THE MANY FACES OF AVICULTURE.

As an avid reader of all things parrot related, I have often read articles that have provoked me to voice my opinions. The following paragraphs are loosely but not exclusively based on one such article 'Hand Rearing Is Not The Answer' by Pam Fryer. I do not wish to discredit her views but feel that there is a much wider story to be told.

Far too many articles that appear in magazines argue so strongly for one point of view that they dismiss out of hand the views of others. Surely the best practices are the ones that allow the aviculturist to pursue their preferred route whilst maintaining the flexibility to use the techniques employed by others.

Most of these articles are so emotive that they use shocking and unsubstantiated facts. Claims of, excessive mortality rates, psychological damage, nutritional deficiencies and battery production are the norm. Yet where do these facts come from?

Once a bird leaves an importers it becomes anonymous, there is no requirement to register its death so how can it be that most birds die within months of importation. I have a large collection of imported African Grey Parrots my annual death rate is just 0.4%, have I been lucky or is this the norm? Who knows?

Parent reared, hand reared and indeed wild caught imports in the majority of cases appear to adjust well to captivity. What psychological benefits are there for parent reared pets over their hand reared counterparts? Perhaps again this is just a word that is used to grab attention and yet again there is no substantive fact to back up such a statement. There must be a place for both methods. As responsible aviculturist we need to look further ahead. We have a duty to provide the domestic pet market with well adjusted individuals, at the same time it is equally important that we put the building blocks in place that will allow us to secure the future viability of our birds. It is vital that we produce youngsters to the second generation and beyond.

No captive diet is as nutritionally balanced as that taken by wild birds. I can see no evidence to support the claim that parent birds provide their offspring with a regurgitated mix that is better than an excellent hand rearing formula. My records show that there is no variation in size or quality of incubator hatched, partially parent reared or fully parent reared babies. In fact the biggest threat to size and quality, certainly with parakeets, comes not from nutritional deficiencies but from the fixation with colour mutations and the need to inbreed in order to fix these new colours.

One pioneer of hand rearing claimed he wished he had not been so as he was only trying to increase the numbers of endangered species. Is it right to learn these techniques with such genetically valuable stock? Why does this make hand rearing acceptable for 'Appendix 1' birds but not for more commonly found specimens? After all the most likely, if any, to be reintroduced to the wild are the ones that have the greatest need to learn from their parents and not the ones that are most likely to spend their entire lives in captivity. If there was ever a justification for not hand rearing this must surely be it.

The generally held belief that all large aviaries are wonderful and all small cages are terrible is far too simplistic. I have seen the extremes of both; large display aviaries that make show the occupants off to their full potential and large aviaries where the feathered occupants have had to compete for food with the local rodent population. I have also seen small cages that are pristine in rooms that are well ventilated and well lit and unfortunately a collection where the conditions were so dark that even though the occupants were just inches away only a silhouette could be seen. When passing comment I received the standard reply 'they breed better in small cages in the dark'. Is this really true or yet more bird folklore?

My own personal experiences with African Grey's shows that they do indeed breed better or a least more quickly in small cages. There is also a considerable increase in productivity if these cages are used in conjunction with regular visits to a large communal aviary. An experiment with adjusting light levels within the breeding quarters made no difference to productivity whatsoever.

Obviously it is wrong to use parrots as battery hens, but is this even possible? Do parrots really lay eggs out of desperation or is it out of their natural desire to breed? I provide my birds with absolutely everything that I think they require; yet they breed as and when they want and I have no desire to change this. Keeping a large number of the same species merely increases my chances of success. Is the removal of eggs and chicks from captive birds any more stressful than that experienced by wild birds? In the wild birds may not lose them to man but they almost certainly lose a large number to other predators, if this were not so there would soon be a population explosion. Whilst this does not justify taking eggs and young for incubation and hand rearing. It does show that many have an over romantic view of what being a wild bird really means.

It never ceases to amaze me that many keepers establish large collections of imported parrots and then suffer a metamorphosis often calling for importation bans and condemning importers as the lowest of the low. I may be being cynical but could it be that these people's sole interest is in the generation of huge profits for themselves. It must be remembered that importers are the foundation of bird keeping without them there would never have been any birds available, if importation was prohibited today many parrot species would quickly vanish from our aviaries. Furthermore, Importers have risked their own financial positions to source the birds that we demand.

Another common misconception is that commercial breeders like myself are just money grabbing parasites that keep their birds in squalid conditions exploiting every opportunity to force them to breed. This type of statement defies all logic, as I have already stated I know of, and have no desire to find a way of, forcing my birds to breed. It is not in my, or any other breeder's, interest to subject their stock to the health risks associated with over breeding and poor conditions. Personally I have invested a substantial sum of money in providing my parrot collection with the best accommodation that I can. I have also given up a very well paid job in the hope that I can eke out a precarious living from extending my passion for parrots into my livelihood. If my motivation were purely financial I would have chosen to invest my money in a much more stable venture.

So what makes a good aviculturist? To me, it is not the ones that build the biggest aviaries or even the ones who breed the most babies. But the ones that listen to and learn from others, the ones that use the advances in aviculture to improve their own techniques and the ones that are prepared to share their knowledge with others. To you it may be someone completely different.

With over 300 species and countless sub-species of parrot to choose from, I have no interest in the propagation of colour mutations. I do however accept that to some this is the mainstay of their avicultural interest. I am proud of the way that I keep my birds and of the results that I have achieved, whilst you may not approve of my techniques surely you must accept that mine is just one of the many faces of aviculture.

by Glyn Griffiths