Is the Helmeted Honeyeater Doomed? by ROY P
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Vol. 3 JUNE 30, 1967 No. 1 Is the Helmeted Honeyeater Doomed? By ROY P. COOPER, Melbourne In 1867 the first coloured plate, with a full description of the Helmeted Honeyeater was published. It was included by John Gould in the Supplement to his monumental work on the Birds of Australia, and the date of publication was December 1, 1867. Now, in the centenary year of its discovery, this rare and beautiful Honeyeater is in great danger of becoming extinct. The dire foreboding that is indicated in the heading on this page is very real, and unless positive steps are taken to protect this species it could become another one of the many species of Australian birds and animals that have been wiped out by the interference of civilisation. The history of the Helmeted Honeyeater over the past one hundred years, including the publishing of two separate descrip tions, by Gould in London and McCoy in Melbourne, on the same day, is full of interest. However, it will not be told in this paper, as it is the subject of another article that is published in the current issue of The Victorian Naturalist; a journal in which so much of the early history of the Helmeted Honeyeater was published. This paper will describe in general terms the biology and ecology of the species as far as is known today, and will indicate the manner in which the Helmeted Honeyeater can be preserved. Meliphaga mssir/lix, the name under which the Helmeted Honey eater is known throughout the world today, is the only indigenous species to be confined to Victoria. Not only is it restricted to this State, but its range is within a very small area, some thirty miles east of Melbourne. TAXONOMY When Sir William Jardine "obtained" the first specimen of the Helmeted Honeyeater he gave it the name of Ptilotis cassidix, and it was with this title that Gould presented it at the meeting of the Zoological Society of London. Twelve months later, when Gould described the Honeyeater in the Supplement he retained this name, but, on the same day, December 1, 1867, Professor F . McCoy also described the new species and gave it the name of Ptilotis leadbeateri. As Gould's description was accompanied by a figure it was accepted before that of McCoy, and the type specimen was labelled Ptilotis cassidix. 2 COOPER, The Helmeted Honeyeater [ Bird Watcher Regarding the crest and the dimorphic variation in the coloura tion of the plumage, McCoy remarked- "The subcristate head, and the female differing in colour from the male, suggests a new subgeneric section for this fine bird". In his 1908 List of birds, G. M. Mathews accepted Ptilotis cassidix for the Helmeted Honeyeater, but later he indicated that he intended to recognise the differences in crest and plumage by proposing Lophoptilotis as a new genus to accept P. cassidix. The new genus was declared by Mathews in his 1913 List, and retained in the 1931 List. However, when The Official Checklist of the Birdls of Australia was published in 1926, the Committee favoured large genera and the Helmeted Honeyeater was given the generic name of Meliphaga. Mathews agreed to accept the large genera conditional that the numerous generic names as used in his lists were included as subgenera. "The subgeneric names have been inserted in the Checklist in the form prescribed by the International Rules, e.g. Meliphaga (Lophoptilotis) cassidix." The 1926 Checklist Committee considered that the Helmeted Honeyeater was an older form than the Yellow-tufted Honeyeater, M elephaga melanops, and accordingly placed it before the latter species in Checklist order. This relationship was confirmed by G . Mack, who stated "it would appear that melanops is the younger, more virile species and that cassidix approaches nearer to the original stock" (Vic. Nat. 50: 156). Gould and Mathews also placed cassidix before melanops. N. A. Wakefield holds a different opinion to the Checklist Committee, Gould, Mathews and Mack, and states "In view of the restricted habitat of this species and its apparent genetic instability (e.g. occasional melanism), it is probable that cassidix originated, by mutation, from the older stock (melanops) after the latter had become established in south-eastern Australia". (Emu, 58 : 191). IDENTIFICATION Considerable confusion exists regarding the identification of the Helmeted Honeyeater from the Yellow-tufted Honeyeater. Both species are similar in general colouration and, although there are va riances in the adult males between each species, the females and immature males are less clearly marked. The main difference lies in the helmet or crest on the forehead and the front of the crown. This appendage is clearly shown in the coloured plates, but when away from the nest the crest is lowered and then other markings must be used to separate the species. The Yellow-tufted Honeyeater does not have a crest, although one writer states that it has a minor "helmet". G. Mack, a museum taxonomist, definitely refutes this statement, and quotes Mathews in his description of the new genera, who stated "The species known as melanops seems congeneric, differing only in the Plate 2 Helmeted Honeyeater - male Photo by Roy P. Cooper June ] COOPER, The Helmeted Honeyeater 5 1967 slightly smaller size and subcrest not pronounced. Nothing could be further from actual fact than the above statement. M. melanops has not the slightest indication of a crest, and the sexes are alike in colouring." The female cassidix differs from the male by having a smaller crest, with the general colours of the body not so distinct. How ever, there is no hard and fast rule that governs all the birds of the same species and I have found that a bright female can often be as colourful as a dull coloured male. The coloured photographs shown in Plates 2 and 3 give a much clearer picture of the plumage pattern and colouring of the Helmeted Honeyeater than can be conveyed in words. Contrary to accepted principles the two birds shown in these plates are the pair that was in attendance at the nest. I could not tell them apart, but after some eight hours in photographing and studying the birds it was possible to know each bird by its behaviour. Initially, when I was setting up the camera, both birds came with large insects in their bills and perched within a few feet of the nest. When all was ready I crouched behind the camera and the birds began to move in to feed the nestlings. The first bird came around the front of the nest and after feeding the young birds it posed for its photo (Plate 2). My movements to reset the camera kept the second bird still until I crouched down once more. T his bird then came in from the back of the nest and after feeding the nestling began to brood them, and it is shown on Plate 3. After several visits it was possible to tell the birds apart by their line of approach through the branches of the large acacia tree in which the nest was placed. The two points of entry into the tree were about four feet apart; the birds flying across a cleared area to enter the foliage. They always approached the tree from the left hand side facing me, and the bird on the front track perched on the front of the nest and the bird further away came in the back of the nest and after feeding the youngsters, settled on them to brood. Unfortunately, the coloured plates of Mathews and Cayley show the birds with a full crest that extends from the forehead to the back of the crown. On the other hand Gould does not show a crest but merely a slight bump in front of the forehead. Again the photographs in Plates 2 and 3 will show the actual size and shape of the helmet. DISTRIBUTION Originally the Helmeted Honeyeater was considered to range over a large part of Gippsland, and specimens in museums have been taken from Western Port, Bass River, Yarrum, Outtrum, Woori Yallock Creek, Yellingbo, Cockatoo Creek, Lilydale, Healesville, the Upper Yarra district, Strezlecki Ranges and Beaconsfield. T here were two apparently reliable records from Woods Point 6 COOPER, The Helmeted Honeyeater [ Bird Watcher and Nowa Nowa, so it appeared that the species had ample numbers and area in which to survive. It would appear that the type locality was the Bass River district. Many years after the bird had been described, A. I . North, the Ornithologist at the Australian Museum, Sydney, visited the Bass River area and the Strezlecki Range on a collecting trip. His surprise at the number of Helmeted Honeyeaters that were in the area is shown in his writings. "At the time of my first visit only small clearings had been made in the virgin undergrowth of these heavily timbered ranges, and on my arrival at Childers I was surprised to find that Ptilotis cassidix was without exception the commonest bird in the bush. For a distance of twenty miles they were also noted along McDonald's Track on the top of the range. - They used to delight in congregating close together near the lower ends of the long strips of bark pendant from the trunks of the large Eucalypti, which swayed to and fro in every breeze, and from one of them three Helmeted Honeyeaters fell at the discharge of my gun. - A few years after this part of the country was settled upon, the aspect gradually changed. The tall straight stemmed Eucalypti were felled , their trunks split up into palings or posts and rails, and the thick undergrowth cut down and burnt off.