of wildlife. It is our duty to

see that their effect is positive.

Discussion

EISENMANN. To what extent are the refuges and

parks that have been set up being protected now?

HERNANDEZ CORZO. Right now the ones I mentioned are actually protected, all of them, even the last

one, with roads and house ready for use for about three

months. All of them are patrolled, and in this connection, strange as it may seem to you, I myself (in spite of
68 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

my high position there, as a high official of my government) personally do patrolling work rather frequently

with my helicopter and airplane. As some people say

down there, I am becoming a law enforcement expert

and I know how to use firearms! This is necessary. So

our refuges are actually protected. We are sure of that.

And I am not speaking of the pure declaration on

paper. They are refuges in actual operation.

CLEMENT. I am sure we are all very impressed and

thankful to Hernandez Gorzo for the broad perspective

he has given us on the Mexican situation. I would like

you to clarify one thing that I may have misunderstood,

which seems to me to have a high potential here. You

suggested at one point that perhaps we need to skip the

"second stage" and go right to scientific management

which would imply governmental imposition. Do you

mean by that second stage the education of the public?

HERNANDEZ CORZO. What I mean is this. And I

consider the question very important. As I previously

explained here, these phases in the evolution of the

conservation movement are from wanton destruction,

to the exhaustive use, to the romantic conservation

movement, to scientific management of the resources.

Since we are now coming into the romantic movement,

I would like to see that this step is skipped and go right

down to scientific management, because scientific and

technical management will really produce economic

values for our people. And this is the best way to convince them that things have to be protected. It is rather

useless (especially in countries like Mexico) to expect

that everyone will understand that wildlife in general

has to be preserved because they represent moral or

social values. They want to see more concrete things,

you know.
Avifauna in Mexico

Allan Phillips

After the introduction by Hernandez Corzo, I do

not think I need to say much about Mexico; you know

about it now. Perhaps I might elaborate on the last

point he was making and say that it is perfectly right

that Mexicans are very practical people. They are interested in things that are practical and in which

they can see a value. This is the way to appeal to them.

They love beauty, birds and flowers, but the practical

aspect is the one that is actually going to conserve the

habitats. Also I might say, right now, that I know a

great deal less than Hernandez Corzo about northeastern Mexico (Tamaulipas, etc.); therefore, I will

not attempt to speak about it. My experience has been

mostly in the western and southern parts of the country, and it is quite a large country.

On a map of Mexico all the Central American

countries get shoved into one corner. So we have an

area which is large and correspondingly diverse, because there are areas such as Tiburon Island where

the annual average rainfall would probably not exceed

about 50 millimeters a year, around the Gulf of California; and there are other areas that would be a wet

forest of one sort or another in Holdridge's classification, on which I am not an expert. We have, of course,

as you would expect, a very steady gradation; as you

go down the west coast from, say, Nogales or San Luis,

Rio Colorado, to Nayarit, the desert thickens up more

and more; first you pass into what is often referred

to as "thorn forest." Passing into Nayarit on the west

coast, and still going right down the west coast (there

are no mountains at all), you come into an area that

is actually quite tall forest, passing meanwhile through

certain areas of palm sabana. This is all diversity at sea

level, practically. Needless to say, crossing the high

mountain backbone of Mexico you have a great many

other environments in an extremely complex country.

Any plans for conservation in Mexico will certainly

fail if they do not take this into consideration. Some

of these habitats are extremely local, some of them are

extremely widespread. Naturally, it is the ones that

are extremely local that we need to think about particularly, and especially if those areas are vulnerable.

The vulnerability of an area is, of course, as various

speakers have commented, largely a function of slope,

because the removal of vegetation on a plain will very

seldom have the disastrous effect of the removal on

a steep slope. One of the rather bad factors of the

present Mexican situation is that there are a number

of peoples and tribes that live in the higher mountains,

particularly in Oaxaca and Chiapas, that practice

farming (this is also true on the east, side of the country). They practice farming on slopes that are absolutely unsuitable for agriculture, and the only result of this will be that there will be nothing but bare

rocks on these mountains after a while. This is something that it will be very difficult to do anything about,

because it is a matter of the culture of these people

who have done this for many years; whether the government through education can eventually persuade

them that'they should move to a more adequate place.

I will not venture to predict.

I should also back up Hernandez Corzo on his statements about the knowledge of the government. The

Mexican Government is and has been for some years

concerned about conservation; the government officials

are intelligent people. They know what the country

is up against, a great deal more than the average farmer does. Unfortunately, the average farmer is the man

who has the machete, the ax, and the match. Therefore we have, in Mexico as elsewhere, a great need of

education, and the government is very actively interested in educational problems, trying to push education. But that is rather a long-range procedure and I do

not anticipate that we can get very far with just plain

education, although it should be pushed to the greatest extent; and I certainly would recommend that conservation organizations that have films arrange for

them to be available for television shows and meetings

of clubs, or anything of that sort. There is a very great

need, which has been mentioned today, of books; there

69
70 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

are absolutely no books on birds in Spanish that are

helpful to the average Mexican. Here again we cannot

get started because nobody can become interested in

birds.

In connection with the Olrog book, it was mentioned that the pictures are not of the best. I wonder

why it is that conservation organizations interested in

educating people cannot supply an artist who can

make attractive pictures; because if you want to interest people in birds, through bird books, they should

be attractive books. That seems to me to be a simple,

elementary step that could be taken, which would not

be very expensive.

The Yucatan Peninsula was mentioned, and you all

know where that is, in the north in the Caribbean

(Gulf of Mexico). That happens to be an area where,

along with these developments that have been referred

to, there is still a great deal of primeval forest. In fact,

the surviving more or less primeval forests in Mexico

today, of the more or less wet type, are concentrated

along the east side of the Yucatan Peninsula, particularly in the northeast of Quintana Roo, and in the

jungles of the Rio Coatzacoalcos in the extreme southeast of Veracruz, where there are still large areas

undeveloped. The story elsewhere is very much as

we have heard it from many other speakers; as soon as

a road goes in, people move in, and the forest is gone

in a few years.

The changes in the populations of small birds ought

to be mentioned, since Hernandez Corzo has concentrated largely on the big birds. I agree completely with

what has been said by the other speakers, that as far

as small North American migrants are concerned, we

need not worry. In the first place they are more or less

adaptable; and in the second place you have to remember the seasonal changes in behavior which have

been referred to rather in passing. A bird is not so

vulnerable to predators or other enemies on the winter

range because it does not have to raise young. It is not

tied to a particular place. The vulnerable phase in a

bird's life history is always when it has to maintain a

territory, to return repeatedly to the same spot to raise

young; and, of course, the extreme vulnerability of

any species is before it actually gets out of the nest.

That is where a very large percentage of birds are lost.

So I think we do not need to worry so much about the

migrants as we do about the local populations. Now

I am fortunate in talking about Mexico because, as a

function very largely of the size of the area, we can

boast of a great many endemic species; we do not

have to speak of one, two, or three. In the Balsas basin

alone, south of Mexico City, in the south-central part

of the country, there are several species completely

endemic to that one region, and quite distinct species

that are practically limited to the northwestern part

of Oaxaca and adjacent southwestern Puebla, some

of them spilling a little farther over. There are also

endemic forms up and down the west coast, which are

in some cases species, and in some very well marked

races; but at any rate the center is one of marked

diversification. The Yucatan Peninsula has a few endemics; the central part of the country generally is

not very rich in birds.

There are possibilities of development in Mexico,

fortunately, which are not shared by the other countries

and which would not damage the fauna too much. I

am, of course, referring particularly to irrigation, because Mexico (unlike many of the countries to the

south) has a great deal of arid land. This arid land in

many cases is flat, level, and rich; it lies at the foot of

high mountains which receive adequate rainfall; and

the government has developed some very fine projects

(I guess it is partly private development). I am referring particularly to the valleys of Sonora and northern Sinaloa. There we have extensive areas that were

once desert and that are now very rich and productive

farmlands; there has been relatively little damage

done to the bird life. It would be nice, I think, when

these large valleys are placed in cultivation, to set aside

some little areas of desert just as a memento, but it is

not really a vital matter. The desert fauna is not particularly local in most cases, and I do not think we

should in any way oppose a development that promises

to ease the lot of the farming without really serious

damage to the avifauna. We should encourage the

settling of people in such areas if possible. If we could

only get the people off the mountains of Oaxaca and

into Sinaloa we would be in good shape.

The central part of Mexico in the north is quite arid

but it is also quite high. The possibilities on the plateau

are definitely less than on these west coast lowland or

Gulf of California (that is, Sonora and Sinaloa) areas.

Farming in Mexico is a very ancient occupation.

Mexico is another of the countries that was occupied

by a numerous population long before Columbus. It

is my opinion that originally the Yucatan Peninsula

was almost all rain forest to within a few miles of the

coast, and the Mayan system of milpa agriculture has
NUMBER 26

had a devastating effect on this forest over the centuries. As you all know, there are a great many ruins,

particularly in northern Yucatan; the Mayas have

certainly been there for a long time, because it was the

center of their empire. I think that probably, when

they moved in, there was a great deal more soil on that

limestone than there is now. This is based in part on

ornithological evidence from work that we are currently doing in that area; certainly it is unexpected, if it

was not originally rain forest, to find certain rain

forest birds occurring well out toward northern Yucatan, such for example as the little spotted-breasted

wren (Thryothorus maculipectus). There is a certain

amount of evidence that rain forest receded long

before the present-day farming began, or shall we say

increased. The centers of Indian population otherwise

were always on the main part of the plateau around the

present Mexico City and westward, and down through

Oaxaca (which has been referred to already as being

a potential desert).

Some of the worst examples of erosion that you

can find anywhere in the world are in northwestern

Oaxaca around Nochixthlan—perfectly horrible

places. You can find others in Nayarit and other areas,

but they are quite local there. Whether desertization is

going to continue or not I would hardly be in a position to know; it is dependent on so many factors. It

is a possibility, and I have hopes that it will be stopped.

Remember that there is a tremendous variation in

altitude all through that country. High mountains are

universal in southern Mexico, and if farmers can be

kept off the tops of them I do not think we will have

only a big desert in Oaxaca.

The effect of hunting on the white-winged dove

(Zenaida asiatica) might be mentioned. My experience

is that most Mexican hunters are, like many hunters

elsewhere, concerned chiefly with the larger birds. Only

the rather wealthy people can afford to go out and

shoot doves. One factor that has helped to conserve

doves in Mexico, and other birds also, is that guns are

not common. The army will frequently take them

away from people if they catch them with unauthorized guns, and relatively very few Mexicans can afford

to do much shooting; so what they go after primarily

are deer, turkey, and Crax, as in other countries. The

pressure on doves is not a very important factor in

Mexico.

Ducks have been hunted very heavily, but a great

deal of the problem is that American hunters go down

71

to Mexico and act with complete disregard of laws,

customs, and everything else. Discouraging these

hunters would certainly help a great deal toward conservation in Mexico. Tales of their deeds are perfectly

horrendous, deeds which are of no possible benefit to

themselves except for the enjoyment of slaughter. That

is more or less an international problem and we should

look into ways of eliminating this practice.

Perhaps we should mention, before closing, that

besides the physical changes in the country, to which

we have been referring, and the chemical changes

which certainly are disastrous (I am thinking particularly of the valleys of Sonora and Sinaloa, which

are very heavily sprayed; I do not know anything about

Tamaulipas), there is also one other physical change:

that is in the composition of the actual fauna itself.

As elsewhere in the world we have groups that are

extending and groups that are receding. I think that

while it is a very good thing to have refuges for Heermann's gulls {LOTUS heermanni), experience with gulls

in other countries would dictate that we should not

let them get out of hand because they can eat the

terns out. Similarly a great increase in cowbirds would

be highly undesirable for certain species, as has occurred. We do not have any data in Mexico, but in

Arizona, I think it is fairly certain that some of the

species we have seen drop out locally have simply

disappeared due to cowbird parasitism. So we have to

bear in mind not only the physical environment of

plants and soil, which certainly are of primary importance, but also biological changes which could have a

disastrous effect on certain species in certain areas.

Mexico is too big a country to pinpoint particular

areas for particular species. As to the distribution of

North American migrants, since I published a paper on

that in the Revista de la Sociedad Mexicana de Historia

Natural a few years ago, I will refer any one interested

to that. As all of you know, I think, and as has been

mentioned, the western migrants have a tendency to

come down in the high pine country. The eastern

migrants generally come down the east coast, but

even in Mexico a good many eastern species

do winter on the west coast. In fact, interestingly enough, if you want to see eastern warblers in

western Mexico, the thing to do is to go as far west as

you can and get out into the mangroves on the coast.

There you will see plenty of American redstarts
72

(Setophaga ruticilla), black-and-white warblers

(Mniotilta varia), northern waterthrushes (Seiurus

noveboracensis), and so forth.

Discussion

IBARRA. I am not sure whether you said something

about the crested guan, which is an important bird,

considered by many ornithologists as one of the

most interesting continental birds. Unfortunately, this

bird—horned guan—is scarce in Guatemala, as well

as some other important species. Certainly I know that

the horned guan and his relatives are not common in

the Central American region. The existence of any

law to protect this bird against hunting is unknown to

me. A few years ago I saw a report of the American

Museum of Natural History and the Natural History

Society of Buffalo. The report describes the results of a

trip to Guatemala and Chiapas of Mexico for a survey

on the population of this bird. I believe that within the

shortest time in the future we should recommend

protection for this bird by proper authorities. I would

like to know if Mexico is taking care of this matter.

HERNANDEZ CORZO. I think I can answer that question. Of course, the use of regional names is usually

confusing. In this case, for instance, I do not know

whether you are referring to the crested guan or to the

horned guan.

IBARRA. The horned guan.

HERNANDEZ CORZO. In fact we have in mind setting

up a refuge for the horned guan in Chiapas. Perhaps

this will be possible next year because the bird is in a

very critical situation, at least in Mexico. As far as

we know there is only one place—not a very large

place—where one can find the homed guan, and we

are taking that into consideration.

VOGT. These seem to be particularly important

papers because this is a sort of projection of things to

come in much of the area that we are concerned with.

Mexico now has 60 people per square mile. By the end

of the century it will have 180 people per square mile

at the current rate of increase. It is doubling in about

21 years, whereas Costa Rica is doubling in about 17

years. The pressure on the environment is going to accelerate, unless somehow there can be a change in

point of view. And erosion is so violent over so much

of Mexico that it just does not leave a habitat. You

will see some very similar country in Dr. Lehmann's

slides. The land is turned into a sterile desert over

very large areas which, it seems to me, cannot help

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

affecting the migratory birds from the United States.

Dr. Wetmore's report on the slingshot is dismaying

and to say that those slingshots do not move northward

very quickly might be challengeable. It is a good, cheap

industry, and within 10 years I would expect to see

them fairly common in Mexico, which brings us to

the importance of "sentimentalist things" as Dr.

Hernandez calls them.

I think there is a tremendous need for education of

the masses. This could be done successfully, I believe,

for two reasons: governments are anxious to get reading material out to the people. Schools that are not

well provided with books would almost certainly

welcome material on conservation and on birds simply

as part of literacy campaigns. Also, the printing of such

books is very cheap in Mexico, and it would be very

easy, and take relatively few dollars, to provide millions

of books of various kinds on conservation of birds and

other resources.

The Conservation Foundation is experimenting with

comic books for campesinos. We chose the comic book

format because it is the one kind of book that campesinos read. And for $65,000 we have been able to get

three comic books, one on soil conservation, one on

wildlife, and one on the value of forests, each in an

edition of 20,000 copies. This is just an initial experiment that caught the imagination of somebody down

there—a Mexican who has doubled the print order.

We could not do anything like that here in the United

States. They are horrible to look at, but they are the

kind of thing the peasants read and like and use, and I

think we could communicate with them through this

medium.

I do not think we should feel comfortable because

there is still so much undeveloped land in Mexico. Because of this rising rate of population pressure and the

literal destruction of the habitat, you do get real areas

of desert in Central America as you do over much of

the central plateau of Mexico.

PHILLIPS. It is quite true, certainly, but there are two

things: In the first place a comic book is not by any

means limited to the country people; it is almost the

only thing a lot of people in the cities read, too.

But I think that it is a very bad mistake to be

alarmed about slingshots or any small weapon. Slingshots are in Mexico. They have been in Mexico for

many years, and they have done no obvious damage

to the bird population; and I do not think they will

ever do any damage to the bird population, as long as
NUMBER 26 73

the habitat is there. We must very carefully distinguish

between attempting to conserve areas and species,

which we want to do, and attempting to conserve

individuals, which is utterly impossible because the

average bird does not live more than 2 years anyway

(it is a very old small bird that lives 4 or 5 years). As

long as there is an adequate vegetational substrate for

birds to nest in, we do not need to worry about slingshots, I am sure of that.

SHORT. If I may be permitted to comment here, it

seems appropriate to note that we have a great responsibility in Latin America to avoid overemphasis on

the saving of individual species, which may be economically possible in North America, but not elsewhere. I think such emphasis is completely unjustified

in terms of the great number of species occurring

there, and the tremendous changes in habitat that are

bound to take place in Latin America. In preparing

the literature and programs that will be put on television, we should stress the habitats and the ecology

of all living things. We should not dwell so much on

saving individual species, because one can take a

species out of its habitat and raise it in a vacuum in a

zoo, thus preserving the species, but only as tiny populations which are completely irrelevant to nature. I

doubt that we can afford spending millions of dollars

on individual species, as we may be doing in this country. We must save the greatest number of species and

can best do this by saving appropriate portions of

various habitats.

PHILLIPS. I would just say that surely Dr. Short

does not mean to imply that we should not stress certain individual species, like the quetzal, that will appeal

to national pride.

SHORT. This would be of little value if we cannot

relate ecology and habitat to saving the species.

PETERSON. IS it not wrong to stress the North American migrants, which are more flexible anyway? The

ones that really are going to be in trouble are the

endemics, the resident species, particularly of climax

environments that have evolved over long periods of

time and that are not successional environments. I

think the birds that live in such environments are the

birds that are in trouble.

FOSBERG. I have one comment on these last remarks

about the preservation of individual species. We must,

of course, preserve the habitat to preserve an individual species. I think it is not at all bad to emphasize

the preservation of individual species since if you preserve a habitat which will enable you to maintain an

individual species you will automatically protect a

great array of other species that also use that habitat.

The habitats are not divided up one by one, with one

bird to a habitat. That is not the way it works. Use the

whooping crane or any other conspicuous species as a

focal point, and you will take care of quite a few other

species that might not have the same publicity value

in themselves.

PHILLIPS. I think that we would all agree on that.

EISENMANN. I was very much interested in what

Dr. Hernandez Corzo said about what is being done in

Mexico. There is no doubt that in Mexico, as elsewhere, there are a great many people on a subsistence

level. Nevertheless, I think the emotional, the so-called

"romantic," aspects are very important. I know little

about Mexico beyond having visited there a couple of

times. But surely Mexicans are as "romantic" as any

people. I suggest that one way to get action is through

appeal to emotions, through what some call romantic

or sentimental considerations. Any group of people

who could have as much fine popular art today as the

Mexicans, even in the lowliest places, must have a

strong aesthetic and romantic feeling. I know that in

the United States the conservation movement began

as a "romantic" movement. It was not an economic

movement. But the leaders were romantics, if you wish,

who understood human nature. And you can always

point out that the things which appeal to people in a

romantic or sentimental or aesthetic sense are also important to the complete human being, even in a material sense. We should not, I feel, in Latin America or

anywhere else, overlook the aesthetic, emotional, and

sentimental aspects of conservation. I think they have

appeal, too. Of course one cannot forget the economic

aspects.

HERNANDEZ CORZO. I want to insist on my points

of view, because I should know Mexico better than

you do, Dr. Eisenmann. I do not mean that we are

supposed to overlook this romantic aspect and the

effect it produces, but I merely say that you here in

the United States are in the position now to change

your conservation movement from the romantic to a

more practical way of expressing it. You know how

schools of thought also change everyday. But this is

your own concern. In regard to Mexico, what I mean

is this. In Mexico (and this is why I began my paper

with a panoramic view of the economic development

338-550 O—70 6
74 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

of the country) our main concern is our economic

development with employment for everybody. We

have lots of people practically not making a living. So

we have to say that this is more urgent than anything

else. This does not mean that there is no room for

romantic expressions, or romantic thoughts and everything else, but they will have to come after the satisfaction of more urgent needs. So this is why I am

very sure that if we go to our people and tell them

that they are supposed to preserve wildlife because

of the aesthetic value they will understand, they will

even shout "Ole," but will not find themselves able to

act accordingly. And since they must eat, they will

continue to kill birds for eating. That is quite true.

And this is the only thing I want to express in my

paper when I say that we must emphasize the practical aspects in preference to the aesthetic aspects in

dealing with the wildlife resources. Land, water, forests, and wildlife are four entities of the same unit and

this unit is the natural renewable resource. They have

a meaning taken together: an economic meaning for

people, and an aesthetic value, of course, and a social

value also. But remember that in Mexico now, according to the actual trends of our economic and

social progress, whether we like it or not (and without this regard of other values) we have to concentrate on the economic values of these four entities

constituting our natural and physical background.
Avifauna in Venezuela

William H. Phelps, Jr.

I have prepared only four pages of notes, but I

knew that by the time my turn came, all of you excellent professionals gathered here would have covered

all the aspects of conservation which are the object

of this meeting. An amateur like me has very little to

add. All the problems discussed here, from different

countries, exist also in Venezuela. Venezuela has recently been cataloged as a semideveloped country, and

the speed with which we are developing aggravates all

the conservation problems in Latin America, as William Vogt pointed out some years ago. They are now

even more serious because more roads are being constructed to more remote areas. And we all know

that civilization and really unspoiled nature are

incompatible.

Somebody once said that a squirrel could go from

the Atlantic Ocean to the Mississippi River without

touching the ground. You can say today that a monkey can almost go from Venezuela to Argentina, after

swimming a couple of streams like the Amazon and

the Orinoco, without touching the ground. I wonder

how long he will be able to do that. Man's influence on

the environment in developed countries is frightening. Some of you may remember a meeting in Belgium

of the UIPN some years ago. The burgermeister of

Brussels stated that there is not one square meter of

Belgium that has not been affected by man. When

that happens conservationists are restricted to conserving Fosberg's type of habitat: one square kilometer, or

a few square kilometers, not because preserving such

small areas is a good idea but because that is all that

is left to preserve! In South America there are still large

areas that can be set aside and something is being done

about it. It is important that in South America large

areas be set aside as reserves very soon, while they

are still considered wilderness. In England there is a

Society for the Preservation of the Landscape. It is

wonderful, but it also frightens one to think of the

eventual establishment of such a type of society in

Venezuela where now our whole nation is "landscape."

William Vogt mentioned that the protection of watersheds may not be keeping pace with the corresponding legislation. In Venezuela this is true, but there is

some progress and strict measures are being taken to

enforce recently enacted hunting and conservation

laws. It is evident that only with continuing education

will there be marked progress in getting as many of

our people as possible to grasp the concept of conservation. The sooner the better, because there is still time

to preserve a lot.

In Venezuela it is forbidden to keep native birds

in cages, not even parrots; however, it is practically impossible to keep people from having parrots in their

patios or backyards. When the turpial was made the

national bird many people wanted one, but as far as

we know the turpial fortunately seems to be surviving

this dangerous notoriety. A branch of the army, called

the national guard, has the responsibility for enforcing

the conservation laws.

The Sociedad Venezolana de Ciencias Naturales

has been the pioneer in nature protection and the

preservation of natural habitats, and for the last 20

years has been very active. The Department of Agriculture has an important section on conservation of

natural resources which is always headed by very

capable and well-trained conservationists. Every year

there are many conferences and other meetings which

the press, radio, and television stations, with their national networks, cover adequately. Some years ago

the International Union for the Protection of Nature

met in Caracas and for a week all Venezuela seemed

to be talking about the protection of nature. Many

thought that with the departure of the delegates the

interest would disappear, but it did not. Fortunately,

what Vogt said at that meeting and what he had written in his book Road to Survival shocked many people

in Latin America into realizing the importance of

conservation. The Venezuelan section of the Interna75
76 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

tional Council for Bird Preservation also has been active in bird protection. Further international

cooperation in bird protection seems worthwhile and

perhaps a resolution could be prepared to recommend

it. We all know that the United States sets the example

by not permitting the importation of birds which are

not allowed to be exported by the country of origin.

Industrial pollution has been mentioned, especially

by Hernandez Corzo, and we in Venezuela are beginning to have our share of it because of the increasing

industrialization. In the Lake Maracaibo region oil

is often spilled accidentally and birds suffer. Although

the oil companies responsible are often fined, the pollution of the waters of the lake and of its beaches

continues to some extent.

Just one word about fires. In remote areas Indians

have always signaled their location to their friends by

setting vegetation on fire. Now, with matches easily

available, it is much easier for them to make fires, and

of course many savanna fires yearly consume at least

the fringes of even the most humid of forests. In the

llanos, the cattle-raising area of Venezuela, the savannas are periodically set on fire. The Sociedad Venezolana de Ciencias Naturales maintains a biological

research station in the llanos, and one of its objects is

to find out why the savannas are burned every year.

The reason remains undetermined after several years

of experiments. It is still a controversial matter.

As far as bird protection is concerned, may I say

that we are not following the example set by some very

industrialized nations with old civilizations where the

people are legally permitted to net little songbirds for

food and to kill them for sport.

Discussion

VOGT. It seems to me that Venezuela does a really

outstanding job on its national parks, setting up some

good areas and effectively protecting them. I wonder

if you would give us some idea of the genesis of the

park notion there, and the influence that Pittier might

have had? This is almost an exception in the Latin

culture. That there is this appreciation of these natural

areas seems to me an encouraging example of the fact

that people can be educated. Am I right in that?

PHELPS. Yes, Dr. Vogt. Dr. Henri Pittier did a lot

for conservation in Venezuela. He was very frank and

open in his constructive criticism everytime he thought

nature was being abused. He was an outstanding

botanist, as you know, and his remarkable personality

and outspoken manner made an impact on every community where he worked. His influence was felt in

Costa Rica, for example, and in other nations of Central America. His approach was merciless you might

say; it almost had that "Vogt" quality.

I understand that the government of the United

States will not permit the importation of birds if they

are protected in the countries from which they are sent,

IBARRA. I do not intend to ask something, but to

suggest that we should keep silent for a few seconds in

honor of the best ornithologist in Venezuela—the late

Dr. William Phelps. In Venezuela there is a famous

collection of birds which is known as the Coleccion

Ornitologica Phelps. This valuable work is all due

to your father and you, who helped him. Only a few

days ago I learned of his death. Therefore, I would

like to suggest in this meeting that we keep silent in

recognition of his life's work as an ornithologist.
Effects of the Environmental Changes on the

Avifauna of the Republic of Colombia

Antonio Olivares, O.F.M.

Historical Perspective

In the republic of Colombia, which occupies an

area of 113,855,500 hectares in the extreme northwestern part of South America, the avifauna has been

classified into 20 orders, 88 families, 678 genera, 1,570

species, and 2,675 subspecies. Of these 200 species are

migratory the greater part of which are winter residents and come from North America. From the austral hemisphere the summer residents number only

five species, the most recent of which, Sublegatus

modestus, was registered in 1964.

Colombia is probably the world's richest country in

bird life. Her extraordinary richness, among other factors, may be explained by considering that this is the

only South American country bathed by two oceans,

the Atlantic to the north, and the Pacific to the west;

the presence of the three Andean ranges that cross

from south to north, locking in the river beds of the

Cauca and Magdalena; the vast llanos in the eastern

region; and the dense jungles of the Orinocan and

Amazonian regions. Such a varied topography divides

this tropical country into four life zones: the tropical

or hot, the subtropical or temperate, the cold, and the

extreme desolate and frigid. There are five faunal

areas: the Colombian-Pacific; the Cauca and Magdalena, including the humid and arid regions; the Caribbean; the Orinocan; and the Amazonian.

Forests occupy 63,335,500 hectares or 55 percent of

Colombia; the river, lake, and swamp areas cover 10

million hectares or 8 percent; and cultivated areas occupy only 2,733,800 hectares or 2.4 percent. The principal crops of 1965 in hectares were: corn, 831,500;

coffee, 810,000; sugar cane, 427,000; rice, 331,700;

cotton, 164,000; sesame, 130,000; wheat 106,000; potatoes, 64,000; and bananas, 26,000. Of a population of

17 million about half are engaged in agriculture.

For information on the first species of Colombian

birds found in scientific literature we turn to Linnaeus

who described in his Systema Naturae (10th edition,

1758) a small parrot (Aratinga pertinax aeruginosus)

whose habitat according to modern authors is Calamar

on the lower Magdalena River, Colombia. In the 12th

edition (1776) Linnaeus includes a tree duck (Dendrocygna autumnalis), originally of Colombia, according to Brabourne and Chubb; and the chavarria

(Chauna chavaria), according to material sent from

Cartagena by Nicolas Jose Jacquin. Continuation and

study of classifying Colombian bird life was carried

on by Miiller (1776), Jacquin (1784), Gmelin (1789),

Humboldt (1805), and Bechstein (1811). In 1828

Lesson dedicated a sickle-winged guan {Chamaepetes

goudotii) to Justin Goudot on material he had collected

in Quindio (Central Andes) in 1827. It is believed

that during his stay in Colombia Goudot taught the

natives how to prepare bird skins. They sent these by

the thousands to Europe, where they were used for

feminine adornment. Only a few reached scientific

hands. The commerce in feathers continued well into

our century. These skins were simply labeled "Bogota"

with no further reference to exact location of capture.

From approximately the middle of the past century,

no less than 270 descriptions of new species were made

by Sclater, Lafresnaye, Berlepsch, and others.

Delattre and Bourcier (1846) were the pioneers in

locating Colombian bird life. Their classifications were

based upon material collected by Delattre on his expedition from Buenaventura to Pasto in 1846, in which

he passed through Cali and Popayan.

The nation was visited in the 20th century by Chapman, Carriker, Wetmore, von Sneidern, Miller and

others, all of whom have published pertinent avian

studies. De Schauensee has reviewed all known infor77
78

mation on bird life up to the past year in his book

The Birds of Colombia. Additions to the work of

Schauensee are being published by Niceforo Maria

and Olivares of the Museum of the Institute de La

Salle Bogota, and of the Instituto de Ciencias Naturales, Universidad Nacional de Colombia.

Among the families that have the largest number of

species in Colombia are the following: Trochilidae

with 134, Formicariidae with 155, Thraupidae with

120, and Fringillidae with 77.

It is necessary to add to the above material the truly

insular birds, such as those of the San Andres and

Providencia archipelago in the Atlantic. It was possible for Bond in 1950 to study its wildlife and 54

species and subspecies were observed. Therefore the

bird life of the archipelago should be added to the

birds recognized in Colombian territory—but the species of San Andres and Providencia are in closer affinity

to the bird life of the West Indies than to the northwest of South America. The avifauna of the Gorgona

and Malpelo islands in the Pacific have been classified

with the continental.

Among the largest birds in Colombia we find the

condor (Vultur gryphus) for its volume, and the jabiru

(Jabiru mycteria) for its height; the smallest are certain hummingbirds (Trochilidae) and a short-tailed

pygmy tyrant (Myiornis ecaudatus miserabilis).

Our birds have not been used for truly productive

and economic means. Since time immemorial the

natives have kept captured birds (Ramphastidae, Cracidae, Psophiidae, Psittacidae, Icteridae, and other

families) to ornament their homes. This custom has

been kept alive to the present day; however, these

species have not been domesticated for profit.

In Colombia the existing species are known by their

names, not by how they live; in other words, work

has been done in taxonomy, but to date very few ecological studies have been completed.

Since the beginning of the present century, particularly in the past 30 years, the density of bird populations, locality or habitat and even feeding habits have

been changed. These changes have been due largely

to man-made transformations of the habitat for economic gain. Man has destroyed great areas of forests,

established grazing lands, drained lakes and swamplands, channeled small rivers, set fires, built dams,

opened highways, and polluted the waters with industrial wastes. Other ecological changes have been

wrought by the increased use of fungicides, herbicides,

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

and insecticides in man's fight against threats to his

crops of sugar cane, cotton, rice, potatoes, tobacco,

bananas, etc. Reforestation has been recognized as essential, and work is going on with species not native to

Colombia, such as Pinus and Eucalyptus.

Specific Effects on Avian Populations Due to Environmental Changes Created by Human Activity

With the destruction of forests, birds immediately

suffer the loss of nests with eggs or chicks and must

emigrate to another forest zone. In the new area tree

birds as well as land birds encounter many difficulties

before adapting to the new habitat, interrupting in this

manner for extended periods of time functions of vital

cycles such as reproduction. Furthermore, the avian

community has been revealed and is more easily hunted

by man and by its natural predators.

Lately in Colombia the forests of the higher altitudes

of the Andes have been destroyed for the cultivation

of potatoes, wheat, and barley. The condor (Vultur

gryphus) has been one of the species most affected

by the environmental changes of these zones. In my

monograph on this bird published in 1963 I noted:

The 3d of January 1963 the author visited the town of

Chita (Boyaca), with the intention of observing the high

peaks of the eastern Andes near the Sierra Nevada of Chita

or Cocuy, where old natives informed him that up to 30 or

40 years ago you could frequently see pairs of condors, who

descended from their high haunts approaching sheep corrals,

occasionally finding an abandoned and new born lamb on

which they slaked their hunger. In this region the condor is

known only by the name buitre, and an old resident tells the

story of the capture of a condor around 1925. Luring him with

the carcass of a small sheep, he took the bird to the town

and a leading citizen had the condor sent to Bogota

where the bird was probably mounted for exhibition in the

National Museum. Others told that around the same time

it was customary to exhibit buitres on the arch over altars

in the processions of Corpus Christi. Lastly, a hunter, who

was an authority on the avifauna of the region, told us that

a year ago he had seen a buitre flying over a path between

the town of Chita and the Sierra Nevada. He stated that he

did not follow the bird and, further, that the few birds seen

in recent years were very shy.

The sites formerly inhabited by the condors in that region

of the Andes are now too heavily populated and fanned, so

that they cannot find food; their niche has been transformed

by the human element, and this must be the reason for their

evacuation. It is likely that in the vicinity of the Sierra Nevada

there still exist some condors, far from human presence and

where the bird has liberty to seek his prey over large areas.

Today it is safe to say that there are more condors

in cages than on the peaks of our Andes.
NUMBER 26 79

If this has happened to the condor, which needs an

immense area for its distribution, what will happen to

communities of tree birds and land birds that have

their habitats circumscribed? Many of these species,

having changed their original homes, roam the vicinity

and are easy victims to their enemies, or conform to a

precarious existence without fulfilling several functions

of their vital cycle, resulting in decimation almost to

the point of extinction. This has been observed in

Formicariidae with the species Grallaria quitensis and

in Thraupidae with Compsocoma flavinucha, Buthraupis eximia, and Dubusia taeniata.

In the subtropical zones, especially in the Central

Andes, the forests have been converted into coffee

plantations or grazing lands, the result being the extinction, in these areas at least, of some species of land

life. In 1915 Chapman found Nothocercus bonapartei

without difficulty in the high subtropical zone, in the

well known area of La Aguadita about 15 kilometers

to the northwest of the Bogota savanna. In recent

years this area has been intensely explored and not a

single specimen has been found.

In the cultivated areas of these regions a few species

adapt themselves to the new environment. In the

Quindio region, which is highly cultivated with coffee,

it is not unusual to find Crypturellus soui, species of

Thraupidae such as Tachyphonus rufus and Ramphocelus dimidiatus, and several species of Synallaxis.

Some areas of tropical cisandine jungle have been

colonized. Because of the clearing of trees and undergrowth in the entire vicinity, populations of the

Cracidae, Psophiidae, Tinamidae, and Passeriformes

have been decimated.

In the draining of lakes and swamplands and channeling of rivers, damage of the following nature has

arisen: In 1963 a small lake was drained in the Bogota

savanna, leaving nests with chicks of Podilymbus

podiceps. The chicks were captured when the rushes

were pulled up, and one chick was brought to the bird

division (ICN) where it is preserved as a study skin.

These environmental modifications create unfavorable

changes for the birds not only in the perimeter of the

dried lake but also for a radius of several kilometers.

In recent years Colombia has been expanding her

highway systems, which cross forest areas and affect

extensive natural areas. Birds crossing these roads are

in danger of colliding with vehicles; it has been exceptional on my many trips not to find dead birds of

Coragyps atratus, Crotophaga ani, Volatinia jacarina,

and species of Sporophila.

There are regions where large areas of land are

burned off to improve cultivation and to clear the land

of noxious insects. How many birds' nests with eggs or

chicks are destroyed and lost in this way?

In 1960 the tablelands of the region south of the

Serrania de la Macarena were on fire, covering an area

of no less than 500 square kilometers in which grasslands and trees that supported a rich bird community

were destroyed. These fires crop up from time to time,

seemingly from natural causes.

With the increase in agriculture and technological

progress, spraying with insecticides, fungicides, and

herbicides has become a common practice. On consuming flying insects, reptiles, or fish contaminated by these

chemicals, birds become ill and die. The result of this

practice is the decrease of Coragyps atratus, Cathartes

aura, and Cathartes burrovianus in the Tolima llanos

where large plantations of cotton, tobacco, rice, and

other crops are located. Large-scale spraying by planes

brings complaints from farmers who feel a lack of these

birds to clean the fields of dead animals. These insecticides contaminate the water the birds drink and

the air they breathe. Already there are only a few

species of Rallidae, formerly easily found in the vegetation that covers the small streams of the sprayed

areas. It will be many years before man understands

and puts into practice the control of pests by biological

methods, not chemical, so as not to displace the balance of nature. In the meantime bird life must suffer

the consequence of such experimentation.

In respect to environmental changes created by man,

it should be noted that there are avian species which

benefit by these alterations: where a jungle is cleared

and the land converted into pasture, prospering communities of Sturnella magna and Leistes militaris are

established. As followers of cattle we find in Cuculidae,

Crotophaga ani and C. sulcirostris; in Ardeidae there

has been a considerable population increase of Bubulcus

ibis, a heron originating in the Old World which established itself in the New World at the beginning

of this century, probably by a casual immigration

through the northeast of South America. This heron

follows the cattle and feeds upon insects stirred up by

the herds, or rests upon the animals and feeds on the

parasites of the cattle. There can be no doubt as to the

abundance of this heron in Colombia today.
80 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

Our congenial and useful sparrow (Zonotrichia

capensis) prospers very well in the immediate areas

of human habitation. It is a small bird which follows

man. One can hike for kilometers and kilometers

through land uninhabited by man and not a sparrow

will be seen or found, but come to a house and this little

bird will be present. In the Bogota savanna Zonotrichia capensis is the most abundant bird. There have

been occasions where 10 pairs of birds, and three to

four nests, were found in one hectare of pasture land.

Asio flammeus is present in areas covered by the

pastures of the Bogota savanna. This bird, which nests

directly on the ground amid the thickest vegetation,

feeds upon the rats that abound in the grasses.

Around corn cultivations, and in any zone except the

paramos, there have been increases in the populations

of Molothrus bonariensis, some species of Psittacidae,

and Pheucticus aureoventris; and in the rice fields there

is an abundance of birds in the genera Sporophila and

Oryzoborus. But as they take advantage of crops for

feeding, these birds present problems to the farmers

and sometimes cause considerable damage, especially

to the corn and rice fields.

In the tropical jungles of the canyons of the Cauca

and Magdalena rivers, enormous tracts of land already have been converted to pasture and all types

of cultivation adapt very well to the climate. The

greatest percentage of vegetation is imported, and in

this area the remains of populations that once were

abundant in their natural environment may be

observed.

In reforestation areas few species which formerly

occupied the land when it had its natural vegetation

are now present. The species which has adapted itself

favorably to Eucalyptus groves is Colibri coruscans.

The cultivation of exotic plants for park and garden

use, such as Abutilon sp., attracts and increases the

populations of Coerebidae, especially Diglossa carbonaria and Diglossa albilatera in the vicinity of

cities.

Because of environmental changes created by man,

it is natural that permanent residents or native species

with preestablished habitats suffer more than the migratory birds. In the last 5 years, however, there has

been a decrease, at least in the department of Cundinamarca, in the quantity of migratory birds. Large

flocks of Anatidae of the species Anas discors have not

been seen in the lakes and swamps—which have lost

some of their water volume—and it has been rare to see

individuals of Anas acuta, A. clypeata, and A. americana. A large flock of Buteo swainsoni passed on October 24, 1963, creating great admiration in this capital.

During the months of October and April one finds

small numbers of Coccyzus americanus, Caprimulgus

carolinensis, Chordeiles acutipennis, Tyrannus tyrannus, Catharus ustulatus, Dendroica fusca, and Piranga

rubra. The latter attacks the bee hives and is hunted.

The same happens with Dolichonyx oryzivorus and

Spiza americana, both of which cause some damage

to rice fields.

Mortality in Birds Which Man Uses as Food

Man's use of birds as food has decimated many

populations and some species are in danger of extinction. Tinamus tao was abundant in the region north

of the Serrania of La Macarena, as noted in the first

scientific expeditions in 1941-50. From this date to the

present day, however, the region, or at least the surrounding vicinity, has been colonized, and in the sierra

T. tao is heavily hunted for its abundant and delicious

meat. In October 1964, as a member of a government

expedition, I explored La Macarena with the objective

of studying its boundaries in regard to a national reserve, and in the territory crossed I neither heard nor

saw the bird in question. The farmers told me that

they were already rare. Tinamus major, which in its

respective subspecies can be found in almost all the

levels of dense tropical zones, constitutes one of the

principal foods for inhabitants of these regions. In

1955 I organized an ornithological expedition to the

Pacific coast regions (Guapi, Cauca) and was able to

verify that an individual that sang was as good as

dead, as there would be several hunters after it. Not

only is the bird hunted but the eggs are highly prized

for their large size and delicious flavor. In all the regions where this bird lives it is doomed to the same

fate.

The Anatidae, especially the native species of larger

size, Cairina moschata, is heavily hunted. Migratory

birds also are sought. The most common victims are

Anas acuta and Anas discors.

Crax rubra (Cracidae) was abundant up to about 30

years ago in the jungles of the Pacific coast, or so I was

assured by natives on my 1955 expedition to Guapi.

However, in two and a half months of exploring I was

not able to obtain one specimen. Some people keep

tail and wing feathers as curios of birds they have eaten.
NUMBER 2 6 81

Pauxi pauxi, hunted in the region of the Sarare (north

of Santander), were found as trophies in native homes.

Hunters familiar with the region contend it is now difficult to obtain specimens. In the southern region of the

Serrania of La Macarena during the 1959-60 expedition, it was still possible to observe in good numbers

the species Mitu salvini, Mitu tomentosa, Crax alector,

Penelope jacquacu, Ortalis guttata, and Pipile cumanensis, of which specimens were collected for the Institute of Natural Sciences. At this time the southern

region was being settled, and the inhabitants hunted

large numbers of these birds for daily consumption. At

present, with the great increase of farms and farmers,

the populations of Cracidae have decreased in alarming

number.

In Suba, in the hills northwest of Bogota, Colinus

cristatus (Phasianidae) was once common and eagerly

sought by hunters. On inspecting the region at the end

of 1965, I had the impression that the species had

vanished.

Among the Columbidae, it should be noted, Columba

fasciata was present up to 20 years ago in small flocks

at the higher altitudes of the north of Boyaca and in

greater numbers in the hills around the Bogota

savanna. These regions have both been explored by me.

Columba fasciata, because of its size and beauty, was

highly prized by the sportsman, and at present one sees

a pair or a lone individual once in a great while. The

same fate has been met by Zenaida auriculata. On my

last field trips to the north of Boyaca I observed that

Leptotila verreauxi, a ground dove of good size and

exquisite meat, was already a rarity.

In some regions the larger species of Ramphastidae

(Ramphastos) and of Psittacidae (Ara) are hunted for

food. These species are usually found in the jungles far

removed from heavy human population.

With regard to the abuse of forest birds in Colombia,

it must be stated that in the beginning of this century,

especially in the eastern llanos, the great egret (Casmerodius albus) was hunted for its beautiful and

singular plumes. For colorful plumage the natives of

the dense jungles captured the Picidae of the genera

Phloeoceastes, Dryocopus, and Piculus; Trogonidae of

the genera Pharomachrus and Trogon; and Cotingidae

of the genera Cotinga and Cephalopterus. In Trochilidae the great devastation was done from the middle of

the past century to the beginning of the present

century by the famous collectors of skins for commercial use. Leo E. Miller, who accompanied Chapman

in 1910 on his expeditions to Colombia, met one of

these hunters who daily obtained 40 hummingbirds in

the vicinity of the Bogota savanna. They were captured by blowguns and sold for two pennies each.

Today, if a collector were to seek hummingbirds in the

same locale, it would be an exceptional day in which

he obtained the same number. European scientists took

advantage of these specimens and described species

which today are very rare and for many years have not

been observed.

The Psophiidae (Psophia crepitans), Burhinidae

(Burhinus bistriatus), and various species of Cracidae

and Rallidae are in great demand for semidomestication with poultry-yard birds. The chicks of Psittacidae

of the genera Ara, Amazona, Aratinga, Pionus, Brotogeris, and For pus are sought as cage birds, either for

their song or their playfulness. Species of Thraupidae

(Thraupis episcopus, Thraupis palmarum), several of

the general Euphonia, Compsocoma, Dubusia, Anisognathus, and the species Cissopis leveriana are hunted

considerably. This is also true for Icterus, Cacicus, and

sometimes Molothrus in the Icteridae. Mimus gilvus

(Mimidae), Turdus fuscater (Turdidae), and species

of Sporophila and Sicalis in the Fringillidae are

heavily hunted.

The Rupicolidae is a family on the road to extinction; its two species, Rupicola rupicola and Rupicola

peruviana, are already very sparse in Colombia. They

are hunted for their plumage as well as for caging.

In the extensive jungles these birds seek and unite on

rocks for their reproductive cycles, and here they are

easily captured.

One also finds as hunting trophies Vultur gryphus,

Sarcoramphus papa, Harpia harpyja, and Jabiru

mycteria.

The Future of Colombian Avifauna

The previous material has clearly indicated that

avian populations in whose habitats human activity

is present become decimated at an alarming rate. The

species most affected will very shortly be of small number and decrease day by day until total extinction.

Those less affected will progress with difficulty and

may establish themselves in prospering populations

where the habitat is favorable to their increase.

Unfortunately, it is almost impossible to stem the

damage to bird life brought about by the destruction or
82

alteration of their natural habitat by man, who will

admit to no obstacle in his opening and use of land.

In favor not only of survival but also of the increase

in the density of the majority of endemic avian species,

is the physical size of Colombia. Of the 113,855,500

hectares, only 2 percent is under cultivation and 55

percent is still in natural forest—but it is nevertheless

suffering from continual devastation of its timber, especially in the central section of the country. Furthermore, all the cultivated land does not form a continuous area but is distributed in various zones so that

species affected by the destruction of their natural habitats have the opportunity of invading neighboring

areas, though they face hardships of a forced and

rapid invasion. Fearing competition with species already established, they must live segregated, and, when

established in the ecotones, at the mercy of and in

danger from unknown predators. The interspecific

relationships are accomplished under difficult circumstances. It is logical to assume that the invading populations disturb or rupture the preestablished equilibrium of the new habitat, especially in respect to the

food chain and pyramid feeding, bringing to a crisis

the interspecific relationships of the new community

through dangerous competition. Furthermore, as is

consistently observed, many species do not migrate

with the urgency required by their vital functions, but

rather undergo a precarious existence and remain in

their old territory which no longer offers them the necessary conditions for feeding and the prosperity of their

population.

But the difficulties and stated dangers, I repeat, do

not directly affect the greater number of species that

populate the nation. Many of those most directly and

disastrously affected have representatives in various

geographical races in areas far removed from those

heavily affected by the human element.

Aware of the necessities and recognizing the characteristics of the Colombian people, it is useless at present

to prohibit, especially in those regions sparsely populated by man, natives from taking advantage of hunting those birds which furnish him with food—even

those birds that are already quite rare. In my expeditions to the dense jungles of Caqueta and Vaupes I

was made perfectly aware that it would be ridiculous

to suggest to a farmer of such a remote area that he

should not hunt the rare Tinamidae or Cracidae that

attracts him with its song in the encircling jungle and

furnishes the main source of meat for his family. This

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

situation will exist for many years in our country. It

is an altruistic thought to attempt to control circumstantial events which contribute to the mortality rate of

edible birds in these remote areas.

Not only is the man of the jungle the hunter, but

progress in transportation, especially air travel, has

made it easy to leave the city for remote jungles where

there is an abundance of game which is sought more

for sport than for food. As for this point, if effective

inspections and hunting regulations are enforced, as

will be mentioned later on in this article, and which

already are in the process of being established, some

control may be expected.

The banning of insecticides on large plantations is

not an easy matter. Until other methods are discovered

to save crops, the agriculturists are forced to use methods available, and bird mortality in cultivated areas

is inevitable.

One direct relationship of man with bird life, the

keeping of certain species in captivity for pleasure, is

not, broadly speaking, a reason for the depletion of

the avian population which lives in the vicinity of

man. On the contrary, it is a custom which properly

directed may favor the avian population which has

captive representatives.

To summarize the future outlook for Colombian

avifauna, as far as birds whose habitats are in direct

contact with human occupation is concerned, I hold no

hope for progress in their species, or better, in their

subspecies. It is easy to believe, or foresee, that by the

end of the present century many birds seen today will

be rare, while others already rare will have disappeared

from those areas heavily populated by man. But

Colombia has enormous unpopulated areas, dense

jungles, wild rivers, and inaccessible mountains where

bird life may live and flourish, far from man, until

man comes to realize and understand the utility and

economic value of avifauna. Man must learn to value

and protect bird life by using scientific advances as

well as seeking to enrich populations of species in

danger of decimation.

Suggestions for the Conservation of Avifauna

1. Educate and teach the people to appreciate the

wonders of nature.

If a people understand the marvels of creation they

will love them, and if they love them will preserve

them. Among these marvels of nature, birds are privi-
NUMBER 26 83

leged beings through their beauty, their song, their

gracefulness, their way of life, and their locomotive

facility. But this is not all, for they also exert an important role in human economics by being active

agents in the elimination of innumerable plagues of insects and invertebrates who destroy crops and vegetation. Leading bioeconomists have gone as far as to

state that without birds the earth would be virtually

uninhabitable. A people who observe, study, and

understand the marvels of birds will protect them,

enjoy their company, and will never persecute them,

much less kill them for unnecessary reasons. How fine

it is to see people forego cutting their lawns and gardens when they are aware that in the branches of a

tree or in the overgrowth of weeds are nesting birds.

And if by chance a chick falls from his nest he is

gently and carefully returned to his home. A good

number of species have maintained the level of their

population because of man's friendship. Classic examples are in Trochilidae, with the species Colibri

coruscans which is abundant in the Bogota savanna.

People have in their gardens flower-bearing plants that

are sought by the hummingbird. In Troglodytidae,

Troglodytes aedon is also encouraged to nest near

human habitation for the sweetness and constancy of

its song.

This friendship between man and bird life should

be stressed more and more in our people, until an

almost mystic feeling is born by which no one would

dare mistreat our birds. If the capture of birds for

food or ornamental purposes were necessary, controlled hunting would be observed simply as a reasonable use of natural resources. Hunting laws protecting

rare bird life or restricting hunting during reproduction periods would be respected. Laws protecting

edible as well as ornamental bird life have already

been passed in Colombia. One of these laws protects

the flamingos (Phoenicopterus ruber), which were

being captured in large numbers to be used in parks

and gardens. If the public becomes aware of existing

problems, however, man will come to appreciate these

birds in their natural environment on our Caribbean

coast and will not think of holding them in captivity.

2. Make ecological studies of avifauna.

The Colombian avifauna has been studied by a large

group of ornithologists from Linnaeus to the present

day. Foreigners and Colombians have cataloged existing species of the country with serious studies on taxonomic problems. They have been able, for example,

to assign to one species five or six geographical races

according to distinct localities and distribution. Work

has been done in nomenclature and geographical distribution, but very little work done on how our birds

live. It is necessary that our ornithologists devote themselves to avian ecology and study at least those species

believed to be of economic and ornamental value, or

which are becoming rare. Studies should be made on

habitat, state of population, feeding habits, voice,

plumage, roosting, offensive and defensive conduct,

running, flight, size of individuals in respect to sex with

their morphology and coloring differences between

male and female (dimorphism), prey and predators,

information of species before the reproductive period,

as well as collecting information of the reproductive

behavior of species—such as whether it is monogamous

or polygamous, extension of its area, defense of chosen

territories, diurnal and nocturnal activities in relationship to seasons and weather, calls and displays of each

sex in mate selection and during mating, copulation

and conduct after copulation, selection of nesting site,

egg laying, incubation, birth and raising of the chicks,

leaving the nest, stages of development of the young,

internal and external parasites which attack the progeny as well as the progenitors. Also knowledge of the

phenomena of symbiosis, be it in the cases of mutualism or comensalism. Finally, the registration of local

migratory paths of Colombian birds.

Results of such investigations would lead to the understanding of the requirements of species and their

environments: the role in the ecosystem, the most

favorable site, and the advantages obtained by belonging to a community of particular floristic and

faunistic composition. With such data man may be

able to establish the best environmental conditions, at

least for species living within civilized areas, and areas

which are to be opened. For example, if through expansion of agricultural areas a natural environment

is to be destroyed, some trees which are known to be

used by birds of the area for feeding and nesting should

be left around the limits of the fields, and small areas

should be reserved to preserve the native and natural

vegetation.

With awareness of reproductive conduct, reasonable

hunting laws should be passed for the protection of

species likely to be affected.

To promote industrialization of birds, they should

be protected in their wild state and ecological studies

made for full knowledge of the most favorable habitats.
84

The feeding and reproductive habits should be observed so as to offer birds in captivity the best environmental conditions required in their reproductive

cycle. Species protected in their natural state will raise

their population levels and will offer the opportunity

of collecting eggs to be taken to incubators where good

results may be expected due to new techniques used

by poultrymen. This experiment was performed with

Colinus cristatus, although not with Tinamus, incubating four eggs of this species with good results.

Unfortunately this was done out of curiosity and not

with an eye toward industrialization.

The chicks of Tinamus, or of any other bird obtained by this method, would not present any serious

feeding problem as experience available from work already done with domestic birds in the care of the

young would greatly help in the development of this

new industry. Procedures would be developed to facilitate or accelerate the reproduction of birds in an

industrial vein.

In this way not only would a new industry be started

with our birds that offer abundant and delicious meat,

but they would be saved from eventual extinction

while respecting those who remain in their wild state.

If the Mexican natives, before the arrival of the

Spaniard and without the aids offered by modern technology, domesticated the common turkey (Meleagris

gallopavo) and began an industry so successful that

today it covers the world why can we not domesticate

and use on a large scale our most useful species to an

economic advantage?

Discussion

DUOAND. In 1947 I published a paper on the birds

of Atlantico listing 301 species. I am sad to say that

since then we have lost at least 57 species, all of them

forest birds, due to widespread deforestation. Forests

have been cut down and burned mostly for the making

of pastures, and also for plantations, but often for no

apparent reason at all; and very little of them have

been left, just small, isolated patches here and there.

This local condition is representative enough of conditions elsewhere in Colombia. It is, so to speak, a preview of the future of the Colombian avifauna, which

is one of the richest in the world, with 2,675 species

and subspecies. In many sections of Colombia we are

literally building deserts through widespread and intense deforestation. This reminds me of a wise sentence by the celebrated French writer Chateaubriand:

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

"Forests precede peoples and nations; deserts succeed

them."

LEHMANN. I would like to ask of anyone here in the

audience some idea of the number of eggs laid by

turkeys before they were reduced to captivity and

domestication. Because, as Dr. Olivares points out,

quite a few of our game birds could be reduced to

domesticity. I think two or three of our species may

lay two or three clutches of eggs a year, enough to

make industry of these birds even if they cannot be

stimulated to lay more eggs at present. Does anyone

know if something like that has been done with the

turkey or other species? Our quetzal lays one or two

eggs, as far as I know, the tinamous up to five. I do

not know if there would be any interest in inducing this

bird by artificial means to lay more than two or three

eggs per year.

Common and Recent Literature on Colombian

Avifauna

Blake, Emmet Reid

1953. A Colombian Race of Tinamus osgoodi. Fieldiana

Zoology, 34(18): 199-200.

1955. A Collection of Colombia Game Birds. Fieldiana

Zoology, 37:9-23.

1959. New and Rare Birds. Lozania {Ada Zooldgica

Colombiana), 11:1-10.

1961. Notes on a Collection of Birds from Northeastern

Colombia. Fieldiana Zoology, 44(4): 25-44.

1962. Birds of the Sierra Macarena, Eastern Colombia.

Fieldiana Zoology, 44(11):69-112.

Boggs, G. O.

1961. Notas sobre las aves de 'El Centro' en el valle medio

del rio Magdalena Colombia. Novedades Colombianas, 1(6) :401-423.

Bond, J., and R. Meyer de Schauensee

1938. The Birds of Malpelo Island, Colombia. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Science of Philadelphia, 90:155-157.

1940. On Some Birds from Southern Colombia. Proceedings of he Academy of Natural Science of Philadelphia, 92:153-169.

Borrero, Jose Ignacio

1952. Algunas aves raras en la sabana de Bogota. Lozania,

1:7-12.

1952. Apuntes sobre aves colombianas. Lozania, 3:1—12.

1955. Apuntes sobre aves colombianas, no. 2. Lozania,

9:1-15.

1959. Notas aclaratorias sobre Pteroglossus didymus

Sclater. Lozania, 11:15—13.

1960. Notas sobre aves de la Amazonia y Orinoquia

colombianas. Caldasia, 8(39): 846-514.

1961. Notas sobre aves colombianas. Novedades Colombianas, 1(6):427-429.
NUMBER 26 85

1965. Notas sobre el comportamiento del colibri coli-rojo.

(Amazilia tzacalt) y el mielero (Coereba flaveola)

en Colombia. El Hornero, 10(3): 247-250.

Borrero, Jos6 Ignacio, and Jorge Hernandez C.

1957. Informe preliminar sobre aves y mamiferos de

Santander, Colombia. Anales de la Sociedad de

Biologia, 7(5): 197-212.

1958. Apuntes sobre aves colombianas. Caldasia, 8(37):

252-294.

1961. Notas sobre aves de Colombia y descripcion de una

nueva subespecie Forpus conspicillatus. Novedades

Colombianas, 1 (6):420-445.

Borrero, Jose^ Ignacio, and Antonio Olivares, O.F.M.

1955. Avifauna de la regi6n de Soata, departamento de

Boyaca, Colombia. Caldasia, 7(31):52-86.

Borrero, Jos6 Ignacio, Antonio Olivares, O.F.M., and Jorge

Hernandez C.

1962. Notas sobre aves de Colombia. Caldasia, 8(4):

585-612.

Carriker, Melbourne Armstrong, Jr.

1954. Additions to the Avifauna of Colombia. Novedades

Colombianas, 1:14-19.

1955. Notes on the Occurrence and Distribution of Certain Species of Colombian Birds. Novedades Colombianas, 1(2):48-64.

1955. Studies in Neotropical Mallophaga. XII (Part 4).

Lice of the Tinamous. Separata del Boletin de

Entomologia Venezolana, 11(3-4): 1-35.

1957. Neotropical Miscellany No. 11. A New Species and

Subspecies of Ardeiphagus from Colombia. Novedades Colombianas, 1(3): 163-166.

1959. New Records of Rare Birds from Narino and Cauca

and Notes on Others. Novedades Colombianas,

1(4):196-199.

1960. New Species of Ardeicola (Mallophaga) from Colombian Hosts. Novedades Colombianas, 1(5):

317-329.

Chapman, Frank Michler

1917. The Distribution of Bird-life in Colombia. Bulletin

of the American Museum of Natural History, 36:

i-x, 1-726.

Conover, Henry Boardman

1941. A new race of Nettion andium from Colombia. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington,

54:143-144.

Darlington, P. J., Jr.

1931. Notes on birds from Rio Frio (near Santa Marta),

Magdalena, Colombia. Bulletin of the Museum of

Comparative Zoology, Harvard, 71(6): 349-421.

Dugand, Armando

1945. Notas ornitologicas colombianas, I, Caldasia,

3(13):337-341.

1947. Aves del departamento del Atlantico, Colombia.

Caldasia, 4(20): 499-648.

1948. Notas ornitologicas colombianas, IV. Caldasia,

5(21):157-199.

1951. Notas ornitologicas colombianas, V. Revista de la

Academia colombiana de Ciencias Exactas Fisicas

y Naturales, 8(30): 157-163.

1952. Algunas aves del rio Apaporis. Lozania, 4:1-12.

1954. Bubulcus ibis (Linnaeus) en Colombia. Lozania,

8:1-7.

Dugand, Armando, and Jose Ignacio Borrero

1946. Aves de la ribera colombiana del Amazonas. Caldasia, 4(17):131-167.

1948. Aves de la confluencia del Caqueta y Orteguaza

(Base Aerea de Tres Esquinas) Colombia. Caldasia,

5(21):115-156.

Dugand, Armando, and William H. Phelps

1948. Aves de la ribera Colombiana del rio Negro (frontera de Colombia y Venezuela). Caldasia, 5(22):

225-245.

Friedmann, H.

1947. Colombian Birds Collected by Brother Niceforo.

Caldasia, 4(20): 471-494.

Gyldenstolpe, N.

1941. On Some New or Rare Birds Chiefly from Southwestern Colombia. Arkiv fur Zoologie, 33A(6):

1-17.

Haffer, Jiirgen

1959. Notas sobre las aves de la region de Uraba. Lozania,

12:1-49.

1961. Notas sobre la avifauna de la peninsula de la

Guajira. Novedades Colombianas, 1(6):374-396.

1961. A New Subspecies of Woodpecker from Northern

Colombia: Picumnus cinnamomeus persaturatus,

Subsp Nova. Novedades Colombianas, 1(6):397—

400.

Haffer, Jiirgen, and Jose Ignacio Borrero

1965. On Birds from Northern Colombia. Revista de

Biologia Tropical, 13(1):29-53.

Hermano, A. M.

1914. El condor. Boletin de Ciencias Naturales del Instituto de La Salle, 2(7,8,9): 198-297.

1915. Capturas interesantes. Boletin de Ciencias Naturales del Instituto de La Salle, 3(1): 15-16.

1916. Capturas interesantes. Boletin Ciencias Naturales

del Instituto de La Salle, 4(28): 46-48.

Lehmann, Fedrico Carlos

1944. Nuevas adiciones a las aves de Colombia. Caldasia,

2(9):407-410.

1946. Two New Birds from the Andes of Colombia. Auk,

63(2) :218-223.

1957. Contribuciones al estudio de la fauna de Colombia,

XII. Novedades Colombianas, 3:101—156.

1959. Contribuciones al estudio de la fauna de Colombia,

XV. Novedades Colombianas, 1 (4): 169-194.

1959. Notas generales. Novedades Colombianas, 1(4) :

223-226.

1960. Contribuciones al estudio de la fauna de Colombia,

XV. Novedades Colombianas, 1 (5): 276-279.

1960. Hallazgo de una colonia de Ardea cocoi Linneo, en

el valle del Cauca. Novedades Colombianas, 1(5) :

276-279.

Lehmann, Fedrico Carlos, and Jiirgen Haffer

1960. Notas sobre Buteo albigula Philippi. Novedades Colombianas, 1(5):242-255.
86

Meyer de Schauensee, Rodolphe

1946. Colombian Zoological Survey. Part II. Notes on

Colombian Crows, Wrens and Swallows. Notulae

Naturae, 161:1-14.

1946. Colombian Zoological Survey. Part IV. Further

notes on Colombian Birds, with the Description of

New Forms. Notulae Naturae, 167:1-13.

1947. New or Little-known Colombian Birds. Proceedings

of the Academy of Natural Science of Philadelphia,

99:107-126.

1948. The Bird of the Republic of Colombia. (Primera

entrega). Caldasia, 5 (22): 251-380.

1949. The Birds of the Republic of Colombia. (Segunda

entraga: Accipitridae-Picidae). Caldasia, 5(23):

381-644.

1950. Colombian Zoological Survey. Part V. New Birds

from Colombia. Notulae Naturae, 221:1-13.

1950. Colombian Zoological Survey. Part VIII. A Collection of Birds from Bolivar, Colombia. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Science of Philadelphia, 102:111-139.

1950. The Birds of the Republic of Colombia. (Tercera

entrega: Dendrocolaptidae-Tyrannidae). Caldasia,

5(24):645-872.

1951. The Birds of the Republic of Colombia. (Cuarta

entrega: Alaudidae-Fringillidae). Caldasia, 5 (25) :

873-1112.

1952. Colombian Zoological Survey. Part X. A Collection

of Birds from Southeastern Narifio, Colombia. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Science of

Philadelphia, 104:1-33.

1952. The Birds of the Republic of Colombia (Addenda

and Corrigenda). Caldasia, 5(26).1115-1214.

1959. Additions to the Birds of the Republic of Colombia.

Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Science of

Philadelphia, 111:53-75.

1964. The Birds of Colombia. Proceedings of the Academy

of Natural Science of Philadelphia, 116:i-x, 1-427.

Miller, Alden H.

1947. The Tropical Avifauna of the Upper Magdalena

Valley, Colombia. Auk, 64:351-381.

1952. Supplementary Data on the Tropical Avifauna of

the Arid Upper Magdalena Valley of Colombia.

Auk, 69: 450-457.

1960. Additional Data on the Distribution of Some Colombia n Birds. Novedades Colombianas, 1(5) :

235-238.

Niceforo Maria, Hermano

1945. Notas sobre aves de Colombia, I. Caldasia, 3(4):

367-395.

1955. Notas sobre aves de Colombia, IV. Caldasia

7(32):173-175.

1955. Una cracida nueva para la avifauna Colombiana.

Caldasia, 7(32): 177-184.

Niceforo Maria, Hermano, and Antonio Olivares, O.F.M.

1964. Adiciones a la avifauna Colombiana, I (TinamidaeFalconidae). Boletin del Instituto de La Salle, number 204.

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

1965. Adiciones a la avifauna Colombiana, II (CracidaeRynchopidae). Boletin de Sociedad Venezolana de

Ciencias Naturales, 26(109): 36-58.

Olivares, Antonio, O.F.M.

1953. Dos aves pescadoras. Universidad de Antioquia.

112:717-724.

1955. Algunas aves de la comisaria del Vaup6s (Colombia). Caldasia, 7(33): 259-275.

1957. Aves de la costa del Pacifico, municipio de Gaupi,

Cauca Colombia, II. Caldasia, 8(36):33-93.

1957. Algunas aves del valle del alto Magdalena, Colombia. Revista de la Academia Colombiana de

Ciencias Exactas Fisicas y Naturales, 10(39): 115-

121.

1958. Monografia de los Tinamiies Colombianos. Universidad Nacional de Colombia, 23:245-301.

1959. Aves migratorias en Colombia. Revista de la

Academia Colombiana de Ciencias Exactas Fisicas y

Naturales, 10(41):341-442.

1960. Algunas aves de Gaitania (municipio de Ataco,

Tolima, Colombia). Caldasia, 8(38):379-382.

1962. Aves de la regi6n sur de la sierra de La Macarena,

Meta, Colombia. Revisita de la Academia Colombiana de Ciencias Exactas Fisicas y Naturales, 11

(44):305-345.

1963. Monografia del c6ndor. Revista de la Academia

Colombiana de Ciencias Exactas Fisicas y Naturales, 12(45):22-28.

1964. Adiciones a las aves de la comisaria del Vaupe"s,

Colombia, I. Revista de la Academia Colombiana

de Ciencias Exactas Fisicas y Naturales, 12(46):

163-173.

1964. Adiciones a las aves de la comisaria del Vaupes,

Colombia, II. Caldasia, 9(42): 151-184.

1965. Monografia del rey de los gallinazos. Revista de la

Academia Colombiana de Ciencias Exactas Fisicas

y Naturales, 12(47): 259-269.

1965. Avifaunae colombiensis notulae, no. 1. Dos aves

nuevas para Colombia. El Hornero 10(2) ;273-275.

1965. Una nueva subspecie de Todirostrum latirostre de

la comisaria del Vaupes, Colombia. Caldasia, 9

(43):269-271.

Olivares, Antonio, O.F.M., and Jorge Hernandez C.

1961. Dos garzas nuevas para Colombia. Novedades Colombianas, 1(6):424-426.

1962. Aves de la comisaria del Vaupes, Colombia. Revista de Biologia Tropical, Universidad de Costa

Rica, 10(1):61-90.

Palmer, Theodor Sherman

1918. Goudot's Explorations in Colombia. Auk, 35(2):

240-241.

Parkes, Kenneth C.

1959. A New Race of Saltator albicollis from Venezuela

and Adjacent Colombia. Novedades Colombianas,

1(4): 200-201.

Todd, Walter Edmond Clyde, and Melbourne Armstrong

Carriker, Jr.

1922. The Birds of the Santa Marta Region of Colombia.

Annals of the Carnegie Museum, 14:i-viii, 1-611.
NUMBER 26 87

Von Sneidern, Kjell

1954. Notas sobre algunas aves del Museo de Historia

Natural de la Universidad del Cauca, Popayan,

Colombia. Novedades Colombianas, 1:3—11.

1955. Notas ornitologicas sobre la coleccion del Museo de

Historia Natural de la Universidad del Cauca.

Novedades Colombianas, 2:35-44.

Wetmore, Alexander

1944. The Subspecific Characters and Distribution of the

New World Skimmers (Rynchops nigra). Caldasia,

3(11):111-118.

1946. New Birds from Colombia. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 106(16): 1-14.

1955. Further Additions to the Avifauna of Colombia.

Novedades Colombianas, 2:45-47.

1956. Additional Forms of Birds from Panama and Colombia. Proceedings of the Biological Society of

Washington, 69:123-126.

Wetmore, Alexander, and Jose Ignacio Borrero

1962. Systematic Notes Concerned with the Avifauna of

Panama. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections,

145(1):12-13.

1964. Description of a Race of the Double-striped Thickknee (Aves, Family Burhinidae) from Colombia.

Auk, 81(2): 231-233.

Zimmer, J. T.

1931—1948. Studies on Peruvian birds. American Museum

Novitates. These numerous papers contain many

references to Colombian birds, as well as all the

records of birds from the Colombian bank of the

no Vaupes, opposite Tauapunto, Brazil.
Avifauna in Colombia

F. C. Lehmann

During the last 25 years a fundamental change has

taken place in the management of the natural resources in Colombia and other countries of our continent. This change is mainly manifested in an alarming

destruction of forests. Naturally, large tracts of wild

forests remain, mainly in the Amazon basin and on the

Pacific coast of Colombia. But these forests neither

shelter all the species of fauna nor contain all the

varieties of flora.

In the mountains of the Cordillera de Los Andes

one finds more alteration, or rather, more destruction

of the primitive habitat and in some cases a radical

change in the ecological aspect. In Colombia the

Cordillera de Los Andes is composed of three large

branches: Cordillera Oriental, Cordillera Central, and

Cordillera Occidental. The first two have the highest

summits, reaching in some cases to the perpetual snows

of Sumapaz, Chita, and Cocui in the Cordillera

Oriental, and of the Pande-Azucar, Huila, Tolima,

Santa Isabel, and Ruiz in the Cordillera Central. In

the Cordillera Occidental the Los Farellones de Cali

is to the south, and the Paramillo to the north. In addition, there are two important mountains which are

isolated from the Andean system; these are La Sierra

Nevada de Santa Marta to the north and La Sierra de

la Macarena to the east.

Except for the last, all these mountains have suffered changes in their ecological aspect. The old humid

and cloud forests of the Cordilleras are continually

being destroyed for cultivation of corn and other nonpermanent crops which are successively replaced by

pastures for colts or permanent pastures. These are in

several cases improperly worked and overpastured,

causing in this way the exhaustion of pastures and the

destruction of the productive soil.

In most cases, clearing, farming, and pasturing is

done on slopes—low hills (60 to 100 percent incline)

so steep that erosion is quickly produced by rainfall

which carries the vegetal layer. In several places where

88

the constitution of the soil is not so firm even landslides are produced. To all these facts it should be

added that burnings take place during the dry season

and this finishes the destructive work of the axe. These

are the prevalent conditions of most of the slope lands

of the country.

In the llanos orientales, which previously were used

exclusively for cattle, the gallery forests on the border

of the rivers have been destroyed for the last 20

years. Here savanna burning is practiced as a method

of straw farming (natural pasture). Burnings are produced every time a few sunny days occur; these are

naturally more extensive and frequent during the dry

season (January to March).

Although vast extensions of tropical forests on the

Pacific coast and in the Amazon basin have been transformed into pastures and farming land, the problem is

less serious in this region. But the forests on the

Magdalena basin are fated to disappear, just as the

Rio Cauca basin has disappeared in almost all its extension due to the demographic pressure, which increases in an unbelievable rate in these regions. This

is beginning to become evident in the llanos orientales

with the immigration of peoples from the interior of the

country.

The felling of trees without mercy in the forests,

which in turn means destruction of the habitat for

several species of fauna, has brought about the extinction of several forms, perhaps including endemic types,

in vast areas of the country, and the invasion of open

lands by savanna forms which were nonexistent before.

Continuous collection and observation records are

demonstrating this. Some birds which have definitely

established themselves in the south are Leistes militaris, Coccyzus pumilus, and Columbigallina talpacoti. Even Phalcoboenus megalopterus has migrated

north for the pastures and plains of the Cordillera Central. Before it was restricted to the south of Narino,

Colombia, and now we find it frequently in the central
NUMBER 2 6 89

part of Cauca. Ptiloscelys resplendens in the same

regions is not rare, as is true of Anas georgica spinicauda. The stocking of trout in the rivers of the

Cordilleras has influenced the population of Merganetta

armata by increasing the food supply.

But for each of the new invading species, hundreds

of species which were common before have disappeared. Many people wonder and question what has

happened to a particular bird, without realizing that

the disappearance of birds is the result of their own way

of handling nature.

In the Valle del Cauca plateau, for example, most

of the birds which were abundant before have disappeared. The first to be affected were the forest birds.

Most of the forests covering the plateau were initially

cleared to pasture colts, then they were gradually converted into cereal and cotton fields, and then sugar

cane fields. As can easily be understood, this radical

change completely eliminated such species. Some of

them should be mentioned: Cypturellus soui, Mycteria

americana, Ajaia ajaja, Cairina moschata, Sarcoramphus papa, several Accipiter and Buteo, Buteogallus

urubitinga, Falco albigularis, Columba cayennensis,

and Ara severa. Among the mammals eliminated in this

region due to the same cause we can mention Felis

onca, Felis pardalis, Felis eyra, Sciurus granatensis,

Cebus capuchinus, Alonata senicula, Aotus lemurinus,

Nasua sp., Potos flavus, and Choloepus hoffmanni,

among the outstanding ones. Also the drainage of

swampy areas has eliminated some other species: Hydrochaerus hydrochoeris, Casmerodius albus, Leucophoyx thula, and various species of the family Rallidae.

Recently, the continuous practice of aerial spraying

of potent toxic pesticides has contributed to the extermination of several species of ground birds and insectivorous birds that eat the poisoned insects or are themselves trapped by the spray; and on several occasions,

even fishes have been the victims of pesticides.

In several places in our cordilleras where we once

had beautiful and rich forests feeding abundant and

clear rivers and ravines with infinite aquatic life, forests full of magnificent wood and orchids, and innumerable fauna, we now contemplate only a scenery of desolation, erosion, or bare rocks and dry river beds.

What is more regrettable is that when we realize that

our woods are exhausted and that the waters which are

indispensable for irrigation of the valleys and the establishment of hydroelectric plants or aqueducts are

exhausted, we think only reforestation is necessary.

The persons in charge of this work forget all about our

native flora and fauna which are nourished there. They

forget the scenery and the biological equilibrium and

think only about planting exotic species, conifers, and

eucalyptus. They think of the forest as an immediate

source of raw material for the elaboration of paper,

and the systematic destruction of the native trees which

still exist in small quantities is continued for this same

purpose. These trees include Erythrina peopigiana and

E. glauca and the Anacardium sp. of our old forests of

the valley. It is necessary for someone to study the native species, since among the 50,000 or more species of

Colombian flora there must only be one or more species

necessary for the production of wood pulp, and these

could be cultivated for this purpose. We also need

rapid-growing species in the secondary forests to protect the soil and the sources of water.

Also, one should not forget about hunting, and the

pressures that some species undergo due to the lack of

proper regulations which would impose bag limits and

hunting seasons. Among the species requiring protection from hunting are the cats, deer, ducks, turkeys,

paujis, partridges, and torcazas (gray wild pigeon).

Modern transportation facilities now give easy access to

regions which were before either inaccessible or difficult to reach. Deer are also killed from planes, helicopters, jeeps, or other vehicles.

Our people need a better education on matters relating to nature and on the consequences of the irrational use of it. I would like to see among the technical

missions, continuously being sent as advisors, not only

economists, engineers of all sorts, and technicians in

general, but also ecologists, naturalists, conservationists,

and teachers of these specialties who could teach our

leaders and the new generations a love and respect

for nature, and, on this basis, develop a "rational" exploitation of our natural resources which are now being

squandered without mercy.

With the elimination of the gallery forests in the

llanos orientales a rich fauna is being exterminated:

tapirs, jaguars, ocelots, peccaries, spotted cavies, deer,

monkeys of all kinds, and agoutis. Most affected among

the birds are the game birds such as pujis, turkeys, tinamous, torcazas, and many others such as toucans and

those essentially forest-borne such as Dendrocolaptidae,

Formicariidae, Furnariidae, Psittacidae, Psophiidae,

and many others. The species needing great extensions

of forests to subsist, such as mountain tapirs, spectacled

bear, and those which inhabit the underbrush of the

336-550 O - 70 - 7
90

high barren plains, such as the small pudu, the rabbits

(Sylvilagus), woodcocks like Chubbia jamesoni, and

ducks (Anas flavirostris and Merganetta colombiana),

are diminishing in an alarming way in the cordilleras.

To all that has been mentioned must be added the

exportation of and local commerce in all kinds of birds,

furs, and game. For each quetzal or gallo de roca that

arrives in the United States or Europe, 50 or more die

in the hands of the collectors and traders.

In face of this sad general situation in Colombia,

I think such urgent measures should be taken as: (1)

promulgation of hunting rules (the government is

considering a project of regulation on game) ; (2)

the establishment of natural reserves and national

parks duly guarded and administered to save some of

our untouched areas before everything is distributed

by the Agrarian Reform; (3) activate programs of

education on ecology, natural resources, conservation,

and rational management of forests and soil. I think

this is the only way to obtain effective results in the

long run.

Our Museum of Natural History is dealing actively

with these programs, and, of course, the range of our

activities is proportioned by its material and economic

capacity. Personally, in addition to continuous work

within the institution, I have visited other places in

Colombia, such as Bogota, Manizales, Popayan, Neiva,

and Ibague, with the purpose of making our problems

known and engendering a concern for conservation.

For this purpose I used visual aids such as films, slides,

pictures, etc., quite successfully. People understand the

problem better when it is explained objectively and

visually.

Discussion

PETERSON. I am a member of the survival committee of the IUCN. In trying to determine for the "Red

Book" what birds are in danger in the world (those

with a population of less than 2,000 individuals), the

one great area where we cannot determine to what

extent certain species are in trouble is in tropical

America. Dr. Lehmann, quite frequently I have asked

you this question: "How many of this species, or that,

do you think there are?" You have replied that it was

no longer to be found in your own country, but that

it perhaps still existed elsewhere. But how do we know

that these particular birds are not gone completely—

whole species?

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

LEHMANN. Yes. Some species as a whole, maybe,

but most of the species still live in other places as

local subspecies.

PETERSON. Did I hear correctly when you said that

perhaps 500 forms are gone?

LEHMANN. At least from our list of birds.

PETERSON. IS it not reasonable then to assume that

not just "forms" but perhaps full species are gone and

we are not aware of it? I think this is reasonable. My

friend Dean Amadon not too long ago made the statement that he thought the next 20 years would see a

lot of extinction in tropical America. I am not sure

that it has not already taken place.

LEHMANN. In my lifetime I have seen many things

PETERSON. And butterflies?

LEHMANN. At the Natural History Museum in

Paris I saw collections of butterflies from Colombia

taken 100 years ago that I have never seen in nature.

PETERSON. This is just some information about that

chap who flies birds up to Florida. A friend of mine,

Phil Livingston, wrote me that he spent four days at

Leticia on the headwaters of the Amazon and found

hardly any birds in the area; perhaps he should have

gone father from the city. He said there was a character

from Tampa, Florida, who is running quite a business

scouring the country for birds and other wildlife and

shipping them to Florida. He has the local Indians

collecting for him, paying them a peso or two—6 to

12 cents for captives. When asked about birds he

boasted that the only ones we were likely to see would

be in his local collecting zoo. We were taken to an

Indian meeting area where he was offered about 100

captive birds taken from the nets and put in wicker

baskets. Most were jac,anas. He refused them all, apparently because he had plenty of jac,anas. The Indians left at the same time we did without releasing the

captives. I asked Mike about this. He said, "Well, they

don't want them to get back in the nets again; instead

they are left to starve to death."

BUECHNER. I am sure all of you will agree that if

we did nothing more than publish the information

which has been set forth in the past 2 days this whole

conference would have been worthwhile. I hope,

though, that we can take some action tomorrow, at

least in terms of setting forth some ideas that might

lead to action programs in various countries involved.

Does anyone wish to comment or make a suggestion as

to how we should proceed tomorrow?
NUMBER 2 6 91

HOWELL. I think that most of us have seen the areas

of common concern and have either mental or written

notes on specific things that need to be done, but I

would like to have information provided as to what

government agencies or international organizations recommendations could be directed. Perhaps Dr. Vogt

would be the person to provide such information.

VOGT. Well, I could start it, but from country to

country there will be variations. Certainly it is obvious

that we should try to get to AID, which is doing more

harm than good as far as conservation is concerned;

and in many countries we might get them to work a

little on better land-use patterns. And I should think

that Fish and Wildlife would take up some of these

problems—migratory birds, possibly—and somehow I

would like to get back to the signatories of the Nature

Protection Treaty of 1940. That is about 12 countries.

BUCHINGER. No, there are 13 countries, because in

the last few months Brazil ratified the treaty and Panama signed and ratified it. Unfortunately there was

absolutely no publicity about this. This was sort of disheartening for the politicians. Carlos Lehmann can tell

you that Colombia was ready to ratify the treaty soon

after Brazil ratified it, but as there was no publicity

involved the politicians lost interest.

If I may suggest it, perhaps tomorrow we could draw

up two recommendations: one referring to what

should be done in the United States, or what can be

done, and then one which advises the countries that

such recommendations were made and might bring

help, if they are adequately linked to similar policies in

Latin American countries.

VOGT. I think that might come under the province

of a treaty, but AID generally says it will not make

recommendations; it has to have the recommendations

or applications come from the respective governments.

One of the problems is to get these governments to take

action or make requests or recommendations.

BUCHINGER. We have international alliances, and

all agreements have certain strings which were attached to them here in the United States.

In several instances the beneficiary government asks

for something which it does not receive. In Argentina

three AID programs have stopped because the Argentina Government was asking for ecological surveys

before any interventions in the ecosystem had been

made.

Another example of lack of ecological considerations in programing can be seen in the notorious case

of the banana plantation in Ecuador. The sponsors

are quite unhappy about the delay in developing a

big-scale program and blame the government for its

lack of interest and cooperation. But let us see what

did occur. To boost the economy in the region of a

roadless area the hill slopes were deforested and

bananas were planted. The banana stands were attacked by insects and an ample supply of DDT and

other insecticides were provided to the Ecuadorians.

The insects which attacked the bananas were controlled, but at the same time so much insecticide was

absorbed by the surrounding waters that the fish in

the nearby rivers died. Consequently, some 2,000

fishermen were handicapped in their business. The

20 families who would have profited by the banana

crop did not fare so well either. They could not sell

the fruit as there are no roads in the region on which

to transport the ripe bananas. So, correctly, the government decided that in the future it is going to look

more carefully into the ecology and economy of development plans, and this stopped or slowed down

several foreign aid plans. I think it would be helpful

if a recommendation would go out from this meeting

that an ecological survey should be made before any

intervention into the ecosystem. If such a proposal

cannot be followed up, the development agencies

evidently are not doing quite what the countries are

asking for. You know in this line that the Corps of

Engineers has been working on some projects in

Panama that have caused quite a controversy. I think

Mr. Eisenmann could tell you more about this.

EISENMANN. Somebody mentioned that the passage

of a law in one country is likely to help adoption in

another. I have noticed this in Panama. Mexico

adopts certain "socially advanced" legislation. It may

be unnecessary in Panama, but before long it will be

introduced in the legislature there. Maybe Costa Rica

will pass the same law, and Colombia, too. Latin

American countries are most likely to imitate each

other in legislation. The feeling is that if something

is good for one, it may be good for another. Of course,

we have much the same situation in the United States.

A law passed by one state legislature is likely to be

adopted by others. And conservation legislation is often

widely adopted once it gets such a start.

VOGT. But, Gene, what do they do after they pass

the law?

EISENMANN. Often they pass other laws! One gets

the impression at times that recognizing a fine prin-
92

ciple by adoption of a law is regarded as more important than practical enforcement. However, in referring to imitative legislation in Latin America I had

in mind certain labor laws, which I believe began in

Mexico.

FOSBERG. I was talking to David Bell, the administrator of AID, not long ago. I asked him, point blank,

if there was any mechanism in AID where their mistakes could be pointed out to them and corrected.

He said, "Why certainly. Send a letter to me. We are

very particular about such things, if only we find out

about them." And I think that if the people here

could actually formulate, not generalities, but specific

things that have been done by AID that have turned

out to be very ill-conceived, and these could be sent—

addressed to David Bell—some of it would get through,

and I think, perhaps, we might see some changes.

Once this kind of thing gets into their thinking and

is called to the attention of the responsible people,

from above, they perhaps would think twice about

doing it the next time. I think that this meeting could

very well produce a series of such examples to be

called to Bell's attention.

VOGT. I think this meeting should commend the

Fish and Wildlife Service for the surveys and censuses

they have started and do everything we can to encourage the continuation and extension of these censuses. If we could have just started 25 years ago we

would be in a lot better shape!

ALDRICH. That is one thing, Bill, that could be done

through the U.S. Government. It is about the only

thing the Fish and Wildlife Service can do that I can

visualize in this program about which we are talking.

The migratory bird research angle is about the only

thing that we can tackle at the present time that we

have the authority to do. And also we have the facilities to do that. So if we could get some encouragement to proceed with that program and get adequate

financing for it—then we could do a job. But we do

need more support. There is no question about that.

HUMPHREY. John, does not the Fish and Wildlife

Service undertake field studies on the distribution of

migratory North American birds?

ALDRICH. We are doing fieldwork in the geographical distribution of migratory birds all the time. Do you

mean doing fieldwork outside the United States?

HUMPHREY. What about the possibility of combining that sort of activity with, let us say, the study of

the total avifauna of an area in the range of a particular group of North American migrants?

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

ALDRICH. That would be a legimate problem for

us if it is significant in understanding what is happening to our migratory birds. Yes, that could be part of

the research that I am talking about, that we would

be qualified to do and justified in doing because we

have legislative authority. We are at all times restricted by authority given to us by Congress. Some

times it looks like inaction on our part when actually

we are limited by congressional acts in what we do.

FOSBERG. DO you have any arrangement with AID

to carry on work under their auspices in foreign

countries?

ALDRICH. NO. There are no connections with AID

whatsoever, as far as I know.

FOSBERG. The Geological Survey, for example, has

a foreign geology branch which has no money of its

own, but AID furnishes money for it to conduct

geological programs in various countries where aid is

being extended.

ALDRICH. AS far as I know we have no connection of

this sort. The limitations of government agencies are

extremely complex, chiefly because of congressional

acts and appropriations. I mentioned the foreign game

bird introduction. That is something the Federal government has no control over. It is strictly a state matter.

There is no Federal law against the importation by

states of foreign game for liberation. So all we can do

is to help the states do a better, more scientific job of

introduction.

PETERSON. IS there a Federal law about song birds?

ALDRICH. There is a Federal law about the liberation

of imported song birds, yes.

PETERSON. What is the difference in philosophy?

ALDRICH. I do not think there is any philosophical

difference, but that is the law. Laws are not always

based on philosophy.

PHELPS. Colombia has furnished an escape valve

for us. The birds that Colombia exports take the pressure off Venezuela; however, the pressure on the red

siskin, an almost exclusively Venezuelan bird, in danger

of extinction, is about $25 million, and continues because there are over one-half million canary fanciers

in the world who seem to be willing to pay about $50

for each bird. They cannot be bought in Venezuela

legally, so there are some clandestine exports through

Curasao. This situation shows the need for better international cooperation. We should unite and help each

other.
Closing Plenary Session

BUECHNER. As an opening observation, I would like

to recall Marston Bates' focus of attention on the

whole ecosystem. The avifauna is, of course, only one

component of that whole system. If we are going to do

something in the way of conservation of avifauna in

any country, we have to consider it a component of a

larger system. It is that larger system that we have to

work with primarily, as was so effectively brought out

in the paper by Hernandez Corzo. I would like to encourage you to keep in mind this larger whole. I think

one can conclude, from what has been said, that the

North American migrants that winter in Central

America and northern South America are not at this

time in any grave danger, because they are so well

adaptable to different kinds of ecosystems, and that

many resident species are already in precarious situations, particularly where forests are being cut down.

What happens in the next 20 years is really critical,

and perhaps for that reason this conference is extremely

timely, coming at a time when there is still an opportunity to change the conceptual environment. We said

yesterday that one approach might be to have persons

from each of the countries abroad give their ideas on

what might be done in the way of conservation programs—in the way of action programs. I think this is a

good starting point, and I would like to call on Dr.

Hernandez Corzo to give us the first talk in this series.

Yes, Dr. Vogt.

VOGT. Excuse me for interrupting, but, as a procedural matter, I should like to make a suggestion.

I do not think that the committee as a whole can

write resolutions or recommendations, and I wanted

to suggest that the Washington group be charged with

that. Perhaps John Aldrich, representing birds and the

Federal government (not officially, of course); Bob

Dorney, representing Latin America and knowing

Latin America; and Ed Graham, representing the Conservation Foundation, can be charged with formulating resolutions and recommendations in the light of

our discussions at the end of today's meeting. They will

all be here. I thought that if this is a sound technique,

it might be useful to bear in mind as we get the recommendations from the various countries.

HERNANDEZ CORZO. I did not prepare in advance

my recommendations or proposals for possible resolutions. I merely have here a few notes, but I think that

some of the points might be useful in considering further resolutions. I have divided my notes into two main

sections because most of the resolutions should perhaps

be carried out in our own countries—I mean by ourselves rather than by an international group of countries or through international action. To begin with,

and for national action in Mexico, what I have here is

as follows:

In the first place, I want to insist (and forgive me

if I am being too insistent in this) on our point of

view of the economical aspects regarding wildlife and

the necessity of resorting to economic incentives for the

protection of natural resources as a whole. And I want

to insist because perhaps you do not know that for the

first time in Mexico at the higher level of the public

administration, in the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry,

and Wildlife, for the first time in our history we are

now preparing a plan for the development of land,

cattle, forest, and wildlife. This is really a new thing

in public adminstration in Mexico, and I think, since

it is a technical plan, it will greatly help in developing

the criteria and techniques and practices of natural

resources utilization. Now, of course, when you speak

of land use or the use of forests or the raising of cattle, and, in a minor degree, the utilization of wildlife,

you expect, or at least people expect, to obtain economic results, to obtain something for the betterment

of their living, for the raising of their standards of living, so this is an economic plan. In Mexico, for instance,

as I explained yesterday, we are forced to put economic before aesthetic aspects. Besides this I want to

emphasize that in handling natural resources we have

to speak of a unit and not about land, water, forest,

and wildlife as separate entities.

Secondly, I want to emphasize the need for publicity and education by all means—radio, television,

and moving pictures. In this connection, naturally, a

good interchange of material is in order. We are just

beginning, perhaps along with other Latin American

countries, to prepare our radio talks. We have had

93
94 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

some written material for a long time—I mean books,

booklets, or brochures explaining the right or wise

use of natural resources. We have not made much use

of radio and television films. Now we have several

films prepared in the Wildlife Department, and other

films are being prepared for the Forestry Department

and for the Department of Agriculture as a whole. Of

course, all this material is at your disposal. Whatever we

can partake, be assured that it is at the disposal of

other countries, and at the same time we would like

to receive in interchange some material of yours to be

used in our own country.

Thirdly, in Mexico—and this is important to the

subject of our concern here—we will have to accentuate

our campaign, especially in our great cities, against

the tradition of keeping birds in captivity. You know

that by really old, old, tradition our people down in

Mexico are very fond of having birds in cages.

Naturally there are families who take good care of

them, and by "good care" I mean a nice and beautiful

and bright cage, and good food. But there are other

families which are very poor but who yet insist on having dogs, and cats, and birds, so we will have to continue educating our people against this use. And in this,

of course, you American people can help a lot, because

we are also beginning to have more and more American

visitors insisting on bringing into the United States

birds for the same purpose. I know you have laws—

I am not very sure, but I am practically sure that you

have laws restricting the use, or perhaps prohibiting

this custom. Anyway, I receive an average of two or

three American tourists per day in my office asking

for sanitary and export permits to bring animals up

here, so you may help in restricting this possibility by

educating tourists not to take live animals from any

other country—which, by the way, will also help from

the point of view of sanitary considerations.

Now, point number four: In Mexico, of course, as I

said in my talk yesterday, it is important to emphasize

the establishment of refuges and special areas for the

protection of avifauna. We have made a good start

since last year, and this is why I spoke about Rasa

Island in the Gulf of California and now mention

Tiburon Island. And perhaps we will begin next year

with the separation of a good area close to San Bias

on the coast of Nayarit, which is really a wonderful area

for the development of avifauna. For this purpose you

certainly can help. Of course, the United States is

the country with the greatest experience in this connection. You have, as far as I know, more than 300

special refuges for wildlife. Your system is really very

good, although I know that you are not satisfied yet.

Anyway, it could be a wonderful example if you would

intensify the publicity about your refuge system, especially with the intention of illustrating it to the Latin

American countries, and also emphasizing the practical aspect of your policy. Because refuge areas, of

course, have a great practical aspect in the case of our

Latin American countries, being areas for recreation,

areas to enjoy the natural environment—and this, of

course, means money and health—it also means dollars,

it means tourists. And if you would help us in educating

the type of tourist that should go to Mexico—I mean

instruct them about how to behave, especially when in

these areas (not to make any collection of animals nor

buy them because it is against the law, etc., but to really

appreciate the fine things of our nature)—then I believe we would be doing a wonderful job of collaboration. And the main point here would be, of course, for

you to publicize much more, as you do for your own

people, to publicize your system of refuges for the

benefit of our countries. I speak, of course, primarily

about Mexico.

Now, from the point of view of international action:

(1) In my opinion you may help if you also, in your

publicity here and especially that for export, insist on

the economic value of natural resources as a unit. I

insist on this because we should not forget that you are

the leading country, that you are doing a fine job in

leading the opinion of the whole continent about the

wise utilization of natural resources. If you do this, not

only in a helpful way from the point of view of scientific

principles, but also enthusiastically from the point of

view of international relations, then you will really be

dragging others' opinions, others' ideas along with you.

Of course you may count on our cooperation, and you

will do a much better job than you are doing now.

(2) Interchange of laws and regulations concerning

wildlife, natural resources, and especially avifauna. We

have not done very much in this connection yet, again

speaking for Mexico. We have the brochures and booklets with our laws, in Spanish of course, and you are

distributing them and sending them to all parts of the

country. Not very much has been done about translating them, especially translating them into English.

As a matter of fact, not much has been done, first because of difficulties about the language, and second—

or perhaps this should come first—because it costs a lot,

at least by our own budget standards, though it would

perhaps not be very much for some of your institutions
NUMBER 2 6 95

which could really do a very good job in translating and

disseminating these laws, particularly if you could send

them to the tourist departments, or tourist offices and

organizations. It is my impression that most of the

American tourists, especially hunting tourists, going to

Mexico still believe that there are no bag limits, no

gun regulations, and that they do not have to ask for a

permit. They are upset when the game warden confiscates their arms. We hear of these experiences along the

border, especially in connection with white-winged

doves. I have here a report on the collaboration we are

doing with the Wildlife Management Institute of

Washington, and part of it is a list of more than 12

American tourists who were fined in Mexico for violations against the hunting law and had their guns confiscated. I have a very, very sad example in this connection, about which I will not speak because highly

important people of the United States are connected.

The American Embassy, of course, took a stand with

our Foreign Department, and names appeared in the

papers. But this is really a very bad thing that we can

very, very easily avoid just with some publicity or

warning.

(3) We must continue to establish, or emphasize, or

enlarge the collaboration work along the border. This

is already under way in Mexico—I mean, between the

United States and Mexico—but not along the border

with Guatemala and Chiapas or Campeche. Judging

by our experience with the United States, this is really

something that helps, and helps a lot. We do not have

to interchange wardens—I mean, to give to the

wardens free passes across the border, not at all. It is

enough that your customs officers know Mexican laws

and that when someone tries to get in with excess bag

limits or with something that is against the law, he is

stopped at the border and sent to the authorities. We

are taking care of our Mexican violators, and American wardens are taking care of American violators, so

there is no complaint from the point of view of international relations. On the contrary, this has been working very nicely for the last 12 months between Mexico

and the United States. I heard somebody here speaking about the lack of collaboration between one

country and another in Latin America—I mean south

of Mexico—and I think that you could take our collaboration work as an example. It will really help in

your countries too.

(4) The preparation of scientific and technical specialists. I said yesterday that there is a strong drive in

Mexico for our economic development. And a very

important part of this is the preparation of professional

people. Technicians at any level, from qualified

workers up to the research workers. We have good

schools, especially the large schools in the larger cities.

But we still need so much more. We need especially to

prepare our people for certain particular subjects. For

instance, short fellowships would perhaps do a much

better job than long-term fellowships. When we send

someone to the United States to get his master's degree

or his Ph. D. or M.D., he stays for such a long time

that perhaps at the end of 3 or 4 years he does not

want to go back to Mexico, or, if he does go back, he

sits down and waits for everybody to bring him everything, and to pay him high respect as a very great

scholar, or everything must be brought to him for the

great work he is planning to do as a doctor. And then

he, of course, does little for the betterment of the

country. Whereas, it would do quite a lot of good if

we could send people here for 3 or 4 or 6 months with

a fellowship to be trained, for instance, in the aspects

of pesticides in wildlife, the biochemical analysis of

pesticides in birds, or in the techniques of banding, or

of marking or censusing areas, with the use of transistor

aids, or things of this kind.

Now, there are also two points which are really big

points, perhaps not for immediate action, but I want

to raise them now because I know they are very important. We should in the continent (I am really

speaking about the continent) have a great banding

program for migratory birds. At present only Canada

and the United States do any banding. In Mexico, we

do not know the techniques of banding and censusing

of migratory birds, so the work that you do and that

the Canadians do really stops in the middle of the continent. Every January U.S. census people are received

in Mexico. They go for 1 or 2 months with a fine airplane, and three or four biologists count along the

coasts of Mexico and even in the central plateau. This

is for your information, and our information, but it

could mean much more if we could participate in the

program. Of course the main fault is ours. We should

have a better organized program and I know that we

will convince our higher authorities to allocate part

of our budget (our annual budget) for the active

participation of Mexico in continental banding and

censusing programs of migratory birds as a major operation. But it would help a lot if you would make the

start—I mean not just showing how things have to

be done—not just doing the showing, but to take the

Initiative in this area and do something in the way of
96 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

an international proposal. And finally, (5) I would

like to see that the proposals and suggestions or recommendations of this conference should be considered

against the general background of the environment or

ecosystem ideas, and from the point of view of the

urgent necessity of recreation for human beings

nowadays.

FOSBERG. In connection with the first two points

that Dr. Hernandez Corzo brought out, we must, of

course, agree, but also, in relation to these same points,

every day we hear about the way insects are developing

resistance against pesticides. Resistant strains appear,

and then we are back where we started after a few

years of using a particular pesticide. However, there

is one thing that might be called a pesticide against

which no known resistance is developed. This is an

insectivorous bird. Dr. Hernandez Corzo brought out

that this should be put in an economic context, and I

think that this is possible concerning birds. You could

very well imagine plans or suggestions made to the

economists, a practical people, to encourage this very

economical pesticide which costs nothing and against

which insects will not develop any resistance. This is

just one more thing that might be brought up at an

economic conference.

IBARRA. I have heard many interesting ideas about

protecting the avifauna of our countries. Early this

morning I was thinking about making some suggestions for protecting birds. Among them was to invite

those countries that have not signed the continental

treaty for migratory birds to do so. Signing this document would be of great help in the near future.

Referring to the discussion about insecticides, I must

talk about my own observation of chemicals in my

country. The results of the application of deadly chemicals to crops give me a pessimistic view for the future

of bird populations, especially the insect-eating birds.

In Guatemala there is a need for proper legislation for

bird protection and an urgent need for education of

the people. We often talk about education and consider it one of the most important and productive ways

to promote conservation. Educating large numbers of

people about specific matters is not easy, but if we do

not try it will become increasingly difficult to stop the

killing of birds.

A few days ago I translated into English some paragraphs from my papers written in Spanish. In one I

talked about an ornithologist who had visited Guatemala in 1924, at which time he noted that the Guatemalan national bird (quetzal) was indeed very scarce,

despite the law protecting it. The fact is that we do not

have sufficient means for extensive publicity about the

national importance of this beautiful bird, as well as

other useful species.

Another point of interest is the establishment of two

natural history museums in Guatemala. One of the

main objectives is to illustrate, with recommendations

from conservationists, why people, especially children,

should not kill birds because of their usefulness; for

example, the hawk destroys harmful rodents and insectivorous birds feed upon insects that destroy our

crops. I must say that these museums are visited by

thousands of children every year, the same children

who in the future will be ardent conservationists. I

consider that this kind of center is enormously helpful

in educating our people.

The publication of magazines and articles in the

newspapers will help our conservation program. In

the past years I have been publishing notes in the most

important newspapers in Guatemala. The effectiveness

of children's books on conservation needs to be brought

to the attention of Latin American countries. Dr. Hernandez Corzo pointed out that books on conservation

published in the United States might be translated for

the benefit of those Latin American countries who do

not stress conservation. This is an excellent idea.

Some Guatemalans identify conservation with sentimentalism, not realizing its significance in the national

economy and the importance of national parks and

refugees in enforcing conservation. The famous Atitlan

Lake in Guatemala, which I believe is the only refuge

in Central America, protects the Atitlan grebe with the

cooperation of the World Wildlife Fund and the Ministry of Agriculture of Guatemala. I know that Mexico,

Argentina, and Colombia have several national parks

by now, but in Central America we need to establish

more refuges and national parks.

I would like also to talk about the bird markets. I

have observed several such markets in Central America

and they should be forbidden. Many people buy birds,

ignoring the importance of having them free.

CLEMENT. Dr. Ibarra's statement raises an important action point when he reminds us that there are

European manufacturers who are using chemical pesticides in his country. Can anyone tell me which

company?

VOGT. One of the principal manufacturers of insecticides in Guatemala is Monsanto.
NUMBER 2 6 97

CLEMENT. We Americans can help by pointing out

our own experience to our Latin neighbors. I think

we have outlived this particular phase of the use of

pesticides and are rapidly bringing it under control. So

we can share information along these lines and help

you convince other people that this is being badly

overdone.

LEHMANN. I think that we should recommend ratification of the Washington Convention of 1940 by the

few countries that have not yet done so. One of those

countries is mine. I have been working in my country

for several years on the minister of agriculture and

the minister of foreign affairs to present it to the Congress for ratification. Having this, I think we will have

a means of putting a little more pressure on the government officers. I understand a new convention or

a new treaty is being prepared that may be more effective than the 1940 treaty, which I understand was

adopted by Dr. Wetmore and other people.

Of course, I think one of the more practical ways of

protecting the avifauna, both native and migrant, is

by establishing national parks and equivalent reserves

to protect immediately both wildlife and forest flora

from the fast rate of destruction some of us have in

our countries. Mine is one of the worst, perhaps. If we

do not set aside these areas and we cannot protect

them within 5 years from now, it will be too late to

protect some kinds of habitats.

I think we should also try to stop this terrible commerce in caged birds and the commercial use of game

animal skins.

Despite the treaty under which birds that are protected in the country of origin cannot be imported

into the United States, smuggling exists, as in the

case of parrots. You do not let people import parrots

here, but they are smuggled in through Mexico. Our

exporters send them to Mexico and your tourists

smuggle them in. I know that because this gentleman

that I mentioned yesterday was permitted to export

monkeys to Harvard. He asked me to help get

monkeys from southwestern Colombia, since he is located in the upper Magdalena. He said since you are

helping export these monkeys, why not help get parrots

from the area. I asked where he would send the parrots,

and he answered, "to the States." I asked how he

could send parrots to the States. He said it was easy

to send them to Mexico and have tourists smuggle

them in in the trunks of their cars.

One important thing we should do is to sponsor

local institutions that are interested in conservation.

Most of our people do not know what conservation

means. For us to use a forest means to destroy it. Our

international bank is now beginning to lend money

on long terms to people who want to reforest with

commercial varieties of native trees, including pine.

Within 20 years a planted forest can yield an average

of 6,000 pesos a year per hectare, which is more than

some of the crops, like poor corn, planted in these same

mountains. Forest planting rebuilds the habitat for

birds, and also helps keep the soil from washing away

and restores and improves the dry river beds we have

there.

BUCHINOER. I would like to point out only that the

manufacturers are not the only ones who should be

stopped. It would be good to ask AID to stop its representatives from giving free samples of pesticides away.

Yesterday I mentioned what was happening in Ecuador in the banana plantations. All the pesticides which

created the problem came from the United States.

CLEMENT. If Dr. Lehmann and his colleagues in

Latin America will tell us where unique accessible

habitats exist, we can help steer tourist traffic to these

areas and in this way provide a basis for showing how

important they are. There is a tremendous increase in

this type of tourism. People want natural history guidance in circling the world and visiting various continents. My own organization can perhaps be quite helpful in this respect because we are in touch with the

public.

LEHMANN. It is very, very important that it was

pointed out here, both by me and someone else, that

the book on the birds of Colombia is of little use to

local people. In the first place it is in English, and in

the second place our people do not know ecology, or

let's say amateur ecology, as you do here in the United

States through the use—for many years now—of the

excellent Peterson guides. We sell the book at the

museum, of course. Most of the people who buy the

book are Americans. The Colombians who buy the

book, even though they speak English, often come to

me with sketches of birds they have seen in the field

but have not been able to locate in the book. However,

publication of this book steers tourists to Colombia to

see the birds, and that is a good sales-talking point for

national parks. If with the establishment of this park

we can bring tourism here, that means gold to us—

that means money.
98

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

CLEMENT. I think part of my point is that we are

now at the stage where we could begin working on a

bird-finding guide to Latin America.

LEHMANN. AS you know, I am preparing my own

book on birds of Colombia with keys from the class

down to the family. I just asked Mr. Eisenmann yesterday to help me in the keys for passerines, which are

very difficult; but with the other groups I have already

made keys that work with the illustrative sketches to

show details. I am doing this work with a Canadian

friend, Phil Brown, who is an excellent photographer

and film maker. He is an engineer and a geologist, and

during the winter months when he cannot follow this

work, he comes down to the tropics and we work on this

book. In the beginning we had the idea of publishing

the book in English, because we thought we could sell

10 copies in English where we could sell one in Spanish. But when I consulted my colleagues, all protested,

so I have translated most of it into Spanish. Of course

I am keeping it up to date. My main problem at the

moment is that I have not the money to pay for someone to make the illustrations. I have made some myself, but still many more have to be done. I would like

to see this book with as many color plates as possible.

SHORT. There are continuously published in this

country many very fine articles concerning various

areas in Latin America. It seems to me quite appropriate to suggest that an organization be set up (and

subsidized) along the lines of Reader's Digest to abstract such articles, translate them into Spanish, and

sell them at relatively low prices throughout Latin

America. Something like this would probably be very

effective.

IBARRA. Obviously we mostly need books which are

not entirely technical. We need to educate children

and the general public. Dr. Peterson published an interesting book recently, and it is my opinion that books

like this one should be translated into Spanish.

BUECHNER. For the benefit of some of you who came

in later, Dr. Vogt suggested that we have a committee

made up of Drs. Aldrich, Dorney, and Graham to formulate recommendations for this group after the meeting. We can express ideas as to what might go into the

recommendations, but we will not adopt resolutions

during the conference.

RUSSELL. British Honduras has the same problems

as the other localities. There is a long-term need and

there is an immediate need. The immediate need is to

preserve two vanishing habitats. These are areas of the

rain forest that are still intact and some sea bird colonies on the barrier reef. The long-term necessity is

for an educational program. We have had considerable

discussion about that.

My feeling is at this point—with an hour and 15

minutes to go—that unless things take place rather

rapidly, the only outcome of this conference will be

in the form of resolutions. These resolutions may be

passed on to representatives at the conference and to

their respective governments. I may be overly pessimistic, but I do not think resolutions will help that

much. I think we have had some very able people at

this meeting who are influential enough in their countries, and they have had difficulty getting the things

done that need doing. What are we going to do about

it? We do need some sort of follow-up after this conference. I may be wrong. Maybe other people have

more respect for resolutions and think they will influence governments. I rather doubt that they will. I

do not feel that the United States should be the country that initiates subsequent actions. We might be able

to provide some of the funds and some of the technical

help involved. I think an international group including

representatives from all of the Latin American countries involved, and not associated with an organization

in the United States, would be most effective. As far

as the actual formation of such a group is concerned,

I hesitate to suggest creation of a new organization

to put something like this into effect, but I do not

know where an organization exists that can handle it

at present.

This is a conference called to consider the effects

of habitat changes on population levels of birds. I think

that we have all recognized that birds are not the

primary concern here. The primary concern deals with

habitat changes. I will acknowledge that birds may

give us the contact that we need for publicity and

educational purposes, and we should use them for

that purpose. Our main objective, I would hope, would

be the conservation of habitats. To further this objective perhaps it may be practical to have an international committee of biologists which may include

ornithologists, zoologists, and ecologists, to provide a

pool from which various countries could request information or recommendations on conservation matters. Ideally, many of you here today representing

Latin American countries could influence your government to the extent of asking for aid from this international group. Or if you do not think you could

persuade your government to ask for aid from this

group, perhaps there are other ways of obtaining it.
NUMBER 2 6 99

If biologists representing three or four different Latin

American countries were to visit another Latin American country, and if they could spend a few days there,

half their time spent in practical politics and the other

half in making practical recommendations on conservation matters, that would accomplish something.

I do not feel that resolutions will do the job. In British Honduras, for example, although I know very little about its government, particularly since it is

changing so rapidly, I do think that a visit from biologists emphasizing the things that we have discussed

would have some influence; and I feel this approach

might do some good in other Latin American areas.

VOGT. Well, there is, of course, an International

Committee for Bird Protection, with a basic responsibility, which might be a vehicle for working on bird

conservation, particularly in view of the fact that we

now see it primarily as habitat preservation. I do not

think we should center this too much on Latin America, because the United States is probably the most,

or one of the most, destructive forces in Latin America.

Someone yesterday spoke about the way we are

helping them to knock down trees. The point is that

they are not doing it wisely. We are cutting death

rates without helping to cut birth rates. We are more

responsible for the population explosion in Latin

America than almost any other country, including the

nations involved. So we have a responsibility there.

I should like to offer just in capsule form some

suggested resolutions—I will not try to formulate

them—that the drafting committee can work on if

you people will approve of them, just in the interest

of saving time.

First of all, we owe a debt of gratitude to the Smithsonian for its hospitality and the excellent work it did

in organizing the meeting. I should like to see a resolution congratulating the Department of the Interior

on the censuses that they have been conducting, asking them to seek similar censuses in Mexico and Canada if it is possible, and to extend such censuses here.

I'd like to see some kind of a resolution urging AID

or the Alliance for Progress to give high priority to

maintaining the biological productivity of the environment, especially soil, water, and the fauna and the

flora, which they have disregarded, particularly in

relation to the agrarian reform program, which is turning into a major destructive force in Latin America.

I suggest that we urge the National Science Foundation to promote research on ecology, with special emphasis on birds in tropical America. The U.S.

Department of the Interior might be urged to cooperate with Mexico to help give better protection to

birds, particularly since American nationals are so

often involved in law violations south of the Rio

Grande. We might nudge the State Department, suggesting that they control American game hogs abroad,

among whom, unfortunately, one has to include two

or three well-known ambassadors; and I'd like to suggest a resolution asking the Pan-American Sanitary

Organization to evaluate the effects of insecticides on

the ecosystems of Latin America: the effect on birds,

on fish, on human beings, on soil. It could be a major

project and I think it is one of increasing importance

and something that we need to do as soon as possible.

And finally there is, as you know, a move in the United

Nations (ECOSOC and UNESCO) to control the

trade in wild mammals and birds, or all forms of wildlife. I think it might be a good idea if this conference

went on record supporting this attempt in the United

Nations.

BUECHNER. Dr. Vogt mentioned AID, and I think

it is appropriate at this time to read to you a statement that Dr. Ripley handed to me at the beginning

of this meeting:

Resolve that this conference on Avifauna of Northern Latin

America, meeting on April 13-15, 1966, urge AID (the U.S.

Agency for International Development) to insert a special

provision or clause in any agreement with a Latin American

nation or agency, in respect to the construction of any dam or

hydroelectric facility. That provision shall be made for providing forest guards, including their transportation, in watershed areas associated with such construction. These provisions

shall include the negotiations of funds to be provided either by

AID or by the nations concerned.

CAHALANE. I think that is fine as far as it goes—I

suggest we incorporate the ideas in a broader resolution, as was suggested by Bill Vogt, touching on all

aspects of natural resources as they are affected by

AID operations. As the present chairman of the bird

protection committee of the AOU, I'll do everything

possible through the committee to urge the Union to

promote research in Latin America, either through

grants, if that is possible, or by encouraging its members or others to do research on winter bird habitats in

Latin American countries. I believe that we need a lot

more information on the details of what is actually

happening to bird populations in many of those areas.

HOWELL. I think that we have all heard enough

"horror stories" to be fully aware that there is a

very acute short-term problem, and there is, of course,
100 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

a long-term problem as Dr. Russell mentioned. There

is no question in anyone's mind here, I know, that the

essential problem is the preservation of habitat and

how this can be done. One thing that was mentioned

earlier was the agrarian reform program and what

effect this is having on encouraging the destruction

of forest habitat because it is considered land that

is not in use. Well, we certainly want to know specifically what can be done about this. AID was mentioned yesterday as welcoming suggestions that would

be appropriate for improving the administration of

this agency and its program. I'd like to suggest that

AID receive a resolution or suggestion from this group

(or from any individual who has the ear of the agency)

that it would be advisable if, instead of requiring that

land which is not in agricultural use be put to such

use or be confiscated by the government, an alternative could be that such land could be retained by the

owner if it were used for purposes which were compatible with the preservation of at least part of the

forest, even if there was selective cutting under sustained-yield management. Certainly some forest is better than no forest at all. If this proved to be impractical,

perhaps some form of tax exemption for preservation

of forested areas could be granted. Some of these areas

must be set aside as natural preserves or parks (or

something that would help to preserve the habitat)

because if not preserved there is not going to be any

long-term need. I'd like to suggest also that we give

more consideration to working through private individuals in Latin America as well as government

agencies.

As I stressed yesterday, in Nicaragua there are a

few very wealthy families, highly influential both socially and economically, who control large areas of

land. I think that if these people could be appealed

to, there might be some chance of setting aside some

areas. I'd like to see some suggestions as to how one

could get through to such individuals in other countries as well, because I feel sure that similar conditions

exist elsewhere. Again, I feel that appeals to national

pride would be quite important in this. In Nicaragua,

for example, a national park dedicated to Ruben Dario

or some other national hero would probably be widely

respected. Having a national bird of a spectacular kind

would be very helpful in publicizing projects to save

the habitat of threatened species. As for other shortterm needs, such as limiting the exportation of rare

species as caged birds—as long as there is money in

this, all the passage of laws locally will not do much

good. This is something about which I think the United

States could do something. I believe I am correct that

most of the money in this business comes from the

United States.

If the United States prohibits the importation from

Latin America and other areas of all threatened species

of exotic animals, except by legitimate zoos and recognized agriculturists, then the practice would virtually stop. On a long-term basis I feel that the United

States should take the lead in preventing the introduction of exotic species into places where they do not

belong. A hundred years after the introduction of the

English sparrow and the starling we should know

better, but still there are agencies within the United

States promoting the introduction of exotics. It should

be obvious that this is usually wrong in two respects.

Either the introduction does not take, in which case

it is a waste of money; if it does take, it is likely to be

disastrous for some of the native forms. This goes

not just for birds but for fishes, as we heard yesterday,

and probably for a great many kinds of plants, too.

As for long-term projects that emphasize the economic

value of conservation, I certainly think there would

be no objection at all to charging a reasonable but

handsome fee to tourists coming to visit national parks

and natural preserves in Latin American countries.

Anybody who can afford to go there can afford to pay

an entrance fee such as we have in our own national

parks, and this source of revenue would make clear that

setting aside such areas is not a dead loss economically.

As for educational matters there is not much that

I could say to add to what has already been said,

except to emphasize a point made yesterday that we

need good field guides and good illustrations. It costs

no more to reproduce a good color plate than a bad

color plate, and there are plenty of extremely capable

bird artists and illustrators who could do the original

work. The same thing might be said for the lost art of

taxidermy. In many parts of Latin America almost

the only means of learning about wildlife is to visit

small local museums and see only a series of poorly

prepared stuffed birds. Dr. Hernandez Corzo suggested that there are opportunities for sending people

to the United States or some other country where

such things as taxidermy are taught. Many such specimens are of considerable historic and scientific value,

prepared by self-taught pioneers in ornithological

study, and I do not wish to disparage their contributions. I would like to suggest, however, that some consideration be given to training people with an interest
NUMBER 2 6 101

in learning taxidermy and actually mastering these

techniques sufficiently so that good local museums

would stimulate the interest of school children and

others in learning more about wildlife and conservation. We have to look in this direction to the next

generation because there is no use pretending that we

can influence or persuade poor farmers who have

been trying to scratch a living off the land for 30 years

that they would be well advised to become interested

in birds and to spare the trees, and this sort of thing.

Of course, as has already been pointed out, the fewer

there are in the next generation the better.

BUECHNER. Before we go on I would like to take a

few minutes to let Lee Talbot explain what is developing in the International Biological Program which may

be relevant to plans being formulated at this conference.

TALBOT. Most of you gentlemen know about the

the International Biological Program (or the IBP). As

a very brief recapitulation, the IBP is to be a worldwide

ecological study, a worldwide plan of research on the

biological basis of productivity and human welfare. It

is aimed at learning more about where man fits in the

ecosystem that he is now dominating and changing.

This program stems from a realization that many of

us think is coming very late: that with the increasing

human population, one of our greatest problems is

not learning more about the stars but, rather, learning

more about how to make our terrestrial environment

produce enough food and other products to support

us; and the further realization that we actually know

relatively little about this critical problem. Many of the

comments made this morning have emphasized the

primitive state of our knowledge—or at least our practice of food production and other types of production

in the tropics and elsewhere.

This program is somewhat of a biological parallel

to the International Geophysical Year that was considered so successful. The aim is to have coordinated

studies into various aspects of ecology, emphasizing

biological productivity, carried out by national IBP

programs throughout the world. At present the program is in what is termed stage I, which is the phase

of design and planning. Stage II will start about the

middle of next year and will consist of a 5-year action

program.

The general organization of this program sounds impressive, but people want to know specifically what is

involved. There is an international body organized

under the International Council of Scientific Unions

which has the function of providing the overall coordination. The research program is divided into seven

sections to provide a framework for its work. One of

these sections is the conservation section, which I shall

mention shortly. Within each country that chooses

to participate, national IBP committees are established

and the actual work through research programs, etc.,

is to be carried out by these national programs under

the national committees. Before the national committees are established, in many cases during this formative

period, the first stage is to have a national correspondent who gets in touch with the international headquarters to get assistance on how to set up the program.

The conservation section would have the most application, I believe, to the subjects that have been

discussed at this conference. One of the objectives of

the conservation section is to put conservation on a

scientific basis. One of the great needs that was brought

out in some of the discussions this morning was to

put conservation on a practical, accepted basis within

each country, rather than on an emotional one, or on

a basis which is not considered important by the people

who happen to implement it—particularly by the politicians, the government administrators, and the landowners.

One of the aspects of conservation that is of primary

concern to the IBP in this connection is to assure that

there are sufficient examples of natural habitats preserved to allow for the needs of studies at present and in

the future. In effect this amounts to assuring that there

are ecological reference points in "natural laboratories"

for present and future needs of science—aimed basically at human welfare. The emphasis that has been

developing this morning on the need to preserve

habitats if we are going to preserve birds or any other

aspect of the environment fits directly into this conservation objective of the IBP. Therefore, within the

terms of reference of the discussion this morning the

IBP offers us an opportunity in perhaps three main

ways: first, it can provide a framework or structure

within which national programs in conservation in

Latin America can be established. Second, it offers

a possibility to obtain international recognition and in

some cases substantial international support for these

programs. Third, it offers a possibility to focus both

national and international attention on the conservation problems and programs involved.

Again this sounds impressive, but in practical terms,

what can we do? Well, first, in a few Latin American

countries there are national correspondents for the
102 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

IBP. Where these exist we can contact them to find out

what they are doing or thinking in terms of conservation and of conservation work. In most cases, judging

by the recent IBP General Assembly in Paris, there

is so far relatively little thinking in this part of the

world in conservation. We can then, in cooperation

with these individuals, work out a conservation program, or find out who should be contacted to accomplish this. This, therefore, is an opportunity for those

who are assembled in this room to generate a conservation program within the IBP structure in the countries

where any such structure already exists. In most of the

countries involved, however, there is not yet a national

committee. Therefore, there is an opportunity and,

I would think, an obligation for those of us here, or

the appropriate officials that we can contact, to become

IBP correspondents. After this meeting if anyone

would like addresses or further information they could

contact Dr. Graham, Dr. Buechner, or myself and we

would be glad to help on this. The IBP provides a

potential for both national and international programs

of support of conservation. The practical support may

come from individual governments, foundations, bilateral programs, FAO, UNESCO, or other international organizations that are becoming more and more

concerned with conservation.

As my wife mentioned at the coffee break much

of what was said this morning and at other times in

this meeting sounds much like a rebroadcast of the

Conference on Conservation of Nature and Natural

Resources in Tropical Southeast Asia held last fall

in Bangkok. It is very striking how parallel many, and

perhaps most, of the problems are between Latin

America and Southeast Asia. One of these problems is

the lack of communication between people within a

country or people in adjacent countries, and the lack

of realization of the opportunities that now exist in the

international field for support in the general field of

conservation.

I would like to present two more specific points. Dr.

Lehmann, among others, mentioned the importance of

national parks and equivalent reserves. There is now a

"United Nations World List of National Parks and

Equivalent Reserves" which has been compiled by the

International Commission on National Parks of the

International Union for Conservation of Nature and

Natural Resources (IUCN). This list will be published

within the next several months. It is worldwide and

it includes parks and equivalent reserves from about

134 countries, along with a series of criteria for judging

the effectiveness of parks and reserves. This list is

merely a document, but it can be a very useful document that one can take to his government and say,

"This country and this country and this country have

so many parks and reserves and we don't have any.

What are we going to do about this?" This prestige

aspect is extremely effective, as has been indicated by

some of the remarks here.

This U.N. list is one of the projects that has been

completed by the IUCN. The IUCN can offer another

form or opportunity for international cooperation,

focus of attention, or support which earlier discussions

here have indicated was needed in Latin American

conservation. If anyone would like additional information on the International Union and how it might be

able to assist, I would refer them to Dr. Graham,

Dr. Buechner, or myself.

BUECHNER. I should point out that Dr. Talbot is

employed by the Smithsonian Institution in the Office

of Ecology, and is on assignment with Max Nicholson

of the central committee of the IBP to help develop

the program in terrestrial conservation.

FOSBERG. I have two not very closely related suggestions, but I will make them both while I am on my feet,

and then subside. In connection with our suggestions

to AID—I have been paying considerable attention

lately to the life-zone system proposed by Dr. Holdridge, and it seems quite clear that this does fairly

differentiate lands in tropical countries into those that

are suitable for certain types of agriculture, those considered suitable mainly for grazing, and those that are

much better adapted for forestry and other purposes.

Now, there exist maps based on this system for most

or all of the Central American countries. This information is available and while the details may not be all

worked out, still I should think that the attention of

AID should be directed to this system as a rough basis

for where they should perhaps promote development

schemes and where they should not, and as to the kinds

of development that are suitable for these areas. I

am sure that AID people will listen a lot more readily

to suggestions made on a practical basis, where there

is a map on which they can see what is being talked

about, and I would suggest some consideration of this

in any memorandum that we direct to AID.

The other suggestion is on an entirely different level.

The proceedings of this meeting will undoubtedly be

published in some way and distributed to at least a
NUMBER 2 6

few people, probably I think to the people who know

most about the subject already. Probably they will not

reach the ones it is most urgent we influence: the general public in the countries we are talking about. I

do not know if this is a practical idea, but I should

think that we might contact the editorial divisions

of the Reader's Digest. This is the magazine with the

most tremendous circulation of any in the world. It has

a special Latin American edition in Spanish. If they

could be induced to go over the proceedings of this

conference and pick out things that should be called

to the attention of the people in these countries and

publish them as an experiment in one of their condensations, especially in their Latin American editions,

it might produce a hundred times as much effect as

simply distributing this volume of proceedings to a few

hundred libraries and biologists, who, of course, can

make good use of it. This would not detract in any way

from its value as a scientific document, but would

spread its influence over a tremendous segment of

the intellectual population, at least, both of the United

States and of Latin America, as well as of other parts

of the world.

HOLDRIDGE. You all know my tendency toward the

use of numbers in ecology. I would like to suggest the

use of the magic number three as a propaganda tool

for the conservation movement. The number would

comprise three types of conservation: One for our

grandchildren and the long-term future, the establishment of natural preserves; one for this year and the

next, the reservation of national parks for weekend

trips and vacations; and, lastly, one for today, tomorrow, and the next day, the enlargement of city parks

and green belts into which every urban man can walk

without expense.

As a goal each one of the three should comprise 1

percent of the national territory. The 1 percent in

preserves, if located to adequately encompass environmental diversity, should be sufficient to save all species

and subspecies except possibly some of the large-bodied

ones. The 1 percent in national parks, and the last near

or in the cities, should be adequate to shelter and sustain the migratory birds.

SPRUNT. I have two much less far-reaching suggestions than some of those that have been given. One

we have been discussing at some length—the danger

of the caged bird traffic and live animal trapping. One

of the difficulties in controlling this is the confused

situation of protective laws in the countries that are

involved. We are able to control this traffic from the

103

U.S. end because we are able to prohibit the importation of animals that are protected in the country of

origin. I have been trying for 5 years to find out what

Latin American countries protect flamingos and I have

not done it yet. It is a very difficult problem. I wonder

if it would be possible to have either this body or

perhaps the Pan American section of the International

Council for Bird Protection prepare and promulgate

a model law very much as was done by the Audubon

Society here in the United States 50 years ago, where

a minimum standard of protection for wildlife species

is drawn and adapted to each of the countries involved.

At least it would provide a starting point. Mexico has

a very good law. Perhaps we could start with that one.

At least you would have a framework so that law enforcement agencies in the various countries would be

familiar with the laws in other countries and would

also show control on the customs level here in the

United States. Actually, I think that the live bird and

animal traffic is only involved with three or four "consumer" countries in the world. Probably the United

States, Great Britain, Germany, and Holland are the

ones that are most involved. If we could, at an international level, get similar laws to that existing in the

United States, Great Britain, Holland, and Germany,

and we could close it off at the consumer end, I think

we could stop the live animal traffic pretty much in

its tracks. I think that you will have to start by simplifying the protective laws in Latin America before you

can get anywhere with such a program.

Now, the other suggestion has to do with getting

conservation over to the people in Latin America.

Dr. Ibarra and others have mentioned particularly the

use of mass media such as magazines and newspapers.

I wonder if it would be possible to have a foundation

here in the United States prepare through the use of

writer-artist combination, or something of this sort,

a nature column to be widely distributed to newspapers and possibly magazines throughout Central and

northern Latin America. I am sure that this would be

used, for newspapers all over the world use canned

material. If it were prepared properly and given to

people free, I am sure that it would be used and might

be a method of getting conservation messages across. It

could be expanded for radio, television, and movies if

money were available. Perhaps the newspaper column

could be done quickly and rather reasonably.

BUCHINGER. I would like to make several comments.

One is that if this meeting contemplates sending a

recommendation suggesting the improvement of some
104

practices to AID, it might be quite a good idea also to

send the same to the Alliance for Progress, the International Development Bank, and the Peace Corps, as

they are all involved in or sponsor enterprises which

have certain effects on the ecosystem. Another comment is that it would also be advisable to include in

the group which is making the recommendations somebody who speaks Spanish. I do hope that the recommendations are going to be published also in Spanish

and in this case the translation is most important; it has

to be made by somebody who has ecological knowledge.

So I hope Dr. Holdridge is going to stay here long

enough to help; if not, I would suggest that Mr. Tasaico should be asked. He is also working at the Pan

American Union (Natural Resources Unit), has his

degree in forestry, and is a Peruvian who has worked in

the Dominican Republic. I must insist that it is very

important how the recommendations are presented.

My third suggestion refers to Dr. Howell's comment,

and excuse me if I have to beat my own drum, but Dr.

Howell was speaking about the importance of getting

private people interested in projects. I would like to

call to his attention that the Nature Conservancy has

a Latin American Desk, and our work is exactly following on this line. On the first day of this meeting, as you

recall, there were two groups who thought that they

disagreed because one stressed the advantages of having privately owned and protected preserves and the

other was speaking about the value of a national park

system. The Nature Conservancy type of organization

feels that both the private and governmental efforts are

important and therefore encourages both. I would call

your attention to our pamphlets both in Spanish and

in English, none of which are copyrighted. In some

countries local newspapers reprint them because the

local authorities develop a patriotic pride in the landsaving movement. In addition to national pride is personal pride. Sometimes there is even too much of it.

One of our projects in Argentina was lost because a

family whom we told could have a natural area with a

stand of palms as a living monument for their grandfather, decided they did not want to buy the land as the

price was too low. They wanted a bigger and costlier

preserve.

EISENMANN. A few more or less disconnected points:

as to resolutions, people of Latin American experience

ought to look at them no matter who drafts them. I

hope that the committee, before promulgating resolutions, will send them around. They need not wait an

indefinite time for reply. Those who do not reply can

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

be ignored, but give them a few weeks to comment.

That is point 1. Point 2 relates to a matter mentioned

by Dr. Ripley last night. I think I understood him to

say that he had in contemplation holding other meetings of this sort, perhaps once a year. I would suggest

that if that is in view, it might be well to have some

of these meetings in Latin America. There we could

have conservation publicity; many other people would

attend and it would be more educational. I do not want

to make any suggestion for a place for the next meeting.

There are places like Mexico which are nearby. In

Panama the Smithsonian Institution has an office and

station, and it would be easier for other Latin Americans to reach. Point 3 involves a matter of emphasis.

Most of us here are interested in birds. We all realize

that we can not have the variety of birds we wish to

preserve without preserving the necessary variety of

habitats. That is why, as I mentioned yesterday, birds,

because of the strong emotional appeal they have for

many people, serve an especially valuable function in

the broader conservation picture. Let us remember,

too, to paraphrase what was said recently by one of my

colleagues, Dr. Dean Amadon, that birds are sensitive

reflectors of conditions in the environment. Formerly,

a canary was taken down into mines to test whether the

air was safe for men. Today, a general deterioration

of environment for birds foreshadows a deterioration

for man.

SWIFT. There have been some very excellent statements made by us here and in nearly every case some

reference has been made to forest destruction. Yet in

pursuing the discussions hardly anyone mentioned forest management. There was a frequent reference to reserves and parks, and this has caused me to suggest

that forest reserves and management ought to be

brought into the picture. Now, I speak without knowledge of the forestry situation in Latin America, but I

do have some knowledge of it here in the United States,

having spent some 35 years in the U.S. Forest Service.

A good part of that time was devoted to heading up

the Division of Wildlife Management.

It is true that foresters historically have not been as

interested in noneconomic wildlife as most of us would

like. But foresters are changing, and changing rapidly,

and I think quite to the good. Within the United

States, for example, the forest system, Federal and

State, preceded the other types of land preserves. And

that was a good thing because these lands were given

a reserve status, recognition, and eventually good administration. Some of our better more-restricted pre-
NUMBER 2 6 105

serves, such as wilderness areas, are part of the national forests. So the forest reserve was the forerunner

to some of the things we are talking about.

Now, the other thing is that the foresters in this

country have also pioneered in the protecting of some

of the species that we worry about. The California

condor, for example. This species is down to perhaps

40 individuals. In the very beginning, with the assistance of outside agencies such as the Audubon Society,

the foresters were the ones who moved to set up a reserve for protecting this rare and vanishing species.

The State and Federal foresters at the present time

are doing a really outstanding job in managing breeding habitats for the Kirtland's warbler and deserve a

great deal of credit. In Puerto Rico, the Puerto Rican

parrot, now 200 or fewer individuals, is perhaps surviving because it has found sanctuary in the Caribbean

National Forest.

In view of these points, I believe the resolution

group should look into the means of strengthening a

national forest system in Latin America. There is at

the present time an International Commission of Forestry operating in Latin America under the auspices

of FAO. Also within this commission there is a committee whose interest is directed to conservation matters, wildlife, and parks.

IBARRA. I know of three ways. First, those countries

that do not have protection laws should legislate to

cover such situations. At this point I want to congratulate those nations that have recently legislated on the

subject, particularly Mexico and Costa Rica.

Second, I should mention the need of publications

such as the one I am publishing in my country entitled

Historia Natural y Pro Natura, which contains conservation articles translated into Spanish. These articles

are written about popular subjects and their translations are of much interest to the people of Latin

American countries. My magazine has an edition of

2,000 copies, and I intend to find a person or institution to sponsor an increase up to 10,000 copies in the

near future.

Third, a point about nonnative birds. In Central

America certain hunting clubs want to import such

birds from Europe or Africa for the sole purpose of

hunting them. We must avoid this, because it means

an unnatural aggression and a threat to our avifauna

and its habitat.

FOSBERG. One comment to follow up Lloyd Swift's

discussion about forestry. One of the problems with

foresters, as I have observed them in Latin America,

is that they seldom go out and look at the trees that

are growing there. They look at the map and say "here

is where we should have some forest. Let's clear away

this brush and plant pine and eucalyptus." This does

not help very much to preserve birds. I think we may

do well to carry on a campaign of enlightenment among

the foresters working in Latin America and perhaps

send some of a different kind down there as advisers,

some that do know there are probably 20,000 species

of trees in Latin America, many of which might have

some future interest. Perhaps they could suggest that

some forest management to preserve the existing combinations and associations of trees would be as worthwhile as trying to train temperate-zone pines and

Australian eucalyptus to do what they want them to

in Latin America.

BUECHNER. I would like to call upon William

Warner of the Office of International Affairs, Smithsonian Institution, to speak on how the Smithsonian, or

other organizations, might help to contribute toward

solving some of these problems of conservation in Latin

America.

WARNER. I feel especially obliged to give you a view

of some of the things of interest to you that the Smithsonian is doing and can do, and some of the things that

we cannot, after Dr. Phelps made those well chosen

remarks about the Smithsonian sending visitors abroad

with resounding letters of introduction. I visited Venezuela with another member of the administrative

staff of the Smithsonian about a year ago, and I feel

that perhaps all we succeeded in accomplishing was

what our people in the Alliance for Progress call "a

revolution of expectations," expectations which we

have not been able to follow through on very fully.

Therefore, I would like to tell you some things we are

doing and hope to do in the future. On the matter that

Dr. Phelps brought up, of international cooperation in

conservation of natural areas, we, of course, want to

do all we can in this area. Some small steps that we

are taking now include adding the Smithsonian's voice

to that of the Department of Interior's in conservation

problems in this country. The voice we add stresses

the scientific value of potential natural areas or reserves; the Department, which of course has many

other factors to consider in setting aside natural areas,

seems to welcome our supporting voice on scientific

uses.

Somewhat more diffiicult, of course, is the situation

abroad. But again, we do try to help in the determination of scientifically valuable areas or threatened habi336-550 O - 70 - 8
106 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

tats. What we cannot do in international conservation

is to consider direct contributions to the acquisition of

new land areas. This is because our governing body,

the Smithsonian's Board of Regents, and our congressional committees feel very strongly about consolidating what we have here in the United States and

not getting overextended abroad. Stated another way,

we are now having too many problems establishing a

reserve and biological field station 40 miles away on

the shores of the Chesapeake to consider doing the

same abroad. But, as I say, we do want to continue to

lend a supporting voice wherever it is wanted, here or

abroad, about scientific uses of natural reserves, parks,

and equivalent areas.

On the AID front, which many of you have spoken

about today, I would almost like to go off the record,

as they say at the other end of the Mall, and tell you

that while I think that many of the resolutions that

you are going to formulate and pass on to AID are

well conceived, you will nevertheless find that it is very

difficult to get real support or funding from AID for

much of what you want to do. Beyond resolutions,

we need to work together in the task of persuading

AID to support the kind of basic research on ecosystems in which we are all so interested. Dr. Ripley wants

very much to promote this; he visualizes an almost

automatic relationship whereby every time our foreignaid administrators plan a new road through undisturbed tropical forests or a new resettlement project

along the eastern slope of the Andes, they would come

to the Smithsonian or other basic research institutions

for before-and-after ecological surveys, which would

be valuable to AID and to science.

But as Dr. Philip Humphrey, here present, can tell

you, since he and I have had the occasion to meet

recently with AID administrators for Latin America,

at the highest level, there is a difficult task of persuasion yet to be done. I can say that AID is not at this

time prepared to invest funds to stimulate the development of national parks or similar reserves, nor are they

ready to support ecological research in the way I have

just mentioned.

We believe that there are two ways to convince AID

to help us in some of the things we are all interested in

here. First, you have to pick and choose very carefully

such basic research projects as arc so intimately connected with economic development or of the saving of

valuable resources that it will be almost a necessity to

our foreign-aid administrators to support them—those

where the need is so clear that they almost cannot ignore it. Dr. Buechner and I have been working in this

connection with the very disastrous problems that you

all know are now taking place with Peru's marine

resources. The shocking decline of guanay birds, from

18 million a year ago to 2 or 3 million now, the serious

losses in anchovy fishes through overfishing—these are

problem areas which need much more ecologically

oriented basic research. This is perhaps a good test case

because one of the proudest accomplishments of AID

in Latin America has been the development of the

fishmeal industry in Peru and the emergence of Peru

as a major fishing nation of the world, as number one,

in fact, in terms of either tonnage or value of the catch.

So here is something vitally connected with valuable

resources. This is the kind of basic research in support

of conservation measures that may stand a chance for

AID assistance.

Second, we are working on the Amazon basin. Our

foreign aid administrators for many years have thought

about the necessity of total ecological studies and resource surveys of the Amazon basin as a sound first

step in planning for development. There have been

some false starts and there have been some political

problems in launching Amazon basin studies, mainly

because many think the only way to begin is to create

a great and ambitious Amazonian Institute de novo.

Meanwhile, we at the Smithsonian believe it is best

to go ahead working with existing Brazilian institutions, some of which are doing excellent work in the

basic ecology of the Amazon, and we hope that when

policy makers and statesmen come around to recognizing the need to increase these studies we will be able

to point to these institutions, show what a good start

they have made, and thus be able to influence orderly

and sensible planning for the Amazon basin.

Finally, as a practical suggestion, we have found that

no matter what you are talking about in basic research

or in conservation measures, AID will listen more attentively or be more interested in any project that has

a "human resource" or training potential in it.

Let's pass to some other points, to some of the educational measures that you talked about. We feel that

in the field of museum education there are perhaps

some promising developments on the horizon. This year

the House of Representatives has already passed and

the Senate is now considering a piece of legislation

called the U.S. National Museum Act. This Act requires that the Director of the U.S. National Museum,

which is of course a part of the Smithsonian, cooperate

in developing new museum exhibit techniques and pro-
NUMBER 2 6 107

fessional exchanges with individual museums or professional associations, "both here and abroad." Our

purpose in introducing this bill was to give us a base of

authority for developing exchanges of curators or museum professionals on our own, without having to beg

from foundations or from federal agencies for whatever help they can give to this neglected field. We hope

in time therefore to have funds for this kind of activity.

Dr. Ripley is intensely interested in the potential of

museums for education in developing nations. We are

trying to determine the dividing line between what can

best be taught in the classroom and what can best be

taught in a museum. This is really a pioneer research

problem, because although people talk much about

cognitive studies, or about the "open-end education"

that museums afford, there really hasn't been much

work or much experimentation in testing the full potential museums may have for education in developing

societies. I myself feel that the potential is great in

Latin America, because I have seen the educational

programs of the Departmental Museum of Cali in

Colombia which our good friend Carlos Lehmann has

built up and what they do for school children. I have

also seen, although not for many years, the Museo de

Historia Natural in Guatemala City, developed by

Professor Jorge Ibarra, here present. And so whatever

else our museum experts may decide about educational

techniques, I believe that we all agree that there is one

message that a museum can get across very easily, and

that is an appreciation among young people for the

natural resources, the wildlife—let's say for the total

natural history of their country. I think we all agree

that this can be done, and I know the Smithsonian will

look forward in the future, with the passage of the

Museum Act, to actually doing something in the way

of experimental exhibits that could be sent abroad

to help conservation education or natural history

teaching.

I think also that a vast and yet untapped source

of assistance for some of the things we all want to do

is the Peace Corps, an organization with which I was

associated during its first 2x/i years. In the beginning

the Peace Corps had a somewhat ambiguous attitude

toward conservation. I think Dr. Vogt, who is with

us today, can tell you that some of us tried to introduce

some of his conservation pamphlets in the training

courses for Peace Corps volunteers going to Latin

America. This was a small start. In the beginning days

of the Peace Corps it was rather hard to convince anyone that such activities as ecological surveys using

Peace Corps volunteers as assistants should form any

part of the Peace Corps program. Such research

projects seemed a little remote. The Peace Corps in

its first year wanted very much to get on with the

most "urgent developmental and educational tasks."

They wanted volunteers to leave monuments behind.

Now in its fifth year, I do believe the Peace Corps is

getting a little more sophisticated and there are some

very promising signs. Already, in fact, we have gotten

an affirmative reception to the idea of using Peace

Corps volunteers as observers on oceanographic ships

or fishing vessels off Peru, to identify and count the

guano-producing species and to observe their feeding

habits far out at sea. But I believe that we should go

on from there to the possibility of using Peace Corps

volunteers and their Latin American counterparts in

conservation education. They could be used at many

levels; as "circuit riders" in primary schools, helping

teachers to develop better natural history teaching

materials; in secondary schools, giving more sophisticated courses on natural resources; and in adult education through radio, television, or extension programs. This can be done and I believe there are encouraging signs that such Peace Corps programs

would be welcome in many southern hemisphere republics. I hope it will be done.

This is very briefly some of the things we are doing

on the international front.

BUECHNER. I think it is evident from this last hour

and a half that there is no dearth of ideas. There are

many avenues of approach. I think from here on it

is up to the individuals in this room to help develop a

program that will eventually achieve some of these

objectives we have in mind.

This concludes the conference.
Suggestions Emanating from the Conference on

Avifauna of Northern Latin America

The following suggestions represent a synthesis of

ideas of participants of the conference in response to

the discussions and an initial list of suggestions

developed by John W. Aldrich.

Natural Areas

The establishment of national systems of natural

areas in both public and private ownership is the key

to avifauna conservation in Latin America. To establish such systems of natural areas, the conferees agreed

that:

1. Ecosystems to be conserved in their natural state

should be identified and described as a basis for management and legislative action.

2. The highest priority should be given to forest

ecosystems through national forest policies aimed at

conserving the remaining natural forest areas. Much

of Latin American forestry is oriented around pine

plantations, which should be encouraged as a deterrent to further destruction of natural forests.

3. The establishment of national parks and wildlife

refuges should be encouraged as emergency measures

in areas where important natural habitats are in danger of being lost entirely.

4. Emphasis is required on areas of mature humid

forest, since it harbors the largest number of nonadaptable species of plants and animals that would

become extirpated with the elimination of the forest

vegetation.

5. In support of conservation measures, appeals

should be made to the pride and patriotism of the

people, landowners, and government officials, with

emphasis on their feeling for the beauty of the landscape and the uniqueness of their fauna and flora,

the need for forest preservation to maintain soil and

water, and the various economic benefits to be derived

from conservation practices.

108

Legislation

With due recognition of the difficulties of enforcing legislation in Latin American countries, the conferees recognize the importance of legislation to establish public policy.

1. The ratification of the existing conservation convention entitled "Convention on Nature and Wild Life

Preservation in the Western Hemisphere" was urged,

together with the suggestion that treaties for bird protection similar to those among Canada, the United

States, and Mexico should be extended to other

American nations.

2. Collaboration should be encouraged between nations to reduce violation of conservation laws by apprehending violators with illegally taken wildlife at border

crossings.

3. Legislation should be enacted to forbid the killing of wild birds, or the taking or destruction of their

nests, eggs, or young, except for scientific or educational purposes, or in the case of game birds, under

careful regulations that will insure reproduction, or

in the case of the species found determinal, only after

careful study and specific regulation.

4. Legislation should be enacted to stringently

protect those species in danger of extinction or local

extirpation, or of special esthetic, patriotic, economic,

or touristic interest.

5. Information on laws and enforcement methods

should be exchanged more effectively among the

American countries.

6. The U.S. Department of the Interior should be

encouraged to cooperate with Mexico and other Latin

American countries in conservation law enforcement

and other conservation management practices.

Research

Programs of research not only increase knowledge

but also focus public attention on the conservation of
NUMBER 2 6 109

avifauna through this demonstration of active concern

and interest.

1. International bird-banding programs should be

organized to stimulate interest and focus attention on

the need for protecting migratory birds, as well as to

obtain additional information on bird migration and

population biology.

2. Since conclusive information is lacking on the

changing abundance of most of approximately 400 species of birds that nest in North America for the winter,

governmental and conservation agencies of the United

States and Canada should be urged to support studies

of avian species within their respective countries to provide a quantitative basis for determining changes in

levels of populations resulting from various causes, including those in the wintering habitats of Latin

America.

Education

Education holds the greatest promise for altering the

conceptual environment of Latin America peoples toward an appreciation for wild animals and their

habitats.

1. Education designed to alter the tradition of keeping wild birds in cages and exporting these to other

countries should be fostered, with the substitution of

less damaging natural history interests.

2. Short-term international fellowships for "on the

ground" training of technicians in censusing, banding,

and other wildlife management techniques should be

promoted.

3. The department of scientific affairs (unit of education and research) of the Pan-American Union

should be encouraged in their current preparation of

educational materials on conservation.

Communication

The communication of sound knowledge to society

as an informal educational process is perhaps the most

powerful force to firmly establish effective conservation

programs.

1. The success of various countries in obtaining economic return and educational benefits from wildlife

refuges and state and national parks through tourism

and recreation should be publicized.

2. The results of studies of the effect of pesticides

on wildlife should be disseminated as widely as possible, and it should be suggested to public health

agencies that they evaluate the effects of pesticides on

ecosystems in Latin America.

3. Simple and interesting stories about animals and

particular birds, capitalizing on public interest in national birds, should be prepared in Spanish, and the

Reader's Digest should be encouraged to publish

Spanish extracts from English language books on

conservation.

4. Conservation activities and accomplishments,

both by governmental and private organizations,

should be publicized in Latin American countries.

5. "Guides to bird watching" for Latin American

countries should be prepared.

6. Attention should be focused on the desirability

of preserving particular areas to conserve avifauna and

foster increased tourism by publicizing their value for

bird watching.

7. Outstanding examples of conservation successes

should be publicized to stimulate similar action in needy

areas.

8. Since conservation consciousness frequently begins

with interest in identifying birds, conservation organizations should be urged to help finance guides to the

identification of Latin American birds.

Management

The management of avifauna is accomplished

through the enforcement of legislation, the control of

population levels through harvesting or protection, and

the manipulation of the vegetation of the avian habitat.

1. Secretary S. Dillon Ripley suggested the following resolutions to the conference, to which the conferees responded affirmatively:

"Resolve that this conference on the Avifauna of

Central and Northern Latin America, held at the

Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C., 13-

15 April 1966, urge AID (U.S. Agency for International Development) to insert a special provision or

clause in any agreement with a Latin American nation

or agency in respect to the construction of any dam or

hydroelectric facility that provisions be made for preserving and maintaining forest watersheds by providing forest guards, including their transportation,

in watershed areas associated with such construction.

These provisions shall include the negotiation of funds
110 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

to be provided either by AID or by the nation

concerned."

2. It was recommended by Lester L. Short, Jr., and

approved by the conferees that:

"Introduction of exotic birds, especially from the

Old World, can ultimately bring about the extinction of

indigenous birds that are unable to compete successfully in direct competition with the exotics. Protection

of indigenous faunas from undue competition from

exotic forms is especially important in view of the

wholesale ecological changes already affecting native

neotropical species as a result of increased human activities in Latin America."

3. In the presently occupied agricultural areas more

intensive use and greater productivity should be

fostered to relieve the pressure to convert wild lands to

agriculture.

4. The cutting of trees along watercourses, lakes,

steep slopes, and roadsides in rural areas should be

regulated to encourage the maintenance of trees in

such localities.
Appendix

Recent Progress fl969j on Legislation to Control

the Trade in Threatened Species

The conference has emphasized the role of the

animal trade in contributing to the reduction of the

numbers of various species of birds and has shown

that the trade threatens some of them with extinction.

The animal trade, like any other one, involves a

supply and demand. Most conservationists have concluded that control of the demand is the only effective

way to regulate this trade at this time.

This conclusion is based on study of the supply end

of the trade and of the difficulties encountered in attempts to regulate exploitation of the supply. In most

countries the conservationist concerned with threatened species is faced with a family of associated

problems.

First is lack of basic knowledge on the fish and wildlife involved. Adequate knowledge of the distribution,

status, and ecology of threatened species is the exception rather than the rule.

Second is the lack of adequate legislation on endangered species, or governmental support where such

legislation exists. In most countries protection of threatened species receives a very low priority compared with

urgent problems of social and economic development.

Third is the problem of enforcement, even where

adequate laws exist on the books. Adequate training

of customs and other enforcement agents is an associated problem. Few such officers are able to identify

a threatened species when they see it.

There is great variation from one country to another in legislative protection given to threatened species. An animal may be totally protected in

one country but be unprotected in the adjacent country, which then may serve as a legal outlet for specimens

illegally or unwittingly obtained from its neighbor.

Given the magnitude of these problems at the supply end of the trade, representatives from many countries have concluded that at this time the only

effective approach is at the demand end.

The conference brought out the key role of the

United States in much of this animal trade. In 1967

legislation was introduced in the Congress of the

United States aimed at controlling this aspect of the

trade. Several bills were introduced in the House of

Representatives and the Senate in the 90th Congress

during 1967 and 1968. These bills were reported out

of committee in the House as H.R. 11618, introduced

by Congressman Lennon, and in the Senate as S. 2984,

introduced by Senator Yarborough. The legislation

was passed in the House and narrowly failed in the

Senate. Subsequently early in 1969, at the start of the

91st Congress, a series of similar bills was introduced

in the House and Senate.

Although they differ in some details, all of these

bills address themselves in general to control of the

import, export, and transshipment of threatened species of wildlife. The U.S. Department of the Interior

is to be the executing agency and under the terms of

the bills, the Secretary of the Interior has the discretion to identify threatened species in consultation with

appropriate authorities. The International Union for

Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources

(IUCN) is specified as the major international authority, and the IUCN Red Book on Threatened Bird

Species is specified as the authoritative compilation

of these data.

Although the United States is in a central position

in the animal trade in the Western Hemisphere, it is

recognized that to be truly effective, control over the

trade in wild species must be international. As a result,

and in accordance with action taken at the IUCN

General Assembly in 1966 in Lucerne, Switzerland, the

International Commission on Legislation of the IUCN

111
112 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

developed a draft international convention on the

import, export, and transshipment of threatened

species. After various modifications the convention was

issued in draft form in 1967 and was submitted to the

68 nations which were member governments or in

which there were member organizations of the IUCN.

The main thrust of this convention is that the signatory

nations agreed not to import, export, or transship

threatened species of wildlife. As in the U.S. national

legislation, there are exceptions for scientific and conservation purposes and the primary authority is the

IUCN Survival Service Commission and its Red Book

compilations. Favorable replies have been received by

the IUCN from many of the nations and various

amendments have been suggested to the original draft.

As soon as sufficient replies have been received, the

IUCN plans to amend the convention accordingly and

seek international ratification.

LEE M. TALBOT

27 February 1969
Index

Abeillia abeUlei aurea, 39

Accipiter, 89

Agrarian Reform: in Panama, 43; uneconomic land-use, 52;

forests in Canal Zone, 56; natural areas, 90; destruction

of forests, 100

Agriculture: crops mentioned, 6; expansion of in El Salvador,

9; coffee and cotton fields erode, 11; decline in cultivation, 18; decline in bird habitat, 18; farm abandonment,

26; dry and moist zones, 27; wet and rain-forest zones,

28; agrarian reform in Panama, 30; Mayan type, 45;

sla&h-and-burn, 45, 49; clearing forests for, 59; cotton

in Nicaragua, 59; overgrazing and the thorn scrub, 59;

land cleared for, 61; mass production in Mexico, 63;

new land scarce, 64; cotton boom in Mexico, 65; use of

chemicals, 65; intensified, 66; unsuitable on slopes, 69;

inilpa devastating to forest, 70; crops in Colombia, 77,

78, 79; corn in cloud forest, 88; Valle del Cauca Plateau,

Colombia, 89; banana plantation in Ecuador, 91; relieve

pressure on wild lands, 110

Agriocharis ocellata, 34, 35, 47

AID: ecological advisors, 89; will not make recommendations,

91; mistakes pointed out, 92; free samples of pesticides,

97; priority to environment, 99; forest preservation, 100;

use life-zone system, 102; improvement practices, 103,

104; funding from, 106; basic research, 106

Aimophila petenica spadiconigrescens, 40

Ajaia ajaja, 89

Aldrich, John W., 13, 32, 49, 61, 92, 93, 108

Alliance for Progress: no concern for environmental deterioration, 11; benefits based on reforms, 30; potentialities of

tropics, 33; land-use capabilities, 43; priority to environment, 99; improve practices, 104

Amadon, Dean, 1, 90, 104

Amaurolimnas c. concolor, 14

Amazilia cyanocephala chlorostephana, 40

Amazona, 81

farinosa, 49

versicolor, 14

vittata, 14

American Ornithologists Union (AOU): resolution, 1; attention bird scarcity, 9; research in Latin America, 99

Anas acuta, 80

americana, 80

bahamensis, 14

clypeata, 80

discors, 40, 80

ftavirostris, 90

georgica spinicauda, 89

Andes: landscape modified to bare slopes, 13; soil erosion, 15

Anisognathus, 81

Anous tenuirostris, 46

Antilles, status of avifauna, 14

Aphelocoma unicolor griscomi, 39

Ara, 81

severa, 89

tricolor, 14

Aratinga, 81

chloroptera maugei, 14

pertinax aeruginosus, 77

Asio flammeus, 80 •

flammeus portoricensis, 14

Atitlan Lake, 36; grebe, 35, 96; natural beauty, 37; refuge, 96

Atlapetes brunneinucha alleni, 39

Audubon Society: study plots, 18; increasing tourism, 35;

magazine, 54; Isla Rasa, 66; wildlife protection law,

103; protecting condor, 105

Aythya affinis, 40

Barro Colorado Island: natural habitat, 14; endangered, 56;

future of, 57

Basileuterus belli subobscurior, 39

Bellbird, three-wattled, 59

Beltran, 64

Benitez, Jaime, 6, 7

Bird-banding, research, 109

Bird guides: Olrog's Argentina, 54; not available, 54; de

Schauensee's birds of Colombia, 54; attractive pictures

needed, 70; need for in Spanish, 97; begin working on,

98; color plates, 100; prepare for Latin America, 109

Birds, captured: cagebird trade, 12, 51, 81; native birds in

cages, 75; ornament in Colombian homes, 78; commerce in, 90, 97; pressure on red siskin, 92; tradition of,

94; money in, 100; traffic in, 103; alter tradition, 109;

trade in, 111. See also Conservation

Birds, game: domesticate, 84, 87

Birds, migratory: unprotected on winter range, 8; U.S.-

Mexico treaty, 9; less affected than endemics, 13; population changes, 17; measuring abundance, 18; mostly

forest-inhabiting, 18; birds of prey, 21; documenting

population changes, 24; utilize secondary forest, 40; increasing in Bermuda, 42; not hurt by habitat changes,

43; reduction by hurricane, 47; flexible habitat requirements, 50, 73; tolerance for many habitats, 61; not

endangered, 70, 93; winter residents in Colombia, 77;

research by U.S., 92; banding program for, 95

Birds, resident: threatened, 28; competition on winter range,

40; in trouble, 73; suffer more than migrants, 80; in

precarious situations, 93; protection from exotics, 110

Bobwhite, 21, 25; black-throated, 60

Bond, James, 14,41,43

Booby: red-footed, 46; aided by refuge, 48

113
114 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

British Honduras, 47

Brotogeris, 81

Bubulcus ibis, 79

Buchinger, Maria, 15, 16,31,33,37,55,57,91,97, 103

Budowski, Gerardo, 9

Buechner, Helmut K., 90, 93, 98, 99, 101, 102, 105, 107

Bunting, indigo, 20, 26, 42

Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife: information on

migration, 17; study plots, 18; measuring population

changes, 21

Burhinus bistriatus, 35, 81

Buteo, 89

swainsoni, 80

Buteogallus urubitinga, 89

Buthraupis eximia, 79

Cacicus, 81

Cahalane, Victor H., 1, 99

Cairina moschata, 40, 80, 89

Canal Zone, forest reserves, 56, 57

Canal Zone Biological Area, Barro Colorado Island, 55

Caprimulgus carolinensis, 80

Casmerodius albus, 81, 89

Cassidix nicaraguensis, 60

Cathartes aura, 79

burrovianus, 79

Catharus ustulatus, 80

Census technique, 18, 19, 20, 21, 25

Centurus superciliaris bahamensis, 14

superciliaris nyeanus, 14

Cephalopterus, 81

Cerro Santa Barbara, 38, 39, 42

Chachalaca, 35, 47, 59, 60

Chamaepetes goudotii, 77

unicolor, 51

Charadrius wilsonia, 46

Chat, yellow-breasted, 20

Chauna chavaria, 77

Chavarria, 77

Chlorophanes spiza, 49

Chondrohierax uncinatus mirus, 14

Chordeiles acutipennis, 80

Chubbia jamesoni, 90

Cissopis leveriana, 81

Clarin, 12

Clement, Roland C, 68, 96, 97, 98

Climate, cycle of, 52

Coccyzus americanus, 80

pumilus, 88

Colibri coruscans, 83

Colinus cristatus, 40, 81, 84

nigrogularis, 60, 65

nigrogularis segoviensis, 40

Columba cayennensis, 40, 89

fasciata, 81

Columbigallina talpacoti, 88

Compsocoma, 81

flavinucha, 79

Condor: attracts concern, 8, 78, 79; protection of, 105

Conference on Human Conservation in Central America:

report on energy needs, 12

Conservation: conference to assess, 1; concept of, 3; ecosystem

survival, 7; Latin American Committee on National

Parks, 15; bird preservation, 30; laws in British Honduras, 49; preserve water sources, 52; education in

schools, 54; laws needed, 55; national pride appeal, 61;

in Mexico, 63; phases of, 64; scientific management

resources, 68; complex environments in Mexico, 69;

books on needed, 72; practical aspects, 74; bird importation, 76; law adoption, 91, 92; protection of natural

resources, 93; laws and regulations interchange, 94; disseminating law information, 95; sponsor local institutions, 97; interchange of biologists, 99; economic value,

100; education, 101; international collaboration on laws,

108; appeal to economics and emotion, 108; ratification

of convention, 108; See also Hunting and Vegetation.

Conservation Foundation: help to Cali Museum, 32; comic

books, 72

Coragyps atratus, 79

Cormorant, double-crested, 46

Cotinga, 81

Cowbirds, parasitism, 17, 71

Crane, whooping, 73

Crax alec tor, 81

globicera, 35

rubra, 35, 40, 47, 51, 59, 65, 80

Crossbill, red, 62

Crotophaga ani, 79

sulcirostris, 79

Crypturellus soui, 79

Cuckoo, yellow-billed, 20

Curassow, great, 47, 51, 59, 60

Cyanolyca cucullata hondurensis, 39

Cypturellus soui, 89

Dactylortyx thoracicus, 39

Darien, 52

Dario, Ruben, 61, 100

Dendrocygna arborea, 14

autumnalis, 40, 77

bicolor, 40

Dendroica dominica, 48

fusca, 80

p. petechia, 14

virens, 48

De Schauensee, Rodolphe Meyer, 35; The Birds of Colombia,

78:

Dolichonyx oryzivorus, 80

Donis, C. A., 11

Dorney, Robert S., 93

Dove, mourning, 21, 67

Dove, white-winged, 21, 40, 65, 67, 71, 95

Dryocopus, 81

Dubusia, 81

taeniata, 79

Duck, tree, 77

Dugand, Armando, 84
NUMBER 26 115

Eagles shot, 51

Economics: population growth block, 13; pressures, 29; loss

from soil erosion, 53; pollution associated with, 64; in

Mexico, 66, 95; wildlife value, 67; resource management,

68; main concern in Mexico, 74; incentives, 93; value

of natural resources, 94

Ecosystem: concept of, 3; human, 4; pesticide studies needed,

12; research, 83; studies before intervention, 91; avifauna

only one component, 93

Education: of squatters, 32; television on conservation, 55;

of public, 68; need of in Mexico, 69; comic books, 72;

in Venezuela, 75; of nature, 82, 89; on ecology, 90; by

all means, 93; films, 94; fellowships, 95; in conservation,

96; program for, 98; taxidermy training, 100; mass

media, 103; museums, 106; altering conceptual environment, 109; short-term fellowships, 109; communication

to society, 109

Egrets, 21; snowy, 46; cattle, 79; great, 81

Egretta thula, 46

Eisenmann, Eugene, 30, 33, 43, 49, 55, 56, 57, 61, 67, 73, 91,

104

Elanoides forficatus, 49

Electron carinatum, 38

El Salto del Rio Naranja, 37

El Salvador, birds scarce, 9

Empidonax euleri johnstonei, 14

Endangered species: importation of, 100; legislation on, 111

Environment: perceptual concept of, 3, 4; operational

concept of, 4; conceptual, 5, 67, 93; destruction of, 9,

14; changed by man, 17, 79; reducing variety, 51; for

human life, 64; industrial pollution, 65; pressure on accelerating, 72; man's influence frightening, 75; birds

adapt cultivation, 79; birds foreshadow deterioration, 104

Erosion: of watersheds, 12; El Salvador, 14; Andes, 15;

Oaxaca, 71; violent in Mexico, 72; on steep slopes, 88.

See also Soil

Euphonia, 81

Faisan de cuerno, 35

Falco albigularis, 89

sparverius nicaraguensis, 40

Falcon, peregrine, 20

Felis panthera, 89

Finch, seed, 47, 60

Fire: not a problem, 28; aids pine savanna, 39, 40; lightning,

46, 60; escape from slash-and-burn, 48; burning savanna,

59, 60, 88; consume forest fringes, 76; natural causes, 79

Flamingos, 83, 103

Flycatchers, 50; great-crested, 18, 20; least, 20; scissor-tailed,

58, 61

Forest: ecosystem concept of, 4; disturbance to tropical dry

and subtropical moist, 11; deforestation, 12, 35; oak

woods and corn, 15; scarce on fertile land, 27; tree crops

as food, 33; cloud reduced, 34; being destroyed for corn,

35; cleared for coffee, 35; broad-leaf evergreen disappearing, 38; logging, 39; destroyed on coastal plain, 39;

cloud forest in Honduras, 39; Olancho rain forest in

Honduras, 39; destruction of, 41, 88; undisturbed in

British Honduras, 45; depletion of, 45; impenetrable

after hurricane, 47; disappearing rapidly, 48; mahogany

and pine replanted, 49; destruction of, 49, 50; openings

aid turkeys, 49; destruction of more important than

hunting, 51; reestablishment of, 52; aboriginal clearings

in Panama, 52; food from tree crops, 53; in Nicaragua,

58; cloud forest disappearing rapidly, 59; clearing of,

59, 79; cleared for crops, 65; Yucatan, 70; Yucatan

rain forest, 71; reforestation exotics, 78; destruction bird

habitat, 78; converted into coffee, 79; devastation of, 82;

57 birds lost by deforestation, 86; cut and burned, 87;

cloud, 88; planting exotic species, 89; reforest with native trees, 97; management system needed, 104, 105;

preserve existing associations, 105; priority habitat, 108;

maintenance of, 110. See also Pines and Vegetation

Formicarius analis, 49

For pus, 81

Fosberg, F. Raymond, 4, 16, 30, 37, 73, 92, 96, 102, 105

Fungicides, common practice, 79

Gampsonyx swainsonii, 60

Gill, Tom, 64

Godman, Frederick Ducane, 34

Goose, white-fronted, 21

Gorgas Memorial Laboratory, Panamanian scientists, 55

Grackle, Nicaraguan, 60

Graham, Edward H., 93

Grallaria quitensis, 79

Greenway, James C, Jr., 15, 36

Griscom, Ludlow, 34, 36

Guan: crested, 47, 51, 59, 60, 72; scarcest game bird, 49;

black, 51; sickle-winged, 77

Gull, Heermann, 66, 71

Habitat: changes in Latin America, 1; marshes drying up,

11; destruction of, 15, 28, 88; changes in, 17; changes

with agriculture, 18; sampling for census, 18; managed

for Kirtland warbler, 20; preservation of, 41, 51, 59,

75, 100; preservation critical, 42; undisturbed, 45; preserving for birds, 53; preservation depends on wealthy,

61; modification of, 66, 82; buying brushland, 67; preserve array species, 73; man-made transformations, 78;

draining of lakes, 79; become decimated, 81; forest

planting rebuilds, 97; preservation in British Honduras,

98; of primary concern, 98, 99; preservation essential,

104. See also Environment

Harpia harpyja, 81

Hawks: pine, 41; shot, 51; disappearing, 65

Herbicides: no problem in British Honduras, 48; in Colombia, 78; common practice, 79

Hernandez Corzo, Rodolfo, 67, 68, 70, 72, 73, 76, 93, 96, 100

Herons, 21

Holdridge, Leslie R., 30, 31, 32, 33, 38, 51, 55, 102, 103

House sparrow, competition, 17

Howell, Thomas R., 14, 41, 43, 49, 61, 91, 99, 104

Hummingbird, 39, 42, 81; ruby-throated, 20

Humphrey, Philip S., 92, 106
116

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

Hunting: game birds suffer, 12; by slingshot, 12, 40, 42, 51,

57, 72, 73; by foreigners, 29; caused little change, 41;

law enforcement, 42; in British Honduras, 47; unimportant, 48; harmful effects, 50; laws needed, 55; little

for sport, 60; Mexican ranchers invite, 67; problem in

Mexico, 71; horned guan, 72; endangering birds, 80, 81;

food and caging, 81, 82; control of, 83; lack of regulations, 89; American tourists fined, 95

Hurricane: brought Sicalis to Tobago, 15; in British Honduras, 46; reduction in birds, 47; destruction to forests,

47; important factors, 48; destruction natural, 49

Hydrochaerus hydrochoeris, 89

Hydroelectric: resources in Mexico, 15; project in Honduras,

41

Ibarra, Jorge A., 15, 16, 36, 37, 42, 48, 55, 72, 76, 96, 98, 105

Icterus, 81

spurius, 47

Insecticides: inhibiting birds, 1; DDT, 9, 91; increased use

of, 11; excessive use of, 36; filter into streams, 59; pearl

kite affected by, 60; in Colombia, 78; contaminate water,

79; common practice, 79; banning of, 82; birds control

insects, 83; fish in rivers died, 91; dangerous to birds,

96; effects en ecosystem, 99

Interamerican Conference of the Conservation of Renewable

Natural Resources of 1948: worthless, 12

International Biological Program: description of, 101, 102

International Committee for Bird Protection, 99

International Council for Bird Preservation, 54, 76; model

law, 103

International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural

Resources (IUCN): concerned with bird preservation,

12; Caracas meeting, 75; Red Book, 90; list of parks

and reserves, 102; authority on threatened species, 111,

112

Jabiru, 78

mycteria, 78,81

Kite, pearl, 60

Lampornis amethystinus nobilis, 39

sybillae, 39

Lamprolaima rhami saturatior, 39

Lanio aurantius, 49

Larus heermanni, 66, 71

Latin American Committee on National Parks, 15

Law, hard to enforce, 53

Lehmann; Carlos, 13, 14, 15, 16, 30, 32, 33, 54, 72, 87, 90,

91,97,98

Leistes militaris, 79, 88

Leopold, Wildlife of Mexico, 65

Leptopogon amaurocephalus, 49

Leptotila verreauxi, 81

Leucopeza semperi, 14

Leucophyoyx thula, 89

Life zones, in Colombia, 77

Lipaugus unirufus, 49

Loxigilla portoricensis grandis, 14

MacArthur, Robert, 1

Macaws, for caging, 51

Mancolola, 35

Margarops fuscatus, 14

Martin, black, 34

Maya: effect on environment, 71; bird evolution, 9

Meadowlark, common, 60

Meleagris gallopavo, 84

Merganetta armata, 89

colombiana, 90

Micrastur ruficollis, 49

Mimocichla ravida, 14

Mirnus gilvus, 81

Mitu salvini, 81

tomentosa, 81

Mniotilta varia, 72

Molothrus, 81

bonarensis, 80

Monroe, Jr., Burt L., 41, 42,43

Motmot, 38

Moynihan, Martin H., 55, 56, 57

Myadestes sp., 12

Mycteria americana, 89

Myiobius sulphureipygius, 49

ecuadatus miserabilis, 78

National Audubon Society. See Audubon Society

National Parks: environmental preservation, 13; La Reserva

de la Macarena, 15; Parque Nacional de Los Faralloncs

de Cali, 15; wardens, 16; squatters out, 16; bootlegging

timber, 31; exploitation of, 32; squatters educated, 32;

Tikal, 36; in Canal Zone, 56; national pride appeal, 61;

outstanding in Venezuela, 76; needed in Colombia, 90;

importance of, 96; protecting avifauna, 97; dedication

to Rubin Dario, 100; entrance fee, 100; weekend trips,

103; establishment of encouraged, 108

National Science Foundation: need for ecosystem research,

13; ecological research, 99

Natural areas; saving, 14; in Colombia, 15; Nature Conservancy, 16; needed in life-zones, 29; on big farms, 30;

destroyed in Costa Rica, 31; privately sponsored, 31;

Sierra de la Macarena, 32; along Pan American highways, 37; rain forests in British Honduras, 48; squatters

invade, 54; highly desirable, 54; support of Nicaraguan

leaders, 61; needed in Colombia, 90; protection of avifauna, 94; establishment of, 100; wealthy influential,

100; key to avifauna conservation, 108; identify and

describe, 108. See also National parks

Nature Conservancy: natural areas, 16; network of natural

areas, 31; Latin American Desk, 32; privately owned

areas, 104

Nature Protection Treaty of 1940, ignored, 12

Nickell, Walter, 47, 49

Noddy, black, 46

Nothocercus, 51

Odontophorus, 51

erythrops verecundus, 39

Off-short islands, bird nesting, 46

Olancho, largest rain forest, 39

Olivares, Antonio, 87

Olrog, C. C, Argentine bird guide, 54

Oreophasis derbianus, 35, 65

Oriole, orchard, 47
NUMBER 26 117

Ortalis, 59

guttata, 81

vetula, 40

vetula deschauenseei, 40

vetula intermedia, 35

Oryzoborus nuttingi, 60

Ovenbird, 18, 20

Oxyura jamaicensis, 14

Pan American Union, conservation education, 109

Panyptila sanctihieronymi, 34

Parrot, 14, 77; sanctuary in Puerto Rico, 105

Pavo de cacho, 35

Pauxi pauxi, 81

Paynter, Jr., Raymond A, 1, 36

Peace Corps: ecological surveys, 107; improve practices, 107

Penelope jacquacu, 81

purpurascens, 35, 40, 47, 51, 59, 65

Pesticides: ecosystem study needed, 12; aerial spraying, 15,

89; DDT, 17; in prey species, 20; in Honduras, 41; no

problem in British Honduras, 48; growing application,

64; effect on doves, 65; need for training, 95; birds as, 96

Peterson, Roger T., 13, 15, 25, 32, 49, 73, 90, 92, 98

Pewee, eastern wood, 18, 20

Phalacrocorax auritus, 46

Phalcoboenus megalopterus, 88

Pharomachrus, 81

mocinno, 34,38,51,59

Pheasant, 25; horned, 35

Phelps, Jr., William H., 14, 32, 76, 92, 105

Pheucticus aureoventris, 80

Phillips, Allan, 14, 25, 72, 73

Phloeoceastes, 81

Phoenicopterus ruber, 83

Piculus, 81

simplex allophyeus, 39

Pigeons, 40, 60; band-tailed, 21; pale-vented, 40

Pines: destruction of, 41; extermination of thrush, 41; preferred by warblers, 48; highlands, 58; warblers competitive, 61; adequate for warblers, 62; western migrants, 71

Pine savanna: result of fire, 39; in British Honduras, 45; periodic burning, 42, 46; in Nicaragua, 58; lumbered, 59;

quail abundant in, 60. See also Pines and Fire

Pintail, 21

Pionus, 81

Pipile cumanensis, 81

Pipra mentalis, 49

Piranga flava savannarum, 40

rubra, 80

Pittier, Henri, 76

Plover, wilson, 46

Podilymbus gigas, 36

podiceps, 79

Pollution: changed environments of birds, 17; oil spill, 76

Population birds: altered by environmental changes, 17; research on changes, 109

Population, human: growth problem, 7; central Mexico, 9;

doubling rates in Central America, 10; densities of in

Central America, 11; pyramided, 11; control, 13; pressure on birds, 12; rapid growth, 27, 29; upswing, 38;

birth control, 43; increasing in British Honduras, 49;

expansion, 53; growth in Mexico, 63, 64, 66, 72; explosion in Latin America, 99

Procnias tricarunculata, 59

Psophia crepitans, 81

Pterodroms hasitata caribbaea, 14

Ptiloscelys resplendent, 89

Puerto Rico, nature study in schools, 7

Pyrocephalus rubinus pinicola, 40

Quail: singing, 39; wood, 51; gambel, 67

Quetzal, 12, 34, 35, 36, 38, 42, 51, 59, 73, 87, 90, 96; largest

population of, 39

Ramphastos, 81

Ramphocelus dimidiatus, 79

Ramphocinclus b. brachyurus, 14

Readers Digest: as model, 98; Spanish proceedings of conference, 103; Spanish extracts on conservation, 109

Redstart, 42, 71

Reforestation, 42

Rhytipterna holerythra, 49

Ripley, S. Dillon: preface, 1; recommendations, 99; more

meetings, 104; promote ecological surveys, 106; museum

education, 107; watershed resolution, 109

Ritterbush, Philip, 32, 33

Robbins, Chandler S., 25

Rockefeller, Laurance, 16

Rupicola peruviana, 81

rupicola, 81

Russell, Stephen M., 48, 49, 98, 100

Sarcoramphus papa, 81, 89

Salvin, Osbert, 34

Scaup, lesser, 21,40,50

Seiurus noveboracensis, 72

Setophaga ruticilta, 72

Shorebirds, flood-fallow aids, 41

Short, Lester L., 26, 73,98

Shoveler, 21

Siala sialis caribaea, 40

Sicalis, 81

flaveola, 15

Siphonorhis americanus, 14

Skutch, Alexander F., 11

Slud, Paul, 29

Smithsonian Institution: conservation, 3; proposal on Canal

Zone, 56, 57; hospitality, 99; in Panama, 104; international cooperation, 105; exhibits abroad, 107

Soil: degradation of, 11; relation to vegetation, 27; tree crops

to preserve, 33; destruction of, 51; too depleted for

farming, 52; on steep slopes, 53; eroded support pines,

62; forest planting protects, 97. See also Erosion.

Speotyto cunicularia amaura, 14

cunicularia guadeloupensis, 14

Spiza americana, 80

Sporophila, 79, 81

torqueola, 47

Sprunt, IV, Alexander, 103

Squatters, 37; burn trees, 51; invade natural areas, 54; on

farms, 57
118 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY

Sterna albifrons, 46

anaethetus, 46

dougallii, 46

Sturnella magna, 60, 79

Sula sula, 46

Swallow: bank, 21; cliff, 21; chimney, 25

Synallaxis, 79

Tachyphonus rufus, 79

Talbot, Lee M., 101, 102

Tanager: scarlet, 18; summer, 18; western, 58

Teal, blue-winged, 21,40, 50

Terns, 71: bridled, 46; least, 46; roseate, 46; sandwich, 46;

elegant, 66

Texcoco Lake, wiped out, 66

Thalasseus elegans, 66

sandvicensis, 46

Thrasher, pearly-eyed, 14

Thraupis episcopus, 81

palmarum, 81

Threatened species. See Endangered species

Thrush: wood, 18, 20; La Selle, extermination of, 41; water,

72

Thryothorus maculipectus, 71

Tiburon Island, refuge, 67

Tinamous, 47, 48, 51, 84, 89; hunting of, 49

Tinamus major, 47,49, 65, 80

major percautus, 35

tao, 80

Torcazas, 89

Tosi, J. A., 28

Toucan, 89

Toucanets, 14

Tourists: growing number of, 35; attraction of, 37; stimulation of tourism, 52; improvement of tourism, 66; export

permits, 94; hunting in Mexico, 95; smuggling, 97; increase in tourism, 97

Troglodytes aedon, 83

aedon guadeloupensis, 14

aedon martinicensis, 14

aedon mesoleucus, 14

rufociliatus rehni, 39

Trogons, 14, 81

Tropical Science Center, in Costa Rica, 29, 31

Turdus albicollis, 49

fuscater, 81

Turkey: horned, 35; ocellated, 34, 35, 47, 65; law means

nothing, 48; enforcing laws for ocellated, 49; exterminated, 89

Turpial, 75

Turrialba, 55

Tyrannus tyrannus, 80

Tyrant, short-tailed pygmy, 78

United Nations, control trade in birds, 99

U.S. Department of the Interior: bird protection, 99; law

enforcement, 108; threatened species, 111. See also Bureau of Sports Fisheries and Wildlife

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, surveys and censuses, 92

U.S. National Museum Act, legislation, 106

U.S. State Department: failed to publish in Spanish, 12;

control American hunters, 99

Veery, 20

Vegetation: replacement of, 6; degradation, 11, 28; back to

woody growth, 18; mangrove thickets, 12; succession

slow in tropics, 13; succession fails, 13; no succession,

15; clearing of woody growth, 20; life-zone units, 27,

28; preservation of natural areas, 28

Vegetation: Wet and Rain Forest, 28; population pressure

on, 28; second growth, 28; mature lack of, 28; Guatemala 1857, 34; disappeared along Guatemalan road,

35; history in British Honduras, 45; succession in British

Honduras, 46; study by Lundell, 49; brush-low-tree

succession, 50; ability to regenerate, 51; protect and enrich soil, 53; pine forests persistent, 62; brushland to

cotton, 65; marshes in Mexico, 66; for dove reproduction, 67; types in Mexico, 69; primeval in Yucatan, 70;

desertization in Oaxaca, 71; substrate for birds, 73;

Bogota savanna, 79, 80, 83; conversion of, 80. See

also Forest and Pine Savanna

Vireo: red-eyed, 18, 20, 25; solitary, 20; yellow-throated,

21

Vogt, William: stimulated conference, 1, 13, 14, 15, 30, 31,

35, 37, 43, 44, 64, 72, 75, 76, 91, 92, 93, 96, 98, 99

Volatinia jacarina, 79

Vultur gryphus, 78, 91

Warblers: winter range, 1; may not suffer, 11; Kirtland, concern for winter range, 11; Kirtland, parks protect, 13;

Kirtland, in Michigan, 17; hooded, 18, 58; magnolia, 18,

20, 58; Kirtland, 20, 43; black-and-white, 20, 72; blackburnian, 20, 25; black-throated blue, 20; black-throated

green, 20; Canada, 20; golden-cheeked, 20; wood, 42,

50; green, 48; yellow-throated, 48; chestnut-sided, 58;

Townsend, 58; hermit, 58; Kentucky, 58; competition

with migrants, 61; in pine forests, 62; grace, 62; in mangroves, 71; Kirtland, management breeding habitats, 105

Warner, William, 105

Washington Convention of 1940, 97

Waterfowl, 21, 40, 41; killing, 8; habitat increased temporarily, 39; in British Honduras, 47; in Nicaragua, 58, 59;

lakes in Mexico, 64, 65; industrial wastes, 66; lakes

drained in Mexico, 66

Watershed: preserved in Honduras, 38; for hydroelectric

project, 41; preserved above towns, 43; management

problems, 48; importance of, 89

Watersheds: lack of protection, 15; protection of, 30, 75;

water shortage, 53

West Indies, status of avifauna, 14

Wetmore, Alexander, 43, 44, 49, 50, 55, 57, 72, 77, 97

Wildlife Management Institute: aid to Mexico, 67; hunting

in Mexico, 95

Wingate, David B., 42

Winter habitats, research on, 99

Winter range: limiting Kirtland warbler, 1; Kirtland warbler,

11; conditions on, 20; no affect on waterfowl, 21; habitat

changes, 42; not limiting, 43; migrants not restricted, 48;

territorialism on, 61; birds not vulnerable on, 70
NUMBER 26 119

Woodcock, 25, 90

World Bank, credit for natural areas, 33

World Wildlife Fund: concerned with bird preservation, 12:

in Colombia, 16; preserving Atitlan grebe, 36, 96

Wren: house, 20; spotted-breasted, 71

Yellowthroat, 20, 26

Zambullidor, 35, 36

Zenaida asiatica, 40, 71

aunculata, 81

Zonotrichia capensis, 80
Publication in Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology

Manuscripts for serial publications are accepted by the Smithsonian Institution Press, subject

to substantive review, only through departments of the various Smithsonian museums. NonSmithsonian authors should address inquiries to the appropriate department. If submission is

invited, the following format requirements of the Press will govern the preparation of copy.

(An instruction sheet for the preparation of illustrations is available from the Press on request.)

Copy must be typewritten, double-spaced, on one side of standard white bond paper, with

V/2" top and left margins, submitted in ribbon copy with a carbon or duplicate, and accompanied

by the original artwork. Duplicate copies of all material, including illustrations, should be retained

by the author. There may be several paragraphs to a page, but each page should begin with a new

paragraph. Number consecutively all pages, including title page, abstract, text, literature cited,

legends, and tables. The minimum length is 30 pages of typescript and illustrations.

The title should be complete and clear for easy indexing by abstracting services. Taxonomic

titles will carry a final line indicating the higher categories to which the taxon is referable:

"(Hymenoptera: Sphecidae)." Include an abstract as an introductory part of the text. Identify

the author on the first page of text with an unnumbered footnote that includes his professional

mailing address. A table of contents is optional. An index, if required, may be supplied by the

author when he returns page proof.

Two headings are used: (1) text heads (boldface in print) for major sections and chapters

and (2) paragraph sideheads (caps and small caps in print) for subdivisions. Further headings

may be worked out with the editor.

In taxonomic keys, number only the first item of each couplet; if there is only one couplet,

omit the number. For easy reference, number also the taxa and their corresponding headings

throughout the text; do not incorporate page references in the key.

In synonymy, use the short form (taxon, author, date, page) with a full reference at the end

of the paper under "Literature Cited." Begin each taxon at the left margin with subsequent lines

indented about three spaces. Within a taxon, use a period-dash (.—) to separate each reference.

Enclose with square brackets any annotation in or at the end of the taxon. For references within

the text, use the author-date system: "(Jones, 1910)" or "Jones (1910)." If the reference is

expanded, abbreviate the data: "Jones (1910, p. 122, pi. 20: fig. 1)."

Simple tabulations in the text (e.g., columns of data) may carry headings or not, but they

should not contain rules. Formal tables must be submitted as pages separate from the text, and

each table, no matter how large, should be pasted up as a single sheet of copy.

For measurements and weights, use the metric system instead of (or in addition to) the

English system.

Illustrations (line drawings, maps, photographs, shaded drawings) can be intermixed

throughout the printed text. They will be termed Figures and should be numbered consecutively;

however, if a group of figures is treated as a single figure, the individual components should be

indicated by lowercase italic letters on the illustration, in the legend, and in text references:

"Figure 96." If illustrations (usually tone photographs) are printed separately from the text as

full pages on a different stock of paper, they will be termed Plates, and individual components

should be lettered (Plate 9b) but may be numbered (Plate 9: figure 2). Never combine the

numbering system of text illustrations with that of plate illustrations. Submit all legends on pages

separate from the text and not attached to the artwork.

In the bibliography (usually called "Literature Cited"), spell out book, journal, and article

titles, using initial caps with all words except minor terms such as "and, of, the." (For capitalization of titles in foreign languages, follow the national practice of each language.) Underscore

(for italics) book and journal titles. Use the colon-parentheses system for volume, number, and

page citations: "10(2) :5-9." Spell out such words as "figures" and "plates" (or "pages" when

used alone).

For free copies of his own paper, a Smithsonian author should indicate his requirements on

"Form 36" (submitted to the Press with the manuscript). A non-Smithsonian author will receive

50 free copies; order forms for quantities above this amount with instructions for payment will be

supplied when page proof is forwarded.

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1970 O 336-550