-
Title
-
Thomas County, July 3-11, July 27-30, 1911
-
Date
-
July 3-11, July 27-30, 1911
-
Creator
-
Frank Shoemaker
-
Description
-
Narratives
-
Identifier
-
321301-1911-0146.jpg
-
Transcription
-
17 devoted all of its attention, until the “memory” wore away, to the large object which had suddenly moved into the region, but which, after all, was probably harmless; then it slowly doubled back on itself, darting its tongue — a most delicate organ of touch – here and there to pilot its way safely, and started down the branch. Reaching the body of the tree, which was in fact only a shrub, not over six or seven feet high, it descended with great deliberation, finally reaching the branch on which the nest was placed. Here it paused for a moment, then started out along the branch. Several inches from the trunk it encountered the top leaves of weeds which extended up into the lower branches of the tree, and thrusting it’s head on these it tried their strength; but they were weak and flexible and would not support it’s weight, so that course was abandoned for the more rigid branch. Slowly the snake crept along, until finally the nest was reached and the sensitive tongue touched its rim. Up to this time the entire behavior of the snake had been deliberate; no rapid movements, no hurried exploration of branches. But now a stimulus was encountered which very plainly was not unknown to the snake; with a rapid movement, almost a jerk, it raised its head several inches above the nest, opened wide its jaws, and struck! . . . Really, that is all there is to the story, for the snake’s conduct, not mine, is the subject of these notes; but in my capacity as referee I may add a few words. Being, if you please, quite as highly organized and functioned as an ordinary bull-snake, it came to pass that even as the snake struck down upon the defenseless heads of the baby vireos, I grasped the reptile amidships and hauled in enough slack that the blow fell short of the nest. That is all. The subsequent court-martial and execution have no place in this narrative. The power of vision in snakes is so poor that probably its sole function, aside from the appreciation of light itself, is the perception of motion. From the standpoint of the snake, if a moving object be large, it is a good thing to get away from, just for luck; whereas if it be small it may be good to eat, and at any rate is worth following up, since there is no danger. There is evidently not the slightest appreciation of form. Snakes in captivity, hungry after long fasting, if a toad is introduced into their midst, will go after it with much ardor, when, if the toad is active, and by its movements continually discovers its whereabouts to the pursuers, it will be promptly overtaken and will pass into the “sad pluperfect”. But if the toad is inactive or distrait, [absent-minded, distraught] and sits moodily awaiting the fell summons, the snake will pass it time and again within a few inches, though hunting as hard as they know how. But the slightest movement is fatal; and it is also fatal if, even though motionless, the toad is touched by a blundering snake with the wonderful tongue — a tactile organ muscled and nerved with marvelous delicacy and beauty. — These observations are so common among those who have taken the trouble to note them that it is hardly worthwhile to put them down, except for their bearing on the incident of the vireo’s nest. There is hardly a shadow of probability that the snake saw the nest from the ground and went up after it, or that any snake ever saw a nest in the tree, or a foot from its eyes. Snakes of many species ascend trees habitually in search of food, and cover great distances along the branches, finding, as we all know, many nests,
-
Rights
-
To inquire about usage, please contact Archives & Special Collections, University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries. These images are for educational use only. Not all images are available for publication.
-
Is Version Of
-
321301-1911-0146_321301-1911-0146.jpg
