I first met Peter back in the 70?s when we worked in the biology dept of the Science Museum of MN where he did study skins and taxidermy mounts of birds. I was impressed at the start with the perfection of his birds. After the SMM he moved to DC for several years and worked at the Smithsonian, replacing about half the mounts in the 100-some year-old ?Birds of the District of Columbia? exhibit. He once went to St Lucia for FWS to prepare a study skin of a St Lucia parrot. Back in Minnesota, he did exhibits for the SMM, Camp Ripley, and a number of other nature & environmental learning centers in the metro area and in greater MN --- city, regional, and state. I believe he also did some work for the Milwaukee Museum, although I don?t think the large project there ever came about. There is a flying bald eagle in the headquarters building of Itasca State Park that he prepared and a green heron? in the wetland below. It would be a good thing to inventory the species and location of all of his taxidermy that can be determined. Most of the work he did in the last 10 or 15 years was for the DNR ---- converting road and window-kill into educational art pieces. There are many of these birds on display in the Nongame Wildlife area of the St Paul DNR building and a former commissioner displayed one of his birds in his office. Others could be seen in the DNR building at the State Fair.
I told Peter and coworkers at the SMM that he had BD,BS,MS degrees ? Best Damn Bird Stuffer in MN State. He had actually studied with Dwain Warner at the Bell Museum and first worked in the bird lab there. And on visits back to MN from DC he would do additional study skins for the Bell. But certainly the quality of his art was some of the best in the country. I think he was mostly self-taught in taxidermy. He devised methods and used preparation materials that he made up. When asked how he was able to do something special with a bird or the parts of the display he often said, ?Whatever works.? In addition, though he was largely self-taught in ornithology, he knew the species name and taxonomic relationships of any North American bird you might ask him. Also its song & calls, its distribution, migration pattern, diet, behavior, plumage, anatomy, etc, etc. It was a lot faster and easier to call Peter and ask him a bird question than to look up such info elsewhere. He knew a lot about birds. To Peter, Louis Agassiz Fuertes was the best of bird painters. He marveled at the watercolor renditions of this painter. Unlike Fuertes, Peter would work individual feathers and barbs with a needle to make them beautiful. What they shared was an ability to make perfectly life-like art. I used to tease Peter by showing him a magazine or calendar photograph of a wild bird that had feathers slightly disheveled or showed a momentary awkwardness of position. I used to tell him that his birds were better than real birds--- better than life. This had no effect on him. Whenever I was at Priscilla and Peter?s I would ask to see any birds he was working on. I would comment on the perfection. (you could not help yourself--- sometimes just uttering ?wow? and ?wow?) He would usually say, ?Oh no. It?s not done.? and he would add that he had to repaint the legs or build up the cere with more wax or completely fix the back by repositioning the feather tracts (again) and re-tweaking individual feathers. Like JJ Audubon he was obsessive with getting the bird right. Like him too he spent many years in poverty. Institutions could not pay him enough to compensate him for the time he spent creating masterpieces. He survived on small contracts, sometimes competing with freeze-dried taxidermy. Yet he loved everything about birds. His mission was to share their beauty with anyone who might look at one of his creations --- however briefly or with how little interest. His devotion was as much to the individual bird itself, in that he would never think of spending any fewer hours on the side of the bird that would not be lit or would face a background and never be seen by a visitor. I think his work was to make the mortal short-lived little bird immortal --- to transform the individual specimen into something that would teach an appreciation of natural beauty, make people curious and observant, and maybe teach people its name. He inspired me with his passion, his obsession, his persistent attempt at perfection, and his patience. Like Fuertes, he died when he could have made much more art. Like Fuertes, he leaves a legacy for conservation of the natural world. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://moumn.org/pipermail/mou-net_moumn.org/attachments/20071212/55e6280d/attachment-0001.html
