June 1941

YOSEMITE NATURE NOTES VOL. XX

June, 1941 No. 6

AFIELD WITH THE NATURALISTS

THE PUBLICATION OF THE YOSEMITE NATURALIST DEPARTMENT AND THE YOSEMITE NATURAL HISTORY ASSOCIATION

Published Monthly

VOL. XX JUNE, 1941 NO. 6 REPTILOPHOBIA

By Ranger Naturalist Ernest A. Payne "A snake! My heavens! Jimmy, get probably reply that it was "natural " away from that horrid thing before or "instinctive, " inferring that the it bites you!" individual is born with the fear of How frequently one hears such an snakes just as surely as he is born exclamation uttered by well-meaning with blue eyes or curly hair. Can park visitors as they wander we accept this as a valid explanation? through the Yosemite Museum, and find themselves on the back porch Jimmie illustrates the typical child where the exhibit of live reptiles is and his response is the normal response housed. Jimmie, who a moment of a normal boy to a new before was an eager, enthusiastic boy experience. If his curiosity and desire absorbed in the thrill of a new to see the animal at closer range experience, has not only been re- had not been suddenly disturbed by strained from fulfilling a sincere and the unfortunate exclamation of the wholesome desire to see the snake adult, he would have undoubtedly more closely, but the object of his picked up the snake and played interest has been made a thing hid- with it. But now his reaction toward eous and one of which he should be snakes is influenced and affected by afraid. the sudden interjection of the vocal The fear of snakes is so wide- warning. spread that we are prone to accept I have been unable to find any- it as an inherited reaction over which thing in the literature that would we have no control. One needs only suggest that the fear of snakes is an to present a snake to the view of inherent endowment of the human any typical group of people to learn organism. However, there is much how deeply engrained this fear and that would indicate that we learn to abhorrence of snakes really is in the fear snakes. emotional response of human be- Dr. J. B. Watson, a proponent of ings. If we were to ask any member behaviorism in psychology, believes of this average group to explain the that the unlearned emotional re- reactions of those present, he would sponses of the child are very few.

He includes only three: Fear, rage, and love. For our problem with Jimmy we need consider only the first, fear. Watson maintains that the stimuli which arouse this reaction in the child are loud noises and the fear of falling due to the loss of support. All other emotions, he believes, are in the form of habits engendered by the modifying or conditioning of these fundamental reactions. Through conditioning, stimuli which originally produced no action can bring about the fear response. Experiments have shown that the small child is not instinctively afraid of small furry animals such as kittens, puppies, and rabbits, and when such animals are placed with the child he will play with them readily. However, it has also been shown that a fear toward the same furry animal may be developed within the child by striking a gong or making some other loud noise near the child at the same time he reaches out for the animal. If this procedure continues, the child associates the noise with the animal, and he learns to be afraid of the animal. Could it not be possible that thousands of Jimmies throughout the country have developed a fear of snakes by means of a very similar psychological process of conditioned learning brought about by the hysterical fear-filled voices of those with whom the children come in contact? That this fear is sincere cannot be doubted. We have all seen people who nearly faint when they discover that a snake is near, even though it be absolutely harmless and safely secured in a cage. During the sum mer of 1940, one of my hiking parties found a rattlesnake near the trail in Little Yosemite Valley. One of the women screamed and ran wild-eyed up the trail, insanely, unreasonably, and sincerely afraid. With such a widespread feeling existing toward snakes could there possibly be any justification in fact for the human response to snakes as would be indicated in the actual bodily injury brought about by the bites of poisonous species? Rubber Boa, a harmless, and beneficial species common in Yosemite. Throughout the world there are about 2400 kinds of snakes. Of this group the vast majority are harmless. In the United States only the

water moccasin or cotton mouth, been bitten by a rattlesnake during copperhead, rattlesnake, and coral the last fifteen years. This one case snake are venomous. Of these, only was that of a large, rather fleshy the rattlesnake is found in California. woman who imagined she had In his book, "Snakes Alive," Clifford scratched her leg on a piece of H. Pope says : "Moreover, many brush while hiking. As a result of species belonging to poisonous exercising strenuously and failure to groups either cannot inflict a fatal obtain prompt medical attention, the bite on man, or rarely ever do so bite proved fatal. because of the docile nature of a The records also show a few cases habitat that keeps them from coming of local government employees having contact with man. I estimate that having been bitten while engaged in only 8 per cent of the species of brushing operations and similar snakes deserve to be greatly feared work, but in every case prompt medby man." ical attention resulted in complete It is estimated that 160 people die recovery." from snake bite every year in the In view of the fact that during this United States. In comparison, the toll fifteen-year period several million from automobile accidents reaches people have visited Yosemite, the thirty thousand deaths each year. number of actual injuries from ven- When we consider the thousands of omous snakes is extremely low, and hikers who frequent snake-infested certainly as a valid basis for caus- areas each year, we see that the ing fears in the minds of visitors, the real danger is negligible. record needs no further comment. In a letter from Dr. Tracy I. Storer On the other hand, the animal in of the department of Zoology, UniYosemite about which there is more versity of California, he states that inquiry and that attracts more attenin California in the decade 1930tion than any other is also the ani1939, the number of deaths from ratmal that damages more personal tlesnakes varied from one to five a property, purloins more campers' year with a total of eighteen for the food, and causes more physical initen-year period. jury to the park visitor. I refer to the Of particular concern to the YoAmerican Black Bear. In addition to semite visitor and to the National the number of tents torn, quantities Park Service staff is the interesting of bacon, milk, bread, cereal, and record of rattlesnake bites within the other foodstuff stolen, the official recpark furnished by Associate Park ords show that during the past four Naturalist M. E. Beatty : years 139 people have been treated "As far as I have been able to at the Lewis Memorial Hospital for ascertain from both hospital and injuries inflicted by bears. In 1940, park records there has been only there were 2; in 1939, 53; in 1938, 17; one instance of a park visitor having and in 1937, there were 67. Certainly

an animal with this reputation merits utmost caution on the part of the camper. But even it should not be feared in terms of the common conception of the word fear. If people would only obey park regulations and avoid fool-hardy intimacies with this wild animal injuries from bears would be very infrequent. The naturalist division of the Na tional Park Service has a real op portunity and responsibility in its contacts with the multitude of park visitors each year in replacing many of the age-old, ill-founded fears and beliefs based upon superstition, misinformation, and ignorance (not only in relation to snakes, but in all phases of natural history) with a positive attitude of caution, understanding, and appreciation based upon facts which have resulted from scientific observation and correct thinking.

BIG TREE HAZARDS

By Ranger-Naturalist Verlin Baysinger The large Sequoia giganteas of ously to display the Big Trees to the the Sierra represent one of the sinutmost advantage, affords visitors gular wonders of the world. The driving over the approximate elevenMariposa Grove of Big Trees is one mile stretch an opportunity to see of the most readily accessible of all and to study these Big Trees which the groves along the Sierra slope, are unequaled elsewhere. It is selfand is yearly enjoyed by thousands evident that the heavy traffic of appreciative visitors. Along with through the grove will ultimately its popularity, a number of trees in produce secondary effects on the this remarkable stand have suffered trees. and weakened through undermining The numerous visitors who come influences coincident with increased into the grove differ extremely in travel. their reactions and in their observaThe development of roads into the tions. A majority is in search of the Mariposa Grove is of primary and Tunnel Tree, and prefers to drive secondary importance in the effect through the grove without stopping. produced on the trees. The wellFortunately, the others desire to planned loop road, laid out ingenileave their cars to study the trees,

gaining some appreciation of the majesty of these monarchs. The travel load increase alone multiplies the fire hazard many times, and this impending danger hangs over the trees threatening their destruction like the sword of Damocles. Another factor to be considered is the damage to the Sequoia that results from the constant walking of hundreds of people over the ground which holds the very shallow root systems of these trees. The earth is packed solidly over the roots, and thus deprives them of essential aeration, due to injury of the root hairs of the root system, and prevents the intake of sufficient nourishment. This type of injury was exhibited by the Grizzly Giant several years ago. At that time the appearance of its foliage was very faded and dull brown in color. Much litter was scattered on the ground beneath which had been blown down by the wind because of the weakened condition of the tree. The Grizzly Giant had suffered because of an old fire burn, and then its roots were injured by construction of the road which passed below the tree. Finally, the assault by appreciative visitors as their footprints packed the earth over the roots brought about a critical situation. This was remedied only a short time ago by the construction of a rustic barrier, by turning of the soil, and planting of shrubs at the base of the tree. Such treatment resulted in an improvement of the condition of the Grizzly Giant which was very obvious this spring. Other trees have likewise suffered. No doubt the Massachusetts tree was similarly weakened by the effect of road construction on its root system with subsequent soil compaction by visitors, which eventually caused it to fall in the wind-storm of 1927.

In the spring of 1940, another very important observation was made by people interested in the Big Trees. During road grading operations in the upper portion of the grove about the middle of May, the Haverford Tree showed some evidence of disturbance. Workers who were on the road crew heard cracking noises in its hollowed base when the heavy grading machinery passed and turned near the tree. Three men investigated, and found new cracks in the root attachment on the northeast side of the tree. This section has a width of about five feet and contains intact bark, cambium and sapwood. The crack had taken a course from the upper right of the section, continuing in a zigzag direction down and to the left, and was about one-quarter of an inch, according to information given by the workmen. This was reported to Superintendent Lawrence C. Merriam, who made a personal inspection with other interested park officials. I arrived in the grove for duty on May 27, 1940, and having been informed about the Haverford Tree, at once made a study of it. The report of the workmen was accurate. Also during my study, which took up about twenty minutes, there were several distinct popping noises originating from the fissure. On successive days I visited the Haverford Tree and the observations were duplicated. On June 1, 1940, a heavy cloud mass rolled down into the grove early in the morning. The dense fog was dispelled about noon by high winds which continued throughout the day, and again I heard cracking sounds from the break in the Haverford Tree. The following day a study of the tree showed that the break had widened. There were no sounds. Several days later this crack was measured. It had widened to a fissure 11/2 inches in width and its depth could not be definitely determined due to obstruction by fiber. Further watching showed no change and no popping sounds were heard. In closing, it is interesting to theorize on causes and results. The Haverford Tree is greatly weakened by a bad fire scar which has burned out the heartwood at the base and has destroyed about fifty per cent of the root attachments, cambium and sapwood layers. Invasion of the sapwood by carpenter ants (species unknown) has occurred in several places. The tree stands very near the loop road intersections and the heavy traffic may cause some damage. Possibly the grading machin-

ery working on the road set up vibration that could have caused the tree to vibrate. There is a greater lean that has developed this spring. In spite of this seemingly indicative incident, the tree may be able to withstand the forces of destruction for many years to come. It will be interesting to watch, and the fortune of the Haverford will all depend on the summer storms and high wind. Fortunately hundreds of other trees are still in good condition and will remain for many future generations. There is a stream flowing past the tree on the north and northwest side, the same side on which the cracking occurred. This boggy area early in the spring may not furnish sufficient support for the tree. It is interesting to note that the lean of the tree is definitely to the north at an angle to the breaking root attachment. This may indicate

OBSERVATIONS OF THE BLUE-FRONTED JAY

By Elizabeth H. Godfrey, Museum Secretary As an all-year-round resident of mer of 1940, when the Blue-fronted Yosemite Valley, the Blue-fronted Jay and the Sierra Chickaree were Jay (Cyanocitta stelleri frontalis) attempting to eat at the same feedgives the general impression that it ing table, the chickaree having had is a self-appointed "boss of the its fill, would carry off a bit of toast, birds." and place it on an oak limb for a With its crest, head and forepart future snack. When the chickaree of body blackish, and wings, tail, returned to the feeding table for anand hinder part a deep, vivid blue, other piece, the Blue-fronted Jay this handsome bird cannot be missed would swoop down on the limb and by even the dullest observer. If its snitch its toast. This performance attractive blue plumage, sailing would continue for a number of through space on a wing-spread dip times without the squirrel's becomor contrasting with forest green, does ing aware of the thieving going on. not attract attention, then a series of The jay in turn would hide the stolen saucy, scolding notes jarring the toast under a dead oak leaf, or stillness, will command it. would fly a short distance to eat it. No other bird in Yosemite Valley Another case of mischievous interis obviously more lacking in the ference on the part of the Bluegood trait of minding its own busifronted Jay was observed one windy ness as is the Blue-fronted Jay. In day in late April, 1938, while watchfact, it seems to take delight in deing a robin commence the construcliberately making life miserable for tion of a nest. The first piece of nestits fellow creatures. For instance, on ing material the robin brought was numerous occasions during the suma fairly long string. No sooner had

this been arranged on the nesting resumed nesting activities at the site, which was the limb of an oak original site, the jay was nowhere near the Administration Building, to be seen. than a meddlesome Blue-fronted Jay In connection with nest building, picked up the string in its beak and it is a delight to watch a pair of carried it to the limb of another oak Blue-fronted Jays constructing their some 30 feet opposite. Thereafter, nest. While the male robin does not each time the robin's back was help at all with the nest, the male turned, the jay stole the nesting maBlue-fronted Jay has as much a part terial it had placed on the limb. In in building it as his mate. The writer retaliation, the robin attempted to had an opportunity to observe a pair drive off the jay by charging in its of young Blue-fronted Jays working direction, but the jay managed to on a nest in an immature cedar near escape the attack. At last the robin the front of the Administration Buildgave up, and flew away. ing in early April, 1940. Together In this particular instance, "give they built the nest in a chummy, a Blue-fronted jay enough string happy manner, bringing twigs, dead and it will hang itself," proved to be leaves and mud. If one arrived at the the applicable adage. On the same nest with some material while the day just before lunch time, the jay other was arranging twigs, the forwas viewed on an oak limb from a former would gently push the other second-story window of the Adminbird away, so that it might contribistration Building, toying with the ute its material to the nest. This was stolen piece of string. After lunch, done without so much as a scolding attention was again attracted to this note from either bird. same tree by a chorus of distressing When this particular nest was near screams from many jays—a sure incompletion, it proved to be of such dication that one of their number is poor construction that part of it fell in trouble. The cause of the alarm away from the supporting branch was at once apparent. From an oak and after apparent consultation and limb, the meddlesome jay swung in consideration on the part of the jays, an upside-down position scolding they abandoned it. violently, with its feet so entangled One afternoon, a few days later, in the string that they were held as it was interesting to observe a pair though they had been securely tied of jays carrying off the material that there. A ranger was summoned to had been used in this nest to anrescue the jay from what appeared other site. In a half hour's time every to be a boomerang of fate. He speck of it had been moved. Whether quickly took out his pocket knife, this was the same pair of jays that cut the string, and set the jay free. originally built the nest could, of The following day, when the robin course, not be determined.

Digitized by Yosemite Online Library Dan Anderson