Wildlife-related books - reviews

Hix

Wildlife Enthusiast and Lover of Islands
15+ year member
Premium Member
Since returning to Sydney from Christmas Island, I have been spending a couple of hours each day on the train to and from work, and have utilised this time to read many of the books I have bought over the years but have only given a cursory glance due to lack of time to sit down and read.
For some reason - and I'm still not sure why - I decided to start writing reviews in case some ZooChatters found them of interest.
A word in advance - only one of these is about zoos, the rest are all about animals in the wild, or conservation.
The first two books I took on the train with me I'm not going to review here - "Life on Air" (3rd revised edition) and "Journey's to the Other Side of the World - Further Journeys of a Young Naturalist" - are both by David Attenborough and are excellent reads, the first about his life in television to date and the second a compilation of three of his Zoo Quest Books ("Quest in Paradise", "Zoo Quest in Madagascar" and "Quest Under Capricorn" which were originally published in the 1960's). If you haven't read them, then you should. I can strongly recommend them.

:p

Hix
 

Babylon’s Ark: The incredible wartime rescue of the Baghdad Zoo

Lawrence Anthony, 2007, published by Thomas Dunn Books

Lawrence Anthony had been shocked by the images of Marjan, the last lion at the Kabul Zoo (Afghanistan), starving, mange and lice-ridden, “with shrapnel embedded in his neck and jaw … half-blind from a grenade attack”. The pictures of Marjan had been broadcast round the world, graphically illustrating how animals suffer during man-made conflicts.

So, in March 2003, when he heard the Coalition forces in Iraq had taken Baghdad, he knew someone had to get in to the zoo to help the animals and get the zoo back on its feet. And he thought it had better be him, because nobody else he knew in South Africa seemed interested.

Shortly afterwards, after organising food for the animals and supplies, and dealing with red tape, he entered Iraq in a rental car with two zoo keepers from the Kuwait Zoo (who didn’t speak English) and made his way to Baghdad. On arrival, he was surprised to find that there was still much fighting in the city as the Coalition forces tried to rout factions loyal to Saddam Hussein. He stayed in a hotel occupied by the Coalition, near the zoo, but couldn’t stay in the zoo after dark.

Only 35 of the 650 animals in the Baghdad Zoo remained, and they were only there because they were too big and /or too dangerous to be taken by the looters who plagued the zoo during the night – all the other animals had either been taken as food, or to be sold on the black market. Those that were left were starving, dehydrated, sick and injured. For the next six months he worked, not just with the two Kuwaiti keepers but with former staff of the zoo who returned to help out despite the risk of being shot as collaborators. And some days individuals did not come in because the fighting near their homes was too intense and it just wasn’t safe for them to be on the streets.

As well as zoo animals, they recovered animals from elsewhere in Baghdad (including from some of Hussein’s palaces) and brought them to the zoo for safekeeping. And the zoo received a lot of goodwill donations from the military forces.

Under Anthony’s direction, the team at the zoo were so successful the zoo was re-opened in July of 2003, and a couple of months later he returned home to South Africa.

The book is written well and was a very interesting read. The challenges Anthony faced finding basic equipment – like a single bucket (which was stolen by looters a few hours later) – and just surviving in what was effectively a war zone, are related in enough detail for the reader to become engaged. And people with an affinity for zoos will be able to empathise with his struggles.

:p
 
The Invisible Ark: In Defense of Captivity
David G. Barker & Tracey M. Barker, 2014, published by VPI Library


When I read the title I thought this was a book defending zoos and conservation centres, hence the reason I bought it. It’s not. The dedication in the front is “To the Keepers of the Invisible Ark”, and in the opening pages there are several more references to the Invisible Ark before they explain what it is, and essentially the rest of the book is about how the Invisible Ark is so much better than zoos.

In essence, the Invisible Ark is all the people of the world who keep exotic pets (or anything other than a domestic species). The Ark is better than zoos, the authors suggest, because zoos have a finite number of spaces where they can keep and breed endangered species, whereas the Invisible Ark doesn’t. Zoos can only hold so many individuals of a particular species, and as a result other animals, or subspecies, are phased out in order to maintain numbers of the form being kept in the region. However, if exotic pet keepers were permitted to keep those species/subspecies which are not the focus of the zoos, then the species/subspecies survives.

This is a simplified version of the argument that the authors put forward, and on the surface it has some merit. In the 168 pages (with no illustrations whatsoever) they describe how they came up with the concept with background information about zoos and conservation, and the private animal keepers they know or have talked to. The book is well researched and well written, but I disagree with their underlying premise – that private individuals are in a better position to save endangered species by keeping them as pets, than zoos are.

They point out – quite rightly – that most zoo animals will never go back to the wild; they simply can’t be released for a variety of reasons, having a genetic disposition to captivity being one of those reasons. Therefore, if we aren’t able to put them back into the wild, we should allow private individuals to keep more of them so at least, when the wild is gone, they will still survive. The authors state that the pedigree of the animals will be maintained, and hybrids/mutations will be discouraged, because purebred individuals will have a greater value (like dogs and cats). But you only need to look at the avicultural and herpetocultural worlds to see that mutations are rampant and command high prices where as the wild morph is rare and cheap.

The authors are American herpetologists (and herpetoculturalists) with lots of experience in the captive care of reptiles, and both have worked in zoos in the past, so they certainly know what they are talking about when it comes to zoos, reptiles and conservation. And as I said, well researched and well written. But, unfortunately, while I read the book a number of recurring impressions kept popping into my head:

  • Although the wild is being destroyed, there is still large tracts of it left in many parts of the world.
  • The issues they have with the US government and other organisations does not necessarily translate to the rest of the world.
  • The underlying motivation appears to be to reduce the restrictions on keeping wildlife so that private individuals can keep species currently restricted or prohibited.

That last assessment could well be incorrect, but that was the impression I got reading the book.

Although I disagree with the basic premise, I would recommend The Invisible Ark: In Defense of Captivity to anyone interested in the subject as there are some good arguments and it will make you think and re-evaluate some of your own opinions and beliefs.

:p
 
The Invisible Ark: In Defense of Captivity
David G. Barker & Tracey M. Barker, 2014, published by VPI Library

Many thanks for your interesting review of a book that I must read. The idea that the private sector will maintain populations of endangered species, and are better able to do it than zoos is a naive view that I have heard again and a again. It is certainly true for some species since zoos and the private sectors keep different, although overlapping, selections of animals. However there are real limitations.
Private breeders are as influenced by fashion in keeping various species as much as zoos are. Where are the large pheasant and wildfowl collections that were so common four decades ago? Species die out in the private sector just as they do in zoos. The private sector do not keep records and genetically manage their populations with the rigor that zoos are now required to do.
Within the private sector the breeding of mutants and hybrids is rife. Just look at the populations of Lady Amherst Pheasant and Saker Falcon.
Private breeders are to be encouraged, there are many individuals that have driven forward the captive management of species. We could argue that much of the innovation in captive management and breeding comes from the private sector. However standards vary greatly. Just like zoos the private sector have their limitations.
 
Yes Carl, all quite true. As I said in my review, they make some valid points and use examples to support their arguments, but most of those examples are US (particularly with Government restrictions), and while many zoos are doing nothing for conservation, the authors ignore the fact that many zoos actually do a lot for conservation.

As for getting a copy, you may need to order it from the authors online (VPI is their own publishing company) - I purchased mine from a meeting of the Australian Herpetological Society; I think the authors had been here and given a talk at a meeting. I should have mentioned it's a softback book that looks like it's self-published - basic fonts, no illustrations etc. However the physical quality of the book itself is the same as many other books in my library.

:p

Hix
 
Many thanks for your interesting review of a book that I must read. The idea that the private sector will maintain populations of endangered species, and are better able to do it than zoos is a naive view that I have heard again and a again. It is certainly true for some species since zoos and the private sectors keep different, although overlapping, selections of animals. However there are real limitations.
Private breeders are as influenced by fashion in keeping various species as much as zoos are. Where are the large pheasant and wildfowl collections that were so common four decades ago? Species die out in the private sector just as they do in zoos. The private sector do not keep records and genetically manage their populations with the rigor that zoos are now required to do.
Within the private sector the breeding of mutants and hybrids is rife. Just look at the populations of Lady Amherst Pheasant and Saker Falcon.
Private breeders are to be encouraged, there are many individuals that have driven forward the captive management of species. We could argue that much of the innovation in captive management and breeding comes from the private sector. However standards vary greatly. Just like zoos the private sector have their limitations.

I agree with this in its entirety - but, the truth is that both 'sectors' are highly influenced by fashion, and this is directly linked to the captive extinction of species. The large pheasant and waterfowl collections have disappeared largely (in the UK at least), and along with much of the 'cage-bird fancy' have been replaced by the huge rise in reptile keeping. This is not just a private sector phenomenon though as the large public collections of these bird spp are either gone or greatly reduced too. I would suggest that hybrid Amherst's Pheasants are common in zoos, too. Private keepers concentration on mutations is unfortunate and will always alienate them from much of the zoo world, although there does seem to be an increasing (albeit still small) determined effort to establish and retain pure wild forms. Zoos too seem to keep plenty of mutations reptiles... A quick surf through the various galleries will soon show that zoo standards vary greatly too, especially in America - probably more dramatically so that do private collections.
 
Last edited:
I've noticed in smaller, privately owned zoos, they will often accept unwanted pets, like mutation birds and reptiles. For them, it's a cheap way to increase their exhibits and they don't care if the animals are not normal.

:p

Hix
 
The following three books are all produced by a small company in Australia called Strange Nation Publishing. From what I can see from their website, all their books deal with cryptozoology, UFOs, ghosts and the paranormal. Normally, I wouldn’t purchase these books but the titles I’m about to review were gifts from well-meaning relatives.
___________________________________________________________________​

The Tasmanian Tiger: Extinct or Extant?
Edited by Rebecca Lang, 2014, Strange Nation Publishing


With a foreword written by Dr Karl Shuker, this book has eleven chapters, each written by a different author. I thought from the title the book might be a decent read about the history and biology of thylacine concluding with a discussion about the possibility of its continued existence, but the focus is clearly on the latter.

The first eight chapters are concerned with sightings, reports and personal quests for the Thylacine, both in Tasmania and on the mainland (and New Guinea). The chapters are well written, and all have been well researched although many rely upon newspaper articles and interviews. And the general consensus put forward is that it is definitely still out there; there have been so many reported sightings over the years it just has to be there - there wouldn’t have been so many sightings otherwise:

Ongoing sighting reports provide evidence that the Thylacine has survived as viable populations in many parts of its original and diverse habitats from arid lands to rainforest, particularly on the mainland where it has been reputedly encountered repeatedly in temperate, subtropical and tropical climatic zones.” (pg. 115)​

In contrast, the ninth chapter “Scientists and the Construction of the Thylacine’s Extinction” by Dr Robert Paddle looks at the history of the decline and eventual extirpation of the species from a scientific perspective, and quotes some cases of Australian species either rediscovered after being thought extinct (eg. Gymnobelideus), or described from fossils prior to living specimens actually been found (eg. Burramys). But ultimately, as far as the Thylacine goes, he acknowledges that sightings are not evidence:

By definition, the Thylacine is extinct, and that label will remain in place until a body is produced, preferably alive, but if not, dead – and no amount of contemporary sightings are going to change that statement.” (pg.151)​

The final chapter, “Thinking Beyond Extinction” by Dr Andrew Pask, is a discussion of the sequencing of the Thylacine’s genome from DNA fragments derived from museum specimens, and what they have learnt about the species from this information. There is also a short discussion about the resurrection of the species from the DNA, which is not possibly because of the degradation of the DNA (it’s all fairly old) and the fact that large parts of the genome are missing. Pask likens the work to completing a 30-million-piece jigsaw puzzle. It’s an interesting and informative chapter.

I enjoyed these last two chapters of the book, but the previous eight were so full of speculation and, to my mind, not enough critical analysis (although there was some), that it didn’t even come close to convincing me of the species continued existence.

:p
 

Australian Big Cats: An Unnatural History of Panthers
Michael Williams and Rebecca Lang, 2010, Strange Nation Publishing

For many years I’ve heard stories of panthers in the Australian bush; around Sydney they have been reported from Lithgow, Katoomba, Colo Heights and the Grose Valley from time to time. They’ve never been properly photographed, even in this day and age, and the few blurry images that are presented are not conclusive. I’ve seen photos that, without a proper scale, could be someone’s domestic cat or a feral individual. The fact that all the photos in this book are printed in black-and-white reduces their quality further.

But the Blue Mountains around Sydney are not the only places big cats have been seen in the wonderful land of Oz – they’ve been reported from all over the country, from Queensland and Victoria to South and Western Australia for many, many years, and this book documents them all state by state. One chapter is even devoted to sightings in New Zealand.

This book, although much thicker at 434 pages (compared to “Tasmanian Tiger”s 172 pages), is very similar in content, relying on newspaper clippings (some going back to the turn of the century) and interviews with more recent witnesses. The first appendix is 60 pages of 79 individual reports not discussed in the main chapters; some of these extra reports are only a sentence or paragraph in length, others over a page long. The second appendix of 58 pages contains more old newspaper clippings, letters, reports, state government and local council documents.

Like the Tasmanian Tiger book above, the general view is that as there are so many sightings there must be something out there. So they analyse the sightings and reports, consider other possibilities or cases of mistaken identity (like black Red Foxes), and sometimes even consider some reports to be hoaxes. They also consider other cats apart from black leopards or jaguars, including Cougars, Asian Golden Cats, feral cats …. and Marsupial Lions (Thylacoleo, Wakaleo and Priscileo), which have been extinct for 30,000 years.

In fairness to the authors, there are some cases where they have analysed the photos or evidence and concluded the reported big cat is actually just a feral cat, or a large domestic cat, but where this can’t be ascertained with some certainty they are happy to speculate about cougars and panthers. One report was of a 72 year old man collecting firewood in the dark when he was attacked from behind by a “snarling bundle of teeth and talons” which left him with bites and scratches that he believes came from a large feral cat. The police believed it was a wild boar based upon pig footprints found at the attack site, and some years later a wildlife ecologist submitting a report to the government suggested it might have even been a wombat. Nobody suggested it was a panther, yet the authors thought it warranted inclusion in their book.

An interesting read, to a degree, but like the Tasmanian Tiger book, I remain unconvinced.

:p
 

Savage Shadow: The Search for the Australian Cougar

David O’Reilly, 1981 & 2011, Strange Nation Publishing

When I read the first chapter of this book it read like a novel. It told the story of the first night a farmer discovered something that was killing his sheep, and the subsequent days with his brother on a neighbouring property. It included simple conversations, small talk, and what they were thinking. The author was clearly not there at the time. This style of writing immediately put me off. If someone is going to use their imagination to speculate about what other people thought, or the minutae of what they did, then the author would definitely use their imagination to enhance their interpretation of facts and events. However, despite being put off by this, I also noticed it was extremely well written. But the second chapter addressed my concerns somewhat.

David O’Reilly is a professional journalist – which explains why the book is so well written – who moved with his family to Perth in 1978 to work for the local branch of a national newspaper. Hearing about a big cat sighting on a farm, and learning that this was not an uncommon report from farmers, O’Reilly drove down to the Cordering area to speak firsthand to the many locals who had heard, seen or hunted the beast.

By the end of the second chapter I found the book compelling reading (because it is a good story and very well written). Over the next several months the author spent a lot of time in the area, went out all night with professional hunters looking for the beast – which they were all convinced by this stage to be a cougar – and interviewed not just farmers but government officials sent to investigate.

In 1980 O’Reilly and his family travelled to Europe and eventually settled in London, but the following year he completed the book and had it published. Sadly, O’Reilly passed away in 2006 at the age of 55. Strange Nation Publishing contacted his widow after her return to Australia and this version of the book was published in 2011.

Because O’Reilly was a part of the story, and because he remained objective, I found this narrative a much better read than the previous books published by Strange Nation, despite my initial misgivings. I am still not convinced there are big cats in the Australian bush but this book suggests there may have been something unusual happening in the Cordering area of Western Australia forty years ago. Although I’m still sceptical, I thoroughly recommend this book as it is a really good read.

:p
 

A Bat’s End: The Christmas Island Pipistrelle and Extinction in Australia​

John Woinarski, 2018, CSIRO Publishing


I was still living on Christmas Island last year, and was at the launch of this book on the island. Although the author wasn’t able to attend two of the researchers who worked with the Pipistrelle in the 90’s and 00’s were there and told stories about studying the bat.

The Pipistrelle was one of five endemic mammals found on the island in the 1890’s when the British government created a permanent colony to mine the island’s rich phosphate deposits. Within 20 years the two endemic rats – Maclear’s Rat (Rattus macleari) and the Bulldog Rat (Rattus nativitatus) – had become extinct, and the once common Christmas Island Shrew (Crocidura trichura) disappeared in the following decades, although rare sightings periodic ally occurred (the last being in 1980) but is now generally considered extinct. And the Christmas Island Pipistrelle (Pipistrellus murrayi) became extinct in 2009, leaving only the Christmas Island Fruit Bat (Pteropus natalis) as the only endemic mammal. However, although the loss of any species is a tragedy, this extinction of the Pipistrelle is particularly tragic in that researchers had rung the alarm bells for more than a decade but the Australian government chose not to act until it was too late.

A Bat’s End provides an excellent background and history to Christmas Island and its wildlife, and sets the stage for the issues and challenges faced by the endemic wildlife and the researchers working on the island. But in the case of the Pipistrelle it also documents, in detail, the rapid decline of the species and the people in Canberra responsible for its ultimate demise, naming names and unashamedly pointing the finger at the culpable. In January of 2009, with only four known adult females left in the wild and a probable four more young individuals, the proposal was made to capture the entire population and breed them up in captivity; this proposal was made by one of Australia’s leading bat experts and was submitted to the Federal Minister for the Environment, who then created an Expert Working Group to look at the broader issues of conservation on Christmas Island. The Groups interim report was handed down in June 2009, and accepted by the Minister in July. With funding, a group of bat experts returned to the island in August but, using a variety of bat detectors, could only locate one bat which eluded capture and remained active until 26th August, 2009. Since then, no-one has seen or heard the Christmas Island Pipistrelle.

The cause of the rapid decline of the Pipistrelle was never ascertained but is likely to have been one of the introduced species on the island – Yellow Crazy Ants, Asian Centipedes and Wolf Snakes have all been suggested and probably contributed in some way.

Although I found reading A Bat’s End to be a bit dry in places, that’s to be expected when there’s government reports and documents involved. However, the overall subject matter is of interest and there is plenty of extra detail and background that keeps it interesting. And, unfortunately, it’s also a sad indictment of a first world government that, in this day and age, permitted yet another unique species to disappear into oblivion through bureaucratic procrastination and inaction.

:p
 
I agree with this in its entirety - but, the truth is that both 'sectors' are highly influenced by fashion, and this is directly linked to the captive extinction of species. The large pheasant and waterfowl collections have disappeared largely (in the UK at least), and along with much of the 'cage-bird fancy' have been replaced by the huge rise in reptile keeping. This is not just a private sector phenomenon though as the large public collections of these bird spp are either gone or greatly reduced too. I would suggest that hybrid Amherst's Pheasants are common in zoos, too. Private keepers concentration on mutations is unfortunate and will always alienate them from much of the zoo world, although there does seem to be an increasing (albeit still small) determined effort to establish and retain pure wild forms. Zoos too seem to keep plenty of mutations reptiles... A quick surf through the various galleries will soon show that zoo standards vary greatly too, especially in America - probably more dramatically so that do private collections.
Picking up on the hybrid Amherst thing, I saw a shocker @ Cleres in October. Delacour would have been horrified. Rest of the park was lovely tbf.
 

The Malay Archipelago
Alfred Russel Wallace, 1869
(Annotated version edited by John van Wyhe, 2015, NUS Publishing)

On the 18th of April 1854, after a seven week voyage from England, a 31 year old Alfred Russel Wallace arrived in Singapore. An experienced collector (having previously spent four years collecting in Brazil), Wallace was planning on sampling the fauna of the myriad islands that make up the Malay Archipelago, later known as the Dutch East Indies, and later still Indonesia. In the mid-1800’s collecting specimens of birds and insects was a popular hobby, not just of Museums but also of the wealthy, and Wallace planned not just on collecting for himself, but to sell to others. Over the next eight years he zig-zagged haphazardly back-and-forth across the archipelago, his movements dictated by available passages on vessels, visiting as many of the islands as possible. Finally, in February of 1862 he departed Singapore for his return to England. He records that he returned with 125,660 specimens – 310 mammals, 100 reptiles, 8050 birds, 7500 shells, 13100 Lepidoptera, 83200 beetles and 13400 other insects (Wallace was quite fond of beetles). In 1869 he published the first edition of The Malay Archipelago, in two volumes, and with many reprints and some revisions the final fourth edition was published in 1890.

The copy I purchased last year in Singapore is a reprint of the first edition, but annotated and edited by Dr John van Wyhe of the National University of Singapore (NUS) who is an expert on Wallace and Charles Darwin. The book I have is actually titled “The Annotated Malay Archipelago”, because as well as the original footnotes by Wallace, van Wyhe has added more than 800 extra footnotes that shed more light on the text by including later events, identifying people or boats in the text, noting errors, or simply identifying species by the scientific names by which they are now known. Van Wyhe has published a number of books on Wallace and as an historian has access to Wallace’s original notebooks (those still in existence) which has helped with the annotations. Interestingly, Wallace doesn’t always appear to have referred to his notebooks as some statements in the book conflict with his notes, such as dates he departed or arrived at locations (sometimes out by a week or more).

Because the book would get confusing if it was written chronologically (because of his back-and-forth travels) he has written the book geographically with the first chapter on the physical geography of the region, then subsequent chapters starting with Singapore and Malacca, and then working his way eastwards through Borneo, Sumatra, Java, Bali & Lombok, Timor, Celebes, the Moluccas and the Papuan Islands (Kai and Aru). Some islands get more than one chapter as he focuses on his travels in the first chapter, and then maybe a chapter on particular species - like the Orangutan, or the Birds of Paradise - and finally a third on the zoology or natural history of that particular island (Wallace also seemed interested in plants). And some chapters are simply about his adventures travelling from one island to the next. However, by writing the book in this geographic manner, it is easier to understand his discussions about the differences in the fauna of the two regions, leading to what later became known as Wallace’s Line, an imaginary line delineating the Australo-papuan and Asian faunas. The final chapter (Chapter 40) records his observations of the races of man in the archipelago, and is followed by an appendix with details of the crania of the various races, and the different languages used throughout the archipelago.

Wallaces writings are in a style typical of the mid-1800’s, using languages and phrases you wouldn’t see in writings today. The word ‘rude’ he used to describe not people, but objects like tables, chairs, huts, villages and boats. Obviously it is an abbreviation of ‘rudimentary’. Things we might describe as rude – like carvings of naked people with overemphasized genitalia – he described as ‘disgusting’. The flora and fauna of an island were referred to as the ‘island’s productions’. He described the different peoples by their races, the islands from which they originated, or their religion. Individuals with mixed race parentage he occasionally referred to as half-caste but more often as ‘mongrels’, and he also describes the local inhabitants as ‘savages’. In fact, in his description of the King Bird of Paradise – a species whose beauty of which he was particularly enamoured – he says:

The emotions excited in the minds of a naturalist, who has long desired to see the actual thing which he has hitherto known only by description ... Especially when that thing is of surpassing rarity or beauty, require the poetic faculty fully to express them. The remote island on which I found myself situated, in an almost unvisited sea; the wild luxuriant forests; the rude uncultured savages who gathered round me – all had their influence in determining the emotions with which I gazed upon this ‘thing of beauty’. I thought of the long ages of the past, during which successive generations of this little creature had run their course … with no intelligent eye to gaze upon their loveliness; to all appearance such a wanton waste of beauty … It seems sad, that on the one hand such exquisite creatures should live out their lives and exhibit their charms only in these wild inhospitable regions, doomed for ages yet to come to hopeless barbarism; while on the other hand , should civilised man ever reach these distant lands … we may be sure he will so disturb the nicely-balanced relations of organic and inorganic nature as to cause the disappearance, and finally the extinction of these very beings whose wonderful structure and beauty he alone is fitted to appreciate and enjoy.”​

I have edited the above passage to remove some superfluous statements, but essentially he is saying that only the civilised man can fully appreciate the beauty of the bird. This is probably based upon the fact that the locals hunt the bird and were not as excited to see it as he was. But they probably saw the bird on a semi-regular basis and had no concept of its rarity, only that it was good eating. However, Wallace’s attitude was the typical colonialist attitude of the day.

(Note: I can appreciate the ‘savages’ point of few in this respect. For instance, I have seen literally hundreds of kangaroos in the wild in Australia where they sometimes become pests in great numbers, plus many more in zoos. When I was attending Zoo Keeper conferences in the USA in the 80’s and 90’s I would visit a zoo and the keepers would proudly show me a pair of kangaroos in a simple grassed enclosure, expecting me to get excited at seeing an Australian animal on display. My complete underwhelm-ment at ‘roos, but excitement at seeing a skunk, puzzled them).

Earlier this year Wallace’s Giant Bee – the world’s largest bee – was rediscovered while I was reading this book, so I looked forward to Wallace’s description of the bee and his discover of it. Sadly, it rates only half a sentence:

Among my insects the best were the rare Pieris aruna – perhaps the very finest butterfly of the genus; and a large black wasp-like insect, with immense jaws like a stag beetle, which has been named Megachile pluto by Mr F. Smith.”​

However, in contrast, his discovery of the bird later to be known as Wallace’s Standardwing was detailed in a single lengthy paragraph that took up almost a whole page, and included an illustration of the bird.

Overall this book is a long read; excluding the appendix it’s over 750 pages in length, but that includes a lengthy introduction by van Whye on Wallace, his travels to Singapore and his itinerary throughout the archipelago, his records (the notebooks and letters) and the eventual publication of the book and its subsequent editions, reprints and illustrations. However, this book is good reading and I thoroughly recommend it to anyone interested in zoological history, the wildlife of the region, or travel journals to see what it was like travelling almost 180 years ago. I particularly recommend this annotated version, published in 2015, as the footnotes contain extra information for anyone who is interested in learning more.

:p
 
The part of the review I particularly liked was where he admitted that Australians are just simple savages in comparison to everybody else on Earth.
You're confusing Wallace (who didn't visit Australia) with Darwin, which is in the next review. And I'm not gonna tell you what Darwin said about the New Zealanders!

:p

Hix
 
Are you going to review Gerald Durrell's books?
Probably not. Although I'm making my way through them all now, I'm rather biased about them - in a positive way - and I don't think I could do a truly objective review. But I might think about it.

I still strongly recommend anyone who is interested in animals or zoos read his books. The Corfu trilogy are of different subject matter, and may not be as popular as the others (as has been discussed in other threads), but I still think I prefer them to the series which had quite a bit of fiction written in.

:p

Hix
 
You're confusing Wallace (who didn't visit Australia) with Darwin, which is in the next review. And I'm not gonna tell you what Darwin said about the New Zealanders!
No, I was referring to your own comment (see below). And yes I know what Darwin said of New Zealanders but he had just spent years being horribly seasick so one cannot expect a sound mind in such a situation. I can't remember the exact quote but when he departed he wrote something along the lines of "I was pleased to leave New Zealand; it is not a pleasant place."


(Note: I can appreciate the ‘savages’ point of few in this respect. For instance, I have seen literally hundreds of kangaroos in the wild in Australia where they sometimes become pests in great numbers, plus many more in zoos. When I was attending Zoo Keeper conferences in the USA in the 80’s and 90’s I would visit a zoo and the keepers would proudly show me a pair of kangaroos in a simple grassed enclosure, expecting me to get excited at seeing an Australian animal on display. My complete underwhelm-ment at ‘roos, but excitement at seeing a skunk, puzzled them).
 
Love the review of one of the great naturalist travelogues of the 19th century. Everyone with an interest in natural history should read Wallace (and Humboldt and Darwin). As a bonus to those with limited funds, most 19th century works are in the public domain and can usually be found as free ebooks without too much difficulty. The Malay Archipelago also directly inspired my favorite modern natural history book, Quammen's Song of the Dodo.
 
Back
Top