SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOlinillSNI NVINOSH1IWS " S 3 I d V d 9 IT 2 v.v.-' ^ _ 2 CO ^ COj| H s-'jvmw q NvvQn gc^/ “ x^m^y1' q ^ ^ O NVINOSHUWS^Sa IdVdan^LIBRARI ES^ SMITHSONIAN^INSTITUTION z r~ z £ z ° ra 2 CO ° /S#%& t; ^ ,r\ J> £ 00 ± co £ SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOlinillSNI NVIN0SH1IWS S3ldVd9IT I k,. I 4tok. 1 A I 4&k I co > \»VA5»^ • ' Wf ^ 2 XftOSV^ > 2 z CO ■•*'•'■ z CO 2: co NVINOSHimS S3ldVdan LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION 00 _ _ = CO 5 _ _ CO w /T^x UJ LJ H /&GWbS\ - fi O *W ” "v^VASVi>- Q 2: ~j z SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOlinillSNI NVIN0SH1IWS S3 I dVdaiT z n z r O r o ~ ^ ‘ . o I NVIN0SH1IINS S3ldVdan LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION Z ^ 00 2 CO 2! < } 2 > 'W*' 5 v\ > «. k z ^SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOlinillSNI NVINOSHIIWS^S 3 I d V d 8 IT “ ^ ^ <” 5 ^ oo _ i O n.un_dC^/ “ O 5 O I ~NVIN0SH1IIAJS ^S3 IdVdaiT^LIBRARI ES^ SMITHSONIANJNSTITUTION ^ « I 5 i ° CO 2 'VW fc 2 > '4gr S X > N4'cms£> 5 ?AR I ES SMITHSONIAN _ INSTITUTION 'NOIXfUIXSN^NVINOSHXIWsXa I UV J) “ ' ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ nilXSNI^NVINOSHlIINS^SB IdVUan^LIBRARI ES^SMITHSON^N JNSTITl 33 m >W' £ X.H^y m Xjgg^Z "T m !AR I ES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOlifUIXSNI NVINOSHXIHS S3IHV cn zl < r co ^ S — y^r^^pX — Z7Z0 ? 5 «fek 5 /mmm i m > VJVASqX- 2 N^’ >' 2 X'ftosvPX > nxusNi^NviNOSHxiiMS^sa i avaanzuBRAR i es^smithsonian' institi “ “ “ O’) — Uj /^± iVA^y o o XXos*^ ~ " o Z .j Z z VARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIJLfUIJLSNI NVIN0SH1IWS S3 I tit z r- ... Z .nilJLSNI NVIN0SH1II/MS S3ltiVtiail LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTIT Z H ,s/df Afr 4 § ^ Z v<*|| w '■zwl/zW w o g g %% 1 s > '^F1^ S X § 5 RARIES^SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIXnilXSNI NVIN0SHXIWSWS3ia\ .nxixsNi NviNOSHiiws S3 1 ava a n LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN_INSTIT THE AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY Edited by MARY HARVEY Vol. 87 January 1981 to December 1981 1981 0) ^entire ty^E ‘po^®N . i^iNDiylDUAL IN FULL COLOUR The Connoisseur's Bird Journal, Britain's newest and most exciting Bird Magazine is out MOW! Published bi-monthly to a 1 1 % x 8% format and printed on gloss art paper, the journal features 40 pages of articles on birds, bird fanciers and all related subjects. Regular contributors include Roy Stringer, John Stoodley, Jim trade e»oj,Hles*+m Hayward, Mike Lubbock, °*?i: ON John Cooper B.V.Sc., D.T.V.M., M.R.C.V.S., F. I .Biol, and Cyril Rogers, plus a host of other leading aviculturists. Available at1 pet shops & newsagents or by direct subscription '^ZiNea^ . ^QjJesT BRITAIN'S MOST EXCITING BIRD MAGAZINE 1 SUBSCRIBE NOW TO THIS WELCOME EDITION TO THE BIRDKEEPER’S LITERATURE _ m Just fill in and post coupon to The Connoisseur’s Bird journal Subscriptions, Flight Publishing I Company Ltd., 41 Sugden Road, Thames Ditton, Surrey. / enclose Please send me the next six issues of The Connoisseur’s Bird Journal NAME..................... ° . I ■ CONTENTS TITLE PAGE . . . . . . i CONTENTS . ii LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS . . . . . iii LIST OF PLATES . iv INDEX . . 280 LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS ARROWOOD, Patricia A. See CLARKE, Anne B. BARNICOAT, F.C. Sixty Years Ago . . . . . . 104 Successes with Birds of Prey at the Pretoria Zoo . . . .....273 BATH, Colin Breeding the Pied Butcherbird at Paignton Zoological and Botanical Gardens, Devon . . . 1 BERTAGNOLIO, Paolo The Red-tailed Amazon and other uncommon South American Parrots . . 6 BIRD, David M. and REHDER, Nancy B. The Science of Captive Breeding Falcons . . . . . . 208 BLOOMFIELD, P.J. News from Chester Zoo . . . . . . . . . . . 177 BURR, Dr. Elisha W. Indian Ring-necked Parrakeets in the Himalayan Mountains at 12,000 ft altitude in winter . . 54 CLARKE, Anne B., ARROWOOD, Patricia C. and STEMBERGER, Sherry Unusual Nest Site Construction by Captive Budgerigars . . 155 COLES, David News and Views . 57, 113, 181 COLLARD, W.J. Birds of Prey at the Natal Zoological Gardens . . . . . . . . . 274 CUMMINGS, W.D. Erasing Imprinting in Parrots and Waterfowl . . . . . 142 ELLIS, Malcolm The Oriole Finch . . . . . . . . . 130 ENGLISH, Walter G. See FOSTER, James W. FOSTER, James W. and ENGLISH, Walter G. Raptor Rehabilitation at Woodland Park Zoological Gardens . . . .«. 266 FREUD, Arthur Sprouting seeds to provide fresh and nutritious food for parrots and other captive birds . . . . 99 Meyer’s Parrot . . . .. . 169 GIBSON, L. Observations on Chloropsis . . . 35 Breeding Hardwicke’s Chloropsis . . „.. . . . 70 Kiwis at Otorohanga . . . . . 175 Notes on a Bald Eagle . . . . . . . . . . . 271 GOODWIN, Derek Some Personal Notes on Rock Pigeons . . . . . . . . 19 HAMILTON, Ned Breeding the Welcome Swallow and Fairy Martin in Captivity . . . 3 Breeding the Flame Robin in Captivity . . . . . . 90 HAWK TRUST - The Secretary The Work of the Hawk Trust . 278 JONES, Carl G., STEELE, Fay A. and OWADALLY, A. Wahab An Account of the Mauritius Kestrel Captive Breeding Project . . . . 191 KENYON, Geoffrey Plants and Aviculture . . . . . . . . . 161 KING, Margaret The Bird Rescue Association - its work and aims . . 62 KIRKWOOD, James K. Feeding Captive Birds of Prey . . . 256 KRAHE, R.G. Breeding the Striped Owl . . . . . . . 242 LOUMANN, J.W.W. Breeding and Hand-rearing the Bearded Vulture at Wassenaar Zoo, Holland .. 223 LOWE, P. Breeding the Olive or Cape Thrush . 98 MARAIS, E. See MUNDY, P.J. MAROLDO, Dr. G.K. The Whooping Crane - Lesson in Preservation . . . . 135 McLOUGHLIN, E.P. A note on the Tepui Parrotlet . . . . . . . 140 MOBBS, A.J. Breeding the Blue-winged Parrotlet . . . 65 MUNDY, P.J. and MARAIS, E. Vultures in Captivity in Southern Africa . . . . 215 NAETHER, Prof. C. Snow Pigeons breeding at 10,000 ft altitude ...................... ................... ....... 51 OLNEY, P.J. News from London Zoo - 1980 ................................................................... 55 OWADALLY, A.W. See JONES, Carl G. REDDER, Nancy. See BIRD, David M. REINHARD, Rudolph Keeping and breeding the Great Grey Owl at West Berlin Zoo ..................... 233 ROYSTON, Avril Notes on two African species ....................................................................... Ill RUSSELL, Dr. W.D. Breeding Steller’s Lorikeet ........................................................................... 152 Breeding the Knysna x Livingstone’s Lourie ................................................ 154 SAYERS, Bernard Notes on captive owls ................................................................................... 248 SCHERZINGER, Dr. Wolfgang Breeding the Ural Owl at Nationalpark Bayerische Wald, West Germany ...... 237 SCHLEE, Dr. Marsha A. Breeding the Blackbird in Captivity ............................................................. 125 SCHRENZEL, Caryn Breeding and Hand-rearing the American Black Vulture at Lincoln Park Zoo, Chicago . . . 212 SPENKELINK VANSCHAIK, Mme. J.M. The genus Bolborhynchus and the breeding of the Mountain Parakeet ......... 92 SPILSBURY, D.T. Breeding notes for my collection of Amazona Parrots for 1980 ................... 146 STEELE, Fay A. See JONES, Carl G. STEMBERGER, Sherry. See CLARKE, Anne B. TURK, A. Birds of Prey at Lilford Park ......................................................................... 276 WYLIE, Stephen R. Notes from the St. Louis Zoological Park, USA . . . . . . 178 CORRESPONDENCE Rothschild’s Grackle, J.R. Hodges, 63; Rock Pigeons: Some comments and queries, D. Goodwin, 121, C. Naether, 123. LIST OF PLATES Adult Pied Butcherbird at Paignton Zoo . . . . . 1 Juvenile Pied Butcherbird, 18 months old . . . . . 1 Pair of adult Purple-bellied Parrots . . . . . . . . 9 Pair of Red-capped Parrots . . . . . . . . 9 Young Blue-winged Parrotlet, one week after removal from parents . . 65 Blue- winged Parrotlet, 20 days old . . . . . 67 Hardwicke’s Chloropsis: at 13 days old; female at 32 days old . . . 71 Sprouting Seeds: 1. An assortment; 2. At the end of 48 hours; 3. After four days; 4. Sunflower seedlings after four days . 101 Male Blackbird feeding his offspring . . . . . . . . 126 Male Oriole Finch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 Meyer’s Parrot: aged four weeks; aged sixteen months . . . . . . 171 A view of the newly-renovated Bird House at St. Louis Zoological Park . 179 Adult male Mauritius Kestrel, Blue, September 1979 . . . . . 191 Recently fledged female Mauritius Kestrel . 199 Captive third-year White-headed Vulture . 219 Captive second-year Cape Vulture . 219 Bearded Vulture chick, one day old and at 18 days old . . . 226 Bearded Vulture at Wassenaar Zoo . . . 229 Bearded Vulture breeding aviary . . . 230 Breeding pair of Great Grey Owls at West Berlin Zoo . . . 232 Young Great Grey Owls, 60 days old . 234 Adult male Ural Owl . . . . . . . 236 Young Ural Owls, 50 days old . . . . . 236 Ural Owl chick a few hours after hatching . . . . . 239 Breeding pair of Striped Owls . 244 X-ray plate of shot Bald Eagle, Woodland Park Zoo . . . . 267 Adult Bald Eagle just before release . 269 The Avicultural Society FOR THE STUDY OF BRITISH & FOREIGN BIRDS IN FREEDOM & CAPTIVITY OFFICERS AND COUNCIL as at 31st December 1980 President DR. JEAN DELACOUR Vice-Presidents F.C. BARNICOAT J.O. D’EATH W. VAN DEN BERGH J.J. YEALLAND D.H.S. RISDON Hon. Vice-President A. A. PRESTWICH Hon. Editor MARY HARVEY Hon. Secretary -Treasurer H.J. HORSWELL Hon. Assistant Secretary MARY HARVEY Members of the Council D. COLES M. CURZON K. DOLTON M.W. ELLIS Miss J. FENTON Mrs. R. GRANTHAM A.V. GRIFFITHS R. HARVEY Prof. J.R. HODGES K.C.R. HOWMAN K.J. LAWRENCE P. LOWE R. OXLEY R.C.J. SAWYER W. TIMMIS OFFICERS OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY OFFICERS OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY PAST AND PRESENT PRESIDENTS 1894- 1895 The Countess OF Bective 1895- 1920 The Rev and Hon F. G. DUTTON (later CANON, and LORD SHERBORNE) 1921- 1925 The Rev H. D. Astle Y 1926- 1955 A. Ezra. O.B.E. 1956- 1963 D. SETH -Smith 1964- 1967 Miss E. Maud Knobei L 1968- 1972 A.A.PRE STWICH 1972 DRj.DE LACOUR VICE-PRESIDENTS 1894- 1895 The Rev. and Hon 1949- 1963 Miss. E. Maud Knobel F. G. Dutton 1950- 1955 D. Seth -Smith 1895- 1900 The Right Hon the 1952- 1961 E. J. Boose y Baroness Berkeley 1958- 1970 Allen Silver 1896- 1899 Sir H. S. Boynton. Bt 1962- 1978 G. S. Mottershead 1899- 1906 A. F. Wiener 1963- 1974 Sir Crawford 1906- 1937 Her Grace the Duchess McCullagh, Bt of Bedford 1964- 1967 A. A. PRESTWICH 1925- 1927 Her Grace the Duchess 1967- 1973 j. J. Yealland of Wellington 1970 Miss P. Barclay 1925- 1935 The Lady*Dunleath Smith, C.B.E. 1925- 1942 H. R. Fillmer 1973 D. H. S. Risdon 1925- 1951 Dr E. Hopkinson, 1973 J. D’Eath C.M.G., D.S.O. 1974- 1979 W. Conway 1938- 1962 J. Spedan Lewis 1978 W. Van Den Bergh 1980- F.C. BARNICOAT HON. SECRETARIES 1894- 1896 Dr C. S. Simpson 1914- 1916 T. H. Newman 1896- 1899 H. R. Fillmer Dr A. G. Butler 1899- 1901 J. Lewis Bonhote 1916- 1919 Miss R. Alderson 1901- 1903 R. Phillipps Dr A. G. Butler 1903- 1904 R. Phillipps Dr A. G. Butler 1919- 1920 Dr. L. Loveli -Keays Dr A. G. Butler 1904- 1909 T. H. Newman 1921- 1922 J. Lewis Bonhote Dr A. G. Butler 1922- 1948 Miss E. Maud Knobel 1909- 1914 R. I. Pocock 1949- 1970 A. A. PRESTWICH Dr A. G. Butler 1971 H.J. Horswell 1894- 1897 1897- 1899 1899-1901 1901-1906 1906- 1913 1913- 1917 HON. ASSISTANT SECRETARIES 1950-1970 Miss Kay Bonner 1971 Mrs Mary Harvey HON. TREASURERS H. R. Fillmer O. E. Cresswell 1917-1919 A. Ezra 1920 Dr L. Lovell-Keays J. Lewis Bonhote W. H. St. Quintin J. Lewis Bonhote B. C. Thomasett 1921- 1922 J . Lewis Bonhote 1923- 1948 Miss E. Maud Knob el 1949- 1970 A. A. PRESTWICH 1971 H.J. Horswell OFFICERS OF THE AVICULTRUAL SOCIETY HON [. EDITORS 1894-1896 Dr C. S. Simpson 1924 The Marquess of H. R. Fillmer Tavistock (later His 1896- 1899 H. R. Fillmer Grace the Duke of 1899- 1901 O. E. Cress well BEDFORD) 1901- 1907 1907- 1908 D. Seth -Smith D. Seth-Smith 1925 The Marquess of Tavistock Dr A. G. Butler D. Seth-Smith 1908- 1909 D. Seth-Smith 1926- 1934 D. Seth-Smith Frank Finn 1935 The Hon. Anthony 1909- 1910 Frank Finn — Chaplin (Later the J. Lewis Bonhote Right Hon. 1910- 1912 J. Lewis Bonhote Viscount Chaplin) 1912- 1917 The Rev H. D. Astley Miss E. F. Chawner 1917- 1920 Dr Graham Renshaw 1936- 1938 Miss E. F. Chawner 1920- 1923 R. I. Pocock 1939- 1973 Miss Phyllis D. Seth-Smith. 1974- 1978 1979 Barclay-Smith, C.B.E. J. J. Yealland Mary Harvey MEDALLISTS OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY THE PRESIDENT’S MEDAL Miss Phyllis Barclay-Smith, C.B.E., 14th March, I960 Arthur Alfred Prestwich, 1 4th March, i960 Dr. Jean DelacoUR. 1 3th March, 1967 Walter VAN Den BERGH, 2 1st February, 1973 THE KNOBEL AWARD Sten Bergman, D.S.C., 14th March, 1960 CURT AF Enehjelm, 1 4th March, 1960 THE EVELYN DENNIS MEMORIAL AWARD MRS. K. M. SCAMELL. 1 3th November, 1967 Printed by Unwin Brothers Limited, The Gresham Press, Old Woking, Surrey A°i^ •Birds A/ICULTURAL MAGAZINE 1981 CONTENTS Breeding the Pied Butcherbird Cracticus nigrogularis at the Paignton Zoological and Botanical Gardens, Devon, by Colin Bath (with plates) . 1 Breeding the Welcome Swallow Hirundo neoxena and the Fairy Martin Petrochelidon ariel at Taronga Zoo, by Neil Hamilton . 3 The Red-tailed Amazon and other Uncommon South American Parrots, by Paolo Bertagnolio (with plates) . 6 Some Personal Notes on Rock Pigeons, by Derek Goodwin (with line drawings) . 19 Observations on Chloropsis, by L. Gibson . 34 Snow Pigeons breeding at 10,000 feet altitude, by Prof. Carl Naether . 51 Indian Ring-necked Parrakeets in the Himalayan Mountains at 12,000 feet altitude in the winter, by Dr. E.W. Burr . 54 News from London Zoo, 1980, by P.J. Olney . 55 News and Views . 57 The Bird Rescue Association - Its Work and Aims, by Margaret King . 62 Correspondence . 63 THE AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE welcomes original articles that have not been published elsewhere and that essentially concern the aviculture of a particular bird or group of birds, or that describe their natural history. Articles should be preferably typewritten, with double spacing, and the scientific names as well as the vernacular names of birds should be given. References cited in the text should be listed at the end of the article. Line drawings should be in Indian ink on thick paper or card; photographs which illustrate a particular point in the article will be used where possible and should be clearly captioned. ADDRESS OF EDITOR Mary Harvey, Windsor Forest Stud, Mill Ride, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 8LT, England. > Top: Adult Pied Butcherbird at Paignton Zoo Below: Juvenile, 18 months old Miss J. Gregson Avicultural Magazine THE JOURNAL OF THE A VICULTURAL SOCIETY Vol. 87 - No. 1 - All rights reserved JANUAR Y - MARCH 1981 BREEDING THE PIED BUTCHERBIRD Cracticus nigrogularis AT THE PAIGNTON ZOOLOGICAL AND BOTANICAL GARDENS, DEVON By COLIN BATH (Animal Superintendent) An adult pair of the Pied Butcherbird was acquired from Perth Zoo, Australia, arriving in this country on 21st June 1972. Breeding did not occur until 1978 when three chicks were hatched on 30th May, none of which survived longer than 24 hours. Accommodation comprises an outside flight measuring eight by three by 3.6 metres high and an inside heated house, eight by three by 2.5 metres high. Both quarters are furnished with large branches and the floors deeply sanded. Sharing the aviary during 1979 were a single cock Splendid Parakeet Neophema splendida, a pair of Fischer’s Lovebird Agapornis fischeri and a trio of Sonnerat’s Junglefowl Gallus sonneratii. The Butcher¬ birds’ diet consists of small mice, day-old chicks, meat, cooked minced chicken and mealworms. In February of 1979 a short trunk section of Chusan Palm Trachy- carpus fortunei was wired into a back corner of the outside flight, the top of which was approximately three metres above the aviary floor. It was upon this that both Butcherbirds began to construct a flat nest in early March. Materials used, apart from palm fibres, included twigs,, moss, camel hair (shed by our Arabian Camels the previous spring) and, some¬ what surprisingly, a large number of hair strands forcibly plucked from the girl keeper’s head by the Butcherbirds themselves. Small pieces of silver paper, sweet wrappers and any other shiny objects pushed through the aviary wire by the visiting public were eagerly added to the fabric of the nest. On 14th March it became apparent that the Butcherbirds would not tolerate the presence of other smaller birds in the aviary and accordingly both the Lovebirds and Splendid Parakeet were removed. Presumably, the Junglefowl posed no threat to the nest and were never attacked. The first egg was laid on 17th March and our observations led us to believe that only the hen bird incubated. On 13th April two chicks and two eggs were glimpsed, though just two days later one egg had been 2 COLIN BATH - BREEDING THE PIED BUTCHERBIRD ejected from the nest and the other was missing, presumably thrown out and perhaps eaten by the Junglefowl. For the First few days, both chicks were fed entirely on mealworms by both parents. Earthworms and insects were never accepted. After about 12 days the parent birds further provided strips of flesh torn from mice. Both young left the nest on 13 th May and from the outset it was clear that the adult birds favoured feeding the bigger of their two fledg¬ lings. As a result of this neglect the smaller juvenile died a week later. The remaining offspring continued to thrive, often returning to the nest with the hen, and was seen to feed of its own accord during early June. At the time of writing, November 1980, it has only now begun to moult its immature brown and white plumage. On 2nd March 1980 the adult birds again began nesting although this year a separate structure was laid down on a weldmesh platform some three metres above the aviary floor. The previous year’s young often imitated its parents by carrying twigs. The hen began to incubate her three eggs on 16th March, all of which hatched on 9th April. The 1979 bird sometimes assisted in feeding the newly-hatched chicks, although more often begged food items from the parents for its own consumption. One chick was found dead on 30th April, the remaining two left the nest on 12th May. As in 1979, the smaller fledgling succumbed after several days of neglect and even more saddening, the remaining offspring died a week later as a result of a sudden attack by the 1979 juvenile. Almost immediately the hen bird began to renovate her nest, commen¬ cing the incubation of two eggs on 28th May. On 9th June the 1979 bird was removed and caged elsewhere. After almost four weeks of sitting the hen was flushed from the nest and on closer examination both eggs were found to be clear. Since the hen was obviously unwell, the nest was de¬ stroyed. Fortunately she is now fully recovered and both adults have now been translocated to a far deeper aviary appropriately adjacent to another pair of cracticids, the Western Magpie Gymnorhina tibicen dorsalis. * * * * As described above, the Pied Butcherbird Cracticus nigrogularis has been bred by Paignton Zoological and Botanic Gardens and this is believed to be the first success in this country. Anyone knowing of a previous breeding in Great Britain or Northern Ireland is asked to inform the Hon. Secretary. 3 BREEDING THE WELCOME SWALLOW Hirundo neoxena AND THE FAIRY MARTIN Petrochelidon ariel IN CAPTIVITY By NEIL HAMILTON (Bird Staff, Taronga Zoo, Sydney, Australia) WELCOME SWALLOW Hirundo neoxena Description Length, 15 cm. Sexes are similar, both having blue-black to the upper part of the body. Flight feathers and tail are dark brown. The forehead, face and throat are chestnut, while the rest of the underparts are white. Legs and bill black. The juveniles are similar to adults but duller in appear¬ ance. Distribution Throughout most of Australia and Tasmania except the far north. Also occurs in New Zealand and nearby islands. FAIRY MARTIN Petrochelidon ariel Description Length, 1 1.5 cm. Sexes are alike. Head regions rust coloured, darker on the crown. Back is blue-black, while the rump and breast are white. The eyes, wings and square tail are dark brown. The legs and bill are black. Juveniles are similar to adults but duller. Distribution Common over most of Australian continent except for the drier areas, but rare in Tasmania. Breeding These two species which were to breed for us at Taronga Zoo were obtained as young birds, mainly because in the past, any adults caught or donated to the Zoo would not survive long in captivity. The reason for this we found was the feeding habits and great flying speed of these species. So, instead of mist-netting the adults birds, we simply located the nesting sites of both species and obtained some young. In doing this, we did not take the entire brood, only one or two from each, depending on the number per brood. Only nestlings which were over half grown were 4 NEIL HAMILTON - WELCOME SWALLOW & FAIRY MARTIN removed as this made the task of raising them much easier. The diet for the raising of both species consisted of moths (with the wings and legs removed), mealworms (in small quantities to prevent clotting of the digestive system occurring), and fly pupae, usually mixed with red minced meat. For most of the time they were fed with tweezers or a matchstick. As the nestlings became older, the food given was dipped in water containing glucose and antibiotics. As they were becoming close to the fledgling stage, the door or lid would be left off the hot boxes in which they were kept to allow them to fly around. The temperature within the rearing room was controlled and they soon learnt to fly, becom¬ ing aware of objects and windows which they soon became proficient at avoiding. When feeding time came around some of the older and stronger birds would eat, thus teaching the others, but while still being hand-fed they received food every two or three hours, and twice at night in the initial stages. A little later the birds became too hard to handle, so they were re¬ moved to a holding cage four feet by three feet by two feet wide, giving them a little less flying room. This enabled the birds to adopt different feeding methods. The diet offered once the birds were self-supporting consisted of the egg-cake mixture, so called because it contains sponge cake, minced egg yolk, cheese and meat, to which is added vitamin E, pentavite, calcium, phosphate and colour food. Their live food consisted of mealworms, fly pupae (which are added to the egg-cake mixture), termites and, when available, moths. The aviary in which both species were placed measured 25 feet in length, 10 feet high and six feet wide. In this a “natural” landform existed, in the shape of a man-made creek with running water at all times. A reddish clay type soil for the floor, grass tussocks, dead stumps and artificial termite mounds. The shelter area consists of sandstone rock ledges, with the whole shelter painted a reddish colour. The number of birds placed in the aviary were five Fairy Martins and three swallows, the sexes of which were unknown. The only other occupants were a pair of Hooded Parrots. Breeding of both species occurred in August and September. The swal¬ lows built their nests of mud under a sandstone ledge as they do in the wild and the martins on the wall above the ledges, their nest being bottle¬ shaped. Both species were observed rolling small balls of clay to form pellets which were later carried up to the nesting site. When nesting sites were at this stage of completion, chasing of others by each species occur¬ red, sometimes quite serious. Later observations proved that it was each NEIL HAMILTON - WELCOME SWALLOW & FAIRY MARTIN 5 mate chasing the other. At that stage the lining of the nest was carried out using feathers, cotton and other soft materials. On 27th August, the swallows were noticed to have three white eggs marked with brown spots, and by 15th September, two young were on the wing. At about the same time, one young fairy martin was seen flying with the others. As far as the staff at Taronga are aware, this was the first time these species have been kept and bred in captivity. In summary, I would like to add that much of the success attained with the swallows and martins was due, in greater part, to the care and attention by the bird-keeping staff of Taronga Zoo. Special thanks to the guidance of Head Bird Keeper, Les Clayton. 6 THE RED TAILED AMAZON AND OTHER UNCOMMON SOUTH AMERICAN PARROTS By PAOLO BERTAGNOLIO (Rome) The Red-tailed Amazon Amazona brasiliensis Local Name No consolidated local name exists. General Remarks I believe that the only person who in recent years had the opportunity to observe the little known Red-tailed Amazon in the wild was Professor Guiseppe Rossi dalla Riva (who lived in Miracatu, Sao Paulo, Brazil), with whom I have been in touch since 1963. His description of adult birds of both sexes indicates that this species is sexually dimorphic. He gave me an account of the subjects taken from the nest and of those bred in captivity and describes their very unusual nesting habitat, nesting site and breeding period. Rossi dalla Riva was always extremely elusive regarding the locality from which his birds came, but through a careful examination of all his letters and a few notes he published in an Italian paper, it is possible to ob¬ tain a good approximation of this place. Only a few of the original small population were apparently left in that limited area. If the indications indirectly given by Rossi dalla Riva are sufficiently accurate, this wild population is outside the distribution area traced by Forshaw (1973). The nesting place, mainly in dead palm stumps emerging from malarial waters, could not be approached by boat due to mud and vegetation, but only on foot with slime up to the waist. These expeditions were stopped by the deterioration in Rossi della Riva’s health. Description Length: 26-40 cm. Adult Male: Forehead and lores cyclamen red turning to pinkish red on crown and occiput. Chin, throat and sides of head lilac with light blue edges becoming cobalt blue on ear-coverts. Nape and posterior neck green, the feathers edged with black. Back and scapulars mealy green. Wing- coverts and tertials green with yellow-green bordering, unconspicuous on lesser wingcoverts and lacking on primary-coverts. Primaries black and secondaries green becoming blue toward tips. Rump and upper tail-coverts green. Breast and abdomen lighter green with a blue reflection. Carpal edge red. Under wing-coverts and under tail-coverts yellowish-green. Tail green PAOLO BERTAGMOLIO - RED-TAILED AMAZON 7 with yellow-green tip, the feathers, except the central pair, subterminally banded red, preceded by very dark purplish-blue in the external pairs. Naked periophthalmic ring and cere ash-grey. Beak light horn darkening toward the tip of the upper mandible. Legs grey. The red on the head is rather variable both in extent and intensity. Adult Female: The rosy-red colour on the head is a little less brilliant and mainly restricted to the forehead, anterior crown and lores. Fea¬ thers of chin, throat and sides of head ash-grey or greenish grey with light blue bordering, more pronounced on the throat. Carpal edge paler. On the whole adult females also are rather variable. Rossi dalla Riva wrote of differences in the call. Immature: Similar to the adult female but duller and with the red usually restricted to the forehead and lores. Back green. Red on carpal edge reduced or completely absent. Cere and naked periophthalmic ring pale brown. Beak lighter. At first Rossi dalla Riva thought that immature specimens could be sexed from the first plumage on the basis of the amount of red and blue on the head, but later on he changed his mind. Nesting habitat Rossi dalla Riva met this species in the wild at the beginning of 1966 when, one evening, three pairs passed high over him in a desolate marsh¬ land interspersed with small trees and surrounded by low, wooded hills. In the area the temperature ranged from 18° to 35°C (65° to 95°C) and annual rainfall from about 1,500 to 2,000 mm. The parrots fed in the forest but nested, surprisingly, in the open area, selecting a cavity a few metres from the ground in the trunk of one of the small trees, usually a dead palm stump. The nests were difficult to locate because the parrots, noisy when in the forest or high up on the wing, became extremely cautious and secretive in the marshland. The nests were shown to Rossi dalla Riva by a local bird trapper who knew these birds, who told him that, though, exceptionally, they may also nest in the forest. The nest-holes were by no means easy to approach because of the surrounding malarial water, mud and quicksands, heavily infested by gad-flies and venomous snakes. On the first occasion two nests were discovered, one with a single chick and another with three eggs. A second visit a few weeks later reve¬ aled that only one of the eggs had hatched, the other two being infertile. In another nest there was a clutch of four eggs. The reasons that may have induced the Red-tailed Amazon to select such an unusual nesting site are difficult to understand. We can suppose 8 PAOLO BERTAGNOLIO - RED-TAILED AMAZON it was a matter of major secrecy, ie. the necessity to escape from certain traditional enemies such as monkeys, coaties or opossums, but in doing so it encountered another predator, an owl locally called Coruja which Rossi dalla Riva saw once emerging from a parrot’s nest. This was not an uncommon event and apparently in certain years the toll was heavy enough to involve almost all the nestlings produced by the small colony. Before Rossi dalla Riva rediscovered the species an old live specimen of unknown origin existed in Sao Paulo (and still does), while the more recent skin the Museu Paulista dated back, it seems, to 1934. Another live specimen was owned from 1958 to 1968 by P. H. Maxwell (London) who had obtained it from a woman whose son brought it back from Brazil. A colour photograph of this bird appeared in the Avicultural Maga¬ zine, Vol. 66, No. 1. The Purple-bellied Parrot Triclaria malachitacea Local Name: Sabia-cica, Aracua-y-ava. In the Wild The Purple-bellied Parrot is an inhabitant of the still vast coastal belt of south-eastern Brazil, from southern Bahia to northern Rio Grande do Sul, where it frequents the virgin forest, often entering nearby orchards and parks in settled areas. It moves in pairs or small family groups with little fear of man so that it can be approached and even caught by resting a slip knot on the tip of a long bamboo pole. Its dark green plumage perfectly merges in the humid forest, but if approached too closely, it may suddenly reveal its presence by fluttering away with a repeated and harsh alarm note, a sort of rapid check-check-check. It feeds on fruits, buds, bark, berries, nuts, seeds and also insects that might be caught on the wing. It is particularly fond of the small fruits of the “Palmito”, a palm growing in the dense forest of which the fruits mature from January to May, attracting small groups of Triclaria. The fibrous pith of this tree yields a starchy food substance mainly used as a thickening agent in soups and puddings. The intensive collecting of the pith, by cutting down the mature palm, has made this plant rarer in the whole littoral belt and this, together with hunting, agricultural land clearing and increasing urbanization, may be among the reasons that have contributed to the decline in distribution and number of this species. The Purple-bellied Parrot nests from September to January in a natural hollow in very old, large trees, (often a palm trunk) that it adapts or enlarges to its own requirements. Rossi dalla Riva does not give other data. Specimens he obtained, mainly young birds taken from the nest, where delicate at first, as was found by Murray (1968) and Turner (1979). PAOLO BERTAGNOLIO - RED-TAILED AMAZON 9 Pair of adult Purple-bellied Parrots Triclaria malachitacea Pair of Red-capped Parrots Pionopsitta pileata, male on left, four weeks old. 10 PAOLO BERTAGNOLIO - RED-TAILED AMAZON In Captivity Rossi dalla Riva bred this species in autumn 1971 (after he had moved to Miracatu, 140 km. south west of Sao Paulo), one male and two females being kept in a flight five metres long by two metres high by 0.8 metres, together with four Blue Sugarbirds Dacnis cayana. The male soon chose one of the females, completely ignoring the other. A certain amount of aggressiveness was shown by the paired female toward her potential rival but nothing serious occurred as she could not fly properly due to a slightly damaged wing. After repeated inspection of a box 60 cm high by 30 cm by 30 cm, the female disappeared into it on 15th October. Inspection at the end of the month revealed two eggs. The first one hatched on 12th November while the other contained a dead embryo. The chick was at first covered by a rather abundant white down and had open ear-holes. A poor quality black and white photograph taken by Rossi dalla Riva gives me an impres¬ sion of strong likeness with the chick of the Red-capped Parrot Piono- psitta pileata, confirming the close relation of these two forms in spite of different head scratching and beak morphology. Unfortunately no further data were recorded by Rossi dalla Riva, except the fact that on leaving the nest immatures are similar to the adult female, the purple colour on the abodmen of the males starting to appear with the first moult. He also mentioned a young male of which the purple colour had gradually extended over most of its underparts. Yellow flecks are not uncommon in hand-reared subjects and are due presumably to dietary deficiencies, invariably disappearing with the first moult. I obtained my first and only pair through Rossi dalla Riva in September 1969. The male was a little over three years old. Unfortunately he almost completely lacked toes of his right foot which was reduced to a mere stump. The two and a half year old female had a defective wing that prevented her from flying properly. At first they were housed in a flight 5 metres long with a perch at both ends and an open fronted shelter facing south. The male made full use of his wings, flying from the perch and reaching the opposite one after almost touching the ground. In 1976 I rmoved the pair to a smaller flight 3 metres long, partly shaded by a Thuja hedge and with a more secluded shelter internally painted dark green, a colour that they seemed to appreciate as they spent a lot of time inside. A nest-box 50 cm high by 25 cm by 25 cm, hung in the shelter, was used by both sexes to sleep in, the female retiring earlier. Toward May 1977, after a particularly rainy spring, there was much excavation at the bottom of the box. The male now sang very often and PAOLO BERTAGNOLIO - RED-TAILED AMAZON 11 I saw him twice performing a sort of symbolic pairing on the right side of the female but with both feet on the perch and without true physical contact. I am unable to say whether this was due to the uncooperative female (who did not crouch down on the perch) or to the fear of balancing on his partly disabled leg. Other South American parrots may pair with both feet on the perch (as I had the opportunity of verifying in Pionus menstruus) but surely this is not the case with the Purple-bellied Parrot. In the spring of 1978 I replaced the old nest-box with a smaller one (40 cm by 20 cm by 20 cm). A new layer of rotted damp wood was pressed onto the bottom, which the birds, as usual, immediately started throwing out. On 11th May, when these internal operations had been completed, I put a fresh egg of a Patagonian Conure in the nest and the female commenced incubating two days later. The male regularly fed her in the box and in the evenings he could be seen perched in the entrance hole, looking out. On 19th May an egg had been laid and a second one on the 22nd, when the larger egg of Cyanoliseus was removed. During the inspections the female stayed motionless with a sleek plumage, while the male sang repeatedly, flying like a butterfly a few inches from my face. On the 25th, I looked into the nest and saw a single egg. Two eggs on the 27th but only one on the 30th. On June 4th the last egg was in the seed dish with a large hole. It measured 31.4 by 24.3 mm. The eggs might have been unintentionally cracked by the lame male. Therefore this year I shall modify the nest or hang it almost horizontally in order to provide a more easy descent. Anyhow, it would be a miracle if he could manage to pair successfully in his partly disabled physical condi¬ tion. Artificial insemination in parrots is still in a rudimentary stage and I think that with untame birds is should be tried only after repeated “natural” failures. The Red-capped Parrot Pionopsitta pileata \ ^ Local name : Cuiu Cuiu General remarks This species is rather rare and decreasing in south-eastern Brazil where it is subject to seasonal movements between the interior and the coastal regions. The distribution area and habitat are similar to those of the Purple-bellied Parrot, but in the south-west where it extends to the sub¬ tropical forests of south-eastern Paraguay and north-eastern Argentina (Misiones and north-eastern Corrientes). It also penetrates cultivated areas and cut down and regrown forest more deeply than the preceding species. In the breeding period, from about October to February, males may 12 PAOLO BERTAGNOLIO - RED-TAILED AMAZON congregate in small groups attracted by certain ripening fruits, in or near the forest. This can explain the almost complete absence of females in past consignments, as with Asian Psittacula. In captive-bred birds, the sex ratio is the natural one, ie. about 50%. Clutch size varies from three to four eggs. Further to the notes I published in 1974 and 1975 the first female born in 1973 (which had been paired to an imported adult male) bred for the First time in 1976 producing a single chick which died when ten days old. In 1977 four eggs were laid and two chicks reared, a male and a female. The latter on leaving the nest showed a reddish-brown feather in the middle of her forehead which she retained through successive moults. Both this pair and the original one, which I still possess, are rather irregular in their breeding performances and on average they tend to nest in alter¬ nate years in rainy summers. Very large amounts of greenfood and spr¬ outed seeds and a sprinkler hose working some ten minutes a day during the driest months may stimulate them to go to nest. Brief Extracts from Guiseppe Rossi dalla Riva’s letters 1963 15th June “I have succeeded in getting two rare parrots Triclaria malachitacea which I have been searching for two years. I think this is the only parrot able to sing. Its voice is similar to that of the Thrush”. 1964. 21st May “I have come into possession of seven young males of Purple-bellied Parrot but unfortunately six of them died within a few days.” 2nd July “The last of the young Triclaria died (Psittacosis?) together with mv old female with whom it had come into contact. 2nd September “I have here with me a rare Amazon that not even the Sao Paulo Museum possesses: it is the Diademed Amazon Amazona autumnalis diadema". 11th November. “I stress the rarity of T. malachitacea and its rapid decrease.” 20th November “My Diademed Amazon met with an accidental death”. 2nd December “Barraband’s Parrot Pionopsitta barrabandi : The species mainly inhabits the middle stratum of the dense tropical forest. As I had the opportunity PAOLO BERTAGNOLIO - RED-TAILED AMAZON 13 to verify personally, he is in the habit of staying motionless for hours and can be detected principally thanks to his peculiar call, a sort of shrill hissing sound”. (Note: As far as I know Rossi dalla Riva did not travel in north-western Brazil much further than Cuiaba. This might mean that the distribution area of the species extends farther south in Matto Grosso than commonly considered.) Red-capped Parrot: rather timid and uncommon. I recently saw a pair in the dense and humid forest. I was able to detect it thanks to the rather pleasing song of the male. Also a more piercing call in reply to another subject on the other side of the valley. When certain fruits ripen in some points of the forest it is possible to see it arrive, but not every year, in small groups of 5-7 individuals. It nests in hollow trees”. 1965 18th February “I possess at present a pair of Diademed Amazon A. a diadema and a pair of Vinaceous Amazon Amazona vinacea. It is the first time that I have the opportunity to see a live specimen of the latter since my coming to Brazil five years ago”. 29th December “I have known that aflockof A. vinacea every year nests in a cliff about 300 Km from Sao Paulo” (Note: the datum was so unusual that I asked Rossi dalla Riva for confirmation, which he did, specifying that he had obtained it from what he considered a reliable source. He used to repeat that without the information furnished by the natives it was very diffi¬ cult to be successful in locating rare species). “Unfortunately I have lost the better of my two Diademed Amazons.” 1966 14th February “Also my second A. a. diadema died. I have presented the skin to the Sao Paulo Museum. They were very pleased to receive it as this form was not included in their collection”. 16th April “I discovered an area where the very rare Red-tailed Amazon Amazona brasiliensis lives”. 8th May “Some natives in the littoral informed me about the presence of the Wied’s Parrotlet Touit melanonotus, a species which I believed extinct in the southern part of his range (the more recent skin from the region, in the Museu Paulista, dates back to 1890). A bird trapper told me that about ten years ago he captured a pair which refused every type of food, dying in a few days”. 14 PAOLO BERTAGNOLIO - RED-TAILED AMAZON 2nd June “I have obtained three beautiful Triclaria and one A. vinacea ”. 18th October “The other day I travelled to the A. brasiliensis area and located two tame subjects in possession of local people who refused to sell at any cost. I spoke to an Indian guide and hope to get some nestlings toward January”. 7th December “I have lost three parrots, including a Triclaria. The latter is a very diffi¬ cult bird. It needs mainly green and varied food. Recently I had the opp¬ ortunity to observe a pair in the dense and humid forest.” “At last I have succeeded in getting a Red-tailed Amazon. It is a tame subject taken from the nest”. “It seems this year there are many Red-capped Parrots P. pileata normally rather rare.” 1967 28th March “I obtained a pair of P. pileata^Qxy delicate, they died in a few days. The young male hardly showed any red on the forehead”. 25 th April “There is an opportunity of buying a few young hand-reared Yellow-faced Amazons Amazona xanthops. Local aviculturists say that males have yellow heads with an orange wash on ear coverts and orange upper flanks and sides of breast”. (Note: It is curious that the same mistake (?) was made by Olrog (1968). I think that the matter would be worth recon¬ sidering in order to exclude with certainty the possibility of polymor¬ phism or sexual dimorphism. The case of A. albifrons , from Central America, is synthomatic in the opposite sense. Forshaw (1973) among others, states that in females alula and primary-coverts are green, while Ridgway (1916) hypothesizes an erroneus labelling for two adult females in the U.S. Nat. Mus. with an amount of red in the wing similar to males. An adult female in my collection has partly red alula and pri¬ mary-coverts, this colour slowly extending with age, and thus I think the two labels quoted by Ridgway could be right.) “I have here with me a new Triclaria” . 22nd May “The last of my A. vinacea died. Looking at British price lists I see that in Europe the species is cheap. Here in Brazil it is on the contrary rare. A. xanthops is less rare and I have at present in my collection a young pair”. “My female Triclaria died of Aspergillosis and now I have a single male PAOLO BERTAGNOLIO - RED-TAILED AMAZON 15 left.” 21st October “I have been once again to the swampy area where A brasiliensis lives, strongly infested by gad-flies. I saw three pairs. I have been able to contact a person who knows where these birds nest and who promised me some young for January”. 25th October “I have lost a young Triclaria, it seems of Psittacosis”. 23rd December “Two more Triclaria have died. Truly a very delicate bird. A nest subject obtained. 1969 22nd May “This year I have hand-reared five A. brasiliensis. One of them unfortu¬ nately escaped when just fledged, disappearing in the skyscraper’s intricate “forest” of Sao Paulo”. (Note: At that time Rossi dalla Riva still lived in Sao Paulo). 2nd July “At present I possess two pairs of Triclaria ”. 1970 20th April “Regarding the information you requested on the Lear’s Macaw Anodo- rhynchus leari and Glaucous Macaw Anodorhynchus glaucus I can only say that the former is not in the collection of the Sao Paulo Museum, while it seems certain that the latter nests in a locality not very far from here (a locality that, as in the case of A. brasiliensis , I prefer not reveal otherwise local collectionists would immediately send their hunters and trappers”. 14th July “I must confess that I am not sure about true sexual dimorphism in immature A. brasiliensis. The young bred by the same pair, both in 1969 and 1970, were practically indistinguishable. In another subject, from a different nest, almost the whole head is red”. 24th August “I have bought six Triclaria. One of them, a male, is lightly mottled yellow“. 1971 3rd March “One Triclaria died. A difficult species indeed!” 16 Paolo bertagnolio - red-tailed amazon “A brasiliensis is much rarer now. This year I succeeded in getting one pullus only. 1 have investigated in vain many surrounding areas with a similar habitat, sinking into the mud up to the chest. In consequence of that I developed a skin disease that withstands every cure”. 1 4th August “Two A brasiliensis escaped”. “In the south (over 1.000 km. from Sao Paulo) I have been told about the nesting of unidentified red-headed Amazons (pretrei, brasiliensis, vinacea ?) If I have time I’ll try to investigate”. 1974 15th August “I have bred both T. malachitacea and A brasiliensis ”. 1975 14th November “Among the parrots I possess there are two pairs of Spix’s Macaw Cyano- psitta spixi and one Glaucous Macaw A glaucus.” (Note: From a previous letter it would seem that C. spixi were aviary bred subjects coming from a private collection in Santos, while the A glaucus was surely taken from the wild (see letter of 4th April 1970). It is worth remembering that Sick (1969) considers the latter extinct in south-eastern Brazil and points out that there have been no recent reports from other parts of its range). “I have in all 20 A brasiliensis and 12 of these are breeders. So far I have not parted with any and for this reason local collectionists have it in for me. Perhaps I’ll sell or exchange one pair in order to calm the waters”. “Also this year I have bred T. malachitacea. There is at present a pullus in the nest”. 1976 12th January “I have suffered heavy losses because of an alimentary intoxication. Among the others the following birds died: C spixi, the A. glaucus two Vulturine Parrots Gy pop sit ta vulturina, one Hawk-headed Parrot Derop- tius accipitrinus , two Golden-capped Conures Aratinga auricapillus , two Blue-throated Conures Pyrrhura cruentata and seven T. malachitacea. A C. spixi and two P. cruentata , though still alive, are in very poor condition and I doubt whether they will survive, though I am trying to cure them by administering methionine and coline. The group of 20 A. brasiliensis did not suffer proving to be strong birds. The pair of Triclaria, with a chick in the nest, escaped poisoning because it was housed in a flight some distance from the main group and fed mainly with fresh vegetable matter, PAOLO BERTAGNOLIO - RED-TAILED AMAZON 17 which is what parent birds use in the rearing period, the male doing most of the work when the chick is near to fledge. Unfortunately when the young bird was ready to leave the box, mother and son were killed by a venomous snake of the genus Bothrops. I have now only two males left. One of them was captured here, over one of the flights, where he had been attracted from the others, perhaps a local form. It looks more stocky and robust and the song is different, completely tone deaf. I’ll manage to get at least a female of the same type. The species is rapidly decreasing”. 27th October “I have at present 16 A hrasiliensis. A number of pairs are now breeding.” 15th December “The Red-tailed Amazons are very quarrelsome. The day before yesterday, when in full breeding activity, I was forced to group them together due to an invasion of snakes that easily penetrate the small breeding compart¬ ments, by now in ruin. In the great community flight where they have been transferred my intervention was repeatedly necessary in order to put down fierce quarrels which blinded one in both eyes”. 1977 20th January “Recently I managed to get a hold of three unidentified Amazons. They are green with blue reflections on the head, one of them with a little red and yellow in the same area. The other two show no red, only a vague yellowish trace. The red-wing speculum is lacking but this colour is present in the middle of flight and tail feathers. Beak dark. They have been cap¬ tured not far from here and no one saw them before”. (Note: The descrip¬ tion is rather approximate but I think it may fit only A. dufresniana rhodocorytha. I presume this because the juvenile plumage of this form has not been accurately described.) “Some months ago Mr. Nelson Kawall unfortunately induced me to give him a pair of A. brasiliensis . I did so in order to calm the waters”. 12th October “This year I was able to put into breeding one pair only of A. brasiliensis , now with three chicks”. In his last of many letters (written the day before that of his tragic death) Rossi dalla Riva offered me all his parrots so that I could make better arrangements for a captive breeding programme. In his opinion it was possible to export them legally, producing a detailed plan supported by an internal organisation such as I.U.C.N., W.W.F., or I.C.B.P. My reply did not reach him in time and I have been informed that the birds are now in the hands of Nelson Kawall, in Sao Paulo. 18 PAOLO BERTAGNOLIO - RED-TAILED AMAZON REFERENCES Bertagnolio, P. 1974. My Birds in 1973. Avicultural Magazine 80. 135-137. Bertagnolio, P. 1974. II Pappagallo a cappuccio rosso. G. d. U. XXV 5: 5-7. Bertagnolio, P. 1974. Breeding the Red-capped Parrot Pionopsitta pileata. Parrot Society Magazine 8: 69-72. Bertagnolio, P. 1975. Notes on the Red-capped Parrot Pionopsitta pileata. Avicultural Magazine 81: 147-150. Camargo, H. F. de A. 1962. Sobre as racas geograficas Brasileiras de Amazona brasi- liensis. Papeis Dep. ZooL S. Paulo. 15: 67-77. Forshaw, J. M. 1973. Parrots of the World. Melbourne. Lansdowne Press. Gyldenstolphe, N. 1951. The Ornithology of the Rio Purus region in Western Brazil. Arkiv. for Zoologi. 2: 1-320. Low, R. 1972. The Parrots of South America. London. John Gifford. Murray, H. 1968. Breeding Notes - season 1968. Avicultural Magazine 75: 17-20. Nichols, H. A. J. & Nichols, T. D. 1978. Captive Breeding Programs for Amazon Parrots. Priv. Pap. Olrog > C.C. 1968. Las Aves Sudamericanai: Una Guia de Campo. Tomo Primero. Fundacion - Instituto “Miguel Lillo”. Tucaman. Ridgway, R. 1916. The Birds of North and Middle America. Part VII. Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus. N. 50: 103-543. Rossi dalla Riva, G. 1968. L’ Amazona brasiliensis. G. d. U. XIX, 3: 21-22. Rossi dalla Riva, G. 1971. Aracu-aiava Triclaria malachitacea. G. d. U. XXII, 11: 30-31. Sick, H. 1969. Aves Brasileiras ameacadas de extincao e nocoes gerais de conser- vacao de Aves no BrasiL An. Acad Brasil. Cienc. 41 suppl: 205-229. Smith, G.A. 1977. Breeding the Red-capped Parrot Pionopsitta pileata. Avicultural Magazine 83: 119-123. Turner, F. J. 1979. A visit to the parrot dealer - Paraguay. Parrot. Soc. Mag. 13: 16. 19 SOME PERSONAL NOTES ON ROCK PIGEONS By DEREK GOODWIN (London) Introduction Readers who are of an age when broad minds and narrow waists are apt to change their respective qualifications, will probably be aware that the Rock Dove or Rock Pigeon Columba livia in its wild, feral and some of its domestic forms, is one of my favourite birds. I have written about various aspects of it before (see references) both in our magazine and elsewhere. Here, I intend to recount my personal involvements with wild Rock Pigeons in freedom and captivity. I was ten years old when I first heard about “Blue Rocks”. My infor¬ mant was an old lady who lived in a big house and kept white fantail pigeons in a dovecote in her garden. I was then an unpleasantly “forward” child, with no trace of the horrifying shyness of adolescence soon to overwhelm me, and habitually made myself a nuisance by accosting and speaking to any adult who seemed likely to be of interest to me. Anyone who kept pigeons came, of course, into this category. I can remember little about this lady except that she was old, white-haired, soft-voiced and apparently happy to discuss the all-important subject of pigeons with an importunate child. Though she was very fond of her fantails, the pigeons she loved best of all were, she told me, the “Blue Rocks” she had kept in her younger days. In reply to my queries, for I had not heard of such creatures before, she described them: very small, neat, blue-grey pigeons with shining necks, black bands across their wings and white rumps. Conjuring their image, along with her lost youth, from the depths of her mind, her description did them full justice. I was grieved to learn that she had not been able to get any “nowadays” (1930) and hoped one day to have some of these delightful little creatures myself. I soon began to read about pigeons in all the bird books that came to my eager hands but most of them had little enough to say. Some of it was incorrect. For a long time I imagined that wild Rock Pigeons were even smaller and more dainty in appearance than they are. Gilbert White of Selborne, usually so meticulously accurate, was one of several who led me astray here, with his erroneous statement that the Rock Pigeon is smaller than the Stock Dove. When I was called up to the Army in 1940 I had long been familiar with other British wild pigeons and with domestic 20 DEREK GOODWIN - ROCK PIGEONS and feral C. livia but I had yet to see a Rock Pigeon, Sightings Overseas I saw my first in late September 1941. Our anti-tank unit was then on the Tobruk perimeter in Libya. As we drove over the steppe desert one day, three pigeons, very blue against the dusty brown ground and with shining white lower backs, flew swiftly and low across our front. My first Rock Pigeons and, although I was not in a very happy state of mind at the time, I felt a gleam of pleasure. Birds were the main solace of my life then and in the next few weeks I saw plenty new to me but it was not until some months later, in late November I think, that I saw Rock Pigeons again. At that period our gun position was in a relatively “quiet” area about three miles from the coast and each of us was allowed a day off in turn to bathe. One had but to walk north and soon the steppe began to slope downwards, one could see the blue of the sea meeting that of the sky, there were wadis (ravines, valleys) into which one descended as if entering a hot house, for they shut off the sharp wind of the desert so that one was, according to the weather, suddenly comfortably warm or uncom¬ fortably hot, and found oneself among a more luxuriant vegetation. All these wadis led to the sea and the one I followed led to a delightfully cliff-enclosed bay. I had followed the wadi, enjoying being alone among the aromatic vegetation and the many migrant birds from Europe, and had at last come out onto the golden sand of the little bay. I was about to undress when a movement in the air caught my eye. Four Rock Pigeons came sweeping down along the side of the wadi in a lovely smooth, speeding glide, punctuated by occasional forceful wing beats, curled over the cliff top to my right and with a quick flutter had alighted and were out of my sight. I had not then acquired any binoculars and, for the thous¬ andth time, regretted my folly in letting myself be persuaded into leaving them at home. I had, however, seen the indentation of the cliff where they had gone. My swim forgotten, I hurried back up the beach and cautiously appro¬ ached the cliff-top at a point that I calculated would be just above the Rock Pigeons. It was indeed, but too much so, for when I poked my head over, they were all on a ledge barely 12 feet below me and flew off almost at the same moment. For a second they were in clear view, shining green and purple necks (Libyan Rock Pigeons tend to have more vividly glossy necks than do their Scottish counterparts), barred wings and white lower DEREK GOODWIN - ROCK PIGEONS 21 backs shining. Then they were gone but, typing this, I can see them still. Alas, I never saw that wadi or that bay again as a few days later we moved to more stressful places. Later that winter, around Cyrene, I saw many parties of Rock Pigeons in flight or seeking food in the rain-soaked fields but never got very close to them. In my last few months overseas, I was based at a camp at Maadi, near Cairo. The race of Rock Pigeon found in the Nile Valley C livia schim- peri is very small and pale, indeed in its small size it quite fitted my childhood idea of the size of a wild Rock Pigeon. Most of those that I saw were associating with dovecote or feral pigeons of the same type and besides the barred wild coloured birds, checkers and grizzles were common. These wild-type dovecote pigeons seemed in the main to asso¬ ciate together and with apparently genuine wild birds but not, or only to a lesser extent, with the larger types of domestic pigeons also very commonly kept in Egypt. Most of these latter were white, pied or red in colour; in the reds and red pieds the colour was often of a very rich, glossy chestnut red such as I have never seen in domestic pigeons in England or Europe. In March 1945 I went on leave to Beirut. Here I soon discovered a bird shop. Among the large numbers of domestic pigeons, oriental frills, swifts, African owls, fantails and the rare (in England) and beautiful Damascenes were some wild Rock Pigeons, to me more lovely than even the most beautiful fancy breeds. The Egyptians and the Lebanese or at least those of them that I saw thus engaged, appear to be incapable of handling any bird or mammal gently, grasping with a force appropriate to life and death struggle with a maddened buffalo even the frailest and most harmless creature. In spite, or perhaps in part because of this, the fully domesticated pigeons of these regions are mostly very tame and disinclined to panic. It was, however, clear that these wild Rock Pigeons were com¬ pletely cowed and terrified by their recent capture and present situation. I took one in my hand, it was tense and afraid, looking at me fearfully with an orange eye set in a narrow ring of orbital skin of the same shade of bluish grey as the surrounding feathers. I was tempted to buy it and its companions and liberate them but a combination of shortness of cash and the fear that if it was thought that English soldiers would pay a good price for Rock Pigeons more would be caught made me resist the temptation. I was not, and still am not, at all sure this was, morally, the right decision. When I left Egypt in the summer of 1945 I little thought that I should ever return but the autumn of 1947 found me back. No longer in the Army, I had been asked to take part in some observations on migrating 22 DEREK GOODWIN - ROCK PIGEONS birds of prey near Port Suez. My companion and I had climbed up into the nearby hills very early one morning. We were progressing along the side of a deep ravine when suddenly my eye caught a movement on the opposite slope, which was in full sunlight. As I put my glasses on the spot I heard the familiar “Coo-roo-k’too-coo” that seemed out of place in this setting. As I adjusted my glasses a flock of about 30 Rock Pigeons was revealed. A few of the males displayed self-assertively (see Goodwin 1956) but most were warming and preening themselves in the early morn¬ ing sun in the way of pigeons , of many different species, the world over. They were the Nile Valley race and I noticed, as seems to be common even in truly wild populations, that there were one or two checkered individuals among the barred majority. Suddenly, so suddenly that all seemed to move as one, they leapt into the air with the fast, loud burst of wing clapping that means “I intend to fly some distance” and were off, flying in a tight, fast-moving flock down to the low ground and out of sight. Later in the day we saw what was probably the same flock wheeling over some waste ground not far from our lodgings. They were the last of their race of the Rock Dove that I ever saw alive, and, almost certainly, the last I ever shall see. Obtaining Rock Pigeons in Britain Back home after the war I started keeping pigeons again and soon began to plan to obtain some wild Rock Pigeons. I wanted them partly to make comparative studies on their behaviour and that of their domestic and feral descendents and partly for their sheer beauty and to assuage my very longfelt desire to own these most beautiful creatures. It was a desire easier imagined than consummated. I found that even to obtain some of the relatively Rock Pigeon-like feral pigeons of Inner London was vir¬ tually impossible by any strictly legal means. The same authorities who spend (in my view cruelly mis-spend) the taxpayers’ money to have large numbers of feral pigeons destroyed, would not allow me to catch a few to keep and study even for payment. I did obtain a few feral pigeons but these were odd individuals that came into my hands by chance - a fledgling fallen from its nest at my place of work, a pigeon suffering from beri¬ beri brought to me by someone who had picked it up in the street and so on. Needless to say these were not the especially Rock Pigeon-like indivi¬ duals that I should have selected had I been permitted to catch a few birds for myself. However, having got these few feral pigeons, and some dom¬ estic pigeons of several breeds, I felt I must have wild members of the species to make my studies of C. livia more comprehensive than they DEREK GOODWIN - ROCK PIGEONS 23 would othewise be. Chance took me, with some friends who were studying seabirds, on a week’s visit to Fetlar, one of the Shetland Isles, since famous for the Snowy Owl having bred on it. My companions feared that, if I suggested to the warden that I would like to take away some Rock Pigeons (it might be mentioned that the wild Rock Pigeon was and is on the “black list” and so can be and is shot for sport throughout its main breeding season), I might make myself highly unpopular and that some of the unpopularity might rub off on them. I thought this highly unlikely and certainly did not intend to take any young Rock Pigeons if the warden forbade it. In the event he not only appreciated the reasons for my wish to obtain as well as to watch Rock Pigeons but was highly tickled by it. “You’re the first person who’s ever come to Fetlar and wanted to see Rock Pigeons!” he told me. In spite of his help I obtained no young Rock Pigeons then. There had been heavy rains the previous week and the water percolating through the cave walls had soaked and killed two nice squabs that we found in a nest on one accessible ledge. This is a very common cause of nesting failure among Shetland’s Rock Pigeons. Later I got in touch with Dr. Theo Kay, a well-known ornithologist who then lived in Lerwick. He was sympathetic and promised to try and get me some Rock Pigeon squabs. In spite of his taking a great deal of trouble and sacrificing much of his valuable time, this proved no easy undertaking, thanks to Shetland weather. Several times young in nests that he had “earmarked” for me were killed, like the squabs I had found, by water coming through the cave walls. The following year, still bent on getting Rock Pigeons, I went to South Uist. I had written to the laird, stating my reason for wanting the birds, and asking for permission to take a few squabs, if I could find them. Un¬ like the dog-in-the-mangerish London officials, he sent a most helpful and courteous reply, via his factor, saying that I was welcome to take up to six Rock Pigeons but expressing doubts as to whether I should find any accessible nests. It is a common error to suppose that all Rock Pigeons nest in inaccessible sites. One of my other helpful contacts had, however, told me that there were, or at any rate had been a few years before when he visited the island, Rock Pigeons on the cliffs just north of Lochboisdale and that he thought some of the caves there would be easy to get into. I was then 35 and a young South African ornithologist in his early twenties was with me. Like most other bird watchers I have met he th¬ ought it a waste of time to look at pigeons, let alone scramble and climb 24 DEREK GOODWIN - ROCK PIGEONS in their pursuit but he kindly offered to help me obtain any young Rock Pigeons that two might reach more easily than one, provided that I alone did the finding of the nests while he regaled himself elsewhere with birds he considered of more interest. Crossing the two miles or so of rough heather moor to the coastal cliffs I was stimulated by the sight of a small party of Rock Pigeons that flew past me on their way to the “machair” (low lying arable and grazing land) on the west coast. As elsewhere in Britain, the South Uist Rock Pigeons sought food on arable and pasture land. I think it is unlikely that this species occurred in the British Isles, at least at any period when the climate and natural vegetation were at all similar to those at present, before agricultural and pastoral man had invaded and altered much of the habitat. Scottish moorland is not easy walking country and it was about two hours before I reached the coast, considerably hotter than when I had set out. Walking along the cliff top was easier and frequent partial descents to try to get views into the mouths of caves and fissures, although tiring and time-consuming, were both exciting and enjoyable. There is no need to enter a sea cave to see if it is being used by Rock Pigeons. Pigeons are moulting some of their small down feathers in spring and summer and, if none of these little white feathers are sticking to the wet parts of the rocks around the cave entrance, one can be fairly certain that the cave is not worth further investigation. The converse is, however, far from true. Many caves, fissures and geos that are used for roosting, or for resting in by day, have no suitable ledges or nooks for nests. One such that I entered, a small cave with a small entrance, held no nests but about half a dozen Rock Pigeons. Most escaped past me while I was still in the widest part of the cave’s mouth but one delayed and, as it flew between my legs, I grabbed at and, to my great surprise, caught it. I could hardly believe it as, with thumping heart, I scrambled out into the light and looked at the beautiful male Rock Pigeon in my hands. My first impulse was to keep it and had I been nearer home, or had I even a suitable large basket to house it temporarily, I should have done so. I had however, omitted to bring any such receptacle, partly from a super¬ stitious “don’t fill your jar before you’ve caught a fish” overhang from childhood conditioning and partly because I had thought, quite wrongly, that it would be easy enough to buy one in Lochboisdale. I knew if I got the bird home safely it would probably settle down as readily as do feral pigeons that have never been confined before but I felt a bit guilty at the idea of putting this glorious wild pigeon to the fears and discomforts of unsuitable confinement for the next four days. On a sudden impulse I DEREK GOODWIN - ROCK PIGEONS 25 Fig. 1. Rock Pigeon of nominate race Columba 1 livia. Diagrammatic sketch, emphasising the areas used in display. The glossy, green and purple specialised neck fea¬ thers; the black wing bars and the white patch on the lower back which they abut on and emphasise. When the bird is alarmed the white rump patch is concealed by the inner wing feathers and flashes into view as the bird takes flight. Fig. 2. Rock Pigeon in medium in¬ tensity wing-lifting display, as seen from above. Note juxtaposition of black wing bars and white rump patch. Fig. 3. Three types of nest sites found on South Uist: (i) In hole in vertical cliff face (ii) On sheltered ledge in an inlet (but not a cave or geo) of the cliff. (iii) On sloping ledge in cave . I was surprised to find that the wild Rock Pigeons had managed to construct nests on ledges such as this, that although where the nest was built had only a shallow slope, neverthe¬ less were sloping downward. Pres¬ umably the heather stems and sea¬ weed used as nesting material “grip¬ ped’ the surface better than the twigs, straws, etc., used by town-liv¬ ing feral pigeons, which I have not known to succeed in making a nest “stay put” in a comparable site. 26 DEREK GOODWIN - ROCK PIGEONS opened my hands and let it go. This salved my conscience, or perhaps gratified my sentimental whim would be a better way of putting it, but it got me no nearer my objective. A little further on my attempts to climb up to a small recess in a low piece of cliff were encouraged when a Rock Pigeon flew out and, after shooting away for the first twenty yards or so, went into a low intensity display fight, in this situation a sign of some strong impulse countering the urge to flee. On reaching and putting my hand into the niche I was not surprised to find a nest with two chipping eggs, though very disappointed, as the young would not be old enough to take when I left in four days* time. A similarly placed nest a little further on held two just hatched nestlings, equally useless to me. Then I found and climbed into a great fissure in the cliff. About 20 pigeons came out of it but not all at once. Those that saw me dashed past me into the open and others, by twos and threes, alarmed by the commotion of their fleeing companions, walked out from still hidden nooks and ledges and only took wing when they caught sight of me. A majority of the (presumed) nests were in nooks that I could not reach. Three on small ledges on the sloping rock face that I was clambering about on, and which I managed to reach, held two sets of chipping eggs and one brood of newly-hatched young. Evidently factors in the environ¬ ment had caused synchronous laying of all five pairs, probably also in the other nests that I could not reach. All these five nests were on top of nests in which young had recently been reared, proof that, contrary to what one might have thought from a distant inspection of the cliffs, nesting sites were in scant supply, as neither wild nor domestic pigeons use the same nest twice in succession if an equally good alternative site is available. I went back to the hotel that evening tired out and a bit downhearted, but awoke next morning in an optimistic mood, eager to get to the coast and continue my search. This sort of quest, of course, satisfies man’s deep and instinctive urge to search and hunt and, like all human behaviour based on fulfilment of instinctive urges, if there is the slightest chance of success, and sometimes if there is not, the characteristic accompanying mood of eager optimism is only banished by physical exhaustion and returns as soon as one is rested. The second day brought its frustrations but also a measure of success as, on a sheltered ledge on the far side of a narrow inlet, I found a nest with one squab about 12 days old. By climbing the easily scaleable wall on my side of the inlet, I could see the young bird on its nest across the 12 DEREK GOODWIN - ROCK PIGEONS 27 foot chasm between but getting it was another matter. I managed to work my way round the head of inlet to a point directly below the nest but was unable to climb to it. Discussing it with John, when we both met over supper, he felt (rightly) that he was a better cliff climber than I and generously offered to come with me and try to get the bird for me next day. When we arrived there next morning the tide was fully in and water foamed darkly in the inlet. Hot from our walk and realising that we should have to wade round at the head of the inlet, we stripped down to bathing trunks. John soon got to the point below the nest and started, not so quickly, to scale the cliff wall. He was nearly at the nest and I was just wondering how he was going to climb down with the squab when, to my horror, he fell backwards off the rock face and vanished, feet last, under the surface of the foaming water. For a horrid moment I visualised him striking some of the many underwater rocks with fatal result, but, to my relief, he broke surface, floundering across to me and climbed out. He was blue and shivering, as the sea was icy cold although the air temp¬ erature was warm, but he was unhurt except for a few scratches and not even disenchanted with the whole project. So we soon put our second plan into operation. We had borrowed a landing net, and two of the longest sticks we had been able to get hold of. These, lashed together, would, we thought, enable us to reach across the chasm and, with luck, scoop the squab off its nest, into the net and thence into our hands. My first few attempts to insinuate the net under the young bird failed dismally. At length, however, I succeeded but as I drew it back, the lashings gave way, the net jerked down at an angle and the young Rock Pigeon was thrown into the sea. I don’t think the fact that my reaction was to jump instantly into the water and snatch up the struggling bird proves (as one cynical hearer of the tale has claimed) that I care more for pigeons than for people. It was rather a realisation that the bird could not save itself, might be swept away, and that I was more directly responsible for its plight than I had been for John’s when he fell in. After all, he was a free agent, the bird had been in my power. I realised, however, what my friend had suffered. The water, which came nearly to my shoulders, was so cold that for a few seconds I literally could not get my breath or move. I held the young Rock Pigeon, which luckily I had lifted high before the cold affected me, above my head and remember thinking that if I did not breathe both of us would be done for. Then, of course, I did manage to draw breath, and floundered ashore. Fortunately the young bird soon recovered from its ordeal. Within a few hours it had accepted me as surrogate parent and so 28 DEREK GOODWIN - ROCK PIGEONS was no trouble to feed. My attempts to secure companions for it failed, however, and I left for home with just one Rock Pigeon instead of the five or six I had hoped for. Keeping Rock Pigeons Joys, like sorrows, seldom come singly, however and very shortly after I arrived home in Virginia Water, I heard from Dr. Kay in Shetland. He had got a young Rock Pigeon for me and was sending it down by plane. The bird duly arrived, after the usual delays and muddles that are, in my experience, the invariable concomitant of air travel whether by man or bird. It proved to be a cock and as the one I had got in South Uist was a hen (Rock Pigeons can be sexed by plumage colour even in the juvenile plumage) I was delighted. Having been taken from the nest at a later stage than my hen bird this youngster did not co-operate very willingly in being fed by hand. But thanks to the example of the South Uist bird and my domestic and feral pigeons, it became moderately tame. As soon as they began to fly I let them free, thinking (wrongly) that they would stay with the other pigeons. From the first their behaviour was of great interest. It did not differ in kind from that of their feral and domesticated conspecifics (that I was keeping under identical conditions) but all their escaping reactions were more intense and “quick off the mark”. The Rock Pigeons were not more timid toward me or other people, indeed the hen was even tamer than any of my other pigeons except one hen feral who, like herself, had been hand-reared from a squab, but they were much more alert. They also had the instinct to follow their father, or in his absence other adult pigeons, to distant feeding grounds, very highly developed. At first, whenever one of my other Pigeons took wing to circle round or perform a display flight, the young Rock Pigeons would shoot off after it, using their fast, vigorous “distance flight”, only to falter in obvious bewilderment when it turned back and they found themselves without their “leader”. Then one day, after they had been at liberty about 3 weeks, both were missing. They were at the age when young racing pigeons, and some other active domestic breeds, are apt to “fly away” as fanciers term it; that is the young pigeons either range off by themselves, or, more often, follow some passing flock. They may lose themselves or deliberately settle else¬ where, they may return days later, tired and hungry. Usually youngsters that do return of their own accord after “flying away” stay for good. So when, to my relief, the young cock Rock Pigeon came back next day and the hen the day after, I thought that they were safely settled. Alas, DEREK GOODWIN - ROCK PIGEONS 29 it was not so: about a week later they were missing again, and although both had rings with my name and address on them, I never saw or heard of them again. I had failed but Dr. Kay was still active on my behalf and shortly after my loss, in August, he sent me two more young Rock Pigeons. These were, I saw with slight disappointment, both hens. So I put them with two ice-blue domestic pigeons of the same age and left them all until they were very hungry before hand-feeding them all together, one at a time of course, but with the other three “penned” between my body and the wall so that they could not get more than a foot or two beyond me and the bird I was hand-feeding. After a day or two of this the young Rock Pigeons became fairly tame. The parents of the two young domestic pigeons - a silver cock and an ice-blue hen - discovered after a few days where their young were, visited them and fed both them and the young wild birds, surprisingly, as usually parent pigeons, unless they have lost their own young, will not adopt strange young of this age, especially when, as in this case, they differ noticeably in colour and “jizz” from their own children. The young Rock Pigeons regarded them as parent-substitutes and, as a result, when adult showed sexual preference for ice-blue and silver pigeons (Goodwin 1958). In view of my previous losses I decided to keep these two imprisoned until they had paired and had eggs. So it was the following spring, before, at different times and singly, they were released. As I type this, nearly 24 years later, I can still re-live the anxiety I felt when the first Rock Pigeon to be let out, after a brief period on the roof of the converted garage she had lived in, flew high into the air and commenced to circle ever wider and higher. It was a fine day and I knew that in such weather the danger of a “fly-away” is greatest although the danger of accidental loss through dis-orientation is least. Frenziedly I drove my other pigeons into the air every time that the circling wild bird seemed to be looking down or in a position where they might catch her eye. I held her mate (a silver, like her foster father) in my hand, ready to throw him into the air as a “last resort“ if she seemed about to break away and fly right off. A last resort that I knew would not succeed unless he saw and flew after and then with her, and her present height made that unlikely, as he was anxi¬ ous to be back on their near-hatching eggs on which, but for me, he would have been sitting. Lovely as was the sight of this beautiful pigeon, that had never flown more than a few yards, flying so strongly in high, widening circles, I could see she was in a nervous and unsure mood. If any pigeon who “knew 30 DEREK GOODWIN - ROCK PIGEONS where it was going44 passed within sight of her she might follow it and be lost. Then at last (she had not been flying more than 15 minutes but it had seemed like an age), to my joy, I saw that she was coming a little lower and the wide circles of her flight were contracting, slightly and irr¬ egularly, but contracting nevertheless. I scared some of the other pigeons up into the air. Their movements caught her eye, as I had hoped they would, she came lower, in a half swoop but still circling. The other pigeons settled back on the roof; the Rock Pigeon came lower. I waited until she was, or rather would be the next moment, in a position to see, and then flung her mate as far into the air as I could. She saw him. I do not know whether, in her bewilderment, she at once recognised him but she came still lower and, when he turned and flew to the roof, she followed and alighted hesitantly beside him. He, of course, at once knew her and turned and displayed briefly to her, she certainly then recognised him and I knew that all was well. Having overcome her initial “infantile” fear of flying downwards from a height (which every pigeon who has always been captive has when first released) and having once come down, after flying high, and found mate and home, there was not the slightest risk that she would now fly away. Her sister did not lay until some weeks later but was then settled in similar manner except that she did not rise so high, and, perhaps because I had more confidence in the outcome, I did not feel so “heart in the mouth” and consequently do not remember the details clearly. Once again I was able to make comparative observations on tame Rock Pigeons kept at liberty with feral and domestic pigeons under the same circumstances. The same alertness and very full development of all escape behaviour was shown by these two adult Rock Pigeons. It was especially striking when all the pigeons were sunning themselves on the lawn and were suddenly scared by a car backfiring or a gunshot in a neighbouring garden. The two Rock Pigeons would be five feet or so up in the air before any of the others was visibly clear off the ground. I must emphasise that this speed and efficiency of escaping reactions was not correlated with any lack of tameness towards people. All four Rock Pigeons would always struggle violently and with surprising strength if held in the hand. In the case of the very tame hen, which had of course been held and carried about by hand since her 12th day of life, this violent struggling when held began as soon as she was able to fly. Before she had shown not the least sign of resistance when grasped. As with tame hand-reared Jays Garrulus glandarius which also struggle violently when held, this behaviour did not seem by itself to induce any lasting fear. If I opened my hand when I DEREK GOODWIN - ROCK PIGEONS 31 held the tame young Rock Pigeon she would not even fly off it. Some domestic and feral pigeons also struggle in the hand (if properly held, I mean, if carelessly held nine out of ten will struggle) but many do not and very few with the same wholehearted violence as did the Rock Pigeons. Domestic pigeons at liberty tend to alight and rest only on one or a few buildings, usually their owner’s house and its outbuildings (if any), at least if these are the nearest buildings to the place where the pigeons are kept. Unless they go “fielding” they usually restrict their foraging to their owner’s garden or other open areas contiguous with the place where he feeds them. This, presumably, is because they have some more inhibitions against alighting or resting on strange buildings and, under the conditions in which they usually live, there is little incentive to do so (they will, of course, explore other buildings if they have no nest site at home, explore strange ground in search of water if this is not given by the owner, and so on.) To my surprise, in view of their parents’ way of life, I had found that feral pigeons, taken as young birds in London, behaved in the same way. The two female Rock Pigeons showed that this trait was absent or much weaker in wild form, at least, if as I think was the case, they were typical of it. From the start they settled freely on neighbouring houses (all the houses in question were fully detached and surrounded by gardens) and, at least during their first few weeks of liberty, often alighted in neighbours’ gardens. On some occasions (and doubtless on many that I did not see) their mates would follow and begin to “drive” them when they did so. Driving of a female pigeon by her mate is his usual response (during periods of mutual sexual activity) to her approach¬ ing other males but it is also done to try to force her to move away from any place where the male feels afraid or ill at ease. (Goodwin 1956). Its use in this situation clearly showed that the domestic males were afraid or anxious when in a garden strange to them. As racing pigeons often do, but as none of my domestic and feral pigeons at that time had hitherto done, both hen Rock Pigeons started to go “fielding”, mostly in a large field about third of a mile away, when their young were about 7 days old. By the time parental cares permitted both sexes to be away from the nests together, the habit was well estab¬ lished and although their mates at first drove them when they alighted in the fields, this did not stop them or make them fly at once back home. Indeed it ended with first their mates, and then all my other pigeons, following their example and fielding, despite ample supplies of food, minerals and grit at home. Unfortunately, soon after this personal affairs involved my going to 32 DEREK GOODWIN -ROCK PIGEONS live in London. I tried to give my pigeons away to good homes but it soon became evident that I had not succeeded. Perhaps because I had given them for nothing (I have a possibly foolish dislike of selling any living creature), they were soon neglected and ill housed and before many months had passed I was told that they had flown away. I hope this was the truth for at least my Rock Pigeons and my ex-London ferals would have been able to look after themselves. I hope that the former lived to pass on their beautifying genes in some feral population. Feeding and comparisons with Palestinian Rock Pigeons Dr. Jurgen Nicolai, who is well-known for his many important studies on pigeons and other birds, found that the Rock Pigeons he kept were (in some contrast to mine) no trouble at all to settle initially but very sus¬ ceptible to canker and other common diseases of domestic pigeons and that they needed to have plentiful supplies of many different small seeds besides the usual grains and pulses given to domestic pigeons (Nicolai 1969). On the contrary my Rock Pigeons never showed the least sign of any ailment, rather of consistent and very vigorous health although at times various sick or injured pigeons that were brought to me, were housed near them, and they received no special foods. Like my domestic and feral pigeons, they were given a staple mix of wheat and maple peas, with the addition of small quantities of wholemeal bread, peanuts, bits of cheese, and what they took at times from house scraps thrown onto the lawn for the wild birds. While they were kept captive the two hens, like my other captive wild pigeons, had a little hemp, millet or canary seed thrown daily among the deep coarse sawdust on the floor of their enclosure, to give them exercise and interest searching and “scratching” (the bill-flicking movements) for it. Once they were given their liberty I did not, as far as I remember, bother to give them small seed regularly. Grit and Kilpatrick’s Pigeon Minerals were always available and, like my other pigeons, when they were feeding young, they ate a lot of the latter. The differences between my experiences and Nicolai’s might, especially in view of mine being based on only four individuals, be due to chance. They might on the other hand be due to genetic differences in the birds involved. It appears (Nicolai 1976) that Dr. Nicolai’s Rock Pigeons came from Palestine. Whatever it may be for its human inhabitants, compared to the Shetlands and Hebrides with their long winter nights and cool wet summers, Palestine probably is a “land flowing with milk and honey” (or at least with seeds and small snails) to a Rock Pigeon. It would not be DEREK GOODWIN - ROCK PIGEONS 33 surprising if Palestinian Rock Pigeons needed a more rich and varied diet than do their Shetland counterparts. Hopefully other readers who have kept wild Rock Pigeons will tell us of their experiences. REFERENCES Goodwin, D. 1956. The significance of some behaviour patterns of pigeons. Bird Study 3: 25-37. Goodwin, D. 1958. The existence and causation of colour preferences in the pairing of feral and domestic pigeons. Bull. Brit. Orn. CL 78. 136-139. Goodwin, D. 1970. Pigeons and Doves of the world, second edition. London & New York. Nicolai, J. 1969. Tauben Haltung-Zucht-Arten. Kosmos, Stuttgart. Nicolai, J. 1976. Evolutive Neuerungen in der Balz von Huasetaubenrassen als Erge- bnis menschlicher Zuchtwahl. Z. Tierpsychol., 40. 225-243. 34 OBSERVATIONS ON CHLOROPSIS By L. GIBSON (Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada) Chloropsis are attractive green birds and the species and sexes are all rather alike, with the obvious exception of C hardwickei. They are birds of tropical Asia, with Bangkok being the approximate centre of the range for all species. This does not mean that all are found in Thailand, although five species overlap there. They can be fairly described as song birds, and are kept as such in their native lands. The following notes are observations on two species, eleven C. auri- frons and five C. hardwickei, over a period of seven years, in my own aviaries. Chloropsis are sometimes called leafbirds. This is the Malay name, but I do not know if this is the original. It probably alludes to the green colour, or possibly to their arboreal habits, and is a reasonable linguistic description. In the “Bird Guide of Thailand ” (Lekagul and Cronin), they are re¬ ferred to, in Thai, as “Banana Leaf Green Birds”. My Siamese syntax being poor, I do not know if this is a name or merely a description. It could also be “Leaf Green Banana Bird” or ’’Green Banana Leaf Bird”. Thai speakers please write. The term “Lruitsucker” is misleading, and sounds like some kind of parasite. The scientific name Chloropsis is easy enough to use. C. aurifrons is usually referred to as the Gold-fronted Chloropsis, whereas the name really means “Gold-forehead”, which is descriptively accurate. It will be called simply aurifrons from here on. C. hardwickei is perhaps named for Albert Yorke, sixth Earl of Hard- wicke, an Englishman who was in India at the end of last century. This is only an inspired guess, as I was unable to dig up any information on the name. I have always found that the study of a bird’s native habitat is one of the more fascinating sidelines of aviculture. It has always been a source of annoyance to me that I travelled a lot before I started keeping birds, and am constantly reminded of lost opportunities for studying a par¬ ticular species in situ. But I always had a keen interest in, among other things, ornithology, botany and entomology, and still took in a lot of useful information. The study of habitat, including climate, geography, flora, and even local cultural attitudes towards birds, is an important early step in the L. GIBSON - CHLOROPSIS 35 attempt to breed a difficult species, or to improve success with more easily bred birds. It is most interesting to actually visit an area, but a trip to the library is usually safer, almost as helpful, and much cheaper. Apart from general field descriptions, I have been unable to find any specific accounts of Chloropsis, either in the wild or in captivity, but I do not have access to a great deal of literature. Nothing appears to be recorded of their breeding habits. Books on aviculture give general infor¬ mation only and also misinformation. An example of the latter is a fre¬ quently made statement that fruit is the mainstay of the wild Chloropsis diet. My experience with the birds does not bear this out, but it can be easily envisaged how the idea arose. I believe it is due to observer bias. The birds are commonly reported as flocking to a fig tree, etc, which they do; it is easy and rewarding for an observer to watch such a tree and report on the large number and variety of birds that visit it. The food is identifiable, and of course it remains on the same spot. Birds foraging for insects do so more discreetly than when feeding on fruit, and of neces¬ sity they must scatter over a wider area. If there is a difference in num¬ bers, there would tend to be more at the single source of fruit, and fewer in view over the insect habitat. In addition, it is much more difficult to identify the food stuff where insects are concerned. They may be carried off to another spot to be eaten ; whereas there is no problem in identifying fruit, and the bird may have to sit on the one spot until it has finished eating. It would certainly remain in the tree or bush. An example of this was seen in my own garden. Overseas visitors sitting in the garden, over a two week period in July, saw a number of Robins T. migratorius spend part of the day, every day, sitting in a cherry tree and stuffing themselves with fruit. Not knowing anything about Robins, they concluded that they were fruit- eaters, or at least vegetarians. In fact, 90% of the diet of local Robins consists of earthworms. In fairness to the Robins, Starlings are a much greater nuisance in the garden. Distribution and Habitat Aurifrons has the widest distribution (along with C. cochinchinensis) and for this reason is probably the commonest species. Its ability as a songster, as well as its availability, may influence its collection by export¬ ers, and it is certainly the commonest Chloropsis in aviculture. It ranges from India and Sri Lanka across Indochina, being absent, I think, from the Malay Peninsula and reappearing in Sumatra. The range of C. hard- wickei is rather vaguely given as the Himalayas - exactly where is not clear, but it would have to be the eastern half - with patchy distribution 36 L. GIBSON - CHLOROPSIS across the northern half of Indochina into China, where it borders on the latter. Like the aurifrons, it reappears to the south of its range, in peninsular Malaysia in this case. One subspecies of hardwickei (probably Indochinese) is said to have quite orange underparts. All my birds were a dull yellow ochre colour. I have no information on the distribution of subspecies, but I have seen a pair of Malaysian birds with the same colour¬ ing. The intermittent distribution of hardwickei may be partly explained by the fact that it is a bird of highland forest, whereas aurifrons is a bird of lowland forest, with 1000 m. (3,300 ft.) being the approximate limit in both directions ( ± 300 m.) Possibly these Chloropsis, and other species in the area, have a more continuous distribution than reported. Asian ornithological records have been compiled by a tiny handful of dedicated individuals, scattered in area and time, struggling against geographical, political and cultural odds. The semi-permanent state of war in Indochina has been both a hindrance and a help, the latter because Europeans came and studied the birds in the area. Constantly active, Chloropsis are strictly arboreal and are associated with patches of broadleaf deciduous or evergreen forest. Their forest habitat means at least 150 cm. (60 in.) of rain a year, and usually much more. There is a high year-round humidity, even when the rain is mark¬ edly seasonal (or monsoon) in character. There is often a secondary peak of rainfall in monsoon areas, and the “dry” season is only relative. The annual mean sea level temperature for Indochina coastal areas varies only a degree or two around 27°C (80°F). The mountain habitat of hardwickei means even more rain, and many areas experience frequent mists, again with high annual humidity. The mountainous northern parts of the Hard- wicke’s range have cool night temperatures in the winter, regularly below 10°C (50°F) and on occasions below 5°C (40°F) as the bird can be found at 2000 m. (6600 ft.). However, it may migrate downhill in the winter, as is common with high mountain birds in the tropics. At any rate, winters are relatively brief, with daytime temperatures quite warm by our nor¬ thern standards. I suspect that C hardwickei is not such a highland bird in peninsular Malaysia (Malaya proper). Even so, upland temperatures are very warm, and there is little seasonal variation throughout the whole area; so the bird may be envisaged there as living in jungle with more than 250 cm. (over 100 in.) of evenly distributed rain, in temper¬ atures of at least 25°C (77oF), in sauna-like conditions the year round. It is of course, difficult to generalise over such a large area, and these comments are basic descriptions only, but for avicultural purposes we can classify Chloropsis as hot, wet area birds. L. GIBSON - CHLOROPSIS 37 General The two species under study are the same size, varying by up to 2 or 3 grams on' either side of 35. The hens are about 10% lighter than the cocks, but as only a small number were checked this may not always apply. They average 15 cm (6 in.) from the top of the head to the tip of the tail, when measured in a normal upright perching position. Such measurements are only approximate, for the degree of extension of the neck can alter this distance. The largest birds were the first pair of Hardwicke’s and the present light green aurifrons, all of which were 16.5 cm (6V2 in.) long, measured as above. Most books, however, list the birds as somewhat larger than they really are. The behaviour of both species is identical, and all comments apply to both unless stated otherwise. Chloropsis need to be catered for in a way that is different, but not difficult. Once their physical and psycho¬ logical needs are understood, they prove to be tough, long-lived birds that are hardier than most people realise. At the beginning, their most aviculturally important trait should be mentioned. At best this is dwelt on only briefly by writers in aviculture, or at worst, not mentioned at all. For some reason, ornithological works usually make some reference to it. This is the life-long, unpredictable, incurable aggressiveness of the Chloropsis. Grzimek’s Animal Life Encyclo¬ paedia, Vol. 9, states that wild Chloropsis will even chase other birds from nearby trees - a fact borne out by an escapee from my aviary. Under¬ standing this trait is a key factor in keeping the birds, and emphasis is placed on the words unpredictable and incurable. Failure to appreciate this is a major cause of initial setback with Chloropsis, and has been a barrier to breeding. Experience with two pairs of hardwickei has shown them to be more persistently aggressive than aurifrons. In two groups of six birds, each group consisting of four aurifrons and a pair of hardwickei , a cock Hardwicke’s dominated one group, and a hen Hardwicke’s the other. Fortunately I have never had more than a pair of hardwickei at a time. Both species have turquoise shoulder patches. The patches are nor¬ mally hidden under the green, or show only slightly. When the birds quarrel, the patch is half exposed, and is displayed at the other bird, accompanied by an annoyed “chat”, rather like a Shama’s call. A serious threat is made by full exposure of the turquoise on half open, shaking wings. Shaking (with rage) is a better description of wing movements than is trembling, which implies fear. This stage is accompanied by an assort¬ ment of loud angry chattering calls. As blue seems to be a threat signal, it 38 L. GIBSON - CHLOROPSIS would be interesting to see the reaction of Chloropsis towards birds with blue plumage. Chloropsis cannot abide the following, in order: birds of the same species and same sex, others of the same species and opposite sex, and, almost equally, other Chloropsis species of the same sex, especially males. Then come other Chloropsis of the opposite sex, followed by birds of similar feeding habits. Having worked through all the above, the Chloropsis will tackle any other bird under 50 g. They may, however, ignore small seedeaters. Cocks are usually more aggressive than hens, but hen Hardwicke’s can be dominant. Hen aurifrons are invariably at the bottom, but can be bad with other hens, or other types of bird. The most tolerant combi¬ nation is two hen aurifrons, followed by a pair of aurifrons. The hen aurifrons are also more tolerant with other birds, but the cock of a pair will more than likely cause trouble on occasions, both with the hen and other types. They fight and establish a pecking order, but it is most impermanent and there is no ensuing peace. A number five bird of six, after huddling defeated in a corner, went berserk and flayed a lot of feathers off the number one bird, whence it became number one for a while. To make the situation more nerve -racking, they will hold an armed truce for anything from a few days to a few months. Then when you go away for the day, all hell breaks loose. They do not kill one another in a prolonged fight, although this can happen. The usual course is to establish domi¬ nance. Then the number one bird harries the number two mercilessly, but does not chase after the others much. In between bouts of chasing, the dominant bird sits on or near the food dish, and keeps all others away. Other birds which eat the same food suffer also at this stage. The losing birds then die off at rates which vary according to the circum¬ stances. This is of course not uncommon among birds, and I have had trouble this way between several Bulbul species, with fatal results. If two or more Chloropsis are kept in one cage, it is essential that every bird is accounted for, and seen to be feeding, every day. This also applies to vulnerable birds caged with them. If several Chloropsis are together in a heavily planted aviary, they must be individually recognisable to the owner because, as a rule, they feed one at a time. An outside aviary should be checked morning and evening in cold weather, as a deprived individual would not last until the next day. L. GIBSON - CHLOROPSIS 39 I have not conducted any experiments to see what brings on the aggressive spells. It does seem that the birds get worse with the onset of cold weather. This is strange, because they would not experience this in the wild, except for some hardwickei. They also seem to be more bad- tempered if deprived of nectar, particularly during a cold spell. If they are crowded, and especially if they are confined together in a small area, fighting immediately breaks out. Longer spells of peace were noticed in the largest aviary, and it would be interesting to hear about Chloropsis in very large zoo aviaries. There is also the serious problem of what to house with Chloropsis, as not many people can spare an aviary for a few birds of one species. When they come into breeding condition, even if breeding is not under way, no birds are safe, except those that are so large that they are a danger to the Chloropsis. Birds that have been kept with non-breeding Chloropsis include Copsychus (Shamas and Magpie Robins) with which an armed truce usually develops, as these birds are somewhat aggressive too. Silver-beaked Tanagers R. carbo and Pekin Robins are safe because they are so fast. This is the only tanager I have ever had. The smaller Garrulax, canorum and mitratus, have been fine, and not too aggressive themselves. But the bird that gave the best account of itself was a Red-crested Cardinal Paroaria cucullata. This bird did not attempt to bother the Chloropsis at all. Two of them went for it daily, one at a time. After several days of this the Cardi¬ nal suddenly set about them. Having put them in fear of their lives it had the good grace to leave them alone, but thereafter they always got out of its way. There is no chivalry like this among the Chloropsis, and often they will eventually wear a bird down, even after it has been in the aviary for some time. The Shamas often suffer this way as they are somewhat lighter in weight, and this is a determining factor along with aggressiveness. All the above precludes the average aviculturist from keeping more than one or two Chloropsis, and as so few people keep them at all, this has been a further drawback to breeding. The first two obtained were aurifrons, and they were kept together in a large cage, where they became quite tame in only two weeks. They constantly bickered, but no serious fights took place, and I now know these were both hens. Most Chloropsis tame quite readily to the extent that they will come to the hand for mealworms or grapes. This should not be taken as evidence that they like their owner, or that they are per¬ manently settled in an aviary. It is more a blend of fearlessness and curio¬ sity rather than friendship, as will soon be seen if they get out. Their 40 L. GIBSON - CHLOROPSIS superficial tameness makes them excellent escape artists, and three birds got out. They are certainly not homers or candidates for temporary- release breeding. The first escapee was one of the original two. It came right down to the mealworm cup as I entered the small and narrow aviary door. Deciding that freedom was better, she bolted. There are a lot of tall trees around and fortunately she stayed in them, and both birds called regularly to each other. The next day she was seen at the aviary, so a trap cage was set up on the roof. That night there was a heavy thunderstorm, but early in the morning the two birds could be heard calling each other. The escapee was in the cage, chattering at the other one between mouth¬ fuls of orange. She was easily caught on the third day, and was fine. The second bird to get out, a couple of years later, was a large male. He flew straight up to a telephone wire in the garden. Sitting on this was the resident Fox Sparrow cock Passerella iliaca, an aggressive little bird the same size as the Chloropsis. The thought of a brawl was an even stronger pull on the Chloropsis than was the idea of instant freedom. He went straight for the Fox Sparrow, but it was no pushover, and was on its own territory. The fight lasted ten minutes and ended with the Fox Sparrow being literally pushed off the fence into the next garden. The Chloropsis stayed in the garden for an hour and a half. He would not come down for a mealworm. Neither did the original hen, although both birds came close to have a look. The male then took off. The escapees all flew very fast, high and straight. It was early April and spring was late, so there were scarcely any blossoms or insects, and most of the trees were still bare. Two days later I found the bird two and a half miles away by sheer luck. It had come down to someone’s caged budgerigar which was being aired outside. It was starving and flew directly into the house when the lady opened the patio doors. She put it in with the budgie and thought it would eat seed. As an afterthought she phoned a pet shop to see what kind of bird it was. Her regular pet shop was busy, so she phoned by chance the shop from which I obtained the bird. Being the only person in town to have bought one, I was contacted. The Chloropsis was hungry and tired, and the budgerigar had bitten off one of its toes. Otherwise it recovered uneventfully in two days. The last bird to get out was the tamest of all. This was a hen which almost got around to nesting in the summer of 1979. She sat on my back and was carried out of the aviary. In spite of extreme tameness, she bolted high and fast, and has not been seen since. So I lost only one. All these birds were C aurifrons. The hardwickei were not as tame, so they kept L. GIBSON - CHLOROPSIS 41 away from the aviary door when I went in and out. Housing The Chloropsis were all housed at various times in each of the aviaries. These consist of a large and a small outdoor flight, two small outdoor aviaries, connected to indoor cages, and a lean-to conservatory against the house. The garden is south-facing. At any given time there were Chloropsis all over, both inside and out. This constant shuffling around was necessary to keep them apart during serious spells of fighting, and it held up any attempts at breeding for several years until space could be spared for them. They did best in the conservatory (see “Honeycreepers”, Avicultural Magazine, Vol. 85, No. 1 1979), and in summer this was hot and humid and no doubt reminded the birds of home. Some of them wintered there in 1978-79 and this was the first time they had been left out. This was one of the coldest winters on record and many plants that had lasted six or seven years died that winter. It dropped to just below freezing on many nights, but the birds were fme in spite of somewhat restricted flying space, because of the heavy vegetation. I find that birds winter better if they have plenty of flying room, and presumably they keep warm from the exercise. It was considerably colder outside. They did just as well in a large (10 m.) well-planted aviary, but no attempt was made to winter them there. Having kept Chloropsis for several years in smaller aviaries, there was a surprising difference noted when they were put into the large aviary. In the latter, they flew from end to end all day, and were on the wing more often than any other birds. They are very agile and acrobatic, and spent much of their time climbing about in the foliage of the small aviaries, and I imagined this to be normal. But as soon as space becomes available they are constant and active fliers. This was borne out by the actions of the escaped birds. The Chloropsis roost in dense foliage, much preferring broad leafed plants. It can be easily seen that they are used to high rainfall. For pre¬ ferences they seek shelter in dense foliage, under a large leaf, and like one that has an umbrella contour. I have even seen them pull a leaf over their head so that they could tuck up underneath it for the night. A month- Old chick instinctively tucked itself in like this. In keeping with their day time habits, they roost apart, in a separate bush if possible. I feel that it is important for the well-being of Chloropsis caged indoors to supply them with leafy branches in which to roost. The Chloropsis are always the first birds to retire, and the last ones to waken. Should it be a wet, dark and cloudy day, the birds will roost 42 L.GIBSON - CHLOROPSIS earlier, or sleep longer in the morning. Surprisingly, they seldom roosted at the highest point (3 m./lO ft.) but were most often found sleeping at the middle of the available height. I had always thought of them as tall tree birds, and as far as I could tell, the original escapee stayed high in the trees, from 30 ft. (9 m.) and up. Chloropsis like to bathe, and in keeping with their arboreal nature, they prefer to do so in rain or in wet foliage. During summer dry spells I often water the aviaries by setting the hose at a light spray and leaving it in a fixed position for a while. The Chloropsis delight in flying through the spray. They will bathe in rain if it is not too cold. If the weather is too cold for bathing, they content themselves with wetting and cleaning their beaks. Their bathing behaviour is just like that of Cyanerpes cyaneus, and there were other parallels which will be noted later. The water dish is set about 2 ft. (60 cm.) off the ground, and although the birds will bathe at ground level if forced to do so, they dislike this. They fly quickly in and out of the bath and return to a twig to shake and preen. They do not stand in the bath and splash around like many other birds. Chloropsis have short legs and an upright stance which makes their tails drag on a flat surface, if they stand normally. The only time they are ever on the ground is when they are in pursuit of an insect - or another Chloropsis. They often chase insects in the air and large insects sometimes are knocked to the ground. The Chloropsis will come down to earth for just as long as it takes to snatch up the insect. They travel in weak hops, taking no more than two or three before becoming airborne again. They never forage on the ground, but in the aviary they will search over low growing plants, such as petunias, for nectar or for insects. Their speciality is extracting insects from rolled up or stuck down leaves. Caterpillars or spiders may stick two leaves together or roll them up with silk. The Chloropsis probes between the leaves with closed bill, then it opens the mandibles and prises the leaves apart. This is such ingrained behaviour that they will practice it indoors by probing between news¬ paper layers on a cage, where they are sometimes rewarded with an es¬ caped mealworm. This applies mainly to smaller cages, raised off the floor. They also examine thoroughly any cracks, such as between aviary posts. To do this they can hang at any angle, including upside down. The long delicate beak can reach far into such spaces and often withdraw a spider. The shape of the beak is as much an adaptation for this as it is for probing flowers. These birds can swing in a full circle around twigs, and I have often seen them do this rapidly, many times in succession. They appear to do L. GIBSON - CHLOROPSIS 43 this as much for amusement as for exercise. This acrobatic ability is tied in with their feeding habits, and they make use of it to get to downward opening flowers, or to seek out insects. Health There are less initial health problems nowadays because of quarantine requirements, but presumably the quarantine station operators now have the problems. In 1972 a friend brought a shipment of birds in from Bangkok, and from this I acquired my original two Chloropsis, and a few other soft bills. This was in my first year of bird keeping, and so aurifrons is one of the three species I have had the longest, almost continuous, associ¬ ation with. All the birds were loaded with assorted exotic diseases, and these were mostly attributable to the unhygenic pre-shipping conditions in Thailand. Later Chloropsis, obtained locally, were healthy, and it is impor¬ tant to know a bird’s history before concluding that a disease is naturally acquired, or pertinent to a particular species. Starting off with disease- ridden softbills threw me into the deep end of aviculture, but I had an interesting time working with these diseases and have been doing so ever since. At first the Chloropsis would eat only nectar, although some ate mealworms. This was cured by removing the nectar and substituting oranges, which they took to readily. Then other foods were added. Some of them, and other species too, suffered from the well known problem of head twirling, accompanying ceaseless hopping or flying back and forth. I put this down to claustrophobia, or confinement-neurosis. It was rather simply cured by lowering the perches away from the cage roof. With more space above their heads, the birds returned to normal. It seemed that it was the roof that brought this on. I was given an aurifrons from the original shipment because it was ailing. I now know that this was a young hen, three to five months old. It gradually went downhill, and developed a lesion at the corner of one eye. A culture from this produced a light growth of the yeast Candida albicans , and no significance was attached to this. A microfilarial worm was also found in the lesion. These microscopic larval worms circulate in the blood stream and settle in various tissues. They are spread by mos¬ quito bites and are common in the tropics in birds and other creatures, including man. This bird had coccidia (as had every bird in the shipment) and it also harboured a strongyloides-like nematode in the gut. These tiny roundworms appeared suddenly in. numbers in the droppings just after the bird ate several large spiders. Although this was probably just 44 L. GIBSON - CHLOROPSIS a coincidence, it is tempting to think of trying spider venom as a purge for worms! The bird died and an interesting finding was made at the autopsy. The outside wall of the heart had five large evenly spaced lesions, deeply embedded in the muscle. Each lesion yielded a pure growth of Candida albicans. The bird was also riddled with filarial worms. Discus¬ sion on these findings is however outside the scope of this article. Out of 15 Chloropsis, this was one of only three to die of natural causes while in my care. The other two were a pair of hardwickei, imported from Britain. The hen died in six weeks, and the cock dropped dead in flight after five months. The cock bird was lighter in weight than normal, other¬ wise nothing was found. They looked well externally. One aurifrons died from an accident, and one escaped. Others were sold, and some died rather quickly after changing hands. They were sold because of housing problems and poor breeding prospects. This left me with a pair of Hard- wicke’s which are the ones in the breeding account. In 1977 I got one auri¬ frons which was a very fine whistler. This renewed my interest in them, and late in 1977 I bought up all the birds in town, ending up with five aurifrons and the two Hardwicke’s which are of course no trouble to sex. All the Chloropsis have always moulted without any problems. The moult usually commences in late September or October, and is finished in November or early December. New birds moulted at other times, often in midsummer, but after a year they settled to moult in late autumn like the others. Of course the time of moulting will be influenced by climate and latitude, and the above may apply only to local conditions. Chloropsis grow quite a thick coat of body feathers, especially if kept outside. These feathers are shed rather easily if the bird is handled. If they come out in great numbers when the bird is caught, this indicates that moulting is imminent, if not underway. However, Chloropsis shed contour feathers at any time more readily than any other bird I have handled. All the aurifrons retained a bright grass-green colour. The green and also the orange on the head, as well as the yellow around the bib, are aff¬ ected by carotenes in food. Lack of these makes the body a faded bluish green and the top of the head turns yellow. The yellow around the black bib is much reduced, almost disappearing in some cases. The hardwickei are not so noticeably affected by food. The green is a much softer, blue-influenced tone, which is more evident on the pre¬ dominantly green hen. The ochre colour of the belly was not brightened at all by a high carotene intake, but the cock acquired a somewhat lighter and clearer shade when he came into breeding condition. One aurifrons was different from the others.This was the largest male, L. GIBSON - CHLOROPSIS 45 who had the best voice. He was a light, sulphur- tinged green, giving an overall golden green hue. This bird continues to moult into this colour, while on the same diet as the others. Even although the birds were always well coloured and in good feather, a surprising difference was noted in the year that they were wintered out for the first time. By February, all the aurifrons were brighter than they had ever been, the heads being a vivid orange. They were in the con¬ servatory, and on the same diet as always. It looked like they had a secon¬ dary moult in readiness for the approaching spring and breeding season, and indeed they went through some breeding behaviour later. Some people think that fat-soluble pigments, like carotene, can be pumped into feathers after they are fully formed. At any rate, I do not know why they were more vividly coloured than before. The conservatory receives a fair am¬ ount of winter sunshine. The birds are usually outside from April to September anyway, but perhaps sunshine was helpful at the stage when the new feathers were grown, in late winter and early spring. Little differ¬ ence was noted in the colouring of the Hardwicke’s but they looked very fit. On the whole, the Chloropsis are not accident prone like some birds. One aurifrons was seen to be sitting puffed up and inactive one morning. It had a piece of grass 18 cm. (7 in.) long hanging from its vent. With difficulty, a further 5 cm. (2 in.) was pulled out. The bird was fine within two days. Another time, a bird kept in the kitchen almost choked on a strip of paper. It is not clear from my records if the same bird was in¬ volved. The Chloropsis beak is not intended for rough usage, nor are the claws. As a consequence they do not become overgrown, and none ever needed trimming. Sexing In 1978, for the first time, I found myself with more than two auri¬ frons at once. Also, for the first time it became apparent that at last I had a pair, or two pairs and a cock to be exact. Information on sexing them had been conflicting, and the commonest consensus was that hens were duller. I could not see a speck of difference in either of my two original birds, or later in another two. Later on I knew this was because each couple was of the same sex. All the field guide books have Chloropsis species straightened out as to sex, except for the aurifrons. TherQ is still confusion over the juve¬ niles. The aurifrons are unusual in that the sexes are very similar as viewed 46 L. GIBSON - CHLOROPSIS in the wild, and this has caused confusion. The extreme example is the painting by John Gould in “Birds of Asia”, supposedly of a pair of auri- frons. The upper bird is, I believe, a hen Chloropsis a. jerdoni , although I must admit to never having seen one. The lower bird is a rather masculine¬ looking hen aurifrons. Unfortunately the text makes a serious mistake in accepting this painting as of a pair. Others are nearer the truth in reporting the hen as a duller edition of the male (or that the male is a brighter edition of the hen, if you are a lady reader). It may look so in the field, but the hen is not in fact duller in colour. It is just that her coloured areas, apart from the basic green, are slightly less extensive than are those of the male. Particularly, she has a narrower, less diffuse yellow band around the black bib, and cocks in breeding condition look brighter yellow from a distance simply because the band is wider. If they are not fed properly, this colour difference is hardly seen at all, and birds in such circumstances are duller, as previously noted, but they can be perfectly healthy in spite of this. There is, after all the above, a simple sex difference which is difficult to spot in the field. It has been noticed unwittingly in captivity, as both male and female birds have been accurately illustrated without comment. The secret is in the blue of the throat. The hen has two blue malar or moustache stripes, joined only at the top, if at all, immediately under the lower mandible. The extent of the separation of these stripes is partly dependent on how the bird is holding its head. If the head is fully extended as when probing a flower, the stripes are completely separated all the way up. If the bird is fluffed up from the cold, or if the head is pulled down, this has the effect of joining the stripes, sometimes all the way. They are only clearly seen when the bird is at eye level or above with the neck extended normally. The distinction is not too obvious from the side. The cock has a more or less square patch of solid blue, and the shape of this is scarcely affected by the bird’s position or the viewing angle. This distinction was seen as soon as I acquired the five birds. I was familiar enough with the birds’ habits by this time to have drawn con¬ clusions about sexing them, and this sex difference fitted perfectly with the previous theories. Some pair behaviour of aurifrons will be described later along with courting behaviour of hardwickei. Vocalization Chloropsis make so many sounds that attempting a written description is hopeless. Their vocalization by itself would be worthy of a separate L. GIBSON - CHLOROPSIS 47 study. At least six fixed sounds or combinations are recognisable, and are used regularly. Four of these are common to both species, and one pecu¬ liar to each. Aurifrons in particular have an endless repertoire, most of which is pleasant. The Chloropsis provide cheerful sounds for most of the year, and they are the most consistent and prolonged singers in the collec¬ tion. Both sexes have an identical range of calls and there is a tendency for the cocks to sing louder and more persistently than the hens. There is noticeable variation between individuals in tone, variety and consistency of song, and I can usually identify each bird by ear. One of the current cock aurifrons has a particularly beautiful wood-wind tone. They have an attractive double-note call for long distance, or out of sight, contact. This call is sometimes extended by adding the notes in reverse order. When the original hen escaped, both birds kept in contact with this call. There is a quieter squeaky call for keeping in touch when the birds are close. Mild annoyance is expressed by a single 4‘chat” and there is a variety of calls beyond this which, as far as I can tell, are used mainly to express different degrees of excitement or aggression. A harsh, quick repetitive cawing serves as a flock alarm. I can usually tell what is going on in the aviary just by listening, and this is a good way to forestall trouble. A long period of silence is also worthy of investigation. In spite of the large variety of calls noted, I have not identified a fixed song in the aurifrons. The Hardwicke’s have less attractive somewhat squeakier voices, and they do not have anything like the variety of calls possessed by the Gold- fronted. But they do have a definite song. This is a four-note call, often extended to five and occasionally reduced to three, on a rather high and penetrating pitch. Both sexes use it to call each other, and the cock sang it endlessly during the breeding season. The pitch and repetitiveness of this began to drive everyone to distraction and I wondered how the other birds were taking it. Except for this song, the lesser repertoire of the hardwickei is common to the aurifrons. Both species are excellent mimics, but the Hardwicke’s do not seem to practice this to the same extent as the aurifrons. Also, my birds appear only to mimic other birds, but this does not limit them to bird calls. Most of them do a very good yelping puppy and they copied this from a cock Shama. A four-month old hardwickei youngster does this as well as any, and it was born after the puppy acquired a 100 lb. bark. It would be interesting to hear if any¬ one has noted Chloropsis do direct mimicry of non-bird sounds, being careful to exclude circumstances like the above. It is strange that mine do not mimic directly, but there are so many mimicking birds that there is 48 L. GIBSON - CHLOROPSIS a chicken and egg situation with regards to who is copying what from where. Should a crow land beside the aviary, or merely fly low overhead, all the Chloropsis forget their differences and gather at the nearest end of the aviary to scream rather corvine abuse at it. They gave every indi¬ cation that they would mob the crow. When I had a hawk in the garden, the Chloropsis all disappeared quickly into the bushes and immediately fell silent. They remained still and were impossible to see unless they moved. Obviously they realised that a hawk is a real threat. An eagle next to the cage wire did not frighten them at all, and they came over and chattered at it from curiosity. Other garden birds usually evoked no res¬ ponse, but familiarity may have been a factor here. Feeding Chloropsis are often classified as nectivorous, and while this is correct up to a point, it is scarcely helpful as to diet. A great many species take nectar when it is available, but in only a very few can it be regarded as a dietary mainstay. Lumping Chloropsis in with fruit-eaters (hence Fruit- sucker) is bad. Conveniently for aviculturists, these birds will use fruit to fill in a large part of their diet, but fruit should not be regarded as a staple, especially where moulting or breeding is concerned. Nor is omnivorous correct, in the sense that starlings, for example, will literally eat anything. Chloropsis are too specialised for that, and a severe restriction on natural food utilisation is imposed by the weak bill, which cannot break down anything but pulpy fruit or soft insects. Neither can they dig out insects in any way, but are restricted to withdrawing them from nooks and crannies, or from between leaves, for which purpose the long delicate beak is well suited. The tongue shows a typical modification for nectar feeding. It has upturned sides forming a sort of aqueduct for the length of the tongue. The tip is frayed into many bristle-like appendages. They form a small tunnel near the end of the tongue, leading back into the main channel. Nectar is trapped by capillary action at the tip. By squeez¬ ing the appendages together, the liquid can be pumped back into the throat. The only other nectar feeder I have examined so far is Yuhina nigrimentum. Microscopically, its tongue was divided into numerous flat ribbons at the tip. Visually the Chloropsis tongue looked just like that of the Yuhina. If given the chance, Chloropsis will live mostly on insects with a little fruit as dessert. This would be difficult, or expensive, but fortunately it is not necessary. L. GIBSON - CHLOROPSIS 49 The birds are fed on a tray suspended from the roof, at a height of 1.5 m. (5 ft.) This can be replenished from the kitchen window. A second feeding point was added later. This is on top of concrete blocks at a height of 1 m (3 ift.) at the opposite end of the conservatory. This can also be reached from a window. Similar tables of blocks are used in the other aviaries. The basic staple for all the Chloropsis is rice pudding. This is sweetened rice, boiled soft in milk, as described for Cyanerpes (Avicultural Magazine , Vol 85, No. 1. 1979). They all like it, as do tanagers in the same aviary. They like chopped grapes. Green grapes are preferred and these are cut into long narrow pieces. The birds take the juice and the pulp, discarding the skin. Next in close order, they like pear and banana. The banana has a strip of skin peeled off, and pears are cut in half. Nectar is supplied fresh daily (twice daily in summer) as an approxi¬ mately 1 5% solution of sugar (table sugar, or sometimes honey) in equal parts of water and milk. This is fed in small cups. Nectar consumption goes up in warm weather, dropping again if it gets very hot, probably because the birds cut down on energy utilisation. It is scarcely taken in cold weather (in outside aviaries). This is partly because the liquid itself is cold, and there is of course less need for fluid for evaporative cooling. But likely the main reason is that the birds feel fuller on the higher calorie solid food that is available. Sometimes the nectar and the rice are heated on cold mornings, and the birds are noticeably attracted to the warm food. Soft insects are preferred to all the above foods, and spiders and smooth caterpillars are favourites. Chloropsis do not use their feet to hold food, which further restricts their feeding, so all insects are deftly manipulated in the bill. Wings and legs are carefully worked off and discarded, although small spiders may be eaten whole, and large ones may be swallowed after five or six legs are removed. Insects are well softened up before being swallowed, and occasionally they are dropped during these manoeuvres. Invariably the insect is retrieved In mid-air, with the bird rarely dropping more than half a metre to do so. All the above remarks apply to both species. Hardwickei are more con¬ servative feeders than aurifrons and some obvious differences are noted. All the aurifrons are very fond of orange, and this contributes much to their bright colour. The Hardwicke’s only eat it if they have nothing else and are hungry. However, the first pair ate some. Granges are cut in half between the poles. This cuts across the grain and enables the birds to eat it right down. Cutting the other way is a waste, as the birds are usually unable to tear It open. 50 L. GIBSON - CHLOROPSIS Aurifrons quickly take to mealworms, larvae or pupae, and some will even tackle the beetles, although they do not prefer such hard prey. The first pair of Hardwicke’s ate mealworms, but the cock only learned to do so after a month. The second pair would not touch them. The aurifrons were willing to try a larger selection of insects (and other food) even if they did not finally eat them, and hard insects were usually rejected. Some of the aurifrons ate cranefly ( Tipula ) larvae, and also butterflies and moths, some of which were caught in outside aviaries. The hardwickei ate none of these but not a great variety of Lepidoptera was available. In spite of not touching Tenebrio in any form, the second pair of Hard¬ wicke’s ate great numbers of grasshoppers and crickets, and these are just as hard and chitinous as mealworms. One newly acquired aurifrons had the strange habit of dunking all its food, even grapes, in a small water dish. When it retrieved the food to eat, it had bouts of sneezing from getting water in its nostrils. It also had the strange habit of tearing paper into strips, and one day it almost choked on a piece. These idiosyn- cracies slowly disappeared over a three-month period. The Chloropsis did not touch eggs, not even tiny Zosterops eggs. All but one ignored small dead chicks, after giving them a cursory inspection, as they did the eggs. A very little scrambled egg was taken. One cock aurifrons flew off with a dead newly-hatched Hardwicke’s chick. It banged the chick three or four times on a perch then dropped it. It did not repeat the performance when the chick was replaced. A good variety of hard berries was made available, but they were always ignored. Not much in the way of soft berries was offered. A few blueberries (Vaccinium) were eaten and also some Rubus spp. (black¬ berries, raspberries, etc) but generally these were only partly eaten, or left until other food was finished. Neither species was ever seen to eat greens. The aviaries all support a wide variety of plants. The Chloropsis sometimes pull off a petal or small flower, or snap soft shoots, particularly the new tips of honeysuckle Lonicera. These are banged about for what looks like amusement, and are never eaten. Possibly some pollen is taken from flowers or sap from the tender shoots. Leaves are never pulled off, and overall damage to plants is negligible. The statement made in Birds of the World (Austin), and elsewhere, that Chloropsis “eat some seed” is ridiculous. Recently, the Chloropsis have been getting soft bread spread with margarine or peanut butter. All of them eat some of this, as do all the other birds, from Sham as to a toucan. They also eat some bread and jam, but this is only given sporadi¬ cally. The feeding of chicks will be dealt with separately in the breeding account which will follow in the next issue. SNOW PIGEONS BREEDING AT 10,000 FEET ALTITUDE By PROFESSOR C. NAETHER (Encino, California, USA) 51 The name given to the species known as the Snow Pigeon Columba leuconata not only describes the coloration but also the habitat of this beautiful pigeon - the snowy, everlasting mountain regions of the Hima¬ layas, Tibet, Burma and Western China, where it nests usually well above 8,000 feet. I was indeed fortunate to become fairly well acquainted with this hardy mountain dweller, this “snow-bird”, some years ago when a generous zoo director in West Germany presented me with a pair. They are exceedingly rare in captivity, even in prominent zoological gardens. For months I had written letters to bird exporters in India and other countries fervently hoping that they would be able to provide a pair or two of these elusive pretty pigeons. While these dealers offered me many kinds of other birds, some of which I did indeed import, as far as Snow Pigeons were con¬ cerned all I ever received were future promises, which never materialised. Even the late Professor Ghigi, well known as the producer of the beautiful Ghigi’s or Yellow Golden pheasant, who at that time maintained a quite sizeable flock of Snow Pigeons at his Italian villa, was reluctant to part with any. He furnished me with addresses of Italian bird importers, which I followed up promptly but with negative results. So when on a memor¬ able forenoon, our express agent, wholly unexpectedly, delivered a simple wooden box with two precious Snow Pigeons, I was overjoyed. Even though there was neither food nor water in the shipping box, the birds appeared lively, moving around in it, impatient to be released from their cramped confinement. I placed them in a quite spacious pen which afforded ample flying space, on their own. Surprisingly, on release they appeared fairly tame, not crashing wildly against the aviary wire, as was my experience with some White-wings, but settling down on convenient perches. Now for the first time I had a good opportunity to scrutinize these rarely kept birds at close range. They were about the size of the average homing pigeon. Their plumage colour reminded me of that of the Gazzi Modena and the Strasser Pigeon. The head of the Snow Pigeon is a blackish grey; the wings are brown- banded. The neck and underparts are snow-white. The black tail is crossed by a V-shaped white band. The bill is dark horn colour,, the feet are bright red and the eyes yellow. The female is slightly smaller than the 52 Prof. C. NAETHER - SNOW PIGEONS male and her plumage slightly duller. The young Snow Pigeons are brow¬ ner than their parents, the usually white areas suffused with grey. Their eyes and feet are dark coloured. Incidentally, the Snow Pigeon goes also by the names of White-backed Pigeon and Tibetan Dove. Snow Pigeons in their natural habitats are said to be wild and wary. Not unlike the Rock Pigeon Columba livia , the Snow Pigeon sets its very simple nest-platform in holes and crevices of rocks from 10,000 feet to the snow level. It is, like most pigeons, a sociable bird, frequently found nesting in small and large colonies. The two white eggs are brooded from 16 to 19 or 20 days. The Snow Pigeon feeds on the ground on cultivated grains, various seeds, and even small bulbs. In grain fields it is often found in company with Rock Pigeons, rapidly running over the ground and foraging. While in the summertime it is observed usually in pairs, in winter the Snow Pigeon congregates in flocks of hundreds and thousands, descending from the 10,000 level to about 5000. When it has finished feeding, it returns to its rocky roost away up high. During flight this pigeon displays at times with widely spread, clapping wings. Now to the pair which was presented to me. The two birds seemed to be alike in size and general appearance. All day long they were busy, flying about in their aviary and inspecting several open-top nestboxes hanging about four feet off the floor. During this time, one bird would jump into the box and immediately make a croaking, rasping “kuck, kuck, kuck” sound, while his companion perched on the edge of the box apparently ready to join him. I thought (and hoped) that the one in the box was a male, calling loudly to the other, a female, to join him in the prospective nest site. This lively activity in and about the box con¬ tinued for several days. Then one day, to my great disappointment, I saw the birds fighting in the box, pushing each other round and round, at times “lifting” one out of the box, only to see it dash back into it. This combative behaviour went on for several days - I concluded that I had two cocks and so I separated them. I bought a husky, blue, barless Strasser hen from a fancier in Nebraska. She was in excellent colour and condition and mated with one of the male Snow Pigeons, within a week of her arrival. The pair produced hybrids whose plumage colour was a light blue with jet-black wingbars. I gave them to a research agency for experimentation. Some weeks after, I lost both male Snow Pigeons Prof. C. NAETHER - SNOW PIGEONS 53 during an excessive heat spell, even though they seemed to be in perfect health. This unexpected loss both shocked and surprised me in the light of a British naturalist’s assertion that Snow Pigeons could readily endure a hot climate, based on his keeping them in captivity. Since that time I have been trying in vain to obtain a true pair of these fascinating birds. (Incidentally, there is a very good photographic likeness of a Snow Pigeon in “The Book of the Pigeon and of Wild Foreign Doves, 5th edition.) In conclusion, there are numerous important aspects of Snow Pigeon’s behaviour not recorded in any literature. Do these high-flying pigeons actually build a nest in the rock crevices, or do they lay their two white eggs simply in some slight depression or obscure corner of some rock? Assuming a prevailing low temperature at 10,000 feet altitude, for how many weeks do they brood their squabs to keep them alive and growing? How many broods per season do they raise? Since they are known to congregate fairly frequently with Rock Pigeons, have hybrids ever been produced; if so, are the latter fertile and what do they look like? What birds of prey and what terrestrial predators are their principal enemies? What about their behaviour in captivity? Their life-span, their resistance to climatic changes, their mating with domestic pigeons, and the produc¬ tivity of hybrids? The answers to some, or all of these questions would be welcomed by anyone at all interested in Columba leuconota, and should be made available in authentic literature devoted to this little-known species. REFERENCES NAETHER, C. The Book of the Pigeon and of Wild Foreign Doves. 5th enlarged edition. 1964. pp. 239-240. NEWMAN, T.H. 1911. The Snow Pigeon. Avicultural Magazine, 3rd Series, Vol. 2 pp. 173-178 54 INDIAN RING-NECKED PARRAKEETS IN THE HIMALAYAN MOUNTAINS AT 12,000 FEET ALTITUDE IN THE WINTER By DR. ELISHA W.BURR (Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatangar, India) Indian Ring-necked Parrakeets are commonly seen throughout India, Pakistan, and Nepal. In northern India they have been reported at altitudes of up to 4,000 feet above sea level in the Kumaon mountains. In Nepal they are commonly seen up to the foothills of Kathmandu at an altitude of 5,000 feet above sea level or less. During the summer months the Indian Ring-necked Parrakeets seek the mountains in search of fruits, berries, seeds and nectar, and are serious pests of orchards. They are often obser¬ ved eating pine cone seeds among other things. As soon as cold weather approaches in September they migrate to the mountain foothills and the warmer parts of southern India. By late November they are seldom to be found above 2,500 feet above sea level due to the extreme cold and snow in the Himalayan ranges. In late December 1979 seven Indian Ring-necked Parrakeets were spotted at an altitude of 12,000 feet above sea level and observed for several days. They were feeding on pine cones amongst snow and sub¬ zero weather. Aviculturists have deemed these parrakeets hardy up to freezing temperatures but observation of them in the wild at -15 °F, in the snow at altitudes of 12,000 feet above sea level or more in the winter months is unrecorded. Few other psittacine birds have ever been found at this altitude before in winter or summer. Whether this incidental find¬ ing is a mere adaptation to the environment due to lack of food else¬ where or whether it is a freak occurrence is not known. * * * 55 NEWS FROM LONDON ZOO - 1980 By P.J. OLNEY (Curator of Birds) Though once again breeding appeared to be delayed by the prolonged cold weather of spring the overall results were better than last year. More species and more individuals were successfully reared, even though we deliberately curtailed the breeding of some common species whose young are difficult to dispose of to suitable collections. The increase in numbers and species bred is du ? mainly to the growth of the incubation and rearing unit and to the interest and enthusiasm of the keepers concerned. There are now two sections actively involved, and this has reduced the work load and allowed more time to gather data. The most noteworthy species incubated and reared artificially included: Ruffs - fortunately two females, bringing our total to five males and three females (one breeding female having died in September this year), five pacific Brent Geese, 16 Sacred Ibis, two Black-footed Penguins (unfortuna¬ tely both died due to an electrical failure in the brooding unit), 1 5 Grey¬ headed Gallinules and 11 Grey-headed Gulls. These were deliberately artificially reared in order to obtain data on techniques and diets, which may be of use for rearing rarer members of these two families. This data could be of particular importance in breeding some species of Rail, so many of which are endemic to small islands and are in danger of extinction in the wild. Many pheasants and ducks were also reared successfully. The most noteworthy species reared by their parents included: African Spotted Eagle Owls, Abyssinian Spotted Eagle Owls, White-cheeked Turacos, Red-billed Hornbill, Chilean Flamingos, Abdim’s Storks and Jerdon’s Imperial Pigeon. The Snowy Owls had three young, and continue to be among our most prolific breeders. Their history is interesting; the male landed on board a ship off the Azores, and was brought to the Zoo in January 1950. Since then he has had three wives and 39 young. His first wife, the mother of eight, died in 1964. His second, the mother of 25, was killed by vandals in 1977 and his third, who is still with him, was hatched in 1977 in Philip Wayre’s collection in Norfolk and has had six young. All the young were reared by their parents, with the male being a particularly protective and devoted father. Again we had the disappointment of the Condor chick dying, four days after being successfully hatched in the incubator. Equally disappoint¬ ing was the non-hatching of two Egyptian Vulture eggs, both containing fully developed embryos: and then later in the year the male of the 56 P.J. OLNEY - NEWS FROM LONDON ZOO parents died with a crop impaction. Partners were found for the Short-eared Owl, Buzzard, Dusky Lory, Orange-winged Amazon Parrott, and Red-sided Eclectus Parrot, and though arranged marriages do not always work, so far they are living in pairs in apparent contentment. We have, however, as always, had to sepa¬ rate a number of birds which previously lived compatibly together, and this is particularly noticeable in the Bird House among the Toucans and Hornbills. The most exciting event was the arrival of a pair of captive-bred (1976) North Island Brown Kiwis. They were presented by Auckland Zoological Park, New Zealand, and delivered to London by the Director, Mr. Derek Wood. Dalgety Limited generously paid most of the expenses involved. The birds are housed in the nocturnal section of the Clore Pavilion where, though rather elusive, they can with perseverance and luck be seen. They live in an air-conditioned area, which has a floor covered in deep peat, leaf litter and branches, and are fed on a mixture of minced ox-heart, Farex or Complan, vegetable oil and a vitamin/mineral supplement. Other foods are occasionally given including earthworms. They are the only Kiwis in Britain, the last Kiwi in this collection being here in 1961. “Cocky”, a Sulphur-crested Cockatoo, who has lived in the Zoo longer than any other bird, and who is now at least 56 years old, was presented with a medal and certificate by the Burlington Arcade Association for so ably entertaining visitors for over 50 years. 57 NEWS AND VIEWS Recent news of the three Australian and New Zealand ground parrots shows some encouragement for the future of these declining species. Great interest and excitement surrounded the official re-discovery of the Night Parrot Geopsittacus occidentalis by Shane Parker of the South Australian Museum while searching specifically for it in the north-eastern regions of the state. Although this was the first confirmed sighting for many years, it was strongly believed it did exist in the more remote areas of the interior. One has to travel in the type of terrain which these parrots inhabit to appreciate its immenseness; coupled with the remoteness of much of its range and its secretive and nocturnal habits, it is probable a scattered population does survive. * * * Fascinating new information is coming to light on Australia second species, the Swamp Parrot Pezoporus wallicus following a study by Charles Meridith and Andrew Isles of the Victorian Fisheries and Wild¬ life Department. The initial purpose of the study was to make a detailed assessment of population densities in the Croajingalong National Park in East Gippsland; but more recently, the team has been looking at other areas of possible habitat along the Victorian coast. The September 1980 Royal Australian Ornithologists Union Newsletter contains a brief account illustrated with two photographs of hand held birds, outlining some of the results of this important project. The report states it to be common in the Croajingalong National Park with seven nests being located. Also a strong, though restricted, population in swampy sedgeland near the Glenelg River, an area where there had been no confirmed reports for more than twenty years. Birds were also present in the Bemm River Mario region and at Wilson’s Pro¬ montory National Park. Valuable data on the diet of these birds have also been collected and it is now thought that the seeds of no less than 14 species of plants are utilised, mostly sedges and rushes in the families Restionaceae and Cyperaceae. The availability of seeds is greatly influ¬ enced in a given area by fire. Seeds are not produced by most heath plants until 12-24 months after a fire. Seed production is apparently high for 58 NEWS AND VIEWS the next 8-10 years, then declines. The densities of Swamp Parrots reflect these changes, the birds being absent for one to several years after a fire, then recolonising; followed by a build up of numbers followed by a decline as the heath ages. The report goes on to say that birds are strongly territorial and are easily censused by their calls at dawn and dusk. Adults are apparently sedentary but there is considerable post-breeding dispersal of young in autumn and winter to areas well away from suitable habitat. They are strong fliers and observations suggest them to be crepuscular. * * * Ten of New Zealand’s endangered Kakapc Strigops habroptilus were caught on Stewart Island in March-April, two of which were females. One of these and a male were transferred to and were released on Maud Island in the Marlborough Sound Sex was confirmed by identification of hormones in the birds’ droppings but, apart from this, the females could be distinguished from the males by small differences in the plumage. * * Mange re Island off the coast of New Zealand provides the last remain¬ ing Black Robins Petroica traversi with their only home. The population is now at a critical level with the total being put at only six. At least two pairs still exist while the sex of this year’s chick is, as yet, undetermined. One nest was destroyed in a violent storm. * * * Better news for the Kokako Callaeas cinerea, a species of New Zealand Wattle-bird. A colony of about 70 have been located in Puketi Forest, north of Auckland. Kauri milling in the area was stopped immediately, but the N.Z. Forestry Service still hopes to selectively log the forest. The Wildlife Service fears that this will ruin the habitat for what may be the only viable population of this species. NEWS AND VIEWS 59 The problems and progress of the captive breeding project for the Great Bustard Otis tarda undertaken by the Great Bustard Trust are high¬ lighted in a recent issue of the Avicultural Magazine (1980, p. 131-140). Paul Goriup, the Trust’s Research Officer, sends the following report outlining the results attained in the 1980 season. He says “two of our three hens nested; one laid a solitary large, infertile egg, while the other produced a full clutch of three eggs. These were removed for artificial incubation after about ten days and were placed in a Roll-x incubator. Owing to the lack of incubation data, we were not sure what temperature would be most suitable, so we used 100°F; and at the hatch, deformities in two of the chicks indicated that this was too high. The third chick was alright. The two deformed chicks died after 2 Vi and six days, while the third died tragically on day eight when it regurgitated a fragment of insect matter, which was then inhaled into the windpipe where it lodged; a plug of mucus formed and choked it. For next year, we are hoping to extend and improve our incubation facilities and techniques in the light of this year’s experience.” * * * Two new books listed in the British Museum (Natural History) Cen¬ tenary Book Catalogue as being in preparation, are of interest to avi- culturists. The first, by Derek Goodwin on Estrildidae of the World will be the more practical of the two for bird keepers as besides Waxbills, the Estrildidae includes Mannikins, Parrot Finches, Australian finches, plus other common African and Asian seed-eaters frequently kept in captivity. The second, by David Snow, is a Monograph of the Cotingidae; a family of about 80 species which include the Bellbirds, Cocks of the Rock, Becards and Cotingas. * * * Mats Tell sends from Sweden the following account of his breeding results in 1980: “In my aviaries the following birds were all reared to independence: one Virginian Cardinal, three Bluish Finches Sporophila caerulescens , two Crested Black Buntings Melophus melanic terns, two Silver-eared Mesias, 14 Bourke’s Parrots, three Azara’s Conures, three 60 NEWS AND VIEWS Sun Conures and three Siy Parrots Pionus maximilianus siy. Nonpareil Buntings, Orange-breasts, Parrot-billed Seedeaters and Red¬ faced Crimson-wings Cryptospiza reichenowii did not even attempt to breed, due to lack of aviary space. As in previous years, the Eclectus Parrots had either clear eggs or chicks dead in shell. All of my Lesser Patagonian Conures laid eggs, which of course were infertile. A 10-month old hen Western (or Stanley) Rosella mated to my old (12-year old) cock bird, chose a narrow log and laid two infertile clutches.” * sfs * A new species of Malimbus Weaver has been found in a minute area of the Gola Forest, Sierra Leone. This yellow and black Malimbe has been christened Malimbus golersis. It is known only from good sight records - let’s hope it remains so; prepared museum skins are of little use and probably damaging to a species with such a restricted range. * * With an estimated population of around 30 Californian Condors Vultur californiarus still surviving, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Audubon Society mounted a “do or die” programme to save the species. The plan involved capturing a number for captive breeding efforts. Unfortunately, soon after the programme began, one Condor chick did die, while being handled by a researcher. The bird was on a remote moun¬ tain ledge and simply keeled over for no apparent reason. The programme was quickly suspended while the research team evaluate capturing and handling techniques with the less endangered Andean Condor and African vultures. News and Views 61 Gert Skipper sends the following notes on the breeding history of a pair of Great Grey Owls Strix nebulosa iapponica resident in the Copenhagen Zoo since 1977: “Young were first reared in 1971 (3), and again in 1977 (3) and in 1979 (5 from two pairs, two of which constitute second genera- tion births). Infertile eggs were laid in 1973, 1975, 1976 and 1978. The pair are housed in a flight measuring 6x8x3 meters and fur¬ nished with living trees and some large logs on which the owls can sit. The back part is sheltered and it is here, in the shade of a large pine, that the nest scrape is made annually. Clutch size varies from three to five with incubation lasting approximately four weeks. The diet consists primarily of mice but is varied periodically with rats and pieces of red meat. Like most Strigiformes, they prove extremely aggressive when nesting.” * * * * The Emerald Starling Lamprotornis iris was the subject of a note by Malcolm Ellis in the Avicultural Society’s Newsletter, published in July 1980. Members 'will be interested to learn that a successful breeding has occurred in the collection of Raymond Sawyer at Cobham, Surrey. It is hoped that in the near future Mr. Sawyer will put pet to paper and give details of what is probably the first captive breeding of this African star¬ ling. * * * * The first captive hatching of the Emperor Penguin Aptenodytes for - - steri took place on September 16th last, at the San Diego Sea World. In a specially designed compartment which simulates the birds’ natural envir¬ onment as near as possible, a colony of these birds has lived since being airlifted from the Antarctic in 1976 and 1977. The colony was increased by a further two hatchings in the week following the first. D.C. CORRECTION YoL 86 (1980) No. 2, pages 95 and 96. Captions for drawings should have read “Wiie-crested Thorntail” 62 THE BIRD RESCUE ASSOCIATION - ITS WORK AND AIMS By MARGARET KING (Founder, Bird Rescue Association) Some time ago an item in the Avicultural Magazine pin-pointed the need for an organisation associated with the care and rehabilitation of wild birds, and although it had not then been formed, or even given a name, in December 1978 a Trust Deed was executed, and in February 1979 the Bird Rescue Association was registered as a Charity. The aims set out in the Trust Deed are as follows: “to promote the care and protection of all orphaned, sick and injured birds, especially wild birds, but not excluding exotic species as the need arises and to promote research into the diseases of birds and methods of prevention, control or cure and to publicise the results of such research.” This dual purpose of active work with rescued birds and the promotion of research is thought to be in harmony with the work of aviculturists and we hope to collect and correlate data from the experience of others, and of our own experience in the field. Several bird hospitals and many indiv¬ iduals have joined the Bird Rescue Association and quarterly News¬ letters are sent to them, communications which try to keep people in¬ formed on our everyday work with birds and to pass on information that we think might be of value. This is as often as not a two-way communi¬ cation conveying as much benefit to us, through contributions and experi¬ ence, as we hope to give to our members. Bird diseases and methods of treatment have been the subject of very little research compared with the situation regarding mammals, but we are fortunate to have on the council of Bird Rescue Association the research veterinary surgeon John E. Cooper, co-editor of First Aid and Care of Wild Birds, recently pub¬ lished by David and Paul and reviewed in the Avicultural Magazine . We need funds for the day-to-day feeding and treatment of up to 100 birds and for the building of a Bird Hospital with its own sea-bird cleaning and rehabilitation unit, other accommodation for species with widely differing requirements, and, when eventually possible, our own laboratory facilities. The Bird Rescue Association 29, Arundel Road, Eastbourne BN21 2EG 63 CORRESPONDENCE ROTHSCHILD’S GRACKLE In the article entitled “A Note on Javanese Aviculture” Alastair Morri- ©n implies that Rothschild’s Grackle is threatened with extinction as a result of the activities of aviculturists. I have yet to see any reliable evi¬ dence that this assertion which has been made so often is true. The future of Rothschild’s Grackle is threatened because Bali has now become very important commercially as a tourist centre and like many other species it will disappear because of man’s erosion of its natural habitat. The survival of many species depends upon properly controlled breed¬ ing programmes in captivity. Many zoological institutions have tackled the problem successfully with some mammalian species but birds are apparently not of sufficient interest to the general public for zoos to spend large sums of money on providing suitable breeding accommod¬ ation. Of course, Jersey Zoo is a notable exception in this respect and it has been shown there that Rothshchild’s Grackle may well be saved by breeding in captivity. However, many private aviculturists have had equally good successes with this species and it is only through the efforts of the back-garden aviculturists that many others will be preserved as living rather than as museum specimens. A few years ago ( Avicultural Magazine, Volume 82, No. 2. 1976) Alastair Morrison made the suggestion that Hooded and Golden¬ shouldered Parrots should be high on a list of species which should not be kept in captivity despite the fact that both are eminently suitable for aviculture and are being bred in gradually increasing numbers in Europe and their country of origin. In the 1930s, aviculturists were blamed for the disappearance from their habitat in Australia of the Bourke’s, the Splendid and the Turquoisine Grass Parrakeet. However, not only are these species now relatively common in the wild but they are being bred in such large numbers in captivity that they can be regarded as domesticated. Perhaps Alastair Morrison should visit some of the aviaries in Europe and Australia to see that private aviculturists have an important part to play in conserv¬ ation. J.R. Hodges, London The Editor does not accept responsibility for opinions expressed in articles, notes or correspondence ORNITHOLOGICAL HOLIDAYS with COX & KINGS The 1981 Programme will include such inter¬ esting and rewarding centres as: Kenya, Rumania, Camargue, Yugoslavia Spain - Berdun-Pyrenees (Huesca) and Laguna de Gallacanta (Zaragoza) Greece - Delphi and Parnassus (Birds & Flowers) Planned for late 1981 /Early 1982 Guyana, Papua New Guinea Ecuador and Galapagos, Morocco For details contact: Cox & Kings Travel Ltd., Special Interest Dept., 46 Marshall Street, London W1V 2PA. Tel: 01-439 8292 BIRD BOOKS BOUGHT AND SOLD Overseas Enquiries Invited Please offer those books surplus to your require¬ ments to the leading world specialist. LIMITED EDITION. The Birds of Prey of the British Islands, 20 colour plates by J.C Harrison, descriptive text by David Evans, half leather, slipcase, folio, 275 signed copies. Unique beautiful bird book. £450 inc. postage . David Evans Fine BirdBooks Marvins Farmhouse, Kingston Deverill, Warminster, Wiltshire, BAI2 7HG. Tel ( 09853) 234 THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY The Avicultural Society was founded in 1894 for the study of British and foreign birds in freedom and captivity. The Society is international in character, having members throughout the world. Membership subscription rates per annum: British Isles £8.00; Overseas - £9.00 (20.00 US dollars). The subscription is due on 1st January of each year and those joining the Society later in the year will receive back numbers of the current volume of the AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE. The subscription rate for non-members is: British Isles and Europe - £9.00; outside Europe - £10.00 (25.00 US dollars). Subscriptions, changes of address, orders for back numbers, etc., should be sent to: THE HON. SECRETARY AND TREASURER, THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY, WINDSOR FOREST STUD, MILL RIDE, ASCOT, BERKSHIRE SL5 8LT. NEW MEMBERS Mrs. D. Ashfield, 36 Station Road, Gosport, Hants, P012 3BT Mrs. B. Duncan, Tropi-Fauna Imports, Inc., 3012 W. New Haven Avenue, West Melbourne, Florida 32901, USA. Mr. D, Gonzalez, Jr., 427-23 Green Oaks Court, Apt. 5, Addison, Illinois 60101, Mr. B. Higgs, Clee Hill Bird Gardens, Hopton Bank, Cleobury Mortimer, Kidder¬ minster, Worcs. Mr. D.P. King, 362 Hampton Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3J 1P8 Dr. C.T. Koehler, 4621 Longview Drive, North Highlands, California 95660, USA. Mr. R.P. Kotz, 304 South Hager Avenue, Barrington, Illinois 60010, USA Mr. S. Lindberg, Vansovagen 50, 125 40 Alvsjo, S-Sweden. Mr. G.D. Long, 554 Pierpont Drive, Costa Mesa, California 92626, USA Mr. F.J. da Matta, Avenida Ari Parreiras 10/301, 24230, Icarai, Niteroi, Brazil Mr. Robert W. Mele, 10003 Forum West Drive, Unit Apt 141, Houston, Texas 77036, USA Mr. M.J.C. Nelson, Tyre Hill Cottage, Hanley Swan, Worcester WR8 OEQ Mr. C.P. Nunemaker, Nunemaker Fish Co., POBox 849, Nags Head, North Carolina 27959, USA Mr. D. Prestel, Hebbelstrasse 3, 5030 Hurth, West Germany Mr. K.H. Reaney, Windsor Safari Park, Windsor, Berks. SL4 4AY Mr. A. Shelton, Blowhard, RSD, Via Ballarat, Victoria, Australia 3352 CHANGE OF ADDRESS Ms Mona Bourell, to 918 Sargent, San Francisco, California 94132, USA Mr. T.R. Bradley to 5017 Proulx Court, Hanmer, Ontario, Canada POM 1YO Mr. M.C. Greene, to 2 Nutts Lane, Rode, Bath, Somerset. Mr. R.M. Leigh to 22 Winchester Street, Salisbury, Wilts. SP1 1HL (Change of address, contd.) Mr. A.J. Swales to Manor Lodge Farm, Steeple Gidding, Huntingdon, Cambs Miss B. Wilkins to 16 Bramley Avenue, Grange Farm Estate, Upper Halliford Road, Shepperton, Middx. Mr. J.C. Witt to 956 N. Shaffer Street, Orange, California 92667, USA DONATIONS The Society is most grateful to the following members for their generosity: Mr. D.R. Baylis Mr. W. P. Bonsai Mr. R. Callaghan Mr. R.A. Chester Mr. M.K. Clark Mrs. B.B. Cox Dr. J. Delacour Mr. K.W. Dolton Mr. J.F. Dowling Miss D.K. Gurney Mr. I.A.S. Harris Mr. D.M. Stanford Head Mr. J.P. Holsheimer Mr. K.C.R. Howman Mr. H.H. Jacobsen Mr. S.C.D.L. Lacey Dr. J-M Lernould Mr. O.D. Long Captain W. Mountain Mr. R. Peters Mr. M.W. Reynolds Mr. D.J. Ripper Mr. U. Schurer Mr. D.P. Shearing Mr. G.A. Smith Mr. D. Surrey Mr. W. Todd III Mr. J.J. Y ealland MEMBERS’ ADVERTISEMENTS (10 p. per word - minimum charge £3.00) WANTED. Female Purple-bellied Parrots Triclaria malachitacea. Will buy or ex¬ change for males. Reply to: Staffan Lindberg, Vansovagen 50, 125 40 Alvsjo, S-Sweden. Ph./8470383. THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY OF QUEENSLAND welcomes new members An Australian Society catering for all birds both in captivity and in the wild. We put out a bi-monthly magazine on all aspects of aviculture and conservation. Anyone interested in becoming a member, please contact: Ray Garwood, 19 Fahey’s Road, Albany Creek, 4035 Queensland, Australia. Annual subscription rates are: 12.00 Australian dollars surface mail, 1 8.00 Australian dollars air mail Published by the Avicultural Society Windsor Forest Stud, Mill Ride, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 8LT, England. Printed in Great Britain by Unwin Brothers Ltd., The Gresham Press, Old Woking, Surrey 5'^/ <*,aOo^a~ g > rcb s A/ICULTURAL MAGAZINE VOLUME 87 Number 2 1981 CONTENTS Breeding the Blue-winged Parrotlet by A.J. Mobbs (with plates) . 65 Breeding Hardwicke’s Chloropsis by L. Gibson (with plates) . 70 Breeding the Flame Robin by Neil Hamilton . . . 90 The Genus Bolborhynchus and the breeding of the Mountain Parakeet by Mme. J.L. Spenkelink Vanschaik . 92 Breeding the Olive or Cape Thrush by P. Lowe . 98 Sprouting seed to provide a constant source of fresh and nutritious food for parrots and other captive birds by A. Freud (with plates) . 99 Sixty years ago: 1920 - Year of crisis by F.C. Barnicoat . 104 Notes on two African species by Avril Royston . 1 1 1 News and Views . 113 Reviews . 118 Correspondence . 121 Election of Council Members . 124 THE AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE welcomes original articles that have not been published elsewhere and that essentially concern the aviculture of a particular bird or group of birds, or that describe their natural history. Articles should be preferably typewritten, with double spacing, and the scientific names as well as the vernacular names of birds should be given. References cited in the text should be listed at the end of the article. Line drawings should be in Indian ink on thick paper or card; photographs which illustrate a particular point in the article will be used where possible and should be clearly captioned. ADDRESS OF EDITOR Mary Harvey, Windsor Forest Stud, Mill Ride, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 8LT, England. A.J. Mobbs Young Blue- winged Parrotlet, one week after removal from parents Avicultural^ Magazine THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY Voi 87 - No. 2 All rights reserved APRIL - JUNE 1981 BREEDING THE BLUE-WINGED PARROTLET Forpus passerinus vividus By A.J. Mobbs (Walsall, West Midlands) Housing Most authors when writing on parrotlets recommend aviary accommo¬ dation. No doubt aviary conditions are ideal, but not everybody can pro¬ vide such accommodation and for those people, I would suggest they house a breeding pair in a large flight cage. My parrotlets are housed in an indoor cage measuring 44 inches wide by 36 inches high and 16 inches deep. As well as the perches usually fitted to such a cage, I supply a perch which reaches from floor to ceiling. This is used regularly by the breeding pair when venturing to the floor of the cage and especially by the young birds which hesitate to fly down to the floor but walk down along the perch quite readily. All perches are of elder, a wood which if chewed is not harmful. It is obvious from the success I have experienced, that parrotlets will breed quite readily in a roomy cage; indeed the Celestial Parrotlet Forpus coelestis has been bred in a 4 ft box cage situated in a small kitchen (Boorer 1964). I have found a Budgerigar nest box placed on a side wall some 6 inches from the roof of the cage (so as to allow the breeding pair to sit on the top), to be acceptable. Diet Non-breeding birds appear to remain in good health if supplied with small sunflower seeds, white millet, plain canary, spray millet, hemp and groats. I supply all these items in separate dishes, not only to avoid wast¬ age but also to give me an idea as to how much of each is being taken. For a non-breeding pair, hemp is rationed to approximately one ounce per day. Soaked seeds consisting of one part plain canary to two parts mixed Budgerigar seed are supplied at all times. Cuttlefish 'bone5 is supplied but very little appears to be taken other 66 A.J. MOBBS - BREEDING THE BLUE-WINGED PARROTLET than immediately prior to egg-laying, when the female may be seen to take small amounts. Mineralised, oyster and limestone grit is available at all times, but as far as I can tell, none is ever eaten. Fruits such as grape, apple and pear have been offered but none has ever been sampled. Lettuce is eaten, especially when young are in the nest Fresh water for drinking is available at all times and water for bathing is supplied every other day. However, my birds have never taken advantage of the latter. The diet for birds with young is the same as the above, plus brown bread soaked in milk. I find the latter is taken avidly especially when the chicks are between one to twenty days old, after which con¬ sumption drops until the bread is eventually ignored altogether. I have found the consistency of the soaked bread to be most important. If it is wet and soggy, the birds take very little, whereas bread which has been soaked and then squeezed out almost dry, is taken avidly. The type of bread used is also important; ‘granary’ being the favourite as this ap¬ pears to remain more firm after soaking than some of the finer types such as Hovis. New bread should never be used; I have found bread about three days old to be best. It is most noticeable that at certain periods when young are being reared, no spray millet is eaten, yet is taken avidly when the birds are not breeding. Soaked seeds are taken readily when young are being reared, but only small amounts are eaten by non-breeding birds. I have mentioned that I ration the amount of hemp seed supplied to non-breeding birds. This seed is given ad lib. when young are being reared and is also supplied to weaned youngsters for the first few weeks, after which it is rationed. Display and Mating When displaying, the cock bird walks backwards and forwards along the perch uttering a prolonged but chittering note. The wings are held slightly open and away from the body, thus emphasising the rich colouring of the flight feathers. Every so often the male opens the wings fully bringing them up to meet over the back. During the whole procedure, the female remains in one position (usually at the end of the display perch), appearing to take little interest in the proceedings. Each time the male reaches the female, he gives her a ‘bop’ with his beak (as does a Budgerigar). After the display has been performed three or four times, the male will attempt to mate with the female. During copulation, the male places the left foot on the back of the female with the right foot gripping the perch. Immed¬ iately copulation has been completed, the female may attempt to mount A.J. MOBBS - BREEDING THE BLUE-WINGED PARROTLET 67 the male by placing her right foot on his back, with the left foot gripping the perch. The actual act can take up to IV2 minutes, during which time the birds keep up a continual soft growling noise. Male parrotlets have a definite song which is usually heard just before the mating display commences and also when the female is incubating or rearing young. In fact whenever the female of my pair is inside the nest box, the male will be heard singing almost continuously. When sing¬ ing the male often moves the head from side to side, bowing low as he does so. The male also has a threat display; it consists of the head being moved from side to side in what can only be described as a writhing motion, with the beak held slightly open. When the cause of the display has been re¬ moved, the male will fly from perch to perch uttering loud (victory?) calls as it does so. This display is used mainly during the breeding season and is directed towards anyone who draws near to the cage. A.J. Mohbs Blue-winged Parrotlet, 20 days old 68 A.J. MOBBS - BREEDING THE BLUE-WINGED PARROTLET Nesting Activity Over a period of some thirteen months (with a rest period and a moult in between) my pair produced eggs and young as follows: September 1978: 5 eggs, 4 fertile. Chicks hatched and raised to indepen¬ dence. December, 1978: 5 eggs, 1 fertile, 4 clear. Allowed parent birds to rear chick until it was some 30 days old when I put it down owing to it having only one eye and, perhaps because of this, being unable to move about other than in a complete circle. June 1979: 5 eggs, 4 fertile. Two chicks died (or were killed) at four days old. Remaining two reared to independence. August 1979: 7 eggs, 3 fertile. Chicks hatched and reared to indepen¬ dence. October 1979: 5 eggs, all infertile. Although both parent birds entered and inspected the nest box regu¬ larly soon after it had been placed into position, only the female slept in the box for the first few days. Once eggs had been laid, the female was seen to leave the box only on very rare occasions and the male would also spend much of his time in the box with her, including the night period. When chicks hatched, the male spent the majority of his time either taking food into the nest box or sitting ‘on guard’ outside the entrance hole. It is difficult to be definite on this, but I feel that the male rarely feeds the chicks while they are in the nest box, preferring to pass food to the female (by regurgitation?) and she then feeds it to the chicks. Once the young have left the nest box, the male appears to take over the responsibility of feeding them (if they are fed at all that is - see later), while the female prepares for another round. Growth of Chicks It appears that a clutch of five eggs is laid over a period of seven to eight days. The first chick from such a clutch hatched within twenty days of the first egg being laid. This does not mean that eggs take some twenty days to hatch, as it is doubtful if the female would begin to incubate immediately the first egg is laid. Low (1980) gives the incubation period as varying between 18 to 23 days, but states that from observations in the wild, it has been shown that the incubation period is in fact 17 days. At birth the chicks are pink with a small amount of whitish down, mainly on the head and back; the egg tooth is most pronounced. At nine A.J. MOBBS - BREEDING THE BLUE-WINGED PARROTLET 69 days the eyes are open and pin feathers appear on the body and wings. At approximately 15 days, the skin becomes dark coloured and being well feathered, the chicks can be sexed with ease. At 30 days of age, well fed chicks will begin to leave the nest box and can be seen feeding from the seed dishes almost immediately. By this time the female will have begun to lay a further clutch. When the first brood from my breeding pair left the nest box, they were never seen to enter it again. Neither parent molested the chicks in any way and the latter were removed from the breeding cage when 32 days old. A later brood, once they had left the nest box, were on occasions attacked by the male, usually when the female left the box for some reason. I put this down to territorial instinct on the part of the male. This particular brood was fed by both parent birds for a day or so after fledging. No other chicks were seen to be fed after fledging. I believe young parrotlets to be self sufficient the moment they fledge and if bred in a cage, it is not doubt preferable to remove them from the parent birds within a day or so whether one sees them feed or not as to leave them could mean they may be attacked, especially by the male. Young males begin to sing at some 30 days of age. At this age the song is much softer than that of an adult male. REFERENCES BOORER, W. (1964). Some notes on the behaviour and breeding of the Celestial Parrotlet. Avicultural Magazine, 70: 23-25. LOW, R. (1980). Parrots Their Care and Breeding. Blandford Press, Poole, Dorset. 70 BREEDING HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPSIS Chloropsis hardwickei By L.GIBSON (Burnaby, B.C., Canada) The general behaviour of these birds, along with housing, feeding and vocalisation, has been described in a previous article. The following will be limited to notes on breeding, with reference to the above when neces¬ sary. Background The birds were obtained in Britain in May, 1976. They got off to a bad start with the cock attacking the hen in the carrying cage, during a long car journey. This caused her to push through the bars, badly skin¬ ning her face. Previously the birds had been together in a tropical aviary. Arriving in Canada, they were put in a small outdoor aviary where the hen got her revenge by beating up the cock. He later avenged this in¬ dignity by keeping the hen from the food on a cold day in October. She was found in the grass at 7 pm on 6th October, frozen stiff and barely breathing. Hand-fed and heated to 30°C (86°F), she recovered by 10 that night. They fought on and off all winter, being separated and put together for varying spells. In February 1977, the hen was put in the conservatory with a number of other birds. She immediately put the food off-limits to the others, and was removed again. Aviary space was scarce, especially for unlikely breeders. They were put out in a small aviary on 6th June. In three days, the hen commenced to build a nest, 1.8 m. (6 ft.) up in an upright trifurcation in a small Vine Maple tree Acer circinatum . The nest side was covered with numerous cedar and laurel branches that I had put there for extra cover. The aviary was already occupied by a pair of Splendid Parakeets Neophema splendida which were on eggs. The Splendid male kept the Chloropsis away from the nest box, but otherwise there was no trouble. The cock Chloropsis was by now singing from dawn till dusk. On 12th June he violently attacked the hen, and so was removed. The nest was only half completed. Four days later the cock was returned, but the nest was destroyed in the next week, probably by him. The Splendid chicks had now hatched and the father was becoming truculent with the intruders, so they were removed. By now all the aviaries were occupied by nesting birds and that was that for the year, as far as the Chloropsis were concerned. They began to fight seriously in November, so were HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPSIS Chloropsis hardwickei 72 L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPSIS separated for the winter. I was in despair about getting them together, and was unwilling to devote an aviary solely to the pair, as all the other birds were nesting so well. All the others were breeding at two pairs to an aviary. With the limited space available, this doubling up meant a great saving in time with regards to studies on the maximum number of species, as of course a whole year is lost if a pair misses the short breeding season. So rather reluctantly I tried to dispose of the Hardwicke’s. Chloropsis cannot go to just any old cage, and there was only one likely prospect. A millionaire with a huge aviary made me an offer I could not refuse. He never came back, and 1 heard later that they got him for tax evasion. The birds were even offered free of charge to the New York Bronx Zoo, against a future trade for Pittas. Fortunately they did not take me up on the offer, or I would not be writing this now. They did however say my name would be put on a waiting list for the Pittas, and as far as I know it still is. I have not had much luck with zoos, apart from the local one, as regards trading birds, or even exchanging information. The only out of town zoo ever to do a trade was in Calgary, Alberta. Quite a few never accorded me the courtesy of a reply. Perhaps the breeding of softbills is at the bottom of a zoo’s priority list. So in spring of 1978, the hardwickei were put in a large aviary, along with two pairs of aurifrons and some Mousebirds. The male soon comman¬ deered the food table and he was removed, as usual. He was returned two weeks later, and all the Chloropsis settled and had a great time flying about. In July, the cock hardwickei began a premature moult which continued until September. The Mousebirds were by now nesting, so all the Chloropsis were put in the conservatory, where it was intended to winter them outside of the house for the first time. Birds which winter in the breeding aviary nest with higher frequency than birds put out in the spring. In September, after only two weeks in the greenhouse, the hen began to line a wicker canary basket with horsehair. The weather had been sunny, but it turned dull and cold, and the nest was left unfinished. At this time the Hardwicke’s shared the aviary with three male and two female aurifrons. By the third week, the large sulphur-green male aurifrons was violently attacking the other two males, but was not confronting the cock hard¬ wickei, or vice-versa. This bird was removed, and a pair of Chestnut- capped Laughing Thrushes Garrulax mitratus put in. A month later, the number two aurifrons male began to cause trouble and was sent to the zoo. This left a cock and two hen aurifrons , and the pair of hardwickei. L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPSIS 73 One of the coldest winters on record followed, and plants that had survived six or seven winters died that year. Temperatures inside fell to freezing on many nights. The birds all remained well and there was no trouble until the spring. On 4th March 1979, the tamest hen aurifrons was found bedraggled and very hungry. She was removed and boarded with the light green male which had been taken out in the autumn. They got on fairly well. This hen escaped in May, and was never seen again. The remaining pair of aurifrons took over a thick honeysuckle vine in which there was a wire canary basket. The hen sat in the basket a lot, and was sometimes fed there by the cock. A bitter territorial battle was fought between the two pairs of Chloropsis resulting in the aurifrons being confined to the corner with the honeysuckle while the hardwickei ranged over the rest of the area. The corner was partly shielded by a wire screen to ward off any direct attacks by the cock Hardwicke’s. Meanwhile, the Garrulax went about their business, oblivious to the trouble. On the same day that the screen was erected, the cock thrush began to build a nest of grass in a clump of bamboo, at a height of 1.7 m. (514 ft.). These truly beautiful birds were a direct contrast to the Chloropsis in habits. They were extremely affectionate and, even when not nesting, spent all their spare time being nice to each other. When mealworms were put in, the cock immediately took one to the hen, before he took one for himself. The Chloropsis never indulged in such romantic beha¬ viour. The hen Garrulax pitched in with the nest, and it was finished by 26th March. They only chased the Chloropsis off if they came down on to the bamboo. The aurifrons became very quiet and flew about close together, just like cyanerpes. The hen began to take horsehair to the half-finished hardwickei nest of the previous autumn. This was against the wall at a height of 2.1 m. (7 ft.) in a creeping fig vine Ficus pumila repens , and was close to the honeysuckle. The wire screen was removed as it now served no purpose. At this time an automatic vent opener was fitted to the roof. As the aurifrons looked like they might nest, the hardwickei were removed to the small outside flight in which the hen had previously built. This shuffling the birds around and removing the ones with the poorest nesting prospects is standard practice. It is often rather compli¬ cated, but has enabled five species to have been bred in each of the last two seasons in only three aviaries. The other aviaries are used for non- 74 L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPSIS breeding birds and juveniles. Space has also to be left for emergencies, such as the injured young Bald Eagle which was boarded for a while in the spring. In fact, space requirement is directly related to incompatability and is the only real drawback to keeping, and especially to breeding, softbills. During April and the first half of May, the Hardwicke’s were quite amicable. In the greenhouse, the aurifrons did nothing further, but the mitratus partly dismantled their nest and built another close by. Then the hen mitratus dropped dead. She had always looked much less fit than the male and was never as active. I do not get too attached to the multi¬ tudes of birds that pass through, but I was upset by the breaking up of this pair, especially with nesting imminent. A post- mortem revealed nothing. The cock was more upset than I was, and went into a state of near-shock for three weeks. He was removed from the aviary, and a pair of newly acquired Silver-beaked Tanagers Rxarbo added. A pleasant spring passed into a cold and windy June, and a unique sight was seen in the garden. On a blustery day the Hardwicke’s were seen pressed together for the first and only time. Four days later, the hen was seen displaying to the cock, by running back and forth on a long branch, while carrying a long grass stem in her beak. The signifi¬ cance of these events was not wasted on me, but a nestful of newly hat¬ ched Shamas delayed any action being taken. The hardwickei were by now looking rather rough, and the hen had head pin-feathers, but she was still carrying grass a week later. So the pair was put into the conservatory and the aurifrons removed, as they made no further progress. Courtship for the Chloropsis, like that of Cyanerpes, consisted of the birds cutting down quarrels to the minimum. The hen hardwickei immediately began to gather grass on the day she was put inside, and the cock began to sing tirelessly. The next morning, the hen was sitting holding a hurt foot off the perch. She was fluffed up and had a large wet patch on her right side, apparently from striking a wet window. No doubt this happened from being chased by the male. By noon she had recovered completely. The following day, the cock began to attack the tanagers violently. They avoided injury be virtue of their rapid flight - the fastest of any birds on the premises. They were removed around midday. By that afternoon, on the 19th June, and after only three days in the conservatory, the hen hardwickei was industriously building. It was going to be a long busy summer. Nests Three nests were completed and used. Three others were started and not finished for various reasons. Two of these have already been men- L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPSIS 75 tioned. The other incomplete one was built at the end of the 1979 season. All were of identical construction. As with all my birds, the widest possible range of building materials was provided. This included feathers, cobweb and a variety of plants, as well as synthetic products such as paper, string and artificial wools. With the sole exception of some pieces of nylon filament in one nest, the only materials used were dry grass and animal hair. The latter was mostly horsehair, but some cowhair was also used. Only the hen was involved in construction, with the cock following her about while she gathered grass. He sat closely and watched the work with great interest, just in the manner of the male C. cyaneus . The first nest was built at a height of 1.7 m. (5 V2 ft.) and only 1.25 m. (4 ft.) from the dining room window. It was in the bamboo clump, and this remarkable plant has been the nesting site for at least half a dozen different birds. Many sites were investigated and when the bamboo was chosen, the nest base was laid in an afternoon. The next day, the walls were added, being made of rather fine dry grass, as was the base. The work progressed slowly as the hen expended a great deal of time and energy tugging at the nylon macrame hanger which held the feeding tray. She succeeded in pulling some nylon into a fuzz, but could not get if off, and she often hang upside down while tugging. When some of the fuzz was cut off she ignored it, as she did also some similar natural fibres. On the third day she began to line the nest with horsehair pulled from the unfinished nest of the previous autumn. More horse and cowhair was supplied in varying lengths and in three colours - black, white and red. Those pieces about 18 cm. (7 in. ) long were most often used, but no colour preference was noted, except perhaps that light hair was less, often taken. Two or three pieces of fine nylon ribbon, unwound from nylon string, were used in this nest only. One piece was used as a main support. On the fourth day the nest was completed. It was built almost at the top of the thick bushy plant, resting on a single thin hard stem that came out at almost a right angle from a cane. The nest was anchored at one place only on the rim to this single cane, by stems of dry grass and a piece of nylon. The other main supports, about the middle of the walls, were two tufts of leaves and their stems. This was a fine leaved bamboo, and the leaf stems were thin, yet strong and pliable. They can be readily pulled into a suitable position by binding with grass, etc. This tough but work¬ able nature of the plant may be the attraction for the birds, and also they may be familiar with it. The finished nest consisted of a shallow grass cup with firm but open 76 L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPSIS lacework sides. There was a thick well- woven lining of horsehair, and the whole thing was quite like the nest of Cyanerpes cyaneus in design and proportions. It measured 6.5 cm. (2 5/8 in.) across inside and 9 cm. (3Vi in.) across outside. The inside depth was only 3 cm. (114 in.) and the total depth was 5 cm. (2 in.). This shallow structure meant that the bird was sitting with about half the body in view, and the tail coming straight out over the rim. This is in contrast, for example, with the Leio- thrix, Pekin Robin, which has only the beak and the end of the tail sticking out of the nest. Later a second nest was built in the fig vine, at a height of 2.4 m. (8 ft.) just above the canary basket containing last year’s nest. The maxi¬ mum available building height was almost 3 m. (10 ft.) The creeping fig also has tough pliable leaf stems. A third nest, and the last to be used, was a reconstruction of the first nest, using lining from the second. All the nests were firmly made and well fixed. In retrospect, it was seen that there was no danger of them coming apart. However, as a precaution at the time, a packing of dry grass was stuffed underneath each nest. The first nest had a hole of about one cm. (3/8 in.) at the join of wall and base. Although there was no danger of an egg falling through, the hole was plugged with fibre as an insulating measure. The fibre used was the beautiful soft gold-auburn inner coat from a tree fern. This was exactly the same colour and appear¬ ance as the fuzzed nylon that the bird had tried to pull from the hanger, yet it ignored this softer natural material. The hen did not gather grass from the ground, nor did she like loose grass higher up. She preferred to tug it out, and this is a natural means by which unsound or rotting mate¬ rials are avoided. So bunches of grass and horsehair were jammed in cre¬ vices and branches around the aviary. The hen did however use some horsehair that was merely scattered over the plants. Chloropsis probably all have similar habits. Certainly aurifrons and hardwickei are identical, and I would expect that nesting would be the same for all. Many books describe Chloropsis nests in identical terms, and presumably the information came from a single original source. For instance, the nests are commonly quoted as being suspended from branch tips, and although plenty of such sites were available, they were not used at all. With regards to nesting materials, what I think is erroneous is the mention of twigs (and pine needles) and strangest of all, inner bark. These dainty birds would find twigs far too coarse for a nest. The often repeated “inner bark” must surely be a misidentification of material, or perhaps the original nest described involved a misidentification of species. L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICK! ’S C1ILOROPSIS 77 Why on earth would a bird want to use inner bark, and how would it be obtained? It would certainly be an impossible task for the weak bill and small feet of a Chloropsis. I went to some trouble to make inner bark available, and assorted outer bark too, but there was no interest shown in any of it. Eggs During the nest construction, the food intake of the hen increased greatly. She ate large quantities of rice pudding, some scrambled egg, and all the soft insects that could be supplied. Nectar was scarcely touched. The day after the first nest was finished, she ate her first mealworm, but never touched them again afterwards. Both birds were now very quiet and relaxed, but rather scruffy looking. On 24th June, two days after the nest was finished, the first egg was laid. It was large and very elongated. This first egg was dull off-white, with very small, faint, diffuse spots at the big end, merging into a solid patch right on the end. The spots and patch were a pale washed-out terracotta colour. The hen continued to eat heavily and took two small dragon-fly larvae which were barely covered with water in a small dish. These were tried as an experiment, as sometimes aquatic live food is readily obtainable under certain circumstances, and has not been exploited as a rearing food by aviculturists. The next day a second egg was laid. This had the same spots and patch, but there was the faintest wash of terracotta over the whole egg. Four subsequent eggs looked like the second egg, and the first was the only white one, as well as being the longest and narrowest, at 24 mm. by 16 mm. The others averaged 23 mm. by 17 mm. It was hot when the eggs were laid, and the hen was off a lot on the first day. When the second egg was laid she sat tight. Inspection from the window did not upset her, but she flushed when the aviary was entered, although the nest was at the far end from the door. The cock now fell silent and took up a vigil on a twig and only left it to feed. This was exactly the behaviour of a male Cyanerpes cyaneus , the only differ¬ ence being that the hardwickei sat as far away from the nest as possible. He scarcely moved for the duration of the incubation. When the first egg was 13 days old, it stood up in the nest at 45° on its small end. The hen threw it out, and it was clear. The next day I checked the remaining egg and it was dark. It was chipped around the end and replaced. An hour later the hen became excited and stood up in the nest chirping and quivering. She began to peck at the egg. The cock left his perch and came to the nest for the first time since the eggs were 78 L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPSIS laid. He sat beside the hen and became equally excited. The hen chipped out an almost fully developed dead chick. It was somewhat dehydrated and weighed 1 .6 g. Newly hatched chicks weigh about 1 .8 g. Four days later on 12th July, the hen began to build a new nest in the creeping fig. Again it was well anchored, but had no bottom support and was shored up with a bunch of grass as before. Although plenty of horse¬ hair was supplied, the lining from the first nest was completely dismantled and used for the second one. The cock recommenced singing, rapidly but quietly, and had an occasional aggressive fit, but he was also seen to feed the hen for the first time. In another four days an egg was laid, followed by another the next morning. This was 22 days after the first clutch was laid. The same incubation pattern was repeated. This nest was just above the aviary door and the hen came off whenever anyone walked past. Fortunately it was very hot, around 32°C (90°F) at nest height, during the day. A sheet of opaque plastic was put over the window adjacent to the nest, and this kept the hen on the nest most of the time. The cock kept his same silent vigil, but switched to the other end of the aviary, so that again he was as far from the nest as possible. He also slept there, but moved to the hen whenever she was off. The hen had by now cut her food consumption, and in the heat was eating some grapes and little else. On 30th July, on the fourteenth day, the first egg hatched. I am rather phlegmatic about birds breeding now, but must admit to being excited at the first nest, the first egg, and even more so at the first hatching, although the high point was to come later. The chick weighed about 1 .8 g, was pink and downless, with a rather long neck and small head for its size. There was no special gape colouring. The other egg hatched next day. At each hatching, the cock came over and showed great interest and excitement. He peered in at the chicks and could hardly wait to feed them. The first chick was fed within two hours of hatching. Both parents took food to the nest. The hen flew directly to the nest, whereas the cock arrived by degrees, after looking about for a long time, again just like Cyanerpes. The chicks were fed on small grasshoppers, spiders and wasp grubs and pupae. A number of wasp nests had been collected and stored in the refrigerator. The grubs will keep for about a week, while the pupae will keep for up to several months. Once the cock was on the feeding tray eating a grape ; when the hen arrived he dropped the grape and gave her a wasp grub, which she took to the chicks. Although the nest was in a creeping fig, it was hidden by large passion vine Passiflora leaves. A hole was cut in these and the adjacent window L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPS1S 79 was scrubbed inside and out. The plastic screen was folded back a little, so that the nest was visible from the garden. A garden table was pulled to a suitable spot and a garden bench was propped against it. The bench served as a stand for heavy 12 x 50 binoculars. A Colius nest in an adjacent aviary was similarly treated, and both nests could be observed from the same spot. I then spent much of the next two weeks in the garden, putting in a dawn to dusk shift on at least two occasions. The binoculars made every small detail clear. The birds always landed on the same stem and fed the chicks from the side and to the back of my field of view. Even from the second day, I could see the chicks’ heads above the rim of the nest. This set up enabled me to see details that were not possible with nests in other situations, even ones close to the window. The same applied to the Colius nest. Fortunately the weather was hot and sunny throughout. I had arranged holidays for this period, and I had great difficulty in convincing my family that I was actually working while sitting there - my meals were brought out to the table. Actually it was uncomfortable, tiring and no fun, although I did get a sun tan. The Chloropsis chicks would beg only for the parents, so the prospects were poor for hand- feeding. Unlike any other chicks, they were also most reluctant to beg for the parents, and often considerable time was spent trying to coax them. Most chicks shoot up when a parent arrives with food, but these chicks seldom did this right away. For the first three days they were very shaky, and their heads wavered rather a lot, 45° from the vertical. The parents were seen to follow these movements with the food item and, when appropriate, it was inserted into the chicks’ beaks only slightly. The adult then supported the chick upright with the food item, if large, or with the tip of its own beak, if the food item was small. The chick then worked its gape around large food items, or pumped them back if small. Feeding was a slow process and again there was a resemblance to Cyanerpes here. The parents macerated all the food well, but some rather large grass¬ hoppers were fed by the cock. The chicks eventually swallowed these. On the third day at the latest, the cock took rice pudding to the chicks, and fed this thereafter. He himself was eating only rice and insects. The hen at this stage switched solely to insects for herself (and the chicks), and this pattern was kept up by both birds for three months, until nesting was finished. Nectar was scarcely touched at all during this time, but they took some currant juice, and left the currants. The parents took far more food to the nest than was taken by the chicks, so they usually ate it themselves, after spending much time prod- 80 L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPSIS ding the reluctant chicks. Occasionally they dumped the surplus food. Both parents cleaned the nest, usually eating the droppings. The hen always ate them. On some occasions, the cock carried them off, especially when he had to eat unwanted food. This cleaning behaviour was highly developed and the parents carefully removed or ate any food left on the rim of the nest. With some birds this is a good way to get extra non-live food into chicks, but it did not work with the Chloropsis. Any faeces that were dropped on leaves below the nest were carefully cleaned off by the adults. A faeces sac was deliberately put on a leaf about a metre below the nest and the hen immediately came and removed all trace of it. One chick went missing on the fifth or sixth day. Day one is the day after hatching. It was not known which chick, and an extensive search failed to find it. The remaining chick was the only one to be raised, but the notes apply equally to the next brood, which reached eight and nine days. At this time the chick’s wing quills were well through, but unopened, and its skin had become dark grey. For the record, it was presumed that this was the second chick, based on eye opening, but there remains the possibility that fledging times, etc. $re one day longer than stated. It is likely that these times are correct, for they correlated with the second brood for as far as they got. On the fifth day, the remaining chick was heard to cheep for the first time. It could only be heard from close by the nest. In succession it took three wasp larvae from the hen, some rice from the cock, and another larva from the hen. This was the most it was ever seen to eat at one time. It should be noted that wasp grubs are an acquired taste and not all birds will eat them at first, but most do so after a few days of trying. Birds will take wasp pupae right away, and these were much preferred for feeding the chick. Wasp larvae do not defaecate until they pupate, and perhaps the waste material which collects for a week in the grubs is distasteful. Two interesting things were seen with the binoculars, which would otherwise have been missed. When food was offered to the chick it usually came up, but did not always gape right away. It was often seen to first taste the food by sticking its tongue through the almost closed beak. Then if the item was to its liking, it gaped and took it. This was later confirmed at the nest when the chick was being hand-fed, and it continued to taste food even after its eyes had opened. When the eyes were still shut, it found the food by touch. The adults often endeavoured to get the chick to beg by banging food on the chin area, then holding it there for approval. The chick occasionally took food from me and it was given L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPSIS 81 some feeds of egg in milk, which were probably not necessary but certainly did no harm. When I offered it a wasp grub once, it tasted it and promptly went back down. When this was repeated immediately with a wasp pupa, the chick tasted then ate it. It would be interesting to know what is fed to the chicks in the wild, for they are so fussy. This tasting would no doubt apply to some other species, but would be most difficult to check. On the other hand, there are chicks which just about jump out of the nest and take anything that is shoved down their throats. The other observation also involved the tongue. It was hot throughout the whole nestling period and the hen was off the chick quite a lot. She would visit it frequently and touch it with her tongue. If it was getting cold, she jumped on and brooded it. Checking temperature with the tongue has been recorded for example in the Australian Malee Fowl Leipoa ocellata. Just about the time of hatching, a source of grasshoppers was dis¬ covered. It was a warm summer with an early spring, and this had brought these creatures to a size not usually seen until a month later in the normal cool damp summers. They keep for two weeks or so indoors, in a fish tank, and longer outside. They must be given fresh vegetation, and never allowed to become stuffy or damp. It was better to replenish the supply frequently. When the chick fledged, and with both parents eating the grass¬ hoppers, I was hard pressed to supply enough. This entailed a half- day’s collecting at the weekend and two evenings during the week. Collecting soon became streamlined with practice, and was aided by two small children and a large dog. The dog flushed the hoppers and the kids grabbed them, while I held a large plastic bag to receive them. A thick rubber band around the top of the bag was a refinement. It was a less efficient process to try to catch them by myself, as about half escaped when the bag was opened, and de-legging them was the only, and slow, way to avoid this. It was found that the grasshoppers have very definite location preferences. They collect in dry south-facing hollows, or flat areas with a protecting bank to the north side. They become sluggish when the sun is not directly on them, and evening collections were easier. The timing had to be just right, for if they became too sluggish, they did not flush, and could not be spotted. Wet days were hopeless. One collecting trip was made to the United States, where the insects were, believe it or not, bigger and (presumably) better. Going abroad for live food must be the ultimate in keeness. Actually the spot was only 24 miles away, and earlier I had travelled up to 35 miles in Canada to collect some wasp nests. All the grasshoppers, including the American ones, had 82 L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPSIS a high rate of infestation with roundworms. These were longer than the insects, being some 25 mm in a 20 mm. grasshopper, and the insects often burst asunder with the pressure from four or five worms. The grasshopper was probably the final host for the parasite. At any rate they did not affect the birds in any way. When the chick was six days old, it was noticed at 1 pm. that it was not being fed. An unbroken watch was kept, and it was found that the chick was not begging and that the parents were scarcely bringing any food. It is not known if one problem was connected with the other, but I got the impression that the parents were discouraged by lack of response from the chick. In the following eight hours, until dusk, the cock fed the chick four times and the hen twice. They both gave up by 5 p.m. I fed the chick 10 times in the eight hours. The parents also made three attempts at feeding, the hen doing this twice, but the chick would not come up. In desperation I put the chick on antibiotics (oral Cephalosporin and Sulpha-trimethoprim) when I heard a click in its breathing at about 7.30 p.m. Later I thought this was due to temporary choking on food, as it had almost gone in an hour. It was breathing at 95/min. in a slow, quick quick, pattern. However, baby birds breathe rather erratically like this, even after fledging. The timing did not mean anything as it varies with species, and one needs a second chick to compare. I decided that 95 was probably all right after I checked some healthy Shama chicks, which were ticking over at more than 100/minute. Although not feeding, the hen sat tight on the chick all the while, and had to be chased off so that the chick could be fed. She went on at night as usual, just as it was getting dark. Each night this was checked, as a pre¬ cautionary measure. Antibiotics were discontinued. The next day the nest was watched from 9 a.m. to 8.30 p.m. The cock brought food twice, but the chick would not beg, so he ate the food him¬ self. The hen did not bring food at all, but continued to brood the chick. I hand fed the chick 36 times, averaging three feeds an hour. The chick sometimes came up for me, but would not open its beak. It was fed by prying open the beak with a toothpick and popping in the food with another one. On this the seventh day, little green tufts burst out of the wing quills. The following morning the parents were seen to feed rather erratically, and this was supplemented with hourly hand-feeds. An interesting thing came to light. In the morning, the chick was hand- fed some cooked salmon for the first time. A little of this had been used as supplementary feeding for Shama chicks, but no adult birds ate it. It was reasoned that this rich, concentrated food would be good for L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPSIS 83 chicks, and, once swallowed, was just basically protein. This was not to be, as far as Chloropsis are concerned. An hour and 15 minutes after receiving the first salmon feed, which was fifty minutes after the second one, the chick defaecated. The first part consisted of a normal sac, followed by twice the volume of almost undigested salmon, with no sac around it. The chick was given a feed of banana and rice. This was high in potassium, and the theory was to counter excess sodium in the salmon. Shortly after¬ wards, the chick ejected more undigested salmon. Either the oil or the salt, or probably both, in the salmon was completely alien to the Chloro¬ psis digestive system and therefore quickly rejected. The chick was all right though, and was fed by me and the parents for the rest of the after¬ noon. The cock was extremely nervous and acting strangely. He once took up a wasp larva and the chick begged immediately. The father put the food into the chick’s gape but withdrew it instantly, and flew off. He came back right away and repeated the performance, and the chick got nothing. Another time the cock gave the chick something which was too small to identify and this was thought to be the only feed of fruit flies given. At the nest the hen was seen to squeeze a wasp pupa and let the juice run back down her throat. This was done several times, and in between she pumped liquid into the gaping chick, with an obvious pumping action of her throat. The amount of liquid in the larve could not account for the amount of pumping and it was surmised that nectar (or currant juice) was being fed also. The chick was hand-fed at 3.25. Fifteen minutes later, during another feed, it opened its eyes for the first time, then closed them again. It open¬ ed its eyes for every feed thereafter that evening, closing them again when fed. On the ninth day, to my great relief, both parents were feeding steadily, and for the first time, the chick sprang up for them and also for me. Strangely, its eyes were tight shut, and remained so all day. It had not cheeped since the fifth day, but resumed this now. One parent feeding triggered off the other, and they always fed at the same time, one waiting its turn very close by. The chick was stuffed with wasp larvae and grass¬ hoppers, with the cock occasionally bringing rice. It was 31°C (88°F) at the nest, and the chick sat with its neck stretched fully and its head dangling over the rim. This was the same position adopted by Cyanerpes chicks in the heat. In spite of the ersatz feeding of the previous three days, the chick had grown dramatically. On this day the droppings were no longer in a sac. 84 L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPSIS They came out very loose and looked bloodstained. This gave me quite a shock, but a microscopic examination showed no blood at all, only reddish fat globules. Grasshoppers were by this time the main food. The vegetation eaten by them is transformed into a dark reddish brown juice. In addition, a number of them had red markings on the body and legs. Evidently they were quite lax'ative, and the “bloody diarrhoea” was a daily occurrence. The parents had difficulty removing these loose droppings and usually ate most of them, but the nest became stained on the bottom, and con¬ sequently the chick too, during its final two days in the nest. There was now about 14, hours of feeding light, and although some other food was taken, the birds were going through 50 - 70 grasshoppers a day. These had started off at 6 - 13 mm. QA - Vi in.) but were growing quickly in the fields and were now 13 - 20 mm. (V2 - 3A in.) long. On day eleven, the parents started to quarrel frequently and as I did not think the chick was getting enough, hand-feeding was recommenced. In the afternoon, it jumped from the nest when I went to feed it. It was returned, and stayed there. The following day, 12th June, the 12-day old chick voluntarily left the nest at 6 p.m., fluttered about 1/3 m. (1 ft.) and crashed to the ground. The parents fed it there, but it was put back in the nest later, and it rema¬ ined there for the night. When picked up, it did not move or make a sound, but the parents got very agitated. After searching the ground, they relocated it and fed it, but the hen did not brood it that night. The chick weighed 20 g., 55.5% of the average weight of both parents, and almost the same percentage as a newly fledged Turdoides jardinei. At the time, the mother weighed 33.5 g. and the father 38.4 g., the latter being the heaviest of all the Chloropsis. The chick had a large head, well developed wings and legs, and a disproportionately small body. The beak was slightly curved, and quite firm. The chick stayed in the nest until the following afternoon. When it left, it was rather soiled on the legs, and its feathers were rather untidy and soiled, but otherwise well formed. The tail had just burst out of the quills, and the chick still could not fly. It was a plain green all over. The legs were a bluish-tinged dark grey, and the nails silver, while the beak was black. The chick was cleaned up with a wet tissue, photographed and sat on a tomato plant, where it remained for the rest of the day. At this stage, the parents showed signs of a rapidly developing problem. They would still only feed together, but began to sit close by the begging chick and hold food for up to 30 minutes before feeding. Sometimes they would land beside it and take off with the food, while the chick clamoured L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICKE'S CHLOROPSIS 85 and begged. The hen was seen to carry grass and horsehair between these bouts of feeding paranoia. The chick was given a heavy hand-feeding last thing at night, as it was obviously not being satisfied. On day 14, the adults were quarrelling fiercely and the cock began to keep the hen from the food. The chick was fed occasionally by either parent, but was largely kept going from hand-feeding. The next day was the same, and obviously one or the other parent had to go. After serious consideration, I removed the hen. The result of this was quite dramatic, and fortunately beneficial. Within half an hour the cock settled to feed the chick regularly. It got eight feeds of rice in 10 minutes, although only one or two grains at a time, and he was also giving it two consecutive grasshoppers per feed. The father had scarcely used any wasp larvae before, and he now fed the chick solely on rice and grasshoppers for the next 17 days, until it was removed. It was decided to leave the father with the chick mainly because he would feed rice, whereas the hen only used insects, which indeed was all she ate herself. Also it is the natural course in most cases for the male to be the main provider for fledged chicks. Another reason was the be¬ haviour of the cock when the chick left the nest. When the nest was examined, both parents were only slightly annoyed, and like all my other birds, they soon became used to routine examinations. But after the chick left the nest they became wildly agitated if anyone approached it. Each and every time the chick was picked up, the picker was struck with varying degrees of force by the cock. Once he knocked the chick right out of my hand while inflicting a violent high speed stabbing attack on me. The injury was scarcely noticeable, but it is of interest that this bird is the only one to have physically struck me (except of course for injured hawks, etc., in different circumstances.) The attacks were accom¬ panied by explosive whistles. He usually just threatened when the chick was approached, but he always struck if it was picked up. Mostly, the offending hand was attacked, but on a few occasions, the head was the target. The aggressive nature of the Chloropsis has to be admired for the great courage that goes along with it, and I decided that the cock could not fail to take care of the chick after such a performance. The parents were so nervous of each other that this had disrupted the feeding pattern at five days and again when the chick left the nest. It was evident that this was the problem and not, for example, my presence in the aviary. Much of the above observation was carried out surrep¬ titiously from the garden or through the house windows, and the cock later went smoothly about his business, even when I was present, as long 86 L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPSIS as I did not touch the chick. Three days after leaving the nest,, at sixteen days old, the chick began to move around a lot. It remained hidden and the green colour made it difficult to see. It was seen to preen itself, and it took the odd feed from me, whenever I was in the aviary. It took half hour naps during the day, sometimes tucking its head in like the adults, and at other times simply withdrawing the head to the shoulders. At night it carefully selected the shelter of a large overhanging leaf. The cock did not sleep beside it. The hen was now in a nearby aviary, and both adults called to each other all day. At 30 days the chick was flying the length of the conservatory, but still made some landing errors. Its tail was well in by now. It still had not been seen at the feeding tray. When it was 32 days old it was put out¬ side with the hen and all four aurifrons. They all flew after it to have a look, but none attempted to feed it, or harm it. The hen did not drive off the aurifrons. It was later put in a large cage with its mother, who ate a large grasshopper but made no move to feed the begging chick. The hen was then put back with the cock. The chick gave a quiet but penetrating double cheep when hungry. It was hand-fed for the rest of the day, and photographed. It weighed 28.5 g., the hen being 33.5 g. The chick’s wings, tail and mantle were a fairly bright green, the contour feathers being a softer green. There was the usual dark colour on the inside of the wing primaries, but no other colours on the chick. The chick drank some milk nectar when its beak was held into it. It had not been seen to drink before this. The next day, to my excitement and great relief, the chick, at 33 days old, was seen busily feeding itself. It ate banana, rice, wasp larvae and took nectar. Probably it could have done so before, but not much earlier. Things went smoothly with the chick, and on 8th September, at 39 days it was heard singing quietly to itself. A month later, a few tiny blue feathers appeared on its throat, and a few beige feathers on its lower abdomen, at around 70 days. These colours gradually spread. The chick was now fairly tame and would take a grape or grub from the fingers. It would also sit on a hand long enough to be photographed. A further month later, at 100 days, it had moulted completely into a beautiful hen. The early singing was no indication of sex, and as noted earlier, males and females are equally vociferous (this also applies to bulbuls). As hardwickei is the most highly coloured Chloropsis, and as the juvenile is plain green, it would be reasonable to surmise that the young of all Chloropsis species would be plain green also. The chick is doing well at the time of writing, and at four months L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPSIS 87 weighed 30.5 g., just short of the adult female weight. It is now a good deal wilder from not being handled any more. It has lapsed into the conservative feeding pattern of the adults, and subsists mainly on banana and milk nectar. Second Brood When the hen was returned to the greenhouse on 1st September, she began to eat heavily, and the next day she commenced to reline the original nest. The grass cup was still intact in the bamboo, and it was lined as before with horsehair, some taken from the last nest. The nest was completed by 4th September. The cock could not wait, and he took a grasshopper to the nest. He jumped in and sat there for 1 Vi minutes, until the hen flushed him out. Some strands of lining were added by the hen over the next three days, the cock again taking no part in the work. On the ninth and tenth, two eggs were laid, both identical to the second original one described previously. The weather now became dull and cool. It had been hot and sunny with no rain at all during the whole of the preceding nestings, and the greenhouse had been sprayed frequently. The hen went on to the nest when this was being done, and both adults bathed in the wet foliage. Because of the rapidly falling temperatures and shortening daylight, a vent was boarded up, and sunblinds were removed. On 14th September, in spite of the automatic vent opener, a hot sunny day put the temperature at nest level up to at least 43 °C (1 10°F), when the eggs were four and five days old. The eggs were probably at this temperature for only a short time. In spite of the heat, they hatched. The first chick came out at 14 days, on the morning of the 23rd, but the second chick hatched at 3 p.m., at less than 13 Vi days. The morning was dull and wet at 13°C (56°F), but it was sunny and had reached 27°C (80°F) when the second chick hatched. On this first day the cock brooded the chicks for ll/i minutes. This was the only difference from the last nesting, and he continued to do so sporadically. He was usually on for 1 - 2 minutes, and vacated when the hen came back from eating, but once he was on for 25 minutes. The adults always entered the nest from the one direction. This was the back, or window side. The result was that, although this nest was not particularly well hidden, the parents blocked off a clear view of the nest. I actually got a better view of the last nest by using the binoculars. The hen always sat on this nest facing away from the house, and consequently always left in that direction, although the bam¬ boo was in the middle of the aviary breadth. The entry and sitting position L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPSIS was fixed on the other nests also and the Chloropsis did not turn around when sitting, as many others have done. Like most birds nesting here, the parents had improved with experi¬ ence and were feeding like clockwork, with no bickering. A potential problem was looming in that I had arranged to go on holiday in October, and a bird-sitter had been engaged. It is of course impossible to attempt holidays during the nesting season, and the family was on the point of revolt as we had not been anywhere for years. In fact the last trip was to collect the Chloropsis. The feeding difference with this brood was that I had run out of wasp larvae, and the grasshoppers had almost all died off because of the autumn, and were very hard to find. At this season spiders are at their peak, and several hundreds of very large orb, or cross, spiders Araneus diadematus were collected. I got bitten several times by them and got shocked more than pained. Some harvestmen (“daddy-long-legs”) Phalangium spp. were also supplied, and these were eaten by the adults, as well as used for feeding the chicks. Some tiny (6 mm./!4 in.) meal moths were also used, but larger moths were not even eaten by the adults. Then I found a comm¬ ercial source of house crickets Acheta domestica. It was hoped that these would be a solution to chick feeding problems. The crickets have large, hard heads, so these were removed, at least for the chicks’ sake. This is of no consequence for the adult birds. For the record, I got bitten by a cricket and it was a good deal harder than a spider bite. This is worth keeping in mind whenever one has birds which are careless about breaking insects up properly for chicks. Suddenly, with no previous indication of distress, the youngest chick died at noon on 1st October, in its eighth day. It was normal in appear¬ ance with well developed feathers, and its eyes had just opened a little. Nothing was found at autopsy, and its stomach was full of spider remains. The next day the remaining chick died in my hand at 1 p.m. It had looked well earlier in the morning. It had a cricket in its stomach and so, like the other chick, it had fed up to the last minute. Both chicks were plump and had given no sign of impending trouble. There was some suggestion, from culturing the intestines, that the last chick might have had an infec¬ tion. I should have taken heed of the first chick’s death and put the other one on antibiotics, even if it did not look ill. Antibiotics are about the only recourse for a sick chick, especially for a sole remaining one. They may or may not have contributed to the survival of tire present juvenile, although it only received them for a short period, but they did no harm, and I still have the bird. The next step is to put half a brood L. GIBSON - BREEDING HARDWICKE’S CHLOROPSIS 89 on antibiotics prophylactically for a week, and give none to the other half. This might give some interesting results, and not just with softbills. One can do little to control bacteria that get into chicks with live food, although of course the birds should be used to whatever comes with insects. But mammalian gut bacteria are completely alien to most birds, and yet captive birds harbour a variety of such organisms obtained from their daily food. The picture is further complicated by the fact that the adults were unaffected by anything, but of course it would take a lot less of, say, an infectious agent, to affect a chick. Epilogue Eight days after the demise of the last chick, the hen began to build again by reconstructing the nest in the creeping fig. Both adults were by now moulting, and the hen had already dropped some wing feathers while she was building. Even so, both birds looked fit and in as good feather as at any time during the year. They were still quite friendly - for them - and had not yet begun their customary winter brawling. The cock was interested in the nest-building. Three days after this construction comm¬ enced, the birds were brought indoors. It was now 13th October, and I would not have been around for any chicks hatching, and the nights were now long and quite cold. A friend offered to buy the birds, so they were sent to Ontario. Thus ended a tumultuous relationship with that pair of birds, after achieving one of my two major goals in aviculture - the other one is to breed Garrulax. I was by this time physically, not to mention mentally, exhausted by the activities of the 1979 season, and a wonder¬ ful peace ensued when the Hardwicke’s left. Even the aurifrons were quiet, and the only trouble was the Hardwicke’s chick (naturally) quarell- ing with a shama chick. The peace was not to last, as my friend (perhaps in revenge) sent me in return four Garrulax canorum Chinese Spectacled Thrush. Each bird seemed intent on annihilating the others. All that remains for 1979 is to tell of some strange happenings with shamas, which also contributed to the excitement and anguish of that breeding season. 90 BREEDING THE FLAME ROBIN IN CAPTIVITY By NEIL HAMILTON (Bird Section, Taronga Zoo, Sydney, Australia) The Flame Robin Petroica phoenicea has a distribution in the eastern states of Australia ranging from south-eastern Queensland, through New South Wales and Victoria to south-eastern South Australia. It is also found on Kangaroo Island, the islands of Bass Strait and is numerous on Tas¬ mania. Like most of the Australian Petroica “Robins” it feeds mainly on the ground, and in winter can often be seen feeding in flocks in open grassland or grazing paddocks. During the spring and summer the sexes pair off and locate themselves within the heavy timber areas along river and creek beds where breeding occurs, usually between August and Feb¬ ruary. In this pretty flycatcher, males are slate-coloured above with a white diamond shaped area on the forehead; white stripe on wings, while chin, eyes and legs are black. Throat, breast and upper belly, orange red; rem¬ ainder of underparts white. Females are brown in colour with white spot on forehead. Older females sometimes have an orange wash on the breast. Immatures resemble the female but have buff markings around the facial area, and are sometimes smaller in size. In April 1978, two keepers and I collected two pairs of Flame Robins, along with other species of birds for the Taronga Zoo. These were mist-netted within the Blue Mountain district, west of Sydney, under permit issued by the National Parks and Wildlife Service of N.S.W. These permits restrict the number of a given species collected to two pairs within the state of N.S.W. and does not include birds designated rare. We have found that Petroica Robins often have coccidia infections so they were given a precautionary quarantine period of 30 days, after which they were split into two pairs and placed in separate aviaries, each planted to form a different environment; one as heath land while the other was landscaped as desert. Within a period of six months we had lost the male from the desert environment cage, but the other pair continued to thrive The aviary in which these are housed is round with an approximate circumference of eight metres and height of two metres, and is furnished with various types of native vegetation, ie. Tea-Tree Melaleuca armillaris and the Wattle Acacia longifolia, tussocks and the usual dead stumps. Running N. HAMILTON - BREEDING THE. FLAME ROBIN 91 water is always available. Other birds located in this cage were a pair of Red-crested Cardinals, Stubble Quail and one each of Brown, Yellow¬ faced and White-naped Honeyeaters. Within the month of November, 1978, both birds were observed building a cup-shaped nest in the Melaleuca shrub, close to the wire and in full view of the public. On noticing this various materials were pro¬ vided; these included the filling from an old bed mattress, coconut fibre, lengths of cotton and hair. Natural materials found within the aviary included strips of bark and grass and when the nest was complete, the cup was lined with spider webs and feathers. Nest-building took approxi¬ mately one week and on 3rd of December, the female was found to be incubating three eggs, the colour of which varied from pale blue to pale green, spotted and blotched with shades of a purple-grey. Incubation is carried out by the female only, with the male feeding her regularly. The incubation period was 16 days, so on the sixteenth day two young hatched. These, however, only survived for three days; the reason, we believe, was that there was not enough food available. The female did not return to the nest. The following season the birds were again observed carrying building material to approximately the same area as the previous season. On 22nd August, the female laid her first egg, and by the 24th had laid two more to complete the clutch. During incubation the male continued to feed the hen on the nest. On noticing two young in the nest on 7th September, the bird-keeping staff began providing not only their regular food, an egg-cake mixture made of sponge cake, minced egg yolk, cheese, fly pupae and added vitamin powder, but additional live food in the form of termites (white ants), mealworms and fly pupae. The parents also had access to various types of fruit (banana, paw paw, grapes, orange and pear) and the honey mixture fed to the honey-eaters, all of which they had been seen sampling at one time or another. One young was lost, later found dead on the aviary floor; lack of calcium was considered the cause of its death. The other young was successfully raised, leaving the nest on 24th September, but was later observed being attacked by other birds in the aviary. On the recommend¬ ation of Les Clayton, the Head Bird Keeper, it was placed in a small holding cage at the back of the aviary, where the parents continued to feed it through the wire, with the male doing the bulk of the work. After a period of two weeks, the youngster was able to feed itself and was released back into the aviary proper. During this time, the female had returned to the same nest laying 92 another three eggs. Before hatching, the first young was again removed when it was observed interfering with the adults’ activites. By the 12th October, three young birds had hatched and by the 31st we had success¬ fully raised the three, this time with no trouble from other birds. At the time of writing (mid-September) two more have been reared and it is beli¬ eved that the account above records the first occasion this species has been bred in captivity. THE GENUS BOLBORHYNCHUS AND THE BREEDING OF THE MOUNTAIN PARAKEET By Mme. J. L. SPENKELINK VANSCHAIK (Soesterberg, Holland) The genus Bolborhynchus includes five species, each with a totally different silhouette. Sexual dimorphism is present in the species aurifrons and to a slight degree in lineola but less in the other species. List of the five species of Bolboryhnchus 1. One of the best known of these is the common Barred Parakeet Bolborhynchus lineola, which has two subspecies Bolborhynchus lineola lineola and Bolborhynchus lineola tigrinus. It is a rather short thick-set bird with comparatively long wings and a short tail, which can be spread out like a fan especially if the bird is afraid. 2. Also well-known is the charming Sierra Parakeet Bolborhynchus ay- mara. In contrast to the Barred Parakeet, it is a very slender bird with long wings and a long graduated tail. 3. The Mountain Parakeet Bolborhynchus aurifrons has four subspecies namely Bolborhynchus aurifrons aurifrons, Bolborhynchus aurifrons robertsi, Bolborhynchus aurifrons margarithae (formerly orbignesius) and the Bolborhynchus aurifrons rubrirostris. It has the same silhouette as the ay mar a. 4. The Andean Parakeet Bolborhynchus orbignesius has a more plump appearance, similar to that of the Barred and the Rufous-fronted Para¬ keets. 5. The Rufous-fronted Parakeet Bolborhynchus ferrugineifrons. MME. J.L. SPENKELINK VANSCHAIK - MOUNTAIN PARAKEET 93 Descriptions 1. The Barred Parakeet B. I lineola comes from Central America, from south Mexico as far as west Panama. Several years ago a small group of the subspecies B. 1. tigrinus from Colombia and central Peru was imported into Europe. This subspecies differs from B. 1. lineola being a darker shade of green with longer and thicker stripes. A cross between these two species will produce young which will be difficult to classify and to sex. A cross between a male B. 1. lineola (with fine stripes) and a female B. 1. tigrinus (with thicker stripes) may produce a son with fine stripes and daughter with thicker stripes, but the son cannot be called a pure lineola nor the daughter a pure tigrinus. Such cross-breeds should be avoided where possible. 2. The Sierra Parakeet B. aymara is the only Bolborhynchus coming from the eastern slopes of the Andes, in central Bolivia and north-west Argentina. As imports from these countries into Europe are difficult or impossible, these birds are rarely offered for sale as newly-imported birds. The Sierra Parakeet is about 20 cm. in length. As a young bird it is almost completely green, the back being a shade darker and the abdomen a shade lighter. On the head the feathers are greyish. After the moult the back remains green, the underparts becoming lighter green. The throat and breast, and sometimes between the legs, become grey, the head a dark grey-brown. The legs and bill of a younger bird and of the hen are dark grey. After the moult, the legs and bill of the cock become brighter in colour, while the eyes of a mature cock are darker than those of the hen. 3. The Mountain Parakeet B. aurifrons comes from the western slopes and the higher parts of the Andes in Bolivia, Chile and Argentina. As with the Sierra Parakeet, imports of these birds are few, and they are not very common in collections. The Mountain Parakeet is about 18 cm. long. With their longer wings and longer tail they resemble the Sierra Parakeet in silhouette. 3. a. The B. a. aurifrons is a bright green bird with a bright yellow forehead and bright yellow around the bill and on its chin, sometimes even down to the throat. A bright yellow patch on its sides stands out very distinctly against the wings. Sometimes the abdomen is also yellowish, but is more usually light green with yellow patches. The hen has almost no yellow, and its light green colouring with just a haze of yellow leads to confusion with B. a. robertsi. The B. a. aurifrons can, however, be distinguished by its yellow legs with just a black tinge. 3.b. The B. a. robertsi is of a broader build than aurifrons. The girth of aurifrons is about 8.7 cm, and that of the robertsi respectively 9.4 and 94 MME. J.L. SPENKELINK VANSCHAIK - MOUNTAIN PARAKEET 9.6 for the hen and cock. Its feathers are a beautiful bright green with hardly any yellow. The cock has black legs and a yellowish bill and the hen has black legs and a dark bill. 3.c. The B. a. margarithae is the most broadly built bird of these sub¬ species. The girth of its breast is 9.7 - 10 cm. The colour is a dull, dark green. The bill and legs of the cock are of a lighter colour than those of the other subspecies. This bird has a somewhat shorter tail, which makes it appear even more broad. Formerly this bird was called Bolborhynchus aurifrons orbignesius which was changed into B . a. margarithae. This change of the Latin name led to a great deal of misunderstanding with another species of Bolborhynchus , the Andean Parakeet B. orbignesius (formerly B. andicola ). An example of this confusion is that the first breeding of the Andean Parakeet in Denmark proved to be B. a. marga¬ rithae instead of B. orbignesius. 3. d. The B. a. rubrirostris comes from north-east Argentina. The mature cock has a redish horn-coloured bill and the hen a dark grey horn-coloured bill. The legs of the cock are lighter than those of the hen. This subspecies has a dark blue-green back and a brighter, blue-grey front and abdomen. The bigger girth of the breast gives this bird a compact appearance. Imported birds of the species B. aurifrons , originating from the higher mountains where the atmospheric pressure is very low, have difficulty in acclimatizing to the higher pressures in Europe, and often have prob¬ lems with their lungs. My experience is that only young birds in a very good condition can survive the stresses of transport and adapt to diff¬ erent living conditions. Breeding these very charming birds deserves all our attention in the hope that we will obtain a generation more adapted to circumstances in Europe. I have all the species and subspecies of the Barred, Sierra and Mountain Parakeets in my possession, so I am able to observe very closely the diff¬ erences in the subspecies and in the sexes. I have studied the skins of these birds in several Natural History Museums, such as Tring, Leiden, etc, but as these skins are up to a century old, it has proved rather difficult to observe from them the minute differences in colour of the bills and legs as these colours have faded away or changed. The only way to see these differences is in the observation of live birds. 4. and 5. The last two species, the Andean Parakeet B. orbignesius (for¬ merly andicollis ) and the Rufous-fronted Parakeet B. ferrugineifrons have not been imported into the Netherlands for some years. B. orbignesius comes from the higher parts and western slopes of the Andes in west Peru MME. J.L. SPENKELINK VANSCHAIK - MOUNTAIN PARAKEET 95 and Bolivia. B. ferrugineifrom comes from the central high mountains of the Andes in Colombia. Both species are plain dark green. The Rufous- fronted has a darker bill and a reddish band on the forehead. The Andean is a bit smaller and has a light grey bill. Breeding the Mountain Parakeet There has been more written about the breeding of the Sierra Parakeet, probably because it is fairly straightforward to breed, and is very easy to please. It is satisfied with all kinds of breeding logs, even Agapornis breeding logs, and is a good breeder and trustworthy parent. Up to six birds may be reared in one clutch, twice a year in some cases. This is not the case for the Mountain Parakeets; out of an import of 100 birds, very few will survive, and in some cases one will be lucky if a single pair is left. Even changes in the weather, accompanied by a change in atmospheric pressure, may cause previously healthy-looking birds to pine away quickly. In the one, or more usually two years it takes to bring imported birds up to breeding condition, the stress caused by these changes in the weather is considerable. In 1977 I bought five pairs of the bluish Mountain Parakeet B. a. rubrirostris . In spring 1978 I had only one cock and two hens left. One day I saw one of the hens dive into a nest-log. After some time it came out again, and was fed by the cock. I had provided several different breeding-logs, for Budgerigars, Agapornis , lories, Neophemas and Cocka- tiels. The hen selected the Agapornis log. Several days after I had seen them feeding each other, I looked in the nest-log. The nest was complete; some mould and chips stamped to a well-formed depression. I resolved to wait several days and when I had not seen the hen for the whole day, I again looked at the nest. There, unfortunately, I found the hen dead, egg-bound with two eggs beneath it. The two eggs were removed and I stored them on a layer of sand to keep them until I had another bird breeding. This sand is sieved and heated in an oven to disinfect it. This I often do with eggs of one clutch to ensure that the chicks hatch at the same time and so to prevent smaller chicks from being trampled by the bigger ones. In such a way, turning the eggs every day, one can keep them fresh much longer. After about one week I put the eggs in an incubator. The death of the laying hen was a big disappointment, but I became hopeful again when I saw that the second hen was willing to take its place. I had already noticed that every time the first hen sat on the nest, the second made advances towards the cock. He was not aggressive towards 96 MME. J.L SPENKELINK VANSCHAIK - MOUNTAIN PARAKEET the second hen, but had paid little attention to it. Now, however, the cock became more attentive. Within ten days the second hen laid its first egg, and went on to lay five altogether. The hen did not seem very conscientious, and as these Mountain Parakeets were housed with other birds I did not dare to take risks any longer, and decided to put the eggs under another bird. The only bird that could be considered must be a bird of about the same size and which was at the same stage of breeding. The only bird suitable was an Elegant Parrot. A pair of these Elegants were given the two eggs of the first clutch, together with the five from the second hen, giving them a total of seven to hatch. Two chicks were hatched from the first two eggs, followed fourteen days later by four more. The problem facing me was that the incubation period for the Elegant Parrot is a week shorter than that of the Mountain Parakeet, and the young are fed for a shorter length of time. Would such a bird feed these different young properly? Besides this, the difference between the first and the sixth young was sixteen days. For fourteen days, all went well; the eldest chick was about thirty days old, the age at which a normal Elegant ought to leave the nest. After this, however, the foster parents did not seem to feed the young ones so well. It seemed as if the foster parents were disconcerted by the failure of the chicks to grow in size, and there¬ fore ceased to feed them. Not daring to take further risks, I gave the young birds one by one to another pair of Elegant Parrots. This pair had younger chicks of about the same size as the young Bolborhynchus. I divided these young Elegants between other pairs of Elegants. Two days after the removal I found the youngest one dead. I decided that the parakeets needed more food, so I started to give the elder two young Mountain Parakeets extra feeding. This enabled the new foster parents to cope with the younger Bolborhynchus. After seven weeks the eldest parakeet peeped out of the nest-log and on the 53rd day it flew out. The two elder birds thrived, but the others, not doing quite so well, did not fly out until the 56th day. The Bolborhynchus hen started nesting again after the removal of the first clutch. This time she laid four eggs; she hatched and raised them herself, and the result was three young parakeets. I hope eventually to breed from these B. a. rubrirostris. Breeding the Bolborhynchus species is well worthwhile. The breeding described above took place in an open outside aviary. My experience with all the Bolborhynchus species is that breeding is much simpler in outside aviaries; for example, my Barred Parakeets did not breed very well in inside aviaries of all kinds, but since being moved to a more open, outside MME. J.L. SPENKELINK VANSCHAIK - MOUNTAIN PARAKEET 97 aviary, they have bred almost continuously. The Bolborhynchus species are charming, small agile birds, always chirping softly. They go into their nest-logs before dusk and stay there overnight. This is very important in the winter, when there is always the possibility that their toes might freeze.This shelter also prevents them from catching cold during misty and rainy autumn days. The Bolborhynchus feed on a mixture of seeds - no millet - and like fruit and vegetables of all kinds. In addition to this, the Barred Parakeet likes some sunflower seed, the Sierra Parakeet likes hemp, and the Mountain Parakeet likes weed- seeds. After two years of observation of these living birds, I have come to the conclusion that B. a, rubrirostris has more in common with B. aymara than with B. a. aurifrons , in a number of ways. Their place of origin in north¬ west Argentina, their behaviour, outward appearance (both species have greyish-blue in their feathers) and even their choice of food is very similar. The rubrirostris , like the aymara , eats mainly seeds, with some fruit and vegetables, while the other aurifrons subspecies prefer vegetables, fol¬ lowed by fruit and some seed. 1 think that B. -a. rubrirostris is related more closely to B . aymara than has been previously thought. 98 BREEDING THE OLIVE OR CAPE THRUSH Turdus olivaceus olivaceus AT THE WEST COUNTRY WILDLIFE PARK, CRICKET ST. THOMAS (Chard, Somerset) By P. LOWE (Curator) The Olive Thrush is a widespread species over the African continent, south of the Sahara. Inhabiting forests and well-wooded areas near cultiva¬ tion, it has become common in urban areas where it is often seen searching among debris and leaves for insects and digging for earthworms on lawns. Sexes are alike in coloration being a dark olive-brown above. The chin and throat are whitish, streaked with brown; chest and breast a dusky olive, shading to orange-rufous on belly and flanks. The bill is a yellowish orange while the legs are yellow-brown. On 12th October 1980, two Olive Thrushes were purchased from a dea¬ ler, though not guaranteed to be a pair. They were released into our Tropi¬ cal House, after spending a period of time in our hospital under close ob¬ servation. I had not expected to see any possible signs of breeding until spring 1981 but it is easy to underestimate one’s charges. I soon found that they were a true pair and within ten days the cock was singing in true thrush fashion, not as loudly as our Song Thrush but sweeter, perhaps with not so many notes. On 1st December the hen was busily building a nest and on 11th Dec¬ ember she was sitting on three eggs amongst a canopy of Passiflora about 10 feet from the ground. On Christmas Day, there were three young thrushes, doing very well, and on 1st January 1981 the young birds were hopping about the Tropi¬ cal House. We picked them up and placed them In our hospital where they were hand-fed for two days but at the time of writing (8th January) they are self-supporting. The hen is sitting again in a different position in the Tropical House. The Olive Thrush was first reared in Britain in 1924. An account of the breeding by W. Shore-Baily is recorded in the Avicultural Magazine (1924, 255-256) and is accompanied by a photograph of the young in the nest. 99 SPROUTING SEED TO PROVIDE A CONSTANT SOURCE OF FRESH AND NUTRITIOUS FOOD FOR PARROTS AND OTHER CAPTIVE BIRDS By ARTHUR FREUD (Smithtown, New York, U.S.A.) Parrots are traditionally fed a variety of dry seeds as their basic diet. In the wild, these birds do consume a certain amount of mature seeds but a much larger component of their diet consists of vegetables, fruits, and seedlings in their early stages of development. As a matter of fact, parrot competition with man for the rewards of his agriculture has created enmity between farmers and parrots wherever both exist in large numbers. Many individuals who keep parrots make an effort to supply fruits and vegetables to their birds but this is frequently done as an afterthought with seeds being considered the mainstay of the parrot diet. Seasonal variations in the availability of fresh fruits and vegetables also tend to cause them to be fed in a rather sporadic manner. Many breeders increase the amount of vegetable products which they feed parent birds as parrots require this type of food for their young. Sprouted seeds are an ideal choice for parrots who are feeding their young as they are moist as well as rich in nutrients. By sprouting seeds in the home, we can provide an inexpensive and unlimited supply of fresh and nutritious plant products in a form which parrots find extremely attractive. The seedlings produced by sprouting are very close in food content and physical structure to the plant products which parrots select when they are free to choose their own diet. The knowledge that seeds could be sprouted and converted into a fresh and nutritious vegetable is ancient and sprouted seeds have long been a component of Oriental cooking. Individuals interested in natural foods have also been proponents of sprouts for many years. When you sprout seeds in your home, it is no different (with one exception) than the natural sprouting which occurs when seeds are planted in the earth and watered. The exception is that in the technique which we will describe the seeds are generally deprived of light so that leaf growth is discouraged and the growing energy of the young plant is dir¬ ected mainly to the growth of the vitamin rich stem. The stem is also tastier and aesthetically more interesting to chew than the leaves as it pro¬ vides a crisp, crunchy texture which leaves do not offer. As a sprout grows in darkness, one can note a spectacular increase in vitamin content. 100 A. FREUD - SPROUTING SEED Oats which normally contain about ten milligrams of vitamin C in 100 grams have a fourfold vitamin C increase in five days of sprouting. Peas do not have a measureable vitamin C content when they are dry. Four days of sprouting yields 86 milligrams of vitamin C per 100 gram serving. Soya beans which are a sprouter’s favourite, become so rich in vitamin C after sprouting that a serving of 100 grams (4 oz) can provide approxi¬ mately the daily vitamin C requirement for an adult. Other vitamins show comparable increases. Sprouted seeds also are rich in minerals and since their fat and carbohydrate content is low, they are ideal foods for captive parrots who do not get as much exercise as they should. Before attempting to sprout seeds, you must realize that one cannot sprout just any seed. Since you are attempting to produce a living plant, you must sprout only fresh, live, healthy seeds. Frequently, seeds are treated with chemicals to prevent sprouting during storage and obviously such seeds would not be selected. One should, of course, avoid any seeds which have been chemically treated to prevent mildew as these chemicals are poisonous. Ideally the seeds you choose should be from a current harvest as these will give you the highest percentage of germination. You might compare your choice of seeds with the manner in which one chooses grass seed for the lawn. A good source of fresh, viable seeds would be a health food store. Let them know why you want the seeds and they may be able to give you some good advice and suggestions. Sprouting is a very simple technique. I would recommend starting with a quart jar which has a wide-mouthed opening. You will also need some rust-proof screening or cheesecloth which can be kept around the mouth of the jar during part of the sprouting process. Some food stores sell a mason jar with an open cover and stainless steel screen that fits within the cover. These are ideal and you may also be able to get an assortment of seeds at the same time as you buy the jar. In addition to the seeds already mentioned, others which can be sprouted include ;mung beans, azuki beans, lentils, alfalfa, almonds, barley, buckwheat, chick peas, red clover, millet, rye and radish. The sweet fresh taste of these sprouts will amaze you. Some, such as the radish, are “hot” but this makes them a particular favourite of parrots whose sense of taste is rather limited. Place about two tablespoons full of seeds (either a single variety or a mixture) in your jar and after rinsing them to remove any debris, fill the jar with tepid water and place it in an upright position in a warm place. At this point the mesh screen is on and it should remain on until your seeds have completed sprouting. A good location for these first and later steps would be the warm oil burner room of your home or a cabinet A. FREUD - SPROUTING SEED 101 Arthur Freud An assortment of mung and azuki beans, plus sunflower and 3. Sprouted seeds after four days. The crop is ready to be enjoyed radish seeds. 4. Sunflower seedlings after four days. These small plants have A sprouted seed assortment at the end of 48 hours. not been exposed to light. 102 A. FREUD - SPROUTING SEED near the stove in your kitchen. During the overnight soaking period, the seeds will begin to swell as they absorb moisture. After about 18 hours you will find that some seeds have actually begun to sprout. At this point, drain the water and rinse three or four times using a moderately heavy flow of water to ensure that all seeds are rinsed. The water can be emptied out through the screen and no seeds will be lost. Drain all water so that the seeds are left moist (not soaking) and replace the jar in the warm location. This time it should be kept on its side so that the seeds can be spread out and the jar covered with a cloth to keep light from the seeds. The end of the jar with the screen should not be covered to provide a free movement of air in and out of the jar. Try to perform this rinsing procedure several times during the second day. If you are normally not at home during the day, it could be done once in the morning and once or twice in the evening. The same procedure should be followed for the third day. By now you will be amazed to see some fairly advanced growth on the part of many of the seeds. Others will grow more slowly and a small percentage will not grow at all. Remember, keep rinsing and draining well and when replacing the jar, turn it several times so that the seedlings are scattered around it so that air can reach them. On the fourth and final day of growth, you must go through the same rinsing and draining pro¬ cedures. Some people also like to spread the seedlings on a paper towel at this point and remove any large, coarse and inedible hulls or unsprouted seeds. One can also place the young plants in indirect sunlight at this point for an hour or two. This brief exposure to the sun will give the sprouts a touch of green as photosynthesis will begin when the seedlings are in the presence of light. The seeds are now ready and may be given to the parrots. After a final rinse and draining the sprouted seeds can be replaced in their original jar but instead of the screen the jar should be closed with its regular cover. The sprouts will retain their crisp, fresh nature for several days if refrigerated. Some individuals have been very successful in sprouting the same seeds which they feed to their parrots. Others have found poor results with these seeds as they have apparently been treated with a sprouting inhibitor. My own recommemdation is that seeds for sprouting be pur¬ chased from a health food store. An interesting technique which I have been told about involves blending the sprouted seeds with a peanut butter maker or a food processor. The soft paste which is produced in this man¬ ner is excellent for handfeeding baby birds or birds which are ill or other¬ wise off their feed. When sprouts are used as part of the normal feeding A. FREUD - SPROUTING SEED 103 procedure, I would recommend that 20 or 30 sprouts be provided in the morning. They may be placed on top of the seeds in the seed dish without ill effect. As a matter of fact, they frequently stimulate the appetite and will encourage parrots to eat additional seeds. Give this nutritious, healthy and tasty food source a try. Both you and the inhabitants of your aviary will be pleased. 104 SIXTY YEARS AGO 1920 - YEAR OF CRISIS By F.C. BARNICOAT (Cleveland, South Africa) All 86 volumes of the Avicultural Magazine make exceedingly interes¬ ting reading if one is lucky enough to lay hands on them. I have always found the volume for 1920 - the year in which the Society was struck by one crippling blow after another - particularly moving. It began with an issue edged in black. Rosie Alderson was dead. She had been a remarkably successful Secretary through the dark years of the First World War and had the happy knack of seeming always able to sug¬ gest just what was needed for the advancement of the Society, whose wel¬ fare she had so much at heart. She was a member from 1896 onwards and a first-rate aviculturist, who concentrated on the dove family. Her love for her birds as individuals and concern for their welfare shines through the articles she wrote from time to time for th q Avicultural Magazine and her instructive and charming book, My Foreign Doves and Pigeons , dedicated to her mother and the numerous bird friends she had made throughout the world. Her kindly helpfulness extended to her fellow human beings, a good example being the offer to look after the birds of anyone who was away at the war. She was present at the Society’s Silver Jubilee garden party held at the Fondon Zoo in June 1919, but in November she was suddenly forced to resign the secretaryship and a notice appeared in the Magazine expressing sympathy with her on her very serious illness. The loss of Miss Alderson - the first of several great women servants of the Society - left a sad void as 1920 began. A member came forward so willingly to take on the secretaryship, and surely there could have been no one with greater enthusiasm or promise for that exacting role than Dr. L. Fovell-Keays. He was a comparative newcomer, having started his collection in the spring of 1913 and joined both the Foreign Bird Club and Avicultural Society, for both of whose magazines he was soon a prodigious writer in a distinctive and interes¬ ting style. His keen intellect, trained to observance in the medical pro¬ fession, was brought to bear on the 500 or so occupants of his aviaries, which received his personal care with meticulous attention to detail, so that his few years of practical aviculture saw numerous breedings, e.g. Bearded Reedling, Zosterops, Cactus Conure. But very soon the war started and as a doctor he felt obliged to enlist. His home and collection F.C. BARNICOAT - SIXTY YEARS AGO 105 were sold in 1916. His zeal, geniality and comradeship were much missed and a special note of rejoicing at his safe return and restoration to health after arduous and perilous war service appears in the Avicultural Magazine of September 1919. He settled in Guildford and started to rebuild his aviaries. In March 1920 he agreed to take on the treasurership in addition to the secretaryship of the Avicultural Society, Alfred Ezra having had to resign as Treasurer through pressure of work. Alas, Lovell-Keays was a star-crossed aviculturist: in April his health suddenly gave way from the after effects of his war service, necessitating complete retirement from work of every description, and he died on 14th May at the age of 44. The membership of the Avicultural Society had great depth and quality in those days: for the second time within a year a new Secretary/Treas¬ urer was found, no less a person than John Lewis Bonhote, virtually a foundation member and former efficient Editor. The February issue also bears a black border, now to mark the passing of the famous president of 25 years’ standing, Lord Sherborne, better known as the Hon. and Rev. Canon F.G. Dutton. In contrast to Lovell- Keays he died at a great age. Born as early as 1830, he became one of the greatest figures of aviculture in the Victorian age. During his lengthy ex¬ perience starting in his Oxford days, he was said to have kept more species of the parrot family than any other aviculturist of his time, in cages, avia¬ ries and at liberty, especially during his many years at the beautiful vicar¬ age at Bibury. His articles and notes were quite a feature of the early issues of th q Avicultural Magazine and Bird Notes , as well as in Dr. W.T. Greene’s classic work , Parrots in Captivity , and described his own experience with such rarities as a pair of Paradise Parrakeets (burrowing into a wall to nest), Horned and Red Shining Parrakeets. He continued to write until well into his eighties, his last short article on his breedings for the year appearing in 1913, though he was still to write letters of apology for non-attendance at Council meetings. Increasing frailty obliged Canon Dutton to give up his parish and move to a small city house in 1917. He took with him his pet St. Lucia Ama¬ zon Parrot - rara avis to be sure - whose splendid condition was the result of enjoying complete liberty daily in a large garden. This was no longer possible in Cheltenham and the bird slowly deteriorated. It was Canon Dutton’s wish that if this parrot survived him, it should go to the Marquess of Tavistock (later the Duke of Bedford) because he would be in a position to give it conditions of semi-liberty again. The story of how this bird made a remarkable recovery at liberty during the summer of 1920 is charmingly told by the Marquess of Tavistock in an article in the October issue enti- 106 F.C. BARNICOAT - SIXTY YEARS AGO tied “The Rejuvenation of Jaco”. In April the time-honoured post of Honorary Correspondence Secre¬ tary, dating from 1903 and occupied throughout by another great avi- cultural figure of the Victorian era, Dr. A.G Butler, passed into history. He wrote an interesting reminiscent article on his experiences in answering all sorts of queries on birds for the Avicultural Society during this long time. The vast experience of this man, who had published his first zoologi¬ cal paper in 1865, obviously fitted him well for his valuable task, but now in advanced years he probably felt like a rest, and the work of Correspon¬ dence and Business Secretaries and of Treasurer was focussed into a single office soon to be held by Bonhote. As Dr. Butler grew older, he took up the hobby of gardening and added no more birds to his collection, but he kept those he already had as long as they lived in order to record data on longevity of birds in captivity, and his interest in aviculture never failed. Of the eight articles that this great au¬ thority and author of bird books contributed to the Avicultural Magazine in 1920, the little note in the February issue is the most poignant - CT still have four living birds ............My hen Napoleon Weaver, the last of those purchased in 1900, still seems quite strong and healthy.” Oh yes, he knew how to keep birds. The economic situation continued to deteriorate after the Great War and the financial problems facing the productiop of journals such as the Avicultural Magazine increased in severity until after 1922. The size and quality of paper of the Avicultural Magazine dwindled steadily from 1916 until the start of 1923. The wonderful coloured plates that had become the major feature of the Avicultural Magazine were things of the past after 1917 when the Society was just able to run to the cost of three coloured plates! The two superlative bird artists, Cron void and Goodchild, were no longer painting for the Society (the latter had died during the war) but in any case coloured plates were out of the question from the financial point of view. Over this five-year period only one coloured plate was produced - in July 1920 - and this was only made possible by the generosity of a member from India, Dr Sataya Chum Law, who had joined the previous year. He had acquired an albino specimen of a Red-vented Bulbul, wrote an article on it and presented an accompanying coloured plate, executed by his painter, J.C. Baneijee. The Bulbul is pure white except for red under tail coverts and a rosy tint about the ears. Dr Law’s loyal member¬ ship was destined to continue for fifty years, when honorary life member¬ ship was conferred upon him and happily he is still a member. Alfred Ezra photographed and described for the Avicultural Magazine of May 1932 his fabulous Calcutta aviaries “..........................................where the most F.C. BARMfCOAT - SIXTY YEARS AGO 107 difficult Indian insectivorous birds, as well as many foreign species, are kept in most perfect condition and very often bred”. Dr Law completely revised the collection of bird skins in the Indian Museum in 1926 and collected specimens for it from all over India. A tale of two Editors In the first quarter of this century there were two journals dealing with wild birds in captivity. The Foreign Bird Club’s Bird Notes was an offshoot of the Avicultural Society dating from 1901. It claimed to have a different emphasis, the Foreign Bird Club concentrating on the exhibiting and practical problems of keeping wild birds, while the older Avicultural Society produced more scientific-type papers dealing with birds more generally. In practice both magazines were very much alike and held many members and contributors in common. I am lucky enough to possess al¬ most complete runs of each, and they are both excellent, complementing each other wonderfully. They claimed not to be rivals, but possibly there was a certain amount of jealousy between them. From March 1907 onwards Bird Notes was fortunate in having an Editor of exceptional enthusiasm - Wesley T. Page. The magazine soon came to revolve around him and most of its regular contributors were more or less his circle of personal friends. Page’s dedication to the monthly production of this magazine was astounding and it virtually became his life’s work. The twelve issues for 1920 were still rich in variety of content but the signs of strain were there between the lines, typified by Page’s unusual editorial in December - “I must press the need of more members contributing to the Club’s journal ........In 1920 we have had too much from the Editor’s pen, which he deplores; true, some have written ‘the more the better’....... but seriously such is not for the permanent good of the Club. .....We need a more varied publication of individual avicultural experience; this we can only gain by more members coming out of their shells and contributing liberally to Bird Notes ............Many of our most valued contributors made the supreme sacrifice for King and Country - F.B.C. suffered very heavily in this respect and the aftermath of the War has not spared us either - surely there are those who will make good the gap.” We can now know that W.T. Page’s voice cried in the wilderness, that even Ms indefatigible energy was wearing thin, that his health was fail¬ ing, that his death some three years later may well have been hastened by over-exertion to keep his Journal going, and that along with him died the Foreign Bird Club. 108 F.C. BARNICOAT - SIXTY YEARS AGO Fortunately for the Avicultural Society it had a broader base of real supporters. During 1917 the editorship had been taken on by Dr Graham Renshaw. When he joined the Society in 1910 he seems to have had a coll¬ ection of birds and to have been particularly attracted to the larger soft- bills like Glossy Starlings and Touracos. Later his interest seems to have centred in the zoos of the world and he travelled quite widely in Europe to study the different collections. A medical doctor by profession, he was an extensive lecturer in zoology at the University of Manchester and author of several works on natural history, such as Animal Romances and More Animal Romances. In contrast to Page he seems to have been rather on the fringe of the avicultural circle. His short editorship of the Avicultural Magazine in these very difficult years seems to show an erudite, original and unusually strong approach. Few errors to be sure got through under his eagle eye. He grouped the articles for special monthly issues under clever titles, e.gAnzac Number - Birds of Australia and New Zealand; Summer Isles of Eden - Birds of the East Indies and Pacific; Somewhere East of Suez - Indo China Number , etc. For the frontispiece of the 1920 volume Renshaw chose a photo of the Bateleur Eagle and his accompanying article describes the possibility of its being the original of the Phoenix, and moved into the theme that, with the importation of foreign species now recommencing, the Avicultural Society was on the point of rising afresh from the ashes like the Phoenix of legend. But aviculture had not yet recovered from the paralysing effects of the war ? many aviaries were not yet re-opened, probably never would be and an overwhelming lethargy followed in the aftermath of the war , so Ren shaw was to become increasingly disappointed with the response from members as 1920 advanced. He opened the June issue with an unusual article entitled “Full circle: Revived Aviculture”. Because the desperate cry in this article is - dare I say it? - Nineteen-eightyish in tone, I quote a few salient sentences from it: “We want the possessors of the new stock to write about it . Such co-operation would not only hasten recovery, but materially lighten the labours of the Editor. When all is said, it is the contributors who make the Magazine, who hold its future in their hands, who determine its character. No editor can evolve papers out of thin air. Every former Editor will agree that this historic chair is by no means a bed of roses. The editing of the Magazine (now thanks to its contributors one of the leading natural history journals of the world) is no sinecure . I give my services during the intervals of a life devo¬ ted to the most exacting of all professions; this is done willingly, but it is seemly that the facts be known.” Obviously be was becoming impatient F.C. BARNICOAT - SIXTY YEARS AGO 109 and in July came some sudden quarrel with the Council, which led to that “interesting announcement to be found on the last page of this (July) issue.” Page 134 of 1920 is indeed one of the strangest and most regrettable pages in the entire Avicultural Magazine. There appears in the middle in block capitals the following: “THE EDITOR REGRETS THAT OWING TO THE ACTION OF CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL HE IS UNABLE TO CON¬ TINUE THE EDITORSHIP OR HIS MEMBERSHIP OF THE SOCIETY.” The lateness of the publication of the July number resulted in a very poor attendance of the meeting at the Zoological Gardens on 23rd July, but the few present enjoyed an excellent tea and discussion on matters avicultural in the Fellows’ Pavilion and the surviving members of the Council gathered at 3 o’clock to discuss the latest bolt out of the blue. No successor to Dr. Renshaw, the last surviving name from the list of Society Officials printed in the January issue, could be found. However Pocock and Seth-Smith kindly undertook to keep the Magazine rolling pro tern and we have cause to be very grateful to the small band of supporters who closed ranks and fought on - Meade-Waldo, Trevor-Battye, St Quin tin, the Marquess of Tavistock, Harper, Frost, Astley, etc., Respectively, they told of how in Kent Blue Tits recovered their numbers through exceptional broods of 15 after the devastating winter of 1917, of how in a Hampshire garden Kestrels and Barn Owls came and disappeared with the fluctuation of plagues of voles and mice that followed the upset in the balance of nature caused by that dreadful winter, of breeding Manchurian Cranes on a Yorkshire estate, of Masked or Red Shining or Pesquet’s Parrots, of the new collection of Indian birds brought from Calcutta for the London Zoo in July, of a collection including 15 Birds of Paradise safely arrived from New Guinea in October, of a white Budgerigar new to aviculture, or breeding Satyr Tragopans and Monals in Herefordshire or the begin¬ ning of a new great bird collection in France at the Chateau de Cleres, the great Hubert D. Astley inspired to handle his pen again, after a long lapse, by the young Monsieur Jean Delacour, “he whose enthus¬ iasm is ever undimmed, ever active, who more than anyone else keeps the fire of aviculture burning within me. ’’Paying his first visit to Europe since the war in the spring of 1920, Astley had met up with Jean Delacour in Paris and whither did they wend their way? “To Notre Dame, to Versailles, the Louvre and all the wonders of the great 110 F.C. BARNICOAT - SIXTY YEARS AGO capital? No! To the chauffeur we said, ‘Quai de la Megisserie’, to Travella where good birds can be found.” And there Astley bought a lovely Cardellino-Canarino (Hooded Siskin x Canary mule). They are nearly all gone now, those characters of 60 years ago. It is cause for the greatest thankfulness and rejoicing that Jean Delacour remains spared to us and is today our much loved President whose enthusiasm is as undimmed as ever, even as a nonagenarian. And with us still are just three other members who date back that far- the Hon. Mrs. N. McGarel Groves (1917) , T.T. Barnard and Dr. Sataya Chum Law (1919). REFERENCES ALDERSON, ROSIE. 1911 My Foreign Doves and Pigeons . London. GREENE, W.T. 1879. Parrots in Captivity . London. Avicultural Magazine. November 1894 to date. Bird Notes. 1 9014925. Ill NOTES ON TWO AFRICAN SPECIES By AVRIL ROYSTON (Nakuru, Kenya) BLUE-SPOTTED WOOD DOVE Turtur afer Distribution: Africa south of the Sahara, but excluding the Cape. This little dove with its grey head, earth-brown upper parts with shiny spots on the wings and black bands across the rump is often seen walking on roads. It flies up with a quick zig-zag flight, showing chestnut on the wings. The dove’s drumming coo can frequently be heard. It is a highly territorial species and a pair will occupy at least half an acre when nesting, allowing no others to nest near. The cock coos and others answer but keep their distance. It has been my experience that this dove nests during the dry season. Two white eggs are laid in a simple nest of roots and sticks. The eggs hatch in ten days. The chicks are reared on small seeds, etc. At one time we had six - eight of these doves, all of them hand-reared. We found that it was impossible to keep young fully-feathered birds of different ages together, as the older birds would attack the younger birds and had to be separated at once, as they would kill them. We had a hand-reared pair in a cage in the house, then flying in the house and sleeping in the cage, and, finally, entirely free within the house. The cock would come forward to greet anyone who wished to be friendly; he would coo, bow, peck and puff himself out and fly onto the hand and hold up his wings in greeting. The hen was much shyer. We moved a pair of adult hand-reared doves to an outside aviary. We found that the hen would nest, but unless plenty of cover was provided, even in an open box, the hen threw the eggs out just before they were due to hatch. Leafy branches of fir trees and a cover above were provided and the birds built again - the eggs hatched, but directly the chicks were fully feathered and left the nest, the cock killed them in a very brutal attack. The doves were then returned to the house. They settled down, flew in and out and spent most of their time in a flower bed. They roosted in the house. The cock brought roots and small sticks and started to build above the window, but at this point we had to leave and move to a house up on the Kisi hills. Here the doves seemed much braver. They nested in a flight cage. When the eggs were near to hatching, the birds were given cooked rice and I added a few wood ant cocoons. Both eggs hatched after ten days and the 112 A. ROYSTON - TWO AFRICAN SPECIES chicks were reared. Before they were ready to leave the nest, as a pre¬ caution, I moved the cock dove to another flight cage in the verandah. I have some very good photos taken by flashlight of these doves in the nest and roosting in the sitting-room after they flew. It is not easy to keep together more than one pair of these doves, once one of the cocks becomes adult. They are friendly with humans and quickly adapt to life in a house and will fly in and out happily. They eat white millet and other small seeds. Mine were particularly fond of broken shells of snails, which they found in leaf mould. BLUE-HEADED COUCAL Centropus monachus This is a large handsome bird with a bluish-black head, chestnut back and wings, creamy white underparts and a fairly long and broad greenish- black tail. I was rearing three young coucals, when two younger ones were bro¬ ught in. The older birds fed the younger ones when they begged for food. They were tame and easy to feed. They thrived on moistened home-made biscuit, grasshoppers, and so on. The young coucals slept in a basket; they did not care to perch. Directly that they became adult and capable of flight, they ran off; they much preferred to run than to fly. The coucals lost all interest in humans and did not return for food, but made off to¬ wards the nearest swamp. These are the only birds I know which really relish slugs. I would never describe them as good pets, or aviary birds, but they definitely have their appeal. 113 NEWS AND VIEWS At its last meeting, the Council of the Avicultural Society voted to donate £25.00 from the Society’s funds to the Phyllis Barclay-Smith Memorial Appeal in appreciation for the great contribution she made to the Society during the 35 years in which she was Editor of the Avicultural Magazine but it was also felt that many members might like to contribute to this Appeal individually. The Appeal has been launched by the International Council for Bird Preservation and the aim is to raise £50,000 to establish the new head¬ quarters of the ICBP at Cambridge which will be named after her. Dona¬ tions, made payable to the Phyllis Barclay-Smith Memorial Appeal, should be sent to: Edward Wright, 5/7 Palfrey Place, London, SW8. * * * A recent report on iron accumulation in the livers of Birds of Paradise, by the Blijdorp Zoo, Rotterdam, seems to indicate a sensitivity to iron amongst captive members of this family. Liver degeneration, through a buildup of the mineral, is regarded as the main cause of death at Blijdorp Zoo and probably also at London Zoo and San Diego Zoo. Before inves¬ tigations started, the daily intake of iron at Blijdorp was given as 3.37 mg per bird; by avoiding vitamin-mineral supplements, currants and raisins, this was decreased to 0.85 mg. The paper contains much information and creates avenues for further investigation into the problem. * * * The only records I can trace of a successful breeding with any member of the Man akin family relate to the Blue-backed Chiroxiphia pareola which was reared in the mid-1970s by London Zoo and by Derrick England. How¬ ever, the Philadelphia Zoo had a near success in 1978 with the Swal¬ low-tailed C. caudata. Curator of Birds, Larry Shelton, writes: “At that time we were housing two males and a female in our large, thickly planted Hummingbird House in which they had been exhibited since 1974. Fre- 114 NEWS AND VIEWS quent display had been observed since their acquisition. However, on 18th May, the female was first seen carrying nesting material. Even with fre¬ quent observation, we could not determine the nest site, but we were rea¬ sonably certain that it was located in the Ficus pumila which grew thickly at the top of the exhibit. The female would be missing for long periods, and we assumed she was incubating. Our proof came on 19th June when we found a youngster drowned in a pool. We estimated the age to be about 14 days.” * * * “News and Views” (Avicultural Magazine , 1980, p. 53) included further news of the Red-headed Blue-bills breeding in Mr. S. Downey’s aviaries at Langata, Kenya. At the end of 1980, Mr. Downey wrote to Malcolm Ellis, to bring him up to date with his latest news. During the past few years, ten Blue-bills have hatched in Mr. Downey’s aviaries. He wrote: “One, as you know, was killed by the old male and another just died - leaving eight.” As the result of a hole made by a rat, a young male and the breeding male Blue-bill got together and there was a fight. Mr. Downey separated them at once. Neither was badly injured, but he found that he could not tell which male was which! Since this unfortunate incident, there has been no further breeding. Species which have hatched young are: Cut-throat Finch, Speke’s, Chestnut, Layard’s, Black-headed and Reichenow’s Weavers, Tambourine Dove, Emerald-spotted Wood Dove, plover (presumed Crowned!), Ross’s Touraco, D’Arnaud’s Barbet and White-headed Barbet. The pair of White- headed Barbets have lived for upward of seven years in Mr. Downey’s avi¬ aries, and to the best of his knowledge have never nested before. Two months before he wrote, a small white head appeared in the entrance to a gourd, and at the time of writing, the young barbet was out and flying strongly. At Langata, a suburb of Nairobi, they had a wet year, with nearly 40 inches of rain - although in other parts, such as the Nanyuki area, from where Mr. Downey had just returned, there had been no rain at all. He wondered if perhaps the drought there was caused by the never-ending destruction of trees for charcoal. He added that almost every day in the newspapers there are warnings issued by officials that people found cutting down trees will be severely dealt with, but nothing seems to happen. NEWS AND VIEWS 115 "Four rehabilitated Bald Eagles were released on a north-western river (specific location withheld for conservation and research purposes) on 13th January by the Woodland Park Zoological Gardens, Seattle, USA. At least two of the eagles (a pair, both adults) were injured by gun shots which damaged their wings*, one was brought to the zoo from Mt. Vernon by the Washington State Game Department, the second from Lopey Island. The other two birds had injuries of unknown origin; an adult fe¬ male found near Aberdeen was received from State Game, and an im¬ mature male was brought in by the United States Department of Fish and Wildlife. Three of the eagles arrived at the zoo less than one year ago. The fourth had been recuperating from its injuries for almost two years. Prior to the release date, zoo staff attached a light-weight transmitter to each bird and stained tail feathers with an identifying dye to help monitor their reintro¬ duction to the wild. The zoo’s raptor rehabilitation programme, named “Project Babe”, began in 1971. Since that time 25 Bald and Golden Eagles (including these four) and several hawks, falcons, Kestrels and owls have been rehabilitated and reintroduced to the wild. The State Game Department actively sup¬ ports the programme by bringing injured birds to the zoo for treatment and by assisting with their tracking following release. During the winter, large numbers of wild eagles are attracted to the thousands of spawned-out salmon which litter the banks of Pacific North¬ west rivers. To ease the rehabilitated eagles’ transition to a wild state, their release is timed to coincide with this abundance of easily captured prey. Furthermore, Bald Eagles are not territorial at this time of the year since food is so easy to come by. Therefore, the birds are able to congregate at feeding sites without harassment from one another. Following release, the eagles will be monitored by zoo staff, local assistants and State Game officials who are studying the resident and migrant populations in Washington State. The released eagles will be tracked with radio equipment until it is determined that they are feeding on their own and capable of survival /’(News Release: Woodland Park Zoological Gardens, Seattle). * * * * Following the hatching and subsequent rearing of Pink-eared Ducks 116 NEWS AND VIEWS from wild-taken eggs ( Avicultural Magazine , 1980, 82-83), Michael Lub¬ bock sends the following notes on breeding the Pink-eared Ducks at the Wildfowl Trust, Slimbridge, during 1980: “One female and two males formed a very close relationship in July. One male seemed to be the more dominant but all three protected a territory on the larger top pond of the Tropical House and kept other Pink-ears away from the area. All the Pink- ears in the Tropical House had been hatched from eggs brought back from Australia in a portable incubator and had been reared in the quarantine station. They were then transferred to the Tropical House where they have been ever since. Very little was known about their breeding particulars, especially in captivity. However, it was known that to entice them to breed in the wild, the coming of the rainy season sparks off their urge as the rain is one of the main links in the food chain, causing growth of vege¬ tation and hatching of flies for young ducklings to be successfully reared. The daily introduced rainfall in the Tropical House could have had a big influence on the breeding of the Pink-ears. From the first clutch of six eggs, four young ones were hatched in an incubator and successfully reared. The female was allowed to incubate the eggs for 18 days before they were removed to the incubator. She was given three Cape Teal eggs in replacement. However, once the Cape Teal had hatched and dried, the female took them from her nesting box to the water where they were instantly attacked by the two males. Before they could be rescued, two had been killed. The third was removed and success¬ fully hand-reared. The first clutch of eggs was laid in early August, the female being just ten months old. They hatched on 10th September. The second clutch of eggs was laid late September; two hatched on 28th October and died within two days. A third clutch was laid mid-November and are still being incubated at the time of writing.” * * * * News from Australian zoos: Melbourne Zoo has bred the Brolga Grus rubicunda for the eleventh successive year (1970-1980); three were reared. A simultaneous event by both Melbourne and Adelaide Zoos in breeding the Fairy Penguin Eudyp- tes minor is believed to be a world first. In each case, one chick was reared by its parents NEWS AND VIEWS 117 Following my note on species of Fairy Wrens bred in captivity (Avi- cultural Magazine , 1980, 182), another species can now be added to this list - Taronga Park Zoo succeeded in rearing the Lovely Wren Malurus amabilis. * * * The latest issue of the Papua New Guinea Bird Society Newsletter contains several interesting papers on birds of the Bensback Floodplain, Western Province; the most important covers the rediscovery of the Fly River Grassbird Megalurus albolimbatus after a period of 44 years. The observations of Brian Finch seemed to indicate that this species is rela¬ tively common where suitable strands of Cyperus sedge exist but he expresses some concern about the destruction of habitat by deer and pigs. Four additional papers cover new species records for the New Guinea region, namely Black Swan, Chestnut Teal, Welcome Swallow Hirundo neoxena and the Fan-tailed Warbler Cisticoia juncidis. * * * * Recent field work on three cockatoos is outlined in the December 1980 Newsletter of the Royal Australian Ornithologists5 Union. Population studies on the Red-tailed and White-tailed Black Cockatoos are summar¬ ised as is the breeding behaviour of the Roseate. Part of the studies on the latter focused on the interactions of parents with their chick and showed that parents would accept strange chicks until about the fifth week, pro¬ vided that they were in the pair's nest hollow and of about the same size as their own chicks. Conversely they would not attend to their own chicks in a hollow different from their own. Between five and seven weeks after hatching, the chicks began to reject foreign parents and, presumably, over this period individual recognition between chicks and parents developed. 118 REVIEWS WILDTAUBEN: HALTUNG, PFLEGE UND ZUCHT (Wild Doves and Pigeons: their keeping, care and breeding) By H-S. RAETHEL Published by Verlag Ulmer, Stuttgart (1980) This very well-produced, handily-sized and clearly legible book deals with all the wild species of pigeons (or doves, it is a pity our language has two words, with different emotional overtones, for birds of the same family) known to have been imported alive into western Europe or the USA. At a rough guess, I should think the book includes about two-thirds of the world’s pigeons. I was not, until I read it, aware that so many of them had been kept by aviculturists. After a short introduction and a description of the book’s aim and lay¬ out, there follows a chapter on the natural history of wild pigeons (which includes their position in the avian class, habitat and climate, food and feeding habits, drinking and bathing, sun- and dust-bathing, display, nest¬ ing, parental care, calls and life expectations) and chapters on the keeping and care of pigeons; their feeding; diseases and their treatment and the breeding of wild pigeons in captivity. The final and largest part of the book deals with the various groups, genera and species. Very different-looking subspecies are treated separate¬ ly, a wise decision, I think, in a book of this kind. The general layout is very similar to that in my own Pigeons and Doves of the World (of which I hope all who read this will have bought at least one copy) but includes a section “Haltung und Zucht” (keeping and breeding) which gives dates and details of the first importation of each species and where, when and to what extent it has been bred in captivity. Such a comprehensive book must, of necessity, be largely a compilation of the work of others but it is a pity that the author gives no clues as to when, or to what extent, he is speaking from personal experience. At the back of the book is a comprehensive list of the literature (presumably) consulted and (in part) utilised but we are not usually told which bit of information derives from which reference. In some cases there is need of this. For example: when compiling my own book, I found conflicting “authoritative” descriptions of the voice of the Eastern Rock Pigeon, Columba rupestris, so gave both, making clear the situation and lack of certainty as to which was correct. In this book, one of these versions, that deriving from Salim Ali, is given without comment. Hence the reader does REVIEWS 119 not know whether Dr, Raethel has copied this from Dr. Salim All’s book, secondhand from mine, or whether he has first-hand information. The species has been kept and bred of recent years in the East Berlin Zoo but the authorities there would appear to be unwilling, or not permitted, to di¬ vulge information about its voice or behaviour to the capitalist West. Most of the information in the book appears to be accurate although here and there one has the impression that an attempt at overmuch com¬ pression from an original source has had unhappy results. I found part of the information on behaviour as puzzling as I did that in the recently published “pigeon” volume of the German Handbook of Central European Birds, and for the same reason. Whereas some German ornithologists restrict the term “Treiben” (when speaking of pigeons) to the behaviour which British pigeon-keepers (and most of the very few British ornithologists who have any interest in pigeons) term “driving” (and this, I gather from Dr Jurgen Nicolai, is its correct usage) others use it instead or (most muddling of all) additionally for the bowing display, which is usually or also termed “Verbeugungsbalz”. Here, on p.14, the author uses both terms. At one point he would seem to be referring to driving (in the English sense) as he writes (my translation) “The cooing calls given by the cock pigeon during the bowing display (Verbeugungs- balz) are softer than the advertising coo ...................... As in many species the driving (treibende) cock pigeon utters these calls, they are called driving coos (Treibrucksen).*’ Yet if he is here referring to the quite differ¬ ent behaviour patterns of driving and the bowing display, his statement is wrong. I know of no species of pigeon which utters its display coo while it is driving its mate, although it may utter it, and perform the accompany¬ ing display, immediately after it has stopped driving. The colour plates are a highlight, of the book. One or two show fright¬ ened birds with bloody ceres and disarranged plumage, betraying rough handling and impatience on the part of the photographer, and something has obviously gone wrong with the colours of the Yellow-legged Green Pigeon (sattoo diet?) on p. 53. Most of the photographs are, however, fair to very good in quality and some show species of which I have never seen (or known of the existence of) photographs before. They will be invalu¬ able for bird artists who too often give their exotic pigeons the shape and “jizz” of Columba livia or C palumbus. There is no price on my review copy but unless the book is very expen¬ sive indeed, any pigeon addict will find it well worth buying for the pic¬ tures alone. Happily, a free copy of the book is a reviewer’s “perk”. D.G. 120 REVIEWS ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE OF THE PAPUAN SUBREGION 1915 - 1976 Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., Vol. 164: article 3. pp. 379-465 By C. B. FRITH. Published as a separate, September 1979. Price 6.15 US dollars. ISSN 0003-0090 Before the introduction to this painstaking and excellent work, the author puts an apt quotation by G. F. Mees: “Bibliography is a most unrewarding occupation, because one tends to get blamed for what one has overlooked, rather than praised for what one has accomplished.'’ All too true. It will, however, be most unfair if any nit-picking reviewer fails to give Mr. Frith praise for what he has here accomplished so ably. Anyone interested in any species of bird that lives in or around New Guinea and who wishes to find out what, if anything, has been written about it will find the “who by”, “what” and “where” clearly and succintly presented here. Everything is cross referenced under both authors and families and species of the birds, so, whether the inquirer has a hunch that Bill Bloggs might have written something about some New Guinea birds and wants to make sure, or wishes to find anything that has been written about, say, Ducula spilorrhoa, or if anyone has ever revised any genus that has members in the Papuan subregion, he will easily find the answer in this work. In his introduction the author clearly describes the scope of the work, the abbreviations used and so on. There is a map (p. 459) showing the area dealt with and its boundaries. As some ornithological writers are apt to overlook (or deliberately ignore) information that has appeared in our magazine, it is pleasing to see that Mr. Frith has not done so, all papers that have appeared in the Avicultural Magazine on any Papuan Region species are listed. A most useful work of reference that could not, I think, have been better done. D.G. CORRESPONDENCE 121 Rock Pigeons: some comments and queries As Columba livia , in all its non-monstrous forms, is a favourite bird of mine, my eye was at once caught by Professor Carl Naether’s article enti¬ tled “Important News Concerning Rock Pigeons” in the Avicultural Maga¬ zine (Volume 86, No. 3, p.176). On reading it, however, I was disappointed to find that it was largely composed of brief descriptions of some of the subspecies of C. livia, all of which have been described in more detail in many books and other publi¬ cations. The only statements I could find that might qualify as being “news” struck me as being very doubtful (and therefore requiring at least some supporting evidence), incorrect or (in one case) incomprehensible. Possibly some or all of these flaws are due to difficulties of translation from the GefliigePBorse article to which Professor Naether refers. I think, however, that they call for comment. P. 1 76, second paragraph Here it seems to be implied that the feral pigeons, in some or many areas have derived from fancy pigeons which, interbreeding over the gener¬ ations, have produced the more or less naturally shaped birds we see today in most parks, cities, sea cliffs, etc. 1 would suggest, on the contrary, that stocks of feral pigeons have derived from nondescript domestic pigeons not greatly differing from wild Rock Pigeons in general appearance, the old fashioned dovecote pigeons (which were very similar to the wild bird in shape and abilities) and racing homer pigeons (nowadays usually called simply “racing pigeons” or “racers” by fanciers) which although larger and with thicker bills than Rock Pigeons, are otherwise very like them in shape. One certainly sometimes sees fantails, frills, ices, tumblers and so on among feral pigeons but I have not known of where such a fancy pigeon, except in the case of one very “poorly-bred” and hardly deformed fantail, have bred successfully in a feral state. If Professor Naether has evidence of any feral population having been derived largely or wholly from any fancy breeds, I, and I am sure many other readers, would be most interested to read a full account of it. P. 177, 7th line et seq. “There may ....... be further subspecies extant in countries where they are simply inaccessible to observers.......” Well, anything is possible but in view of the extent to which collectors have in the past explored virtually all parts of the world where Columba livia is likely to occur, it does not 122 CORRESPONDENCE seem very probable that more races of this bird remain to be discovered. Could Professor Naether suggest areas where he thinks undiscovered forms of G livia may lurk? P. 177, lines 25-27 “ . in given habitats Rock Pigeons have crossed with certain native species . ...thus definitely affecting plumage coloration.” I know of no evidence that the Rock Pigeon, in a wild or feral state, has hybridised with any other species. It has been said to have done so with the Speckled Pigeon C. guinea in Africa but I have seen no evidence for this. As, obviously, the Rock Pigeons of any area would be native species, the wording of the above sentence seems a bit odd. However, if Professor Naether (or anyone else) has any evidence of wild (or feral) C. livia inter¬ breeding with any other species in a free state , could we please have full details? P. 177, middle of first paragraph The statement is made that the size of the various subspecies of C livia are at least in part environmentally determined (I assume that here the word “species” is being used where “subspecies” should have been, other¬ wise the sentences would not make sense), and that those living on a wild diet in arid environments “tend to be smaller in size than species (sic) in¬ habiting grain-producing regions. Yet further on we are told, correctly, that the smallest subspecies is C livia schimperi, an inhabitant of the high¬ ly fertile grain-producing Nile Valley! P. 177, third paragraph C livia daklae is certainly the lightest coloured race of the Rock Pigeon. For that very reason it is incorrect to say that “Its upper parts and wings are light grey contrasting strongly with a white back”. In fact, the very pale silvery cream of its mantle and wing coverts contrast hardly at all with the white of the lower back. P. 177, last lines and continuing over the page I cannot understand what is meant by the statement that the race of Rock Pigeon from the Indian peninsula C livia intermedia functions as the “originator” of all subspecies. Could we have some explanation as to what is meant here? 40 Frankfurt Road. Herne Hill, London, S.E.24 Derek Goodwin CORRESPONDENCE 123 Professor Naether replies:- My article “Important News Concerning Rock Pigeons” in the Avicul- tural Magazine , Volume 86, No. 3, p. 176, is a translation based on a series of articles bearing a similar title and appearing in the West German Geflri- gel-Borse, to which magazine I have the pleasure and privilege of contribu¬ ting occasionally. As such, my article presents in translation the views and statements of the German author, to whom queries should rightly be addressed with a view to learning the exact nature of the research data forming the basis for the article series. Many years ago, a so-called World Exposition was held in the city of San Diego. At its conclusion between thirty and forty breeds of so-called fancy pigeons exhibited were simply turned loose on the environment. Within a period of approximately ten years, during which time they re¬ mained in San Diego, they interbred and degenerated to such an extent as to lose and change both their form and colour of plumage - in short, they had become common street and park pigeons, their colour tending to re¬ semble that of the Rock Pigeon. As to the Rock Pigeon hybridising with any other species, I recall that Mr. Rudkin (deceased), a successful and well-known parrot fancier in Fillmore, California, maintained a flock of about 30 Speckled Pigeons which had free flight the year round. He informed me that some Rock Pigeons in due time joined his Speckled Pigeons, feeding with them reg¬ ularly and in time mating with them. He made a practice of destroying all eggs laid since he did not wish to increase his flock. The Rock Pigeons flew with the Speckled Pigeons and nested with them in the Rudkin loft: both species were exceedingly shy. I have no desire whatever to become further involved in any part of this “argument” and I hope that Mr. Goodwin will, in due course, report his findings about the Rock Pigeon’s inheritance, etc., in the form of an article in th e Avicultural Magazine . 124 ELECTION OF COUNCIL MEMBERS Members of the Avicultural Society are again reminded that, under Rule No. 10, they are entitled to nominate members to serve on the Council. Nominations should be sent to the Hon. Secretary, in writing, and should include the names of the proposer and seconder as well as the signature of the nominee, expressing his or her willingness to serve if appointed. The criteria for electing members to Council are that nominees should be able to attend the Council meetings (held three times a year) and that they are able to make some contribution to the work of the Society, par¬ ticularly in the funding and publication of the Avicultural Magazine. Nominations for overseas members will be welcomed if it is felt that the nominees will be able to make a contribution in their own countries towards recruiting new members and obtaining material for the Magazine. MEMBERS’ ADVERTISEMENTS (10 p. per word - minimum charge £3.00) TOR SALE. Avicultural Magazine - Bound volumes 1928/29. Good condition. Offers? Phone Stevenage 50311, 10 a.m. - 4 p.m. WANTED for breeding - One or two Shama hens, if possible bred in captivity. L.F. Hervouet, Les Petites Touraques, Chemin Bastide Blanche, 83350 Ramatuelle, France. CORRECTIONS Volume 86, No. 2. Page 82. Caption to photograph should read “Musk Ducklings.....”, not Pink¬ eared. Page 83. Caption to photograph should read “Pink-eared Ducklings . ”, not Musk Ducklings. Volume 86, No. 3. Page 123. Caption to photograph should read, “Beechey’s Jays, 23 days old ....” not 32 days. Volume 86, No. 4. Page 251, line 2. “ . 35 days . ” should read “ . 25 days . ” "Well all be there! 7th Annual Convention AM€RICAN F€D€RATION ofAVICULTUR€ August 5-6=7- 8 -9, 1981 Town & Country Hotel and Convention Center, San Diego, California Early Bird Drawing 45 Prominent Speakers Seminars Case Reports Raffle Prizes Commercial Exhibits Aviary and Park Tours "Early California" Banquet Meet Fellow Aviculturists Legislation Information 32 BRUTON PLACE - BERKELEY SQUARE - LONDON W.l Telephone: 01-499 0365 THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY The Avicultural Society was founded in 1894 for the study of British and foreign birds in freedom and captivity. The Society is international in character, having members throughout the world. Membership subscription rates per annum: British Isles £8.00; Overseas - £9.00 (20.00 US dollars). The subscription is due on 1st January of each year and those joining the Society later in the year will receive back numbers of the current volume of the AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE. The subscription rate for non-members is: British Isles and Europe - £9.00; outside Europe - £10.00 (25.00 US dollars). Subscriptions, changes of address, orders for back numbers, etc., should be sent to: THE HON. SECRETARY AND TREASURER, THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY, WINDSOR FOREST STUD, MILL RIDE, ASCOT, BERKSHIRE SL5 8LT. NEW MEMBERS Mr. Paul Adams, Midland Bird Garden, Stanmore Hall, Stourbridge Road, Bridge- north, Shropshire W VI 5 6DT Mr. D. Alderton, 158 Balfour Road, Brighton, Sussex BN1 6NE Mr. B. Allison, 30 Kingston Road, Underwood, 4119 Queensland, Australia Mr. G. Austin, Midland Bird Garden, Stanmore Hall, Stourbridge Road, Bridge- north, Shropshire W VI 5 6DT Mr. J.E. Ball, 7 Shenstone Avenue, Stourbridge, West Midlands. Mr. F. Baver, Ettersburg Star Route, Garberville, California 95440, USA Mr. D.R. Colby, Aloha Land Aviaries and Supplies, P.O. Box 761, Lahaina, Maui, Hawaii 96761, USA Mr. C. Cozzo, 84 Congress Street, Brooklyn, New York 11201, USA Mr. B. Eley, 715 Park Boulevard, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70806, USA Ms. H. Franklin, 179 Hespeler Road, Cambridge, Ontario N1R3H6, Canada. Mr. W. Howes, 36482 Camp Creek Road, Springfield, Oregon 97477, USA. Mr. A. Jackson, Harewood Bird Gardens, Harewood, Leeds, Yorkshire. Mrs. F.D. Lovelett, 2713 Dumbarton Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C.20007, USA. Mr. L. Martell, 9 Kirkwood Road, Alexandra Park, Salisbury, Zimbabwe. Mr. R.L. McDonald, P.O. Box 607, Orange, Texas 77630, USA. Mr. I.H. Mitchell, 62 Albany Road, Lytham St. Annes, Lancashire FY8 4 AS. Mr. M.A. Mogg, 1A Finnamore Wood, Frieth Road, Marlow, Bucks. SL7 2HX. Mr. S. Nixon, 125 Elm Drive, Crew, Cheshire CW1 4EL. Mr. S.M.F. Pearl, Kingham House, Kingham, Oxfordshire. Mrs. M. Prevost, 2824 South Bartell Apt. 38, Houston, Texas 77054, USA Mr. T. Pullinger, 170B Ruxley Lane, West Ewell, Epsom, Surrey KT19 9HA. Mr. M. Roper, 9 Dartmouth Road, Cannock, Staffordshire. Mrs. W.M.R. Shields, 55 San Juan, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87544, USA Mrs. Y. Surcouf, 13 Satanita Road, Westcliff, Southend on Sea, Essex SSO 8DG Mr. G. Thurlow, 1 Eton Road, Goole, North Humberside DN14 6PA Mrs. P.B.M. Walker, “Genista”, 10 Broome Close, Billericay, Essex. Mr. G. Wallen, 6615 Franklin Avenue, Apt. S-5, Los Angeles, Calif. 90028, USA Mr. P. Webster, 11214 North 40th Drive, Phoenix, Arizona 85029, USA Mr. C.A. Wheat, C.A.W. Birds, 1027 Santa Fe Avenue, Martinez, Calif. 94553, USA Mr. J.F. Woolham, 32, Caughall Road, Upton by Chester, Cheshire. CHANGE OF ADDRESS Mr. P.G. Bell to c/o Thenford House, Thenford, Banbury, Oxfordshire. Ms. Mona Bourell to 5613 Single Spring Drive, No. 6, Kelseyville, Calif. 95451, USA Mr. A.E. Chaney to 26970 N. Broadway, Escondido, Calif. 92026, USA Miss J. Fenton to 44 Hertford Street, Cambridge CB4 3AG Mr. R.H. Goudswaard to 20A Epuni Street, Wellington 2, New Zealand Mr. C. Lindstrom to Lovtaktsv 47, 14142 Huddinge, Sweden Mr. M.H. Magnussen to 14032 Mathews Drive, Woodbridge, Virginia 22191, USA Mr. E.A. Maxwell to Flat 20, 17 Clarges Street, London W14 7PG. Mr. P.B. Pugh to Jersey Wildlife Preservation Trust, Les Augres Manor, Trinity, Jersey, Channel Islands. Mr. D.W. Robinson to Gateways, Belbroughton Road, Blakedown, Nr. Kidderminster DY10 3U Mr. D.G. Roles to 1 1450 Barnett Valley Road, Sebastopol, California 95472, USA Mr. A.J. Swales to 2 Hammerton Road, Steeple Gidding, Huntingdon, Cambridge¬ shire, PE 17 5RE Mr. A. Rutgers to Les Popoyes, Les Rives, Anthy, 74200 Thonon-Les-Bains, France Mrs. R. Wiseman to 8 Park Road, Richmond, Surrey. Mr. J.C. Witt to 225 S. Oak Street, Orange, California 9266, USA. DONATIONS The Society is most grateful to the following members for their generosity: Mr. M. Albek Mr. N.J. Munden Mr. P. Bertagnolio Mr. G.W. Noreen Mr. W.Potter Bonsai Mr. N. 0‘Connor Mr. T.R.M. Brosset Mr. R.E. Oxley Mrs. V.E. Douglas Dr. S-H. Raethel Mrs. W. Duggan Mr. R. Restall Mr. R.P. Girdler Mr. B. Riley Mr. D.B. Hall Mr. A.S. Roger Mr. D.G. Hanover Mr. K.M. Scamell Mr. R.L. Henshaw Dr. A. Seitz Mr. F.S. Hogg Mr. F.L. Smith Mr. K. Howman Mr. T.G. Taylor Mr. K.W.S. Kane Mr. R. Thomas Mr. Hannu Kapyla Mr. J. Trollope Miss M. King Mr. H.W. Wareman Mr. Van Praet Lucas Mr. M.E.E. Warren Mr. A.J. Mabille Mr. J.D. Willmott Mr. H. Montgomery Mr. C.K. Wright Published by the Avicultural Society, Windsor Forest Stud, Mill Ride, Berkshire, SL5 8LT, England. Printed in Great Britain by Unwin Brothers Ltd., The Gresham Press, Old Woking, Surrey 5^8,50^*/ % & ' AGRICULTURAL MAGAZINE VOLUME 87 Number 3 1981 CONTENTS Breeding the Blackbird Turdus merula in captivity, by Dr. Marsha A. Schlee (with plate) . 125 The Oriole Finch Linurgus olivaceus, by Malcolm Ellis (with plate) . 130 The Whooping Crane: Lessons in Preservation, by Dr. G.K. Maroldo . 135 A Note on the Tepui Parrotlet Nannopsittaca party chlora, by E.P. McLoughlin 140 Erasing Imprinting in Parrots and Waterfowl, by W.D. Cummings . 142 Breeding notes for my collection of Amazona parrots for 1980, by D.T. Spilsbury . 146 Breeding Stella’s Lorikeet Charmosyrta papou goliathina , by Dr. W.D. Russell 152 Breeding the Knysna x Livingstone’s Lourie Tauraco c. corythaix x T.c. livingstonii, by Dr. W.D. Russell . . . 154 Unusual Nest Site Construction by Captive Budgerigars, by Anne B. Clark, Patricia C. Arrowood & Sherry Stemberger . 155 Plants and Aviculture, by Geoffrey Kenyon . 161 Meyer’s Parrot Poicephalus meyeri, by Arthur Freud (with plates) . 169 Kiwis at Otorohanga, by L. Gibson . 175 News from Chester Zoo, by P.J. Bloomfield . 177 Notes from the St. Louis Zoo, by Stephen R. Wylie (with plate) . 178 News and Views . 181 Reviews . 187 A vicultural Magazin e binding . 189 THE AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE welcomes original articles that have not been published elsewhere and that essentially concern the aviculture of a particular bird or group of birds, or that describe their natural history. Articles should be preferably typewritten, with double spacing, and the scientific names as well as the vernacular names of birds should be given. References cited in the text should be listed at the end of the article. Line drawings should be in Indian ink on thick paper or card; photographs which illustrate a particular point in the article will be used where possible and should be clearly captioned. ADDRESS OF EDITOR Mary Harvey, Windsor Forest Stud, Mill Ride, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 8LT, England. Male Blackbird feeding his offspring Avicultural Magazine THE JO URN A L OF THE A VICUL TURA L SOCIETY Vol. 87 - No. 3 - All rights reserved JULY - SEPTEMBER 1981 BREEDING THE BLACKBIRD IN CAPTIVITY Turdus merula By Dr MARSHA A. SCHLEE (Museum of Natural History, Paris, France) This paper recounts the successful nesting of a four-year-old, hand- reared male and a yearling female, in a greenhouse aviary maintained at the Laboratory of Entomology, Museum of Natural History, Paris. A much earlier breeding attempt was reported by Miss E.E. West (1911) but it had a most unfortunate outcome with no young birds surviving for more than a few days after hatching. Environmental setting The aviary was constructed by blocking off part of a greenhouse with a nylon protecting net. Its ground surface measures approximately 2.5 by 6 metres and the highest point of the roof is about 3 metres from the floor. Heating pipes run along the walls and are regularly used by the birds as perches. The aviary has a dirt floor in which grow a wide variety of trop¬ ical plants including a papyrus and a rubber tree. The maintenance diet of the Blackbirds is comprised of commercial feed for insectivorous birds, fruit and insects (particularly mealworms, crickets and cockroaches). History of the nesting pair The male bird was received on 31st May 1976, at an estimated age of 9 days. He came from the department of Sarthe in the west of France. Be¬ cause of the nature of the imprinting process in birds, I was not at all cer¬ tain that a hand-reared male would accept a female of his own species as a partner. Sexual behaviour was displayed every year as soon as moulting ended, and copulatory attempts were carried out on a number of inani¬ mate objects - rocks, sponges, glass case, etc. In October 1977, this bird was observed parading and posturing in full courtship display on the edge of a sink, the whole time uttering the characteristic “strangled” song. Courtship behaviour was obviously being directed to the water tap which the male mounted and with which he attempted to copulate. 126 Dr. M.A. SCHLEE - BREEDING THE BLACKBIRD The exact origin of the female Blackbird is unknown, for she was mys¬ teriously placed in the aviary in the spring of 1979. She had full juvenile plumage and was probably about two months old. One Sunday in July 1979, the door of the aviary had been pushed in and both birds were missing. A careful search of the greenhouse and the adjacent garden - for the roof was open for ventilation - revealed no sign of them. That evening at about 4.00 p.m. both birds came back and tried to enter the aviary. The female hid as soon as I approached, and I was not able to catch her, but the male, on the contrary, entered as soon as I showed him his feeding dish. The next day there was no sign of the female until about 4.00 p.m., the time when I made the evening rounds and often distributed mealworms. She had again entered the greenhouse and was poking her head through the netting. After placing a dish of food in a con¬ spicuous position, I was able to gently direct her toward the door of the aviary. Although the female chose to stay in the artificial setting of the aviary, she has remained completely wild. Pair formation On 30th April 1980, I took the male bird out of the aviary in order to treat him for a respiratory problem. An examination of his faeces revealed the presence of a large number of mycelia. Up until that time, the relation¬ ship between the male and the female was characterised by aggressive dis¬ plays, chasing and an occasional fight. I returned the male to the aviary on 3rd June. As soon as I released him, the female gave high-pitched trilling calls, each of which was ans¬ wered in the same manner by the male. Both birds then took up a squatt¬ ing, face-to-face position followed by aggressive “seep” calls and the snapping of beaks. Suddenly the female attacked the male and chased him around the aviary. Pair-formation was apparently the outcome of these manoeuvres, for the next day the birds conducted themselves as an estab¬ lished couple and nesting activities were begun. Nest site and construction On 4th June the male was seen prospecting part of a tree that had been placed 2 metres off the ground in a corner between the heating pipes and the greenhouse roof. The bird’s behaviour consisted of some “stran¬ gled” song and courtship postures, in addition to trying out the site by squatting and turning in circles. This display was observed every spring al¬ ways on the same block of wood which, moreover, housed an ant colony. That afternoon the female frequently visited the corner but she did not Dr. M.A. SCHLEE - BREEDING THE BLACKBIRD 127 carry any nest material. Moss, cotton, dry grass and straw had been placed in the aviary in order to give the birds a wide choice of material. Nest construction was started on 5th June, but all the materials fell off behind the block of wood. Consequently the next day the garden cura¬ tor stuffed straw into the space between the nest site and the side of the greenhouse. The ants reacted to this disturbance by swarming out of the colony and by taking up defensive postures; however, the insects never reacted to the presence of the Blackbirds. When I came to the aviary dur¬ ing the afternoon of 8th June, I saw that the nest had been completed. The male was standing guard over it, and the female was not in sight. Laying, incubation and hatching From 9th June onwards, the female spent much time on the nest and appeared to be incubating. According to the date of hatching, however, the first egg must have been laid at least a week later, around 16th June (incubation in Blackbirds lasts about thirteen days). I did not inspect the nest contents for fear that the female, who was not the least bit tame, would abandon the clutch. Only three eggs were laid, which could be ex¬ plained by the fact that the clutch was laid quite late in the season. All three eggs hatched. On 29th June, in the afternoon, I found two broken egg shells in the corner of the aviary that was furthest from the nest; on 2nd July, I found the third egg shell in the same place as the first two. Incubation must have started with the laying of the first egg. When the female was off the nest, the male usually stood guard over it and frequently “arranged” the rim; in no case was he further away than 1.5 metres from the nest when I was in the aviary. Care of the nestlings The parents took turns feeding their offspring and depended almost entirely on the food items that I supplied. As far as I could tell, only ani¬ mal matter was fed to the nestlings. I had put commercial feed, fruit, bread and hard-boiled egg in the aviary but these items remained un¬ touched and were not used even by the adult birds in self-feeding. The approximate number of insects consumed over the thirteen-day period in which the young birds were in the nest was as follows: 250 Crickets Acheta domestica (1-2 cm long); 250 Cockroaches Blaberus craniifer larvae and newly-moulted adults (1.5-4 cm long); 200 Coleopterans Tenebrio molitor larvae and adults; 13 coffee cups full of the Coleopteran Alphitobius diaperinus larvae and adults; and several hundred larvae, pupae and adults of the Lepidopteranylrargasta kuehniella. Nonetheless, the bulk of 128 Dr. M.A. SCHLEE - BREEDING THE BLACKBIRD the diet was made up of earthworms (average length 8 cm) and more than 1 200 were consumed. The daily food intake increased in proportion to the nestlings’ development and additional insects were supplied whenever necessary. On 7th July I discovered an ant colony in the Laboratory garden and was thus able to give the birds an additional source of food. However, they did not seem to recognise the ant pupae as food. Eventually I summoned the male, who was accustomed to taking mealworms out of my hands, and repeatedly offered him the pupae. As soon as he tasted them, he gathered them up and fed his offspring. To keep the nest clean, the adults either swallowed the faecal pellets or dropped them in the corner of the aviary the furthest from the nest. Removal of the young from the nest On 12th July, although the young birds were fourteen days old, they had still not left the nest; however, I saw only two nestlings when the male went to feed them. Since I did not see the third one on the ground, I climbed up to the nest to investigate. The young birds froze immediately, but when 1 gently caressed and covered them with my hand while search¬ ing for the third nestling, they both gave “purring” calls, apparently think¬ ing that the female had come to brood. I found no trace of the third nest¬ ling. I finally found its body, about 4.5 metres from the nest, behind the receptacle that the birds used for bathing. The third nestling was ex¬ tremely underdeveloped and obviously suffered from malnutrition. It must have been 12 days old at the time of death but in appearance it resembled an 8-day-old bird. I went back to the nest to examine the other two young birds. Just as I was about to put the first one back into the nest, it screamed and the male bird promptly dived at my head. (He had been perched next to the nest, quietly watching me handle his offspring.) The young Blackbird would not stay in the nest, so I slipped it into my laboratory coat and left the aviary. My original plan was to take the nestlings when they were ready to be fledged and then handrear them so that they would be tame enough to be used in a series of learning experiments that I intended to carry out in the future. When I came back to the aviary half an hour later, the second young bird was no longer in the nest. I was able to locate it by listening to it respond to its parents’ contact calls. When I caught the young bird, it screamed and the male immediately gave alarm calls and ran toward me in an aggressive posture. He examined my hands and since I was no longer holding the bird, he started searching elsewhere. During the entire episode, the female constantly gave alarm calls and high-pitched Dr. M.A. SCHLEE - BREEDING THE BLACKBIRD 129 “chinking” noises but remained out of sight. The next day the parents were still looking for their offspring, but during the following week the reproductive phase waned and the annual moult began. There was a marked difference in colour between the fledglings - a difference that I had already noticed when they were much younger. One fledgling was very dark, while the other one was quite light. As it turned out later, the difference in colour corresponded to a difference in sex: the darker bird was a male, the lighter one a female. Handr earing of the fledglings Both young birds were extremely wild, ran about in all directions trying to hide, snapped their beaks and defended themselves when ap¬ proached. I had to force feed them for three days; whenever they had the possibility they would immediately spit out any food that was given. Their diet consisted of insects, fruit and moistened commercial feed mixed with hard egg yolk. The fledglings started to eat insects by themselves at the age of 23 days and became fully independent at 29 days. Both fledglings had to be treated for gape worms Syngamus trachea , the first signs of the infection appearing on 20th July when they were 22 days old. The Syngamus larvae are known to be ingested by such transport hosts as earthworms in which they become encysted. The earthworms used to feed the nestlings were certainly the source of the infection. The treat¬ ment consisted of inhaling barium antimonyl tartrate powder in an en¬ closed box. Five days later I noticed that the young birds were infected with ascarids and a vermifuge was given in their drinking water. The nesting behaviour of these captive Blackbirds corresponds to that described by Snow (1958) in wild populations. However, it seems neces¬ sary to emphasise the rapidity of pair -formation and nest construction, as well as the total dependence on animal matter for feeding the nestlings. REFERENCES SNOW, D.W. 1958. A Study of Blackbirds. George Allen and Unwin Ltd., London. WEST, E.E. 1911. Nesting Notes on the Blackbird. Avicultural Magazine, July, pp. 257-259. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author wishes to thank Mr. Pierre Bourricaud for his assistance in caring for the birds. 130 THE ORIOLE FINCH Linurgus olivaceus By MALCOLM ELLIS (Wadebridge, Cornwall) As an avicultural subject, the Oriole Finch Linurgus olivaceus is vir¬ tually unknown. It is not included in any of the birdkeeping books with which I am familiar and it seems that before now, it has never been written about in the Avicultural Magazine. I first became aware of the Oriole Finch on seeing David Reid-Henry’s small black and white sketch of a male in “Birds of the Sudan” by Cave and Macdonald (Oliver and Boyd, 1955). My first opportunity to see this species alive came when a pair was added to the collection at London Zoo. The pair came from Mr. and Mrs. Barnley’s aviaries in western Kenya. Sub¬ sequently the Barnleys have been among my closest friends and often I have helped them with their birds which have included several Oriole Finches. So far I have not managed to see this species in the wild. It is designated a genus to itself within the family Fringillidae, sub¬ family Carduelinae (goldfinches and allies). It is listed between two other monotypic species, the Sao Thome Grosbeak -Weaver Neospiza concolor and the Golden-winged Grosbeak Rhynchostruthus socotranus. Most readers will be unfamiliar with the Oriole Finch and seeing that it comes between two such named species, they may get a mistaken impression of its appearance. It is hardly grosbeak-like: it measures about 5 inches in length (127 mm) and, as can be seen from my photograph, possesses only a moderately stout bill. I had reservations about including here my photograph of a male L. o. elgonensis held in Jane Barnley’s hand. However, the bird shows no obvious distress and the photograph illustrates well the bill, also the head and wing markings, as well as providing a good idea of the species’ propor¬ tions. Covering the head and extending to a point on the centre of the chest, the male’s distinctive mask is jet black. Black is the main colour of the primaries and secondaries. The innermost secondaries show a yellow edge and white tip. The primaries also show a white tip. Otherwise, the upper- parts, including the tail, are mostly olivaceous yellow. The hind neck, sides of the neck and the underparts are yellow with, in places, a golden tone. The bill is orange yellow. The legs and feet are orange brown. The male bears a resemblance to some orioles, especially Old World black-headed species. It is, of course, considerably smaller. Having seen MALCOLM ELLIS - THE ORIOLE FINCH 131 Male Oriole Finch Linurgus olivaceus elgonensis, Cherengani Hills, western Kenya. 132 MALCOLM ELLIS - THE ORIOLE FINCH only L. o. elgonensis, it is difficult for me to make comparisons between the races. From descriptions, it seems that other males differ from L. o. elgonensis , principally in their upperparts being more greenish in colour. Some descriptions of L. o. olivaceous and L.o. kilimensis describe their upperparts as mainly rich moss green. The female Oriole Finch is coloured mainly olive green and is remi¬ niscent of a tiny, dark male Greenfinch Carduelis chloris. The young Oriole Finch is described as being duller than the female, with pale green¬ ish tips to the wing coverts. Tim and Jane Barnley have found that young males seem to take quite a time to assume adult plumage. They have sent away what were thought to be females only to learn that later they moul¬ ted into adult male plumage. The Oriole Finch was discovered first on the island of Fernando Po, which now seems to be called Macias Nguema Biyoga, off the coast of West Africa. Later, it was found to inhabit not only Cameroon Mountain, but other localities in the highlands of what is now Cameroun. More recently it was found to extend to the Obudu Plateau, Nigeria. The West African race is the nominate one. L. o. elgonensis , described first from Mount Elgon, occurs on the Ima- tong Mountains of Sudan, eastern Uganda and western and central Kenya. With it is now included L.o. keniensis, which was listed from central Ken¬ ya, having been described first from northern Mount Kenya. L. o. kilimen¬ sis was listed from Mount Kenya, but recent works omit Kenya from its distribution. Described first from Mount Kilimanjaro, it is now listed only from north-eastern to south-western Tanzania and northern Malawi. Ban¬ nerol an (1953), mentioned the possibility of an undescribed race from west Kivu. Presumably this was L.o. prigoginei, described in 1950, and listed by Mackworth-Praed and Grant (1973) from Kivu and the eastern Congo border! Britton (1980) lists it from the Impenetrable Forest, south-west Uganda. The Oriole Finch is confined mainly to mountains and highlands in tropical Africa. Serle and Morel (1977) record that it occurs as low as 1,800 ft. (548 m) on Cameroon Mountain. Overall, it is most frequent at altitudes between 5,000 and 9,000 ft. (1,524 and 2,743 m). Bannerman ended his notes about the Oriole Finch: “It is worthy of note that the race on Mount Elgon ascends to the bamboo zone at 20,000 feet.” It is indeed worthy of note! Mount Elgon is ‘only’ 14,178 ft (4,321 m) high, so 20,000 ft. must be a misprint and should be 10,000 ft. (3, 048 m), which is the highest altitude for the Oriole Finch given by Mackworth-Praed and Grant (1960). MALCOLM ELLIS - THE ORIOLE FINCH 133 According to the same authors (1973), the nominate race L o. kili- mensis and L.o. progoginei , usually are seen feeding in small scattered flocks at the forest edge or among the boughs of large trees; and L.o . elgonensis is found among bamboos and dense bush. It is much the same as the habitat described by Bannerman, whose notes refer mainly to the nominate race. In addition, he mentions that the Oriole Finch is attracted to abandoned farms, where there is an impene¬ trable tangle of small trees, bushes, grass and thorns. Tim and Jane Barnley are familiar with L. o. elgonensis on the Cheren- gani Hills, nearby Mount Elgon and in the Kakamega Forest, western Ken¬ ya. Tim Barnley described its habitat as damp riverine forest, alongside abandoned shambas (African smallholdings and farms), which have become overgrown with nettles; he added that when the birds are not feed¬ ing, often they are in tall trees. According to Mackworth-Praed and Grant (1960), the food of the Oriole Finch is: “Noted as grass seeds, tree seeds, the seeds of a sapro¬ phytic orchid and occasional caterpillars”. Tim and Jane Barnley first noticed it feeding on unripe nettle seeds and nibbling the minute seeds from figs. Unripe seeds from the cultivated tobacco plant are much rel¬ ished. Tim Barnley wrote that, although equipped with a fairly substantial and strong seedeater’s bill, the Oriole Finch feeds mainly on unripe and other soft seeds, buds and some fruit. Soft-bodied insects are taken and, in captivity, mealworms, but the skins of the latter are discarded. He feels that in captivity the diet should be that of a ‘softbilled’ species and include adequate greenfood. In addition, he suggests that soaked seed be offered. The food which Tim and Jane Barnley first got caged Oriole Finches to take was homemade bird-meal (a local brand of plain biscuit, finely crushed, with honey and dripping rubbed in, with Complan and chick mash with Vitamealo added), then banana and paw paw covered with the meal, with nectar alongside. In notes sent to me by Jane Barnley, she wrote that they sift through their food and discard a lot, rather like tits do. Aviary-proud, she described Oriole Finches as ‘filthy’ feeders; adding that they are not as greedy as Grey-headed Negro Finches Nigrita canica- pilla. Freshly caught Oriole Finches they house indoors, singularly or in pairs, in small travelling boxes. These afford the occupants a nicely sec¬ luded home during their early days In captivity. Made mainly from hard- board, each box has one or sometimes two perches going from side to 134 MALCOLM ELLIS - THE ORIOLE FINCH side and has a soft, fine-mesh nylon covered front, which in turn is covered by a hessian flap which can be raised when the occupants have become accustomed to confinement. Throughout the first few days, at regular intervals, the birds are re¬ moved from the boxes to be fed diced fruit, mixed with the aforemention- tioned meal and nectar. The first few occasions it is usually necessary to open the bird’s mandibles and gently push the food down. Fortunately most birds soon learn to accept food held between the fingers. The bird’s bill is carefully wiped clean after each feed. This way, the presence of food on the bill shows when a bird has started to feed itself. By that stage the birds are usually well settled and if, in the morning, they are quietly watched when fresh food is put in the cage, they will usually go down to the pot almost immediately and begin to feed. When it has been seen that they are feeding well, they may be transferred to a unit of small outdoor aviaries. There again, they are housed singly or in pairs, with suitable companions such as waxbills, negro finches and the like. Tim and Jane Barnley have found individual Oriole Finches to be somewhat vindictive if introduced to an unfamiliar Oriole Finch of their own or the opposite sex. They have found them to be very tempera¬ mental birds, which tend to sulk, are difficult to establish and prone to “coughing” ; once established and out in aviaries, they are fine. It was in June 1964 when a pair of Oriole Finches arrived at London Zoo and this was the first time that this species had been represented there. At the same time a pair went to the late Capt. de Quincey. It was almost certainly the first importation of this species into Britain. The London Zoo pair was housed in an indoor aviary which contained an assortment of waxbills and other small seedeaters. The male Oriole Finch died after living at the Zoo for one year and seven months, the female after four years and two and a half months. Jane Barnley has kept records of the Oriole Finches which have been sent abroad. A cat had kittens in her early records, but those which remain show that in 1965, three went to Milwaukee Zoo; in 1966 two went to Birdland, Bourton-on-the-Water; in 1972, four went to Switzer¬ land; in 1973 four went to Mrs. Scamell in England, and one to Rome. During 1976 a total of 22 Oriole Finches were sent to Denmark, West Germany and Belgium. The following year, a total of 26 were sent to Denmark, West Germany, Austria and Britain. Since the Kenya Government ban on hunting, etc., no Oriole Finches have been sent abroad by the Barnleys. Dr. G.K. MAROLDO - THE WHOOPING CRANE 135 REFERENCES BAMMERMAM, D.A. 1953. The Birds of West and Equatorial Africa. Vol. 2. Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh and London. BRITTON, P.L. (Ed.) 1980. Birds of East Africa. East Africa Natural History Society, Nairobi. MACKWORTH-PRAED, C.W. and GRANT, C.H.B. 1960. Birds of Eastern and North-eastern Africa. Vol. 2. 2nd Ed. Longmans, London. MACKWORTH-PRAED, C.W. and GRANT, C.H.B. 1973. Birds of West Central and Western Africa. Vol 2. Longman, London. SERLE, W. and MOREL, G.J. 1977. A Field Guide to the Birds of West Africa. Collins, London. * * * THE WHOOPING CRANE: LESSONS IN PRESERVATION By Dr. G.K. MAROLDO (Texas Lutheran College, Seguin, Texas, USA) During the past few decades, the Whooping Crane^ Grus americana has made a notable recovery from the brink of extinction. American and Canadian governments, interested organisations and private citizens have contributed to this set of events. This is a survey of efforts made to pre¬ serve this endangered species. As North America became more heavily populated in the last century, the migratory Whooping Crane retreated from its range which had once extended from the east coast to the Rocky Mountains in the United States and from southern Manitoba and Saskatchewan to south-eastern Alberta in Canada. By the turn of the century, Whooping Cranes wintered only in the south Atlantic and Gulf states and in north-eastern and central Mexico (Stevenson an d^ Griffith, 1946). Meanwhile, in Canada they withdrew even farther north than before to breed. Never an abundant species, these birds travelled every autumn with their young from their nesting grounds some¬ where in Canada to southern United States. In the spring, of course, the cranes returned to Canada, 136 Dr. G.K. MAROLDO - THE WHOOPING CRANE Concern for survival Serious concern for Whooping Crane survival dates from the 1930’s and 1940’s when it was realised by Robert Porter Allen, a biologist with the National Audubon Society, that their numbers had dwindled to new lows (Allen, 1952). As their established habitats contracted and vanished, the cranes migrated farther and farther to the north and to the south in search of new territories. Blackjack Peninsula on the south Texas coast in Aransas and Refugio counties thus became their wintering grounds. Their summer range was in northern Canada, its precise location then unknown. A few non-migratory Whooping Cranes subsisted in south-western Louisiana. To protect the remaining migratory Whooping Cranes and other birds and mammals, the Aransas National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1937 as wintering grounds. In 1941, 21 wild cranes were counted: 15 of them spent the winter at Aransas, and six others, of the non-migratory flock, in Louisiana. The summer nesting grounds at Wood Buffalo National Park, North- West Territories, Canada, was finally pinpointed in 1954. However, even today not all of the nesting sites have been located. Some Whooping Cranes may be spending part of the summer in some years in Manitoba (Boothroyd, 1980). Research and management efforts Knowing the summer and winter Whooping Crane areas prompted res¬ earch and management efforts. It was now known that the remaining wild flock travelled 2,500 miles (4,050 kilometres) which took approximately 16 days, twice a year. In one year, the cranes fly 5,200 miles (8,424 kilo¬ metres) and spend 32 days or more along the perilous flyway. The possi¬ bility of establishing eventually a shorter migration route was already in the minds of many who were worried about the cranes’ endurance and safety. Although the number of cranes did increase from 15 in 1941 to 24 in 1956, this was hardly encouraging news. Indeed, it prompted a conference in Washington, D.C., of American and Canadian conservationists and biolo¬ gists to discuss the fate of the cranes. It was here that the Whooping Crane Advisory Group was formed. By then, the non-migratory cranes in Loui¬ siana had disappeared (Maroldo, 1980). Discussion at the conference centred around a highly controversial management proposal: breeding Whooping Cranes in captivity. Conservationists were concerned about removing young cranes from the wild for attempts at captive breeding because numbers were so low (Ricciuti, 1979). Dr. G.K. MAROLDO - THE WHOOPING CRANE 137 The proposal, however, was accepted in 1961 with one change. Erick¬ son’s (1976) recommendations on egg-taking, transport, artificial incuba¬ tion, hatching and rearing procedures were initiated on Sandhill Cranes Grus canadensis rather than Whooping Cranes. About this time, the Whooping Crane Conservation Association was formed and dedicated to crane survival as a species (Scott, 1976). Egg-man ipulation Because of the encouraging results with Sandhill Cranes, successful procedures were transferred to Whooping Cranes in 1965, with the es¬ tablishment by the Bureau of Sport, Fisheries and Wildlife of the En¬ dangered Wildlife Research Station at Patuxent near Laurel, Maryland (Erickson, 1968). It was ascertained that a wild Sandhill Crane egg could be successfully removed from a clutch of two, and sent to Patuxent for hatching. A joint proposal by the Canadian Wildlife Service and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, employing this strategy with Whooping Cranes, was launched in 1967. Accordingly, eggs removed from Wood Buffalo would be sent to Patuxent for the study of life processes, notably hatch¬ ing and rearing. From 1967 to 1974, when the procedure was discontinued 50 eggs were removed from the wild, and 41 chicks hatched. Of this number, 18 birds were lost in the first six months, and five lost in adult plumage (Kepler, 1978). There were similar losses with Sandhill Cranes at Patuxent over the years (Carpenter, Locke and Miller, 1976). However some Sandhill and Whooping Cranes have reached maturity in captivity and are producing eggs. As yet, no female Whooping Crane has mated naturally, all fertile eggs are produced by artificial insemination (Note 1). The Foundation Worldwide realisation of the plight of many cranes in the early 1970’s led to the inauguration of the International Crane Foundation in Baraboo, Wisconsin. Its objectives to ensure the survival of cranes are research, habitat preservation, captive propagation, restocking and public education. Sandhill Foster-parents Concerted efforts on the part of the American and Canadian govern¬ ments and others over the years produced a gradual increase in Whooping Crane numbers. Two main sources of danger troubled the experts: (i) a catastrophe at either the winter or summer grounds could devastate the wild flock; (ii) still another could be equally disastrous along the migration 138 Dr. G.K. MAROLDO - THE WHOOPING CRANE fly way. In the spring of 1975 a bold experiment was undertaken to ad¬ dress these concerns. The solution was later to become known as the Sand¬ hill Crane Experiment. The plan was to remove Whooping Crane eggs from wild nests in Canada, and from captive nests at Patuxent, and place them with nesting Sandhill pairs at Grays Lake National Wildlife Refuge, Idaho. Sandhills migrate with their young every fall from Grays Lake to Bosque del Apache National Wildlife Refuge, New Mexico, a distance of 870 miles (1,409 kilometres). It was hoped that young Whooping Cranes reared by Sandhills would migrate with their foster-parents and, as nesting pairs, locate permanently in the Rocky Mountain region. This plan further enab¬ led scientists to place identifying leg bands on young cranes for record and study (Drewien and Kuyt, 1979). The first Whooping Crane to migrate south with its Sandhill foster- parents was called “Corny”, because of its atypical love of grain, otherwise absent from the natural diet of Whooping Cranes. Progress in the programme has been slow, but rewarding. By late au¬ tumn 1980, 20 Whooping Cranes migrated from Grays Lake to Bosque del Apache. Three of these have not, as yet, been accounted for on the winter range, but they may be alive elsewhere (Note 2). Central fly way To protect the Wood Buffalo-Aransas flock along the hazardous fly¬ way, a migration monitoring programme was set up in 1975, and the area was designated Critical Habitat in 1978. More protection plans are antici¬ pated in the future (Note 3). Recovery plan The final draft of the Whooping Crane Recovery Plan, developed by a recovery team since 1975, was approved in 1980. Its primary objective is to remove this crane from the endangered species list. A secondary objec¬ tive is to insure 40 or more nesting pairs in the Wood Buffalo-Aransas flock and 20 or more nesting pairs in the Rocky Mountain flock (Note 4). San Antonio Zoo The San Antonio Zoological Gardens and Aquarium, Texas, has a long, successful history of propagating and rearing Whooping Cranes. It is the only place where this species can be viewed by the public without special permission, as a daily attraction. World Population of Whooping Cranes The following table depicts the early 1981 count (Note 5). Dr, G.K. MAROLDO - THE WHOOPING CRANE 139 1981 WHOOPING CRANE COUNT Crane Location Number Wood Buffalo-Axansas Flock Rocky Mountain Population International Crane Foundation San Antonio Zoo Patuxent Captive Flock 78 20 (17) 1* 2* 22 Total 123(120) *As of October 1980 The Whooping Crane is still very much endangered^ but Its future appears brighter now than ever in recent history. REFERENCE NOTES L Kenny, F. The long, thin track of the whooping crane, United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, News Release. March 7, 1980. 2. Drewien, R.C. Personal communication, February 25, 1.981 3. The whooping crane. Biological Services Program, United States Department of the Interior (FWS/OBS-80/01.3), March 1980. 4. Whooping crane recovery plan. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, January 23, 1980. 5. Gms americana. Quarterly Newsletter , Whooping Crane Conservation Association Inc., 20, (1), March 1981. REFERENCES ALLEN, R.P. The whooping crane. Research Report No. 3 of the National Audu¬ bon Society , 1952. BOO THRO YD, P. Whooping crane records for Manitoba, 1943-1979. Blue Jay , 38, (3), 162465. CARPENTER, J.W., LOCKE, L.N. and MILLER, J.C. Mortality in captive sandhill cranes at the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, 19664975. In J.C. LEWIS (Ed.) Proceedings of the International Crane Foundation Workshop , Oklahoma Univer¬ sity Press, 1976, 268-283. DREWIEN, R.C. and KUYT, E. Teamwork helps the whooping crane. National Geographic , 1979, 155, (5) 680-693. ERICKSON, R.C. A federal research program for endangered wildlife. Transactions of the 33rd North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, 1968, 418433. 140 Dr. G.K. MAROLDO - THE WHOOPING CRANE — - - , - . Whooping crane studies at Patuxent Wildlife Research Center. In J.C. LEWIS (Ed.), Proceedings of the International Crane Foundation Work¬ shop, Oklahoma University Press, 1976, 166-176. KEPLER, C.B. Captive propagation of whooping cranes: a behavioral approach. In S.A. TEMPLE (Ed.), Endangered birds: management techniques for preser¬ ving threatened species. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1978, 231-241. MAROLDO, G.K. Crip: the constant dancer. Blue Jay, 1980, 38, (3), 147-161. RICCUITI, E.R. Deathwatch at Patuxent. Audubon, 1979, 81, (1), 82-92. SCOTT, L. The whooping crane conservation association. In J.C. LEWIS (Ed.), Proceedings of the International Crane Foundations Workshop, Oklahoma University Press, 1976, 223-224. STEVENSON, J.O. and GRIFFITH, R.E. Winter life of the whooping crane. The Condor, 1946, 48, (4), 160-178. A NOTE ON THE TEPUI PARROTLET Nannopsittaca panychlora By E.P. McLOUGHLIN (Co. Kilkenny) Some field notes on this rarely-observed parrot, with its strange habitat, may be of interest to readers since none has apparently been previously published. These notes were related to me in Georgetown, Guyana, in 1973 by Adrian Thompson, the veteran Guyanese explorer. He encoun¬ tered this species on one of the earlier unsuccessful (pre-1973) attempts to scale the precipitous cliff face of Mount Roraima* at the boundary of Guyana with neighbouring Brazil and Venezuela. On this occasion a base camp was established at 7,000 feet. Above it the mountain rose almost sheer for 1 ,800 feet to the summit. The birds could be heard at this point each morning and evening mov¬ ing to and from their feeding grounds in the forest below. In their journey from one altitude to another the birds passed through the cumulous cloud level. Almost continual cloud and mist prevented these observers from actually seeing the birds whose numbers were, in consequence, hard to estimate but Thompson felt that they might possibly have run into thou- E.P. McLOUGHLIN - THE TEPUI PARROTLET 141 sands judging by the level of calling heard as they went by. Below the cloud level the air again became clear before the forest canopy was reach¬ ed. On one morning when the summit was clear above them and the clouds below more dense than hitherto, the passage of the birds was noti¬ ceably later than usual. Thompson did not actually see the birds roosting but wondered if they were using the crevices in the sandstone cliff for this purpose. In the latter part of October and the beginning of November 1973, when the joint Guyanese-British team sponsored by the Observer news¬ paper made the first successful ascent of the cliffs of Roraima, Hamish Maclnnes was able to throw some further light on this species. He described, in the Observer , a stage in the ascent at a point about 700 feet from the summit, and commented, “Our high point for the day was a ledge 8 inches wide with a superb miniature garden hanging from it inhabited by green parrots”. In a personal communique he amplified this note as follows: “There was a particular ‘nest’ that I observed for many hours being only 3 feet from it. The ‘nest’ was about 5 feet long and about 2 feet in diameter and was made up of living plants which had formed a kind of basket. The ‘nest’ hung free below a very big overhang and was in a fairly exposed place. The birds returned to this ‘nest’ just before dusk ..... and used to chirp away for a while before settling in for the night.” It was possible for Maclnnes on occasion to follow the flight of the flocks visually and in fact he saw them on a number of occasions. “The birds used to fly in groups of about fifteen to twenty and swoop around the cliff, descending to about 5,000 feet on the El Dorado Ridge. There would be very animated chirruping as they swept past.” During a brief visit (of a few hours) spent on the summit by day, there was no sign of this species, as might have been expected. Summary Considered by Mayr and Phelps to be “an old element and a very distinct species endemic to the Southern Highlands of Venezuela, also found in N.E. Venezuela at Sucre”, the Tepui Parrotlet descends over 3,000 ft each day from its roosts on cliffs near the summit of Mount Roraima to its feeding grounds in the forests which lie at its base. Proof of its nesting in the mountain roosts was not obtained. My grateful thanks are due to Adrian Thompson, and to Hamish Mac¬ lnnes and the Observer newspaper.. 142 W.D. CUMMINGS - ERASING IMPRINTING REFERENCE MAYR, E. & W.H. PHELPS, Jnr. 1967. Bulletin of American Museum of Natural History, Vol. 136, article 5, New York. ♦Mount Roraima, highest point in the Pacaraima Range, summit 9,094 feet, ( fide Cartographic Section, Department of Lands and Mines, George¬ town, Guyana.) ERASING IMPRINTING IN PARROTS AND WATERFOWL By W.D. CUMMINGS (Durban, South Africa) Over the years I have kept and bred many kinds of exotic birds and have thereby had considerable opportunity to study their behaviour under captive conditions. Birds are individuals and it is, naturally, essential to know and under¬ stand their characters and environmental and dietary needs in order that they should thrive under controlled conditions. In isolation or other unnatural environments in which they are sometimes kept, deviations in character occur just as in humans, and especially in their close association with humans, when they are treated as pets. I would like to quote just a few cases that I have experienced of bird imprinting and the methods used to normalise their behaviour and to re¬ introduce them into associations with their own kind. Waterfowl imprint on hatching and this can cause problems later on, when maturity is reached, if they are hand-reared, or foster-parented under a hen, or reared with other species. This association causes deviation in behavioural development which sometimes becomes extreme on reaching maturity and the breeding state. W.D. CUMMINGS - ERASING IMPRINTING 143 Case 1. A Blue Snow gander Anser caerulescens whose history was unknown would not pair to another Snow Goose, but would readily pair and break up a mated pair of Barnacle Geese. He would foster-father a brood of ducklings and protect the duck and her brood from all opposition, and this year he fosterfathered two orphaned Black Swans of approximately 2 Yl months old until they were fully grown, and they, in turn, gladly and fully accepted his role as protector. His problem probably started when he arrived in the Mitchell Park, Durban, as a mate to an adult Snow Goose (female) who dominated him and on reaching maturity he was still afraid of this goose. Another goose was obtained and this time the roles were reversed and he was decidedly aggressive towards her, displaying a mixture of territorial protection and a “hang-up” from his relationship with the other goose. The goose came into lay in the spring after a year of close association in a small paddock on their own - he was more tolerant towards her and I was hoping that, when the goose was receptive to mating, the final aggres¬ sion would disappear. Unfortunately, this was not the case and he attacked her on the nest causing an internal rupture and she died. The fully-devel¬ oped egg was removed and put under a broody hen, but was not fertile. A further two Snow Geese were obtained on loan - a possible pair, pre¬ viously kept again in isolation for three years or so from any other Snow Geese and which later turned out to be females. The gander was running with these two geese for several months when the two young Black Swans were introduced into the paddock, when he immediately took over the cygiets and drove off the female Snow Geese. He was very vocal in his protection of the cygnets. Meanwhile the two new Snow Geese still be¬ haved as a pair, having developed this bond in isolation over the years. A further pair of Blue Snow Geese were obtained and this time proved to be a normal mated gander and goose and these were now added to the group of the aggressive gander and the “paired” females. For some time, as could be expected, they kept in their separate groupings and, in order to stir the relationships up, I separated the aggressive gander and the more feminine of the paired females into another enclosure within hearing but not within sight of the remaining three. The two females called constantly to each other, but after three weeks or so I noticed the new gander taking an interest in the pair bond female remaining with him. To reduce the stress and noise between the pair bond females, I put her and the aggress¬ ive gander back into an enclosure next door to the other three. There was immediately a great deal of aggressive vocal interplay between the two 144 W.D. CUMMINGS - ERASING IMPRINTING groups, with the newest gander showing a great deal of preferential solici¬ tude toward the pair bond female he was with, much to the annoyance of his own mate. Two weeks later this pair bond female made a scrape and laid four eggs - unfortunately in a very sunny exposed spot and I replaced them with dummy eggs and put the other eggs under a hen. With all the hullabaloo and social disturbance (the goose that laid had been with the aggressive gander for nearly a year and showed a slight inter¬ est in him; also the mated female showed jealous tendencies towards the new gander’s preference) I could not hope that the eggs would be fertile. To my delight a gosling hatched under the hen. I had to remove the new gander, his mate and the goose that laid (which incidentally was the male looking of the pair bond females) and they were released into the main duck pond with other geese and ducks, and it is of interest to note that a trio-bond has been formed and that they keep very much together in their new home. The pen where the aggressive gander and the one goose remained was divided and the bantam and gosling were introduced. There was no interest shown by the gander in the gosling, for I was hoping that his strong pater¬ nal interests would come to the fore once again and he would rear the gosling, thus avoiding a repetition of the social disorder I had experienced to date. When the gosling was two months old, I removed the division and allowed the bantam foster mother and gosling to associate with the two adult Snow Geese. The aim now, since I had one unsociable gander (anti¬ female), one female pair bond female (anti-male), and one single gosling, was to form a family unit and in so doing to cure all three of their social imbalance. There was not much interest shown between the Snow Geese and gosling and after two weeks I removed the bantam. The gosling showed only a little distress but I noticed the Snow Goose female showing an interest in the gosling when it made distress calls; now after another two weeks they are inseparable and she is aggressive towards the other ducks and shelgeese if they approach the gosling. The gander continues to ignore the youngster, but shows minimum aggression towards it but he is now fully in moult, which state would reduce his reactions. Out of the five Snow Geese, I now have a fully integrated trio, with good prospects for breeding, a rehabilitated goose and a gosling brought up as a Snow Goose with good future prospects for normal behaviour. There is still one uncertain individual in the aggressive gander who is now toler¬ ant towards the foster goose and gosling and who might make another family group. W.D. CUMMINGS - ERASING IMPRINTING 145 Case 2 Ducks also form strange bonds, especially if reared with other species or isolated from their own species during a breeding season. There was a case of a Chiloe Wigeon drake Anas sibilatrix whose own duck died and a replacement Chiloe duck took three months to obtain. Meanwhile in associating with Rosy-bill Ducks he paired to an unmated female Rosy-bill. When the Chiloe Widgeon duck was introduced he made a few head- -bobbings and then swam off with the Rosy-bill. He was then isolated with his own duck onto another pond for eight months and seemed completely rehabilitated. He was re-introduced back onto the main pond, where within ten minutes he disassociated from his own duck who followed him around while he searched for an unpaired Rosy-bill duck, and having found one, he followed her everywhere; while searching he attempted to mate with paired Rosy-bill females. Case 3 Changed behaviour patterns experienced in parrots and cockatoos are usually due to their being kept in complete isolation from their own kind with human companionship instead. Thus, when confronted with another of their own or other species of whatever sex, the reaction is aggression. If both are removed and put into a completely new environment, indiffer¬ ence takes the place of aggression in the attitude towards the new compan¬ ion. I have experienced several cases (with Grey Parrots and cockatoos) where, after periods of a year or two, in outdoor conditions with the human influence removed and with nesting facilities available, after per¬ iods of twenty years in cages, they have been rehabilitated - having paired up, mated and produced broods. In every case when normalising is effective, they (in the case of males) have become fearlessly aggressive towards their erstwhile human compan¬ ions. In two cases, after having been caged for fifteen to twenty years, al¬ though they have paired up and reared broods of youngsters, they have never tried to regain their powers of flight but walk all over their outdoor aviaries, and again this refers to a Grey Parrot cock and a Lesser Sulphur- crested Cockatoo cock. There is one case of a talking Greater Sulphur-crested Cockatoo which, apart from never attempting to fly, has also lost its power of talking in cockatoo language and is more fluent speaking English; it only reverts to cockatoo shrieks when upset or annoyed. In conclusion, it is interesting to note that three species of arctic- breeding geese have successfully bred in this sub-tropical climate in Durban. 146 BREEDING NOTES FOR MY COLLECTION OF AMAZONA PARROTS FOR 1980 By D.T. SPILSBURY (Welland, Malvern) Thirty-two couples and trios of Amazona were given nest boxes for the 1980 breeding season. The birds had been paired by watching behavioural patterns, by limited natural selection within a group of a given species and by noting head and mandible differences - all rather hit or miss! I suppose that laparoscopy, the modern sexing technique, will increas¬ ingly become the accepted method of sexing monomorphic species but I have not used the method yet for I worry about the pre- and post-opera¬ tive stress factor. My 1980 notes are concerned with both failure and success but there is little point here in writing about the pairs that did not get beyond nest preparation. The reasons for these failures can be either simple or com¬ plex. Age, either immature or too ancient, incompatibility, incorrect sexing or poor management are all factors that must be overcome in future years. Included in this first failure category are Amazona a. aestiva, A. a. xan- thopteryx, A. albifrons nana, A. amazonica, A. autumnalis lilacina, A. far- inosa, A. festiva , A. ventralis and A. vinacea and also additional pairs of the following species and races. The second category embraces those pairs and trios (three birds of a species housed together in an attempt to form a pair and all relatively young birds) that produced eggs. All eggs within this group were infertile and it may well be that my assumed males are not quite what they seem to be. A. collaria laid four eggs, two from the same position on a perch, two were laid in the nest and incubated. One egg was misshapen, the others were variable in profile and measured 32 mm x 25 mm. Two pairs of A. ochrocephala oratrix laid. Pair A were the major dis¬ appointment of the year for in 1979 they had infertile eggs and again this year they laid two separate clutches of three and three in May and July. Pair B laid three eggs. Six eggs were measured and the range was between 37 mm and 42 mm length x 30 mm and 32 mm width. The smaller eggs and the most variable in profile were laid by the female of pair B, a young¬ er bird. One pair and a trio of A. finschi laid three eggs and four eggs respec- D.T. SPILSBURY - BREEDING NOTES 147 lively. I believe that within the trio two females laid for when brooding began, two birds were always in the nest. Regular examination of the nest always revealed the four eggs to be in pairs, well separated. The pair’s eggs were 35 mm x 28 mm, 36 mm x 28 mm, and 37 mm x 27 mm. Three eggs from the trio survived; they measured 37 mm x 29 mm, 38 mm x 29 mm and 40 mm x 30 mm. Profile was variable but three were ovate. One pair and a trio of A. a. autumnalis laid eggs throughout early sum¬ mer but managed to break them with the exception of one egg laid by the female of the pair. This measured 38 mm x 29 mm and was ovate. The third category consists of the pairs that produced young and this year all young that hatched were reared to independence. Six was the total and, whilst not spectacular, it gives encouragement. I am ashamed to admit that one of these pairs, a male A aestiva paired to a female A.o. panamensis, have produced and reared in exemplary fash¬ ion their hybrid young. I loathe the haphazard production of hybrids that many aviculturists indulge in and am not a little embarrassed to find that I am guilty of lowering my own standards. This pair of birds came from the collection of the late Mrs. N. Howard and had been housed together and had formed a strong pair bond. They were separated immediately with the intention of breeding with specimens of their own kind. I have been unable to obtain other panamensis and the aestiva attacked four assumed females in the past three years. The fe¬ male panamensis has laid eggs each year and despite separation, out of sight of each other, the two birds have always recognised one another’s calls, despite the cacophony of Amazona sounds. The male was at some time a talking pet and is quite the most savage creature on the property, far worse that the three Dobermanns! Indeed I have considered flying the bird at such quarry as the pony riders who des¬ troy the verges in this part of the world but since the bird so loathes me, it would be imprudent of me to give it free-flying advantage. I relented this year very late in the spring and the birds rejoiced in each other’s company, mated, nested, laid four eggs, incubated and hatched the two fertile eggs and reared them. Hatching was 28 days after the first night of incubation (which began after the second egg was laid). The first youngster left the nest at 59 days but returned at night. Three days later the second bird left the nest and neither young returned. The female laid again whilst the young were in the nest. Six eggs were laid but only one survived; it was ovate and measured 36 mm x 29 mm. 148 D.T. SPILSBURY - BREEDING NOTES One of the pairs of A. a. salvini nested and laid three eggs but I was not able to determine length of incubation or indeed see the young until eight days after hatching. This was due to the female’s extreme caution on leav¬ ing the box and rapid return to it if I attempted to examine the nest. Hatching could be ascertained by the very vociferous young. The young of the three pairs of Amazona that hatched were all very vociferous soon after birth, being both nidicolous and psilopaedic. It is interesting that all chicks soon after birth could be heard clearly from within nine metres of the nest; also that the young called in unison. I would have thought that the young calling in the wild would have created enormous problems for their survival from predators. This nestling calling lasts some fourteen days after which the young remain fairly quiet within the nest, unless disturbed. The pair reared until about twenty days when it became apparent that they were being fickle in their food selection for the young. Over the next five days they stopped feeding soaked Purina dog chow, brown bread soaked with milk and a nectar mixture, fruit and the soaked seed and beans. The adults always had a preference for dry peanuts and despite soaked peanuts being available, they carried the dry peanuts to their shallow drinker, hulled them and chewed them together with water into a rough paste which they fed to the young for two days. On the twenty-fifth day no food was taken and in the evening the three young were removed for handrearing. Having handreared parrakeets of the genus Neophema from a few days old, Amazona are simply reared providing one is prepared for the disci¬ plines of the task. The young were removed to a room heated to 90°F and housed in a box from which direct light was excluded. Absorbent paper was the floor covering and this was changed after each feed. I favour a modified tea¬ spoon rather than a syringe but did use the latter when time was short. We all borrow from the successful experience of earlier and contem¬ porary aviculturists and I would like to pay tribute here to the Rev. Ram¬ on Noegel and John Stoodley who, working respectively with Amazona and Pionus have achieved standards we must all aim for and it is comfort¬ ing to be able to consult their writings and, in John Stoodley’s case, to be able to telephone. Thus the dietary needs of the handreared young were based on the diets used by Noegel and Stoodley and listed as follows (these ingredients are blended to a rough powder to which hot water is added): D.T. SPILSBURY - BREEDING NOTES 149 1 part Farex 1 part soya flour 1 part milled wheat germ 1 part hulled sunflower kernels 1 part hulled peanuts 1 part hulled mixed soaked beans and peas Mashed banana and stewed apple, sweetened with a little honey, and grated cuttle fish ‘bone’ were added to each meal. A vitamin and trace element compound was given once a day and twice a week a pinch of grit was added. I did not stick to a rigid formula and added Finely-chopped spinach beet and dandelion leaves, a nectar mixture and soaked Purina dog chow and various pulped summer fruits. It is most important to feed the mixture warmed to an acceptable level to suit the young parrots for they will not accept cold food. I found that four feeds a day (8 am, 1 pm, 6 pm and midnight)at this age prevented fresh food from being added to a large resi¬ due from an earlier feeding within the crop. The salvini young progressed well; they resisted feeding from 50 days after hatching and were seen peering out of their box at 56 days. At 65 days the young climbed out of their ‘nest’ and were placed in a cage where they perched straight away. Flight was first observed two days later and the examination of soaked seed began at once. At 70 days three meals were fed and at 80 the birds were fed morning and night. A ‘tutor’ at some stage after 65 days would, I feel, have cut the weaning period. However, I am pleased with their progress although they are slightly behind the development of the hybrid young, due, I feel, to the period of parental neglect. The young are smaller than their parents but differ in appearance slightly. The young leave the nest with black striations on the upper man¬ dible which, like the lower mandible, is a whitish-yellow. The lilac blue of the crown and occiput is much paler and the iris darker than in the adults. In mid-May the female of a pair of A. viridigenalis laid a single egg which had been broken within the nest before the month was out. The female laid again on 6th June, began incubation on 9th June and the single egg hatched on 2nd July. The egg was unusual in that it was a long oval in profile and quite different in shape to the earlier egg and all other eggs laid by related species. Parental care of the young bird was left to the female and, unlike the other breeding males, the male viridigenalis did not feed the female nor 150 D.T. SPILSBURY - BREEDING NOTES roost within the box at night. The female fed only soaked mixed seed and began *to neglect the bird for long periods. On 2nd August the young bird was removed from the nest when blood was discovered on it and within the nest. The bird was very cold, clammy to the touch and almost white in colour. Closer examination revealed that the bird was stunted for its age (no feather sheaves on the wings at 32 days) was bleeding from the mouth and had extensive bruising on both sides of the lower neck. The growth development was curiously one-sided. The left tibia was shorter than the right, and the whole left foot was swollen badly, giving the effect of ves¬ tigial toe development. The crop contained four large pieces of soaked peanut (presumed). The first task was to bring heat and sustenance to the bird. We fed it by a dropper for it could not raise its head to take from a spoon, and gave a very liquid and honey-sweetened mixture every two hours. This in itself caused worry for the bleeding began each time we fed. The following morning the bird was discovered in its small padded nest well covered in blood but the eyes were open and its body colour had returned to the normal salmon pink. After three days the bleeding had stopped and food was being taken from the spoon in the normal way. At this point we became worried about the large particles which had not cleared the crop. Attempts at tube clearance failed and I was not prepared to operate on the crop in order to remove the solid matter as I felt that the bird could not accept further stress. At 38 days the solid pieces had dispersed and the feeding became as for the salvini. At 46 days the feather sheaves were at last obvious and the one-sided look was no longer apparent. At 60 days the bird climbed out of its box, a very small replica of the adult. The collection of Amazona species here does not contain any that is particularly endangered as yet but in this world of man’s dominance the need to change and exploit natural habitats will result in the reduction of common and rare species alike. Aviculturists, whether private amateurs or professionals in zoological collections, have a duty to preserve wildlife through captive breeding and the techniques of successful breeding and rearing should be recorded for others and improved upon. With Amazona breeding in mind, particularly the endangered species, improved tech¬ niques will make it possible to increase the number of young reared each year by the removal of first clutches for artificial incubation and rearing, thus allowing a second fertile clutch. Our small successes this year, within what is quite a large, specialised D.T. SPILSBURY - BREEDING NOTES 151 by modem standards, must be improved upon and I aim to establish six breeding pairs of each species. There is no useful object served in just keeping birds and as many of the serious zoos and bird gardens are now attempting to keep fewer species but in larger numbers of pairs and groups, so must the private aviculturist become more responsible. We must stop squandering the lives of the thousands of exotic birds that pass through our hands. I am a firm believer in the conservation of a species within its natural habitat and no joy compares with the sight and sound of a group of Amazona exploiting their natural world. However, in the twenty or so years that I have been interested in the genus, and despite the umbrella of protection held by the international conservation bodies, the species of Amazona are becoming rarer, one after the other, and in real terms very little is being done to reverse this trend. I feel very strongly that the greatest threat to the continued survival of endangered Amazona species is not the violent acts of nature, vanishing natural habitat or the shooting and trapping by illegal methods, but rather the uncompromising attitude by conservation bodies and, in partic¬ ular, their controlling experts against captive breeding. Do we have to wait until every species numbers less than one hundred, like Amazona vittata whilst under the ‘protection’ of the U.S.A., before desperate measures include aviculture? Not all genera can be helped by captivity, but the genus Amazona does breed in confinement and I am convinced that no species within the genus would fail to respond to captive conservation. But it is important that such a programme of captive breeding is attempted with young taken from wild nests and handreared, and not with trapped adult birds. It is improbable, of course, that captive-reared young could be estab¬ lished back in the wild unless fertile eggs or young could be deposited in wild nests. But as I see it, the choice is between the aviary or the museum. I am becoming a militant aviculturist but why not? I have a duty, like everyone else who cares to see that the other living things on earth survive and prosper under the ever increasing influence of civilised man. 152 BREEDING STELLA’S LORIKEET Charmosyna papou goliathina By Dr. W.D. Russell (Bryanston, South Africa) Two pairs of this species were imported from Belgium during June, 1978. The birds arrived in excellent condition and were soon acclimatised to their South African conditions. They were kept indoors for three months because they had arrived in our mid-winter. During the spring of 1978 the pairs were placed outdoors in separate aviaries measuring 6 ft high x 12 ft long x 3 ft wide. Two nest boxes were supplied, one a wooden “grandfather clock” type box, 18 ins high x 9 ins square, and a natural log nest of similar measurements. The pairs settled down in the aviary fairly quickly, but were never seen to enter the nests supplied. The diet consisted of a nectar made from diluted commercial honey (non-purified), Complan (a milk substitute powder) and condensed milk. Apple was fed, although very little was taken. The birds did not seem over- fond of any fruit although various fruits were tried. A baby cereal mixed with the nectar was also supplied and the birds ate very little of this more solid food. A vitamin and mineral mixture was added to the nectar twice weekly. During March 1979, when I was overseas in USA, I had the misfortune to loose one cock and one hen from the two pairs from a severe bacterial enteritis. On my return, I tried to pair the remaining two birds. Unfor¬ tunately the cock persecuted the hen unmercifully and she had to be re¬ moved. She later died and I was unable to diagnose the cause despite all the various laboratory tests performed. During May 1980, on a visit to England, I had the fortune to purchase a hen. This hen, once she had been through quarantine and had settled down in an outdoor aviary, was introduced to the cock. The pair appeared to take to one another from first sight and the cock was very attentive to her. During the spring of 1980, the “grandfather” box was removed and a natural log nest, placed in a semi-horizontal position, was introduced. During October 1980, the birds were seen to enter the nest and spend long periods of the day together in the nest and the first chick hatched on 2nd December, 1980. There was tremendous excitement in the aviary that day and the cock spent most of the day flying restlessly up and down, calling and showing aggression every time anyone approached the aviary. Dr. W.D. RUSSELL - STELLA’S LORIKEET 153 This led me to believe that the eggs had hatched so the nest was checked when the opportunity presented itself. A day later the second egg hatched. The chicks were covered in grey down and appeared very strong. The chicks were reared exclusively on the nectar for the first 14 days and only during the third week was apple and a little baby cereal taken. At this stage pin feathers appeared on the chicks. The chicks grew rapidly and as they grew so more fruit and baby cereal was taken. Eventually, on 20th January, 1981, the first chick left the nest followed two days later by the second. The chicks’ plumage resembled that of the adults and they were virtually the same size as adults. The only difference noted between chicks and adults at first glance was the dark eye and dark beaks. The chicks flew strongly from the first day and for the first night slept in the nest with the parents. Thereafter they slept on the perch and were never seen to enter the nest after this time. The chicks are two cocks and are especially fond of apple and cereal, which the parents do not seem all that partial to. At the moment, the parents do not seem to be all that interested in the nest and do not look as though they are going to lay again this season. 154 BREEDING THE KNYSNA x LIVINGSTONE’S LOURIE Tauraco c. corythaix x T.c. livings tonii By Dr. W.D. Russell (Bryanston, South Africa) Initially a pair of surgically sexed Livingstone’s Louries were housed in a large planted aviary measuring 20 ft x 10 ft x 8 ft high. The pair were ex¬ tremely incompatible and the female always avoided the male’s attentions, even attacking him on occasions. Later in the summer of 1980 a Knysna Lourie male was introduced to the hen and she settled down and accepted her new mate immediately. The hen built a nest in a small wicker dog basket using small twigs and finally lining the nest with small branches of a fir tree, which was planted in the aviary. Three eggs were laid and incubation started immediately after the first egg was laid. The male and female alternated in the incuba¬ tion process which lasted 23 days. Only one chick hatched and the other two eggs were later found to contain dead chicks. The chick grew extremely rapidly and was fed initially on sweetened baby cereal and fruit (grapes, paw-paw and apple). Later, soaked sultanas, bananas and strawberries were fed, with the parents then feeding soaked dog biscuits which were refused when the chick hatched. During the third week the chick was feathering up very rapidly and was extremely aggres¬ sive to my examination of the nest. After 32 days the chick left the nest and flew quite strongly although it never wandered very far from the nest but spent most of the day sitting perched on the side of the nest calling for food. This breeding was extremely rewarding due to the tameness of the parents who allowed me to inspect the nest regularly and were never really concerned when one entered the aviary. Once again, the compatibility of the pair proved just how necessary this is to successful breeding. 155 UNUSUAL NEST SITE CONSTRUCTION BY CAPTIVE BUDGERIGARS By ANNE B. CLARK, PATRICIA C. ARROWOOD and SHERRY STEMBERGER (University of California, Davis, USA) In two flocks of captive Budgerigars Melopsittacus undulatus housed outside year round, females in breeding condition, as evidenced by cere colour and some copulatory behaviour, not only excavated long tunnels in two by four inch vertical wooden cage supports, but also dug holes in the ground. This is' remarkable for several reasons. Budgerigars in their natural breeding habitat in Australia utilize holes in various species of Eucalyptus and Acacia as nest sites. Usually the nest holes are in dead, or partly dead, but still standing trees (Wyndham, 1978); occasionally they are in fallen trees or toppled stumps. Budgerigars have also been reported to nest among the roots of the Mallee shrub (Bennett, 1961). In captivity, the “domestic” Budgerigar readily uses nest boxes of varying dimensions. The holes used by wild Budgerigars are either excavated by other animals or are naturally occurring, as when a branch has broken off and a knot hole rotted out (Wyndham, 1978). They are not reported to exca¬ vate their own holes as do several other species of the family Psittacidae (see table 1). Nor do they in captivity excavate their own tunnels and nest cavities in logs as do, for instance, the species Brotogeris of South Amer¬ ica (Arrowood, personal observation; Hardy, 1963; Power, 1967). Breeders report that Budgerigars do not extensively chew the inside of wooden nest boxes or cups therein, though they often chew around the entrance hole. Our two flocks of Budgerigars are housed in adjacent large 10 by 20 foot outdoor cages. Both cages have natural earth floors in which a variety of grasses grow seasonally. One flock of 1 1 birds includes five experienced breeding females and six experienced males, all of which raised one to three clutches between May and October 1979. The second flock of 16 birds consists of 10 female and six male offspring from the 1979 clutches of the experienced flock. Nest boxes were removed from the experienced flock in October 1979. The young flock had no nest boxes since they were removed from the parental flock (and boxes) four to six weeks after fledging. We observed courtship behaviour among members of the young flock throughout November, December 1979 and January 1980. During this 156 CLARK, ARROWOOD & STEMBERGER - BUDGERIGAR NEST SITES interval they formed, broke and reformed pair associations. The females’ ceres darkened over this period and took on the “scaly” appearance characteristic of breeding birds. The experienced flock showed a post¬ nesting decline (subsequent to October 1979) in active courtship behavi¬ our and females’ ceres paled through December 1979. They also then resumed active courtship and ceres darkened in February 1980. In January 1980, young females, two in particular, began chewing a cavity in an old but unrotted wooden two by four inch horizontal beam of their cage. They managed to excavate a long (16-18 inch) tunnel into which they could totally disappear. They gnawed the wood with their beaks and sometimes backed out of the cavity entrance to drop chips. Subsequently, they began cavities in two more places in the two by four inch beams. No males were observed excavating although they often sat nearby while a female associate chewed. The same group of females worked all the sites. These females had not formed permanent pair associ¬ ations with males although their ceres were quite brown. We then observed females in the experienced flock - who had similarly been chewing and making tunnel-holes in cardboard covering part of a roosting box - investigating depressions around the edges of a large plastic rubbish bin that was turned upside down on the earth floor of the cage. (Food was placed on top of such a can in each cage to deter mice.) They used their bills to clear larger holes under the edge and were observed daily digging holes through which they could force their bodies under the can. The digging techniques entailed pulling dirt toward them with their beaks in a scraping motion while sitting with heads toward the rim and breasts pressed onto the ground. Several scrapes with the beak were then followed by backward kicking/scratching motions of the feet to clear the dirt from under them. As the bird scratched with one foot, it held the wing on that side loosely out and leaned away from the foot used. It would then resume scraping (and lifting) dirt out of the furthest inward extension of the hole. Birds successfully made entrances to the space under the can. After the can was moved so the birds could not get under without making new holes, two females were observed eyeing small depressions in the dirt and then scraping these out with their bills, apparently attempt¬ ing to make burrows directly into the ground. Soon after this behaviour was noted in the experienced flock, females in the young flock began burrowing in the same manner. Although none succeeded in making a nest size chamber directly into the ground, one experienced female burrowed under the can and, in a CLARK, ARROWOOD & STEMBERGER - BUDGERIGAR NEST SITES 157 slight depression underneath, laid two eggs. Her mate never entered but stayed outside in the vicinity of the can, either perched on top, on a nearby branch, or right on the ground. In the young flock, one female in particular twice constructed long (approximately 18 inch) tunnels under a small metal can right side up on the earth. These tunnels were just large enough to admit her as she squir¬ med through. She never made a cup-like depression. However, as we moved the can when she had worked on it only two days, it is possible she would have. This female had not formed a clear pair bond with a male at the time but did so soon after. Another young female successfully completed and regularly used two entrances to the upside, down can, spending one to four minutes at a time underneath. She was then courted by a young male who already had a female associate. She reciprocated. He finally switched his courting and attention completely to her and would walk back and forth, fluff and preen in front of, and peer into the entrances just as males do to nest box entrances. For reasons pertaining to other aspects of our study, nest boxes were first provided in the 1980 breeding season in March. Within minutes of boxes being given to the experienced flock, females were fighting over them. Only the female who had laid under the can continued to show some interest in that site. She did not begin to defend a nest box and often sat on the can or peered through a tiny hole in the top. This may be due to her having laid there, although the eggs were removed. The young female in the inexperienced flock also did not desert her nest site when nest boxes were provided. She laid and incubated an infer¬ tile clutch under the can. The young male who had been courting her switched his attentions to a female with a nest box. In spite of nest boxes being available and no males attending her, she laid a second infertile clutch under the can. We then transferred her to another flock. Psittacines in general use enclosed nests. Most Australian psittacines use natural cavities in Eucalyptus. In Table 1 we summarize data for the subfamily Psittacinae on those species known to excavate their own nests, nest in logs lying on the ground or actually nest in cavities in the ground. Eleven species are known (or suspected) to excavate their own nests, which may be in the ground, in termite nests, in tussocks, or in trees. Seven species are known to nest in the ground, although probably only four of these do so regularly (Antipodes Green Parakeet, Red-fronted Parakeet, Ground Parrot, Night Parrot). Harrison (1973) reported one instance of a Sulphur-crested Cockatoo Cacatua galerita excavating a cavity in the earth floor of an aviary. 158 CLARK, ARROWOOD & STEMBERGER - BUDGERIGAR NEST SITES TABLE 1 SPECIES OF THE SUBFAMILY PSITTA CINAE KNOWN OR SUSPECTED TO EXCAVATE ALL OR PART OF THEIR NEST CAVITIES, TO NEST IN LOGS ON THE GROUND, OR TO NEST IN THE GROUND Species Excavated Log on Ground In Ground Opopsitta diophthalma Double-eyed Fig Parrot + Geoffroyus geoffroyi Red-cheeked Parrot + Geoffroyus simplex Blue-collared Parrot + Alisterus scapularis Australian King Parrot + * Aprosmictus erythropterus Red-winged Parrot + * Polytelis anthopeplus Regent Parrot + * Platycercus eximus Eastern Rosella + + Psephotus chrysopterygius Golden-shouldered Parrot + ** Psephotus pulcherrimus Paradise Parrot + ** + Cyanoramphus unicolor Antipodes Green Parakeet + + Cyanoramphus novaezelandiae Red-fronted Parakeet + + Neophema chrysostom a Blue- winged Parrot + Neophema pulchella Turquoise Parrot CLARK, ARROWOOD & STEMBERGER - BUDGERIGAR NEST SITES 159 Melopsittacus undulatus Budgerigar + + b, m Pezoporus wallicus Ground Parrot + + *** Geopsittacus occidentalis Night Parrot + + *** OTHER PARROTS Cacatua galerita Sulphur-crested Cockatoo + a + a, t KEY: + All data from Forshaw 1973, with the exception of: a, Harrison 1973 b, Bennett 1961 * Nests are deep in trunks of trees, often near ground level, indicating excavation. ** Nests are in termite mounds *** Nests are in tussocks t cavity in aviary floor m cavity among roots of Mallee shrub As pointed out earlier, Budgerigars are not reported either to excavate their own holes or ever to dig their own holes in the ground. Presumably, ground nests would be risky due to snake, lizard or small mammal preda¬ tion. Our observations and the data summarised in Table 1 suggest that Australian psittacines may well be capable of nest burrow construction when normal nest sites are unavailable. At least, behaviour patterns suffi¬ cient to do so exist in Budgerigars. That these small birds are not reported constructing ground nests in the wild may be due to a combination of factors, including availability of nest holes, concentration of ground pred¬ ators, soils harder and drier than the soft moist earth in our cages or a lack of observers in the right place at the right time. 160 CLARK, ARROWOOD & STEMBERGER - BUDGERIGAR NEST SITES ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The study of Budgerigar behaviour was supported by an O.P.E.R. Grant from the Institute of Ecology, University of California, Davis, to A.B. Clark and J. A. Stamps. P.C. Arrowood received support from an Earle C. Anthony Fellowship in Ecology from the University of California, Davis, and S. Stemberger from a research assistant- ship from San Diego University, Joint Doctoral Program. REFERENCES Bennett, R. B. 1961. Care and Breeding of Budgerigars, Canaries and Foreign Fin¬ ches, New York, Arco Publishing Co. Inc. Forshaw, J. M. 1973. Parrots of the World. Melbourne, Lansdowne Press. Hardy, J.W. 1963. Epigamic and reproductive behaviour of the Orange-fronted Parakeet. Condor 65, 169-199. Harrison, C.J.O. 1973. Nest-building behaviour of Quaker Parrots Myiopsitta mon¬ achal. Ibis 115, 124-128. Power, D.M. 1967. Epigamic and reproductive behaviour of Orange-chinned Para¬ keets in captivity. Condor. 69, 28-41. Wyndham, Edmund. 1978. Ecology of the Budgerygah Melopsittacus undulatus (Shaw) ( Psittaciformes : Platycercidae) Ph. D. thesis. University of New England, Armidale, Australia. 161 PLANTS AND AVICULTURE By GEOFFREY KENYON (Wokingham, Berkshire) When our Editor asked me to write an article for the Magazine on plants for aviaries, I decided to tackle the subject in two sections. Firstly broad principles, and secondly a suggested list of suitable plant material. My profession as a nurseryman and landscape gardener no doubt influ¬ ences my approach to the subject. In garden design I have always striven to create a mood and achieve a harmonious blending with the surroundings. I have become over the years ever more convinced that this harmony can only be achieved by the creation of “plant associations”, that is, plants adapted by nature to particular environments. It is with this in mind that I suggest aviculturists take a really critical look at birds and plants together to form a harmonious ecosystem. The use of plants in enclosures and aviaries fulfills several purposes. Amongst these are to provide shelter from the elements, to give a sense of privacy and suitable nesting sites, and to enhance the appearance of the structure. Another invaluable benefit conferred by plants is that they help to prevent the build-up of chemicals by assisting in the breakdown and ab¬ sorption of the droppings. Wire mesh and framework are rarely attractive and are always an unnat¬ ural intrusion so they are all the better for being disguised as much as poss¬ ible and the necessarily hard perimeters of the enclosure made to look less determinate. Bitumen painting of netting is trebly important; from an aesthetic point of view, from the practical purposes of prolonging its life in these days of high costs, and also because some plants react adversely to drips from galvanised materials. Plants inside aviaries must be sufficiently tough or sufficiently vigorous in growth to withstand damage caused by the birds. In some cases, especi¬ ally if the aviary is heavily stocked, regular replacement is necessary. Many small insect-eating birds are beneficial to plants, keeping them free of insect predators - in fact, a horticultural research station with a large conservatory has recently installed Zosterops with this end in view, though I have seen damage done by these birds to young shoots and won¬ der whether they will find this natural control system entirely satisfactory. At the other extreme we have the parrot family whose members in general are so destructive that any plants must be outside the aviary. In between these two types we may achieve a balance through the use of vigorous resistant plants, avoidance of overstocking and a programme of planned 162 GEOFFREY KENYON - PLANTS AND AVICULTURE replacement. I have already mentioned the durability of bitumen-treated netting and it should be borne in mind that this covering only adheres satisfactorily to “weathered” netting. Those who do not wish to wait for this to occur naturally can obtain a mordant solution to provide an etched surface which will give the prospect of immediate painting coupled with proper adhesion. Use only first grade bitumen products and ensure that you are employing the correct formulation for the purpose in hand. We naturally wish our structure to blend in with its surroundings and so much of the planting must be on the outside. Climbing plants on pillars or on pergolas disguise the hard outline of the aviary. A pergola on the south side of a structure should be planted with deciduous plants. These will provide shade in summer and at the same time will allow the penetration of winter sunshine. When designing a pergola, remember the incidence of both summer and winter sunshine and try to obscure the latter as little as possible. Sufficiently wide spacing of the crossbars helps here whilst creating a dappled shade in summer. The use of climbers which can be hard pruned to confine them closely to the supports assists here. Wisteria and ornamental vines have lush summer growth and may be rigorously “spur pruned” in autumn with benefit to their display as well as to their primary purpose. It must always be remembered that the penetration of winter sunshine is of the utmost importance. An aviary that is sunless and dank in winter by reason of poor planting would be infinitely better without any plants at all. It cannot be too strongly stressed that even in summer the sunshine should be able to penetrate the aviary and that the planting should allow this while still giving suitable areas of shade which, of course, vary due to the movement of the sun. Evergreen climbers must be most carefully used therefore and are better confined to the northern sides of the structure. I have always felt that planting creates an atmosphere and the use of the right plant for the habitat we wish to present greatly adds to the pleasure which plants give. I would always advise the use of plants which are naturally found in a similar environment to the birds’ natural home. I think it is acceptable to mix plants emanating from different countries provided that they inhabit similar environments. Nothing, however, strikes such a discordant note as, say, the employment of plants naturally found in dry areas in an attempt to embellish a collection of waterbirds. Always carefully plan before deciding which plants to use - plants occurring later¬ ally where shore-frequenting birds are displayed, heathy scrubby vegeta¬ tion for those dwelling in the uplands and the general run of shrubs for GEOFFREY KENYON - PLANTS AND AVICULTURE 163 those found in woods and their margins. A pleasant conceit would be to use only those actual plants which the species would find in its natural home. In all planting, remember the basic rules of scale, boldness of grouping, contrasting foliage, form and colour. Before planting there must be careful preparation, particularly when the planting is inside the enclosure. Drainage must be adequate, some¬ times more than adequate from the plants’ point of view. Nothing is so conducive to disease as a sour, waterlogged soil. A wide-spreading fibrous root system enables the plants to exploit the area and keep the soil sweet by assisting in the breakdown of excrement , using the products for growth. An open, permeable soil is of the first importance. Any moisture-loving plants on pool margins should be planted in an open vegetable soil - it is unlikely that amelioration of the existing soil will be sufficient here and fresh suitable compost must be imported. Any soil in the aviary must be fully exploited by a thrusting and vigorous root sys¬ tem. Where parasites are a problem and necessitate the use of regular sanita¬ tion, plants must be confined in some way. They may be planted in beds covered with netting to prevent the birds having access to the soil or the bed may be surfaced with a layer of graded stones through which oocysts will be washed out of the reach of questing beaks. The rest of the aviary floor can be either of similar stones, or concrete or turf which can be re¬ placed with fresh at regular intervals. This brings us to the most important plant of all - grass. A vigorous grass sward is of inestimable benefit in all cases. In small enclosures and where there is concern about parasites, it can be covered with wire netting raised above the earth by an inch or so - do not forget to treat the netting with bitumen first, both for economy and also because many grasses are inhibited by the drips from zinc. Use tanalised, or similarly treated timber and not creosote or other cresol-based preservatives. In large enclosures there must be provision for cutting, always design the areas of grass for easy manipulation of the machine employed and set any adjacent paving below the level of the sward. In extensive enclosures, fruiting trees provide a welcome bonus in season. To summarise, successful planting must create a mood. Apart from the plants being able to thrive in the position required, they must be aestheti¬ cally right for the situation. You can only create a pleasing picture by correct choice of plants to show off the bird. Nothing would look more out of place than, for example, birds of the seashore amongst hybrid tea 164 GEOFFREY KENYON - PLANTS AND AVICULTURE roses. Avoid, like the plague, any highly developed garden plants, except outside the enclosures. Always plant inside the aviaries with hygiene in mind. Dense, shrubby ground cover is difficult to keep vermin-free inside the aviaries and if used outside, gives ideal mouse cover. Finally, study plant associations as they occur in nature and model all your internal landscaping accordingly. The planting outside must, of course, harmonise with that inside and also provide a pleasing transition from the garden proper. SHOR T LIST OF SUGGESTED PLANTS FOR A VI ARIES A list of plants must only be a suggestion to intending planters, as there is an infinity of sorts to choose from. The following suggestions are divided into groups suitable for enclosures of modest dimensions; no recommendations of trees or of plants for glass¬ house type aviaries have been made in order to keep the article to manage¬ able proportions. Evergreen Shrubs Aucuba may be either plain leaved or spotted but all are especially val¬ uable as they grow in full sun to dense shade. Bamboos, those woody grasses, do well in enclosures as they appreciate the shelter provided by the enclosure. They are available in a wide range of heights. Berberis in general dislike waterlogged soil and some people may find their prickles unacceptable but they provide good shelter and ideal nesting sites. Ceanothus, of the stiffergrowing sorts such as thyrsiflorus , provide good crotches for nesting and a welcome display of blue flowers. The laxer growing sorts may be tied to the perimeter walls or to pillars. When we consider the genus Cotoneaster we have many suitable shrubs from dwarfs to small trees and a walk round a good botanic garden and a selection of those which particularly appeal will be rewarding. The semi¬ evergreen C. simonsii tolerates clipping well and is one of the best for smaller enclosures. It is also freely available and low-priced. Cytisus are somewhat short-lived but are quick-growing. They should be clipped over immediately the flowers fade to maintain compactness. Clipping cannot, of course, be done if they are being used for nesting. Eleagnus ebbingei is a handsome grey-green and silver shrub which should be more planted. It seems to have been overlooked in favour of GEOFFREY KENYON - PLANTS AND AVICULTURE 165 its newly introduced variegated form and its gold-painted relative E. pun- gens maculata. All these provide dense shelter and protected nest sites. Escallonias quickly give a wealth of pink to red blossoms over glossy foliage. They respond kindly to pruning. Hebes are what used to be called shrubby veronicas. We now have a range of species and cultivars too numerous to list, from real dwarfs to good sized shrubs. Consult a good list and avoid the tender sorts unless you live in a warm area or near the sea. Ilex, in its free-growing green forms such as I. pyramidalis , are not so prickly as the common holly and although no sort is really fast growing, they are indispensable where dense growth and glossy foliage are essential. The genus Ligustrum contains the ubiquitous privet of suburbia, a shrub that must not be despised for aviary use. A more ornamental species is L japonicum, a free-growing shrub with glossy leaves and white flowers. Lonicera provides an ideal small shrub in L. nitida. This is compact, trims well and establishes quickly. L. pileata is horizontally branched and provides excellent ground shelter. Mahonias again provide good shelter for ground-dwelling birds and the common M. aquifolium is cheap enough when extensive planting is necess¬ ary. They thrive in sun or shade. Rhododendrons need somewhat special conditions but R. ponticum, which has made itself at home over large tracts of our heathlands, is a provider of superb shelter. It transplants at virtually any size, provided you have the strength. It needs an acid soil. Although conifers can scarcely be called shrubs, they are, in their young state, excellent for our ouroose : the genera Thuya, Chamaecyparis, Cup- ressus and Cupresso-cy pans first spring to mind and many of these may be clipped to control over-enthusiastic growth. Scots Pine and Douglas Fir may also be restricted to a more domestic size by suitable use of the seca¬ teurs and provide a welcome variation of foliage type. Deciduous Shrubs These are especially to be considered where the penetration of winter sunshine takes precedence over shelter. The number of sorts available is legion as by far the greatest number which are hardy in our climate lose their leaves in winter. Amelanchier has masses of creamy flowers and autumn colour . Buddleias provide summer colour, are rapid growing and may be hard- pruned annually. 166 GEOFFREY KENYON - PLANTS AND AVICULTURE Caryopteris is a good blue flowered dwarf shrub which may also be pruned hard each year. Chaenomeles are the well-known “japonicas” and either spreading or upright growers may be chosen. The dogwoods, Cornus alba and stolonifera and their varieties, are quick to establish and submit with good grace to hard pruning. Crataegus includes our native hawthorn and may be trained as shrubs or small trees according to our needs. They give good nesting cover and, if there is room for them to develop, a welcome display of bloom. Eleagnus commutata, the “Silver Berry”, is a compact, intensely silver shrub with small fragrant flowers. Forsythias grow well, flower well and clip well and if you find the vivid gold too harsh, the variety ‘primulina! should be planted. The shrubby honeysuckle Lonicera purpusii requires a fair amount of room but has fragrant flowers in winter. In the genus Philadelphus we have many to choose from. Some are vigorous, upward thrusting growers whilst others are of modest proportions. They provide masses of flowers and are mostly delightfully fragrant. A look through a comprehensive catalogue is a necessity here but bear in mind the sorts “Belle Etoile”, “Burkwoodii” and “Innocence”. Shrubby potentillas give good ground cover, have a long flowering period and are easy to grow. Ribes, the currants, are always useful, the red-flowering spring sorts being most attractive although they have a somewhat pungent smell. Species roses contain many sorts of quiet charm and these, along with some of the modern hybrid shrub roses, will give variety. The rugosa types are dense growers and the single sorts bear opulent tomato-red hips in season. Sambucus canadensis maxima is a superb foliage plant - prune hard in spring to obtain the largest leaves. Our own native elder is available with plain or variegated leaves and with either black or yellowish berries. The thread-leaved form S. nigra heterophylla is of modest growth. S. racem- osus has scarlet berries. Spiraeas are of quick growth, easy to control and useful in situations where compactness must be maintained. Where there is room Viburnum opulus is especially good. This is found either red or yellow berried as well as in its sterile form, the much loved Snowball tree. The fruits are not palatable to birds until late in the season. Weigelias must bring this short list to a close. They are shrubs of GEOFFREY KENYON - PLANTS AND AVICULTURE 167 modest growth and easy to establish. Climbing Shrubs These are especially valuable as they clothe walls and pillars giving shelter without trespassing on flying space. The vigorous species of Clematis quickly clothe their supports, submit to clipping with cheerful grace and we need look no further than C. mon- tana in pink or white, C orientalis with its yellow orange-peel flowers or the golden lanterns of C. tangutica. Ivies come in all sizes and a multitude of leaf shapes and colours. They are cheerful evergreen plants for almost any situation. The common hop and its less vigorous golden form is ideal where quick cover is required. Honeysuckles again are most valuable climbers. The species L. capri- folium, L. periclymenum and japonica do well in full or partial shade. The scentless, scarlet types prefer a warmer position as does the sweetly fragrant Lonicera etrusca. Polygonum baldschuanicum is of vigorous rampant growth which will climb into large trees or cover' unsightly buildings but may be pruned hard annually to control its size. Many species roses are of climbing or lax growth and will always be admired. There are also single flowered sorts in the garden varieties such as Frances E. Lester which give a delightful display. Solanum crispum, which should be obtained in the “Glasnevin” form, provides quick cover. The vines contain many sorts which are over vigorous but the grape vine is always controllable and the variety Brant is excellent. Wisterias are lovely but very vigorous and their requirement of summer pruning renders them undesirable when in breeding aviaries. There are many suitable plants to clothe the floor of aviaries but choose those with good foliage. A critical look at plants when not in flower pays dividends. Plants to use in aviaries containing shore-dwelling birds The shrubs to be found in such an environment are frequently grey¬ leaved, glossy-leaved or narrow-leaved to enable them to cope with diffi¬ cult conditions. Eleagnus, Senecio, Halimium, lavenders, rosemary, San- tolina, buckthorns, tamarisks, escallonias the the larger leaved hebes will plete the picture. There have been some most valuable grasses raised in Germany and these are now becoming available from specialist nurseries. 168 GEOFFREY KENYON - PLANTS AND AVICULTURE In conclusion, these lists are necessarily very brief and many good and suitable plants are omitted but you will, I hope, be given ideas when con¬ sidering what to plant. BIBLIOGRAPHY Hilliers’ Manual of Trees and Shrubs. David and Charles, Newton Abbot, England. 4th edition 1977. Perennial Garden Plants. G.S. Thomas. Dent, 1976. Water Gardening. Frances Perry, Country Life. The Pruning of Trees and Shrubs. W. Dalkmore, Dulau. (the two latter books are usually available secondhand) 169 MEYER'S PARROT Poicephaius rneyeri By ARTHUR FREUD (Smithtown, New York, USA) Meyer's Parrot is widely distributed through central and eastern Africa. Subspecies can be found in Uganda, Tanzania, Kenya, Malawi, Zambia, the Congo, Angola, Lesotho and South Africa. As with most of the African parrot species Poicephaius meyeri has been familiar to ornithologists since early in the 19th century. Peters lists the nominate plus as many as eight subspecies and designates 1827 as the year in which the bird was first des¬ cribed and named. A.A. Prestwich dates the discovery a year earlier and describes Dr. Bernhard Meyer, the physician who was honoured in the naming of this parrot as an individual who rendered outstanding services in the encouragement of the early study of natural history. Meyer, who lived from 1767-1836, undertook numerous expeditions for the purpose of studying plants and birds. He visited many European scholars in his travels and in return, they came to admire his outstanding bird collection. The famous German poet, Goethe, visited Meyer on at least two separate occasions. Forshaw condenses the number of subspecies to six. In general the dif¬ ferences between the subspecies are minor and take the form of a variation in intensity of colour or the area covered by a particular marking. Geogra¬ phy, of course, is also a factor. Meyer’s Parrot is also referred to by the names Meyer’s Brown Parrot, Brown Parrot and Sudan Brown Parrot. The repeated reference to brown in its name is appropriate as the head and the upper parts of the breast and back are a greyish-brown. The rump is a bright turquoise although this is not normally visible when the wings are folded. There is a bright yellow marking at the bend of the wing and also on the thighs. The feet and beak are greyish-black and the iris is reddish-orange in adults and brown in young birds. All of the subspecies with the exceptions of Pm. reichenowi and P.m. damaremis, possess a bright yellow marking on the crown which may ac¬ count for the nickname of “Goldbug” for this parrot which is commonly used in Germany. Wolfgang de Grahl comments that sex differences be¬ tween these birds could not be determined even with a ‘‘bridal couple”. He accurately reports that in recent years they have once again become commercially available. De Grahl notes their behaviour as shy and timid and goes so far as to suggest that when you are acclimatising them, you 170 ARTHUR FREUD - MEYER’S PARROT should use a type of crate cage with only one side open to provide the parrots with maximum privacy. Rutgers and Norris make reference to the wide distribution and large numbers of these birds in Africa. They point out that, although importa¬ tion has been sporadic, the species is well known in captivity and was first seen in the London Zoo as early as 1855. W.T. Greene gives a good description of the Meyer’s and, unlike many early (and a few current) authors, properly distinguishes it from the Brown -headed Parrot Poicephalus cryptoxanthus. Sydney Porter wrote with great enthusiasm for his pair of Meyer’s Parrots. Porter, who was an indefatigable traveller, had seen these birds in the wild in Africa and noted them chattering away madly as they ate and wasted the fruits of a M’sasa tree. Sometimes the tree seemed to be raining half-eaten fruits. Porter commented that parrots “ ....... are surely the most wasteful birds in creation.” When a stranger approached the tree, all chatter and other sounds would cease and nothing could be seen as the greyish-brown birds blended silently with their surroundings. Porter remarked that it is easier to get within reach of an eagle than a wild Meyer’s Parrot and yet no bird makes a tamer or more charming pet. The natives of his day would catch the parrots by locating their roosting spots and placing sticky substances on the twigs. Those parrots which were not eaten would be sold. There are a number of good descriptions of the breeding of Meyer’s Parrot to be found in the literature. Prestwich lists an early success by J.B. Rough of South Africa. The birds, which were caught wild on Mr. Rough’s farm in the Transvaal, produced quite a number of young in 1952. Another South African success was achieved by J.F. Brauckmann who describes his results in 1960. Mr. Brauckmann had kept Meyer’s for many years but had never bred them. He varied his nest boxes and other con¬ ditions and finally placed his birds in a 12 ft x 15 ft x 6 ft aviary with hollow palm tree stumps, a 10 inch by 12 inch square nest box, and a 12 inch square by 24 inch high box. Three eggs were laid and three chicks hatched with only one of the young being reared to maturity. In 1959 three more eggs were laid (from a new pair of adults) and these hatched out on the 19th and 23rd days of incubation. The middle egg did not hatch. The chicks resembled baby Budgerigars when they hatched. Both of these were reared and left the nest after nine weeks. Two more chicks resulted from a second round of four eggs and these also stayed in the nest for about nine weeks before going off on their own. ARTHUR FREUD - MEYER’S PARROT 171 Alan H. Booton Meyer’s Parrot, aged sixteen months 172 ARTHUR FREUD - MEYER’S PARROT Dr. William S. Hawkins of Sunland, California, bred his Meyer’s Parrots in 1971. His pair were purchased in 1969 and at that time were immature, newly-imported birds. Writing in the May, 1972, Dr. Hawkins describes how the parrots were kept in an indoor flight until spring and then were placed in a 4 ft wide by 23 ft long outdoor aviary. A 10 inch square by 18 inch deep nest box with about 4 inches of peat was provided. Late in the summer of 1970 the birds began to show an interest in their nest box and three eggs were laid early in September. The hen alone incubated and while all three eggs were fertile, none hatched. Dr. Hawkins speculates that the record heat in southern California that summer might have been a factor in the failure of the eggs to hatch. In 1971 the birds again showed interest in the nest box quite early in the spring. Three eggs were laid during the first week in February. In spite of a severe earthquake which struck the area on 9th February 1971, the hen did not leave the nest and two eggs hatched on 21st February and the third egg hatched two days later. The parents were devoted and attentive with the male co-operating handsomely. The young appeared similar to baby lovebirds with patches of white down. In October of the same year a second round resulted in three fertile eggs which hatched on 12th November. The parents again provided good care but, as the weather was turning cold, the three downy chicks were removed by Dr. Hawkins on 9th December and thereafter hand-reared. They were fully on their own by the first week in February. Their owner described them as smaller and duller editions of their parents. Raymond Franklin in England also bred Meyer’s Parrots in 1971. He noticed that the male had a larger beak than the female and more yellow on the crown. Of course, this might have been due to a difference in their subspecies rather than their sex. He provided a 12 ft by 3 ft by 6 ft flight with a small shelter and on 3rd April 1971 hung a small hollow log in the flight. The male fed the female but they showed no interest in the nest until Mr. Franklin filled it with peat. As quickly as he did this, the hen would throw out the material. One egg was noted on 16th May but to Mr. Franklin’s delighted surprise, two chicks were discovered on 16th June. They appeared to be about one week old and covered with down. One chick began peering out of the nest by 30th July but did not leave until 10th August. A second chick left the nest on 13th August. Mr Frank¬ lin was pleasantly astonished when still two more young appeared on 15th August making a total of four strong, healthy birds from this first clutch. Mr. H. Mekin of England described the breeding of a pair of Meyer’s Parrots in 1974. He had had his birds for several years and always believed them to be a pair. Several nest boxes were offered and the birds selected a ARTHUR FREUD - MEYER’S PARROT 173 30 inch by 12 inch square unit. After copulation in April, 1974, the hen was not seen again for six weeks. By the end of June, Mr. Mekin decided to risk looking into the nest and a large chick, with colour patterns similar to his parents was discovered. This youngster left the nest after another five weeks. Alan H. Booton of Riverside, Illinois, has had remarkable success in breeding parrots during the last few years. Perhaps it is not so remarkable as Mr. Booton has gone about his breeding endeavours in a highly organ¬ ised way and has had the expert help and advice of Ralph and Tina Small of Brookfield, Illinois. As a matter of fact, the breeding pair of Meyer’s used by Mr. Booton was loaned to him by Ralph Small. The male member of the pair appears to be Pm. transvaalensis while the female who lacks the yellow crown marking is apparently P. m. damar- ensis. As with all Meyer’s, the pair was shy and would retreat into the nest box whenever Mr. Booton entered the room. In contrast to this their five handfed babies would eat from a spoon and were so playful that they would “play dead” in Mr. Booton’s hand while lying upside down and totally relaxed. The diet he provided for the parents was 3 parts sunflower, 1 part dove mix (without corn), 1 part safflower and Vi part parakeet mix. Purina monkey chow was also included as well as a variety of fruits and greens. Brewer’s yeast was sprinkled on the moist fruits and vegetables just before they were fed and poultry vitamins added to the drinking water on a daily basis. When young were in the nest, the amount of safflower as well as sweet corn and other vegetables, was increased. The flight cage was 8 ft long by 3 ft wide by 6 ft high. Three of these cages are in a special room in Mr. Booton’s basement. Wooden partitions separate them so that the birds in one flight cannot see those in the others. The room is lit by Vitajite fluorescents which are on for 1 5 hours a day and regulated with an automatic timer and dimmer. Night lights are also provided. A 15 inch by 15 inch square nest box with a 3 inch opening was used. Damp bark and pine shavings were placed in the box and the parents chewed up the bark until it reached a finer consistency. Three clutches of three eggs each were produced during the year. In the first clutch one hatched, one chick was dead in shell and one egg was infertile. In the second clutch two hatched and one egg was infertile. In the third clutch two eggs hatched and one was dead in shell. Incubation took 24 days and the young were removed for handfeeding when they were three weeks old. The breeding pair used by Mr. Booton were well along in their teens but he estimates that this species could breed at about two years old. 174 ARTHUR FREUD - MEYER’S PARROT Ralph Small’s formula was used for handfeeding the babies and it con¬ sisted of 2 parts raw peanuts, 2 parts hulled sunflower, 3 parts Purina mon¬ key chow, 2 parts fruit mynah chow and 3 Vi parts of high protein pablum. In addition, an eighth of a teaspoon each of powdered calcium and sea salt and one teaspoon of soy milk powder were added. The material is ground as fine as possible in a blender and when you are ready to use it, warm water is added to form a thick, soupy consistency. Mr. Booton reports that the adults and young are all very quiet birds. They use an alarm-type call when startled or if they should wish to attract your attention but normally they do not just sit and make noises in the manner of the Amazons and other parrots. He kept two of the five young for himself and at the time of this writing, they are 19 months old. One has a small band of yellow on the crown and the other has just a few flecks. Thus, at least one of the offspring has inherited the absence of yellow crown found in its mother. The birds can talk and have picked up words from the pair of African Grey Parrots which share their aviary. REFERENCES BOOTON, Alan H. Personal interviews in October and November, 1980. BRAUCKMANN, J.F. “Meyer’s Parrot Breeding” Foreign Birds, March/- April 1960, 91. DeGRAHL, W. Faibiger Atlas Papapageien, Braunschweig: Horst Mueller Verlag, 1972. FORSHAW, J.M. Parrots of the World. New York, Doubleday, 1973. FRANKLIN, Raymong. “Breeding Meyer’s Parrots” Magazine of the Parrot Society, November 1972, 259-260. GREENE, W.T. Birds of the British Empire, London, The Imperial Press, 1898. HAWKINS, William S. “Meyer’s Parrot” Avicultural Bulletin, May 1972, 27-32. MEKIN, H. “Breeding of the Meyer’s Parrots” Magazine of the Parrot Society February 1974, 32. PETERS, J.L. Check List of the Birds of the World, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1937. PORTER, Sydney. “An Avicultural Miscellany” Avicultural Magazine , May 1931, 138-146. PRESTWICH, A. A. Records of Parrots Bred in Captivity, London, 1954. - - — - “I name this parrot . ”, Edenbridge, 1963. RUTGERS, A. and NORRIS, K.A. Encyclopaedia of Aviculture. London, Bland- ford Press, 1972. 175 KIWIS AT OTOROHANGA By L. GIBSON (Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada) In May 1980 I travelled to Adelaide, Australia, to attend, among other things, the Avicultural Convention. I stopped off in New Zealand on the way and visited the kiwi breeding establishment and walk-through aviary at Otorohanga, in the centre of North Island. The aviary is intended to house native birds and plants but as it had only just opened, the trees and bushes, many of which had been donated by Mrs Noeline Gibson, were still rather small. The bird collection was by no means complete but the larger, more obvious birds were represen¬ ted, such as native ducks, keas, kakarikis, native woodpigeon, Moreporks (a nocturnal hawk-owl Ninox novaeseelandiae , called the Boobook in Australia; both names are after its call), etc. The small native softbills, many of which are disappearing rapidly, were not catered for yet, with the exception of fantails Rhipidura fuliginosa. It seems that softbills are neglected the world over. The kiwi breeding pens are operated by the Otorohanga Zoological Soc¬ iety which, of course, desperately needs funds, so if any of our readers would like to help to save kiwis, and other New Zealand birds, donations would be most gratefully received at P.O. Box 222, Otorohanga, New Zea¬ land. The resident kiwi expert is Barry Rowe, who has a chemist’s shop (drug store) in the town. The new nocturnal house for the display of kiwis has reversed daylight. Two kiwis are always on display but as these birds sleep a lot, even during the night, they are rotated in the display house. The 2 o’clock shift consis¬ ted of a hen Brown or Common Kiwi Apteryx australis , weighing about 4 lbs. (1.8 kg), and a*rare hen South Island Giant Spotted Roa Apteryx haastii at 5 lb. (2.3 kg). The latter bird had recently been found in a trap and this species cannot be seen outside New Zealand. There is one very rare species, the Little Spotted Roa Apteryx oweni. Roa is the Maori name, as is kiwi, the latter being named after its rather squeaky call. The adjective “common” is, of course, only relative. The birds were fed on a mixture of chopped ox heart, cooked porridge and soya oil with added vitamins and minerals. They eat by throwing the food up into the bill with the tongue. As soon as the feeding dish was put in, both birds ran up to feed but they are rather quarrelsome and one bird had to wait its turn. When feeding, one bird (the Common, if I recall correctly), ate and then stretched its neck up fully before swallowing but 176 L. GIBSON - KIWIS AT OTOROHANGA the other bird did not do this, so it was possibly some sort of threat dis¬ play or nervous reaction. The birds had the area divided off territorially, and used well trodden paths to the food dish. Normally they feed by pro¬ bing in the soil; they did this every few inches and worked quickly to cover the area thoroughly. They feed on worms, etc., which they smell through nostrils at the tip of the bill. To aid this, the kiwi has an excep¬ tionally large olfactory bulb behind the bill. It also has rictal bristles at the base of the bill which no doubt augment its poor eyesight with an extra sense of touch. New Zealand is particularlu well supplied with earthworms, having about 190 species, so the kiwis do not have to work too hard in the humus of the forest floor - or what is left of it. The kiwis have exception¬ ally well-developed legs for running and burrowing, and they are also used for kicking- other kiwis mainly, though they will kick cats or people who disturb them. I got a hefty kick from one for disturbing its sleep. Kiwis also have excellent hearing. The Brown Kiwi breeds at three years old which puts it amongst the slowest of birds to mature. One or two, occasionally three eggs are laid about three weeks apart and they hatch at the same interval. The egg is huge, being between 400 and 500 grammes, although most are nearer the bottom of the range, and this is about 20-25% of the adult bird’s weight. It also differs from other eggs in that the yolk is about 60% of the weight of the egg, compared with about 40% for pheasants and 20% for small passerines. The eggs are incubated solely by the male for 71-75 days, at a temperature of 35.4°C. The temperature of the adult is only 38°C, which is two or three degrees lower than that of most birds. The chicks are born at an advanced stage, and live on the remains of the yolk sac for a week or two during which time they lose more than a quarter of their weight. They are kept together until they are six months old, after which time they get too quarrelsome. The staff at Otorohanga were particularly helpful and spent a lot of time showing me around and answering questions. The time spent there was not only interesting but useful, as I managed to dry out after being soaked to the skin by a thunderstorm, which caught me earlier while walking in the bush. 177 NEWS FROM CHESTER ZOO By P.J. BLOOMFIELD (Assistant Curator of Birds) Recent acquisitions to the Bird Section, imported from Sydney Zoo, were ten Australian White Ibis Threskiomis molucca, four Kookaburras Dacelo novaeguineae and four Tawny Frogmouths Podargus strigoides. The arrival of the Ibis and Tawny Frogmouths is particularly interesting as these have not been exhibited at Chester Zoo before. The Ibis arrived on 7th April from our quarantine quarters and were put into a holding area so we could observe feeding habits: when we are satisfied that they are all feeding well, the birds will be transferred to an open island on the water¬ way which runs through the Zoo. This island measures approximately 80 metres x 30 metres. It is hoped that we will be able to start a breeding colony of these birds in this accommodation. The four Kookaburras will be introduced to our existing pair and it is hoped that these birds will again produce youngsters. Further notes will follow in a future issue of the Avicultural Magazine on the Tawny Frogmouths: these are new birds to us here at Chester and we will be learning from them all the time. Another new arrival is a male Kea Nestor notabilis from Rotterdam Zoo. This bird is now on show in our Parrot House with our female Kea. The most notable hatching at Chester Zoo last year was our Blue-eyed Cockatoo. Both our pairs were sitting on one egg each, and the two were hatched and reared. We re particularly pleased with this breeding as one of the males is a bird which was bred here in 1978. We now have a group of this species totalling seven birds. At the time of writing, our two pairs are showing great interest in the nesting barrels again so we are hoping for a repeat performance. Other breedings include: Black-crowned Night Heron, White-crested Laughing Thrush, Sclater’s Crested Curassow, Common Rhea, Derbyan Parrakeet, Red-headed Laughing Thrush and Sacred Ibis. 178 NOTES FROM THE ST. LOUIS ZOOLOGICAL PARK, USA By STEPHEN R. WYLIE (Curator of Birds) Nearly three years have elapsed since the last communication from the St. Louis Zoo. Much has happened during that time, particularly with regard to our aviary. Opened in 1930 and described in the Avicultural Magazine , Volume 37, No. 10, October 1931, our Bird House has under¬ gone a complete renovation. The project, nearly two years in the planning, officially began with the closing of the facility in November of 1978. From the very inception of the project, the real challenge had been to design a floor plan and exhibit system that would be compatible with the building’s original superstructure and that would also retain its architec¬ tural integrity. Therefore, the first stages of renovation involved the re¬ moval of the building’s interior, with the exception of those support structures and pertinent architectural features. The total number of exhibits was reduced from 56 to 36. The open flight exhibit measures approximately 538 square feet (49.98 square metres); other exhibits vary in size from 102 to 429 square feet (9.48 to 39.85 square metres). Each exhibit is bounded by cement plaster walls and vertical stainless steel wires. Each wire is drawn to a tension of 75 lbs and is attached to a spring that insures the maintenance of that tautness. The spacing of wires in most of the exhibits is one inch (2.54 cm) on centre; however, exhibits for very small birds are spaced one-half inch (1.27 cm) on centre. Floor and ceiling braces, in the form of I-beams, were added to compensate for increased strain on the superstructure by the ten¬ sion wires. Most of the exhibits are curvilinear in form. Between the vertical wire fronts of the exhibits and the carpeted public walk space lie continuous planting pockets. Approximately 6,500 tropical plants of nearly 110 varieties are growing within the exhibits and in the public planting spaces. Ambient light for all exhibit and planting pocket areas is supplied via sky¬ lights installed in each exhibit. This light source is supplemented by timer- regulated incandescent flood lamps located above the planting pockets. There are many exhibit themes - shorebird, African savannah, American desert, and tropical forest - and pools and streams were constructed accord¬ ing to the theme of each exhibit. Varieties of natural stone were used as much as possible to create the desired mood; and tree stumps and limbs, vines and other plants have been included to enhance the natural effect. In conjunction with other improvements, the renovation also involved the in- STEPHEN R. WYLIE - NEWS FROM ST. LOUIS ZOO 179 A view of the newly-renovated Bird House at St. Louis Zoological Park 180 STEPHEN R. WYLIE - NEWS FROM ST.LOUIS ZOO stallation of completely new air-handling and plumbing systems. As an appropriate finishing touch to the renovation, a special exhibit area was created for a 26-piece porcelain bird collection representing the works of Boehm, Granget and Cybis. These renditions, displayed in eight glass cases, are appraised at nearly 150,000 dollars and are protected by a sophisticated alarm system. On Saturday, 22nd September, 1979, after a construction period of 283 days, the St. Louis Zoo Bird House was re-opened to the public. The final cost: 1,500,00 dollars. Breeding results during the renovation period were very poor because much of the collection was in temporary housing during most of 1979 and construction resulted in the closing of the incubation and brooding facilities. However, some interesting hatchings did occur in 1978 and in 1980. Koo¬ kaburras, Speckled Mousebirds, Spurwing Plovers, Stanley Cranes, Carib¬ bean Flamingoes, King Penguins, East African Crowned Cranes, Yellow- crowned Amazon Parrots, Superb Starlings and a Mottled Owl were among the species successfully reared. Numerous waterfowl and gamebirds were reared, including Hooded Mergansers, American Goldeneyes, Red Shovelers, and Argentine, Cinnamon, Puna and Sharp-winged Teal; Satyr Tragopans, Mikado, Koklass, Malayan Crested Fireback and Palawan Peacock Phea¬ sants; and an Australian Brush Turkey. The 1980 breeding season was cur¬ tailed by unseasonably hot weather. The average daytime temperature was near 100°F (37.8°C) from mid July to early September; and, as a result, egg-laying virtually ceased halfway through what is considered the normal reproductive period. It has taken nearly a year and a half for us to work out the problems normally associated with any renovation project. During this period of adjustment, we have strived towards fulfilment of the exhibit and avicul- tural potential of the building and its inhabitants. Specimens have been acquired and single birds paired. Natural nesting materials are constantly being procured. Weather permitting, it is hoped that our labours will prove fruitful in 1981. So far, the signs appear promising. NEWS AND VIEWS 181 Sunday, 7th June, proved to be an occasion to remember for the many members of the Avicultural Society and their guests who spent the after¬ noon visiting Chestnut Lodge, at Cobham, in Surrey, by kind invitation of Miss Ruth Ezra. The gardens were looking superb and the collection of birds belonging to Miss Ezra and Mr. Raymond Sawyer, which must now rank with the foremost private collections in Europe, provided great in¬ terest to all the visitors. Not only are the birds superbly displayed and maintained but the breeding record at Chestnut Lodge is very impressive. Satyr Tragopan, Palawan Peacock Pheasant, Green Jungle fowl, Schalow’s Turaco and Emerald Starling have been bred there this year, last year’s Emerald Starling helping to feed this year’s young. Stilts and Ringed Plover were sitting; also Redshanks and Avocets were incubating eggs but unfortunately very heavy rain subsequently flooded the nest. During the delicious tea provided by Miss Ezra, members had an opportunity to meet our President, Dr. Jean Delacour, who was visiting this country for his ninetieth birthday celebrations and everyone was delighted to see how well he looked. It was also a great pleasure to welcome M. and Mme. Walter Van den bergh; after many years as the world-famous director of the Antwerp Zoo in Belgium, M. Van den bergh is now enjoying an active retirement and is making a very valuable con¬ tribution to our Society as a Vice President. We are very grateful indeed to Miss Ezra, not only for being a wonder¬ ful hostess but for most generously donating the proceeds of the visit (£78) to the Society’s funds. * * * The January/March Issue of the Avicultural Magazine contained an excellent article by L. Gibson on two species of fruitsuckers. Despite one of these, the Golden-fronted, being a common avicultural subject, success¬ ful breeding accounts for Chloropsis are virtually non-existent so the very full account given by Mr. Gibson in the following issue of the Magazine of his successful breeding of Hardwicke’s Chloropsis Chloropsis hardwickei is of particular interest. No complete breeding of Chloropsis has occurred, as far as I am aware, in Britain; the closest was achieved by Dr. Maurice Amsler who hatched the Golden-fronted on several occasions, one of which survived for fourteen days. Two separate reports of the same attempt appear in the pages of the Avicultural Magazine , the references being 1917, 224-227, and 1941, 193-196, for those interested. 182 NEWS AND VIEWS FOREIGN BIRDS, Vol. 46, No. 4, Winter 1980, included an account of the breeding of the Red-headed Pytilia Pytilia hypogrammica by Mr. D. Bardgett, Silsden, West Yorkshire. Towards the end of July, one youngster left the nest. This was possibly the first breeding in Britain of this species, which is usually known as the Yellow- winged Pytilia. * * * Members will be very sorry to learn of the death of Dr. Leslie H. Brown. An authority on African birds of prey and flamingoes, he was, especially of late, a prolific author. Members may be interested to know of the Peterson Field Guide to the Bird Songs of Britain and Europe which was started in 1969 and now des¬ cribes itself as the world’s most comprehensive bird song encyclopaedia. It consists of a collection of fifteen long-playing records of extremely high quality and in all the voices of 585 species are represented. The total number of separate recordings is over 1 ,000 and the running time is twelve hours. The records can be obtained from Conifer Records, Horton Road, West Drayton, Middlesex or direct from the producers, the Swedish Radio Company, 8-105 10 Stockholm, Sweden. * * * The Yellow-faced Parrotlet Forpus xanthops was first introduced to aviculture about two years ago and specimens have found their way to collections in at least four countries. So it is pleasing that at least two avi- culturists have now reported success. Mr. and Mrs. Spenkelink, in Soester- burg, Holland, list the species amongst those bred during 1980 (see below) and Jan Sorensen, Bronshoj, Denmark, documents his rearing, in Danish, on pages 66-67 of the April 1981 issue of Stuekulturer . * * * It is always a pleasure to receive reports of second generation breed¬ ings. Jim Haywood of Carterton Breeding Aviaries, Carterton, Oxon, sends news that young of both Amboina King Parrakeets Alis terns amhoinensis and Queen of Bavaria’s Conure Aratinga guaroula reared in his aviaries, have themselves reproduced. NEWS AND VIEWS 183 The collection of parrots kept by Mr. and Mrs. J. Spenkelink at Soester- berg, Holland, is renowned and their many breeding successes have been recorded in this Magazine. Their latest breeding results, for 1980, are very impressive : Red-breasted Conure Aratinga holochlora rubritorquis 4 Maroon-bellied Conure Pyrrhura frontalis 23 Black-tailed Conure ” melanura 21 Green-cheeked Conure ” molinae 12 Painted Conure ” picta 14 Blue-throated Conure ” cruentata 6 Crimson-bellied Conure rhodogaster 2 White-eared Conure leucotis 15 Sierra Parakeet Bolborhynchus aymara 9 Austral Conure Enicognathus ferrugineus 7 Yellow-faced Parrotlet Forpus xanthops 6 White-bellied Caique Pionites leucogaster leucogaster 4 Short-tailed Parrot Graydidascalus brachyurus (died) 1 Blossom-headed Parakeet Psittacula cyanocephala 4 Moustached Parakeet alexandri cala 4 Blue-crowned Hanging Parrot Loriculus galgulus galgulus 8 Philippine Hanging Parrot philipp ensis 9 Ornate Lorikeet Trichoglossus ornatus 2 Goldie’s Lorikeet goldiei 12 Swainson’s Lory haematodus moluccanus 3 Perfect Lorikeet euteles 2 * * * How do you develop a safer but lighter miner’s helmet? Researchers at the University of California decided to study woodpeckers for possible clues by seeing if they developed headaches while drumming. They dis¬ covered that each peck takes less than one-thousandth of a second and that the impact is more than 300 times greater than an astronaut feels when taking off into space. Nothing is felt by the woodpecker, scientists report, because they have superb reflexes and are able to keep their necks tense, like a boxer in action. It was deduced that helmets should be made thicker, lighter and be better padded to resist puncture. 184 NEWS AND VIEWS David Webster writes: ‘My Hyacin thine Macaws are approximately eight years old now but were quite immature without full complement of tail feathers in 1973. These are now very hardy aviary birds housed on the rear of my house with a viewing window into my living room - now closed off - with an outside aviary for exercise. I noticed in 1978 for the first time ever, a sudden hostile attitude, being an impressive raising of the head and body feathers every time I looked through the window where their nesting barrel is situated. Normally previous to this both male and female have been very friendly indeed. This aggressive attitude has continued ever since around the nesting area. “In May 1979, the first egg was laid which, when checked, proved in¬ fertile so was removed. In July, two eggs were laid, one of which was fer¬ tile. This chick was pipping in shell for three days but made no attempt to break out and died just before hatching. I removed both eggs and opened them, the chick was fully formed in correct hatching position with yolk not fully withdrawn. It weighed 28 grammes. “It was not until July 1980 when they laid two more eggs, this time both fertile. First egg was pipping weakly. I opened it after the incubation period passed. Both appeared identical in malposition with head over right wing and beak facing down towards small end of egg.” * * * After several unsuccessful attempts, the Oklahoma City Zoo has reared an Ornate Hawk-Eagle Spizaetus omatus . Three pairs of this small South American Eagle are kept in an area off the zoo grounds. One pair laid and incubated a single egg for three weeks before abandoning it. When this happened, the egg was removed to an incubator for a further four weeks. The chick weighed nearly two ounces when hatched and trebled its weight in the first ten days. It grew rapidly on chick entrails, horse meat and bird of prey diet. This is believed to be the first occasion that this particular species has reared in captivity. * * * An American member, Mr. Tony Silva, of 8225 West 30th Street, North Riverside, Illinois 60546, would be interested to hear from anyone who has bred the Cuban Conure Aratinga euops or the Hispaniolan Conure A. chloroptera, or who may have any information about these two con- ures. NEWS AND VIEWS 185 In Kenya, the third annual census of birds within the Nairobi Provincial boundary took place on 23rd November 1980. The 1980 census received less publicity and, as a result perhaps, the number of participants was red¬ uced and this probably was reflected in a lower count than in the previous census. In the 1980 census, 13,431 birds of 285 species were counted. Included were 700 Garganey, two Peregrine Falcon, 58 European Bee-eater, 98 Cin¬ namon-chested Bee-eater, 23 Hildebrandt’s Starling, 85 Superb Starling, 224 Variable Sunbird, 575 Bronze Mannikin and 232 Crimson-ramped Waxbilh European Hobby (2), Imperial Eagle (1), Little Ringed Plover (1), Brown-hooded Kingfisher (1), Grey-headed Kingfisher (2), Von der Deck- ends Hornbill (1), Malachite Sunbird (2) and Speckle-fronted Weaver (5) were among species not recorded during the first and second census. * * * Back in 1975 I spent a long weekend bird-watching on Kangaroo Is¬ land, just off the coast of South Australia. Although numerous species were seen in the three days, the highlight being ten minutes watching a flock of feeding Beautiful Fire-tails Emblema Bella , my goal, the Glossy Black Cockatoo Calyptorhynchus lathami eluded me. So it is with slight envy that I read the latest letter from Fred Bohner who has just returned from a week's holiday there searching for this highly specialised cockatoo. He writes: “We saw three at a place called Harvey's Return on the north coast and thirty-nine at Billy Goat Gully where we made many in¬ teresting observations. There seemed to be very few hens and this fact is also reported by other observers. In the main group we only saw about four hens so I hope some are nesting as about three of the males were feeding young (probably almost a year old). The area where they were located is about halfway along the north coast and is in a hilly, well- protected conservation park. Observations could only be made along the slopes of a steep ravine totally covered with casuarinas both sides. At the bottom of the 400 ft slope was a permanent supply of water and tall eucalypts.” Of his own birds, Fred reports that the Red-tailed Black Cockatoos are rearing their sixth youngster. They laid twice this season as the first youngster died due to last year’s baby taking too long to become inde¬ pendent. The second is now thriving since the previous year’s chick was successfully weaned and subsequently moved to another aviary. 186 NEWS AND VIEWS Mr. A. Gardener, whose account of breeding the Griffon Vulture pub¬ lished in the April/ June 1980 issue of the Avicultural Magazine aroused much interest, now writes to say that he has bred an Indian White-backed Vulture which fledged at 19 weeks and it is believed to be the first to be reared to independence in this country. His long-term ambition is to es¬ tablish a breeding colony of these birds and we look forward to reading his account of this project in a future issue of the Magazine. The world captive population of the Siberian Crane Grus leucogeranus could be more than doubled if fifteen chicks hatched from wild-taken eggs are reared. Dr. Vladimir Flint discovered 26 nests in the tundra of Yakutia. One egg was removed from 16 nests with two-egg clutches and transported to Moscow in portable incubators. Four eggs were sent to Walsrode Vogel- park in Germany, the remainder being deposited at the Soviet Union’s crane breeding centre in the Oka State Reserve, south of Moscow. * * * With the January-March issue of the Avicultural Magazine came a change of cover illustration. For the previous thirteen years two Diamond Sparrows drawn by Robert Gillmor adorned the cover, but a Rothschild’s Grackle has now replaced them which has been drawn and most generous¬ ly donated by Malcolm Ellis, the well-known bird illustrator and regular contributor to the Magazine. This elegant Indonesian starling was first discovered in 1912 and some sixteen years later made its first appearance in aviculture. This first impor¬ tation of five birds went to the collection of the late Alfred Ezra who, in 1931, recorded the rearing of one young. Despite the fact that it is now being reared in many collections, it remains to be seen how viable the present captive population is. Aviculture may be the last stronghold for this endangered bird - let us hope we can meet the challenge. 187 REVIEWS PHEASANTS IN ASIA, 1979 Published by the World Pheasant Association, 1980, pp. 116 Price, including post & packing: £8.50 (Overseas - 17 dollars surface, 23.50 dollars airmail) Available from the WPA, Harraton Square, Church Lane, Exning, Suffolk This excellent publication by the W.P.A. contains the proceedings of the first International Symposium on Pheasants in Asia held in Kathman¬ du, Nepal, between 21-23 November 1979. Commencing with the docu¬ mentation of formal introductions, it progresses through the almost thirty papers covering many aspects of pheasant research, both captive and wild, read at the Symposium. The main body of papers, most of which relate to the pheasants with little or no attention being paid to the other galliformes of the region, are grouped conveniently into five categories. Keynote papers on Forestry, National Parks and Conservation in Nepal and Pheasant Conservation - a Minimum Programme - are followed by reports on the status of pheasants in Nepal, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, Eastern India and the Himalayas. A new subspecies of Cabot’s Tragopan T. c. guangariensis , discovered in 1978, is described in the final paper in this section. Field study techniques are discussed in four papers while those devoted to captive breeding take in nine. Three of these cover the Cheer Pheasant programme while an interesting account outlines the work of the Blyth’s Tragopan breeding centre in Nagaland. The final section concerns Conser¬ vation Management and amongst subjects covered are tourism and educa¬ tion. The text is dotted with photographs, detailed maps and some del¬ ightful sketches by Robert Gillmor, Timothy Greenwood and Esdaile Hudson. It is pleasing to note that a second symposium is planned for 1981 in Kashmir and I hope that at least a part of this will be set aside to discuss the status and needs of some of the other galliformes of the region, many of which must be suffering from the same pressures afflicting their larger cousins. D.C. 188 REVIEWS INSTINCTIVE NAVIGATION OF BIRDS (Incorporating “Bird Navigation - The Sterile Controversy) By EDWARD GERRARD Published in 1981 by the Scottish Research Group, Pabay, Broadford, Skye, Scotland. Price £4.50, post free. On receiving a review copy of this book from our fair editor, my first impulse was to return it, pointing out that as I have, at least since the autumn of 1948, made only rather casual observations on bird migration and read only a small part of the vast literature on the subject, I am not properly qualified to pass judgement on it. However, before taking this honest course I succumbed to the tempta¬ tion to “dip into” it and found it so interesting, so novel in conception and so (outrageously or justifiably?) iconoclastic, that I felt I could not let moral scruples stand in the way of my possessing it. Hence this review. Very briefly and, I fear, doing the author the injustice that any attempt to thus summarise such a work is bound to do, his claim is that migrating birds navigate (and sometimes fail successfully to navigate) as a result of relatively simple responses to overt and obvious stimuli. These are: attrac¬ tion to the sun or other sources of light, to remembered landmarks, to features similar to or suggestive of their home surroundings, and, in the absence of any such objects, to any salient features, such as moving clouds or the cloud masses over oceanic islands. Ideally one would need to read this book in conjunction with the various reports on migration studies whose hypotheses he questions and whose alleged results he denies. Unless he has grossly mis-quoted the cited works ( and I do not think he has), he makes what seems to me a very telling case against at least some of them. If this is a sample of the products of the Scottish Research Group, I am not surprised that they complain that “orthodox” editors of ornithological journals will not publish their offerings. Such refusals may be unjustifiable, even deplorable but, human nature being what it unfortunately is, hardly surprising. Did the small boy who noticed and proclaimed that the Emper¬ or had no clothes endear himself thereby to the court officials? Perhaps it is merely because of my ignorance that I finished the book half convinced by the author. Certainly Mr. Gerrard’s theories would account for such regular apparent anomalies as “Ruckzug” and the fre¬ quent sight of parties of Swallows Hirundo rustica passing each other as they migrate in opposite directions along the same coastline. Though I do not subscribe to all the author’s views about the abilities, REVIEWS 189 or lack of abilities, of homing pigeons (here miscalled carrier pigeons), as a one-time member of the Middle East Pigeon Service (1943-44) I think that when he says (p. 166) “The authorities appeared to have exaggerated the homing abilities . . . for propaganda purposes . ”, he is en¬ tirely right in his opinion and restrained in his expression of it. The book is illustrated with a wealth of clear, and clearly understan¬ dable diagrams and some welcome range maps of various migratory spe¬ cies. It is also written well and if with a touch of asperity, even perhaps acidity here and there, readers will, I think, find this understandable. Who, alas, could deny that there is at least some truth in his remark (p. 134), “The final disaster to overtake ornithology was the introduction of specia¬ list techniques which, in line with so many other allied sciences, forced fragmentation of comprehension, often at the expense of sound reason¬ ing.”? Whether the future will see Mr. Gerrard win fame as a new, inspired and correct thinker; roundly and publicly refuted by those whose theories he has so trenchantly challenged; or found dead in a plastic bag outside an ornithological laboratory, I would hardly dare to hazard a guess. I can, however, strongly recommend anyone interested in bird migra¬ tion, ornithological controversy, or the more widely important question of scientific probity to obtain and read his book. D.G. A VICULTURAL MAGAZINE BINDING The following undertake binding of volumes of the Avicultural Magazine > Mr. A.J. Swain, 45 New Road, Bromham, Bedford, MK43 8QH. Messrs. P.G. Chapman & Co. Ltd., Kent House Lane, Beckenham, Kent, BR3 1LD. The price for this service, together with postage and packing, may be obtained on application to Mr. Swain to to Messrs. P.G. Chapman & Co. Members should ensure that their volumes are complete before sending them for binding, and should state whether they require the paper wrappers and advertisements omitted or bound in. If bound in, they must state whether they are to be bound where they occur or at the end. Usually the paper wrappers are omitted. Missing back numbers, if still available, may be obtained from the Society. INSTINCTIVE NAVIGATION OF BIRDS By E. GERRARD 1981 180 pp. plus 105 diagrams Post free £4.50 (overseas £5) or send large SAE for descriptive leaflet and free pamphlet on the ‘Perdeck Saga’ revelations The Scottish Research Group Pabay, Broadford, Skye, Scotland MEMBERS’ ADVERTISEMENTS (10 p. per word - minimum charge £3. 00) FOR SALE. Common Shelduck, hand-reared and pinioned, very tame. Delivery August. Upton, Park Lodge, Margaretting, Ingatestone, Essex CM4 OEN. WANTED. Avicultural Magazines : Vol. 80, No. 4; Vol. 67, Nos. 1 & 2; Vol. 66, No. 1; Vol. 62, No. 1. Complete volumes also accepted. Offers to William Todd, 1310 D Hawthorne, Houston, Texas 77006, USA. THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY OF QUEENSLAND welcomes new members. An Australian Society catering for all birds both in captivity and in the wild. We put out a bi-monthly magazine on all aspects of aviculture and conservation. Anyone interested in becoming a member, please contact: Ray Garwood, 19 Fahey’s Road, Albany Creek, 4035, Queensland, Australia. Annual subscription rates are: 12.00 Aus. dollars surface mail, 18.00 airmail. BIRD WORLD MAGAZINE. Interesting, informative, well-illustrated. Dedicated to the presentation of quality information. Eight to ten articles each issue, including veterinary articles. Annual Subscription (US dollars only) 12.00 (six issues) - postage extra: 8.00 surface mail, 12.00 airmail. Box 70, North Hollywood, Calif. 91601, USA. THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY The Avicultural Society was founded in 1894 for the study of British and foreign birds in freedom and captivity. The Society is international in character, having members throughout the world. Membership subscription rates per annum: British Isles £8.00; Overseas - £9.00 (20.00 US dollars). The subscription is due on 1st January of each year and those joining the Society later in the year will receive back numbers of the current volume of the AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE. The subscription rate for non-members is: British Isles and Europe - £9.00; outside Europe - £10.00 (25.00 US dollars). Subscriptions, changes of address, orders for back numbers, etc., should be sent to: THE HON. SECRETARY AND TREASURER, THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY, WINDSOR FOREST STUD, MILL RIDE, ASCOT, BERKSHIRE SL5 8LT. NEW MEMBERS Mr. J.A. Ahnstedt, 2813 S. Taft Hill Road, Fort Collins, Colorado 80526, USA. Mr. M.T. Ammer, Noorderkampweg 15, 8191 JG Wapenveld, Holland. Ms. S.A. Baghian, Sandy’s Birds, 1678 Calle Diamonte, Newbury Park, Calif. 91320, USA. Ms. S.J. Bradway, 20 Maplewick Lane, Willingboro, New Jersey 08046, USA. Mr. T.A. Crowell, 14 Glenview Road, N. Caldwell, N.J. 07006, USA. Mrs. M.C. Davison, Maple Glen Gardens, No. R.D. Wyndham, Southland Ph 160X, New Zealand. Mr. G.S.J. Edwards, 48 Belle Vue Road, Shrewsbury, Shropshire. Mr. B. Eley, 1028 Napoleon Avenue, New Orleans, Louisiana 70115, USA. Ms. P. Evans, 8 Horseshoe Bend, Portola Valley, Calif. 94025, USA. Mr. A. Flanagan, 13048 Via Latina, Del Mar, Calif. 92014, USA. Mr. A. Green, 24 Manor Road South, Hinchley Wood, Esher, Surrey KT10 OQL. Mrs. N.J. Haller, 621 Wewoka Drive, Boulder, Colorado 80303, USA. Mr. J. Jarvis, 11 Densole Way, Densole, Folkestone, Kent. Mrs. Milton R. Kaack, 7321 Sycamore Street, New Orleans, Louisiana 70118, USA. Ms. R.E. Lee, 808 Comet Drive No. 105, Foster City, Calif. 94404, USA Mr. Robert J. List, 2621 West Hwy Apt. 12, Lodi, Calif. 95270, USA Mr. A. Mackintosh, 17 Venter Street, Parkdene, Boksburg 1460, South Africa. Mr. R. Miller, 46 Taywood Road, Thornton Cleveleys, Blackpool, Lancs. Mr. K. Pedley, Woodside Bungalow, Woodlands Road, Dodford, Bromsgrove, Worcs. Dr. M.D. Purton, Department of Veterinary Anatomy, University of Glasgow Vet¬ erinary School, Bearsden, Glasgow. Mr. J.M. Ridgeway, 9 Northwood Road, Thornton Heath, Surrey CR4 8HU. Mr. W.A. Sontag, Jnr. Ingelheimerstrasse 3, D-6501 Nieder-Olm, W. Germany. Mr. R. Stein, 3115 Calhoun Way, Stockton, Calif. 95209, USA Mrs. P. Sutherland, 32-50 70 Street, Apt. 4B, Jackson His, New York, USA £22 CHANGE OF ADDRESS r. P.T. Bauml to 2305 Fitzhugh 7, Dallas, Texas 75204, USA. 5. Mona Bourell to 1855 Maxine Avenue, San Mateo, Calif. 94401, USA. r. W.G. Chiister to 44 Badshot Lea Road, Badshot Lea, Farnham, Surrey. DONATIONS The Society is most grateful to the following members for their generosity Mr. R. Basso Mr. R.P. Brinkman Mr. Luther D. Dean Mr. D.M.S. Head Mr. M. Roper Mr. M.E.M. Tell Mrs. P.B.M. Walker Mr. J. Zitta Published by the Avicultural Society, Windsor Forest Stud, Mill Ride, Ascot, Berks, Printed in Great Britain by Unwin Brothers Ltd., The Gresham Press, Old Woking, Surrey s'-f g. jo sv-a A9^ ^CULTURAL MAGAZINE Contents An Account of the Mauritius Kestrel Captive Breeding Project by Carl G. Jones, Fay N. Steele and A. Wahab Owadally (with plates) . 191 The Science of Captive Breeding of Falcons by David M. Bird and Nancy B. Rehder . 208 Breeding and Hand-rearing the American Black Vulture at Lincoln Park Zoo Chicago, by Caryn Schrenzel . 212 Vultures in Captivity in Southern Africa by P.J. Mundy and E. Marais (With plates) . 215 Breeding and Hand-rearing the Bearded Vulture at the Wassenaar Zoo, Holland, by J.W.W. Louman (with plates) . 223 Keeping and Breeding the Great Grey Owl at the West Berlin Zoo by Rudolf Reinhard (with plates) . 233 Breeding the Ural Owl at the Nationalpark Bayerischer Wald, West Germany, by Dr. Wolfgang Scherzinger (with plates) . 237 Breeding the Striped Owl by R.G. Krahe (with plate) . . . 242 Notes on Captive Owls by Bernard Sayers . 248 Feeding Captive Birds of Prey by James K. Kirkwood . 256 Raptor Rehabilitation at Woodland Park Zoological Gardens by James W. Foster and Walter G. English (with plates) . 266 Notes on a Bald Eagle by L. Gibson . 271 Successes with Birds of Prey at the Pretoria Zoo by F.C. Barnicoat . 273 Birds of Prey at the Natal Zoological Gardens by W.H. Collard . 274 Birds of Prey kept at Lilford Park by A. Turk . 276 The Work of the Hawk Trust . 278 THE AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE welcomes original articles that have not been published elsewhere and that essentially concern the aviculture of a particular bird or group of birds, or that describe their natural history. Articles should be preferably typewritten, with double spacing, and the scientific names as well as the vernacular names of birds should be given. References cited in the text should be listed at the end of the article. Line drawings should be in Indian ink on thick paper or card; photographs which illustrate a particular point in the article will be used where possible and should be clearly captioned. ADDRESS OF EDITOR Mary Harvey, Windsor Forest Stud, Mill Ride, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 8LT, England. Carl G, Jones Adult male Mauritian Kestrel, Blue. September 1979. Avicultural Magazine THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY Voi 87 - No. 4 -All rights reserved OCTOBER - DECEMBER 1981 BIRDS OF PREY ISSUE AN ACCOUNT OF THE MAURITIUS KESTREL CAPTIVE BREEDING PROJECT By CARL G. JONES (Forestry Quarters, Black River, Mauritius), FAY N. STEELE (9818 E. Boulder, Mesa, Arizona 85207, USA) and A. WAHAB OW AD ALLY (Conservator of Forests, Forestry Headquarters, Cure pipe, Mauritius). The Mauritius Kestrel Falco punctatus Is commonly regarded as the world's rarest bird of prey. In 1973 the world population was thought to be only eight or nine birds. It seemed as though the kestrel was doomed to extinction and in, December of that year, after consultation with some of the greatest conservation authorities, a pair was captured for a captive breeding attempt. This was, and still is, regarded as one of the bird's most promising hopes for longterm survival. In 1976 Dr. Stanley Temple, dis¬ cussing the conservation of the three most endangered Mauritian birds, the kestrel, the Echo Parrakeet Psittacula echo and the Pink Pigeon Neso- errns mayeri , claimed that: “By 1980, the captive breeding program should be capable of producing 20 or more young of each species per year for restocking and interisland transplants or for distribution to co-operative breeders”. Since 1973 a total of eight kestrels have been taken from the wild and there have been some limited successes in breeding them, in cap¬ tivity. Today no captive Mauri an Kestrels remain, the last one died in January 1980. In this article we discuss the plight, of this beautiful falcon and outline the history of the conservation effort. Natural History and Status The Mauritius Kestrel is a unique island form believed to have evolved from the same ancestral species as the Common Kestrel F. tinnunculus . A little smaller than its European couterpart, the males weigh about 130 g and the females about 165 g. The dorsal plumage is not unlike that of a female Common Kestrel and the breast and abdomen are a creamy white with neat spots and heart shapes. The kestrel evolved in the evergreen 192 JONES, STEELE & OWADALLY - MAURITIUS KESTREL BREEDING forests which once almost completely covered Mauritius, and as a result, it has developed many accipitrine characteristics - adaptations for a forest life. The wings are short and rounded, more like those of a Sparrow Hawk Accipiter nisus than a typical kestrel; it also has longish legs and tail. A dashing hunter, it preys mainly on large insects, lizards and passerines which it usually catches beneath the canopy of the forest. More manoeu- verable than a European or American Kestrel Falco sparverius , most of the prey is caught after direct flying attacks. These may develop into tail chases. Occasionally it may stoop at passerines like a large falcon or hover above scrub lands and drop onto quarry. Prey may be located by still hunt¬ ing from a cliff or tree vantage point, or by moving quietly through or above the forest (Jones, 1980; Jones and Owadally, 1981, in press). Mauritian Kestrels, in common with most other small falcons, can be mature at a year old. Courtship flights begin in September or October and are similar to those of other kestrels and falcons. The kestrels lay their usual clutch of three eggs during any month between September and (?) January, in a tree or cliff cavity. The eggs take about 30 days to hatch and the young remain in the nest for five weeks. After fledging the young are probably partly fed by the adults for several months and they stay in or near the parents’ breeding territory until the following breeding season (Jones, 1980). The main reason for the kestrel’s rarity is habitat destruction and al¬ teration. Today only about 1-2% of its forest habitat remains. What is left has been, and continues to be, simplified by introduced “weed” spe¬ cies that oust the native plants and destroy the structure of the forest, turning it into a dense scrub. This causes a reduction in the numbers of the kestrel’s main prey species (Jones and Owadally, 1981). This is almost certainly the main reason for the low density of kestrels in the habitat available. In the past some kestrels have been shot by hunters (Temple, 1977) but today this does not occur due to conservation education on the island. Monkey predation has been suggested as an important cause of mortality of eggs and young (e.g. McKelvey, 1977; Temple, 1977) but this remains to be proved. When Mauritius was first colonised in the 16th century the kestrel was probably found all over the island. Today it is limited to an area of about 50 sq. km. of gorges and mountains in the south-west of the island in and around the Black River Gorges. In April 1973 when Dr. Stanley Temple first surveyed the population, he could only locate about eight or nine individuals. By the following June there had been no breeding in the population, a wild pair had disappeared, three birds had been captured for JONES, STEELE & OW AD ALLY - MAURITIUS KESTREL BREEDING 193 captive breeding and only a minimum of four birds remained. Since then the wild population has increased with at least one to three successful breeding pairs each year, except in 1975 when no young were produced. By 1978 the population was believed to be about 10-15, since then the situation has been thought to have remained stable. The Captive Breeding Project Personnel and Organisation In January 1973 Dr. Stanley Temple from the Peregrine Fund of Cornell University, USA, arrived on Mauritius. He was supported by the International Council for Bird Preservation and funded by the World Wild¬ life Fund (US appeal) and the New York Zoological Society, to study the Mauritius Kestrel and later some of the other endangered birds. The project was, until 1976, entirely run by the ICBP, when the Mauritius Government took over the supervision of the project under A. Wahab Owadally, Conservator of Forests; however, the ICBP has continued to manage the technical side of the project. Since 1976 the captive breeding facilities for the kestrel and other endangered birds and fruit bats are kept at a purpose-built Government aviary at Black River on the south-west coast of the island. Before this date the birds were kept in the aviaries of a private aviculturist, Mr. B. Lenferna, which were closed for personal reasons. Temple stayed in Mauritius until February 1975 when William A. New- lands from Scotland took over the project and stayed until the end of the year; he was replaced by David S. McKelvey from the USA. In July 1977 Philip Trefry, who had been managing the Canadian Wildlife Service's Pere¬ grine Breeding Project, took over from McKelvey. Trefry stayed until Feb¬ ruary 1978 when Fay N. Steele, Curator of Birds from Albuquerque Zoo, USA, replaced him. Steele was working on a year’s leave of absence and after his period on Mauritius, his work was taken over by Carl G. Jones from Wales who has been on the island since January 1979. John E. Cooper, Royal College of Surgeons, England, has been the veterinary advisor to the project since its inception. In 1978, a Mauritian, Yousoof Mungroo, spent a year at the Jersey Wildlife Preservation Trust learning the techniques of breeding endangered animals in captivity. Since his return to Mauritius he has occupied the post of Scientific Officer in charge of wildlife and works on the captive breeding project and does field work on the kestrel and other endangered wildlife. Aviary Design and Daily Management of the Kestrels The kestrels were kept in aviaries 2.5 m wide by 7.5 m long and 3 m 194 JONES, STEELE & OW AD ALLY - MAURITIUS KESTREL BREEDING high. The framework of steel 'tubing is covered with 1 cm welded mesh. The whole aviary is built on a concrete plinth with a concrete cyclone shelter built at the rear 2.5 m wide by 1.7 m deep by 2 m high, with a door from the aviary into the shelter 0.6 m wide by 1.9 m high. Aviaries- are built in series lying with their lengths adjacent to each other with inter¬ connecting doors. The dividing walls between aviaries were entirely screened with panels made from the mid-rib of the Traveller’s Palm (sic) Ravenaia madagascariensis , so that birds in adjacent aviaries were visually isolated from each other. The rear 1.5 m of the roof was also screened v/ith Raven- ala panels to provide some shade and cover. The aviary floor is natural coral sand and each aviary has one or two small shrubs. Morning Glory Ipomoea sp. grew over the front and roof. Natural perches of varying widths were placed on the sides and at either end of the aviary and also in the cyclone shelters. A permanent concrete bath 0.3 m by 0.3 m by 5 cm deep (a bit too small and shallow) was provided in each aviary and was cleaned and filled each day from its own tap. Food was placed on a raised concrete feeding block with a shallow moat around the base to exclude ants (Figure 1). Each aviary had three different nest boxes, a triangular one (placed in a comer of the cyclone shelter opposite the door) 30 cm high by 40 cm on the two sides meeting at a right angle, the front had an 8 cm lip. A rectan¬ gular nest box 80 cm long x 30 cm wide x 30 cm high with an entrance hole 45 cn kibg x 20 cm high, was placed high at the rear of the aviary. The third nest box was the most complex in design and was placed in the cylcone shelter and entrance was gained via a hole 20 cm x 20 cm in the wall of the cyclone shelter (Figure 2). All nest boxes had an ample substrate of coarse sand and wood chips. Each nest box was used for roosting and caching food, although the third type of nest box was preferred for egg laying. The birds were fed once a day; during the non-breeding season they were given one mouse or the equivalent daily. In the early years of the project the kestrels were fed day-old cockerel chicks obtained from a local hatchery, but their use was discontinued because of the risk of Newcastle disease. They were also fed locally caught passerines and reptiles but in recent years the diet was mostly domestic, disease-free laboratory mice and occasionally beef. The Mauritian Kestrel in Captivity Prior to this captive breeding project the only evidence that we can find that the Mauritius Kestrel has previously been kept in captivity is JONES, STEELE & OWADALLY - MAURITIUS KESTREL BREEDING 195 Fig. 1. Ground plan of aviary layout for three of the kestrels in 1979. aviary sides covered with ravenala panels^ iast j. 5 m of flight roof covered with ravenala panels 196 JONES, STEELE & OWADALLY - MAURITIUS KESTREL BREEDING the account by Guerin (1940) which we have translated from French. “In April 1830 a ‘spotted kestrel’ visited the domicile of Julien Des¬ jardins in Flacq and stayed for about 15 days in the surroundings, hov¬ ering over the poultry-yard, and catching a few chicks here and there. At last it was shot and as it was slightly hurt, Desjardins kept it in a cage feeding it raw meat.” Mauritian Kestrels adapt well to a captive life, even wild caught adults settle down and show reproductive behaviour. They are naturally very tame and when first brought into captivity, behave in a relaxed manner even if placed in a relatively open aviary. The kestrels never became al¬ armed when the aviaries were entered daily to clean water baths, feeding surfaces and to feed them. They were so tame that they used to take food from our fingers. Excess food was temporarily cached in a corner of a nest box or less often where a branch made an acute angle with an aviary side. Bathing was regular, about two to four times a week, and one male used to occasionally dust bathe. At night the kestrels roosted inside the nest boxes, less frequently in the cyclone shelters or in a corner of the aviary. This behaviour is probably adaptive in wild birds since it will help them avoid cyclones. In the aviary the birds were quite agile and could fly and grab a cockroach, gecko or wild mouse, turn in a tight circle of less than a metre and return to a perch, the whole flight being one fluid movement. Most of the social and breeding behaviour was reminiscent of that of other kestrels and will be described under the breeding accounts of the different females that have been in captivity. Female A In December 1973 Stanley Temple trapped a mated pair of kestrels. In March of 1974 the female, believed to have been an old individual, died of a chronic, and probably long standing, infection of the oviduct. A replacement female B, believed to be a young unmated bird was trapped in May 1974. Female B Only a few months after capture, on 18th September 1974, she laid the first egg of a clutch of three eggs. These were placed in an incubator to encourage her to lay a replacement clutch which she did not. Two of the eggs were fertile and one hatched. This young kestrel was being hand- reared but died when 13 days old due to a brooder malfunction (Temple, JONES, STEELE & OW AD ALLY - MAURITIUS KESTREL BREEDING 197 85 cm Fig. 2. Nest box for kestrels constructed from plywood. 1977). The infertile egg was analysed for pesticides and although detec- table levels of several toxic chemicals were present, they were below the level normally associated with reproductive disfunction in raptors (Tem¬ ple, 1978). The 1975 breeding season was equally unsuccessful. Two clutches of three eggs were laid, the first clutch was placed in an incubator and the female was allowed to incubate the second. Four of the eggs were broken in an accident and of the remaining two, one was cracked under the incubating female and one was infertile (Temple, 1976). In 1976 only a single egg was laid, this was laid on 28th October, nine¬ teen days after the first observed mating. It was described by McKelvey (1977b) as a “great big, oversized, healthy looking egg”. The egg was infertile. During the 1977 season the pair were first seen copulating on 23rd September. Two days later it was noted that the kestrels were mating at least a dozen times a day. On 9th October the female was making a scrape in the nest box. At the beginning of November the female began spending a lot of time in the nest box and by the 7th of that month, it was recorded 198 JONES, STEELE & OW AD ALLY - MAURITIUS KESTREL BREEDING that she was spending most of the day in the box. Mating continued regu¬ larly and the female still continued to spend a lot of time in the nest box. It was suspected that this female was near the end of her reproductive life and it was important to replace her with a bird from the wild if the captive breeding of the kestrel was to succeed. On 13th December Philip Trefry climbed to a nest site in the Black River Gorges and took the larger of two nestlings. This bird (Yellow/Blue) was estimated to be about two or three weeks old. The young kestrel was hand-fed on finely cut up blouse Geckos Hemi- dactylus frenatus and Gehyra mutilata and later Agama Lizards Calotes versicolor and mice. An attempt to interest the captive pair in fostering the young kestrel was made. On December 16th it was placed in the nest box, but had to be removed almost immediately since both adults behaved aggressively to it. The adult pair continued mating regularly but no eggs were laid. The female was found dead in the nestbox on the morning of 26th January. Post-mortem examination revealed that she had a tumour - a neoplasm of the oviduct (Cooper, 1979). It was incorrectly suspected that the young kestrel was a male, so on 22nd December another two young were taken from the wild. These birds (Yellow and Green) proved to be two males. Female Yellow /Blue (= Orange) In early August 1978 it was thought that this bird might be a female. She was placed with the “Old Male" that was trapped in 1973, but he was terrified of her even though she showed no aggression towards him. After two hours together he had become so stressed that they had to be separa¬ ted. Old Male died on 18th September and the post-mortem revealed peri¬ vascular cellular infiltration of the liver (Cooper, et al, 1981). A trial pairing was attempted on 15th August with the male Yellow. He had been housed in a cage adjacent to the female and they often perched next to each other on either side of the dividing wire. Yellow was placed in with the female and they appeared quite compatible. During early September the female started displaying reproductive behaviour and on the 24th of that month, she laid an egg off the perch which smashed on the floor. Her reproductive behaviour intensified and she would solicit copulation and beg for food. During the last week of the month the male started food passing to the female but no successful copulations were seen. An infertile egg was taken from the nest box on 1st October and on the 7th another two eggs were removed and placed in the incubator; these were also infertile. All the eggs laid by this female were infertile and her JONES* STEELE & OW AD ALLY - MAURITIUS KESTREL BREEDING 199 Carl G. Jones Recently fledged female Mauritius Kestrel stretching unilaterally. Photographed in the Black River Gorges, 11th January, 1980. 200 JONES, STEELE & OW AD ALLY - MAURITIUS KESTREL BREEDING second clutch of three eggs was completed on 22nd October when she laid the third egg in the afternoon. This clutch was taken on the day she laid the last egg; she again recycled and the third clutch was removed on 2nd December. In December the one and only copulation attempt was observed with this pair. A fourth and final clutch, this time of only two eggs was removed from the nest box on 1 1th January, 1979. The pair had to be sep¬ arated soon after on 3 1st January as the female had the male pinned to the floor and we feared that the female would kill him. The failure of this pair to produce fertile eggs during the 1978/1979 season was originally believed to be because the male was too young. It later became clear that because she had been partly hand-reared she had become partly imprinted to humans. Reviewing the events of the breeding season it would have been wiser to place the female with the male, instead of vice-versa which had resulted in the female being dominant over the male. The male was probably capable of breeding but frightened of mating with the larger, aggressive female. It was regarded essential that the female was “cured” of her socialisa¬ tion problems, and we attempted this by the following means: (a) placing the female out of sight of humans, and (b) forcing her to use the male’s aviary for breeding, and (c) allowing her a choice of males. The kestrel aviaries were laid out adjacent to each other, the female sand¬ wiched between two males. Screens were placed on the aviary sides so that the female could not see humans, but could see the male kestrels in the adjacent aviaries through metre square wire mesh windows set high in the solid dividing partitions. This allowed her and her prospective partners clear vision of each other if they desired, but also allowed them to retreat out of sight. Nest boxes were placed in the males’ aviaries so that the female had to enter a male’s “territory” if she wanted to breed. A great deal of time was spent preserving the integrity of the males’ territories. The males were managed so that they felt secure in their aviaries. We erected baffles and secure perching sites, to which the birds could hide behind or retreat to if they felt threatened. The female was placed in her seclusion aviary on 5th August, 1979. She was sandwiched between the male kestrels Red (bred 1978 to wild-caught pair Blue x Silver, see below) and Green. The male kestrel Green was ad¬ jacent to Yellow. On 9th September all three of the above male kestrels had made nest scrapes. On the same day the dividing window between the female kestrel and the male kestrel Green was opened. The female was JONES, STEELE & OWADALLY - MAURITIUS KESTREL BREEDING 201 aggressive to the male so the dividing window was only opened when there was someone around to keep a close watch on the progress of both birds. The kestrels were together for a few hours daily until 22nd September when Green appeared unwell. He died on 26th of the month from a low grade, probably chronic infection with terminal pneumonia. On 24th September the female and the male Red were allowed access to each other via the dividing wire mesh window. This pair were not very compatible and very little courtship behaviour was seen. The female was outwardly aggressive to the male and often attacked him. On 23rd October this pair was separated. The tips of the female’s wings were clipped on 25th October to reduce her manoeuverability in the aviary so that she would have great difficulty in catching the male during any aggressive interaction. (This method of reducing the female’s dominance has been used successfully by Campbell (1976) with Merlins Falco columbarius). The female kestrel and the male Yellow were placed together on 27th October. This pair appeared quite compatible although there was some aggression from the female. Both birds became very vocal, whining and chittering. The first solicitation by the female was seen on 3rd November and the first food pass on 5th November. Both birds showed a great deal of courtship activity and the first copulation was seen on 16th November. After this date, mating was seen almost daily. During this period both birds seemed fit although the male occasionally breathed in a laboured fashion. During the afternoon of 1st December the female entered “egg laying lethargy”. We were not unduly concerned, and expected the female to lay fertile eggs. That evening after dark she was sitting on the floor of the aviary. She was picked up and placed in the nest box. An egg could be felt in the oviduct. The following morning at 6 a.m. the nest box was checked, she seemed fit and alert but the egg had not yet been laid. At 8.45 a.m. the nest box was again checked and she was found dead. On inspecting the body, the egg contents ran out from the cloaca. The body was taken to the Ministry of Agriculture Veterinary Laboratory and they diagnosed egg peritonitis and cultured Streptococus pyogenes from the oviduct, which also contained the egg shell remains (see Cooper et al ., 1981). The male Yellow died on 1st January 1980 after developing bad sinusitis around both eyes, a swollen tongue and a discharge from the nostrils on 29th. December. Sinusitis, which first developed in May 1979, was a recurring problem with both Yellow, Green and most of the other kestrels. 202 JONES, STEELE & OW AD ALLY - MAURITIUS KESTREL BREEDING Female Silver During early 1978 it was thought that the four captive kestrels were all males and it was a high priority to trap a female. On 22nd July 1978 on the cliff above Jules Edouard stream in the Black River Gorges in a known kestrel territory, Fay Steele caught an adult pair of kestrels simultaneously on a ballchattri trap baited with House Sparrows Passer domesticus. In the succeeding months another pair of kestrels took over this nesting territory and successfully reared three young. Within an hour of being placed in an aviary both birds had each eaten a white mouse. They settled down in captivity with no problems and ate the pieces of chicken, beef and mice offered to them but plainly preferred mice. They were placed in their permanent aviary on 23rd August and immediately began to inspect the three nest boxes provided. The following day they were observed copulating. After this date and for the next month copulations were frequent - up to twelve times a day. In mid-September the female started to spend a lot of time in the nest box, staying from 30 minutes to an hour at a time. On 21st September she entered the nest box, we believe, to start incubating a clutch of eggs. During the next month the female would emerge from the nest box sometimes three or more times a day but only for food. The male would take food from the food block, then fly to a perch and call the female. She responded by emerging from the box and he would pass food to her; she would quickly eat, seldom staying out for longer than 15 minutes, then return to her eggs. During the morning of 23rd October when the male called her she failed to come out to take her food. At 9.40 a.m. she came out of the box, took a mouse from the male and returned to the nest scrape with it. The female was heard clucking and there was a sound of movement coming from inside the box. She was evidently feeding at least one chick, which had hatched 32 days after the start of incubation. On 30th October the nest box was checked and there was a Kestrel chick and two eggs which proved to be dead in shell. The chick developed normally and as it grew older, the female would stay longer and longer out of the box. By 5th November she was staying out for up to 15 minutes at a time; five days to a week later this period had lengthened to 20-25 min¬ utes and on 15th November it was noted that she was staying out of the box for most of the day but still brooded the chick at night. On 21st November, the chick spent most of the day standing at the entrance to the nest box. The following day the parents were trying to entice it to leave the box. Thirty-six days after hatching on 28th November, the young kestrel left the nest. This bird Red proved to be a male. After leaving the JONES, STEELE & OWADALLY - MAURITIUS KESTREL BREEDING 203 nest he was a very poor flyer and flapped and clambered around the aviary, but within a week he was strong on the wing. He continued to be fed by the male. On 7th December the fledgling was seen feeding for the first time by himself, on the food block. A week later the adult male started to stop the young kestrel from going into the nest box, so the fledgling was removed and placed in an aviary of his own. The day the fledgling left the nest box the adult female spent most of the day in the box and was fed by the male. During succeeding days the female still maintained a strong interest in the nest box and continued to be fed by the male although the young kestrel always got his food first. On 3rd December the adult pair were seen copulating, which was obser¬ ved daily until the end of the year. As the year drew to a close, the female spent longer and longer in the nest box and when it was checked on 31st December there was one egg present. When the box was again checked on 4th January there were two eggs which completed this clutch. (References to three eggs being laid in this clutch (e.g. Jones, 1980) are probably incorrect since a third egg was never seen.) The pattern of incubation behaviour shown by the adults was similar to that shown for the first clutch. The male would incubate more fre¬ quently than before and would take over the incubation for about five or ten minutes while the female was feeding. During incubation the fe¬ male would usually be given food by the male in a food pass, occasionally the female would retrieve cached food for herself if the male was out of sight, for example while he was incubating. The change over between the female and the male was initiated by either sex. Sometimes the female would emerge from the box and wait for the male to fetch food for her, or he would call (whine) and she would emerge from the box. While out of the nest box the female defaecated, stretched wings, tail and legs by uni¬ lateral stretching and preened and roused (ruffling feathers and body shaking). After feeding the female would usually call the male (whine) and he would leave the box, sometimes the change over occurred without any vocalisations. On 3rd February a broken egg was found beneath one of the perches, the contents were rotten and it was not possible to say whether it had been fertile. The remaining egg was removed from the nest box on 11th February; it was thin and brittle, had a crack in it and all the contents had run out. After the 1978/79 breeding season the female often looked unwell but we were not unduly alarmed since she seemed to be eating adequately. Although a little overweight, we did not restrict her food intake since it 204 JONES, STEELE & OW AD ALLY - MAURITIUS KESTREL BREEDING was suspected that she was carrying pesticides, stored in her fat. In 1979 we never observed any courtship activity between the pair. On 1st October the female was seen shuffling in the rectangular nest box and on inspection there were two nest scrapes present. The male completely ignored the female. During October the female whined with excitement at feeding time, and when she could see the kestrels in the adjacent aviaries and also whined softly when in the nest box. The male showed no reaction to the female’s behaviour. He behaved as if ravenously hungry, mantling over his food and retreating away from the female. By the end of October it became obvious that the male was unwell. He always appeared very hungry despite being in plump condition, his eyes appeared glazed and he occasionally showed poor co-ordination. We removed him on 9th Novem¬ ber and he died on 25th November ; postmortem examination showed that he had peritonitis, sinusitis and small quantities of pesticides in his tissues (Cooper et al , 1981). The day that the male was removed from this pair, the female was placed in an aviary adjacent to her son Red. This pair could see each other via a wire mesh window built into the aviary side. Within a few minutes of placing the female in the adjacent aviary the male started to call the female with a high pitched “tink-tink-tink”. The male was calling to the female while perched opposite to her and also while he was in the nest box. They were allowed together the following day, both birds having access to both aviaries. Courtship progressed rapidly; the female started to solicit to the male, and the male food passed to the female on the first day they were together. Both birds became very vocal, whining and chittering, and the male tinking. The first copulation was seen two days later on 12th November. After this date, copulation was seen about once daily. Towards the end of November courtship was noticeably beginning to wane until by mid-December there was no obvious court¬ ship behaviour. In mid-December both birds appeared in good health. At the end of December the female looked a little unwell and sat dozing for much of day and she gave the impression of being an old bird. On 4th January she was found dead on the floor of the aviary. Post-mortem results were in¬ conclusive, but she did have sinusitis and small amounts of pesticides in her tissues. Red remained in good health until 12th January when in the evening he was showing laboured and distressed breathing. He died the following day from a respiratory infection, the body was also examined for viruses, chlamydiae and mycoplasmas, and a new species of myco¬ plasma was identified (Cooper et al., 1981). JONES, STEELE & OWADALLY - MAURITIUS KESTREL BREEDING 205 Captive Breeding: a Reappraisal The deaths of all the captive kestrels was a terrible disappointment to everyone involved in its conservation. Post-mortem results suggest that the deaths were multifactorial in origin and no one condition could be incrim¬ inated. All the captive birds had short reproductive lives. Three of the four female kestrels that have been in captivity died from oviduct condi¬ tions. Only one female thrived for more than one breeding season, two of the birds produced eggs for only one season and one failed to breed at all. The poor reproductive success shown by the kestrel in captivity is of especial interest since Brown and Amadon (1968) attributed the decline of the species to “genetic deterioration”. Cooper (1979), Temple (1978), Jones (1980) and Cooper et al. (in press), all suggest that the reproductive conditions from which some of the captive kestrels have suffered may be under genetic control. Poor reproductive success could also account for the extreme rarity of the kestrel in the wild, although available evidence does not support this. Despite all of the problems that have been encountered with the cap¬ tive kestrels, we believe that it is a suitable bird for captive breeding. It adapts well to captivity and all the captive birds, if they have lived long enough, have shown reproductive behaviour. Since the beginning of the project in 1973 eight birds have been taken from the wild. Five of these were adults and three as nestlings. Three of the females were taken as ad¬ ults and may have been at the end of their reproductive lives. In a recent document (Jones and Owadally, 1981) it has been argued that the Mauritius Kestrel’s best chance of survival is through captive breeding. In future years it is proposed to take eggs and young from the wild for another attempt at captive propagation. Further to this we shall pursue the study of the kestrel in the wild to precisely determine the causes of its low population. Hopefully our studies will help secure the future of this beautiful falcon. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We are grateful to Yousoof Mungroo and Indurdeo Khelawon for their help in caring for the captive kestrels and to John E. Cooper, Royal College of Surgeons of England, for veterinary help and advice. Carl G. Jones and Fay N. Steele were both supported by the International Council for Bird Preservation, World Wildlife Fund (US Appeal) and the New York Zoological Society. Since March 1981 Carl G. Jones has been supported by the ICBP and the WWF International. Table 1 - Reproductive Histories of the Captive Mauritian Kestrels 206 JONES, STEELE & OW AD ALLY - MAURITIUS KESTREL BREEDING Is ^ „S ■§ i 85 •S s o £ 73 43 ej o .5 "3 a 4m to O ^ o , to 03 M < X to 3 *2 3 « 5 £ is- o o s g ■3 3 ,2 ' 3 T3 cj o> E IS O ja £ ■8 -S >* «t © a b .3 « ^ 73 •§ | a, 43 to to 43 43 H H ^ ’ll £ o I ^ wj to SJ 73 * g bfi to II IS ■5 5 a - 9 ’I T3 © a § Is a 222 MUNDY & MARAIS - VULTURES IN SOUTHERN AFRICA miration, and this about-face was more easily accomplished than trying to engender a positive response out of disinterest. As one example of this we could mention our “ricketty” birds, and the interest and sympathy that they have aroused (Figure 2). The syndrome of twisted and broken wing bones is caused by a lack of bone fragments in the diets of the chicks (Mundy and Ledger, 1976), as a result of the elimination of the bone¬ crunching hyaenas in the foraging range of the adult vultures; it is correct¬ ly called metabolic bone disease or osteodystrophy (Cooper, 1978). After we displayed the problem on television, several livestock ranchers took to breaking up the skeletons of carcasses in their own effort to help the birds. As the rancher is precisely the person who inadvertently supplies much of the food for the Cape Vulture, this demonstration of care for the bird’s problems is an important step forward. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank Dr. D. Brand and Messrs. R. Friedman, W. Labuschagne, H. Scott, J. Seale and J. Spence for information on the vultures in their care and for access to the aviaries. We thank the Conservation Trust of Zimbabwe for financially supporting the vultures at Larvon Bird Gardens where much of the research is conducted and Harry and Marie Scott who care for them there. REFERENCES ANTHONY, A.J., KOMEN, J. & MUNDY, P.J. 1981. Lappet-faced Vultures Torgos tracheliotus hatch and rear a White-headed Vulture Trigonoceps occipitalis in the wild. J. Zool., London. 191: 503-508. COOPER, J.E. 1978. Veterinary Aspects of captive birds of prey. Standfast Press, Saul (England). HOUSTON, D.C. and COOPER, J.E. 1975. The digestive tract of the White-backed Griffon Vulture and its role in disease transmission among wild ungulates. J. Wildl. Dis. 11: 306-313. MUNDY, P.J. and FOGGIN, C.M. 1981. Epileptiform seizures in captive African vultures. /. Wildl Dis. 17: 259-265. MUNDY, P.J. and LEDGER, J.A. 1976. Griffon vultures, carnivores and bones. S. African J. Sci 72: 106-110. TERRASSE, J.-F. 1977. Maturite sexuelle du Vautour fauve, premieres donnees obtenues dans la nature. Oiseau 47 : 214-218. VAN EE, C.A. 1981. Captive breeding of Cape Vultures at the Bloemfontein Zoo. Vulture News 5: 14-15. 223 BREEDING AND HAND™ REARING THE BEARDED VULTURE AT THE WASSENAAR ZOO, HOLLAND By J.W.W. LOUMAN (Director) The Bearded Vulture or Lammergeyer Gypaetus barbatus is one of the largest flying birds, with a wingspan of nearly 9 feet. It inhabits the high, remote mountains from southern Europe to the Himalayas. A smaller sub¬ species is found in Africa. Bearded Vultures are becoming extremely rare in the wild and up till now, have seldom been bred in captivity apart from the notable record of the Royal Zoological Gardens, Sofia, Bulgaria, which used to breed this vulture regularly. The Director, Dr. Ad. Schumann, has written exten¬ sively on the breedings and A.A. Prestwich (1955) summarised these accounts as follows: “The first success was in 1916, and up to 1928 nine young Lammergeyers had been reared with only one failure recorded. “The hen usually laid during the first week or so in January. The clutch was two on each occasion, except 1925-26 when only one egg was laid. The incubation period was 55-58 days. Both eggs were always fertile; invariably the second nestling was killed and partially eaten within two or three days of hatching. The one occasion on which the second young one was rescued, it died within four days. “In March 1929 there were eleven offspring of the original pair living in the Sofia Zoo. These events took place in an aviary 6 metres long, 7 deep and 8 high.” Malcolm Davis (1931) mentions a very tame pair in the National Zoological Park, Washington D.C., and says: “This pair was probably bred in captivity.” Possibly they had come from the Sofia Zoo. In recent years our zoo has been attempting to breed these magnificent birds and now, after many setbacks, it seems that we are on the right road. It all started 18 years ago, when four of these birds (subspecies aureus ) arrived at our zoo from Russia. They were at least six years old because they were already in full adult colour and although males and females are practically identical (females are slightly heavier), we were fairly sure that we had two pairs. Observing them during long periods, we noticed that they often formed two couples. Each individual was recognisable by little differences in the head and breast markings. For many years it was our ambition to breed them and to increase our chances, we decided to provide them with more privacy. Each (pre¬ sumed) pair was placed in individual aviaries which were not shared with 224 LOUMAN - BREEDING BEARDED VULTURE other birds. One aviary measured 5x14x6 metres high and the other one 6 x 12 x 5 metres high. The aviaries were provided with perching poles, nesting places and shallow bathing pools. Both aviaries were surrounded by some trees, which reduced the sunshine to a few hours a day. It was not until recent years that both pairs started to lay eggs and these mostly appeared fertile, thus proving that we had two true pairs. Although the parents incubated their eggs very well, all chicks disappeared out of the nests on the day of hatching. Last year one youngster was hand- reared, but unfortunately died after two and a half months, probably due to osteomalacia. This was a little better than the year before when, for the first time, we tried to hand-rear such a chick. It died after only one week from an omphalitis. In order to obtain much better breeding results from our Bearded Vultures we now have well advanced plans for building two new large aviaries. They will be located at a much quieter place, a little further away from our visitors and not surrounded by large, shade-giving trees. The nesting platforms will be built 6 m above the ground, against a stone wall and facing north, just like the niches that Bearded Vultures like to use in the wild. They will also get high perching poles and platforms, a grass plot and a shallow bathing pool with rocks nearby. Our experience is that Bearded Vultures occasionally like to take a bath in their pool but after¬ wards do not manage to fly away because they have become too wet. They must first dry themselves, somewhat like cormorants do when their feathers have become wet. The new aviaries will also be free of obstacles in the middle part to make flying easier for the birds. The Dutch Appeal of the World Wildlife Fund will contribute £3,000 to help our zoo accomplish this breeding project in the coming year. To¬ gether with a few other European zoos, we have agreed to co-operate with a new World Wildlife Fund/International Union for the Conservation of Nature project (No. 1657), the aim of which is to reintroduce Bearded Vultures into the Alps where they were exterminated nearly a century ago. We have promised to give all the Bearded Vultures that we breed to be released in the wild. They will receive full protection in these nature res¬ erves and will be looked after as long as necessary. It will probably take another year before the new aviaries are ready to accommodate our two breeding pairs. In the meantime we have improved both of their old aviaries as far as possible. These aviaries are functional but we do not consider them ideal for breeding. We enlarged the nesting platforms and placed walls and ledges nearby. Also the aviaries were better equipped with more perches and new feeding platforms. In the LOUMAN - BREEDING BEARDED VULTURE 225 wooden doors at the back of the nesting platforms, we mounted a small, one-way glass spy hole so that we could observe all the activity of the birds without being seen by them. To avoid disturbance, ladders to the nests at the back of the aviaries were permanently fastened and placed out of sight. With these temporarily improved aviaries we had hopes of better breeding results in the next season. We were rather disappointed when last November (1979) only one of our breeding pairs wanted to occupy its new nesting platform. The other pair preferred their old nest, which was built under a shelter on the ground. We had not yet removed it to give the birds more choice. Both pairs made rather large nests, using all kinds of nest material which we regularly spread on the floor of the aviary. They took beakfuls of grass sods, short sticks, heather and fir tree twigs into their nests, one by one. We even found some remains of their food in their nests, such as pieces of hide and bones. Large amounts of sheepwool and hay were used by them for the inside lining of the nest. This was an ideal insulation for the eggs against the cold winter temperatures which also occur during their natural breeding season in January and February, high in the mountains. We were very hopeful about the breeding pair which had occupied the newly-built nesting platform. On the day the first egg was laid, they started incubating it by turns. Naturally the keepers in charge, Mr. J. Odijk and Miss F. van Rest, avoided any dis¬ turbance in or near the aviaries during the incubation period. They even stopped most of the cleaning in the cage. The food choice was now grad¬ ually changed from cattle and sheep meat and split bones with marrow to more freshly-killed rabbits and guinea pigs. Although the parents always had sufficient food available and were never disturbed, they unfortunately killed their chicks after hatching, leaving some bloodmarks behind as evi¬ dence. The other breeding pair, as mentioned, preferred to use their same old nest again. We thought that they had less chance of success because the conditions for them were now exactly the same as in the previous year when they had killed their chicks in the eggshell (the day after we had found some remains containing blood in the nest). This year, therefore, we decided to remove their two eggs and put them into an egg-incubator, one week before the predicted hatching day. We believed that it was not worth the risk of losing the eggs again, although we realised that the chance of having imprinted birds was fairly likely. The eggs were coloured dull salmon and mottled with light brown. The eggs were not dipped in an egg dip solution before being put in the incubator but we did take all other hygienic precautions to avoid infections of the eggs in the incubator. 226 LOUMAN - BREEDING BEARDED VULTURE Wassenaar Zoo Bearded Vulture chick, one day old Wassenaar Zoo The same chick, 1 8 days old, in the hospital incubator LOUMAN - BREEDING BEARDED VULTURE 227 The temperature was set at 37.5°C with a maximum humidity. On 24th February 1980, a small hole appeared in the shell of one of the eggs but it took more than two whole days before the chick hatched completely. This was after 53 days’ incubation. We have also observed long hatching periods with chicks of other vulture species in our zoo. The second chick hatched on 2nd March. Both were allowed to dry out before being moved into a hospital baby incubator with a temperature set between 30° - 32°C. The chicks had a greyish white down and a brown bar across their cheeks. After a week the temperature was changed to 26° - 28°C ; this was necess¬ ary because we noticed that when the temperature rose above 30°C, the chicks would continually gasp for breath, apparently getting too hot. The incubator was not standing in our chick rearing room but at the home of our Head Keeper of the Bird Section, Mr. L. van der Voort. His wife, a former bird keeper, took charge of the chicks’ care during the first weeks. Every two to two and a half hours, except at night, they were fed young pink mice and freshly killed, skinned and cut up mice and guinea pigs (flesh, lungs, heart, Ever and so on). At the same time the incubator was cooled and cleaned. A 4% multi-vitamin/mineral preparation was added to every meal. We used “Carnicon” (Trouw, Putten, the Netherlands), which contained 11.5% Ca and 0.5% P, especially prepared with a flavour for carnivorous mammals. The younger chick did not appear viable and died a few days after hatching. It seemed very weak and abnormally formed. Its eyes were of different sizes and it kept its head a little sideways. This did not improve after a few days. It vomited its food after nearly every meal. The other chick did not cause us much trouble and within a few days it was obviously becoming much stronger. It could hold up its head for short periods without bobbing. When it was hungry, it made loud, chirping cries and when fed, it would gape rather like a young songbird does. The amount of food fed daily was about 25-30% of its body weight. By two and a half weeks, the young Bearded Vulture (we called it “Esthel”) was taken out of the incubator and placed in a large artificial nesting box. In the bottom we placed an electric waterproof heating pil¬ low, connected to a thermostat. Above this nest we hung up a heating lamp, run on a separate circuit, as a safeguard. We believe that the chick could not control its body temperature efficiently during the critical first weeks. The pillow was regularly covered with freshly cleaned, textured cloth. Three sides of the nesting box were made out of plyboard and only the front was glazed. It was annoying that the chick always squirted its faeces against the glass window, apparently trying unsuccessfully to keep 228 LOUMAN - BREEDING BEARDED VULTURE its nest clean. Cleaning the nest had to be done carefully as the faeces were very caustic to the skin of the bird keepers’ hands but they never seemed to irritate the chick’s skin, which also got dirty sometimes. As time passed and the young bird grew, we fed it less frequently and the portions offered became bigger. The meals now also contained freshly killed, skinned and cut up rabbits. In the past our zoo has had quite good results hand-rearing vultures such as the Condor Vultur gryphus and King Vulture Sarcoramphus papa. The food for these chicks was always put first in an artificial gastric juice. This contained pepsine and hydrochloric acid and was needed to predigest the food, just as the parent birds do in their crop before feeding it to their chicks (International Zoo Yearbook, No. 20 : Dr. P. Zwart and J.W.W. Toll¬ man). Although Bearded Vultures do not predigest their food for their chicks, they do seem to give them some digestive juices together with the food they feed. We therefore followed the advice of Dr. Ellen Thaler of the Innsbruck Zoo in Austria. This is the only zoo in recent years to have had some successful breedings and one hand-rearing of these vultures. Her advice was simply to spit a little on the food before feeding it to the chick. No water was additionally offered. At the age of five weeks the first dark primaries showed through the grey down of the chick’s wings. We learned that Dr. Ellen Thaler had once been successful placing a hand-reared Bearded Vulture of about one and a half months back into the nest of its parents. These parents had been allowed to rear only one chick because it is known that Bearded Vultures never succeed in rearing both chicks in the wild. Attracted by the hungry begging cries of the new chick, the parents also started to feed their second chick. Separating such a chick from its human foster parents within a few weeks could help to prevent harmful imprinting. We therefore decided also to move our chick back to its parents.In order to let the chick gradually get used to the cold temperatures outside, we first placed it in an unheated room. Very bad weather conditions post¬ poned the reunion until the end of April. It was then placed in an old sheltered nest on the ground. For security measures the entrance to this nest was screened by a wire netting. The mesh measured 15 cm which allowed enough space for the parents to feed their chick. At first the parents reacted with some excitement to the introduction of the chick, but unfortunately showed no signs of wanting to feed it. This situation did not improve when, a few days later, we removed the wire netting from the front of the nest. To observe the birds, we used a telescope in a hiding place located some distance from the aviary. This was nec- LOUMAN - BREEDING BEARDED VULTURE 229 essary because we noticed that they managed to recognise us imme¬ diately and then mostly stopped their activity. Even when we walked amongst a crowd of zoo visitors and were not carrying any equipment or food with us, they could not be fooled. It was disappointing that the parents never tried to feed their chick and for some reason they did not seem to accept their new roles as parents. The chick never made begging cries when its parents approached but as soon as it saw its keeper or other people nearby, it would start to cry repeatedly for food. In trying to solve this problem, we hit upon an unusual idea which is perhaps worth mentioning. We hid a tape recorder in the nest near the chick and it played, at intervals, the begging cries of a hungry Bearded Vulture chick. Observations through the telescope showed that the parents did get a little curious but it did not result in them feeding their chick. Probably not only a begging call but also the begging beha¬ viour of the chick is necessary to tempt the parents to start feeding it. After spending more than three weeks with its parents, we were suddenly forced to end this experiment. Early one morning, totally Wassenaar Zoo Bearded Vulture at Wassenaar Zoo, clearly demonstrating the origin of its name 230 LOUMAN - BREEDING BEARDED VULTURE Wassenaar Zoo One of the two Bearded Vulture breeding aviaries. The nest can be seen at the top, the chick is on the ground (75 days old). The tape recorder is hidden beside the chick. LOUMAN - BREEDING BEARDED VULTURE 231 unexpectedly, one of the parents viciously attacked the chick. Luckily enough a keeper happened to be passing and was just in time to rescue it before it was seriously injured. We cannot explain this behaviour; the parents acted as if they were attacking an intruder. Maybe the period between hatching and the reunion was too long for the breeding pair to still behave as real parents. After this incident the chick was placed in onother aviary. Although it was sitting alone, it was able to see other vultures in neighbouring aviaries. At the age of three months its meals were reduced to only two a day and consisted more and more of ordinary pieces of cattle and sheep meat with Carnicon. Crushed watersnail-shells were once in a while given as an additional calcium resource. The weight of the young vulture at 16 weeks was 5.650 kg and its wingspan was 210 cm. Its plumage at this age had become dark brown with patches of white and light brown show¬ ing here and there. Every night the young vulture slept on the highest spot in the aviary which it could easily reach, having already managed short flights. At 18 weeks it was fed only once a day. It could now tear up small pieces of meat from carcasses, in the same manner as the adults. After its dinner it often lay down with its legs pulled up. This behaviour did not disturb us much because we had also noticed this sometimes in our adult vultures. At the time of writing (September 1980) the young Bearded Vulture is just over half a year old, progressing well and becoming completely independent. Because we had minimised human contact, it has now grad¬ ually become less tame and it seems to exhibit no signs of imprinting on humans anymore. We hope that this will mean that our young Bearded Vulture will make a good subject after all for the World Wildlife re-intro¬ duction project in the Alps. REFERENCES DAVIS, M. 1931. Aviculture, p. 299. PRESTWICH, A.A. 1955. Records of Birds of Prey Bred in Captivity (published privately) PSENNER, Dr. Hans. 1976. Haltung and Zucht des Bartgeiers. Zool. Garten, Jena, 4-5. THALER, Dr. EUen and PECHLANER, Dr. Helmut. 1979. Volierenbrut und Handaufzucht beim Bartgeier. Gefiederte Welt, 2. 232 West Berlin Zoo Breeding pair of Great Grey Owls at the West Berlin Zoo, male on the left 233 KEEPING AND BREEDING THE GREAT GREY OWL Strix nebulosa lapponica AT THE WEST BERLIN ZOO By RUDOLF REINHARD (Scientific Assistant) The Great Grey Owl Strix nebulosa is undoubtedly one of the most fascinating species of the holarctic owls. The subspecies S. n. nebulosa J.R. Forster 1772 occurs in an area ranging between the 70th and 40th degree of latitude of North America whilst the northern European and Asiatic subspecies S.n. lapponica Thunberg 1798 is to be found between the 70th and 50th degree of latitude. The existence of a third subspecies, S. n. elisabethae Stegmann 1925, is documented only by a single stuffed specimen originating from North Mongolia. In 1911 the Berlin Zoo obtained for the first time several specimens of the Eurasian subspecies which unfortunately died five years later in 1916. It was not until 1964 that this species became available again and a single female was purchased. In 1971 three more specimens were received from the Helsinki Zoo which all proved to be females and one was sent to the Copenhagen Zoo in 1972, another on breeding loan to Hannover Zoo in 1976. Fortunately we were finally able to obtain a male S.n. lapponica in 1977 which came from the Copenhagen Zoo though it originated from Helsinki. This male newcomer - imperceptibly smaller than the females - was given a mate and they were installed in an outdoor aviary measuring 16 sq. m. x 3 m, with dense undergrowth. Twonestboxes,80x60 x 50 cm, were put up 2 m above ground level and one side of each of these was left open with a slat to prevent the eggs from falling out. In spring 1979 the female started to make sounds which had not been heard before - low, rhythmical cat’s mewing which was presumed to be an enticement call to the male. At the same time, the male started what seemed to be courtship feeding, taking rats and mice to the female occa¬ sionally. On 15th April the female moved into a nest box to lay five eggs in nine days which were removed for incubation and to encourage a second clutch. Only a week later, the same call was heard again and on 5th May the female moved back into a nest box. She laid six eggs which we left with her to hatch but unfortunately the first chick to hatch out was accidentally killed by the female and pushed from the box. Therefore we removed the remain¬ ing eggs for incubation also. Shortly after the chicks hatched. Their birth- 234 REINHARD - BREEDING GREAT GREY OWL Young Great Grey Owls at 60 days old REINHARD - BREEDING GREAT GREY OWL 235 weight averaged 48 g each. While one chick did not survive, the rest were reared without problems. They were fed on chopped up mice and sparrows. Their eyes opened at five days and their food call sounded somewhat like that of young Tawny Owls. They developed extremely well and at 100 days they had reached an average weight of 947 g, resembling the adults totally in size and plumage, though their food call still revealed them as juveniles. This is the first successful breeding of this species recorded in any Ger¬ man zoo, and elsewhere only Copenhagen Zoo and Helsinki Zoo have successfully bred the Great Grey Owl. In 1980, we incubated two clutches of five eggs each, of which only four chicks were hatched, the rest of the eggs being infertile. The first clutch of six eggs in 1981 proved fertile and all the chicks were hatched but their average birth weight of 35 g was markedly lower than that of the chicks previously hatched. None of the chicks survived and post-mortem examination revealed rachitic deficiencies as well as pseudomonic infec¬ tions. The symptoms observed - respiratory distress as well as heavy secre¬ tion of phlegm from the beak - strongly suggested an aspergillosis infesta¬ tion. From a second clutch this year, three chicks were hatched out of four eggs. They proved to be considerably stronger, weighing about 50 g each, and so far they have developed very well and we expect all to sur¬ vive. The average size of the Great Grey Owl’s eggs ranges between 4.68 x 3.92 cm and 5.30 x 4.22 cm; their weight averages between 48.2 g and 50.9 g, and their colour is a dull white. REFERENCES BURTON, J. A. 1973. Owls of the World, pp. 128-130. Peter Lowe, London. EVERTS, W. 1980. Erfolgreiche Bartkauzzucht. Die Voliere, 3. Jahrg., Heft 4, pp. 143-144. REINHARD, R. 1980. Erfolgreiche Bartkauz-Zucht irn Zoo Berlin. Die Ge- fiederte Welt, 104. Jahrg., Heft 10, p. 184. ECK, E. and BUSSE, H. 1977. Eulen. Neue Brehm-Bucherei, Vol. 469, Witten¬ berg Lutherstadt. 236 REINHARD - BREEDING GREAT GREY OWL Ural Owl Strix uralensis in an “angry”position - adult male Young Ural Owls - 50 days old 237 BREEDING THE URAL OWL Strix uralensis AT THE NATIONAL? ARK BAYERISCHER WALD, WEST GERMANY By DR. WOLFGANG SCHERZINGER Compared to its near relations, the common Tawny Owl Strix aluco and the interesting Great Grey Owl S. nebulosa, the Ural Owl is a large bird with a long tail. Its name is misleading because the Ural Mountains repres¬ ent only a small part of this owl’s breeding area; in fact, it ranges east to Siberia and Japan, and as far south as the Carpathians. I prefer, therefore, the German name “Habichtskauz”, meaning “Goshawk Owl”, because of the long, broadly barred tail feathers and the vertically striped breast fea¬ thers, which show a striking similarity to a young Goshawk. Its other characteristics are almond-shaped eyes, abroad facial disc delicately marked with lines, occiput heavily striped, a narrow beak and a wide range of calls. In addition to the main range in northern Europe, small populations of Ural Owls still exist in Slovakia, Yugoslavia (Slovenia), the Austrian Alps and the Bohemian woods. In the most westerly areas, the owl only occurs sporadically but breeding pairs have been reported in recent years in Austria. In the woodlands of the Nationalpark Bayerischer Wald, the last record of the Ural Owl was in 1926 and since then it is thought to be extinct. Now the administration of this national park is trying to re-establish this owl by introducing young birds which have been bred in captivity. When I first started to try to breed this species, I could find almost no previous references. Behm (1909) published a breeding success; in 1930 Heinroth reared three young which also bred in the following years; in Nuremberg Zoo a pair bred, unfortunately unobserved, in a reserve cage in 1961 (Seitz, 1966); egg-laying was noted for two years at the Alpenzoo, Innsbruck (Psenner, pers.) and Japan (Kazame, 1974). When I obtained two Ural Owls from Sweden in 1970, I had already successfully bred Pygmy Owl, Tengmalm’s Owl, Little Owl and Snowy Owl, and hoped to collect a lot of information about this species by watching the owls during their daily activity peaks over several weeks. Their aviary measured 4 m x 7 m and was furnished with large, hollow trunks, rough branches and thick fir trees. When they arrived in Feb¬ ruary, the owls started courtship after a few days of acclimatisation. Although I could not get much information from the literature about 238 SCHERZINGER - BREEDING URAL OWL the meaning of their numerous calls, I very soon learned that I had two males when they tried to copulate with each other. Luckily Professor Psenner from the Alpenzoo, Innsbruck, co-operated by quickly exchang¬ ing one of them for an adult female. That April this newly mated pair laid two clutches of two and four eggs, all of them fertile, but broken by the owls after a few weeks’ incu¬ bation. Artificial incubation was tried unsuccessfully. The next year, the pair had to move and they were put in an aviary 4 m x 4 m in size and 1.7 m high. Here five healthy chicks hatched but were killed by their parents. It was obvious that the cause of all these losses was the female’s high level of aggression - even when disturbed during feeding or changing the water, she left the nesting hole, attacked the keeper or her mate and jumped back on to the clutch vigorously. On 2nd February 1972 the owls had to be moved again, this time into an enclosure in the Nationalpark, which was covered in deep snow with heavy frost. Based on experience, their new aviary was built as large as possible (4m x 12 m), provided with plenty of hiding places and different nesting holes. The branches were very large to make copulation as easy as possible. That year the female produced two clutches of two and three eggs, laid in a natural hollow, 60 cm deep. In spite of all these efforts, the eggs were broken again so before the 1973 breeding season, I fixed a wooden stick across the nest hollow so that when entering the hole the owl had to jump on it first. Although the female sat constantly on the clutch, I put the eggs in the incubator for hand-rearing and two young owls were reared - the first breeding success in our Nationalpark after so many failures (Scherzinger, 1974). These cap¬ tive-bred owls in turn bred more readily and so the results increasingly improved with the following generations. We realised that five breeding pairs at least would be needed for the re-introduction programme and so, in order to avoid producing very inbred birds, I looked for some unrelated blood. In 1973 I bought a pair from Sweden and a pair from Rumania; in 1977 I was able to exchange two young birds from our breeding stock with owls from the East Berlin Zoo. However, since both the Rumanian owls showed distorted behaviour and appeared unable to breed successfully, our whole breeding stock is based on six specimens. These birds were kept in aviaries measuring 4 m x 8 m, with one side sheltered, a wind-screeen at the back and a solid roof for 2 m. For breeding holes I offered hollow trees or nesting boxes with a concave shaped bottom. Hiding places were offered by spruce trees. All five aviaries were placed within a former Ural Owl habitat so the young SCHERZINGER - BREEDING URAL OWL 239 W. Scherzinger Ural Owl chick a few hours after hatching owls could be released where they had been reared but it was necessary to fence off photographers and tourists. In the following years, successful natural rearing occurred regularly but not in all the pairs. To avoid any risk of this precious breeding stock being destroyed by disease or theft, some pairs of our offspring were placed with experienced private breeders from 1978 onwards. Hence in 1981 the Nationalpark has five breeding pairs and seven others live in zoos or other breeding collections. Between 1973 and 1981, the caged owls in the Nationalpark produced at least 100 eggs and 47 young, and 17 young were reared in other collec¬ tions. The most successful year was 1977 when 12 young owls hatched from 14 eggs. Losses of eggs through breaking (f.i. 1980) or of whole from 14 eggs. Losses of eggs through breaking (f.i. 1980) or of whole clutches through interruption in brooding (f.i. 1979) occurred often in 240 SCHERZINGER - BREEDING URAL OWL other seasons. Nevertheless, compared with the poor number of other recorded successes (once each - Behrn 1909, Nuremberg Zoo 1961 and Berlin Zoo 1977), I feel the results are very satisfactory. Young Ural Owls start their courtship song as early as in the first autumn, the pair bond is fixed during the winter and they become sexually mature within their first year. Eggs are laid between 1st March and the last week of April but replacement clutches are sometimes laid as late as the middle of May. The average clutch is three eggs (maximum six). The female only incubates and the young hatch after 35 days. Their eyes are closed and they are covered with a very fine down. Ural Owl nestlings are very robust and develop more quickly than the Tawny Owl. Their eyes begin to open on the third day and on the fifth day the feathers of the second plumage emerge, and the nestling is covered with greyish-brown barred fluff when three weeks old. At this stage the male Ural Owl carries food to the nest site and hands it over to his mate at the entrance or in the hollow; he very rarely feeds the young ones himself. At five weeks the young owls leave their nest and jump on to the ground. Running and hopping they disappear into dense vegetation and try to climb up the trees using their beak, claws and wings. They are able to fly well by six weeks old. From the 75th day the adult feathers appear, first on the belly and breast, then at the neck and on the back, and finally on the head. The adults care for the young for about ten weeks and the young owls stop their begging calls when about 14 weeks old - in the wild they have to find their own food from this time (Scherzinger, 1980). As an experiment a male Ural Owl was put with a female Tawny Owl, a smaller, related species. This female produced three hybrids in 1978 but attempts, over two seasons, to breed from these hybrids failed al¬ though they showed very active courtship behaviour and even copula¬ ted (Scherzinger, in press). On the other hand, a male hybrid was crossed successfully with its Tawny Owl mother in 1981 and one young was reared. In the early years, the young Ural Owls were retained to enlarge the breeding stock but in 1975 for the first time young Ural Owls were re¬ leased in the woods. I used the same technique as had been so successful in re-introducing young Eagle Owls into the Nationalpark since 1972. A young bird, at least three and a half months old, fully fledged and with nearly fully developed plumage, is caught, ringed and put into a basket¬ shaped pile of twigs beside the parents’ aviary at nightfall. The young owl stays in this hiding place for 10-20 minutes, recovering from the shock, and then climbs out, looks around to get its bearings and usually goes over SCHERZINGER - BREEDING URAL OWL 241 to the parents’ aviary. On no account must the keeper disturb the bird at this point or it will fly away and starve. This releasing technique allows the bird to be in contact with its parents or siblings in the aviary so it will stay in the vicinity and we can offer it food. Ural Owls stand up to this test as well as Eagle Owls but have a shorter begging period and disappear after a few weeks. From 1975 to 1980 a total of 30 Ural Owls were released but to date we have not been able to follow their progress. Only one female settled in the Nationalpark and her calls were recorded for three years. Most of the young owls will probably have dispersed into lower-lying areas where the winter is not so cold and there is not so much snow as in the mountains of the Nationalpark. This question should be answered within the next few years by radio transmitters, provided that we continue to breed the Ural Owl as successfully as at present. REFERENCES BEHM, A. 1909. Fortpflanzung des Kolkiaben Corvus corax L. der Habichtseule Syrnium uralense Pall, und des Uhus Bubo bubo L. in der Gefangenschaft. Zool. Beob. Frankfurt, 50: 225-229. HEINROTH, O. & M. 1931. Die Vogel Mitteleuropas. IV, Berlin. KAZAME, T. 1974. Observations on egg clutches of wounded Ural Owls in aviaries. Misc. Repts. Yamashina Inst. Ornithol, 7: 333-349. SCHERZINGER, W. 1974. Habichtskauznachzucht im Nationalpark Bayerischer Wald gelungen. Zool. Garten, 44: 59-61. . 1980. Zur Ethologie der Fortpflanzung und Jugendentwick- lung des Habichtzkauzes Strix uralensis mit Vergleichen zum Waldkauz Strix aluco. Bonn. Zool. Monogr. 15: 66 pgs. . . (in press). Beobachtungen an Waldkauz- Habichtskauz-Hybri- den Strix aluco x Strix uralensis. Zool. Garten. SEITZ, A. 1966. Habichtskauzbrut im Nurnberger Tiergarten. Gefiederte Welt, 90:1. 242 BREEDING THE STRIPED OWL Rhinoptynx clamator By R.G. KRAHE (Smithers, British Columbia, Canada) For over a decade I have had a special interest in maintaining and breed¬ ing owls from all over the world. Because of my successes and failures dur¬ ing these years, this group of birds has become increasingly fascinating to me. Doubtless a pair of Striped Owls from Paraguay, that I obtained from a friend in 1969, was the final incentive for this development. At the time both birds were two and a half months old and still in their juvenile plu¬ mage. According to the Striped Owls which I later bred, I could recon¬ struct their age exactly from the development of their plumage. At the beginning, of course, I did not know whether I had a true pair but a difference in weight and size between them gave me some hope. As has been said already, both birds came from Paraguay, almost the furthest point of their South American and Central American distribution which ranges from southern Mexico, including a part of the West Indies (Tobago), to northern Argentina. Their habitat in these countries is decid¬ uous seasonal forest, marshes, riverine forests and savannahs. They are resi¬ dents of the lowlands and are absent from mountains. The genus Rhino p- tynx , contains the single species clamator of which there are four races. Description They are the size of a Tawny Owl Strix aluco, approximately 3540 cm long, but they appear more powerful on account of their much larger and more powerful beaks and talons. Generally they look more like the smaller species of the genus Bubo, the Spotted Eagle Owl Bubo africanus. The females are somewhat larger and heavier than the males, the average weight of my female Striped Owls being over a pound (570 g) and that of the males under a pound (490 g). The underparts are white to buff with sooty brown streaks. These streaks become so concentrated on the breast that they almost form spots. The throat is white. The whole upperparts, including head, wings and tail, are brown to ochre. Wing and tail feathers are barred transversely with bold sooty brown. The head and back have sooty brown vertical streaks like the underparts. The legs and feet are fine buffy feathered. The facial disc, bordered black, is reddish brown in young birds and becomes more white as they get older but there is still a brown tinge around KRAHE - BREEDING STRIPED OWL 243 the eyes. The eye is composed of two colours; the pupil is dark blue and the iris dark orange. I should add that the colour difference between pupil and iris can only be seen close up. From a distance the eyes appear to be dark brown. In young Striped Owls, the colours of the iris and pupil are noticeably lighter. The beak is dark grey and the lores are white. Management Shortly after their arrival they were moved into an aviary 8 m long by 4 m wide and 2.5 m high. The back part of the aviary is completely enclo¬ sed and only the planted front of the aviary is open. This planted part is con structed so that the aviary gets sunshine and rain throughout the year. There is a small pond in which the owls regularly bathe. Although I know that the adaptability of many tropical species of animals to our Central European climate is not difficult, I was still very surprised to see the Striped Owls splashing in the pond when it had a thin layer of ice on a frosty January morning in 1970. It seems that the tropical climate of their natural home is not necessary and the cold northern winter does not bother them at all provided - and from my observations this is the most important factor - the food supply increases in the same measure as the thermometer falls. During a heatwave in the summer, they lose much of their appetite and equally in the coldest part of the winter their normal daily ration is often doubled. Whilst on the topic of daily rations, I should discuss diet, at which point I find that many people decide that owls are not so lovable after all. When giving a talk about my owls, I mention the 3,000 one-day old chicks lying in our freezer or our mice and rat breeding, I find I am looking at many horrified faces even though I point out that it is essential to offer a natural food to these creatures. My Striped Owls’ diet is made up of 60% one-day old chicks, 30% mice and 10% rats (the percentage is calculated from the number of pieces and not the weight of the prey). The day-old chicks are frozen and left to thaw for twelve hours before feeding. Mice and rats are fed freshly killed and still warm or else given alive to the owls. The average daily consump¬ tion is two chicks or four mice or half a rat. All the literature states that Striped Owls feed on small mammals. Ffrench also mentions that grass¬ hoppers are taken. I trained my Striped Owls to hunt for live animals shortly after they arrived and although the main part of their food is dead, they do occas¬ ionally catch live mice and rats. The female Striped Owl was able to kill a fully grown male rat which I never saw the male do. 244 KRAHE - BREEDING STRIPED OWL K G. Krahe Breeding pair of Striped Owls on the nest Both Striped Owls became accustomed to their new life without problems and by the time a year had passed, it was obvious that they were doing very well. They had moulted from juvenile to adult plumage and were very beautiful. They were sharing an aviary with a pair of Spectacled Owls Pulsatrix perspicillata and there have never been any problems with either species in eleven years, even when they were both rearing young. I became very interested in the calls of the Striped Owls and es¬ pecially the deep, short, ragged “barking” which was uttered by the male six to seven times in succession. This “whoo-whoo-whoo-whoo-whoo- whoo-whoo-whoo” increases from the first “whoo” to the last in tempo and volume. The female answers or joins in with the same series of calls, though the pitch is higher and her barking sounds like “whoi-whoi-whoi- whoi-whoi-whoi-whoi” . The function of these calls, I am sure, is to establish position and con¬ tact. The “barkings” are uttered only when sitting and at any time of day or night, when either resting or active. In particular, during the mating season, which is not connected to any distinct time of the year, the male utters a hollow soft “whoo”, lasting almost two seconds. The KRAHE - BREEDING STRIPED OWL 245 female answers with a soft screarning.The female’s reply to these “whoo” calls, which go on for hours, is often heard only before breeding. “Bar¬ king” in unison is heard much more often. The male’s call means terri¬ tory demarcation and mating readiness whereas the female’s screaming means only mating readiness. When several Striped Owls were kept in the same aviary, there was a recognisable though not very rigid order of precedence. Ilf an owl of a lower rank perched beside an owl in a higher position, the latter threatened the first owl which then made a series of rapid whining “ee-ee-ee-ee-ee” cries. This appeased the superior owl which generally allowed the lower- ranking owl to perch. But sometimes it led to a fierce attack. The fear-cry of Striped Owls is a loud, shrill screaming. When surprised and threat¬ ened, they utter a loud, strong “Wou” which again can be compared to a dog’s bark. Breeding Striped Owls are sexually mature in their first year and so my pair started to breed in December 1970. On 14th December, the clutch with four eggs was complete and the female sat fast. This was the first of a total of 27 breedings up to 1979. The nest is a scratched hollow in the ground which is made by the fe¬ male. Holes near the ground will also be used. The nesting site is chosen by the male and marked by scratching. The eggs are laid at an average interval of two and one-third days (56 hours). The shortest interval between two eggs has been a little more than one and three-quarter days (44 hours). The longest interval between egg- laying has been three and a half days (86 hours). Striped Owls’ eggs are dull white and I found that the average egg size, based on the measurements of 83 eggs, was 44.65 x 36.45 mm. The greatest variation is between 40.5 - 49.2 mm in length and 32.95 - 38.3 mm in width. The egg weighs between 28 and 33.5 g. The average clutch is three eggs but there have been clutches of only one egg or as many as five eggs. The 27 clutches consisted of two clutches of one egg, two clutches of two eggs, sixteen of three eggs, six of four eggs and one of five eggs. During nesting, the male supplies the female and later the young with food. After the prey is caught and no longer moving, the male takes it in his beak and sits down close to the nest. Calling constantly and retain¬ ing the prey in his beak, he tries to get the female away from the nest to deliver up the mouse or rat. Another variation is when he marches right 246 KRAHE - BREEDING STRIPED OWL up to the nest and gives the prey to the female. The word “march” is chosen deliberately because neither of them ever land straight on the nest. The landing ground is some way from the nest and the remaining distance must be covered on foot. Striped Owls do not hop but stalk like cranes, starlings or storks only it does not look so elegant; it it best compared to a duck’s waddle. When the male gives the prey to the female, she reacts in one of three ways: (i) She leaves the eggs and eats the prey away from the nest. During this time, a maximum of five minutes, the male stays and guards the nest. (ii) If the prey is not too large, she takes it and swallows it without getting up from the eggs. (iii) She takes the prey, lays it amongst the eggs and continued incuba¬ ting. I have never seen the male incubating but he is regularly close to the fe¬ male on the edge of the nest. The pair are very devoted. Once when I was catching the owls up for measuring and weight control, the female watched with great interest until the moment I caught the male in a net. Immediately she started to attack me and my daughter who was helping me. The same attacks have been made by both of them when someone comes too close to the nest or to the dependent young. First they snap their beaks, “spit” like cats, form a semi-circle with their outspread wings and then they step from one foot to the other in their excitement. This threatening attitude is not actually dangerous, although it appears to be. If one keeps ones eyes on them whilst walking slowly backwards, all is well. This threat is an attitude which we know many animals are capable of showing. In instances when I have ignored the threat and come closer still to the nest with eggs or to the young, the owl has stopped snapping and spitting, has put its wings together, paused and stooped its body and then seconds later started to attack. With its large talons stretched forward, it continually attacks my head only. If unable to duck, I have had a painful strike on my head with blood flowing from where the claws caught. The following incubation periods are based on all the breedings in my aviaries. The first-laid egg needs a term of 33-34 days, the remaining eggs need only 31-32 days. As with so many other birds, I have found that the actual incubation period is preceded by a short time when the eggs are kept warm. After the Striped Owl has laid her first egg, she sits high on the nest but after the second egg is laid, she presses herself right down on the nest to give full warmth to the eggs which explains why two of the KRAHE - BREEDING STRIPED OWL 247 young always hatch at the same time although one egg has been laid two and a third days before the other. The remaining young hatch at the same intervals as the eggs have been laid. The incubation of the whole clutch is, therefore as follows: first egg - 34 days, second egg 31.5 days, third egg - 31.5 days and the fourth egg - 31.5 days. The incubation period of the Striped Owl is, therefore, 31-32 days. Of the first clutch, two chicks hatched on 10th January, 1971, the third on 12th January and the fourth on 14th January. Newly-hatched Striped Owls are covered with thick, grey-white down; they weigh 18- 22 g and are 8-9 cm long. To my disappointment, only one young owl was reared from the first clutch and, in fact, this was the case with most of the broods in the follow¬ ing years. After the young hatched, all except one disappeared during the first five days. For the first time, at the end of 1974, and in subse¬ quent years, two young owls have been reared and in 1978 the whole clutch survived, three young being reared from three eggs with no problems. Whilst I cannot describe all the breedings in my aviaries, I would just like to briefly describe one failure. For this brood the female had chosen to nest in the uncovered part of the aviary and the nest hollow had been scratched by the female in the existing soil. She had already laid two eggs when there were heavy rainfalls during the night. In the morning the nest- hollow was full of water and the female sat drenched to the skin on the eggs. I built her a new nest a little higher but right beside the nest standing under water, took the two eggs and put them in the new nest. The female understood the situation straight away and laid the third egg in this nest that afternoon and continued brooding. However, it rained a lot that month and often the female became very wet. Although during incubation the nest hollow was no longer full of water, the circumstances had been very disadvantageous and the embryos died in different stages of devel¬ opment. Since that time, the female has never nested in the uncovered part of the aviary. As already described, the newly-hatched Striped Owls have grey-white down which is replaced after a few days by new, long buff down. This buff down is in turn replaced by the normal adult plu¬ mage after two and a half months. The owlets leave their nest in the third week by foot as they are as yet unable to fly. Their parents watch them very carefully and are very ag¬ gressive at this time. When the young start attempting to fly, the parents give them whole prey rather than prey already broken up into pieces. The wing and tail feathers develop right from the first day and grow so quickly that after a month the owlets are able to fly for short distances of about 1 m to 1.20 m. These wing and tail feathers are moulted in the 248 SAYERS - CAPTIVE OWLS following year. At four weeks the weight of the owlets is 25 times greater than their weight at birth. After that they lose weight because of their increasing activity and will reach their normal weight when three months old but a further weight gain is possible. The contact call of the owlets after leaving the nest is a long, high “sspee’. Striped Owls are seldom seen in zoological gardens or private aviaries. All the Striped Owls currently in zoos in West Germany and West Berlin are young from my breeding pair but unfortunately none have bred to date. SOME NOTES ON CAPTIVE OWLS By BERNARD SAYERS (Chelmsford, Essex) Over the years I have frequently been asked if a good text book existed which provided comprehensive information about the captive maintenance and breeding of owls (Strigiformes). To my knowledge, no such book exists although a number of papers on the subject have appeared in scattered journals. When the editor of this Magazine invited contributions for the special issue devoted to birds of prey, my mind turned to providing a few notes based on my experience of keeping and breeding owls over the past 17 years. It was only after I had thought carefully about these notes that I realised how little of value there was to record. This can be explained by two factors :- Owls are some of the least demanding of all birds to keep and breed in captivity and seem to respond well to a regimen based on sound com¬ mon sense, and, Secondly, since much of their activity is nocturnal, it can be very diffi¬ cult for a keeper to closely observe the complete behaviour of his charges. SAYERS - CAPTIVE OWLS 249 Quite simply, it is my belief that if three basic requirements can be satisfied, birds in captivity, if physically and psychologically sound, must breed. These requirements may be summarised as follows 1. True , compatible pair Many species of birds are difficult or virtually impossible to sex visually and this, in the past, must have resulted in many species gaining unjust reputations for being difficult to breed simply because many of the at¬ tempts involved examples of the same sex. Fortunately science has now come to the rescue in that birds can be sexed surgically (laparoscopy) sexed by means of a hormone analysis utilising either a faecal sample or feather pulp. In many respects, the former technique would seem to be the more successful with almost 100% accuracy and very low risk. In general, most species of owls can be sexed visually with reasonable reliability and, if physical characteristics are considered in conjunction with behaviour, few mistakes should result. However, I have found some species, such as the Little Owl Athena noctua extremely difficult to sex reliably and with these species, surgical sexing would undoubtedly save a great deal of was¬ ted time. Similarly, incompatibility does not frequently prove to be a problem with owls unless they have been tamed and become imprinted to some ex¬ tent. Usually two birds of the same sex, even when adult, will agree per¬ fectly amicably and in several cases I have known, when two females have been housed together, they have laid and incubated clutches of in¬ fertile eggs in the same scrape. Even more surprising perhaps is that some species will live and even breed on the colony system if the aviary is sufficiently spacious. Also I know of several instances involving a number of species in which unmated birds have occupied the same aviary as a breeding pair, yet even when the latter were rearing chicks they made no attempt to injure their aviary com¬ panion. However, having made these observations, they should be promptly qualified by the caution that, in general, colony breeding is not advisable and true pairs should always be segregated from unmated birds. As mentioned previously, owls which have been hand-reared and isola¬ ted as pets frequently become anti-social misfits and when attempts are made to pair them for breeding, it is not uncommon for them to attack or even kill their potential mate. As with any form of livestock, sweeping generalisations are never wholely correct and to illustrate this point, one male Great Eagle Owl B.b.bubo, which had been used by an illusionist and was a very tame imprint, ultimately settled down perfectly successfully 250 SAYERS-CAPTIVE OWLS to domestic duties even though he continued to court his keeper with great vigour. It is probably true to say that the more intelligent a group of birds are, the more likely it is that there will be problems involving incompatibility. Thus the very intelligent birds such as parrots and crows can be very selec¬ tive in accepting a mate. Although I have kept owls for some years and continue to find them of immense interest, I cannot, with any conscience, claim that they would score well in the intelligence status and possibly, for this reason, few true pairs prove to be incompatible. Save, that is, for the imprints. 2. Diet To my mind, a nutritious, varied diet is essential if any form of livestock is to be bred to maximum effect. Many attempts to breed from sound pairs of birds undoubtedly fail because too little attention is given to diet. Quite obviously, the ultimate would be to supply exactly the same diet that the birds would consume in the wild, but this is rarely, if ever, poss¬ ible. Consequently, for many birds, complicated formulae need to be em¬ pirically involved in order to simulate the natural diet and so promote satis¬ factory results. Fortunately it is quite simple to simulate almost exactly the natural diet of raptors. All owls are predatory birds and naturally prey on insects, mammals, birds, reptiles and fish. Few are strictly specialised in their feeding habits, although some do show a preference for certain prey species. In many instances this is probably determined more by avail¬ ability and ease of capture than by gastronomic selection. In the wild owls have rarely been witnessed scavenging from large carcasses unless forced to do so by extreme conditions. Therefore, to summarise, owls prey on spe¬ cies which are small enough to be killed easily and then eaten in their en¬ tirety. This food pattern can be closely simulated in captivity with little difficulty if whole carcasses can be supplied which are small enough to be eaten whole by the owls then the natural diet will have been matched al¬ most exactly. If owls are graded, according to size, into three categories, my birds are fed as follows :- Small owls (Scops, Little, Malayan Spotted, etc.) Mice and day-old poultry chicks. On many occasions I have attempted to vary the diet offered to these species by offering insects in the form of live locusts, mealworms, beetles, etc., but with no success. The birds have never accepted insect food unless they have been very hungry. Instead, they have shown a consistent preference for mice or poultry chicks and SAYERS - CAPTIVE OWLS 251 this has even applied to very small species such as Common Scops Owl Otus scops. It would seem that self-denial of such insect food has little ad¬ verse effect because one of my Collard Scops Owls Otus bakkamoena has now been in captivity for over twenty years and my small owls seem to breed successfully on a diet of mice and chicks. -- Medium sized owls (Barn, Tawny, Woodford’s, Boobook, etc.) Mice, chicks and young rats up to approximately 4 oz in weight. Some collections provide these birds with jointed rabbit and sections of large rats. This diet, while quite adequate, is to my view much less satisfactory than small items which can be fed in their entirety. By providing small ro¬ dents and chicks, the owls can consume the whole body and so ensure a balanced intake. - Large owls ( eagle owls of all species and Snowy) Chicks, rats up to 12 oz in weight and small rabbits. I have seen domestic pigeons and fully grown poultry fed to the larger owls. Admittedly no hard evidence to suggest that this practice has been responsible for prob¬ lems can be offered, but I have always avoided these items on the basis that domestic poultry and pigeons frequently carry a wide variety of avian diseases; although their inherent resistance keeps it suppressed and the symptoms are not noticeable. Some species of owls, particularly those symptoms from the Arctic, are very susceptible to avian diseases encountered in poul¬ try and I have reasoned that the possibility of disease being promoted by infected food is too great to be acceptable. Finally, as a few general observations on diet; I only use captive-reared chicks and rodents. Apart from the problem of obtaining wild-caught mammals and birds in sufficient quantity (I use approximately 4 tons of chicks and rodents each year) the risk of introducing disease or toxic sub¬ stances is too great. In these days of widespread use of insecticides, herbi¬ cides, rodenticides, etc., any wild-taken bird or animal must be suspected of being contaminated and although the level of contamination may have been sub-lethal to the individual concerned, when fed to an owl these traces of toxic substances frequently prove to be cumulative until they reach a lethal level. Also victims of a shotgun must always be totally avoi¬ ded. There is always the possibility that odd lead pellets will remain in the carcass and these, if eaten, are broken down by the gastric fluids and ab¬ sorbed into the blood stream. According to experiments with waterfowl, one lead pellet is quite frequently sufficient to cause the death of ducks the size of Mallard. All of the food fed to my owls is as sterile as can be assured. Domestic 252 SAYERS- CAPTIVE OWLS poultry chicks are hatched under carefully regulated conditions and simi¬ larly the rodents used are the excess production from research units where careful controls are imposed. Ideally, freshly killed items should be offered to raptors, but due to logistical problems, this is rarely possible. The most convenient method is to acquire food in bulk and store it in deep freeze until it is required. All carcasses are best frozen whole and not eviscerated; subsequently the com¬ plete, thawed body can be fed to the raptors. All chicks and rodents which are destined for owl food must obviously be destroyed in a manner which does not contaminate the carcass. Ob¬ viously physical methods such as breaking the neck are satisfactory in that contamination is not involved, but these methods may not be as humane as gassing. Victims may be gassed with Carbon Dioxide (CO2) without any risk of harmful contamination, but many other substances such as carbon tetrachloride and chloroform must be strictly avoided. I know of instances where numbers of raptors died after being fed with rodents and chicks destroyed with the latter preparations, which seem to leave harmful resi¬ dues in the body tissues of the victims. In general, no supplements or vitamin additives are offered to my owls or, for that matter, thought to be necessary. The only exception is the addition of a dusting of sterilised bonemeal to the food offered to the Snowy Owls Nyctea scandiaca when they are feeding chicks. The chicks of this species grow very quickly and initially some of the youngsters had slightly dropped wings until the diet was changed to one composed en¬ tirely of rodents dusted with sterilised bonemeal. Subsequently there has been no recurrence of this problem. Some breeders of raptors do use various supplements, but I tend to think that these preparations should be used with caution. If the diet is perfectly adequate then I see no reason for adding supplements. Indeed, the gratuitous use of random quantities of vitamin additives may be harm¬ ful rather than beneficial. If supplements are to be used, they should be specifically aimed towards counteracting a particular deficiency in the diet and then in carefully controlled quantities. Owls are generally hardy birds that seem well able to cope with the British climate provided that they are well housed and fed. Admittedly in some very cold localities, some of the small species from the tropics may need some artificial heat but so far I have never found this to be necessary in south-east England. I have learned of instances where birds of prey in this area died during very cold weather and their deaths were attributed to the low temperatures. However, I tend to think that these birds died of SAYERS - CAPTIVE OWLS 253 starvation because their food had been thrown in once a day and much of it had become re-frozen before it could be eaten. During very severe weather I warm the food slightly and feed small quantities on two or three occasions during the evening. In this way, it ensures that all food can be eaten before becoming re-frozen. It will be noticed that food intake will increase markedly during severe weather, but I have never seen an owl which has been permitted to feed adequately showing signs of distress from low temperatures. 3. Housing Birds maintained in captivity, if kept clean and fed on uncontamina¬ ted food seem to contract infections from two sources in particular; stale aviary floors and from the droppings of wild birds. In fact, con¬ trary to popular belief, wild birds seem to show little fear of captive rap¬ tors and frequently perch on the roof of their aviaries. To combat these two sources of possible infection, my aviary frameworks are supported on 9 inch high stone walls. The aviary floor is then built up with inch pea- shingle until almost level with the top of this wall. The top 2 inches of this shingle infill is then replaced regularly. In this way a reasonably sterile and sharply drained floor can be maintained. If it is thought that weeds may grow through the shingle and prove a problem, as a precautionary measure, perforated plastic fertiliser (of non-toxic composition) bags can be spread over the aviary floor before the 8 inch layer of shingle is applied. To reduce the possibility of infection from wild birds, all of my aviaries have completely covered roofs. The house/nesting area is covered with a boarded and felted roof and the outer section is roofed with transparent corrugated polyvinylchloride sheeting. This roof cladding may pose prob¬ lems in the summer in that the aviary could become very hot. This prob¬ lem has been averted by the shade given by overhanging, deciduous trees and climbing plants. By this means, shade is provided in the summer but in the winter, when maximum light is essential, the trees carry no leaves and cast little shade and climbing plants can be cut back. Not only does a covered roof reduce the risk of infection from wild birds, but it also ensures that ground-nesting owls will not have their nest scrapes flooded or covered with snow at a critical time. It is most important for birds to gain a feeling of security within their aviary if they are to breed successfully. The amount of seclusion necess¬ ary does, of course, depend very much on the phlegmatic or neurotic tem¬ perament of the bird in question. Very tame examples will often settle to breed in very open structures and will tolerate a high level of disturbance 254 SAYERS - CAPTIVE OWLS and close proximity of spectators. At the other extreme, very nervous birds will sometimes only satisfactorily settle to breed in a totally enclosed aviary which eliminates all forms of visual disturbance. Mostly, owls fit into a niche midway between these extremes. Certainly the aviaries employed by some collections open to the pub He are, to my view, far too open and, even worse, are situated so that they can be completely encircled by the public. Under these conditions it is only the tame birds which are likely to breed. These remarks do, of course, apply mainly to quite small structures because if the aviary is planted and spacious and/or is very lofty, the birds will derive a sense of security by retiring to the cover of trees and bushes or to the higher points of the aviary where they will be well above the spectators. By virtue of the fact that my aviaries have to be contained within a modest sized garden, necessity has precluded them from being very large. I have, therefore, designed them to afford the owls maximum privacy whilst still permitting easy observation. One end of the aviary takes the form of an open-fronted shelter and the back and the end of the aviary are screened with V* inch obscured, wired glass. Only the fronts are wired and for this 1 inch by 1 inch by 12 swg plastic coated weldmesh has been found to be most suitable. Conventional wire netting is less satis¬ factory because during the breeding season many owls tend to fly at the wire with considerable impact in a show of aggression. Wire netting seems to be far more likely to cause injury to the birds on such occasions and it is not unusual for them to lacerate their feet and cere when colliding with a barrier of this material. Similarly chain link has been found not to be en¬ tirely satisfactory. The mesh size is usually large enough to admit sparrows, rats and other vermin and this shortcoming would, of course, largely nullify the other precautions taken to isolate the owls from possible sources of diseased or toxic material. Also, I have known of a few isolated instances where birds have trapped a toe between the woven links of a taut panel of chain link. Extraordinarily, some years ago I lost a Javan Fish Owl Ketupa ketupu which occupied an aviary with a front of VA inch x 1 inch weld¬ mesh. The bird had inserted its hooked beak through the VA inch dimen¬ sion and twisted the head at right angles so becoming locked in position. The bird was found dead probably through shock because no injury was apparent. The floors of the open-fronted shelters of my aviaries are carpeted with a 9 inch layer of compacted peat moss. Most of the large owls and many of the smaller species seem to be content to scratch out a nest scrape in this peat moss although some prefer an elevated nest box. The nest scrape is protected by a large sheet of plywood leaning against the back SAYERS - CAPTIVE OWLS 255 wall of the shelter. Nesting on the floor has some advantages in that many owls nest during very cold weather and an elevated nestbox surrounded by cold air is probably a harsher environment than a deep hollow scratched in a floor covering of peat. Also, since young owls tend to be rather preco¬ cious it is easy for them to wander around the aviary and then return to the warmth of a brooding female in a ground nest, but if a very young bird scrambles out of an elevated nest, it may have difficulty in returning. Also, when I have birds which prefer to nest in raised boxes, the aviary floor below the box is kept covered with a deep layer of loose peat when young¬ sters are present. This ensures that there is little chance of injury if a young bird tumbles out of the nestbox before it can fly properly. In these instances, the peat cushions the impact of crash-landings. At the end of the breeding season all of the peat nest litter is stripped out and the retaining walls around ground sites, together with nestboxes, are scrubbed and dis¬ infected. They are then treated with a pyrethrum dust insecticide before clean peat is replaced. Much of the peat which is packed in plastic sacks is very wet initially. However, if the new peat is installed directly at the end of the breeding season, it will have dried suitably by the time the follow¬ ing season commences. It may sound elementary, but many collections seem to give little thought to the siting of perches. I favour restricting the number of perches to two, which should be natural branches with bark attached. To exercise the feet, these should be of different diameters and situated as far apart as possible. It is also preferable to site them at different levels because this ensures that the birds are always flying up or down which provides greater exercise. Oddly enough, one still sees many aviaries at zoos and in private collections which only have one large, centrally placed branch. This either markedly reduces the inmates" level of activity or, alternatively, the birds fly between the branch and the wire sides of the enclosure so damaging their plumage. Also, it is not uncommon to see an aviary, say, 20 feet long with the perches situated 6 feet from the ends and therefore reducing the effective length significantly. Most owls appreciate an upturned log in the centre of the aviary to be used as a feed block. Finally, on die subject of aviary furnishings, most owls are avid bathers and should, at all times, have access to a large container of clean water. I have found plastic cat-litter trays very suitable for the small species, plas¬ tic washing bowls for the medium sized birds and either galvanised cattle drinkers or the large aluminium tray, used for bulk meat transport, for the large species. 256 FEEDING CAPTIVE BIRDS OF PREY By JAMES K. KIRKWOOD (Department of Animal Husbandry, University of Bristol School of Veterinary Science Introduction Nutrition is a fundamentally important aspect of the management of captive raptors, and yet, in view of the profound influence that incorrect feeding can have on health and breeding success, surprisingly little has been written on the subject. Nutritional diseases due to feeding imbalanced diets are still frequently seen in raptors, particularly in young birds, and deaths due simply to starvation are not uncommon among inexperienced falconers’ birds (Cooper, 1978). The aim of this paper is to recommend whole-animal diets; the laboratory mouse and, with some reservations, the day-old chick, as well-balanced diets for captive birds of prey; and to show how require¬ ments for these diets can be calculated quantitatively. The balance of nutrients in the diet In devising a diet for birds of prey, it is not sufficient to describe its requirements in terms of weight or volume (eg. one cropful) of food per day, since the nutrient content of foods vary greatly. For example, weight for weight, insects contain about twice as much energy as lean beef (See Table 1). It is important to consider the concentrations of specific nutri¬ ents. Meat diets, containing no bone, skin or visceral organs, are very unsuit¬ able for birds of prey, and lead to bone disease due to inadequate calcium content or poor calcium to phosphorus ration (Cooper, 1975) and to vitamin deficiencies (particularly A and E, Graham & Halliwell, 1978). Whole adult animal diets such as laboratory mice are much better quality foods, containing approximately twice the concentrations of metabolisable energy, crude protein, calcium and phosphorus per unit of dry matter, than those recommended for growing poultry (Table 2). The balance of the nutrients is thus very similar to that suitable for poul try. This is of considerable practical importance since, assuming that a raptor’s requirements are not dissimilar to those of a growing fowl, once it has eaten enough of a diet of whole animal to satisfy its energy demand, it will have ingested sufficient protein, calcium and phosphorus in the pro¬ cess. (See Table 2) KIRKWOOD - FEEDING CAPTIVE BIRDS OF PREY 257 Day-old chicks are a rich source of vitamins A and D3, but their cal¬ cium and phosphorus content is low. They should not therefore be fed unsupplemented to growing raptors which have a very high demand for these minerals. The kestrel colony at Bristol University (Kirkwood, 1980a) is fed on laboratory mice and day-old chicks, and the only dietary supplement given is calcium lactate which is given orally at a rate of 100 mg/day to growing eyasses between the ages of five and 20 days. No evidence has emerged from observations on this colony, for a need to add vitamin or mineral supplements to a diet of mice and day-old chicks for breeding birds. Even eggs from clutches considerably extended by ‘egg-pulling5 techniques (Kirkwood, 1980a) and from second clutches, which would be expected to suffer most from dietary inadequacies, appeared normal, had good hatch rates and gave rise to healthy young (Fig. 1). During moult there is a particular requirement for sulphur-containing amino acids for feather growth (Newton, 1972) and the scarcity of these in vegetable diets may necessitate a degree of over-eating among some birds in order to obtain for normal moult (Dolnik & Gavrilov, 1979). However, in meat diets these amino acids are not scarce and it is very unlikely that whole-animal diets are deficient in them. The Bristol kes¬ trels moult normally on unsupplemented diets. Energy and Food Requirements It can be argued that energy is the most important nutrient for two reasons. Firstly, because it is energy which first runs out during starvation or under-nutrition, and secondly, because, as shown above, once a raptor has eaten enough of a whole adult animal diet to satisfy its energy dem¬ ands, it will generally have ingested sufficient other nutrients in the pro¬ cess. The energy available to a raptor from its diet (the metabolisable energy, ME) depends upon the nature of the diet and on the efficiency with which this energy can be extracted during its digestion (Kirkwood, 1979). The ME values of laboratory mouse and day-old chick are about 1.5 and 1.0 Kcal/g. freshweight respectively. ME values are generally about 75% of the gross energy values of raptor foods (Kirkwood, 1981 ) and a list of gross energy values is given in Table 1 . The ME requirements for captive birds of prey for maintenance in good health without loss or gain in weight, can be predicted from bodyweight using Kirkwood's ( 1981 ) equation: 258 KIRKWOOD - FEEDING CAPTIVE BIRDS OF PREY (1) MEm = 110 vfi' . (W = weight in Kg, MEm = maintenance ME requirements in Kcal) and little precision is lost in simplifying this ex¬ pression to : (2) MEm = (90 x W) + 20 for birds of less than 1 .5 kg. From this a useful First estimate of a raptor’s daily maintenance require¬ ment for mouse or chick can be calculated: (3) F = MEm - D (F = food requirement in g/day, D = ME value of diet in Kcal/g). A worked example, showing how the food requirements of a bird of known weight may be estimated, is shown in Fig. 2. It is important to weigh captive birds regularly to check that weight is remaining within the normal range (consult Brown & Amadon, 1968, for the normal weight ranges in diurnal raptors) and this should be done prior to feeding when the weight of the gut contents is minimal. The requirements for breeding and growing birds are higher than those of adults for maintenance. Breeding birds should be fed ad libitum for several months before the start of laying and during the incubation and rearing period, as should growing birds from hatching until their feathers are ‘hard-penned’ (mature), which may not be for several weeks after fledging. The growth and consumption of a diet of mice of a typical kestrel is shown in Fig. 3 Food consumption during growth considerably exceeds that required by adults for maintenance (See Figure 3). Rations should also be increased during moult and in cold weather. The energy requirements for moult are not known, but it seems wise to advise an increase in intake of at least 20% above maintenance level during moult. A re-examination of the data of Craighead and Craighead (1956), expressing food consumption in terms of g. food/g. bodyweight 0.75/day (a scale that eliminates the difference between species due to size), shows that food intake generally increases as ambient temperature falls (Fig. 4). There is insufficient information available at present on which to base any hard and fast rules about the effects of cold, but Fig. 4 provides evidence that rations should be increased (by perhaps 20-30%) during chilling weather (0°C). Conclusion There is evidence both from the chemical analysis of whole adult animal diets (in particular the laboratory mouse), and from experiences with their use in the maintenance of a breeding colony of kestrels, that provision of sufficient of these diets to meet the energy requirements will automatically ensure the adequate intake of other essential nutr- KIRKWOOD - FEEDING CAPTIVE BIRDS OF PREY 259 ents. The risk of vitamin and mineral deficiency can be further reduced by correct aviary design, enabling sunning behaviour (important for the synthesis of vitamin D3), and floored with natural turf from which ‘rangle’ stones, whose function is unknown (Fox, 1976) and a variety of inverte¬ brates can be picked. Regular weighing gives a good indication of health status and whether or not sufficient food is being provided and eaten. TABLE 1 : GROSS ENERGY VALUES OF ITEMS USED IN THE FEEDING OF CAPTIVE BIRDS OF PREY Gross Energy Value Diet (Kcal/g. fresh) Source Laboratory Mouse 2.1 Day-old Chick 1.5 Day-old Turkey 2.1 Laboratory Rat 2.0 Chicken 2.0 Wild Rodents, voles 1.5 Altricial Birds 2.0 Fish 1.5 Insects 2.3 Arthropods 2.3 Locusts 2.5 Lean Beef-heart 1.3 Lean Venison 1.2 Lean Meat 1.2 Bird & Ho., 1976. Brisbin, 1970 Bird & Ho., 1976. Kirkwood, 1979 Duke et al, 1973 Bird & Ho., 1976 Bird & Ho., 1976 Gorecki, 1965 Dunn, 1975 Cummins & Wuycheck, 1971 Cummins & Wuycheck, 1971 Cummins & Wuycheck, 1971 Kirkwood, unpublished Johnson, 1974 Mosher & Matray, 1974 TABLE 2: A COMPARISON OF THE RECOMMENDED CONCENTRATIONS FOR SOME NUTRIENTS IN POULTRY DIETS, WITH SOME RAPTOR WHOLE-ANIMAL DIET COMPOSITION (Data from McDonald et al, 1973, and Bird & Ho, 1976) 260 KIRKWOOD - FEEDING CAPTIVE BIRDS OF PREY •Nebraska Brand artificial bird of prey diet, Central Nebraska Packing Co., North Platte, Nebraska KIRKWOOD - FEEDING CAPTIVE BIRDS OF PREY 261 Fig. 1 : Breeding Results of the Bristol Kestrel Colony, 1980 PAIR NUMBER i 2 3 4 EGG NUMBER 1 l/DP 1/inf? i/s i/s 2 1/DP 1/A 1/DI 1/S 3 1/DI 1/DH 1/S 1/DI 4 1/A 1/S 1/DP i/s 5 1/DP 1/B i/s i/s 6 1/S 1/S 1/DI 1/inf? 7 i/s i/s 1/DI 1/inf? 8 2/S 1/s 1/B 1/DI 9 2/S 2/DI i/s 1/S 10 2/S 2/S 1/S i/s 11 2/DH 2/S 1/A i/s 12 2/S 2/S i/s 13 2/B 2/DI 1/DI 14 2/DI 2/S 15 2/S 16 2/S 17 2/S 18 2/S The number 1 Key or 2 indicares whether the egg was in the first or second clutch. DP died at pipping A taken for analysis DI died during incubation inf infertile DH died soon after hatching B broken (during weighing S hatched successfully and measuring) The poor hatch rates of the early eggs probably reflects sub-optimal artificial incubation. The high success rate of the later eggs is good evi¬ dence that the diet of laboratory mice fed ad libitum and supplemented occasionally by day-old chicks (with no added vitamins or minerals), is quite adequate for captive breeding. 262 KIRKWOOD - FEEDING CAPTIVE BIRDS OF PREY Fig. 2 : Calculating the requirement of a bird of prey for a diet of laboratory mouse For example, what is the requirement of a 0.22 Kg kestrel for maintain- ance in captivity? 1 . The metabolisable energy requirement of a 0.22 Kg kestrel in K/cal day = 20 + (90 x 0.22) from equation 2 in text = 39.8 Kcal ME/day. 2. The metabolisable energy value of a laboratory mouse is 1 .5 Kcal/g fresh (see text) and therefore the kestrel’s requirement of 39.8 Kcal ME/day can be met by eating: 39.8 - 1.5 = 26.5 g mouse/day Similarly, knowing the ME value of day-old chick is 1.0 Kcal/g. fresh, it can be calculated that the kestrel’s requirement for chick is 39.8 g./day. KIRKWOOD - FEEDING CAPTIVE BIRDS OF PREY 263 (unu) H3H1V3J lIVnVULNaD JO H1DN31 ‘( s) NQIldWASNOD (3003 ‘C3) IHDiaMAdOa AGE (DAYS) FIG. 3: CHART TO SHOW GROWTH AND FOOD CONSUMPTION IN A COMMON KESTREL FOOD CONSUMPTION (g/g 0.75/day) 264 KIRKWOOD - FEEDING CAPTIVE BIRDS OF PREY KEY Cc Circus cyaneus Ac Accipiter cooperi Fm Falco mexicanus Fp Falco peregrinus Fs Falco sparverius Bj Buteo jamaicensis FIG. 4 AMBIENT TEMPERATURE AND FOOD CONSUMPTION IN SOME RAPTORS (Data from Craighead & Craighead, 1956) KIRKWOOD - FEEDING CAPTIVE BIRDS OF PREY 265 REFERENCES BIRD, D.M. & HO, S.K. 1976. Nutritive values of whole animal diets for captive birds of prey. Raptor Research 10, 4549. BRISBIN, I.L. Jr. 1970. A determination of liveweight calorific conversion factors for laboratory mice. Ecology 51, 541-544. BROWN, L & AMADON, D. 1968. Eagles, Hawks and Falcons of the World. Country Life/Hamlyn, Feltham. COOPER, J.E. 1975. Osteodystrophy in birds of prey. Veterinary Record 97, 307. COOPER, J.E. 1978. Veterinary Aspects of Captive Birds of Prey. Standfast Press, Saul, Gloucestershire. CRAIGHEAD, J. & CRAIGHEAD, F. 1956. Hawks, Owls and Wildlife. Stackpole Co., Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. CUMMINS, K.C. & WUYCHECK, J.C. 1971. Calorific equivalents for investigations in ecological energetics. Internationale Vereinigung fur Theoretische und Ange- wandte Limnologie 18, 1-158. DOLNIK, V.R. & GAVRILOV, V.M. 1979. Bioenergetics of molt in the chaffinch Fringilla coelebs . Auk 96, 253-264. DIKE, G.E., CIGANEK J.G. & EVANSON, O.A. 1973. Food consumption and energy, water and nitrogen budgets in captive great-horned owls. Comparative Biochmistry and Physiology 44A, 283-292. DUNN, E.H. 1975. Growth, body components and energy content of nestling doublecrested cormorants. Condor 77, 431-438. FOX, N. 1976. Rangle, Raptor Research 10, 61-64. GORECKI, A. 1965. Energy values of body in small mammals. Acta Theriologica 10, 333-352. GRAHAM, D.L. & HALLIWELL, W.H. 1978. Malnutrition in birds of prey. In Zoo and Wild Animal Medicine. Ed Fowler, M.E. W.B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia. JOHNSON, W.D. 1974. The bioenergetics of the barn owl Tyto alba. MA Thesis Cali¬ fornia State University, Long Beach. KIRKWOOD, J.K. 1979. The partition of food energy for existence in the kestrel Falco tinnunculus and the barn owl Tyto alba. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology 63A, 495-498. KIRKWOOD, J.K. 1980a. The management of a colony of common kestrels Falco tinnunculus in captivity. Laboratory Animals, 14, 313-316. KIRKWOOD, J.K. 1981. Maintenance energy requirements and rate of weight loss during starvation in birds of prey. In: Recent Advances in the Study of Raptor Diseases. Editors Cooper, J.E. and Greenwood, A.G. Chiron Publications, U.K. MCDONALD, P., EDWARDS, R.A. & GREENHALGH, J.F.D. 1973. Animal Nutri¬ tion. 2nd Edition. Oliver & Boyd, Edingburgh. MOSHER, J.A. & MATRAY, P.F. 1974. Size dimorphism: a factor in energy savings for broad-winged hawks. Auk 91, 325-341. NEWTON, I. 1972. Finches. Collins, London. 266 RAPTOR REHABILITATION AT WOODLAND PARK ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS By JAMES W. FOSTER, D.V.M. (Director of Science) and WALTER G. ENGLISH (Curator of Birds) In the autumn of 1971 a raptor programme was initiated at Woodland Park Zoological Gardens in Seattle, Washington, titled “Project Babe” after an imprinted Golden Eagle. The primary goal of the programme at that time was to gain infor¬ mation regarding the breeding of birds of prey in captivity, and, if success¬ ful, to help re-establish the wild population by releasing surplus birds back into their natural habitat. It was then felt that the programme would not only provide a worthwhile research project for the Zoo’s staff and volun¬ teers, but would also aid in fulfilling part of the Zoo’s conservation re¬ sponsibilities. The first breeding season was very successful in that two Prairie Falcons and two Harris’s Hawks were hatched and fledged. A great deal of data on the reproductive behaviour of these birds was also collected. It soon became apparent that a second part needed to be added to the programme. Since the Zoo was the logical place for treatment and rehabili¬ tation of sick and injured birds, a surplus of Bald and Golden Eagles had accumulated on the Zoo grounds. Some of these birds were permanently crippled, so efforts were made to enter them into educational or breeding projects while others proved to be releasable. The releasable birds were a problem in the respect that Zoo personnel did not have the time to spend to monitor the birds following release, and the more desirable sites were somewhat distant from the Zoo grounds. As a result of this need it was decided that a raptor rehabilitation programme would be implemented with our interest directed especially toward Bald Eagles (Foster, 1972). The state of Washington has the greatest population of Bald Eagles in the lower 48 states and the Golden Eagle population is also substantial in number. Volunteers were recruited to monitor the birds following release and sites were selected for the reintroduction. Methods All Bald Eagles are released at one of the following locations: The Skagit River near Rockport, Washington or San Juan Island in northern FOSTER & ENGLISH - RAPTOR REHABILITATION 267 Walter English X-Ray plate of a Bald Eagle brought into the Woodland Park Zoological Gardens on 1st June 1977. Shot on San Juan Island, 11 of the 15 lead pellets are seen here. Since 1972 nearly 80% of ah eagles treated at the Zoo have been shot, either by rifle or shotgun. Puget Sound. There are 100 to 180 wintering Bald Eagles in the Skagit area which is not protected as an eagle sanctuary by the Washington State Game Department and the Natural Conservancy. Bald Eagles are attracted to this area by the large numbers of salmon that spawn and then die in the river each year (Servheen, 1975). The rehabilitated eagles are usually released in December and January when salmon carcasses are most abundant. On San Juan Island there are approximately 50 to 100 Bald and Golden Eagles in residence each winter (R.L. Knight pers. comm. 1977). That portion where the eagles are released is a National Park, American Camp. Besides the large surrounding bodies of water which con¬ tain many food items which are utilized by the eagles, they are also attrac¬ ted to the area because of the exceptionally large number of European Rabbit, with 25 to 120 to be found per hectare (Stevens 1975). The re¬ habilitation eagles are released at both sites during winter in order to avoid territorial conflicts with resident nesting populations of Bald and Golden Eagles. 268 FOSTER & ENGLISH - RAPTOR REHABILITATION Depending on which release site is going to be used for a given year, the eagles are fed whole salmon or rabbit carcases for at least one month prior to release in order to condition them to the most abundant food source they will have, once in the wild. At Woodland Park, all eagles to be released are held in a rehabilitation or off exhibit enclosures, in groups of up to three. Every effort is made to keep the release eagles as wild as possible (Servheen and English, 1976, English and Servheen, 1977). Handling is minimized to prevent feather damage or trauma, so no effort is made to tame the eagles. The rehabilitation enclosure which is on exhibit is partly shielded from public view by the use of plants and shrubs so that contact with humans is reduced. Just prior to release, coloured leg streamers, radio transmitters, and Fish and Wildlife riveted aluminium bands are placed on each bird. Radio transmitters are mounted as tail-feather mounts by securing them with nylon surgical sutures to the top tail feathers (Servheen, 1976). When sufficient salmon carcasses are available in the Skagit release area as verified by field checks, the birds are hooded and wrapped to prevent injury and are transported to the release site. Again, as for all the eagles, human handling and disturbance is kept to a minimum. The actual release is done away from open water so that there is a reduced possibility that the eagles will attempt their initial flight over water. All released eagles are monitored closely for several weeks to observe their adaptation back to the wild and their movements in the area. Food availability is also monitored during this initial period, and if it becomes low, salmon or rabbit carcasses are distributed to the birds. Notices are sent throughout western Washington describing the project and encouraging the public to become involved in the work by reporting sightings of released eagles (Servheen and English, 1976, English and Servheen, 1977). Results and discussion The success of this rehabilitation programme very greatly depends on the availability of an abundant, easily obtainable food source in the release areas and a minimum of human disturbance when the eagles are regaining their powers of flight. This allows the eagles to develop muscle strength on their own with no need to train and fly them just prior to release. The birds will remain wild and wary of man, and there is no danger of injury or feather damage as a result of accidents during training. The release of eagles in a wintering area eliminates the dangers of territorial aggression from resident adults and allows the rehabilitated birds to learn secure feeding and roosting sites by following the local FOSTER & ENGLISH - RAPTOR REHABILITATION 269 Keith Yoshida The authors (English 1., Foster r.) with an adult Bald Eagle just before release in west¬ ern Washington. wintering population. Since the rehabilitated eagles are released several months before the abundant food supply dwindles, they have sufficient time to develop the strength and skill necessary to compete in the wild state. (Servheen and English, 1976, English and Servheen, 1977). During the last eight years, 39 Bald Eagles and numerous other birds of prey have been treated at the zoo. In 1979, 24 birds were admitted for treatment, six of which were Bald Eagles. None of these birds were later reintroduced to the wild and eight are pending release. Of the other seven, two were transferred to other zoos, one was retained at Woodland Park Zoo and four died. Of 39 Bald Eagles received from 1971 to the spring of 1980, 14 have been successfully returned to the wild and four are pending release, giving a success rate of 46% with this species. Although there have been a number of raptor rehabilitation programmes started throughout the country, little material has been published indi¬ cating the results of these projects. The primary reason for this lack of data is that most of the birds have been released after rehabilitation, and 270 FOSTER & ENGLISH - RAPTOR REHABILITATION success has been assumed without long-term monitoring or observation. When so much time and expense have been invested in the bird, it is essential that adequate time be spent by observers to determine whether release was successful, preferably using radio-telemetry equipment. Tele¬ metry gear, which includes a three-channel receiver and transmitters, is necessary in order to locate and assess the hunting ability of the eagles after their release. We are often asked why such a considerable amount of time is spent on raptor rehabilitation when we are probably dealing with “Nature’s losers” anyway. It is true that many of these birds that become sick or injured have been forced into marginal habitat because they have been poor competitors. Often this marginal habitat is in close proximity to people: the raptors then may find little prey, or may be shot for target practice or by farmers who feel that they are protecting their livestock. Our answer has been that for humanitarian reasons we have no choice; but perhaps an even more important reason is that the information that results from these programmes helps to educate the public on the value of wildlife and the role of the predator in nature. If this is true, it is time well spent. REFERENCES English, W. and Servheen, C. 1977. A rehabilitation programme for Bald and Golden Eagles. J.N. Amer. Falconers Ass., 16: 25-27. Foster, J.W. 1976. Project Babe. N. Amer. Bird Bander, 1 (4): 179. Hutchins, M. and GledhiU, L.G. 1977. The use of closed circuit television for rese¬ arch, and education and animal management in a zoo setting. In C. Crockett Wilson and M. Hutchins, eds. Applied Behavioral Research at the Woodland Park Zoological Gardens. Hills Riviana Foods, Topeka, KS., 25-50. Servheen, C. 1975. Ecology of wintering Bald Eagles on the Skagit River, Washing¬ ton. M.S. Thesis. University of Washington, Seattle. 96 pp. Servheen, C. 1976. Deck-feather moult in Bald and Golden Eagles in relation to feather mounting of radio transmitters. Raptor Research, 10 (3): 84-87. Servheen, C. and English, W. 1976. Movements of rehabilitated Bald Eagles and proposed seasonal movement patterns of Bald Eagles in the Pacific Northwest. Raptor Research, 13 (3): 79-88. Stevens, W.F. 1975. The biology of the European Rabbit Oryctolagus mniculus on San Juan Island, Washington. M.S. Thesis. University of Washington, Seattle. 104 pp. 271 NOTES ON A BALD EAGLE Haliaeetus leucocephalus By L. GIBSON (Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada) These are a few notes on an eagle which I had for several weeks. It crashed in front of a car in West Vancouver. Fortunately the driver was sensible, and left the car where it was while she phoned the S.P.C.A. The bird stayed put until it was picked up. This was a bird in its second sum¬ mer, with a wing span of about six and a half feet (two metres) and a weight of about 8 lb 6 oz (3.8 kg.) It still had its white streaked juvenile plumage, with a brown head. It was thought to have been shot, but information was vague. There was a large tear in its left wing. The smaller radius bone was intact, but the larger ulna was broken. It was, however, a clean break, but one end of the bone stuck out. The bird had lost a considerable amount of blood by the time I got it. The wound was cleaned and damaged tissue removed. Antibiotic powder was put in the wound and the bird was started on the antibiotic Septra (sulphonamide and trimethoprim). This was put into a fish. The next day an elastic bandage was wrapped around the wing. It lasted a few hours. It was put on again more firmly and stayed on. The bird was housed in an indoor flight 19 by 5 by 5 feet (5.7 by 1.5 by 1.5 metres). For the first few days, especially if a sudden movement was made, it would throw itself back on its tail, leaving its feet free to strike. It was supported by the wings, or one wing after it was bandaged. When it did this, the tail was bent forward under the bird. The long tail dragged on the ground when it walked, and soon got in rather a mess, as did the long wings. The huge flight feathers weighed up to 4.5 g. each. Only once did it attempt to bite. The beak is quite blunt (in contrast to hawks) and it is not used as a weapon. Its feet, however, were the same size as my hands, with wicked claws. Once they locked on to something it was very difficult to break their grip. Its main food was fish. These were usually taken head first and swal¬ low whole. Digestion was complete - bones and all. The droppings were semi-solid and smelled awful as is the case with all fish-eaters. Meat would be eaten when there was no fish. No parasites were found in the droppings but the bird did have feather lice. In fact it was only the third local spe¬ cies, along with crows and herons, to have lice. The eagle was eating four or five two ounce (5.6 g) oolichans, and up to eight, per day, with some meat on occasions. Oolichans are a local smelt 272 GIBSON - BALD EAGLE which run upriver from the sea for a few weeks in late spring. Fortunately, the run had just started when the eagle came into my care. These fish are very oily and were once dried and used as candles by the Indians. In seven days, the eagle was taking fish from my hand. This was accom¬ panied by a loud double grunt.This was the only sound it ever made. It was a very perceptive bird, and would only let me come near. If anyone else came into the room it would run into a corner and hold its head down to one side, in what can only be described as an attitude of shyness. It would let me handle the broken wing, provided I moved slowly. By now the wound had healed well, with no infection, but one end of the bone was still sticking out. This time, the bone was wired together. A week later the bandage was taken off as it was serving no purpose. The wing had healed, but drooped badly. Antibiotics were discontinued. The eagle was put out daily in the garden for exercise. At first a cloth was thrown over it, but later it was simply picked up across the back, the wings being held to the side, and the feet being held well away from my body. Once outside, it elicited no more than curiosity from the other birds. This was more than can be said for my old dog. Normally peaceful, he ran straight through a fence at it when he first saw it. They had to be kept apart after that. The eagle ran about the garden, jumping on high objects, and flapping its wings. It could move at surprising speed with the aid of its wings. In a couple of weeks, it went to the local game farm, just as it was beginning to moult. I visited it about three months later. It had moulted beautifully and could manage up a two-perch pole to its shelter, 12 feet up. Its wing still drooped badly but it was sitting exercising it vigorously. It still had a brown head and was noticeably smaller than a white-headed cage-mate. 273 SUCCESSES WITH BIRDS OF PREY AT THE PRETORIA ZOO By F.C. BARNICOAT (Johannesburg, South Africa) The National Zoological Gardens of South Africa in Pretoria is the country's leading zoo. During a visit this July I had the good fortune to meet Mr. J, Nieman (Head Keeper - Bird Section) who kindly described some recent breeding successes with owls and other birds of prey, a rep¬ resentative collection of which has long been housed in this zoo. The Birds of Prey Aviaries - a fine steel structure - date from 1912 and the Large Flight Aviary, 45 m long and 13 m wide, from the same period. Through the years birds of prey have proved among the most long lived exhibits and there have been some notable characters, like the Andean Condor, but scant attention was paid to breeding. Recently the outlook has changed and a concerted effort has been made to do away with overcrowding of aviary space, to ensure ideal diets for individual species and to provide such species as are kept with optimum conditions for breeding. The owls have now been moved to the new complex of owl aviaries, which is really magnificent. Each species is housed in its own large aviary - Barn Owl Tyto alba , Grass Owl Tyto capensis , African Marsh Owl A to cape ns is, Wood Owl Ciccaba woodfordii , Cape Eagle Owl Bubo cap¬ ensis , Spotted Eagle Owl Bubo africanus and Eurasian (Great) Eagle Owl Bubo bubo. The Barn Owls have raised four young and several of the others have laid eggs, so that further breeding successes seem a likelihood in the near future. Inspiration comes from the rearing of no less than 28 Spotted Eagle Owls, most of which were carefully rehabilitated into the wild state. Being able to put something back into the wild is one of the aims of the zoo. At present six species of vulture are being displayed - 2 King Vultures Sarcorhamphus papa in an aviary to themselves and which it is hoped will soon be sexed by laparoscopy and will prove to be a pair, and several Tur¬ key Vultures Cathartes aura , Cape Vultures Gyps coprotheres, White- backed Vultures Gyps africanus , Black Vultures Aegypius monachus and Indian Black Vultures Sarcogyps calvus all housed together in the Large Flight Aviary. One end of this aviary is a simulated cliff face, but a pair of Cape Vultures preferred an artificial nesting site erected near the centre of the aviary - a wire platform approximately IVz metres square on top of a pole about 3Vz metres high. On this they had constructed a substantial nest of drybranch.es and the female is at present incubating an egg. As I watched, she left the nest and soon returned with a mouthful of green leaves which 274 COLLARD - BIRDS OF PREY AT NATAL ZOO she worked into the nest. The outcome of this nesting is being eagerly awaited because it is thought that this would be the first breeding in cap¬ tivity if a Cape Vulture were to be reared. Other birds of prey in the collection include the Fish Eagle Haliaetus vocifer, Black Eagle Aquila verreauxi , Tawny Eagle A. rapax , Wahlberg's Eagle A. wahlbergi, Bateleur Terathopius ecaudatus , Jackal Buzzard Buteo rufofuscus , Black-breasted Snake-eagle Grcaetus pegtoralis , Banner Falcon Falco biarmicus , Rock Kestrel Falco tinnunculus , Yellow-billed Kite Milvus aegyptius and Black-shouldered Kite Elanus caemlem . This is merely a list noted at random. The zoo has recently been delighted by the successful rearing of a Gymnogene Polyboroides typus. The pair had an aviary to themselves and 19 eggs were laid before success came at last. Six Greater Kestrels Falco rupicoloides have also been bred. * * sp * BIRDS OF PREY AT THE NATAL ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS, SOUTH AFRICA By W.H. COLLARD (Director) The Natal Zoological Gardens are situated some twelve miles outside Pietermaritzburg in an attractive spot on the edge of the famous “Valley of a Thousand Hills”. Many pressing tasks connected with the animals have had to take priority to erecting bird aviaries on the scale I should have liked. Consequently our accommodation for the birds of prey has hardly been extensive enough to really encourage breeding results. Furthermore, the restrictions of the nature conservation authorities in South Africa ensure that birds of prey seldom become available. Most birds of this group which have been in the zoo were injured specimens, rescued and subsequently presented to us. It is disappointing that mates for our odd birds were practically never obtainable. This group is attractive to the general public, and feeding presents no problem. We use chickens as the staple diet and rats whenever they are trapped. Cheap supplies of meat are frequently available from farmers in the surrounding district, but extreme caution must be exercised as we discovered to our cost. A number of birds, including the female of my much-valued pair of Black Eagles, died after eating meat from a carcass preferred by a farmer who, unbeknown to us, had dosed the animal very heavily with antibiotics in his attempts to save It. This disaster underlines the necessity of being' very cautious of the source of the meat supply one uses. COLLARD - BIRDS OF PREY AT NATAL ZOO 275 In the large aviary devoted to the birds of prey I have at present a pair of Yellow-billed Kites Milvus migrans aegyptius. After about four years here, they nested in 1980. Unfortunately the two eggs layed were broken by the Pied Crows in the same aviary. The only other species I had in a pair was the Black Eagle Aquila verreauxi which like all our local birds we hold on special permit from the Natal Parks Board. The female was lost tragically after being inadvertently fed on contaminated meat, as men¬ tioned. Fortunately the male was unaffected and remains a handsome exhibit. We have also acquired an immature Black Eagle which is now probably nearing four years old, and it has at last lost its brown juvenile plumage and is rapidly assuming the black plumage of the adult male with the white “V” on the back clearly visible. I have had two other species of eagle for seven or more years, a male Tawny Eagle A. rapax and a female Wahlberg’s Eagle A. wahlbergi. At present I also possess odd specimens of the Jackal Buzzard Buteo rufofuscus and the Marsh Harrier Circus aeru- ginosus ranivorus. It is a pity that the prospect of getting mates is so remote. In the past I have kept successfully the African Goshawk Accipiter tachira , Little Sparrowhawk Accipiter minullus , Chanting Goshawk Melierax canorus, Greater Kestrel Falco rupicoloides and Rock Kestrel Falco tinnunculus, but usually in single specimens. All these species are rela¬ tively common and widespread in South Africa, but they have been attrac¬ tive in our aviaries none the less. I also have four Cape Vultures Gyps coprotheres in the largest aviary. They have made nests, but never laid. This is the largest and most com¬ mon species of our vultures, but its numbers are declining in the wild state as more and more land is developed for agriculture and the dead animals are buried. I should imagine that they would need very large aviary ac¬ commodation for breeding success in captivity. This area is fairly mountainous and the wild population of birds pro¬ vides much additional interest. The White-necked Raven is a handsome bird somewhat larger and with a far heavier beak than the crows. It is jet black with an attractive white collar. It always bred in the surrounding moun¬ tains, but over the years the supplies of food it is able to steal through the feeding of large quantities of meat to the animals in the zoo as well as in the nearby Natal Lion Park have led to an artificial increase in its numbers. Large flocks of them come into the zoo from the surrounding mountains with the result that it is no longer possible to breed waterfowl or gamebirds of any kind here. They have become a pest and even seem to be having an adverse effect upon the local wild bird population. 276 BIRDS OF PREY KEPT AT LILFORD PARK, PETERBOROUGH By A. TURK (Curator) From 1861 , when Thomas Littleton Powys acceded to the title of fourth Lord Lilford, there has been a collection of birds within Lilford Park. There was, however, a break of 26 years from 1944, when the estate was sold to pay death duties, until the present Lord Lilford, the seventh, re-acquired 240 acres of the estate in 1970. Since this time, the grounds, the Hall and, most importantly, the aviaries have been renewed, re-stocked and opened to the public. The fourth Lord Lilford was responsible for the establishment of a very large and comprehensive collection of birds from all over the world. A man with a deep and abiding passion for all things ornithological, he was an authority on European birds, with a special affection for Spain where he had travelled extensively. He had a great many published works to his name and was President of the British Ornithologists’ Union for 29 years. I have estimated that approximately 433 species of birds were kept be¬ tween 1865 and 1893. In spite of the diversity of species kept, Lilford had a great interest in birds of prey and, indeed, was an accomplished falconer. Ninety-three species of diurnal and nocturnal birds of prey were kept between the dates mentioned above. It is very difficult to choose examples but some of the more unusual were the Harpy Eagle, Spanish Imperial Eagle, several forms of Gyr, White-bellied Sea Eagle, Red-footed Falcon, Great Grey Ural Owl, Boobook Owl and Burrowing Owl. Of course, the bird that Lord Lilford is usually remembered for is the Little Owl Athene noctua. He released a great many on the estate over a period of several years and mentions liberating 44 in one year. They were probably of Dutch origin and were purchased from Leadenhall market. The releases began around 1888, the first nest being found on 23rd April 1889. Although he was not the only person to try establishing these charming owls, his birds played a major part in the colonisation of Britain. Free-flying Lammergeiers Gypaetus barbatus, against a back-cloth of an English country hall, must have been a unique sight. Lilford achieved this by obtaining the birds as fledglings and allowing them their freedom in the courtyards and, eventually, the whole park where he could enjoy the spec¬ tacle of these huge birds circling the Hall (often pursued by a flock of rooks) or basking in the sun on the grassed terrace. On 7th April 1888, Lord Lilford reported, in a letter, that one of his Golden Eagles Aquila chrysaetos, at 11 years of age, was sitting on one TURK - BIRDS OF PREY AT LILFORD PARK 277 egg. Unfortunately, there is no record of hatching. The birds had, in Lord Lilford’s words, “built a good nest themselves”, an illustration of which, with the female sitting, was depicted by Archibald Thorburn who had been engaged to illustrate Lilford’s “Coloured Figures of the British Islands”. A White-tailed Sea Eagle Haliaeetus albicilla was living in the aviaries in 1894. It was then 40 years old and had been taken from a nest in southern Ireland. Lilford mentions that, at that time, he thought there could be no more than three pairs living wild in the United Kingdom. Two vultures, a Black Aegypius monachm and a Griffon Gyps fulvus, paired, built a nest and laid from one to three eggs every year for about 13 years but apparently the eggs were never fertile. Both birds were taken from nests in Spain, In May 1893, a Ural Owl Strix uralensis laid an egg but made no attempt to incubate. The egg was transferred to a Barn Owl’s nest but there is no record of it hatching. Two years later a pair of Burrow¬ ing Owls Speotyto cunkularia laid four eggs and hatched one chick, in spite of the fact that there were also Prairie Dogs in the same compartment. Of course, with such a large collection, there are many events of avicultural interest and I have only been able to mention a few here. Finally, I do feel that, whilst it is unlikely that collections such as Lilford’s will be seen again, and in spite of its great interest to ornitholo¬ gists at that time and the wealth of new information gleaned from it, it was a great consumer of birds which is something that our present day collections must not be. 278 THE WORK OF THE HAWK TRUST Loton Park, Shrewsbury, Shropshire, England Many species of birds of prey are threatened in the wild. The causes of their decline vary, but include persecu¬ tion by man (shooting, trapping and egg collecting), destruction of the wild places in which they live and the use of poisonous chemicals. As a result, birds of prey need our help. The Hawk Trust is a charitable association, created in 1969 by a handful of enthusiasts concerned about the alarming decline in birds of prey. It is doing all it can to conserve British and, to a lesser extent, foreign birds of prey. It achieves this by organising voluntary wardening and guarding of vulnerable nests; by educating the public, shooters, landowners, farmers and gamekeepers ; by scientific studies on birds of prey in the wild and in captivity. As a result, much is being learned about these birds and their way of life. The Hawk Trust also leases a forest area on the Welsh borders and hopes to increase its control of similar areas suitable for birds of prey. One aspect of the Trust’s work concerns those birds of prey that are found sick, injured or orphaned. Such birds will die if they do not receive specialised care. The Hawk Trust seeks to provide this by advising veterinary surgeons and members of the public on the treatment of casualties and, in a few cases, by providing such care itself. The Trust has veterinary surgeons and zoologists amongst its members and these, in conjunction with the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, have organised a scheme to ensure that endangered British species receive prompt attention from a veterinary surgeon with experience of birds. It must be emphasised, of course, that all birds of prey are protected in Britain and only those birds that are genuinely sick, injured or abandoned may be kept without a licence. Hawks, eagles and falcons - the very names symbolise freedom and the wide open spaces of our world. And as the wild world comes under in¬ creasing human pressure, these splendid birds are among the first to suffer. The Hawk Trust aims to alleviate this situation through the support of its membership, which must continue to grow if it is to succeed. The birds of prey deserve this help as they are not only beautiful but also play an important role in nature. Readers who would like further information, or who might like to consider joining, are welcome to write to the Hon. Secretary at the above address. I would like to thank all the contributors to this special issue who took time off from busy lives to write such interesting articles, and particularly Bernard Sayers for valuable advice and suggestions as to the contents of this issue. As always, I am very grateful to John Yealland for his patience and hard work in proofreading all the issues of this year’s Magazine, and to David Coles for pro¬ viding “ News and Views”, for preparing the indices and for much general help in obtaining and preparing articles. The special issue for October-December 1982 is on So ft bills and original contri¬ butions to this will be very welcome (by the beginning of August, please). Editor The Editor does not accept responsibility for opinions expressed in articles, notes or correspondence MEMBERS’ ADVERTISEMENTS (10 p. per word - minimum charge £3. 00) THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY OF QUEENSLAND welcomes new members. An Australian Society catering for all birds both in captivity and in the wild. We put out a bi-monthly magazine on all aspects of aviculture and conservation. Anyone interested in becoming a member, please contact: Ray Garwood, 19 Fahey’s Road, Albany Creek, 4035, Queensland, Australia. Annual subscription rates are: 12.00 Aus. dollars surface mail, 18.00 airmail. BIRD WORLD MAGAZINE. Interesting, informative, well-illustrated. Dedicated to the presentation of quality information. Eight to ten articles each issue, including veterinary articles. Annual Subscription (US dollars only) 12.00 (six issues) - postage extra: 8.00 surface mail, 12.00 airmail. Box 70, North Hollywood, Calif. 91601, USA. 280 INDEX Amazon, Red-tailed, Notes on, 6 Amazona , Breeding Notes, 146 Aviculture, Sixty Years Ago, 104 Bird Rescue Association, 62 Birds of Paradise, Iron Accumulation in, 113 Birds of Prey, Feeding Captive, 256 .. .. kept at Lilford Park, 276 .. .. kept at the Natal Zoo, 274 Blackbird, Breeding in Captivity, 125 Blue-bill, Red-headed, Notes on, 114 Bolborhynchus, The genus, 92 Breeding Results: Haywood, J., 182 Sawyer, R., 181 Spenkelink, Mr. & Mrs. J., 183 Spilsbury, D.T., 146 Tells, Mats, 59 Budgerigars, Nest Construction by, 155 Bustard, Great, Trust - 1980 Season, 59 Butcherbird, Pied, Breeding, 1 Chloropsis, Observations on, 34 , Golden-fronted, U.K. hatchings, 181 , Hardwicke’s, Breeding, 70 Cockatoo, Glossy Black, Wild Observations, 185 Condor, Californian, Population of, 60 Conure, Queen of Bavaria, second genera¬ tion, 182 Coucal, Blue-headed, Notes on, 112 Crane, Australian, bred, 1 16 .. , Siberian, Captive Population, 186 .. , Whooping, Preservation of, 135 Dove, Blue Spotted Wood, Notes on, 111 Duck, Pink-eared, bred, 115 Eagle, Bald, Notes on a, 271 Falcons, The Science of Captive Breeding, 208 Finch, Oriole, 130 Grackle, Rothschild’s, Comments on Conservation, 63 Hawk Trust, The work of, 278 Hawk-Eagle, Ornate, bred, 1 84 Imprinting, erasing in Waterfowl and Parrots, 143 Kakapo, Capture of, 57 Kestrel, Mauritius, Account of Breeding Project for, 191 Kiwi, North Island Brown, at London Zoo, 56 Kiwis at Otorahanga, 175 Kokako, Population of, 58 Lorikeet, Steller’s, Breeding, 152 Lourie Hybrid, Knysna x Livingstone’s, 154 Macaws, Hyacinthine, fertile eggs from, 184 Malimbus golems. Discovery of, 60 Man akin, Swallow- tailed, Hatched, 113 Martin, Fairy, Breeding, 3 Obituary: L.H. Brown, 182 Owl, Great Grey, Breeding Results, 6 1 5 Keeping and Breeding, 233 .. , Striped, Breeding 242 .. , Ural, Breeding, 237 Owls, Notes on Captive, 248 Parrakeet, Amboina King, 2nd generation, 182 , Indian Ring-neck, in the Himalayas, 54 : , Mountain, Breeding, 92 Parrot, Meyers, Observations on, 169 .. , Night, Rediscovery of, 57 .. , Purple-bellied, Notes on, 8 .. , Red-capped, Notes on, 11 .. , Swamp, Ecology of, 57 Parrotlet, Blue-winged, Breeding, 65 , Tepui, A note on the, 140 , Yellow-faced, Breeding Records, 182 Penguin, Emperor, hatched, 6 1 , Fairy, bred, 1 16 Pigeon, Rock, Personal notes on, 19 .. , Snow, breeding at 10,000 ft, 51 Plants and Aviculture, 161 Pytiha, Red-headed, bred, 182 Raptor Rehabilitation Project, 115, 266 Reviews: Wildtauben: Haltung, Pflegeund Zucht, 118 Ornithological Literature of the Papuan sub- region 1915-1976, 120 Pheasants in Asia - 1979, 187 281 INDEX (Contd.) Reviews (Contd.) Instinctive Navigation of Birds, 188 Robin, Black, Population of, 58 , Flame, breeding, 90 Seed, Sprouting for bird food, 99 Starling, Emerald, Breeding Result, 6 1 Swallow, Welcome, Breeding, 3 Thrush, Olive, Breeding, 98 Touraco Hybrid. See Lourie Vulture, American Black, Breeding & Hand¬ rearing, 212 , Bearded, Breeding and Hand-rearing, 223 , White-backed, bred, 1 86 Vultures, In captivity in Southern Africa, 215 Woodpeckers, Research on, 182 Zoos, News from: Chester, 177, London, 55, St. Louis, 178 THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY The Avicultural Society was founded in 1894 for the study of British and foreign birds in freedom and captivity. The Society is international in character, having members throughout the world. Membership subscription rates per annum: British Isles £8.00; Overseas - £9.00 (20.00 US dollars). The subscription is due on 1st January of each year and those joining the Society later in the year will receive back numbers of the current volume of the AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE. The subscription rate for non-members is: British Isles and Europe - £9.00; outside Europe -£10.00 (25.00 US dollars). Subscriptions, changes of address, orders for back numbers, etc., should be sent to: THE HON. SECRETARY AND TREASURER, THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY, WINDSOR FOREST STUD, MILL RIDE, ASCOT, BERKSHIRE SL5 8LT. NEW MEMBERS Mr. P.J. Adams, 90 Holland Road, Little Clacton, Essex. Mr. T. Arndt, Max-Reger-Strasse 10, 7518 Bretten-Golshausen, Germany. Ms. M. Baum, 4117 France Avenue South, Minneapolis, Mn. 55416, USA Mr. M. Blackburn, Parrot-disc, P.O. Box 5699, Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740, USA Mr. P.D. Brookes, 70 Tean Road, Cheadle, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffs. Ms. E. Buckey, Crand Aviary, 267 N. Grand Street, Eugene, Or. 97402, USA Mrs. R. Byford, RD2 Bon 612, Apollo, Pa. 15613, USA Mr. J. Chetcuti, P.O. Box 461, Port Elgin, Ontario NOH 2CO, Canada. Mr. J. Cuomo, 12, Brownsell Avenue, West Haverstraw, N.Y. 10993, USA Mr. K.C. Darling, Orchard Cottage, Brighton Road, Lewes, East Sussex Ms. J. Dedell, 58 West 15th Street, New York, N.Y. 10001, USA Mr. M. Drake, Blandford, Pompers Lane, Hurstpierpoint, Sussex. Dr. L. Goodman, 21 Cannon Street, Newlands, 7700 Cape, South Africa Mr. M. Gottfried, Hauptstrasse 63, 2273 Hohenau/March, Austria Mr. R.B. Humm, 3235 Tenth Avenue North, St. Petersburg, Fla. 33713, USA Mr. P. Jason, P.O. Box 532, Redway, California 95560, USA Mr. M.G. Knight, 62 Laburnum Avenue, Newbold Verdon, Leicester LE9 9LQ Mr. S. Lennartsson, Aspegarden Tornevik, S-59041 Rimforsa, Sweden Mr. J. Norem, 805 W. Oakland Park Boulevard, Oakland Park, Fla. 33311, USA Mr. A.B. Olszewski, 605 Henderson Street, Jersey City, N.J. 07302, USA Mr. W. L. Ormond, 224 Beachhaven Road, Beachhaven, Auckland 10, New Zealand Mrs. J. Parcell, 1400 N. 65th Avenue, Hollywood, Fla. 33024, USA Mr. A. Platt, Dove Cottage, 264 Beacon Road, Wibsey, Bradford, West Yorks BD6 3DU Mr. A.L. Quintana, R. No. 1, Box 132, Whiteland, Indiana 46184, USA Mr. D. Ramsey, 3751 Jammes Road, Jacksonville, Fla, 32210, USA Dr. W.D. Russell, P.O. Box 67853, Bryanston 2021, South Africa Mr. J. Schwarzberg, Unterm Jaeger 6, D 4630 Bochum 7, West Germany Ms. V.L. Settles, P.O. Box 4 - 3043, Anchorage, Alaska 99509, USA Mr. W.A. Starika, 708 21st Avenue, Belmar, N.J. 07719, USA Mr. F.W. Strange, 38 Glenfield Crescent, Mickleover, Derby Ms. D.E. Susre, 25823 - 70th Avenue, N.E., Arlington, Wa. 98223, USA Mr. N. Tabony, Charivari, Sun Ray Avenue, Whitstable, Kent Capt. F.J. Turner, Livestock Project Unit, PMB 5676, Ibadan, Nigeria Mr. J.R. Van Ooosten, 8023 17th N.E., Seattle, Wa. 98115, USA Mr. J. Voelker, 25 Mirror Place, Oak Ridge, N.J. 07438, USA Mr. J.D. Warren, 1 Chestnut Road, Yardley Gobion, Towcester, Northants. Mr. B. Wherry, 37 Wolfenden Avenue, Bootle 20, Merseyside L20 OAY Mrs. H. Whitmore, Winklands, Hollybush Ride, Windlesham, Surrey Mrs. L.D. Wiezycki, 8316 N. Boulevard, Tampa, Fla. 33604, USA Mrs. C.F. Wilson, 1495 Tutwiler Avenue, Memphis, Tennesee 38107, USA Mr. A. Womersley, Waverley House, Mont Arthur, St. Brelade, Jersey, Channel Islands CHANGE OF ADDRESS Mr. R.H. Broom to Clifton Cottage, 12 Maidenhall, Highnam, Gloucester GL2 8DC Dr. W.G. Buchanan, to 345 Estudillo, Suite A, San Leandro, California 94577, USA Mr. E. Clewlow, to P.O. Box 28071, Malvern 4055, Natal, South Africa. Mr. E.H. FitzSimmons to 220 Redwood Highway, Mill Valley, California 94941, USA Mr. J. Moller Hansen, to Aalykke 3, 7800 Skive, Denmark Mr. K. Holdsworth to Bwlch-y-Groes-Faen, Machynlleth, Powys SY20 8TY Mr. P. Jorgensen, to Vardegade 13, 3 th DK2100, Copenhagen O, Denmark Mr. C.E. Knoder, to National Audubon Society, 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20003, USA Mr. S.C.D.L. Lacey to No. 6 Langlands, Maesydre Road, Wrexham, Clwyd Mr. M.R. Lacoste to Case Rive 318, CH 1211 Geneva 3, Switzerland. Mr. A. Merand to CES Jules Ferry, 2 rue de Bretagne, 53800 Renaye, France Mr. M.A. Mogg to 83 Mountbatten Avenue, Wakefield, West Yorkshire WF2 6HH Mr. T.D. Omar, to P-4 Forest Park, Durham, N.H. 03824, USA Mr. T. Pullinger, to 834a London Road, Cheam, Surrey SM3 9BJ Mr. M. Roper to 44 Franche Road, Kidderminster, Worcs. Professor L.G.R. Santos, to Rua do Amapa 116Rc, Curitiba, Panama, Brazil 80 000 Ms Caryn Schrenzel to Lincoln Park Zoo, 2200 N Cannon Drive, Chicago, Ill. 60614 Mr. B.P. Shearing to 9 Cleveland Drive, Abraham Heights, Lancaster, Lancs. LAI 5EW Dr. B. Vargha, to Szabo Ervin U.40, H-1191 Budapest XIX, Hungary. Mr. G. Wallen, 1540 North Sierra Bonita, Los Angeles, California 9))46, USA. DONATIONS The Society is most grateful to the following members for their generosity Mr. J. Ingels Mr. J.M. Ridgeway Mr. J. Taylor Miss Rosemary Bissell Mr. E. Clewlow Prof. J.R. Hodges Published by The Avicultural Society, Windsor Forest Stud, Mill Ride, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 8LT, England. Printed in Great Britain by Unwin Brothers Ltd., The Gresham Press, Old Woking, Surrey THE AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY Edited by MARY HARVEY Volume 88 January 1982 to December 1982 1982 (0 CONTENTS TITLE PAGE . . i CONTENTS . . . . . . . . ii LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS . . iii LIST OF PLATES . . iv INDEX . . . . . 255 LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS AUSTIN, G. See GIRDLER, R. BARNICOAT, F. The Boswell Parrot Collection ... ... . . . . 101 The 50th Anniversary of the Splendid Grass Parrakeet in Aviculture . . . ... ..... 159 BERRY, R.J. and TODD, W.W. Breeding Touracos at the Houston Zoological Gardens ... ... 205 BIBEN, M. See GREENWELL, G.A. BOURNE, D. and CHESSELL, D. Breeding the Black and White Casqued Hornbill at the Metro Toronto Zoo . ... ... ... ... 15 CALLAGHAN, E. Breeding the Senegal Parrot .. ... ... . . . . 130 CARTER, C. Nesting of the Speckled Hummingbird . . . . 151 CHESSELL, D. See BOURNE, D. CLARKE, P. Breeding the Spectacled (White-fronted) Amazon Parrot . 71 COLES, D. See EVANS, K. COLES, D. Captive Management of the Hoopoe . 226 CORDONNIER, P. Notes on the successful breeding of the Dalmatian Pelican at the Parc of Villars-les-Dombes . 33 DELACOUR, J. Len Hill- an appreciation ... . ... ... . . 56 ELGAR, R.J. Notes on Violet-eared Humming Birds ... ... . . 26 Nest-building of a female Speckled Humming Bird ... ... ... 153 Humming Birds: their Care and Management ... . 213 EMERICK, C. See GREENWELL, G.A. EVANS, K. and COLES, D. Breeding the Crimson-rumped Toucanet at Padstow Bird Garden . ... . 193 GIBSON, L. Breeding the White-crested Jay Thrush . 135 GIBSON, L. and HERVOUET, L. LAI, Dr., LEWIS, D., OXLEY, R., and WOODLEY, B. Notes on Shamasand the Magpie Robin . 243 GIRDLER, R. and AUSTIN, G. Notes on the Yellow-faced Parrotlet . . 156 GOODWIN, D. Some Aspects of Human and other predation on birds ... 52 Bird Fancying, Foe of Aviculture . 88 GREENWELL, G.A. and EMERICK, C. and BIBEN, M. Inbreeding depression in Mandarin Ducks: a preliminary report on some continuing experiments . . ... 145 HA.RRISON, E.J. Observations on a captive Buffy Humming Bird . 81 HERVOUET, L. See GIBSON, L. HILL, B. Notes on the Birds in some London Parks . . 39 HODGES, Professor J.R. Reply to A Dissenting View on Aviculture by Alastair Morrison (1 13) . 116 HORSWELL, H.J. J.O. D’Eath - An Appreciation . 120 INGELS, Dr. J. Breeding Tanagers in captive conditions . 142 On the Adaptability of Tanagers to Captive Conditions ... 235 KENYON, G. Controlled environment aviaries ... . 36 LAI, Dr. See GIBSON, L. LEWIS, D. See Gibson, L. LOW, R. Breeding the Cape Parrot ... ... ... ... ... ... . . ... 1 Reply to A Dissenting View on Aviculture by Alastair Morrison (113) ... ... 117 LOWE, P. Breeding the Red-breasted Blue-bill . . . 148 LUBBOCK, M. Vent Sexing and Pinioning young Waterfowl . . 84 MANN, Mr. and Mrs. R. Breeding the Red-topped Amazon Parrot . . . 12 MARE, J.J. Breeding the Red-winged Starling ... . . . . 191 MAROLDO, G. Cranes in Asian Zoos, 1981 . . ... ... 104 MORRISON, A. A Dissenting View on Aviculture . . . ... ... ... 113 OLNEY, P.J. Notes from London Zoo, 1981 ... ... ... ... . 109 OXLEY, R.E. Management Methods of a Back-Garden Collection . 239 See GIBSON, L. RENS, J. Birds of Prey bred at Wassenaar Zoo, Holland, 1982 . 150 SAWYER, R.C.J. Breeding the Splendid Starling . . . 189 SCHLEE, Dr. M.A. Additional Notes on Breeding the Blackbird in Captivity ... ... 198 SHEPPARD, C. News from the Bronx Zoo, New York ... ... . ... ... Ill SPEAKM AN, P. Free-flying Barbary Doves - my introduction to them . ... 163 STOODLEY, J. Incubators and Hand-rearing in Aviculture . . . 74 TAYLOR, M. Observations on the Nightingale ... . . . . 210 TODD, W.W. See BERRY, R.J. WENNRICH, Dr. G. Sunbathing behaviour in five species of Ibises at the Walsrode Bird Park ... . . . . . . 96 Keeping Asian White Storks at Vogelpark Walsrode ... ... ... 127 WOODLEY, B. See GIBSON, L. WYLIE, S.R. Breeding the African Spoonbill at the St. Louis Zoo . 69 CORRESPONDENCE Modern Farming Methods and their possible effect on Bird Life, J. Stoodley, 65 ; Notes on Sex-Identity in Birds of Identical Colour, W.D. Cummings, 66 ; Modern Farming Methods and their possible effect on Bird Life, S.B. Kendall, 120; Unusual Cockatoo Feeding Habits, Prof. P. Bertagnolio, 179; Dr. H. Quinque’s reply to “A Dissenting View of Aviculture” by Alastair Morrison. 179; Rare Birds and Aviculture, J.J. Yealland, 183; Simulation Hybridisation, D. Gonzalez Jr., 185. LIST OF PLATES Female Cape Parrot . . . . . . . . . 1 Male Cape Parrot with first youngster shortly before it emerged from nest . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Cape Parrots: adult male, adult female and two young . . . . . . 9 Male Violet-eared Humming Bird . . . . . 27 Female Violet-eared Humming Bird . . 27 Young Violet-eared Humming Bird at 10 days old . . 27 Young Violet-eared Humming Bird at 18 days old . . . 27 Young Violet-eared Humming Bird at 20 days old 28 Dalmatian Pelicans, 43 days old, at the Parc of Villars-les-Dombes ...... 34 African Spoonbill with chicks at the St. Louis Zoological Park . . 69 Young Spectacled Amazon Parrots . . . . . . 73 Sunbathing in Ibises (3) . . . . . . 97 Sunbathing in Ibises (3) . . . 99 Red-crowned Cranes at Peking Zoo . . . 107 Y oung Asian White Storks at Walsrode Bird Park . . . . . 127 Part of the new breeding centre at Walsrode Bird Park . . . . 129 Two young storks born in 1980 in front of their pen . . . 129 King Vulture chick at Wassenaar Zoo . . . . . . . 150 Splendid Starling (in colour) . . . . . . . 189 Juvenile Crimson-rumped Toucanet . 197 Environmental setting of pair of Nesting Blackbirds . . 201 A selection of housing ideas for humming birds . . . 216 Various drinkers available for humming birds . . . 219 Rufous-breasted Hermit in typical postures of a healthy, sick and torpid humming bird . . . 223 Four juvenile Hoopoes hatched at Padstow Bird Gardens . . . . 233 Juvenile Magpie Robin . . ...251 Rufous-breasted Hermit in typical postures of a healthy, sick and torpid humming bird . . . . . . ....223 Four juvenile Hoopoes hatched at Padstow Bird Gardens . . . 233 Juvenile Magpie Robin . . 251 The Avicultural Society FOR THE STUDY OF BRITISH AND FOREIGN BIRDS IN FREEDOM AND CAPTIVITY OFFICERS AND COUNCIL as at 3 1st December 1982 President DR JEAN DELACOUR Vice-Presidents F.C. BARNICOAT Miss R. EZRA W. Van den BERGH J.J. YEALLAND D.H.S. RISDON Hon. Vice-President A.A. PRESTWICH Hon. Editor MARY HARVEY Hon. Secretary-Treasurer H.J. HORSWELL Hon. Assistant Secretary MARY HARVEY Members of the Council D. COLES M. CURZON K. DOLTON M.W. ELLIS Miss J. FENTON Mrs. R. GRANTHAM A.V. GRIFFITHS R. HARVEY Prof. J.R. HODGES K.J. LAWRENCE P. LOWE M. LUBBOCK R. OXLEY R.C.J. SAWYER W. TIMMIS OFFICERS OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY PAST AND PRESENT PRESIDENTS 1894- 1895 1895- 1920 1921-1925 1926-1955 1956-1963 1964-1967 1968-1972 1972 The Countess of Bective The Rev. and Hon. F.G. Dutton (later Canon and Lord Sherborne) The Rev. H.D. Astley A. Ezra, O.B.E. D. Seth-Smith Miss E. Maud Knobel A. A. Prestwich Dr. J. Delacour VICE-PRESIDENTS 1894-1895 The Rev & Hon 1949-1963 Miss E. Maud Knobel F.G. Dutton 1950-1955 D. Seth-Smith 1895-1900 The Right Hon The 1952-1961 E.J. Boosey Baroness Berkeley 1958-1970 Allen Silver 1896-1899 Sir H.S. Boynton Bt. 1962-1978 G.S. Mottershead 1899-1906 A.F. Wiener 1963-1974 Sir Crawford 1906-1937 Her Grace the Duchess McCullagh, Bt. of Bedford 1964-1967 A. A. Prestwich 1925-1927 Her Grace the Duchess 1967 J.J. Y ealland of Wellington 1970-1980 Miss P. Barclay- 1925-1935 The Lady Dunleath Smith, CBE 1925-1942 H.R. Filmer 1973 D.H.S. Risdon 1925-1951 Dr. E. Hopkinson 1973-1982 J. D’Eath CMG, DSO 1974-1979 W.G. Conway 1938-1962 J. Spedan Lewis 1978-1982 1980 1982 W. Van den bergh F.C. Barnicoat Miss R. Ezra HON SECRETARIES 1894-1896 Dr. C.S. Simpson 1914-1916 T.H. Newman 1896-1899 H.R. Fillmer Dr. A.G. Butler 1899-1901 J. Lewis Bonhote 1916-1919 Miss R. Alderson 1901-1903 R. Phillips Dr. A.G. Butler 1903-1904 R. Phillipps Dr. A.G. Butler 1919-1920 Dr. L. Loveil-Keays Dr. A.G. Butler 1904-1909 T.H. Newman 1921-1922 J. Lewis Bonhote Dr. A.G. Butler 1922-1948 Miss E. Maud Knobel 1909-1914 R.I. Pocock 1949-1970 A. A. Prestwich Dr. A.G. Butler 1971- H.J. Horswell HON. ASSISTANT SECRETARIES 1950-1970 Miss Kay Bonner 1971 Mrs. Mary Harvey HON. TREASURERS 18944897 H.R. Fillmer 19174919 A. Ezra 18974899 O.E. Cresswell 1920 Dr. L. Lovell-Keays 18994901 J. Lewis Bonhote 19214922 J. Lewis Bonhote 19014906 W.H. St. Quentin 19234948 Miss E. Maud Knobel 19064913 J. Lewis Bonhote 19494970 A. A. Prestwich 19134917 B.C. Thomasett 1971- H.J. Horswell HON. EDITORS 18944896 Dr. C.S. Simpson H.R. Fillmer 1924 The Marquess of Tavistock (later His Grace 18964899 H.R, Fillmer The Duke of Bedford) 18994901 O.E. Cresswell 1925 The Marquess of 19014907 D. Seth-Smith Tavistock 1907-1908 D. Seth-Smith D. Seth-Smith Dr, A.G. Butler 1926-1934 D. Seth-Smith 19084909 D. Seth-Smith Frank Finn 1935 The Hon. Anthony Chaplin (later the Rt. Hon Viscount 19094910 Frank Finn J, Lewis Bonhote Chaplin) Miss E.F. Chawner 1910-1912 J. Lewis Bonhote 1936-1938 Miss E.F. Chawner 1912-1917 The Rev. H.D. Astley 1939-1973 Miss Phyllis Barclay- 19174920 Dr. Graham Renshaw Smith, CBE 1920-1923 R.L Pocock 1974-1978 J.J. Y ealland D. Seth-Smith 1979 Mary Harvey MEDALLISTS OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY THE PRESIDENT’S MEDAL Miss Phyllis Barclay -Sro it h, CBE. 14th March 1960 Arthur Alfred Prestwich, 14th March, 1960 Dr. Jean Delacour. 13th March, 1967 Walter Van den bergh. 21st February, 1973 THE KNOBEL AWARD Sten Bergman, DSC. 14th March 1960 Curt af Enehjelm. 14th March, 1960 THE EVELYN DENNIS MEMORIAL AWARD Mrs. K.M. Scam ell. 13th November, 1967 Bird World BOX 70 / NORTH HOLLYWOOD, CALIFORNIA 91603 ARTICLES ALREADY PUBLISHED: Picking a Parrot Breeding Roseiias Taming Parrots Show Preparation Parasites in Birds Hand-Raising Surgical Sexing Training Birds to Perform Nutrition in Parrot Types The African Grey Grooming Parrots Color Feeding Pacheco's Disease Avian Pox The Norwich Canary A Germ -Free Aviary Softbi/ls Orange Weavers Talking Birds Squawking Birds Moult Budgie Colors Parrot Toys Traveling with Birds Indoor Aviaries Flock Disease & Immunity Color in Canaries The MAGAZINE FOR - BIRD ENTHUSIAST THE CHOICE OF THOSE WHO KNOW Bird World AMERICAN A VICULTU R ISTS GAZETTE If there are titles above that might have interested you, think of how much more there will be in future issues. □ 3 YEARS ... $30.00 □ 2 YEARS ... $22.00 □ 1 YEAR ... $12.00 CANADIAN & OVERSEAS PLEASE ADD $5.00 PER YEAR. FOREIGN PAYMENT MUST BE IN U.S. FUNDS IN THE FORM OF A POSTAL MONEY ORDER OR BANK DRAFT. OR: PHONE IN YOUR SUBSCRIPTION ON VISA/MASTER CHARGE (213) 769-61 1 1 — 10:00 A.M. - 4:00 P.M. MON.-FRI. SUBSCRIBE NOW LTTf NORTH HOLLYWOOD, CA 91603 AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE VOLUME 88 Number 1 1982 CONTENTS Breeding the Cape Parrot Poicephalus robustus by Rosemary Low (with plates) . 1 Breeding the Red-topped Amazon Parrot Amazona dufresnia rhodocorytha by Mr. and Mrs. R. Mann . 12 Breeding the Black and White Casqued Hornbill Bycanistes subcylindricus subquadratus at the Metro Toronto Zoo, by D. Bourne and D. Chessell . 15 Notes on Violet-eared Humming Birds - the genus Colibri by R.J. Elgar (with plates) . 26 Notes on the successful breeding of the Dalmatian Pelican Pelecanus crispus at the Park of Villars-Les-Dombes, by P. Cordonnier (with plate) . 33 Controlled Environment aviaries by G. Kenyon . 36 Notes on the Birds in some London parks by B. Hill . 39 Some Aspects of Human and other predation on birds, by Derek Goodwin . 52 Len Hill - an appreciation, by Dr. Jean Delacour . 56 News and Views . 58 Reviews . 63 Correspondence . 65 THE AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE welcomes original articles that have not been published elsewhere and that essentially concern the aviculture of a particular bird or group of birds, or that describe their natural history. Articles should be preferably typewritten, with double spacing, and the scientific names as well as the vernacular names of birds should be given. References cited in the text should be listed at the end of the article. Line drawings should be in Indian ink on thick paper or card. Photographs (preferably black and white prints) which illustrate a particular point in the article will be used where possible and should be clearly captioned. Manu¬ scripts should be submitted in final version as alterations, other than to typographical errors, cannot be allowed at proof stage because of the high cost. ADDRESS OF EDITOR Mary Harvey, Windsor Forest Stud, Mill Ride, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 8LT, England. Thomas Brosset Avicultural Magazine Tilt: JOURNAL ON THE A V [CULTURAL SOCIETY VoL 88 - No. 1 - All rights reserved JANUAR Y -MARCH 1 982 BREEDING THE CAPE PARROT Poicephalus robustus By Rosemary Low (Barnet) Beauty, it is said, is in the eyes of the beholder, thus I would not expect the Cape or Brown-necked Parrot Poicephalus robustus to be universally considered attractive. Indeed, Emilius Hopkinson (1910) described it as “an extraordinary ugly-looking bird on account of its huge, powerful beak and ungainly head, its heavy build and rather dull coloration , and except for its rarity possesses few attractions as a cage bird.” To my mind, nothing could be further from the truth. Its huge beak gives it the air of a delightful caricature of a parrot; its head is not ungainly - this impression being an illusion caused by the bill; its build is not heavy and its coloration is far from dull. As for possessing few attractions, the three specimens I have kept have caused me to rate the Cape Parrot as one of my favourite species. It is true that they tend to be shy but one, a tame male, was one of the most charming and intelligent parrots I have ever kept. In my experience, it has an advantage shared by no other parrot of sim¬ ilar size: it is quiet and its voice is pleasant - almost musical. Hopkinson described in his birds “the awful habit of screaming wildly when anyone goes near them” which I assume one can equate with “growling” in un¬ tamed Grey Parrots, as my birds have never behaved in this way. In coloration, the Cape Parrot is nearest to the Jardine’s Poicephalus gulielmi , but is immediately distinguished by its larger size and much more massive beak. The nominate race is found in extreme south-eastern Africa from Knysna and eastern Cape Province to Natal, western Zululand, wes¬ tern Swaziland and eastern Transvaal. It is a locally distributed bird of forest and thick bush. Judging by their appearance, my birds are of the race suahelicus from Mozambique, Zimbabwe, northern Lesotho, northern South West Africa to Angola, southern Congo and central Tanzania. Birds of this subspecies are more beautiful than the nominate race. The 2 ROSEMARY LOW - CAPE PARROT head feathers of the male are silver-grey, suffused with pink - an effect of unusual beauty quite unlike that of any other parrot. It is also unlike that of the nominate race in which the head is brownish - but certainly not brown, being tinted with greenish and yellowish-brown. In P. robustus robustus females and some males have the forehead orange; in suahelicus only the female has the forehead, and part of the crown orange. The feathers of the back and wing coverts are black, broadly edged with dark green. The rump and underparts are green, suffused with dull blue and/or grey. Thighs and outer edge of the wing are orange and the tail is blackish-brown. The iris is dark brown and the bill is pale horn colour. Length is slightly smaller than a Grey Parrot, ie. about 32 cm (12 in.). The head and bill are larger in the male, somehow giving it an appealing air which, to my eyes is more attractive than the more colour¬ ful plumage of the female. Apart from Hopkinson’s articles in the Avicultural Magazine (1910 and 1916), Bannerman’s notes which quote Hopkinson, and reports of the breeding successes at Basle Zoo in Switzerland (Lang, 1969), and those of G. and H. Isert (1980), very little has been written about the Cape Parrot. It is a rare bird in captivity for several reasons. First, it would appear to be difficult to establish, the mortality rate among freshly caught birds being high. Secondly, export is prohibited in some parts of its range. Its numbers are increasingly giving cause for concern, although its exact status in the three areas in which it is found must be difficult to deter¬ mine. At the time of writing it is placed on List B (vulnerable) of the Washington Convention. Thirdly, there has never been any demand for or interest in this species. This may be due partly to its fearsome beak . As can be seen from the accompanying photograph, the tip of the upper mandible tapers to a very curved, fine point, exceeding in this res¬ pect any parrot I know. (One wonders whether this is an adaptation for dealing with a certain item of its diet.) Those unfamiliar with this species could gain the impression that the bill was overgrown. According to Ban- nerman, the length of the upper mandible is 39.46 mm in the male and 34.4 in the female. Until 1975 my knowledge of the Cape Parrot was mainly confined to the specimen exhibited at London Zoo and to those seen during a visit to Basle Zoo in 1972. It was there that the first recorded captive breeding occurred in 1964. In 1975 my husband and I were unexpectedly offered a male Cape Parrot which had been bought at Harrods three years previously. The owner felt that she could no longer give it sufficient attention. It so hap- ROSEMARY LOW - CAPE PARROT 3 pened that a dealer had been advertising a female of this species for several months and I therefore lost no time in telephoning him. To my great dis¬ appointment I was informed that he had parted with it to another dealer on the previous day! He did not know the name of the buyer, only that he occasionallly took birds to the well-known Sunday morning bird mar¬ ket in the East End of London. The following day was a Sunday and by a great stroke of good fortune my husband was able to track the bird down and to return home with it. (The purchase price was very modest, indica¬ ting the complete lack of interest in this species.) It almost seemed as though fate had played a hand to bring the male and female together. The two birds were caged side by side for a while and, on introduction, proved to be entirely compatible. After several months it was possible to place them in ?n outdoor aviary where the female proved to be rather shy, disappearing into the nest-box on sight of people. The male, however, was tame and soon established himself as a favourite. I could not resist saving special tit-bits, such as cubes of cheese, for this engaging character. When excited, he would quickly rap his beak on the side of the aviary, and also make a noise like distant machine-gun fire. I recorded the subsequent events in “Parrots: their care and breeding”: “During their first year outside the male constantly fed the female, with elaborate pumping of the head, and also attempted to mate. Regrettably, he entirely lacked a tail and this never grew, so whether he was ever com¬ pletely successful I do not know. During the following year the female laid two clutches, the first egg of each clutch being laid on August 10 and September 12. The nest was inaccessible but the dates were accurate be¬ cause I have never seen a parrot which was more obviously about to lay. The nesting site was a narrow log which supported a large nest-box. The birds gnawed through the base of the box into the log.” To my intense regret, a few days later the male was horribly injured by a predator, probably a fox, which pulled his leg through 25 mm (1 in) welded mesh and bit it off at the top of the thigh. Not surprisingly, the shock and resulting loss of blood led to his untimely death. Exactly a year later, while visiting Walsrode Bird Park in Germany, my attention was claimed by two male Cape Parrots in an enclosure in the Parrot House. Later I learned that there was a female with two chicks in¬ side the nest-box and was privileged to have a quick glimpse of the two- week old chicks with their large, light coloured bills. To my delight the Director generously agreed to let us have the surplus adult male. This fine bird arrived at the end of March and was quarantined on our premises for the required 35 days. On May 12 he was placed with the 4 ROSEMARY LOW - CAPE PARROT female in a small outdoor aviary which measures only 1.8 m (6 ft) x 76 cm (2 ft 6 in) x 1.8 m (6 ft) high. There is no enclosed shelter; part of the roof is covered and the aviary is surrounded by small conifers, with a fence at the rear. Thus it is extremely secluded. By watching from an up¬ stairs window which overlooks the aviary I saw, that day, that the two birds were delighted with each other (previously they had been caged side by side for a few days). The female spent hours preening the male who, in turn, was seen to feed the female with laborious head-pumping move¬ ments. The female had always been shy and the nervousness of the male re¬ sulted in the pair seldom being visible, for they would sit at the end of the aviary hidden by the conifers. Judging by her behaviour, I estimated that the female had laid by August 12. She deserted the nest on September 27 - two weeks after the eggs were due to hatch. It is possible that a chick or chicks had hatched and died; on the other hand, I have known even ex¬ perienced breeding hens to incubate for two weeks past the hatching time. The male would spend long periods in the nest or sitting in the entrance but would rush nervously into the box when the aviary was approached. This made nest inspection a pointless exercise as the small base of the nest was covered by the adults. During the end of October the female laid a second clutch. On the evening of November 28 I heard a sound which was unexpected and deeply gratifying - that of a chick coming from the Cape Parrots’ nest- box. That was the first indication of its presence. Soaked sunflower seed was at once given instead of dry sunflower as the crop of a young chick can become impacted with whole dry kernels, and soaked seed is more nutritious and easier to digest. The seed is soaked for 24 hours, then washed thoroughly under a running tap. The quantity of apple and carrot was increased and a couple of cracked walnuts were offered daily. I was worried by the fact that the more nutritious foods, such as corn- on-the-cob, cheese and breadand milk, were thrown on the floor, untasted by these conservative feeders. On the night following the first sounds of the chick, I heard it again, loudly and clearly penetrating the silence of the night. On subsequent evenings I listened in vain. For about ten days, the presence of the parents in the nest was the only hint that it survived. The weather was uncharac¬ teristically kind and mild but, knowing it could not stay that way much longer, my husband and I decided to move the nest-box containing the whole family - that is, if the chick had survived - to an indoor flight. On December 10 my husband inspected the nest and caught a brief ROSEMARY LOW - CAPE PARROT 5 glimpse of a chick. Just before dusk two days later, the family was trans¬ ferred to a flight indoors measuring about 1 .8 m (6 ft) long, 60 cm (2 ft) wide and 1.8 m (6 ft) high. The nest -box was hung at the back in the darkest part of the room, and a tall-growing ivy was placed nearby in an attempt to simulate their previous situation. The birds were extremely wary and the male disappeared into the nest when anyone entered the room. For several days we kept out as much as possible - but the room contained about 15 other birds which needed atten¬ tion. Gradually the Cape Parrots became used to their new environment and after two weeks their happy chortling calls could again be heard, indi¬ cating they were quite at home. By this time the weather was bitterly cold and the first snow had fallen. After a few days, when it was apparent that no harm had been caused by their abrupt removal, the nest -box was inspected daily. At first it was not easy to see the chick but after a few days we were able to take a good look at it. The parents would hide their heads in the corners, leaving the chick undefended and standing up unconcernedly and looking at us. The food-begging call was often heard: a high-pitched double note, which became lower in pitch as the chick matured. By Christmas the young bird was covered in dense, short white down. Its large pink beak had prominent protruberances on each side; its feet were pink with white nails. By December 27 the chick’s forehead and crown were pale orange - coloured by the feathers under the skin, covering the same area as the orange on the female’s head. By January 4 its forehead was covered in bright orange feathers, the rest of the head being unfeathered. By January 14 its wings were feathered. Body size was two-thirds that of an adult. The daily inspection on January 17 revealed that the chick had been plucked on the head; subsequently the nape, mantle and breast were plucked. However, much to my surprise, new feathers had replaced the plucked ones by the second week in February. It was during this time that I first heard the young bird quietly warbling in the nest-box. During nest inspection on February 17, I gently picked up the young bird to en¬ sure that its feet were perfect. It made no attempt either to bite or to struggle. Next morning it was seen at the nest entrance for the first time. There was no hint that anything was wrong with it, or of the tragedy to follow. It continued to look out of the nest but made no attempt to leave. On March 1 I removed it from the nest and placed it on the perch. It was then apparent that the chick was abnormally weak. On the following day it fell from the perch and, much to my distress, it died during the early 6 ROSEMARY LOW - CAPE PARROT hours of the following morning. Autopsy revealed that, although apparent¬ ly normal, it was severely afflicted with rickets and many of its bones were broken in the fall. Food taken during the rearing period consisted mainly of soaked sun¬ flower, sweet com (bought frozen, then thawed), apple, carrot and grapes and, on occasions, celery. One or two walnuts, a great favourite with this species, were offered daily. I can recommend offering sweet corn to birds which refuse corn-on-the- cob. At First the grains were ignored but were soon taken with relish. They eventually formed the larger part of the vegetable matter taken. No animal protein was included in the rearing food for the simple reason that the par¬ ents would not eat it. Neither would they take food on which bone meal had been sprinkled. However, cuttlefish “bone” was eaten and this must have been the principal source of calcium. Either it was insufficient or the diet was lacking in Vitamin D, preventing absorption of calcium. During the spring the pair were returned to their outdoor aviary but, much to my disappointment, made no further attempt to nest during 1980. In 1981 the female laid during the middle of May, on or about May 16. Nest inspection was a pointless exercise during incubation since whenever anyone approached the aviary, the male retired to the nest -box and neither bird would move when the nest -box lid was opened. When the nest was inspected on June 21 a chick was seen which was judged to be about one week old. At the second inspection a few days later a second chick was seen. (Doubtless it was present, but hidden, at the first inspection.) Regular inspection then occurred at intervals of a few days; each time a handful of pet litter (compressed wood shavings) was placed in the nest to help absorb the droppings. On July 7 I noted that the chicks had a covering of very short white down, in evenly spaced tufts. Six days later the down colour had changed to golden yellow. There was an orange blush on the forehead where the feathers were coming through; wing feathers were also erupting. The bills were a light pink with the sides of the upper mandible raised slightly. On July 211 noted in my diary that the chicks had “dense gold and yellow down with a ruff of white down framing the neck. They stood up and growled while the parents hid their heads.” No further notes were made on their development as my husband and I were away for 17 days. On August 19, shortly after our return, one Cape chick was looking out of the nest. One chick was seen out of the nest on September 4 and two chicks on September 7. However, they were very shy, and returned to the nest when they saw anyone near, so could have ROSEMARY LOW - CAPE PARROT 7 left the nest unseen before then. They were perfectly feathered and large - as large as the female. The upper mandible of the first chick to leave the nest was slightly larger than that of the female so possibly it is a male. Both young differ from the adults in the pinker beak and cere and in the absence of orange feathers on the bend of the wing and on the thighs. They otherwise resemble the fe¬ male except for the reduced area of orange on the head and the dark grey feathering on the lores. They returned to the nest every night for several weeks after first vacating it. The rearing foods were similar to those already mentioned, with the addition of fresh or cooked peas on occasions and the stones of peaches and plums from which they extracted the kernels with ease. Bone meal or bone flour was sprinkled on the sunflower seed. As most members reading this will not be in possession of the Avicul- tural Magazine for 1910, it might be of interest to quote further from Emilius Ho pkin son’s interesting article on this species. Regarding its wild life he wrote: “In the Gambia these parrots appear to be confined to that part of the country between the mouths of the Vinntang Creek (about 30 miles from the sea) and the McCarthy Island District, some 150 miles up the river, and within these limits are especially common on the South Bank where the country is well-wooded and fringed with a very deep belt of Mangroves. They never seem to wander far away from the river or its creeks at any time, and even on our boundary, though in most places this is only seven miles from the river, one never sees them; nor have I ever come across a single individual in the Upper River, where there are no Mangroves (and, therefore, probably no attractions for the Bambaras (the Mandingo name for this species, the Bambara people being renowned for their strength and size), nor in the districts near Bathurst and the sea, where, although there are plenty of Mangroves, these are bushes rather than trees. In fact, one may say that they confine themselves to that part of the country where the water is neither too salt nor too fresh, but sufficiently brackish to encourage a luxuriant growth of Man¬ groves. In the breeding season they are even more local, and are then hard¬ ly ever to be seen outside the Mangrove belt. “During the winter months they go about in parties of six to twelve, visiting the farms and clearings to feed on the ground-nuts, which are dug up about November and left in heaps in the open to dry: but every evening they are seen flying off in the direction of the river to roost in the trees which border it. They make their presence known far and wide as they fly over by their hoarse grating cries, and look when on the wing as if they 8 ROSEMARY LOW - CAPE PARROT were weighed down in front by their huge beaks and heads, though in spite of their apparent top heaviness their flight, accomplished with very rapid wing-beats, is fast and powerful. Their breeding season commences about March or April, and they make their nests in holes in the larger trees of the Mangrove belt, which is half forest, half swamp, an almost impene¬ trable growth, except by means of the small creeks which in places pierce it, and to which they keep themselves almost entirely during the hot months of the year. “ . Their only enemies here must be the Green Monkeys, and against them the old birds should have splendid weapons in their terrible beaks....” Regarding this species in captivity, Hopkinson wrote: “The young I have almost given up trying to keep, as I have never yet known any survive longer than eight months, an age that was only reached by one of my birds, most of which died soon after being taken, or at any rate within six months. While hand-fed they take readily what is given them, chiefly crushed and chewed ground nuts, with perhaps a little bread, biscuit or boiled rice, and as they get older and begin to feed themselves, will eat groundnuts freely, though nothing else; but they rarely seem to thrive. I think the reason must be that they are fed by their parents almost entirely on the seeds and fruits of the Mangroves among which they are born, and that for this we can supply no efficient substitute. The old birds thrive better, or at any rate last longer; one I had lived two years at least at the Zoo after it got there.” In view of the foregoing information regarding the difficulty of estab¬ lishing the Cape Parrot in captivity, the observations quoted by Forshaw (Skead, 1971) are highly surprising: “In some parts of the Transkei region, eastern South Africa, there is widespread removal of young birds from nests and trapping of adults for sale as pets, and it has been suggested that this could be contributing to the noticeable decline in numbers.” Export of this species from South Africa is prohibited; in any case, as previously mentioned, there is no demand for it. If widespread trapping occurs, this must be to meet a local demand, which again seems unlikely. According to Skead (1964), in South Africa the main foods of the Cape Parrot consist of the seeds of the yellow-woods, Podocarpus falcatus and P. latifolius , kaffir plum Harp ephy llum caffrum , wild olive Olea capensis and Commiphora caryaofolia. He states that Podocarpus is particularly important and has a great influence on movements. Seeds of the introduced black wattle (Skead, 1971) are another favourite seasonal food. Courtship behaviour consists mainly of the male feeding the female with exaggerated head-swirling movements. In the first male, who was not R.H. Grantham Male Cape Parrot with first youngster shortly before it emerged from nest R.H. Grantham ROSEMARY LOW - CAPE PARROT Cape Parrots - left to right: adult male, adult female and two young. The latter can be distinguished from the female by their dark lores. 10 ROSEMARY LOW - CAPE PARROT inhibited by my presence, I observed him to drop his wings, to form a cape around the lower half of the body. I have also observed this in courting Grey Parrots Psittacus erithacus. My pair is very affectionate in their beha¬ viour towards each other, and spend long periods in mutual preening. Nesting. It was regrettable that I was unable to record clutch sizes or the incubation period; the latter is probably 28 days. Three eggs formed the clutch in a nest found in Rhodesia (Vincent, 1946); it was situated about 6 m from the ground in a hole in the trunk of a Brachystegia tree. Approximately 30 cm from the entrance the eggs were laid on bare wood in a cavity about 18 cm across. Captive Breedings. I believe that these have occurred in only three other collections: at Basle Zoo in Switzerland, and at Walsrode Bird Park and with G. and H. Isert in West Germany. At Basle, consistent successes were achieved between 1964 and 1971, young being reared each year ex¬ cept in 1969. By 1968 15 young had been reared. In his account of these successes, Lang (1969) mentions a clutch of four eggs and another of three, also a nest in which three young were reared, thus three or four eggs may form the usual clutch. Incubation periods were not given. Nestling periods were apparently extremely variable, lasting between 54 and 79 days, but probably averaging about ten weeks. Indeed 54 days hardly seems credible and I cannot help wondering whether this was recorded in error. At Walsrode two chicks were reared in 1978. As already mentioned, a second male (later the father of my young) was present. In answer to my enquiry, Dr. Teichmann and Klaus Trogisch told me that he was not al¬ lowed near the nest-box or permitted to feed the chick. In 1979 two more chicks were reared at Walsrode. Those reared in 1978 moulted when about six months old. Immature plumage. On leaving the nest the first young bird resembled the female but had slightly more orange on the cheeks - a feature which is barely noticeable in the female. The feathers of the crown and forehead were tipped with orange, the rest of the head feathers being grey or pearly, some with an orange tinge. The feathers of the lores were dark grey, instead of orange as in the female. The upper mandible measured 3.7 cm ( 1 % in) long and 2 cm (8/10 in) wide. The edge of the upper mandible was soft and slightly raised. The young bird measured 25 cm (10 in). The next two young were identical in appearance to each other. I noted, in addition to the features described for the first young bird, that they lacked the orange thighs found in the female. The beak, also the cere had a distinct pink tinge. They were fully as large as the female; at a quick glance the difference in the bill colour was the best means of recognition. ROSEMARY LOW - CAPE PARROT 11 Immature plumage is of particular interest in robustus. First, almost certainly it varies according to the subspecies. Secondly, as in more parrots than is generally realised, immature plumage is more colourful than that of the adult. Forshaw (1973) describes the immature plumage as “No orange-red on thighs or wings; head and neck brownish-olive; sometimes marked with pink; tail dark green.” His reference came from Dr Lang and the birds bred in Basle Zoo which are of the nominate race. REFERENCES BANNERMAN, D.A. 1931. Birds of Tropical West Africa. Vol. 2. HOPKINSON, E. 1910. The Brown-necked Parrot. Avicultural Magazine pp. 107-112. . . 1916. Some Firefinches and other Gambian Birds. Avicultural Magazine, 313. ISERT, G. & H. 1980. Breeding the western race of the Cape Parrot. Avicultural Magazine, 205-9. LANG, E.M. 1969. Some observations on the Cape Parrot Poicephalus robustus robustus. Avicultural Magazine , 84-6. LOW, ROSEMARY. 1980. Parrots, their care and breeding. Blandford Press, pp. 304-8. SKEAD, C.J. 1964. The Overland Flights and Feeding Habits of the Cape Parrot Poicephalus robustus robustus (Gmelin) in the Eastern Cape Province. Ostrich, VoL 35, 202-223. 1971. The Cape Parrot in the Transkei and Natal. Ostrich, supple¬ ment No. 9, 165-178. VINCENT, A.W. 1946. On the breeding habits of some African birds. Ibis, Vol. 88 pp. 48-67. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am indebted to the Director of Vogelpark Walsrode, Wolfgang Brehm, also to Klaus Trogisch, for providing the male of my breeding pair. * * * As recorded above, the Cape Parrot Poicephalus robustus has been bred by Mr and Mrs R. Grantham. This is believed to be the first success in this country. Anyone knowing of a previous breeding in Great Britain or Northern Ireland is asked to in¬ form the Hon. Secretary. 12 BREEDING THE RED-TOPPED AMAZON PARROT Amazona dufresnia rhodocorytha By Mr. & Mrs. R. MANN (Peterborough) Only four adult Red-topped Amazon Parrots are known to be kept as aviary birds in Britain. We do not know the number kept as cage pets but it must be very small. Our pair, which are on loan to us by Mr. Bryan S. Ward, were acquired separately about five years ago, having been kept as cage pets, and may well be quite old. In 1980, in a previous foster home, they laid eggs that failed to hatch. Description Forshaw, in his book “Parrots of the World”, called this bird the Red- fronted Amazon but this is not really precise enough. Nine other Amazon species have red to the front of the head and consequently we prefer the older, more apt name of Red-topped Amazon. Like the other mainland Amazons, the basic colour is green with paler underparts and tail feathers that have wine-red markings. This species has an orange-red speculum to the wing. They are one of the few pink-billed Amazons. The most distinc¬ tive feature of this large bird is its head, the front and top of which is an attractive orange-red; margining the lower bill there is a yellowish-orange broad strip, while the sides to the head and throat are bluish. The iris is brown (Cooper, in Forshaw, shows it red). It weighs about 1 lb (450 to 500 g). Breeding The pair were put out on 12th July, five days after receiving them. Previously the 10 feet square aviary had held a pair of Triton Cockatoos Cacatua galerita triton. This aviary forms part of a row and is sheltered along the back with elm and willow trees. The 2 metre-long, sloping nest box had previously served the cockatoos and was made of 10 cm thick planks with thick strips of wood fixed in the corners and “steps” made out of wood to encourage the birds to provide their own nesting material. This was fastened to the back wall, well shaded from direct light, and arranged so that the lower end entered the thickness of the wall and the inspection door opened into the feeding passage behind. The cockatoos had built a nest of thick wood splinters and the hen Amazon may well have augmented this with her own parings of wood. Within a few days of putting them out¬ side they were seen feeding and preening one another. A fortnight after we MR & MRS R. MANN - RED-TOPPED AMAZON PARROT 13 had received them they were mating. The hen sexually solicits by holding her head down and raising her vent. Before pairing both sexes flicker their wings excitedly and they also quiver the wings during copulation. It is general for American parrots to make a constant loud purring noise during mating and in these birds it sounded almost like the rapid quacking of a duck, or, with hindsight, like a chick Amazon being fed. The cock only put one foot on the back of the hen when treading, keeping hold of the perch with the distant one. After mating the hen entered the nest; in these early stages the cock was never seen to go into the nest hole. On 10th August the first egg was laid. Strangely then, and at all times, the parents were never aggressive and this may well have been because we never had to enter the aviary to examine the contents of the box. The three eggs were laid at three-day intervals and incubation started when the second egg was laid. The hen did all the sitting and the male appeared to feed the hen only after she had left the box, in the morning and early evening. He always roosted outside the box. Incubation took 24 days. On the day of hatching the cock particularly sought out the soaked bread and it was now that he first began to enter the nest box. After the hatching he took to sitting just inside the nest hole, looking outward. The chicks were almost naked for they had only a very few isolated “hairs” to the skin and the ears and eyes were sealed tight. Growth was rapid. The hen could never be caught off the nest and we could only get to see the chicks by gently raising her body with a short stick but she seemed completely unperturbed by this. When the chicks were 14 days old, we could clearly hear them being fed from a distance of 50 metres. The noise of Amazon chicks begging is a repetitive “gu-gu-gu”. Now when we looked at the chicks, the hen would hiss bronchially and rock her fluffed body slightly up and down, and the chicks also began to do likewise. Most American parrot chicks make no sounds of objection when being handled. As the weather began to get cold and the nights draw in, and because the parents had not yet begun their annual moult, we took the chicks into the house for handrearing on 11th October. The two older chicks were exactly 30 days old and the other three days younger. They were covered with secondary down through which sprouted the well-grown pins of their feathers. The eyes and ears were open and no colours were yet dis- cernable although by the next day the blue on the cheek was breaking through. With the very first feeding they hissed slightly, but after a mouth¬ ful or so readily took to the spoon. When 34 days old, the biggest chick weighed 450g, the next 380g, and the youngest 470g. Soon after this they began to fly and were fully independent by the time they were a 14 MR & MRS R. MANN - RED-TOPPED AMAZON PARROT hundred days old. The male parent did not seem particularly well at about this time and so we brought him and his mate into the house for medication and warmth. The chicks, which they had not seen for almost five weeks, were ignored. They seemed as unconcerned when the young¬ sters flew to land and walk over their cages as they would have been were they houseflies. At five weeks old, blue quills were visible around the throat area and the beaks were horn-coloured. By the sixth week, yellow and faint red feathers were now appearing on the head and the blue was more promin¬ ent on the cheeks and throat areas. The skin around the eyes was white as opposed to a light charcoal grey in the adults. Foods and feeding The parents would take almost any food. Their main diet was pine nuts, peanuts, which they preferred unshelled, and a verysmall amount of sunflower seed. The cock had a passion for freshly picked peas, celery and carrots and had an orange most days. Their intake of sunflower increased when the chicks were about two weeks old. They consumed soaked bread with relish. The recipe was a basic nectar mixture initially given to us by Mr. Aberdeen of Boston Aviaries which was made up of honey, golden syrup, black treacle, condensed milk and a dry mix of Farex, red peppers, PYM, seaweed and cod liver oil with wheatgerm. Warm water was added to this mixture and large chunks of bread stirred in. Both particularly liked cubes of cheese which were fed by hand, through the wire. The chicks were fed on a mixture made up of Farex, ground sunflower seed, Bemax, red peppers, bonemeal, seaweed and PYM mixed to a sloppy consistency with water and a little milk. Grit and vitamins were added two or three times a week. The amount of sunflower seed was increased each week and ground less finely. They now share their parents’ taste for celery and cheese and enjoy lightly buttered toast in the mornings for their breakfast. We would like to thank Mr. George Smith for his valuable help and advice, his encouragement in writing this article and for suggesting us as a foster home for these Amazons, and to express our gratitude to Mr. Bryan Ward for allowing us to house and so breed these beautiful birds. 15 BREEDING THE BLACK AND WHITE CASQUED HORNBILL Bycanistes subcylindricussubquadratus AT THE METRO TORONTO ZOO, CANADA By D. BOURNE (Foreman) & D. CHESSELL (Senior Keeper) The Black and White Casqued Hornbill (or Grey-cheeked Hornbill), Bycanistes subcylindricus subquadratus ranges from Cameroon and Angola eastwards through central Africa to Kenya. The male is a large black and white bird with a dark bill and truncated casque. The female is smaller and has a casque confined to the base of the bill. For a more detailed description see Mackworth-Praed and Grant (1970). In late 1974 the Metro Toronto Zoo received 3.3 young B.s. subquadra¬ tus from Uganda via a dealer. On arrival the birds were quarantined, wormed with piperizine and telmin, and given tetracycline as a prophylac¬ tic treatment. After the quarantine the birds were removed to new holdings and paired. The first breeding pair was in a holding barn for the 1976 and 1977 seasons. The female died of an injury at the end of the 1977 season and the male died a month later of enteritis and septicaemia. This pair nested and laid fertile eggs which failed to hatch (see Table II for details) The other two breeding pairs, housed in the African Pavilion, had access to elm trunks with rotten centres from 1976 through the 1979 breeding season. These trunks did not stand up to the excavating by the hornbills and were eventually replaced with artificial nestboxes. In 1980 both African Pavilion breeding pairs nested successfully. One young was reared by the pair in the north aviary (NA) and two young were reared by the pair in the south aviary (SA). Diet The basic diet offered to the hornbills at the Metro Toronto Zoo con¬ sisted of 300g carnivore mixture (Table IV), lOOg hard-boiled egg, 45g carrot, 250g banana, 130g apple, 130g tomato and lOOg grapes. Additives to this basic diet included two tablespoons SA-37 Supplement Powder, one teaspoon dicalcium phosphate, and one tablespoon Carnivore Supple¬ ment Powder. The grated carrots and eggs, along with the vitamin and mineral supplements, were added to the carnivore mixture. This mixture was then rolled into small balls of approximately one inch in diameter. The fruits were cut into one inch, bite-size pieces. The carnivore ball mix¬ ture and the fruit pieces were kept separate on the feeding tray and offered 16 D. BOURNE & D. CHESSELL - BLACK & WHITE CASQUED HORNBILL to the birds once a day at approximately 10:00 a.m. The average daily consumption of the basic diet for the SA pair was 560g, with the consumption of the carnivore ball mixture representing 30%, or 150g of the total intake. Enclosures The enclosures for each of the three breeding pairs differed substantially The holding barn pair was in a concrete-floored, wooden-walled and wire mesh-fronted enclosure measuring 4.3 m long x 2.4 m wide x 2.1 m high. A window (1.2 m x 0.6 m) at one end allowed some natural light into the enclosure, but required supplementation with incandescent light. The area was not open to visitors and staff were restricted. The temperature for the area was maintained at approximately 21°C, and the relative humidity at about 60%. The two pairs in the African Pavilion were in vocal contact with each other but not within sight. The pavilion temperature was maintained around 23°C and the minimum relative humidity was approximately 60%. The NA pair was in a well-lit, pyramid-shaped aviary of 2.5 cm nylon mesh (15.2 m x 7.6mx 15.2 m high), which followed the contours of the building. This aviary was shared with a group of Vulturine Guinea Fowl Acryllium vulturinum as well as a pair of Red-crested Touracos Tauraco erythrolophus. The nestbox, 7.6 m above the dirt floor, was the highest perching point in the aviary. The SA pair were in a smaller, pyramid-shaped aviary of 2.5 nylon mesh, 7.3 m x 6.1 mx9.1 m high. This aviary was much darker due to climbing plants covering the mesh. A covered public walkway, cutting through one side, with glass viewing panels, allowed the public to look into the aviary. The nestbox was one of the highest perching points in the aviary, 3.6 m above the ground. There was also a small, shallow pool in each aviary. Nestboxes and Materials In the wild, B. subcylindricus nests in a cavity fairly high in a tree or, in certain instances, in rock crevices (Granvik, 1923). The entrance hole is normally reduced to a narrow crack using a clay/soil mixture. The pair in the holding barn utilised a nestbox measuring 46 cm x 46 cm x 61 cm high. It was located 1.5 m from the ground and had a 20 cm x 18 cm entrance hole. This opening was located 28 cm from the base of the box, and a small perch was just below it. No material was added to the box by the keepers, and apart from visual checks and re- D. BOURNE & D. CHESSELL - BLACK & WHITE CASQUED HORNBILL 1 7 moval of two unhatched eggs, the nestbox was left untouched between seasons. This pair was offered a clay/straw mixture in one bowl and moist clay in another. The NA pair used a nestbox measuring 46 cm x 46 cm x 91 cm high. This nestbox had a 18 cm x 23 cm entrance centrally situated 64 cm from the base. A perch below the opening allowed easy access to the nest. The nestbox was packed with shavings to the level of the base of the hole. The nestbox for the SA pair was 58 cm x 61 cm x 91 cm high, and had a 15 cm x 15 cm entrance hole 61 cm from the base with an access perch similar to the other nestbox. This box was also packed with shavings. Both pairs had a constant supply of wet clay in a bowl at ground level and both boxes were partially sealed with clay by the keepers. This clay was subse¬ quently chipped off by the birds when they became interested in the nest- boxes. Courting Feeding of the female by the male was the initial courting activity. In the year-round heated buildings in which the three pairs were kept, this activity started in January or February. In an outside aviary at Birdworld, Farnham, England, it started in mid-April (Porritt and Riley, 1976). The Metro Toronto Zoo males gave their females all of the grapes, the favourite food of all the hornbills. The barn male also gave his female pieces of hard- boiled egg yolks. The barn male established his pairing by attacking another male housed with them a month before his female walled-up in 1976. During this period occasional mutual preening was seen, including the male grabbing at the female’s neck and preening around her tail feathers and vent area. This activity was seen from early February to early April in the NA and SA pairs and was followed by mating in mid-April. In the NA pair an attempted mating was seen six weeks before a successful one was observed. The final matings for the NA and SA pairs were observed 29 and 1 7 days, respec¬ tively, before the female was sealed in the box. In 1977 the bam pair mated 55 days before the female was walled in. Unfortunately, no eggs were found in the nest at the end of that confinement. Courtship, feeding and preening occurred prior to the presence of a nestbox in the NA pair as well as in the pair at Birdworld (Harvey, 1973). Sealing-up and Confinement The first interest in the nestbox was normally shown by the male in January or February. The NA male showed first interest in the box the day 1 8 D. BOURNE & D. CHESSELL - BLACK & WHITE CASQUED HORNBILL after copulation. Male interest in both cases involved chipping away of the old clay and removing some shavings from the interior of the nestbox. Within a few days the females were seen on the nestbox or perch in front, investigating the hole and contents. On occasion the male appeared to be coaxing the female to the box with food. He would fly to the tree perch next to her and offer her food, then fly to the nestbox perch with it. If she did not follow, he would repeat the process. The SA female entered the box during February or March, six to seven weeks before seal-up, but the NA female did not enter the box until two and a half weeks before seal-up. The males were never seen to enter the nestbox. The use of wet clay started in the days following the female’s first entrance. The female was never seen carrying the clay, which agrees with Moreau’s statements (1937) about the genus Bycanistes. However, he also said that females do the work of sealing, but our experience agrees with Harvey (1976) in that the males were found to perform most of this work. Occasionally, when the female was inside the box and the male outside, they were seen with bills crossed, smoothing clay on one side of the hole, then the other side. Examination of the box at the conclusion of the breeding season showed a 10 cm thickness of clay around the hole inside the box, and a 7 cm thickness on the outside. From her first interest to final seal-up, the female spent more and more time in the box, often hitting at the interior walls. The male made frequent visits to her with clay balls and food. Wet river clay was used almost ex¬ clusively during the sealing-up process, although Chapin (1926) mentions that dung is often used by the genus Bycanistes. In 1977 the barn pair used their faeces before switching to the clay provided. Later the barn male was seen working with ground meat, but this was after the female was sealed in. The use of clay continued occasionally even when the work appeared complete, with one male adding clay 70 days after seal-up. The finished slots varied in shape from a crescent 10 cm high x 1.9 cm wide, to a T-shape 15 cm high x 2.5 cm wide. The female of the barn pair was sealed in by early March (1976) or early April (1977), whereas the NA and SA females, as well as the Bird- world females, were sealed in by early to mid-May. During the May-June incubation period the food intake, especially of the carnivore ball mixture, steadily increased. In June, the average daily consumption of the carnivore ball mixture for the SA pair was 320 g (43% of the total), more than twice their original consumption. The fruit consumption for this period remained constant (420 g per day). D. BOURNE & D. CHESSELL - BLACK & WHITE CASQUED HORNBILL 19 Live food was also offered during this period. The average daily intake for the SA pair consisted of six newborn mice, 12 mealworms and 18 crickets. The NA pair also increased their intake of the carnivore ball mix¬ ture, but never accepted any live foods. This increased intake of higher protein food items during incubation concurs with the observations of Porritt and Riley (1976). The birds were fed twice daily during this period to ensure that fresh food was always available. In early July, possibly during the rearing period, the SA male began demanding more food. The daily carnivore ball mixture consumption for this period was 620 g (43%), with the fruit consumption being 830 g (57%). The daily live food consumption also increased to six newborn mice, 30 mealworms and 25 crickets. This doubling in food consumption was prob¬ ably due to the increased demand of the youngsters. In August, just before the female and young emerged, the SA pair’s intake of carnivore ball mixture dropped to 490 g per day, whilst their fruit intake remained the same (810 g per day). The carnivore ball mix¬ ture represented 37% of the total daily intake, which was comparable to the original proportion before sealing in. During July the NA pair had been gradually eating more food when, abruptly on 21st July, 44 days after sealing up, the female stopped accep¬ ting any food. This time period approximates the end of incubation repor¬ ted by Moreau and Moreau (1941) for Bycanistes. The male continued to offer the female food during the following days and never showed any signs of abandoning his post. On 24th July she again started accepting food from the male. Both males were seen carrying objects other than food and clay to the female in the box. These objects were predominantly twigs, but also included grass, leaves, stones and bark. The SA male was seen offering these materials during the three weeks prior to seal up, but the NA male was only seen offering them during the third week following seal up. According to Chapin (1926), West African hornbills never used material to line the nest. Moreau and Moreau (1941) also suggested this for most African species, although they mentioned acceptance of bark chips by a female B. cristatus and a nest full of fruit stones. After emergence, exam¬ ination of the interior of the SA nestbox produced a matted nest primarily of sticks with feathers and shavings that could be lifted out in one piece. This “nest” was 13 cm below the hole. The NA box had a similar matted nest but no sticks were used and fewer feathers were evident. These mater¬ ials were found beneath the nestbox and were presumed to have been 20 D. BOURNE & D. CHESSELL - BLACK & WHITE CASQUED HORNBILL pushed out during the female’s cleaning of the box or refused when offered by the male. When the females emerged, their fine appearances gave every impress- ion of a complete moult. Millar (1921) found that B. bucinator used feathers to line the nest, while Cowles (1926) found feathers dropped from the nest. While the NA and SA females were in their boxes, occasional body, flight or tail feathers were found below. Examination of the SA nest- box after emergence produced many body, flight and tail feathers, some incorporated into the nest. Moreau (1937) quotes Pitman as finding a B. subcylindricus nest with a naked nestling and a flightless female with primaries all growing in. During the long period inside the box the female and later her young were seen to defaecate with their posterior to the small hole. In the more inaccessible south aviary a faecal pile 1 5 cm deep developed about 1 m from the box, with the maximum distance being 2.4 m. In early June, what were presumed to have been faecal sacs from the young were seen being passed by the female to the male, which he then dropped. Sticks and wood shavings were also found beneath the nestbox. On examination of the box after the emergence of the birds there was al¬ most no faecal material and under the surface nest the wood shavings appeared unused. Emergence On 27th August and 17th September, after a confinement of 112 days and 122 days respectively, the SA and NA females broke out of their boxes. On the day prior to emergence the SA male was seen chipping at the clay and two birds were heard calling from inside. On the actual day of emergence, the male became aggressive toward the keeper when he entered the aviary. The SA female was seen removing clay and was out by 8.40 a.m. The first young, a male, emerged by 9.50 a.m. and the second, a female, by 12.00 noon. All three birds flew well, although both young appeared nervous at first but calmed down after a few hours. The NA fe¬ male and her young, a male, were out by 7 a.m. In wild B. cristatuSy the birds emerged between 7 and 9 a.m. The fe¬ male took an hour to remove plaster and then she and the male encouraged the young to leave. The female in this case was described as being “shabby and weak” on emergence (Moreau and Moreau, 1941). All the B. subcylin¬ dricus females at the Metro Toronto Zoo appeared in good condition after emergence, which concurs with the observations of Porritt and Riley (1976). D. BOURNE & D. CHESSELL - BLACK & WHITE CASQUED HORNBILL 21 All the young were almost the size of the parents (Table I). Their sex was easily discernible with the males having the characteristic large casque. The shape was different from the adult male casque (see photograph) and blood lines could be seen in the transparent white part of the casque. The day following emergence the SA pair were both seen feeding the young, although the young were slow to accept food from the male. In the following days the young were vocalising along with the adult male and moving with confidence around the aviary. The first sighting of a young eating on its own occurred on 7th November, 72 days after emer¬ gence. One hundred and one days after emerging, the adult male was seen chasing and harrassing the juvenile male with both vocalising. No food was eaten that day. Two days later the young pair were removed. The NA male was aggressive at feeding times for several days following emergence. The young was only being fed by the parents until 1st Novem¬ ber, 45 days after emergence, when it began to feed on its own. At 139 days after emergence the adult male was seen harrassing the juvenile male so the young bird was removed. At Birdworld, B. subcylindricus young rejected the adult male’s attempts to feed them (Porritt and Riley, 1976). He fed the female who then fed the young. The young in that case were seen eating independently after approximately 40 days. Following their removal from the breeding pairs, the juvenile NA male was placed with the juvenile SA female in an off-display, bird-breeding unit with the eventual hope of a first generation breeding. Summary The successful breedings that have occurred here at the Metro Toronto Zoo and at Birdworld (Porritt and Riley, 1976) have occurred in a variety of aviaries. The smallest aviary at Birdworld measured 4.6 m x 5.5 m x 2.4 m high, which was smaller than the African Pavilion aviaries but larger than the one at the holding barn. The availability of a suitable nestbox (filled with wood shavings), clay and diet were instrumental in the breeding of these hornbills. In both the north and south aviaries the nestboxes were the highest perching points, and offered the animals security. The wood shavings were adjusted by the hornbills to the level they desired. A supply of moist river clay was always available once courtship commenced and the diet was adjusted according to their needs. Although the maintenance diet consisted primarily of fruits (70%), it became necessary to increase the amount and proportion of animal protein during the period of confinement. At these times the 22 D. BOURNE & D. CHESSELL - BLACK & WHITE CASQUED HORNBILL amount of animal protein consumed doubled and represented up to 45% of the total intake. When the female and young emerged the consumption of animal protein dropped to 37% of the total. The consumption of fruit at that time remained the same and the overall increase in food consump¬ tion was accounted for by the increase in the number of birds. The two pairs of hornbills in the African Pavilion nested at a different time from the pair in the bam. The dates and times of the significant reproductive events for the Metro Toronto Zoo and Birdworld pairs are tabulated and compared in Table II. From the information in this table it appears that the majority of pairs sealed up in May and emerged during late August or early September, after 112-123 days of confinement. Early emergency from the nest cavity has been reported frequently. Porritt and Riley (1976) mention captive B. subcylindricus breaking out after only seven days in 1973 with successful seasons in 1972 and 1974. Moreau and Moreau (1941) cite a pair of B. crista tus, in four consecutive seasons, breaking out from 20 to 86 days after sealing up, but successful seasons followed. No apparent causes were mentioned. The Metro Toronto Zoo holding barn pair had two unsuccessful seasons. In 1976 the female emerged after 104 days, leaving two eggs. The eggs were dull white with a pitted surface, measured 49.3 mm x 37.4 mm and contained rotting embryos, one-third developed. In 1977 the same female emerged after 1 14 days with neither eggs nor young. However, in neither year were shavings used. Seal up is obviously no guarantee of success. According to the International Zoo Yearbook, Birdworld at Farnham in England, Wassenaar Zoo in Holland, Berlin Zoo in West Germany and the Jurong Bird Park in Singapore have all bred Bycanistes subcylindricus but the subspecies was not specified. During the writing of this paper, both the NA and the SA pairs again started to nest. As of May 1981, both females were sealed into their boxes. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to thank John Carnio, Bob Johnson and Susan Guinn for criticism and help, the Africa Pavilion and holding barn staff for their invaluable records and care and, lastly, the many who have published then successes and failures for us to benefit from. REFERENCES CHAPIN, J.P. 1926. Les Calaos (Bucerotidae) congolais. Bull. Cere. Zool Cone, iii, pp 9-20. D. BOURNE & D. CHESSELL - BLACK & WHITE CASQUED HORNBILL 23 CHOY, P.K. 1978. Breeding the Great Pied Hornbill at Jurong Bird Park. Avicultural Magazine , 181-183. CHOY, P.K. 1980. Breeding the Great Indian Hornbill at Jurong Bird Park. Int. Zoo Ybk. 20: 204-206. COWLES, R.B. 1926. The Nesting Habits of the Crowned Hornbill Lophocerus melanoleucos. SI Afr. J. Nat . Hist. VI: 20-24. GRANVIK, H. 1923. Contributions to the Knowledge of East African Ornithology. Birds Collected on the Swedish Mount Elgon Expedition, 1920. /. Ornithol. LXXI: 1-280. HARVEY, P.M. 1973. Breeding the Casqued Hornbill at Birdworld. A vie. Mag. 79 (1): 23-25. HUTCHINS, M. 1976. Breeding Biology and Behaviour of the Indian Pied Horn- bin. Int. Zoo Ybk. 16: 99-104. MACKWORTH-PRAED, C.W. and GRANT, C.H.B. 1970. Birds of West Central and Western Africa. African Handbook of Birds. Series III, Volume I, London. MILLAR, AJ. 1921. The Nesting Habits of the Trumpeter HornbiU Bycanistes bucinator. S. Afr. J. Nat. Hist III: 217-219. MOREAU, R.E. and MOREAU, Wm. 1941. Breeding Biology of the Silvery- cheeked Hornbill. Auk 58: 13-27. PORRITT, R. and RILEY, M. 1976. Breeding the Black and White Casqued HornbiU at Birdworld, Farnham. Int. Zoo Ybk. 16: 104-105. STONOR, C.R. 1937. On the Attempted Breeding of a Pair of Trumpeter Horn- bills Bycanistes bucinator, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 107(A): 89-95. Table I - Weight and Wing Length Comparisons NA Male Adult NA Female Adult NA Male 1980 hatch SA Male 1980 Hatch SA Female 1980 Hatch Age 8 years 8 years 9 months 8 months 8 months Weight 1525 g 1250 g 1450 g 1240 g 1160 g Wing Length 363 mm 325 mm 370 mm 360 mm 315 mm TABLE II - COMPARATIVE DATES OF MAJOR BREEDING EVENTS 24 D. BOURNE & D’ CHESSELL - BLACK & WHITE CASQUED HORNBILL « 3 ^ T3 C VO ^ O o3 > CD £ ** oo^o s ? 2 3 a s Mr -3 ^ § l l 8 -lit zs2l f | Oh -< o (S j- 00 •8 f 2 < I* 3 T3 OV OQ a a 1 < _ j X oo •jr m 1 Ch O ' < Z a a Emergence 17 September 27 August 16 June 24 July 17 September 16 September (122 days after (112 days after (104 days after (1 14 days after (123 days after (113 days after seal up) seal up) seal up) seal up) seal up) seal up) TABLE III - NESTING EVENTS OF DIFFERENT GENERA D. BOURNE & D. CHESSELL - BLACK & WHITE CASQUED HORNBILL 25 ^ 5 § ^ CD S pu « Carnivore Supplement Powder manufactured by United Co-operatives of Ontario, 151 City Centre Drive, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada. SA-37 Pet Supplement Powder manufactured by Rogar/STB, Division of BTI Products, Inc., London, Ontario, Canada. 26 R. J. ELGAR - VIOLET -EARED HUMMING BIRDS NOTES ON VIOLET-EARED HUMMING BIRDS THE GENUS COLIBRI By R.J. ELGAR (Manchester) The genus Colibri consists of medium to large humming birds ranging from Mexico through Central America to the northern third of South America. One member, the Brown Violet-eared Humming Bird Colibri del- phinae is found on the Caribbean island of Trinidad. The genus contains four species, three of which are mainly shining green in colour and one - C. delphinae - is various shades of brown. Both male and female of all members of the genus have elongated ear-coverts of metallic violet purple, hence the common name of Violet-ear. Brown Violet-eared Humming Bird Colibri delphinae Distribution Tropical to subtropical zones to an altitude 8,500 feet in Central America from Guatemala to Panama and south to Peru, Bolivia, Colombia, Venezuela, Guianas and in the Brazilian states of Roraima and Bahia, also the island of Trinidad, preferring open woodland, shrubbery, coffee and banana plantations, roadsides and gardens, feeding from ground level to a height of 40 ft. When resting it prefers to perch high in a tree and will spend periods of the day hawking insects from the same high perch. It usually nests quite low, at 4-5 ft., making a small cup-shaped nest on a bare twig in some shady place. Description It is a medium sized humming bird, some 4 Vi inches in length. The upper plumage is grey-brown to olive with a bronze gloss, upper tad- coverts at the base are black, rump and tips of upper tail-coverts cinnamon-buff. The tail is greenish olive with subterminal coppery purple band and tipped buff. Underparts are dull greyish-brown, some feathers have paler edges that form indefinite streaks; elongated ear-coverts glit¬ tering violet purple ; centre of throat glittering green changing to glitter¬ ing blue on lower throat. Over the past twenty years I have owned several of this species. They are long lived and robust birds, ideal for cages or communal humming bird flights although males in breeding condition can prove to be rather aggres¬ sive with small species. This species has been bred in captivity in West Germany in recent years. At present I have one female in my collection R.J. ELGAR - VIOLET-EARED HUMMING BIRDS 27 Male Colibri coruscans Young at 10 days old Female Colibri coruscans Young at 18 days old Photographs R. J. Elgar 28 R.J. ELGAR - VIOLET-EARED HUMMING BIRDS Young Colibri coruscans at 20 days old which built a nest in December 1979, sat in the nest for periods of the day for several weeks but failed to produce any eggs. Unfortunately I do not have a male. Green Violet-eared Humming Bird Colibri thalassinus Distribution Sub-tropical to temperate zones to an altitude of 9,500 ft in Mexico, Panama, through Colombia, Ecuador and Venezuela, north of the River Orinoco, eastern Peru, Bolivia to north-west Argentina. It prefers the open mountain slopes, feeding in areas where the partial removal of mature woodland has occurred and secondary growth has started. It feeds on the flowers of terrestrial bromeliads and shrubs up to tree-tops. Description A medium sized humming bird, 4 inches in length, body plumage shin¬ ing green, glittering green on throat and breast. Patch below eye, pro¬ longed over ear-coverts, violet-blue. Tail green with subterminal blue-black band. R.J. ELGAR - VIOLET-EARED HUMMING BIRDS 29 Over the past twenty years I have owned several of this species but in recent years a female that I acquired in 1973 has been most interesting. She has nested on numerous occasions, in 1977 rearing a hybrid to a male Colibri delphinae, in 1979 rearing a further youngster to a male Colibri coruscans , and in 1980 having two nests to a male of her own species but failing to rear the young to maturity. Over a period of five years she has hatched twelve chicks, rearing two to maturity. Sparkling Violet-eared Humming Bird Colibri coruscans Distribution Subtropical to arid temperate zones to an altitude of 9,500 ft in Col¬ ombia, Venezuela, Ecuador to Peru, Bolivia and north-west Argentina. A highly territorial and vocal humming bird, preferring open areas of cloud and rain forests, plantations, open terrain with scattered trees, feed¬ ing at all levels from ground bromeliads to tree tops. C. coruscans is a large humming bird, 5l/i inches long, with all upper plumage shining green, and chin, throat, cheek and lengthened ear-coverts purple-blue. Lower throat and breast are glittering emerald green, the breast and throat feathers have dark centres giving a scaled appearance; flanks and belly are shining green, central tail feathers shining blue-green, the rest dark green with subterminal deep purplish blue band slightly forked. Females are slightly smaller, have a more curved bill, and a white ocular spot. C. coruscans is a species that is well suited to aviculture being robust and long lived. It was first bred in Britain by Mrs. Scamell in 1967. In recent years it has been bred on a number of occasions on the Con¬ tinent. In 1980 a pair owned by Mr. K. Dewell managed to rear several young and a pair in my collection reared two females in the latter part of 1980, plus one male in January 1981. At the time of writing there has been several nestings from another female in my collection but at present no more have been reared. Display and breeding cycle of C. coruscans As in the wild, C. coruscans is a highly vocal and territorial humming bird and once moulted will sing and display almost continuously through¬ out the day. The male’s display can loosely be divided into three phases: 1. Male perches on prominent perch in his territory, utters short bursts of song interrupting this with his advertising call. He will then vibrate his wings vigorously at an angle of 90Q . At the same time he moves his head from side to side watching for any female to approach his territory at the same time leaning slightly back- R.J. ELGAR - VIOLET-EARED HUMMING BIRDS 30 wards to show a violet patch on his breast; ear patches are ex¬ tended. 2. He will fly vertically with a slow floating wing beat, swaying from side to side. The height to which he will soar is determined by the height of the enclosure. In the wild they can go as high as 60 ft. then slowly descend to their original perch. This will be re¬ peated several times until a female is attracted to his area. 3. The male will then fly to the female and hover in front of her with his bill pressed into the female’s lower breast or vent area, swinging his body from side to side, his ear patches extended and singing continuously. When the female takes up a crouching posi¬ tion, he will then fly over her with bill pressed in her nape still using his swinging flight to prevent the female from departing; cop¬ ulation then takes place. Nest Construction As with all female birds (as far as we know) they build and complete the nest without any help from the male. When a female wants to nest, she becomes hyperactive, spending portions of the day nest-building. This is done with great determination and they seem oblivious to other birds in the area, also ignoring any humming birds in the vicinity of the nest. The nest is usually completed in five or six days. My female Colibri usually construct their nests of cotton wool and dried sphagnum moss bound with fresh spiders’ webs. A female C thal- assinus used to attach small pieces of dark brown moss to the outside of the nest. The nests are constructed at heights varying from 18 inches to 6 feet, the majority being between 5 and 6 feet, in plants of Synogonium vellozaianum, Philodendron scandens, Nephrolepsis spp., Hoy a camosa and Gssus antarctica. In captivity it is difficult to draw any conclusions from this because of the limited dimensions of the flight and nesting sites available. Along with nesting activity the female will make her condition known to the male by flying over him, almost touching him while he is singing, plus going through a milder display, then perching within a few feet ready to be mated. Egg-laying and incubation The female when laying her eggs, perches on the rim of the nest with bill pointing outwards and the tail resting on the rim behind her so the vent is above the cup of the nest. After laying the egg, she will usually fly R.J. ELGAR - VIOLET-EARED HUMMING BIRDS 31 off. In young and mature females there is a space of one day before the second egg is laid, but as a female becomes older there may be a gap of two days. On some occasions, only one egg may be laid. The eggs are usually laid within an hour or so of daybreak. Incubation starts after the second egg has been laid but the female sleeps on the first egg throughout the night. Incubation lasts for 15 to 16 days. I made the following notes in 1980 about the hatching and develop¬ ment of two Colibri coruscans chicks: 16th October - female laid egg in nest constructed in Cissus antarctic- 16th October - female laid egg in nest constructed in 16th October - female laid egg in nest constructed in Cissus antarctica 16th October - female laid egg in nest constructed in Gssus antarctica. She was housed in a flight measuring 8 ft x 2 ft x 6 ft high and had access to the male through the open door of the flight. 18th October - female laid second egg. The male was removed from the vicinity of her flight. 23rd October - I examined the eggs and both were fertile. The female was incubating well, leaving the nest approximately every thirty minutes to feed and gather more cobwebs for the nest. These trips lasted only a few minutes. 1st November - In the morning there was a small amount of eggshell on the floor of the flight, the first chick had hatched. 2nd November - In the morning there were no signs of the second egg hatching. When I returned from work I examined the nest and the second egg was just hatching. The chick seemed very weak and still had part of the eggshell covering its head which I removed, using a small stem of a leaf. 4th November - Both chicks were developing well although there was a noticeable difference in size of the two chicks. 7th November - Small chick was catching up with the older one. Both now had pin feathers showing. 11th November - The older chick’s eyes were slightly open, the pin feathers starting to open and both young looked very healthy. 13th November - The older chick’s eyes were fully open, the young chick’s starting to open. Both were feathering up well and the flight feathers beginning to open. The female stopped brooding the chicks at night and slept on her usual perch. 17th November - Both chicks were very active in the nest. The tail and primaries were growing well and both young were preening their feathers and snapping at fruit flies that passed the nest. 20th November - Both chicks were taking turns on the rim of the nest 32 R J. ELGAR - VIOLET-EARED HUMMING BIRDS exercising their wings. Both slept in the nest at night. 22nd November - Both chicks were very active and I thought that they would fly soon 23rd November - The chicks were perching away from the nest and the female was extremely aggressive towards the young. If they did not gape for food, she displayed to them using phase No. 3 of the male’s display. 25th November - I was very concerned for the safety of the young so I removed them to a small stock cage with several nectar tubes. Within an hour both young were feeding themselves. At present I have two females and one male Colibri coruscans which were imported from Colombia in March 1976. Both females have nested but only one has reared any young to maturity, to date two females in the first nest plus a male in January 1981. The other female has hatched young but they have failed to live more than fifteen days. Colibri coruscans can prove to be extremely aggressive in a mixed flight when established so care must be taken when housing them. Once the female is incubating the eggs, it is wise to remove the male so that the female can tend the nest in peace. Once the young have hatched, large numbers of fruit flies are required, es¬ pecially for the first eight days. White-vented Violet-eared Humming Bird Colibri serrirostris Distribution Occurs in eastern Bolivia, southern Brazil to northern Argentina. A medium-sized humming bird, some inches in length. The upper plumage is shining green, the underparts glittering green. The chest is shining green, the centre of the feathers darker green giving a spangled effect, upper chest shining turquoise, lengthened ear-coverts metallic purple, rest of underplumage grey-green and under tail-coverts pure white. I have never observed a living member of this species. Mr. P.H.Hastings imported several into Britain many years ago, also several have appeared on the Continent in recent years. I have a male Colibri coruscans x C. thalassinus in my collection which is almost identical to a photograph of this species, except for having grey under tail coverts instead of white. BIBLIOGRAPHY ELGAR, R.J. 1977. The Breeding of a Hybrid Humming Bird. Avicultural Magazine, 83, pp. 130-134. 1979. A Hybrid Humming Bird Reared. Avicultural Magazine, 85, pp. 71-74. P. CORDONNIER - DALMATIAN PELICAN 33 PETERS, J.L. 1945. Checklist of Birds of the World. Vol. 5.; SCAMELL, K.M. 1967. Breeding the Violet-eared Humming Bird. Avicultural Magazine, 73, pp. 109-115.; MEYER DE SCHAUENSEE, R. 1971. A Guide to the Birds of South America. . and PHELPS, William H. Jr. 1978. A Guide to the Birds of Venezuela. SCHUCHMANN, Karl L. 1979. Kolibris Haltung und Pflege. SLUD, P. 1964. The Birds of Costa Rica. NOTE ON THE SUCCESSFUL BREEDING OF THE DALMATIAN PELICAN Pelecanus crispus AT THE PARK OF VILLARS-LES-DQMBES, FRANCE By P. CORDONNIER (Assistant Erector) The International Zoo Yearbook reports only one breeding success of a captive Dalmatian Pelican, at the Nuremberg Zoo in 1976, with no accompanying details on either the conditions or outcome. Neither Crivelli (1981), nor Kramer (1980), nor Klos (1966) mentions a successful breeding of this species, though the latter points out a case of cross¬ breeding at the Berlin Zoo (P. crispus x P. rufescens). In 1969 and 1971, six Dalmatian Pelicans were bought by Villars-les- Dombes Park. They are pinioned and kept on a lake, which measures roughly one and a quarter acres, together with two White Pelicans, four Pink-backed Pelicans (brought there in 1979), four Cormorants and various other waterfowl. White Storks live on the pond banks. An anti¬ freeze device maintains an ice-free area of 200 square metres during severe cold as these birds live out all the winter. They are fed every morning and the meal consists of large fish such as mackerel and roach; the daily average quantity is about one kilogram per 34 P. CORDONNIER - DALMATIAN PELICAN bird. Since 1978, polyvitamin capsules have been inserted into the fish in winter. In 1976, a circular island 25 metres square was created in the centre of the pond and it is now covered with trees. Materials such as rushes, small twigs, etc., are left there in abundance. The nests are built along the edge of the island and consist of a large collection of branches, shaped like a cone and measuring one metre in diameter at the base, half a metre in diameter at the top and more than one metre in height. The inside is lined with grass. The first clutch was observed on 6th June 1979, the second one on 15th February, 1980. The eggs vanished after a few days’ incubation. In 1981, two eggs were laid on 17th March. A chick hatched on 26th April and was found dead the day after. A cold spell accompanied by snowfalls probably caused its death. On 15th May, two nests had two eggs each; three chicks hatched on 22nd June; the chick which was alone on a nest died at once. After hatching, the adults took turns on the nest until 20th July when they left the chicks by themselves for half an hour for the first time. Having found no published records of the chicks’ diet, we placed very small fish near the nest for three weeks. The adult on the nest never took any, unlike the other birds on the pond. G Krass Dalmatian Pelicans, 43 days old, at thePark of Villaxs-les-Dombes P. CORDOMNTER • DALMATIAN PELICAN 35 The first departure from the breeding site, on 4th August, was pro¬ voked by us approaching the nest to take some pictures of the chicks. They were then 43 days old. They kept swimming for an hour and got back to the island. They did not leave of then own accord and regularly until 15th August. The chicks were usually fed after fish distribution although feeding by the parents was occasionally observed before. They continued on into November even though the chicks fed by themselves on some days. little aggressiveness is shown by adults in their territorial behaviour: the two nests were in contact and within three metres of a Cormorant nest where two chicks were bred at the same tune. Both young pelicans were ringed on 24th August (63 days old). At this age the primaries were nearly fully developed, some down was left on the head, back and belly and the iris was grey. The distinctly curved bills were respectively 210 and 280 millimetres long, and the wings 445 and 520 millimetres long. REFERENCES CRIVELLI, A. and VIZI, O. 1981, The Dalmatian Pelican Peleeanus crispus Bruch 1832, a recently world-endangered bird species. Biological conser¬ vation, 20, 297-310. KLOS, U. 1969. Notes on the breeding of Pelicans at West Berlin Zoo. Int Zoo Yearbook ,6, 211-212. KLOS, U. 1969. A brief note on the incubation and rearing of a pelican hybrid Peleeanus arts pus x Peleeanus rufescem at West Berlin Zoo. Int Zoo. Year¬ book » 9, 121422. KRAMER, H. 1980. Bruton euiopaiseher Vogekrten in Gafangensehaft Zool Garten N.F. , Jena 50, 89-137. 36 G. KENYON - CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT AVIARIES CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT AVIARIES By GEOFFREY KENYON (Wokingham, Berkshire) We tend to think of glasshouse aviaries as tropical houses but there is a wealth of plants and birds which do not require high temperatures. We can easily create environments from the just ‘frost free’ to the hot, humid con¬ ditions of a tropical rain forest. It is with these considerations to the fore that I title this article as above. Let us consider the type of structure that is best for our purpose and the siting of the building. The site chosen should be an open one but shel¬ tered from winds. The provision of wind shelter will greatly reduce heating costs and is, therefore, of greater importance when warm regimes are the requirement. This type of aviary is essentially of “walk-in” design so we can consider solid side walls and a translucent roof. The loss of illumina¬ tion by only having a light transmitting roof is not a serious loss from the horticultural point of view when one does not require maximum growth as is essential in a commercial glasshouse. In these days of ever escalating fuel costs, cavity walls built in concrete or lightweight blocks and rendered will be the preferred method of wall construction. A wall of this type will have a heat loss of well under a third of that of single glass and if the cav¬ ity is filled with insulating material, still greater heat savings may be achieved. A double glazed roof has half the heat loss of single glazing and is usually an economic necessity especially where warm regimes are con¬ templated. Roofs of corrugated plastic, while cheap to construct, have a greater heat loss than flat cladding because their surface area is greater, by reason of their corrugations, than the area covered. They are also more difficult to seal in an efficient manner at both eaves and ridge. There are now available double skin plastics. The well-known Correx is a forerunner of this type of material and this is an ideal material for double glazing under glass cladding or, for that matter, under a corrugated roof. One greenhouse manufacturer at least is now employing a stronger and more durable plastic of double skin construction for cladding glasshouses. As this material is flexible, curvilinear roofs can be constructed. Using two skins of these new products gives a roof with a very low heat transmission. This material is available for the home constructor. Ventilation can be automated with benefit. The standard type of venti¬ lator can be obtained with electric motors arranged to open the ventilators G. KENYON - CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT AVIARIES 37 an appropriate amount. In small structures, there are types designed for the amateur’s glasshouse which, on this scale of operation, are an efficient method. A greatly more efficient method of ventilation is to use louvres and fans. With this type of ventilation we have the opportunity of cooling the incoming air by the use of water soaked pads. Fans and their associated inlet louvres are available for virtually any size of house and proper horti¬ cultural types only should be employed. Heating systems must be designed to respond quickly to demand and be capable of being accurately controlled. Thermostats should preferably be of the electronic type and be housed in an aspirated screen to give true readings. An accurate instrument rapidly repays the extra initial cost as only ^ degree or so higher than that required increases costs by a surprising amount. Tables are available for all areas showing the likely heat input re¬ quired and should be consulted to determine maximum heat input needed. It may be useful here to consider the input and, therefore, costs which apply in my own area of southern England. From a basic 45°F (5.6°€) minimum the cost will be doubled on increasing our thermostat to 50°F (10°C), To maintain 55°F (12.8°C) the heat requirement is slightly more than trebled while an increase to 60°F (15.6°C) will cost five times as much. Should we require a temperature of 70°C (ll.l°C) to be main¬ tained, we can expect our fuel costs to be eight times that of a 45 °F (5.6°C) regime. Of course, these figures are only a guide and are affec¬ ted by the severity of the winter and the situation of the building. Before any construction is started, a schedule of all requirements should be made. A study of the various types of commercial structures and environmental control systems should be undertaken. If you instruct a glasshouse manufacturer to carry out the work, the different requirements to those which he is used to in commercial glasshouse design must be made plain. The success of this type of aviary is dependent on satisfactory growth of the plants and a low enough rate of stocking to ensure rapid recycling of waste products. The cooler the temperature, the slower will this break¬ down occur and as the water requirements will also be lower, some cleaning may be necessary under favoured perches. Where there are pools and streams avoid perches over them unless, as atBirdland Bourton-on-the Water, water is not recirculated and any droppings are continuously carried away. Our next consideration is the growing medium of the plants. We have a choice of a paved floor with all plants in containers or the plants may be grown in the soil floor of the house. Growing in containers is a straight- 38 G. KENYON - CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT AVIARIES forward operation but feeding and watering is more time-consuming than when the plants are grown in the soil of the house. Where the plants are to be planted out, the subsoil must first be investi¬ gated. Drainage must be good and where there is the slightest doubt about this, adequate provision must be made to dispose of drainage water. More plants are killed by overwatering and stagnant soil conditions than by any other cause. If there is any doubt, excavate to 20 inches (50 cms) and lay 10 inches of rubble. If necessary, first lay field drains to prevent the exca¬ vation becoming a sump. If the area was under grass before building, the turves can be laid, grass side downwards, over the rubble; otherwise it should be ‘blinded5 by a layer of 3A inch stone. When excavating ensure that the topsoil is kept in a separate heap from the subsoil which may be dis¬ carded. The topsoil should have generous additions of peat, composted bark fibre or leafmould and, if necessary, an appropriate amount of coarse gritty sand. Also incorporate a slow action base fertiliser and where necessary an appropriate amount of ground chalk (calcium carbonate). A suitable base fertiliser is John Innes Base which can be purchased or made from: 2 parts hoof and horn, 1/8 inch grist 2 parts of 18% superphosphate of lime 1 part sulphate of potash About 4 oz per square yard would be appropriate and about 1 lA oz of ground chalk. This latter will, of course, be omitted if the ground is natu¬ rally calcareous or if lime-hating plants are to be grown. Fritted trace ele¬ ments are usually of great benefit and should be used according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Where boggy conditions are required, the proportion of peat, leaf- mould, etc., should be increased to at least 75% of the total. Conversely, where a more arid environment is required, crushed stone should be a major constituent of the compost. It must always be our aim to promote healthy growth of plants and ob¬ tain a vigorous thrusting root-system to break down and recycle all waste products. This will be found difficult where dry conditions must be main¬ tained and here easily removable surface dressings must be used. To conclude, let us turn our attention to plants. In Britain today the plants available from nurserymen are few compared with those offered before World War II. However Cornish nurseries offer many plants which need cool conditions and seed of South African and Australian species are fairly easily come by. Seedsmen in the warmer American States can also be an interesting source. Some of the smaller British seedsmen offer inter- B. HILL - BIRDS IN LONDON PARKS 39 esting plants. Many plants offered as house plants are of considerable vigour when planted out and are easily obtainable. Visits to botanic gardens will prove invaluable and notes of plants and temperatures will provide the basis for your “Wants” list. Finally, for those dreaming of lush tropical gardens, the book “Tropical Gardens of Burle Marx”, by P.M. Bardi, will prove compulsive reading. Unfortunately this book, which was published in 1964, is now out of print although it is occasionally offered by specialist booksellers. It is lavishly illustrated and shows what can be achieved by a planter with intimate knowledge of his plants and great artistic appreciation. NOTES ON THE BIRDS IN SOME LONDON PARKS By BRIAN HILL (Yeovil, Somerset) Bird-watchers in London are not deprived of their hobby because they live in a built-up environment. On the contrary, a comparative analysis of breeding birds seen around Barnet and the nearby outer fringes of suburbia in Hertfordshire and those recorded regularly in Somerset revealed that ninety percent could be seen in London parks. From this, I conclude that it is habitat which determines which species are to be seen, and London’s bird population does not seem to object to traffic noise and pollution be¬ cause of the great variety of habitat to be found in the capital. The variety of birds is, in fact, greater than for a comparable area elsewhere in the country. My article is intended to encourage appreciation of the London Parks as examples of “aviculture without confinement”, because, since the time of W.H. Hudson, their management for public recreation has paid especial attention to the welfare of the birds, and the birds are much tamer than their country cousins. The parks I am going to report on specifically are the Inner or Central parks, i.e. St. James’s, Hyde Park, Kensington Gardens, and Green Park, and the Outer parks - Richmond, Osterley and Bushey Parks. The former are typical municipal parks, that is, open spaces, short grass, formal shrub¬ beries and isolated trees, with a proportion of exotic species. There are formal flower beds and usually an artificial lake with concrete margins. 40 B. HILL - BIRDS IN LONDON PARKS These contrast with the Outer parks which, in addition to similar habitat to the Inner Parks have pasture with occasional trees, grazed by herds of cattle or deer, and in some cases, arable farmland. Their waters also have more natural margins and assorted vegetation. Richmond Park is a good example of the Outer parks. It has semi¬ natural vegetation and two important factors determining the appearance and vegetation are: (i) acidic, gravelly and sandy soils, and (ii) heavy graz¬ ing by deer. The former gives rise to extensive areas of Bracken and other vegetation characteristic of the soils, resulting in a scarcity of many native shrubs which require a calcareous soil, e.g. Dogwood, Spindle, Privet and many berry-bearing plants are not available to birds, although Hawthorn is around in small numbers and some Bramble is in the fenced-off areas There is a lot of Laurel and Rhododendron which provides cover and roosting for birds but not food. Many Oaks are old and hollow which pro¬ vide acorns, caterpillars, nesting holes and the fissured bark full of insects offering hospitality to many species, e.g. Treecreeper, Nuthatch, owls, woodpeckers, Pheasant and Jay. This park has not altered much since I have known it - about thirty years - and this is due to the intense grazing by deer, because no regenera¬ tion of woodland goes on, apart from in the fenced-off areas. In the Isa¬ bella Plantation - open woodland with standard trees, particularly mature Birches - the birds are regularly fed by visitors, so are very tame. Blue Tits, Great Tits, Coal Tits all come to the hand of strangers. Nuthatch, Song Thrush, Dunnock, Blackbird, House Sparrow, feral pigeon will all come flocking for food. In this woodland garden there is a pond with some water- fowl, e.g. Mallard, Coot and Moorhen. The Pen Ponds consist of two shallow lakes, with extensive marsh and reedbed at one end, which is a fenced-off sanctuary, and having islands in the centre for birds; e.g. Tufted Duck, Mallard and Teal. The birds are fed by visitors and are mostly tame. There are flocks of migrating birds in spring and autumn and many wild birds winter on the ponds. “Bird Life in the Royal Parks Report for 1971-72” mentions that in the Inner parks as many species in the course of a year are recorded as in the Outer parks, thus: Hyde Park, Kensington Gardens 88 species Osterley Park, Bushey Park 87 species However, the number of breeding species is higher, thus: Hyde Park, Kensington Gardens 32 species Osterley Park, Bushey Park 48 and 47 species respectively. B. HILL - BIRDS IN LONDON PARKS 41 This indicates that habitat is encouraging more breeding because there is a wider range of habitats in the Outer parks. The Inner parks have less shrubbery (except in sanctuary areas) and when it is present is likely to be evergreen and exotic species. The most notable exceptions to this are the woodland areas of Holland Park where conditions are almost ideal in their attraction to a wide range of arboreal species, i.e. mature trees, frequent glades, well-developed shrub layers, dense growth of Brambles and rank growth of grasses, thistles, Nettles, Willowherb, etc. It is relevant to recall that W.H. Hudson (1898) drew attention to the effect expansion and the destruction of natural vegetation was having on London’s bird population. In 1922 the Committee on Bird Sanctuaries in the Royal Parks was established and the advice of the first commission was to set up areas to be regarded as bird sanctuaries in which the vegetation, particularly the undergrowth, could be left untrampled, and in more or less a natural state. In the Inner parks these attempts to conserve the dwindling numbers of less adaptable birds were only partially successful, and a shortage of insect food was probably one of the reasons why some species were never able to re-establish themselves. However, the report recommended that the term ‘Bird Sanctuary’ should not be interpreted in its narrowest sense; i.e. a neglected area allowed to become a thicket. It is necessary to retain a suitable habitat in terms of vegetational structure and species composition. Pruning and thinning-out is necessary to ensure correct plants are grown, thereby providing food and nesting habitat and sites. Successional changes in the vegetation can in time so alter the habitat that it loses its attractiveness. Many of the species of birds which are regularly to be observed in London’s parks are dealt with in the following notes: Great Crested Grebe Podiceps cristatus Only the larger lakes can support this bird for breeding purposes. It has nested in Regents Park and Hyde Park for the first time for many years. The provision of specially protected areas on the lakes is thought to have been of key importance for this and the Heron. However, colonisation of the Central parks could well be due to “overspill” from the waters of the outer suburbs; i.e. the gravel pits and certain reservoirs. A cursory analysis of the productivity (in terms of number of young reared to fledgling stage per pair) for Osterley Park (data supplied by D.G. Harris) would seem to support this idea. The figures for many years from 1955-80 showed the 42 B. HILL - BIRDS IN LONDON PARKS productivity was no greater, and on the whole much less, when there were more than two pairs. In some instances it was evident that quarrelling between adjacent pairs upset their breeding. Little Grebe Podiceps ruficollis It was only recorded as a bird of passage in 1975 in the Inner parks. I think it could become a breeding species in St. James’s Park, although the margins of the lake may not be suitable for it. The nest is anchored to partly submerged vegetation, so if there were algae and small areas of reed on the lake margins, it could encourage the Little Grebe to nest. In Rich¬ mond Park the habitat would appear very suitable, but examination of the reports shows that, although it is regularly observed, it has had irregular breeding successes there. The most recent record of nesting was in 1973 (until 1977 when published records ceased) but the success or otherwise was not recorded. In 1955-56 chicks were hatched but none fledged. The record seems to point to antagonistic or predatory species as the cause of failure to rear the chicks. It has been recorded that Pike in the large ponds (Pen Ponds) take ducklings of Tufted Duck, so possibly they are respon¬ sible for taking Little Grebe chicks. Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo It is a visitor to all the larger waters of the London Parks and also to res¬ ervoirs and the River Thames. See “Wildlife in the Royal Parks” for an account of the history of the pinioned birds in St. James’s Park. Heron Ardea cinerea It is to be seen either regularly or occasionally on all the waters of the London parks. The story of its decline as a nesting species in Richmond Park and its establishment in Regent’s Park is most interesting. A heronry existed for many years in Sidmouth Wood, Richmond, which rapidly declined during the 1950’s and was abandoned by the early 1960’s. Crows were taking advantage of the disturbance caused by people passing, as the Herons would fly off the nest, and the Carrion Crows take their eggs. The establishment of a heronry in Regent’s Park in 1972 is all the more remarkable because this park has far more visitors and they are closer to the colony. The birds have evidently become accustomed to the almost continuous passage of people. By 1976 there were eight pairs. Mallard Anas platyrhynchos In 1955-56 in Richmond Park the report mentions the very high mor- B. HILL - BIRDS IN LONDON PARKS 43 tality of ducklings. Twenty-one nests had approximately one hundred and eighty eggs but very few survived. Again, Pike are suspected of being the most serious predator. D.G. Harris (personal comment) is of the opinion that most broods do not survive for long at Osterley Park for the same reason. Tufted Duck and Pochard typically nest much closer to water than Mallard - which very often nest hundreds of yards from water. For nesting purposes they therefore have a requirement for marginal cover or ground close to water free from disturbance and predators. These requirements are met by the provision of sanctuary areas about the Serpentine, Duck Island in St. James’s Park, the islands and sanctuary area of Regent’s Park lake, and the more extensive areas of reed bed and islands in the lakes of Rich¬ mond Park. Canada Goose Branta canadensis My interpretation of the data which I extracted from some of the “Bird Life in the Royal Parks” reports is as follows: Small numbers of introduced pinioned pairs (less than five pairs) bred in the Central parks and in the grounds of Buckingham Palace for many decades. Pinioned birds, occasionally breeding, have been part of the col¬ lection of Buckingham Palace grounds for many years. However, the intro¬ duction of full-winged birds (from the Midlands) to the Serpentine dates from 1955. By the mid-1960’s nesting in small numbers (less than five pairs) was established by full-winged birds by the Serpentine and St. James’s Park. In addition, many more birds flying in from further afield in the Thames Valley used the Serpentine for roosting (peak count of 85 in 1965). In the Outer parks, the species occurred only outside the breed¬ ing season and rarely exceeded ten birds. This situation continued up to 1975 but breeding in the Central parks was then controlled by the park authorities. Nesting in the Outer parks (Richmond and Bushey) was estab¬ lished in 1976 and numbers out of breeding season at Osterley Park had in¬ creased to a peak of seventeen. The data recorded for 1977 show nesting at Richmond and Bushey recurring at 1-2 pairs but otherwise flocks of 10- 20 birds on the waters, whilst Osterley gained the first nesting pair, an out of season peak of 25. Data supplied by D.G. Harris show the subsequent increase at Osterley Park: 1977 1 pair bred, reared 6 young. 1978 1 5 .. 1979 3 18 .. 1980 3 18 .. Resident, maximum 25 35 .. 58- 61 44 B. HILL - BIRDS IN LONDON PARKS If the increase of this bird in the Thames Valley has been documented and any studies made of the interchange of birds from this wider area, with those of the parks, it would put these notes in perspective. For reasons which have not been specified in the official reports, the further increase of this bird is viewed with disfavour by some. If there are good reasons for this, and culling or control measures become necessary, then they ought to be explained to the public. The sight of a flock of geese at close range in flight above the Serpen¬ tine is a marvellous experience for a provincial bird-watcher like myself. With reasoned culling, done in an orderly manner, the birds could be offered for sale “oven-ready”! The Canada Goose is, of course, an intro¬ duced species, but truly native species of waterfowl may be seen as pin¬ ioned birds in the parks. These evidently attract wild species of duck to stay during winter. Sparrow Hawk Accipiter nisus In the 1950’s it was a regular nester in the Outer parks and even nested in Greenwich Park up until 1955. By the early 1960’s, however, it had ceased to nest even in the Outer parks and its occurrence was becoming increasingly irregular. By 1976 it was not visiting even the Outer London parks. In 1977, when I spent several months living in Barnet, I frequently saw Kestrel over open spaces in that area (and Mill Hill and Hendon) but I only once recorded Sparrow Hawk. However, I can find reason to be hopeful for the species, for during the late 1970’s I have witnessed a resur¬ gence of Sparrow Hawk in Somerset and Dorset. Kestrel Falco tinnunculus In the Outer London parks this bird is frequently to be seen and all parks carry nesting pairs. It has been observed regularly in the Inner Lon¬ don parks but only in 1974 bred, in Regent’s Park. Every year since, it has increased and established itself as a nesting bird in Central London. I think it must have made behavioural adaptations. Partridge Perdix perdix Coveys are readily observed in Bushey Park. In many of the Outer parks are preserved areas of rough grassland grazed by deer and I am sure this is the reason for maintaining the Partridge. The bird is local in Somer¬ set. Where it does occur on arable areas, it is because the field headlands retain long ungrazed grass required for nesting and feeding the chicks. Its main stronghold is on the Somerset Levels where much of the grassland is B. HILL - BIRDS IN LONDON PARKS 45 down to hay; elsewhere short term leys, often restricted to one or two dominant species of grass, are quite unsuitable for it Common Pheasant Phasianus colchicus Nesting in all the Outer parks and the Queen’s Cottage woodland in Kew Gardens is a particularly good place to see the cock birds come out of the undergrowth for hand-outs. The Central parks would not seem to have sufficient cover, but perhaps the species has not been introduced there. W.H. Hudson would be cheered if he knew that the Pheasant has con¬ tinued to nest in Kew Gardens. In his book (1898), he was predicting that, with increasing disturbance of the Queen’s grounds in Kew Gardens, the Pheasant would disappear there but, in fact, that delightful bit of wood¬ land is one of the best parts I know to get close-up views of Pheasant. They will emerge from the undergrowth and accept scraps of food thrown out for them, and the birds nest in all the Outer parks. Red-legged Partridge Alectoris rufa More easily observable than the Grey Partridge and can be seen occas¬ ionally at Osterley Park. I have also seen them on arable land in the Mill Hill area. Water Rail Rallus aquaticus A regular in the Outer parks, especially in Pen Ponds, Richmond Park, where during my frequent visits in the spring of 1976 I would hear several calling from reed and marshy beds at the southern edge of the pond. I think it could occur in Central parks if the lakes had denser marginal vege¬ tation. Also, competition from Moorhen may be a deterrent. Moorhen Gallinula chloropus Amazing to learn that about a hundred years ago it was unknown in the London parks (ref. W.H. Hudson) and yet now it is abundant, nesting in all kinds of situations, e.g. disused Woodpigeon’s nests. Coot Fulica atra In the mid-1950’s it was a recent addition to the list of birds breeding in Central London, although it had been a winter visitor for several years previously. In 1898, W.H. Hudson suggested it might become established if Moorhens were given Coot eggs to hatch, but experiments on these lines seem to have failed. Since 1926 when a pinioned pair were released 46 B. HILL - BIRDS IN LONDON PARKS in St. James’s Park, which bred successfully, the species have nested regu¬ larly. The 1976 report (Birdlife in Royal Parks) shows the Coot as resident and breeding in all the London Parks except around Ham House and Greenwich Park. In St. James’s Park there were: 8 pairs in 1943 9 pairs in 1944 12 pairs in 1950 28 pairs in 1955 The number of wintering pairs has also increased considerably, over one hundred may be expected under normal weather conditions, more in a severe winter. Some birds retain territory throughout the winter. Lapwing Vanellus vanellus Nested in Richmond Park in 1955 and 1956 when there was less bracken than at present and there was, I believe, some ploughed land. Nests regularly at Osterley Park where there is some arable land. Common Sandpiper Tringa hypoleucos Of the several species of wading birds which occur sporadically in the London Parks which have appreciable areas of water and/or marshy ground, this is the most widespread, and a regular spring visitor. Herring Gull Lams argentatus This bird has increased in the following ways: Mid-195Q’s - a wintering bird in the Central parks in small numbers, by mid-1960’s it was nesting in the Zoological Gardens in Regent’s Park, and nesting had been attempted in St. James’s Park or on nearby buildings. So it is now established as a resident bird in small numbers in Central parks and a winter visitor in larger numbers in Outer parks. Presumably, because of the more abundant food supply in the Central parks this species contra¬ dicts the usual assumption that the Outer parks are colonised by breeding birds most readily. Stock Dove Columba oenas Feeding very largely on seeds, found on weedy arable land, waste ground and about stock yards, it is better suited to the Outer parks. Thus it is to be found in some strength at Osterley Park, where there are arable fields, in lesser numbers in Richmond and Bushey where there is no arable land, but many trees offering nest-holes. What is surprising is to find it nesting, albeit irregularly and in small numbers, in Central parks such as Hyde Park and Kensington Gardens. It B. HILL - BIRDS IN LONDON PARKS 47 could become established in the Central parks and this it has done as well as recovering from low numbers of the mid-19605s in the Outer parks. Woodpigeon Columba palumbus Another species which W.H. Hudson would be gratified to know was now a common, and almost tame bird of the Central parks. Once more, to a rural bird-watcher, it is a remarkable state of affairs for this wary bird. Collared Dove Streptopelia decaocto Established as a nesting species at Osterley Park by 1973 and the 1977 edition of “Bird Life in the Royal Parks’9 lists it as also nesting in Hamp¬ ton Court gardens. It was then listed as present (but not apparently nest¬ ing) at Regent’s Park. Bam Owl Tyto alba Richmond Park has the most consistent records for nesting, but it occasionally has been recorded as doing so at Osterley as well. Tawny Owl Strix aluco In the Inner London parks it probably preys more on birds than ro¬ dents. It feeds on roosting birds, snatching Sparrows and Starlings easily in the shrubbery. An analysis of pellets from beneath a tree in Richmond Park in 1957, when examined, showed the remains not only of Short¬ tailed Voles but of several House Sparrows and a Thrush. Swift Apus apus Has for many summers been seen in the skies above the capital. Green Woodpecker Picus viridis The habitat of the Central parks would seem to be suitable were it not for the turf being too much trampled and there being too high a level of disturbance for this invariably very shy species. Its occurrence in the Cen¬ tral parks up to the late 1950’s, but not thereafter, can presumably be cor¬ related with the vastly increased usage of those parks. Meanwhile it con¬ tinues as a breeding bird in the Outer parks. Skylark Alauda arvensis Richmond Park and Bushey Park provide suitable habitat for this species, i.e. ■ an intermingling of short turf and areas of longer, rougher grass. The Central parks are not suitable for nesting, but it occurs regu- 48 B. HILL - BIRDS IN LONDON PARKS larly on autumn passage and frequently in winter when severe weather will often result in large numbers appearing in Regent’s Park. Jackdaw Corvus monedula No longer a nesting bird of the Central parks; by the late 1950’s not even resident in the parks, only recorded on passage. Since this bird is usually tolerant of man, and it cannot be due to lack of breeding sites - plenty of large old trees - I wonder if it could be the lack of ploughed land, and grazing animals? In Yeovil, Jackdaws can often be seen picking up scraps from the quieter roads, usually detachments from a flock which nests in an area of parkland close to town, near to farmland. Cattle pro¬ vide rich dung fauna, especially beetles which Jackdaws relish (my own tame Jackdaw does) and so they may be necessary to provide the feeding grounds lacking in the Central London parks. The nesting Jackdaws of Kensington Gardens may have survived into the late 1950’s from the days when there were more horses there. The species flourishes in parks such as Bushey and Richmond which are extensively grazed by deer and/ or sheep. Tits Pams spp. A good spot to have the Great, Blue and Coal Tits coming to feed even from one’s outstretched hand is the Isabella Plantation at Richmond Park. At this marvellous place these birds, along with Dunnock, Nuthatch, Robin, Blackbird and feral pigeon, especially on frosty winter days, there is an excited traffic of birds to and from the bushes and the scattered food. Jays hide and seek a little further away but will also come, especially for peanuts. The Long-tailed Tit and Marsh Tit, which are respectively the least adapted to take advantage of food supplied by people, and the most arboreal, are therefore the least frequent in the Central parks. Thrushes Turdus spp. The habitat requirement for the Mistle Thrush Turdus viscivoms are met in all the parks, i.e. expanses of turf for feeding and large trees for nesting. The Blackbird Turdus mem la is very abundant in the London parks and it is commonplace to have about ten birds foraging in view within one of the shrubberies during the autumn and winter. It would appear that parks and suburban gardens are the species’ optimum habitat as they supply an abundance of short turf for providing worms, supplemented by soft fruit, apples, ivy berries and handouts from the public. Studies by L. Batten B. HILL - BIRDS IN LONDON PARKS 49 (1973) have shown the species to be more abundant in suburbia than in farmland or woodland. When I kept a Blackbird in an aviary with an earth floor, about 24 feet by 6 feet, it came as a revelation to me to find that, provided the con¬ dition of the soil was suitable for the bird to catch enough worms, food I offered was largely ignored and supplementary feeding was only really required during periods of frost or sustained drought. I eventually re¬ leased the bird because she was pugnacious towards the cock birds I offered as mates. Whereas the cover provided by the typical park shrubbery, with an abundance of evergreens and ground kept clear of weeds suits the Black¬ bird admirably, it does not meet the needs of the Song Thrush. This species prefers rank vegetation - typically a mixture of beds of Nettles, Willowherb, Bramble clumps and thickets. Where it seeks to hunt on turf it usually gets chased off by Blackbirds. Hence it is usually reckoned to be far less common than its congener. However, it is more easily over¬ looked when foraging in rank vegetation, and it nests in all the parks. Whereas Richmond Park has since 1973 regained the Stonechat Saxi- cola torquata as a nesting species after an interval of many years, it has lost the Redstart Phoenicurus phoenicurus since the late 1960’s. This appears to be in common with a decline in many parts of the country, and for such a migratory species this cannot be attributed simply to loss of habitat in Britain. I find it more as a nesting bird on the central Somer¬ set peatlands, with their antique pollarded Willows, rather than on those mature deer parklands in Somerset and Dorset. Nevertheless, a great loss for the deerk parks of Richmond and Bushey. Wheatears Oenanthe oenanthe Nested in Richmond Park in 1955 but declined since then. There is far more Bracken nowadays which may be a contributory factor. The Report mentions that the Bracken was being mechanically crushed in the late 1950’s. Warblers Sylvia spp. and Phylloscopus spp. It has been claimed (for instance, in the “Bird Life in the Royal Parks” reports for 1971-74) that a lessening of air pollution in Central London since the passing of the Clean Air Act in 1956 has been the main reason for the increasing occurrence and nesting of some of the warblers in the Central parks. However, the insectivorous Wren Troglodytes troglodytes and Spotted Flycatcher Muscicapa striata have nested in some of the 50 B. HILL - BIRDS IN LONDON PARKS Central parks before the restriction on the burning of sooty and smoky fuels. W.H. Hudson, writing at the turn of the century when, by all accounts, air pollution was far worse, did not attribute the decrease in the warblers primarily to pollution. He thought that the tidying up of the Central parks, which was depriving the birds of their habitat, was the cause. He found most of the commoner warblers nesting on Hampstead Heath, which is merely a few miles from the centre. I would assign more importance to the success which the Committee on Bird Life in the Royal Parks had on persuading the maintenance staff of the ecological benefits of allowing more patches of weeds and scrub to develop. If any readers have any opinions on this matter, I would be glad to hear of them. Certainly the Outer parks, especially Richmond, where the vegetation structure and composition has remained little altered formanydecades, the common warblers have always been well represented. D unnock Prunella modularis The Dunnock is usually the little bird which gleans the tiny crumbs left over after the House Sparrows, Chaffinches, Pigeons and others have taken the food scattered by visitors. It seldom tackles the larger bits of bread even when there are no competitors nearby. Seeds form an important part of the birds’ diet for much of the year. Besides those of Nettle and Bramble which I have seen them take, a wild bird that I had in captivity would readily take the seeds of Annual Meadow Grass Poa annua , Aquilegia and Forget-me-not. Meadow Pipit Anthus pratensis The Meadow Pipit has always been recorded as a resident and breeding bird of Richmond Park and exists also in other open spaces of the metro¬ polis which offer expanses of uncut, tussocky grass. In the Central parks with their clean cut regime it only appears during the winter months and on passage. Pied Wagtails Motacilla alba The increase of the breeding status of the Pied Wagtail may be directly related to its adoption of urban situations (e.g. factory roofs, sewage treatment works) for mass roosting, with the birds dispersing to the parks and open spaces to feed. Grey Wagtail Motacilla cinerea The Grey Wagtail has also increased even in the Central parks and has B. HILL - BIRDS IN LONDON PARKS 51 nested in recent years in Richmond Park. There has been a national trend for this species to establish itself about fresh water habitats other than streams in hilly and mountainous country, with which it is traditionally associated. Starling Sturnus vulgaris and House Sparrow Passer domesticus The Starling continues to be an abundant bird at all times of the year but apparently has lost its dominant position together with the House Sparrow during the autumn (Bird Life in the Royal Parks, 1975). There has been an increase in the numbers of Woodpigeon, Black-headed Gull, Mallard and Blackbird, which all readily take up food handouts from the public which would otherwise be taken by the Starlings and House Spar¬ rows. Evidently competition from these species resulted in a decrease of Starlings and House Sparrows. Additionally, Tawny Owls exert a sig¬ nificant predatory pressure on House Sparrows especially in the Inner parks. Finches - Fringillidae The apparently isolated stock of Hawfinch Coccothraustes cocco- thraustes in Kew Gardens has nested there in diminishing numbers for many years but now in very small numbers. Greenfinch Chloris chloris and Goldfinch Carduelis carduelis have increased over the last twenty-five years and nest in virtually all the parks. So do the Bullfinch Pyrrhula pyrrhula and Chaffinch Fringilla coelebs, but the Linnet Carduelis cannabina is confined to nesting in the Outer parks. Redpoll Carduelis flammea is a recent colonist, even nesting in Regent’s Park. REFERENCES GOODWIN, D. 1979. Birds of Man’s World. Cornell University Press. HUDSON, W.H. 1898. Birds in London. David & Charles reprint, 1969. SIMMS, E. 1974. Wildlife in the Royal Parks. H.M.S.O. . 19 75 . Birds of Town and Suburbs. Collins. Committee on Bird Sanctuaries in the Royal Parks. 1928-1977. Birdlife in the Royal Parks. H.M.S.O. Committee of the London Natural History Society. 1964. Ed. R.C. Homes. Birds of the London Area. 52 SOME ASPECTS OF HUMAN AND OTHER PREDATION ON BIRDS By DEREK GOODWIN (Herne Hill, London) When discussing the effects of predation on birds or other animals, it is now usual to consider the numbers of the prey species that are, or are believed to be, actually killed, and whether this represents more than the loss of a number that would “have been bound to die anyway” because the habitat could not support so many of the prey species through the en¬ tire year. When this is done, it is often claimed that the resultant figures show that predation has little or no effect on the numbers of the prey, which are controlled by the availability of food. This sometimes appears to be the case even when human predation is concerned, as Murton (1965) showed for the Wood Pigeon Columha palumbus in Cambridgeshire. However, in the Wood Pigeon we have a species for which man’s activities both provide food and decrease the number of its predators and competitors. The situation is different where man does not persecute the Wood Pigeon’s non-human predators (Tornia- lojc). That human predation can eliminate species even where there is an abundance of food and (except in relation to human predation) suitable habitat is clearly shown by the absence of the Wolf and the Wild Boar from the British countryside, to give but two of very many possible ex¬ amples. It is sometimes assumed that the numbers of a predator must be con¬ trolled by those of its prey, never vice versa. This has indeed become al¬ most dogma with those who wish to protect creatures formerly regarded as inimical to man’s interests or still so regarded by some. It can be a useful argument but it is not always wholly and sometimes not even partly true. Where a predator is entirely or very largely dependent on one species of prey, then, of course, its fortunes are bound to rise or fall with those of its prey. For example, the Snail Kite Rosthramus sociahilis feeds, so far as is known, only on one species of water snail. Obviously if this snail decreases so must the Snail Kite, unless it can quickly learn to take other prey. On the other hand, wherever he can do so, man preys on the Common Pheas¬ ant Phasianus colchicus, the Peregrine preys on the Rock Pigeon Columba livia (and its domestic and feral descendants) and the Jay Garrulus glan - darius takes the nestlings of the Long-tailed Tit Aegithalos caudatus. Yet not one of these three predators is dependent on the numbers or even the presence of the prey species cited provided, as is almost everywhere the DEREK GOODWIN - ASPECTS OF PREDATION 53 case, other foods from the very wide range that they freely take are avail¬ able. Yet it is certain that man is often responsible for local extermination of the Pheasant. That predators tend to select the most easily caught prey and so are particularly likely to kill aged, crippled, diseased, weakly and young indi¬ viduals is well known and it is widely, and no doubt rightly, held that ex¬ cept for the young, the removal of such “unfit” specimens is of benefit rather than otherwise to the prey species. Oddly enough some of those I have known who have been most emphatically admiring of such a situa¬ tion among other species are among those who would be the loudest to denounce any suggestion of its application to their own species. Still there can be no doubt that where a species is largely or entirely free from preda¬ tors, its population usually includes proportionately many more defective individuals than would otherwise be the case and some of them may sur¬ vive for a considerable time. Town-living Black Kites Milvus migrans and feral pigeons and urban man are obvious examples. Were the “unfit” individuals in such populations to be killed by preda¬ tors, it is uncertain whether their places would be taken by “fitter” indi¬ viduals, and hence only a temporary decrease in total population caused, or whether the result would be a permanently smaller but proportionately healthier population. I think this latter would be more likely in most cases. But besides the effect, or lack of it, caused by the loss of the individuals actually killed by predators, there may be side effects of predation and the consequent fear of the predator which can affect the numbers, distribution and feeding behaviour of a species, at least within certain areas. Gullion and Marshall (1968) found that adult Ruffed Grouse Bonasa umbellus, which live in habitats that provide cover whence Goshawks Acci- piter gentilis (a species which wealthy hawk enthusiasts have of recent years introduced, or as some think re-introduced, into Britain on a fairly large scale) can ambush them, have an expectation of life a third less than those living in habitats where they cannot be readily ambushed. In this case the “dangerous” habitat nevertheless suffices to maintain populations of the prey. It is probable, however, that some habitats that would provide sufficient food and other necessities for a given species do not and cannot harbour it because they provide insufficient means for it to escape from enemies. The elimination of the predator might then alter the situation. In much of eastern England, where human persecution has virtually wiped out the larger birds of prey, the Pheasant habitually forages in large open fields with little or no cover. It is unlikely that it could do so to the same extent, if at all, if large raptors were. present. 54 DEREK GOODWIN - ASPECTS OF PREDATION Cade's studies (1967) show that in parts of Alaska, the Great Grey or Northern Shrike Lanius excubitor has a “terrific impact” on smaller birds and renders otherwise ideal breeding habitat only of marginal value for them. He concludes that this shrike definitely affects the numbers of its prey. For the past 23 years I have paid attention to the feeding habits of the feral pigeons Columba livia , Wood Pigeons and House Sparrows Passer domesticus near my home in south-east London (Herne Hill). The extent to which they exploit, or fail to exploit actual or potential feeding sites is very much influenced by the hunting activities of feral and domestic cats. In the case of the pigeons (probably also of the House Sparrows) this is not due to the removal of the relatively few individuals actually caught by cats but to the fear-induced behavioural changes of those birds which see a cat suddenly appear from ambush and narrowly escape from it or see a companion caught. When this happens even in a garden where they have been feeding daily for months, they sometimes desert the feeding place permanently, more often desert it for a period of several days or weeks. When they do return, they show for at least some days afterwards an ex¬ treme caution that considerably reduces their feeding efficiency. The above reactions are those shown when the cat has suddenly dashed out from its hiding place among plants in a garden, behind the wheel be¬ neath a parked vehicle in the road or other such place. That “out of sight, out of mind” does not apply to the birds in such situations is clearly showm by the fact that when and if they do return to feed in the “danger area”, they constantly stop to stare nervously, with lifted head, into the gloom beneath the car or among the shrubs or Michaelmas daisies whence the cat appeared before. The avian eye (surprisingly) appears even less competent than the human eye at picking out an immobile cat partly hidden in cover, or perhaps the very vivid mental impression causes the frightened bird (like a child or primitive human in comparable circumstances) to conjure up a “vision” of the dreaded object. At all event one often sees the birds show¬ ing obvious fear when looking at an ambush where the human watcher can, when he gives it careful scrutiny, clearly see that there is not a cat (or any other predator) lurking. Despite what is often said by some ignorant nature journalists, birds that are tame towards humans are not thereby rendered any more vulnera¬ ble to non-human predators than are timid individuals. But what I have found with surprise is that some “tame” individual Wood and feral pigeons did somehow grasp the fact that I scared the cats away, or at least that cats did not appear when I was present. Often, at a stage when, owing to a re- DEREK GOODWIN - ASPECTS OF PREDATION 55 cent fright, such birds would not come down into the garden for food put out for them, they would at once do so and begin to feed close to me if I went out and stood near the food, only to fly up again onto the roof or (Wood Pigeons) a tree, as soon as I went inside the house. Where any bird species is frequently shot by man, it usually shows con¬ siderable fear of him and (unlike where human killing is by means only of trapping or netting) flees to a distance from him. This means that where man is abundant and conspicuous, such species are often unable to exploit places that would provide them with food or else are unable to exploit them to the same extent as they otherwise could. Everyone who has paid even casual attention to them (in Britain) knows to what an extent the Grey Heron Ardea cinerea and the Kingfisher Alcedo atthis are prevented from feeding, and in the case of the Kingfisher often prevented from feed¬ ing their young, by the presence of anglers, ramblers and other people by the waterside. The popularity of angling and other aquatic and waterside recreations means that for most of the daylight hours Herons cannot seek food at weekends or on public holidays on many waters that are usually available to them during the week. It is, of course, intense human persecu¬ tion, especially by shooting, that has caused this timidity on their part. Though both Herons and Kingfishers are now nominally protected in Britain, except where it can be proved that they are doing serious damage to trout-fishing interests, the law in these matters is not always observed. Individual birds of persecuted, or formerly persecuted, species may learn that men are harmless in certain areas or that certain categories of people are everywhere harmless. With species that are abundant in spite of persecution (usually because man also persecutes their predators or com¬ petitors), such as the Wood Pigeon, local populations in “safe” areas may show considerable “tameness” or indifference to man which is in strong contrast to the behaviour of their conspecifics elsewhere. These facts do not, however, disprove the hypothesis that human persecution may often have a depressing effect on bird populations, irrespective of the “signifi¬ cance” or otherwise of the actual numbers killed. In conclusion, I suggest that in birds the effect of some predators on some prey species is often greater than any calculation of the mere number of individuals actually killed would indicate because fear of the predator may restrict the areas which the prey can exploit for food or living space, or the periods of time that it can devote to food-seeking or reproductive behaviour. The availability of food, water, nesting and roosting sites, though essential, are not always and perhaps not usually the sole deter¬ minants of whether or in what numbers a bird species can exist in an area. 56 DR JEAN DELACOUR - LEN HILL They must be present in conjunction with a biologically (and probably also psychologically) tolerable chances of escaping from predators. It is perhaps worth adding that many birds, like man, seem relatively unafraid of dangers which they have no innate disposition to fear. In London, and doubtless most other towns as well, very many more feral pigeons are killed by the traffic than fall victim to cats. Over most of the world far more people are likewise killed by traffic than by predators. Yet, though they may show apparent fear when avoiding speeding cars, it is clear by their subsequent behaviour that the traffic evokes none of the terror that an attacking cat or a man-eating Tiger one the loose would inspire in a pigeon or a man respectively. REFERENCES CADE, T.J. 1 96 7. Ecological and behavioural aspects of predation by the Northern Shrike. The Living Bird, 6: 43-86. GULLION, G.W. and MARSHALL, W.H. 1968. Survival of Ruffed Grouse in a boreal forest. The Living Bird, 7: 117-167. MURTON, R.K. 1 965. The Wood-pigeon. TOMIALOJC, L. 1979. The impact of predation on urban and rural Woodpige on Columba palumbus (L) populations. Pol. ecol Stud. 5:4: 141-220. LEN HILL - AN APPRECIATION By Dr. JEAN DELACOUR (President of the Avicultural Society) It has been a great shock to Len Hill’s many friends all over the world to hear that he died suddenly on his return journey from the Falkland Islands that he owned and visited every year. He was not quite seventy years old and appeared to be as fit and active as ever when he left England six weeks previously but he fell asleep on the plane and did not wake up. Len Hill was an unusually bright character. He came from humble ori¬ gins and started working life as a boot boy, living with his parents in the stableyard of the very place that he later acquired, Chardwar Manor at DR JEAN DELACOUR - LEN HILL 57 Bourton-on-the-Water. In his youth he became a successful builder and then, because he loved birds, he gathered together one of the best collec¬ tions in the world in the four acres of gardens at the back of the lovely old Manor, the famous “Birdland”. He had, without doubt, a very special gift for planning aviaries and enclosures, as well as a great deal of taste and no space was wasted. Now at Birdland there are beautiful greenhouses full of well arranged tropical plants and suitable birds, very pretty outdoor aviaries, lawns, ponds and penguin accommodation. None of it is highly elaborate but it is all well built, well conceived and practical as well as attractive. The birds are tame and healthy, in perfect condition because they are well housed and cared for. There are also excellent educational and public facilities. I remember opening a lecture hall there a number of years ago which was adorned with a beautiful mural by Peter Scott. There was a great reception on that occasion, attended by many of our old members who have since left us. Len Hill was a marvellous host and a very generous man. In the course of the years, he gave many delightful parties for our members - we paid for the reception but the money collected went to our treasury. He was, in fact one of our very best supporters and gave equally generously of his time by entertaining the members at social meetings when he showed films of his birds. Len Hill had a flair for special undertakings, the most unusual being the acquisition of two uninhabited islands of the Falklands group, Grand Jason and Steeple Jason. Birds, particularly penguins, are abundant there and he scrupulously preserved them taking only, now and then, a few specimens for his Birdland. He could also write well about this and his other bird activities. In these difficult days for private initiative that the world is going through, Len Hill stood out as an exceptional example of free enter¬ prise. The members of our Society, and indeed all those in the world who share our interest in birds, will feel the poorer for his sudden and unexpected departure. 58 NEWS AND VIEWS Since mentioning Raymond Sawyer’s success with the Emerald Starling Lamprotomis iris in the January-March 1981 issue of the Avicultural Magazine, Larry Shelton, Curator of Birds at Philadelphia Zoo, sent the following notes on the breeding activities of what is probably the first success with this species in the United States. He writes: “In October 1980 we obtained four Emerald Starlings from an importer. After a period of quarantine, we placed the birds in our Jungle Bird Walk Exhibit. Even though this exhibit is both extremely large and heavily planted, the birds were extremely shy and, except for feeding, remained in the highest parts of the exhibit. In addition to eating our standard softbill food mixture, nectar, fruit, crickets, mealworms and grubs, the birds, as both Bannerman and Mackworth-Praed stated, were extremely fond of the black ants which gathered wherever our nectar containers were located. “From February on we frequently observed the starlings holding pieces of green leaves in their beaks. This seemed to have been a pair-bonding ritual and the leaf particles did not seem to be nesting material. By April we knew the birds were at least nest-building. As for location, we only knew that it was not in any of the artificial nest boxes or natural logs we had provided. Even later when the birds were carrying live food (mostly mealworms) the combination of the elusiveness of the birds and the heavy planting and size of the exhibit made location of the nest difficult. Its actual location was in a cavity of a branch of a large fibre-glass tree made for the planting of bromeliads and supporting vines at a height of approxi¬ mately 15 ft. The nest entrance width was about 4 inches and the maximum width of the branch was about 8 inches where it joined the main trunk 2 ft below at a 45 degree angle. “One young fell from the nest entrance on 11th May and drowned in a pool below the branch. After netting the fishes in the pool it was drained. For several days until fledging the remaining young birds (actually two) would come to the entrance for feeding. Both parents fed but the male would carry only one mealworm or cricket at a time whereas the female would carry several in her beak at each feeding. The plumage of the fledg¬ lings was basically a duller and more yellow green where the adult was iri¬ descent emerald, with dark brown replacing the brilliant purple areas. “In June the adults renested in another practically inaccessible loca¬ tion. This time the nest site was in a crevice in a rough stone column heavily covered with Philodendron and other plants at about 14 feet above NEWS & VIEWS 59 the exhibit floor. The site was such a visual cul de sac that observation of the nest was impossible. A single individual emerged from this nest in mid- July. At the time of writing (August 1981) the two older young are fast assu¬ ming the coloration of the adults. The green plumage is almost indistinguish¬ able from the emerald of the parents and the brown areas are being flecked with purple.” * * * The Avicultural Society’s first visit abroad was generally judged to be a great success and, thanks to the very efficient arrangements made by Stitta Tours, everything went smoothly and pleasantly throughout. Even the weather was obligingly warm and dry. Twenty-four members left London Airport on the morning of 28th September and, after lunch on the plane, arrived at Hannover and then transferred to the private coach which was to transport them for the entire visit. The party drove through pleasant countrysidee to Celle where they spent that and the following night and enjoyed exploring this picturesque town with its ancient half-timbered gables. The following two days were spent at Walsrode Bird Park and thanks to the devoted attention of Dr. Gunter Wennrich throughout that time, a really comprehensive study was made of this world-famous collection, in¬ cluding some fascinating tours behind the scenes. We also had the oppor¬ tunity of meeting Herr Trogisch who is in charge of the parrots at the park. Much has been written about this wonderful park (and Dr. Wennrich has promised to write about their achievements for future issues of the Avicultural Magazine) but no one was disappointed and it really did live up to all our expectations. The final day was spent at Hannover Zoo whose Scientific Assistant, Dr. Boer, conducted our party on an extensive tour of this attractive and interesting city collection. Although the mammals were predominant (in¬ cluding breeding groups of African and Indian Elephants, and the only pair of Pacific Walruses in Europe), there were some very interesting birds such as free-flying Cattle Egrets and third generation free-flying European Cormorants. The visit ended at the Herrenhausen Garten where members found much of interest in the magnificent orchid and cactus houses and the ornate English gardens. Members enjoyed not only the places they visited on this tour but also each other’s company and it is hoped to organise another trip to Europe this year. 60 NEWS & VIEWS Mr. F.C. Barnicoat writes from Johannesburg: “The South African National Cage Bird Championship Show for 1981 was held in Port Eliza¬ beth. The best wild bird on show was a Red-faced Aurora or Yellow-winged Pytilia Pytilia hypogrammica and the SANCBA medal for the most meri¬ torious breeding reported for 1981 within the Republic of South Africa was awarded for the successful breeding of two Stella’s Lorikeets Charmo- syna papou stellae. Both the above awards were further achievements for Dr. W.D. Russell of Bryanston, Johannesburg. * * * Amongst the new arrivals at Padstow Bird Gardens are a trio of Lesser Seed Snipe Thinocorus rumicivorus. These interesting little birds are infrequent aviary subjects these days, although they are now present in several collections through recent importations. They are quiet, unassum¬ ing birds which seem to thrive well on a diet of mixed seeds, chick crumbs (to which ours are rather partial) and live food in the form of mealworms and blow-fly maggots and pupae. Cress is also consumed in small quanti¬ ties. Very little literature is available for the family as a whole but an interesting account of this species appears in the Avicultural Magazine in 1913 on pages 321- 323. * * * Not unlike the Seed Snipe in appearance, the Sandgrouse are another family of which several species have appeared recently after a lapse of some time. But unlike the Seed Snipe, Sandgrouse have fared well in cap¬ tivity, particularly in the first two decades of this century when several aviculturists had breeding success. At least four species - Pallas’s Syrrhap- tes paradoxus , Black-bellied Pterocles orientals, Greater Pin-tailed P. al- chata (1897, pp. 178-180) and Chestnut-bellied P. exustus (1905, 64-66) have been reared in captivity. (Breeding references appearing in the Avi¬ cultural Magazine are bracketed.) * * * Another coffee table tome due for publication shortly covers the Australian malurids (fairy wren group) The author, Dr. Richard Schodde, recently showed slides of Richard Weatherley’s portraits illustrating the monograph to members at a meeting of the Papua New Guinea Bird Society. An indication of their quality is perhaps reflected in the meeting NEWS & VIEWS 61 report which sums up the audience’s reaction as ‘'stunned silence”. Those interested had better start saving their pennies! The Society’s Newsletter for March-April contains an interesting paper on the Origin and identification of New Guinea Birds of Prey. The same issue also documents the first confirmed sighting of a new species in the New Guinea region - the Grey Falcon Falco hypoleucus. * * * More good news on the conservation front. A “probable sighting” of one of New Zealand’s rarest birds, the Laughing Owl Sceloglaux albifacies, has been reported. A Forest Service hunter identified the bird by flash¬ light in the Mt. Richmond State Forest Park. The Laughing Owl has been thought extinct for nearly 70 years - the last positive sighting was in 1914. It is understood that the New Zealand Wildlife Service plans a major ex¬ pedition in the early spring to try to make a positive identification. * * * In a recent letter, Henk Wareman outlines some of the breeding achievements from the Netherlands for the 1980-1981 seasons. Lories and lorikeets are well represented with Forsten’s, Ornate, Meyer’s, Perfect, Goldie’s, Iris, Black-winged, Violet-naped and Chattering being bred. Three species of hanging parrots - Vernal, Blue-crowned and Philippine - were also reared. Other species reared include Yellow-naped Yuhina, Black¬ eared Golden Tanager, Purple Sunbird, Black-billed Seedcracker and Chestnut Sparrow. There was also a successful breeding of the Hawk-headed Parrot with one survivor out of a brood of three. The breeder was advised to give more soft food such as greenfood and fruit, but the birds did not thrive on this so he reverted to feeding hard and sprouting seeds only, to save the sole survivor. Mr. Wareman also reports the occurrence of a Barraband’s Parrot Pionop- sitta harrabandi in a consignment of parrots and parrkeets from South America. The bird, a male, unfortunately was very short lived. Six species of medium sized parrots make up the genus Pionopsitta , of which only one, the Red-capped P. pileata is seen with any regularity in collect¬ ions. Very little appears to be known about barrabandi. Forshaw states it to be rather rare and locally distributed in the Upper Amazon Basin. Nothing is known of its breeding behaviour. 62 NEWS & VIEWS Many members will have been interested to read recent contributions to the Magazine written by W.D. Cummings (late of Keston Foreign Bird Farm) who is now living in South Africa and is in charge of the Mitchell Park Aviaries in Durban, which he describes as follows: “Mitchell Park Aviaries is a small collection of birds and mammals set in one of the oldest and most beautiful parks in the subtropical city of Durban. Apart from all the common parrakeets, conures, pheasants and water- fowl, which breed annually, we also breed regularly Blue-crowned Pigeons, Rajah Shelduck, Black Swans, the diminutive Blue Duiker, Madagascar Star Tortoises and the North American turtles. The Seychelles Giant Tortoises (over 95 years old) mate but no eggs have ever been found. An interesting adaptation are the white and golden forms of the Mozambique Talapia (fish) which we have now firmly established in our ponds after several disastrous set-backs.” “We are hoping to breed the White-bellied Caique this year. The pair seem to desert just as the eggs are chipped or are fully developed so this year I have swapped their eggs over with a pair of Black-headed Conures. The Caiques have hatched and are feeding the Conure chicks but the Caique eggs have not yet hatched under the Conures - there was a week’s difference in the laying period but this pair of Black-headed Conures are good parents and have successfully reared their own chicks in previous years. I have also successfully reared six splendid Hawaiian Geese from the one adult pair - the first clutch was taken away.” * * * At Padstow Bird Gardens resides an African Grey Parrot, mostly called George, who, in between drawing as much blood as possible from public and staff alike, delights in mimicking the calls of several birds found wild in the area. While his repertoire includes Curlew, Oystercatcher, Herring Gull and Tawny Owl, the passerines elude him, probably because their calls have too high a frequency pitch for him to imitate. One species which is not so restricted is the Marsh Warbler Acrocephalus palustris , a palaearctic migrant which winters in Africa. Research on its ability to imitate other species shows its repertoire to include 212 species, made up of 99 European and 113 African species. Taped individuals contained on average 72 identified species, but as a fifth of the complete song remained unidentified, in due course the song of other African birds will be added to boost the overall total. D.C. 63 REVIEWS WILDLIFE AND NATURE PHOTOGRAPHY By MICHAEL FREEMAN Published by Croom Helm Ltd., London. ISBN 0-7099-1008-8. 219 pages, 150 colour and 350 black and white photographs and drawings. Price £13.95 As an enthusiastic but extremely amateur photographer, I found this beautiful book to be quite the most practical volume on this subject that I have ever read, having struggled and given up halfway through many others. Whilst the author says that he assumes the reader to already possess a basic knowledge of photography, I found that many of the simplest principles, which had hitherto eluded me, suddenly became apparent. This book really does fulfill its promise of giving the reader a complete course in wildlife photography, from the fundamental to advanced and specialised projects. The author, whose work has for many years been admired in wildlife books and journals, provides a list of basic equipment needed with a checklist of cameras, lenses and accessories that are most suitable for different purposes, describes at length general field work and specific camera techniques and then gives instructions for stalking, build¬ ing hides, using bait and lures, photographing animals in flight as well as close-ups of very small subjects. He also discusses photography in con¬ trolled conditions such as the studio, tank or aquarium with excellent tips on lighting and microscopic work. The following chapters suggest many unusual and interesting subjects in different locations and conditions in every part of the world. The drawings which illustrate specific points are excellent and, as one would imagine, the many colour and black and white photographs accom¬ panying the text are of the highest quality and alone make the purchase of this book worthwhile. I suppose that by today’s standards, which admittedly still take a bit of getting used to, the price is reasonable. M.H. 64 REVIEWS To mark their 70th anniversary in 1979, the East Africa Natural History Society decided to publish two important works. These are now available from the Society, P.O. Box 44486, Nairobi, Kenya.. BIRDS OF EAST AFRICA Edited by P.L. BRITTON, 271 pp, 5 colour plates, 15 black and white photographs, 4 maps. Price: 130.00 K. Shs. This is described in the Preface as an attempt to summarise what is known of the status, distribution and habitat requirements of birds in East Africa (Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda), with details for all species reliably reported, including distribution details for all subspecies. There are repro¬ ductions from five coloured paintings by Rena Fennessy, otherwise identification is not dealt with and there are no general descriptions of the 1,293 species. The view is taken that such information may be obtained from Mackworth-Praed and Grant’s handbook which covers the three countries. THE BREEDING SEASONS OF EAST AFRICAN BIRDS By L.H. BROWN and P.L. BRITTON, 164 pp. Price: 105.00 K. Shs. This work attempts to bring together all that is known of the breeding seasons of East African birds and relates them, so far as possible, to the climatic factors, especially rainfall, controlling scarcity or abundance and seasonal changes of various foods. * * * Collins have published BIRDS OF AFRICA: A Bird Photographer in East Africa, with photographs and text by John Karmali, Chairman of the East Africa Natural History Society (192 pages, price: £12.50 ), and A FIELD GUIDE TO THE BIRDS OF EAST AFRICA, by John G. Wil¬ liams (415 pages, price: £7.95 ) which means that a larger selection of East African species can now be found in one guide. Information previously available in two guides has been revised, many species have been added and all the colour plates showing some 665 species, are new and have been painted by Norman Arlott. M.E. 65 CORRESPONDENCE MODERN FARMING METHODS AND THEIR POSSIBLE EFFECT ON BIRD LIFE Following the breeding season each year, I, like fellow aviculturists walk round and tidy up the aviaries. Bundles of chewed branches and other debris that have accumulated through the summer months can be gathered up, repairs to flights and shelters can be carried out before the onset of winter, feathers can be picked up and labelled to give to young collectors who wait all year for a rare bird to moult and thus enhance their feather collection. This should be a time to relax and review with enjoyment the suc¬ cesses of the year. Also, for us, it is a time to delight in the view from the aviaries across a valley which is an ever changing picture of the farming industry - a view which, for much of the year, we are too busy to admire. Visitors to our collection are enchanted by the landscape, seeing only beautiful English countryside stretching far into the distance. Few see danger in so picturesque a setting, but my own enjoyment is marred by fears for the birds under my protection. As soon as crops are harvested, these acres of farmland will be chemically treated with weed¬ killer before the annual burning of stubble begins. The view of the valley is then obliterated by dense smoke and we are sent, coughing and choking, indoors. Even with doors and windows closed the fumes still penetrate the house. Sometimes, after these unpleasant sessions, both my wife and I have experienced stomach pains. I am, there¬ fore, concerned as to both the immediate and long-term effect that these possibly poisonous fumes could have on birds of the countryside and par¬ ticularly on aviary birds. At this time of year many hedgerows are burned and destroyed com¬ pletely. The number of small corpses found beneath tells its own sad story. Under one such hedgerow I counted 23 small unidentified birds, seven Partridge, two Hedgehogs and a number of small rodents. These hedgerows are lost in future to the multitude of bird, animal and insect life that has previously lived there. In the aviaries during one particularly bad year, I lost six nests of young chicks when hens became distressed and deserted during stubble burning. As a precautionary measure against possible contamination, all food and water dishes are removed, and no green twigs are cut for the birds for several weeks. 66 CORRESPONDENCE After the environment has been subjected to these pollutions, there is a noticeable drop in food intake and for several days birds are subdued and look distressed. In spring and summer low flying aircraft bombard the aviaries with sprays and pellets when treating adjacent fields against pests and mildew, etc. I am aware that these sprays and pellets should be avoided by humans and feel that they could be equally dangerous to birds. The drift from weedkillers applied to the land has damaged conifer hedges planted here as windbreaks for the aviaries and Goldcrests nesting in these hedges desert their young. I am not sure why the young subse¬ quently die ; whether it is because the natural food supply becomes con¬ taminated, or whether it is as a result of direct contact with chemical sprays. My knowledge of poisons is limited; I am only aware that the young are healthy and vigorous before fields are sprayed and are found dead afterwards. The Goldcrest is one species I have noted to suffer as a result of the use of chemicals on farmland, and another is the Partridge. This little game bird was seen in abundance on my meadowland at one time but numbers have rapidly decreased over the last twenty years. I collected several dead Partridges during the breeding season and as this coincided with fields being sprayed, I am of the opinion that farm chemicals may well be the cause of the decline of the Partridge here. I fear this is yet another bird that modern farming cannot support. The arrival of the Nightingale was always looked forward to, but sadly we have not heard this lovely songster for several years. The only bird that seems to benefit from modem farming methods in this area is the Collared Dove, which can be seen in flocks of up to 100 birds. I would be interested to read fellow members’ comments and points of view on the use of farm chemicals and stubble burning in relation to both captive and wild birds. Down House, Old Mill Lane, Lovedean, Hants. J. Stoodley Notes on Sex-Identity in Birds of Identical Colour I was interested to read the article on breeding the Greater Hill Mynah Gracula religiosa by Andrea J. Ouse of the Van Saun Park Zoo, New Jersey, USA, ( Avicultural Magazine , 1980, Vol. 86, No. 1, page 5) in which CORRESPONDENCE 67 she barely discerns or describes any visible sexual difference between the cock and the hen bird. When we first bred the Greater Hill Mynah at Keston Foreign Bird Farm in 1957, about which my friend and colleague, Edward Boosey, wrote an account ( Avicultural Magazine , 1957, Vol. 63, No. 5, p. 160), our pair were easily identifiable - but I do agree that some pairs are very difficult to identify. Our cock bird was, as I remember, the runt of a consignment of fifty or so “gapers” imported from India the year or so before and, since he need¬ ed special attention to survive - he was left behind when the rest were sold - he became a special pet. He was a small bird, much smaller than other sexually identifiable cocks and hens in the consignment, his growth having been retarded by the conditions to which he was subjected, prior to shipment overseas. However, he had identifiable male characteristics - his wattle was long and tended to overlap and the yellow skin coloration around the beak tended to extend through the bristles around the upper beak and eyes. His feet were small in this case, comparable to his body size but his beak was thicker and the top of his head flatter than in the hen. The young hen, selected from another consignment the following year, tended to have a fmer bill, rounder head and smaller, paler yellow wattles, and hen she proved to be. She was a better specimen than the cock bird, identical in size, although immature and a year younger than he, but she had not had the same shock in early growth that the cock had experien¬ ced. Even after two or three years, and following minor changes in build and wattle development, the pair were still sexually identifiable apart. There is, however, percentage-wise, a proportion of individuals within a species of identical coloration and these are almost sexually indisting- uishavle. Added personal characteristics also vary in the individual, and vary according to the locality and this will affect body size variation, the dullness or intensity of coloration and even other physical variations such as the beak shape and the size of the feet. Age also changes certain physi¬ cal attributes and behaviour patterns make sexual identification more difficult. Some species are more easily identifiable sexually as they leave the nest, but grow together as they become independant. All this makes identification of some individual birds very difficult. Unfortunately breeders of birds often select the sexually identifiable young to retain for further breeding and part with the more difficult-to- sex youngsters. In so doing they part with the hens throwing the larger, more vigorous body size and those with deeper coloration for the more fragile, finer proportioned birds, to the detriment of their breeding stock. To overcome this problem is to revert back to the method mentioned 68 CORRESPONDENCE by Miss Ouse in her article of allowing the birds to select their own mates, which method, where possible, I would highly recommend to ensure com¬ patible, matched breeding pairs, the natural way. Nature is infinite in its individual variations, even within a species, so sex identity can often only be made of the small percentage of the ob¬ vious and of the balance only by knowing all the facts concerning their age, background, locality and past history, which is often not possible. Science has now come to our aid and if one likes to take the plunge, positive identification can be made through the Endescope test to avoid the hazard of sitting for years with two rare birds, indistinguishable but of the same sex. Mitchell Park Aviaries, W.D. Cummings Durban, South Africa. The Editor does not accept responsibility for opinions expressed in articles, notes or correspondence. MEMBERS* ADVERTISEMENTS (10 p. per word - minimum charge £3.00) FOR SALE. Avicultural Magazines , Vols. 53-87 incl. (Vols. 53-68 bound). Offers to: Robinson, 1 Blackbo rough Close, Reigate, Surrey RH2 7BZ. England. THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY OF QUEENSLAND welcomes new members. An Australian Society catering for all birds both in captivity and in the wild. We put out a bi-monthly magazine on all aspects of aviculture and conservation. For membership details please contact Ray Garwood, 19 Fahey’s Road, Albany Creek, 4035 Queensland. Annual subscription: 14.00 Aus. dollars surface mail, 20.00 Aus. dollars airmail BIRD WORLD Magazine. Interesting, informative, well-illustrated. Dedicated to the presentation of quality information. Eight to ten articles each issue, including veterinary articles. Annual subscription (US dollars only): 12.00 (six issues). Postage extra: 8.00 surface mail, 12.00 airmail. Box 70, N. Hollywood, Calif. 91601, USA. AMERICAN CAGE-BIRD MAGAZINE features timely and interesting articles on canaries, finches, hook bills, and other birds by leading breeders and fanciers. All show dates and show information are also published. Monthly subscription 12.00 US dollars. American Cage-Bird Magazine, 3449 North Western Avenue, Chicago Illinois 60618, USA. Printed in Great Britain by Unwin Brothers Ltd., The Gresham Press, Old Woking, Surrey THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY The Avicultural Society was founded in 1894 for the study of British and for¬ eign birds in freedom and captivity. The Society is international in character, having members throughout the world. Membership subscription rates per annum: British Isles £8.00 ; Overseas - £9.00 (20.00 U.S. dollars). The subscription is due on 1st January of each year and those joining the Society later in the year will receive back numbers of the current volume of the Avicultural Magazine. The subscription rate for non-members is: British Isles and Europe - £9.00; outside Europe - £10.00 (25.00 U.S. dollars). Subscriptions, changes of address, orders for back numbers, etc., should be sent to: THE HON. SECRETARY &TREASURER, THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY, WINDSOR FOREST STUD, MILL RIDE, ASCOT, BERKSHIRE SL5 8LT. NEW MEMBERS Mr. S.B. Arrao, 6 Little Lane Road, Newburgh, New York 12550, USA. Mrs. L. Barbercheck, “The Golden Nestegg”, 611 Mulberry Dr.E., West Bend, Wis. 53095, USA. Mr. P J. Bennett, 1315 Marlowe, Lakewood, Ohio 44107, USA. Mrs. V. Bradley, 17 Woodfield Gardens, Leigh on Sea, Essex. Mr. N. Brickell, 2 Dorset Court, 450 Windermere Road, Durban 4001, Natal, South Africa. Mr. J.A.M. Cabral, R. Conde de Almoster, 94-1-DRT, 1500 Lisbon, Portugal Mr. M. Carlton, 7 Westbrook Park Road, Woodston, Peterborough, Cambs. PE2 9JG Mr. H.A. Collins, 111 Carshalton Road, Stton, Surrey, SMI 4LL Mr. K. Evans, 40a High Street, Padstow, Cornwall PL28 8BB Mr. E.R. Fetter, 4101 Lincoln Way, San Francisco 94122, Calif. USA Mr. W. Jerel George, 500 Majorca Avenue, Coral Gables, Fla. 33134, USA Mr. J.R. Jackson, 78-6928 Walua Road, Kailua Kona, Hi. 96740, USA Mrs. S. Koppe, 10612 Dublin Road, Walkersville, Maryland 21793, USA Mr. R. Lyn, 10407, Kurt Street, Lakeview Terrace, Calif. 91342, USA Ms. T. Meyer, 8605 Chinaberry Drive, Temple Terrace, Fla. 33617, USA Mr. D. Otter, Seacrest, West Promenade, Colwyn Bay, Clwyd. Mr. T. Pepworth, Filton Graphics, 37 Bourton Avenue, Patchway, Bristol . Mr. A.R. Raines, 1 Longfield Bungalows, Leigh Road, Hindley Green, Wigan, Lancs. WN2 4XF. Mr. A. Robinson, 2 Gawber Road, Barnsley, Yorks. Mr. K.P. Turner, 14 Austral Avenue, Linden Park S.A. 5065, Australia. Mr. R. Wallis, 4 Station Road, Yate, Avon. Dr. G. Wennrich, Vogelpark Walsrode, Am Rieselbach, D-3030, Walsrode 1, West Germany. Dr. H. Wunsch, Eduard - Conz Strasse 9, D7260 Calw., West Germany. CHANGES OF ADDRESS Mr. E.B. Boning to Brant House, Wayford, Norwich, Norfolk Mr. D. Goodwin to 6 Crest View Drive, Petts Wood, Kent BR5 1B7 Mrs. R.M. Hale to 2510 Edwards Lane, P.O.B. 231, Orient, N.Y. 11957, USA Mr. D.M.S. Head, to 106 Hanbury Road, Dorridge, Knowle, West Midlands Mr. T. Pullinger to The Lodge, Riverdale, London Road, Dorking, Surrey RH5 6AE Mr. J.H. Swift, to High House, Osbaston, Knockin, Salop. Mr. M.R. Taylor to 61 Appledown Close, Alresford, Hants SO 24 9JD. DONATIONS The Society is most grateful to the following members for their generosity. Mr. W.P. Bonsai Mr. J.R. Padgett Ms. Mona Bourell Mr. P.G. Paris Mr. R. Callaghan Dr. S-H. Raethel Mr. D.F. Castle Mr. W. Riley Mr. M.K. Clark Mr. D.H.S. Risdon Mr. M. Curzon Mr. B.C. Sayers Mr. Luther D. Dean Mr. K.M. Scamell Mr. R.F. D’Erlanger Mr. D.P. Shearing Mr. K.W. Dolton Mr. R.C. Small Mr. R.J. Elgar Mr. C.H. Smith Mr. Alan W. Gibbard Mr. F.L. Smith Mr. R.P. Girdler Mr. G.A. Smith Mr. P. Gondouin Mr. J.H. Swift Miss D.K. Gurney Mr. R. Thomas Mr. F.W. Hancock Mr. W.Todd III Mr. D.M.S. Head Mr. G. Volkemer Mr. Hannu Kapyla Mr. C. Walraven Mr. S.C.D.L. Lacey Mr. H.W. Wareman Mr. O.D. Long Mr. M.E.E. Warren Mrs. F.D. Lovelett Dr. W.E. Wiseman Mr. A.J. Mabille Mr. J.C. Witt Mr. W.K. Macy, Jr. Mr. C.K. Wright Mr. I. Mitchell Mr. J.J. YeaUand Professor C. Naether Mr.J. Zitta Mr. R.E. Oxley Published by the Avicultural Society, Windsor Forest Stud, Mill Ride, Ascot, Berkshire SL5 8LT, England. AS/ICULTURAL MAGAZINE MH 8’^cb VOLUME 88 Number 2 1982 CONTENTS Breeding the African Spoonbill at the St. Louis Zoo (with plate) by Stephen R. Wylie . 69 Breeding the Spectacled (White-fronted) Amazon Parrot (with plate) by P. Clarke . 71 Incubators and Hand-rearing in Aviculture by J. Stoodley . 74 Observations on a captive Buffy Humming Bird by Edward J. Harrison . 81 Vent Sexing and Pinioning young Waterfowl (with line drawings) by Michael Lubbock . 84 Bird Fancying, Foe of Aviculture by Derek Goodwin . 88 Sunbathing Behaviour in Five Species of Ibises at the Walsrode Bird Park, Germany (with plates) by Dr. G. Wennrich . . 96 The Boswell Parrot Collection by F. Barnicoat . 101 Cranes in Asian Zoos, 1981 (with plate) by Dr. Georgette Maroldo . 104 Notes from London Zoo, 1981, by P.J. Olney . 109 News from the Bronx Zoo, New York, by Christine Sheppard . Ill A Dissenting View on Aviculture by Alastair Morrison With replies by Rosemary Low and Professor J.R. Hodges . 113 J.O. Death - An appreciation by H.J. Horswell . 120 Correspondence . 120 News and Views . 122 THE AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE welcomes original articles that have not been published elsewhere and that essentially concern the aviculture of a particular bird or group of birds, or that describe their natural history. Articles should be preferably typewritten, with double spacing, and the scientific names as well as the vernacular names of birds should be given. References cited in the text should be listed at the end of the article. Line drawings should be in Indian ink on thick paper or card; photographs which illustrate a particular point in the article will be used where possible and should be clearly captioned. ADDRESS OF EDITOR Mary Harvey, Windsor Forest Stud, Mill Ride, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 8LT, England. -• LlBMW^ African Spoonbill with chicks at the St. Louis Zoological Park Avicultural Magazine THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY Vol. 88 - No. 2- All rights reserved APRIL-JUNE 1 982 BREEDING THE AFRICAN SPOONBILL Platalea alba AT THE ST. LOUIS ZOOLOGICAL PARK, USA By STEPHEN R. WYLIE (General Curator/Curator of Birds) The African Spoonbill is one of two species of spoonbill that Eves and breeds in tropical Africa. Distinguished by its white body, red facial skin and legs, pink and grey bill, and crestless head, the African is slightly larger than its more northern complement, the White or European Spoonbill P. leucorodia. It occurs in scattered populations south of the Sahara, primarily in the vicinity of shallow lakes and tributaries. In October 1977, the St. Louis Zoological Park purchased three African Spoonbills for display in its larger outdoor, walk-through aviary. During the warmer months of the year, this exhibit contains numerous avian specimens of mainly waterfowl, cranes, flamingoes, gulls, touracos and wading birds. Many of these breed annually, and it was hoped that the new additions would also. During 1978 our African Spoonbills failed to demonstrate any inclina¬ tion to reproduce. Because this species is a colonial nester, a co-operative venture was entered into with the Chicago Zoological Park, Brookfield, Illinois, and with Busch Gardens, Tampa, Florida. These institutions lent one and two female specimens respectively in an effort to further enhance the reproductive prospects of this group. However, the birds also failed to display any reproductive behaviour during the 1979 and 1980 breeding seasons. It was suspected that their transfer to indoor quarters during the winter months was inhibiting propagation. Since the spoonbills had failed to take advantage of the existing nesting locations, a decision was made to construct one that would, hopefully, prove more acceptable. In May of 1981 a tree that had been recently “topped” was chosen as a possible nest¬ ing site. We utilised a circular metal basket with a rounded bottom. It measured 22 inches (55.9 cm) and 1 1 inches (27.9 cm) in height, and had previously been used as a container for hanging plants. This structure was placed directly atop the sheared tree trunk, approximately 13 feet (3.96 m) 70 STEPHEN R. WYLIE - BREEDING THE AFRICAN SPOONBILL from the ground, and then fresh leaves and twigs were woven into its alu¬ minium frame. By late May, two of the spoonbills (the St. Louis male and the Chicago female) began showing signs of pair bonding, as they were often observed allo-preening. By early June their behaviour had advanced to exchanging, carrying and gathering nesting material. Within a short time they had com¬ pletely removed and replaced the leaves and twigs we had provided. Three eggs were laid in July, 1981. The first egg appeared in the nest on 1 st July, and the female immediately began to incubate . Consequently, it was impossible to determine exactly when the other eggs were laid, but it was surmised that they were laid at two to three-day intervals. Incubation duties were shared by both sexes; while one was on the nest, the other usually perched in the immediate vicinity. The pair maintained its bond by allo-preening during incubation and by vocalising and copulating when they exchanged positions on the nest. The first white chick was observed on 27th July, and was estimated to be approximately two to three days old. The parents had already begun feeding the chick with regurgitated food. The African Spoonbills were fed primarily with smelt; however, they had access to our flamingo diet, which is a gruel containing krill. A pan of a commercially prepared diet for birds of prey was also available to them. By the first week of August, all three chicks had hatched and were being diligently cared for by the pair. This included not only feeding and brooding, but also shading the chicks from the hot August sun. At approximately four weeks of age, the oldest chick was beginning to venture from the nest on to adjacent limbs of the tree, returning only for feeding and brooding. Within time, however, all the chicks were roosting on adjacent limbs, where they were fed by the adults. They began flying freely about the exhibit during the second week of September. It is interesting to note that when the spoonbills were transferred to their winter quarters on 18th October, two eggs were discovered in the nest. They had apparently been laid in late September or early October, but both proved to be infertile. This species was first bred in captivity in 1978 at Vogelpark Walsrode in West Germany. The breeding and hatching of African Spoonbills at the St. Louis Zoological Park is an event which, we believe, represents the first success with Platalea alba in North America. It well illustrated the importance of co-operative breeding ventures between zoological institu¬ tions, for without it, this accomplishment would certainly not have occurred. BREEDING THE SPECTACLED (WHITE-FRONTED) AMAZON PARROT Amazona albifrons nana 71 By P. CLARKE (Somerset) I bought my first Spectacled Amazon Parrot, a hen, in October 1976, and just four months later, in February 1977, 1 followed up an advertised “pair for sale”. As the Spectacled is sexually dimorphic in colour, I recog¬ nised the “pair” as two cocks. I took both of them home, however, and in¬ troduced ‘Choice A’ to the hen. The hen sought the cock’s company by persistently following him around the aviary, all over the wire and along the perches. Usually he ignored her, but occasionally would turn on her and reject her. The second cock was tried the following year but with simi¬ lar results. And so, after two years, the cocks were reunited and at once showed an affection for each other that they had never shown for the hen. I now believe that the previous owner could have mistaken them for a true pair as they even feed one another. In December 1979 I bought and tried yet another cock. Initially he started off by sitting at a distance from the hen, but by that very same evening they were roosting together. One could not wish for a more compatible pair. They preen each other, feed together and roost very close. Throughout the year the cock enters the nest box and coaxes the hen to follow by making curious noises. They are unlike any parrot noise that I am familiar with, and the best way I can describe it is as a soft and fairly high-pitched mewing. He can keep this up for as long as ten minutes, but the only time I have seen the hen enter the nest box is in the breeding season. In the spring of 1980 there were four fertile eggs, but disaster struck when a squirrel disturbed the hen and she deserted. Although the eggs were chilled, I put them into an incubator and eventually three chicks hatched out. Alas, to my great disappointment I failed to rear them. In the spring of 1981, four fertile eggs were laid on April 18th, 21st, 24th and 27th. My hopes were high again as the hen sat tight and the cock fed her in the nest box, but then on the 25th day I noticed a newly hatched chick lying in the seed tray. One of its legs had been severed below the heel and was still bleeding. The chick was very pale and died soon afterwards. I just could not face this happening again so I put the three remaining eggs into an incubator. I remembered a television docu¬ mentary which described how, by tweeting to a duckling prior to hatching one could imprint one’s voice on to the duckling and the duckling would 72 P. CLARKE - BREEDING THE SPECTACLED AMAZON PARROT then respond only to that person’s voice. I tried this and found that the eldest chick was soon peeping back strongly, and similarly with the other chicks within some 48 hours of hatching. I have the incubator in my bed¬ room, and the chick would reply to my voice even from the far side of the room - about 17 ft. It felt uncanny to be communicating with a chick which was still enclosed in its shell, but the experiment was worth while since, after hatching, the chick would answer back and gape for food whenever I tweeted. Each chick made the first pip about 24 hours before hatching. After a long rest the chick then chipped around the egg until the top was broken off. The latter chipping, plus heaving its head from the shell and kicking itself out of the egg, only took each chick a maximum of 30 minutes. The chicks hatched out on May 16th, 18th and 21st - that is, on the 25th, 24th and 24th day of incubation. Initially the chicks were fed every two hours on Farlene, and then later on baby food (Cow and Gate fruit delight), finely sieved ground sunflower seed, some scraped cuttlefish bone, a few drops of Vitapet (a mixture of vegetable oil and cod liver oil, and more palatable than plain cod liver oilO, a small amount of yoghourt, a trace of Vionate powder and a few grains of grit. It has been said that if one can get past the first seven days then one has a real chance of success, but in my experience the first seven days present few problems and the critical days are from the 7th to the 15th. I have a cock Eclectus which has been indoors for some years and which makes a habit of regurgitating and feeding the padlock on its cage. It seemed to me that this secretion could contain enzymes from the bird’s saliva, and gastric juices brought up from the proventiculus into the crop during regurgitation. The reason I think this secretion is proventicular in origin is that it is nothing like “pigeon’s milk”. The latter is a thick and cheesy protein secretion originating from the degeneration of cells which line the crops of both sexes of the pigeon in the breeding season. My Eclectus, which feeds the padlock throughout the year, secretes a slime and seed which smells slightly acrid and of wet wheat germ, is nearly colourless, and when given a litmus test, indicates strong acidity. It is said to be comparatively easy to rear a chick that has been fed by its parents even for a few days, and so, as I had already decided to feed the regurgitated secretion to at least one of the chicks, I started with the middle one. I collected the secretion and mixed it with a little water in order to separate the slime from the seed and then, with some trepidation, mixed the liquid with the Farlene and administered it to the middle chick. I monitored the chicks’ crops to see how they fared, and observed that P. CLARKE - BREEDING THE SPECTACLED AMAZON PARROT 73 when the crop of the middle chick was empty, the other two were still three-quarters full. As and when the secretion became available, I added it in turn to each chick’s feed and, throughout the rearing, encountered no digestion problems at ah. Careful examination of the pin feathers revealed that the colours of the feathers were distinguishable even while still enclosed in their sheaths. I was able to see red in the primary covert and alula areas and thereby knew, even at the pin feather stage, that all three were cocks. It has been docu¬ mented that a “known hen albifrons ” - one that has laid - “has the alula and primary coverts partly red”, but I am not optimistic that any of my chicks will turn out to be a hen, especially since in my hen, which has no red at all in the wing, the red in the peri-ophthalmic region is noticeably less bright than in the cock and the three chicks. P. Clarke Young Spectacled Amazon Parrots At the time the photograph was taken the red in the face was restricted to the loral region, and it was not until some two months after the chicks 74 J. STOODLEY - INCUBATORS AND HAND-REARING were otherwise fully feathered that the tiny red feathers began to appear in the region which surrounds the eye and forms the ‘spectacle’. After the chicks had reached the pin feather stage, I hoped that trom then on everything would be plain sailing; but an accident occurred which, with hindsight, I should have anticipated. The chicks were vigorous and lively, and had outgrown their container. Everything was going so well and I did not want to change anything. And then the eldest chick, while climb¬ ing about, got his needle-sharp claws into the skin of the youngest chick, between the neck and the back of the shoulder, and ripped a slit which needed four stitches to close. Fortunately no internal damage was done and a lesson learned. Although it resulted in a considerable setback in the chick’s progress when compared with its brothers (see photograph), it has now fully recovered and is their equal, both in size and feathering. As described above, the Spectacled (White-fronted) Amazon Parrot Amazona albifrons nana has been bred by Mr. P. Clarke. This is believed to be the first success in this country but anyone knowing of a previous breeding in Great Britain or Northern Ireland is asked to inform the Hon. Secretary. * * * INCUBATORS AND HAND-REARING IN AVICULTURE By J. STOODLEY (Lovedean, Hampshire) Many years ago, when serving my apprenticeship as an aviculturist, I held strong views against placing eggs or chicks under foster parents. Any bird unable to produce and rear their young unaided was of no use to me, and there was no place for such birds in my collection. Later, my outlook changed. I came to terms with the fact that some pairs would take several seasons before becoming reliable breeding birds. Eggs produced in these first years were of value, as a percentage could be hatched if placed under willing hens. Unfortunately I was to find that few foster hens incubated these eggs successfully. Different types of eggs had different requirements, and this was especially true of the Pionus group. J. STOODLEY - INCUBATORS AND HAND-REARING 75 The same problems occurred when using small incubators, and the over¬ all experiment was far from satisfactory. I was determined to continue working with parrot eggs, and decided to build my own incubator. There had been no previous work of any signifi¬ cance done on parrot incubation, and very few parrots were being bred in Britain. My work, therefore, had to start from scratch. We were unable to obtain much useful or helpful information on incu¬ bators until we met Mr Philip Glasier of the Newent Falconry Centre. It was pleasing to meet a man of such outstanding achievement who was so very generous with his knowledge, and on his invitation my wife and I spent a day at the Centre. We joined a group of his students discussing the merits of an incubation unit that Mr. Glasier had built. I sketched and made notes of the successful unit before joining Mr. Glasier on a walk through the falconry grounds. His birds were obviously delighted to see him, and although a heavy fall of snow had kept visitors away, for us it was a perfect day to observe this vast collection of birds of prey. Having obtained the components required the incubator was assembled. The unit takes the form of a simple cube, each side being approximately 29.5 ins (75 cms) in length. However, two-thirds of one side form a door which opens to the full width of the cube. A large opening is essential to provide easy manipulation of the eggs within, and the removal of the egg tray. Above the door is a small glass panel which allows observation of the thermometer without the incubator door being opened. On one side, about 4 ins (10 cms) above the base, are three holes approximately % in. (2 cms) in diameter. There are three similar holes on the opposite side, but these are twice the distance above the base. They ensure a constant change of air within the incubator. The sides of the cube are double skinned to restrict heat loss. Simple household insulation is placed between the walls which are about 34 in (2 cms) apart, including the door of the unit. The interior surface is For¬ mica and the exterior plywood. Placed centrally within the incubator is the egg tray. This is constructed with wooden dowels about Vi in. (12.7 mm) in diameter. The dowels are plastic covered which aids cleaning and, more importantly, facilitates the turning of the eggs. The tray is supported on slides, so that it is easily removed. Two fans positioned on the top and bottom of the incubator are essen¬ tial to assist the circulation of heat and air. Surrounding the fans are two heating elements, each of 120 watts and controlled by a heavy duty light- 76 J. STOODLEY - INCUBATORS AND HAND-REARING ing dimmer, which ensures that the elements are never used at their maxi¬ mum output. The temperature within the incubator is controlled by a Jumo Adjustable Contact Thermometer, type MS 1ZZ, coupled to a Jumo Relay GKT 15-0, and also a Jumo Thermometer 141 1 at egg level. A small light bulb inside the incubator allows observation of the eggs and thermo¬ meter. The completed unit is most accurate, capable of maintaining a tempera¬ ture to within 0.2 of a degree. I select a temperature of 98.5 degrees F (37 degrees C) with confidence that it will be maintained. To obtain humidity within the unit, I use one or two flat dishes about 7 ins (17.8 cms) in diameter, which contain water. To increase humidity I place the dishes closer to the fan, and vice versa. Some adjustment with regard to surface area of water is necessary, and a smaller container sometimes comes in useful. Having built the incubator, the next problem was which eggs to select for our First experiment. Although Mr. Glasier obtains almost one hundred percent success rate, we were not so optimistic. However, a number of Pionus eggs were put up. The eggs were marked with an arrow on each side. These arrows are in opposition to each other which allows me to rotate each egg 180 degrees and then counter rotate. In this way, turning is accomplished without the egg rolling continually in the same direction, which would be most harm¬ ful. If the egg is continually turned in the same direction, there is a danger that the embryo would be strangled. I turn the eggs as near as possible every two hours, and ideally seven times per day. I suggest a minimum of five times per day. An odd number of turns were made to avoid having the egg lie on the same side for two nights running. In this first batch a percentage of eggs failed to hatch. These failures were examined, and my findings show that some eggs had lost too much moisture, the air space being large, while others had a small air space with excess moisture, this being the unabsorbed albumen. These problems were to be overcome, however, as I was gradually becoming more aware of the actual requirements. It will be appreciated that birds come from vastly different climatic zones and varying altitudes, especially the Pionus and Amazons. This obviously has a bearing on conditions prevalent at the time of incubation. All new eggs were weighed and coded, using balance scales of great accuracy. Interesting facts on average weights of various eggs are as follows: J. STOODLEY - INCUBATORS AND HAND-REARING Blue & Gold Macaw Ara ararauna grams 30.4 Double Yellow-headed AmazonA mazona ochrocephala oratrix 20.25 Salle’s Amazon A. ventralis 18.20 Primrose-cheeked Amazon A.autumnalis autumnalis 17.75 Blue-fronted Amazon A. aestiva aestiva *17.50 Green-cheeked Amazon A. viridigenalis 17.25 Spectacled Amazon A. albifrons 13.50 Yellow-fronted Amazon A. ochrocephala ochrocephala 17.10 Blue-headed Pionus Pionus memtruus 15.25 Dusky Pionus P. fuscus 13.00 Maximilian’s Pionus P. maximiliani 15.20 Bronze-winged Pionus P. chalcopterus chalcop terns 14.15 Coral-billed Pionus P. sordidus sordidus 18.50 Plum-crowned Pionus P. tumultuosus tumultuosus 15.40 African Grey Parrot Psittacus erithacus 17.90 Eclectus Parrot Lorius pectoralis 18.50 It is interesting to note that eggs of small parrots of the Pionus group are not much smaller than eggs of the considerably larger Amazon parrots. Clean eggs are an important part of successful hatching, although it is not advisable to wash them. Soiled eggs can be cleaned dry with a very fine sandpaper. I prefer not to put cold eggs straight into the incubator at 98.5 degrees F (37 degrees C), and allow them to warm gradually for several hours beforehand. After three days’ incubation the eggs are weighed again and weights recorded. They are also candled at this stage. I find the best method of candling is to use a 40 watt lamp in a light-tight box. An egg-shaped hole is cut into the top of the box, and I have several rubber discs which allow me to adjust the aperture to the size of the egg. The lamp must be about 2 ins (5 cms) from the egg, and great care must be taken not to expose the egg to the heat of the lamp for more than a second or two. Since I have a great many eggs to candle, I place a compression switch on the floor and illuminate the box for each egg with a press of the foot. This leaves my hands free, and avoids any overheating of the globe and box. A fertile egg shows blood vessels in the yolk, although at this early stage they are very thin. I also observe the air space. Clear eggs are not discarded at this stage, but wait until the next candling at six days. At this point all clear eggs are then removed. I continue to weigh and candle eggs every three days. At nine days this will sometimes reveal slight movement, 78 J. STOODLEY - INCUBATORS AND HAND-REARING the embryonic development will be considerable and a distinct centre is developing. The air space should continue to enlarge. Eggs that are not keeping to their charted course are transferred to another incubator according to their requirements. Although humidity control is important, the eggs can tolerate fluctuations in this respect to a greater degree than variations in temperature. I know that, provided the egg loses 16% of its weight during its incuba¬ tion period, it is most likely to hatch. The embryo has some slight control over its water metabolism. For instance, should it be subjected to excess moisture then a period of drier atmosphere will compensate, and vice versa. However, I have found that eggs may hatch with a variation as much as 4% above or below the theoretical 16%. This does not apply to temperature control where mistakes cannot be rectified and, in most instances, prove fatal. An example of weight loss calculated at 16%:- If weight of an egg is 20 grams, then the theoretical weight loss in 28 days would be 3.2 grams. Loss per day would, therefore, be 3_.2 _grams = q 1 1 4 grams 28 days T days To measure relative humidity in a forced air incubator, I find the most reliable method is to use a wet bulb thermometer. This is simply a normal thermometer with one end of a cotton wick slid over the bulb end, and the other end of the wick immersed in distilled water. The liquid prevents the wick from hardening, hence the reading will remain correct. It is impera¬ tive that the wick covers at least 3 cms of the thermometer stem. The average humidity requirements are between 50-60% (relative humidity, not to be confused with wet bulb readings). Exceptions do occur, as with the Coral-billed Parrot of the Pionus group. I was obliged to reduce relative humidity to 40% to achieve success. The following rela¬ tive humidity figures were obtained with the use of a Whirling Hygro¬ meter, and the relevant tables. Incubator temperature 98.5 degrees F. Wet bulb readings (degrees F): 78 25.5 = 40% 80 26.2 = 44% 82 27.8 = 50% 84 28.9 = 54% 86 30.0 = 60% 88 31.1 = 66% 90 32.2 = 72% At about 18 days, a large dark area will have appeared inside each J. STOODLEY - INCUBATORS AND HAND-REARING 79 egg, and large veins can be seen reaching towards the pointed end of the egg - towards the unabsorbed albumen. Three or four days before the eggs are due to hatch they are placed in a shallow wire basket lined with Kleenex tissue and are no longer turned. A cover is placed over the basket. Over the last two days a dry atmosphere helps the chick to break the mem¬ brane and enter the air space. If the egg is held to the ear, very often the chick can be heard scratch¬ ing or tapping, sometimes even squeaking. Close inspection of the shells will often reveal small cracks. (I avoid the temptation to open the incuba¬ tor every few minutes). At this stage maximum humidity is essential to assist emergence from the shell. Some chicks take many hours to hatch. If this occurs naturally, it will emerge with the aid of the egg tooth, which is a small pointed knob on the tip of the upper mandible. The empty egg shells are collected for future use. If a chick has made no effort to pip, I candle to check its position before making a small hole into the air space. If the chick is alive a pulsating movement can be seen, and if the chick’s beak has pierced the membrane, it will be able to breathe and the possibility of suffocation will be averted. I then moisten the mem¬ brane with warm water applied with a small paint brush. The blood vessels will show very clearly when wet, and if they are bright red then I know that they are still attached to the umbilicus. The hole in the shell is capped using one of the empty egg shells collected beforehand. When the chick is ready to be released from its shell, the veins will no longer be bright red when moistened. They will be very dark red, which indicates that they will not bleed when I assist the chick’s emergence. The hole in the shell is enlarged, and with the aid of the wet paint brush, I en¬ large the hole in the membrane around the beak. I prefer to help release the chick a little at a time, constantly taking note of whether the chick will try to further free itself by its own endeavours. When placing the chick back in the incubator, care should be taken to keep it away from the draught caused by the fans, thus avoiding excessive drying of the membranes. After two hours, I see if further assistance is required. Some chicks exhaust themselves in their efforts to get free. While this tricky operation is being carried out, I wear magnifying lenses and always have to hand cotton wool buds and Friar’s Balsam. The latter is used if the umbilicus is not fully healed. When the ehick finally emerges, the membrane remains in the shell, and a considerable amount of excreta is also present. If, when the egg was opened, the beak had not pierced the membrane, I moisten it as previously described. The mandible should be clearly visible. 80 J. STOODLEY - INCUBATORS AND HAND-REARING Using a large needle, I puncture the membrane, taking care not to rupture the veins. I make the insertion just large enough to let air in, then I cap the hole as before and return it to the incubator. It may be a day or two before the veins change to a dark colour, then I proceed as before. Using the technique I have described, I have greatly in¬ creased the number of youngsters successfully hatched - chicks which, in earlier years, I would have written off as dead in shell. I am delighted to read from time to time that since publishing my work on releasing chicks from the egg, other aviculturists are using my methods to save chicks that would otherwise perish. In past years my feeding formulae have always included well known brands of baby cereals together with many other ingredients. I occasionally lost a chick at about fourteen days, however, and this I considered was due to the diet. I felt this may be because the diet contained an excessive level of grain protein. Therefore, we decided to experiment with different diets. The chicks were divided into three groups, and what can only be des¬ cribed as feed trials were carried out. Group 1 was fed on a baby cereal, Group 2 on a mixture of ground sunflower, soya cereal, juice from carrot and greens and a small amount of cereal, and Group 3 was fed on first stage baby meat and vegetable dinners (glass jar variety). All groups had SMA dried baby milk included in their diet. We prefer this milk to any other, including fresh, because the animal fat has been removed and replaced by vegetable fats. To introduce flora into the system all chicks were fed a small amount of yoghourt. This, we feel, contributes greatly to our successful rearing from the egg. I find that chicks that have benefitted by as little as one day with the parent birds are very easily hand-reared and suffer no digestive problems, proving that the first crop milk is most important. After three weeks chopped sunflower was added to all three groups, and the results of our trials assessed. Group 1 had a death rate of 10%, Group 2 suffered no losses, but some crop compaction and slow growth was evident. Group 3 suffered no losses, and was enjoying vigorous growth. In conclusion, first stage baby dinner proved the best diet on all counts. It is pleasing to find my early published work on parrot nutrition, es¬ pecially in the use of natural yoghourt and baby foods, is now being so widely published and used with success in the U.K. Birds are made to gape for their feed and never tubed, because when birds are tube fed they prove difficult to get on to seed. All food is fed warm. Newly hatched chicks are given fairly liquid food using a small syringe with l/i ins (1 Vi cms) of cycle valve rubber attached to prevent damage to the soft mandible. 81 In different parrots the shape of the mandible varies considerably. Blue-fronted Amazons have wide shovel-like lower mandibles, while the Spectacled Amazon and Salle’s Amazon are somewhat finch-like at this early stage. During the first days the brooder temperature is reduced slightly by 34 degrees. Humidity is very important to prevent dehydration, and I keep the relative humidity between 60 and 65%. In conclusion, I would like to make clear my reasons for incubating eggs. I find if I take early first round eggs, all of which are not usually fertile, the hen will continue to lay. The second clutch is more likely to be fertile. These eggs are brooded by the hen, and she will also raise the chicks. With the help of my incubators, which can also be used as brooders, some pairs have produced six or seven chicks in one breeding season. One exceptional pair have produced many more. I consider these results well worth the late nights and early morning feeds. OBSERVATIONS ON A CAPTIVE BUFFY HUMMINGBIRD Leucippus fallax By EDWARD J. HARRISON (Mississippi State University Research Center USA) For four and a half weeks in 1979 I observed a Buffy Hummingbird as it developed from the nestling stage. At that time I was working at the Margarita Island campus of the Fundacion Fa Salle near Punta de Piedras, Venezuela. On 24th August 1979 a student brought to me a young hum¬ mingbird that she said had fallen from a tree. The bird was barely large enough to cover my thumbnail, but its body was completely covered with grey feathers. Its remiges and rectrices had just begun to develop, so its powers of flight consisted of the limited ability to break its fall. The bill, although elongated, was not as long in proportion to the body as that of an adult bird. The young bird seemed to be unable to open its toes suf¬ ficiently to stand on a flat surface, a condition that persisted as the bird matured. 82 EDWARD J. HARRISON - BUFFY HUMMING BIRD On the first day I fed the bird a solution of sugar and water, but thereafter honey replaced the sugar. Initially I used a micropipette to place droplets of the solution on the commissure near the tip of the bill to induce the bird to lick them up. Within 24 hours, it learned to lick droplets directly from the micropipette. On the second day I assembled a feeding station from a laboratory stand, a clamp and a tiny (M 0ml) glass vial. I clamped the vial to the stand so that it was tilted about 45° from the vertical and placed it where the bird could reach it without moving from the small twig that served as a perch. Feeding from the micropipette continued, but from time to time I moved the feeding station slightly so that the bird’s bill entered the vial and dipped into the honey water. By 26th August it had learned to lick the honey water directly from the vial, so the micropipette was no longer necessary. The bird used the feeding station throughout the remainder of the observation period. The bird was kept uncaged in my office, and during the first week it made several attempts to fly. By 30th August it could fly in a straight line and was making several flights a day. The bird passed most of the day preening, scratching by the leg-over-wing technique (see also Skutch, 1964) and feeding from the vial while sitting on its perch. Because it still had very poor control over its landings, the bird was confined to a box at night. During the second week, the bird continued to refine its flight skills and gradually developed the ability to hover and manoeuvre. Ruby- throated Hummingbirds Archilochus colubris have been reported as having this ability at fledging (Bend, 1940), but other authors suggest a more gradual development of manoeuvrability (Allen, 1951, p. 301). By 5th September it was flying at will, pausing here and there to investigate and then moving on. It had also gained control over its landings, so it was no longer confined at night and allowed to roost on its perch. At this time I placed the feeding station so that the bird had to feed on the wing. This presented a more natural situation and encouraged exercise. A Petri dish, filled with water and placed on top of an inverted beaker was offered as a bathing site. Within a few minutes, the bird noticed the new appara¬ tus and flew around it to investigate. After familiarising itself with the dish and its contents, the bird perched on the rim and bathed. From its position on the rim, the bird moved its bill downward to touch the bottom of the dish, ran the bill tip along the bottom toward the opposite side of the dish until its head entered the water, and then raised the bill tip out of the water. When done in rapid sequence, these movements produced a scooping motion that caused water to flow over the bird’s head and down its nape. Other hummingbirds have been observed to perch in the water EDWARD J. HARRISON - BUFFY HUMMING BIRD 83 to bathe (Bent, 1940), but I did not observe this one to do so. Its reluc¬ tance to enter the water may have been due to the inability to stand flat- footed on the bottom of the dish. By 21st September the bird’s plumage had developed sufficiently to confirm its identity as a Buffy Hummingbird. Honey and water still constituted the major portion of its diet, but it also fed on fruit flies Drosophila sp. that visited mangos and bananas kept in the office. The bird first showed an interest in flowers by approaching and hovering near a flower pattern on a shirt. I followed up this interest by keeping a supply of Hibiscus flowers in my office. Although the bird inspected the flowers often, I never observed it attempting to feed from them. Perhaps the honey water provided a food source that was too convenient. The bird might have been converted to the natural food source by limiting its access to the honey water. Unfortunately, on 29th September the laboratory building was subjected to an unannounced fumigation, and the bird died. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I thank Dr. R. Lohoefener for the helpful comments he made on an early version of the manuscript. REFERENCES ALLEN, A. A. 1951. Stalking birds with a color camera. National Geographic Society, Washington, DC, USA. 328 pp. BENT, A.C. 1940. Life Histories of North American cuckoos, goat¬ suckers, hummingbirds, and their allies. United States National Museum Bulletin, No. 1 76. SKUTCH, A.F. 1964 Life History of the Scaly-breasted Hummingbird, Condor, 66: 186-198. 84 VENT SEXING AND PINIONING YOUNG WATERFOWL By MICHAEL LUBBOCK (Goodewood, Montgomery, Alabama, USA) All the waterfowl family can be vent sexed, some more easily than others. The tree duck genus (. Dendrocygna ) is probably the most diffi¬ cult to sex at all ages and the swans prove difficult to sex during adoles¬ cence. One obviously needs practice to become competent at vent sexing waterfowl. It is very important to know how to upturn the bird and care¬ fully manipulate the vent in order to see whether it is a male or female. The bird should be as relaxed as possible. Big swans often require two people to sex them, one to hold the bird and the other to scrutinise the vent. Before 1969, very little vent sexing had been practised on downy young of wild waterfowl, possibly because it was thought they were too small and any manipulation of the vent could cause ruptures and bruising or that it might lead to a bacterial infection which might be fatal. However, this practice had been used on domestic birds for quite a long time and a paper on the subject was published by the B.D.K.A. Year Book in 1934. Pinioning, on the other hand, was done when the young were a few days old. Whether the bird was pinioned on the right or left wing depen¬ ded on the year - even years on the right, uneven on the left. I took the job, in 1969, of running the largest private waterfowl collec¬ tion in America, owned by Mr. Winston Guest Jnr. He had enough faith in my capabilities to allow, many of the ideas that I had bottled up for a number of years in England to be put into practice. One of my first notions tried was to sex and pinion young “downies” in the first week. By careful manipulation, I found all the downies were very easily sexed, and even the difficult tree ducks and swans presented no problem at all. In fact, the swans were very much easier to sex as cygnets than when they were adoles¬ cent or even adult. There are obvious advantages in sexing and then pinioning downies, if the males are pinioned on the right wing and the females on the left. Keep¬ ing records every time young are pinioned and sexed will let the breeder know the sex ratio of the young that are being reared. Also, when the birds are caught up as adolescents, they do not have to be sexed as the pin¬ ioning will show this. Many thousands of downies have been sexed in this way and there have been no obvious injuries to the birds after establishing their sex. Their eventual breeding has not been impaired. When I returned M. LUBBOCK - VENT SEXING AND PINIONING 85 IMMATURE MALE Right IMMATURE FEMALE Jill Davis 86 M. LUBBOCK - VENT SEXING AND PINIONING to the Wildfowl Trust in England, I introduced this sexing and pinioning procedure there. As mentioned previously, practice makes perfect, but it does not take very much practice - say on some Mallard ducklings or Canadian goslings - to become proficient. For the first 48 hours the yolk sac is still being absorbed and to attempt to sex the young at this stage could result in rupturing the sac. The downies, like the adult waterfowl, have a penis or clitoris, which is usually very obvious. However, there are quite often times when the penis cannot be seen, so the sexer immediately thinks the bird is a female. One is far safer to look for the clitoris; if this is not visible at all, then it is almost certain that the penis is hidden from view and a closer inspection should reveal it. Very occasionally one comes across a rather large clitoris and the immediate reaction is that it is a small male; or on the other hand, a small penis can be mistaken for a clitoris. The penis comes from the left of the vent, the clitoris from the bottom centre of the vent. If these various observations are followed, the sexer should never make too many mistakes. It is not uncommon to find an hermaphrodite in waterfowl and this pre¬ sents obvious difficulties, having both penis and clitoris visible. Occasionally female sexed birds will take on the bright plumage of the male, but usually not quite as bright. When the bird starts to change into the more colourful plumage, the sexer will have doubts on his ability. However expert you are, there are going to be a few mistakes. Pinioning young is a very easy operation, but few people do it pro¬ ficiently. It is unwise to pinion in the first couple of days after hatching and they should be seen to be eating and content. In most cases, very little bleeding occurs, although some species bleed far more than others. Shelduck and sheldgeese are among these. The ideal time to pinion and sex is on the 4th or 5th day after hatching. It is far better to pinion during the coolest part of the day. If the young are being reared with a heat lamp, this should be either switched off .or raised higher and excess water should be taken out of the pen. The downies could become very wet and chilled owing to the heat bulb being turned off or raised. When the young seem settled again and there is no sign of bleeding (this could take two or three hours), the heat lamps and water can be returned. Nearly all cases of young dying after pinioning are due to a combina¬ tion of stress brought on by handling, pinioning and overheating. They are best placed in a cool dark brooder for two or three hours before being returned to the rearing brooder. It is very important to cut the end of the wing as close to the thumb, or bastard, as possible, with a diagonal cut as M. LUBBOCK - VENT SEXING AND PINIONING 87 PINIONING DIAGRAM shown in this diagram. This procedure is sometimes better done by two people - one person holding the bird with one hand whilst the other hand is left to hold the wing below the area that is to be cut, between the thumb and forefinger. This will reduce the bleeding. Pressure should not be released for at least a minute after the operation. I do not suggest that you can necessarily pinion adults in this way. If in doubt about pinioning you should consult your local veterinary practitioner. 88 BIRD FANCYING, FOE OF AVICULTURE By DEREK GOODWIN (Petts Wood, Kent) For the purposes of this article I define “Aviculture” as the keeping of birds for reasons other than those of competitive showing or the produc¬ tion of food or plumage. I define “Bird Fancying” as the keeping or breed¬ ing of birds either for show or to conform with the standards by which those birds are judged at shows and on which their value depends in the eyes of fanciers. I use the term “wild type” for a bird that resembles its wild ancestor in shape and size, irrespective of its colour or pattern, and “wild colour pattern” for a bird coloured and marked like the wild ancestor, regardless of its shape and size. I believe one aim of many aviculturists is, and should be, to perpetuate captive (or semi-captive) stocks of many species of birds. I am not talking here about “saving” species that are threatened with extinction in the wild or mistakenly thought to be in that plight, but just perpetuating stocks of some of the many attractive species that breed readily in captivity. Further, to perpetuate them in a form very similar to the wild ancestor, at least as far as size, shape and colour pattern are concerned. Inevitably, there will be some “selection” for those individuals most adaptive to cap¬ tive conditions. This may make the captive stock less viable in the wild, should they be returned to it (though this is not always the case) but it also makes them even easier to keep and breed and sometimes more ap¬ pealing because of their greater “steadiness” and tameness. Provided a plentiful stock of the wild colour pattern is maintained, I would not con¬ demn the breeding of mutations in colour or pattern. I believe that bird fancying is inimical to the above aim. That if not opposed it will transmute our gold into dross or rather the offspring or descendants of lovely creatures into unattractive monsters whose only commendations are the prizes they win on the showbench and the money they and their relatives are consequently worth to those who subscribe to the fanciers’ standards. In the case of wild species at bird shows, the standards on which they are judged usually do no more than demand that, other things being equal , a large bird is better than one of normal size. A small enough step but a step in the wrong direction. In practice, judges usually also favour rarity per se (has any reader ever seen first prize in the “Jay, Magpie or Chough” class at shows not won by a Chough, if a bird of that species was DEREK GOODWIN - BIRD FANCYING 89 in it?) but the show standards are not to blame for this quirk. Once a bird breeds so freely in captivity and is so widely kept that it becomes domes¬ ticated, or at least begins to become so, and is taken up by fanciers, the scene is set for its rapid “improvement”. We all nowadays know to our cost that in politics, social services, housing, and the nationalised indus¬ tries the bitter modern English saying “Improvement means deteriora- tion”is almost always -true. It is true too when the fancier starts “improv¬ ing” domesticated or semi-domesticated birds, at least from the point of view of all who valued them for their natural beauty or other qualities. There is one widespread fallacy that I should like to deal with first because it tends to make people think there is no need to bother to per¬ petuate birds of wild type and colour pattern. This is the idea that if the fancier’s misguiding hand is removed from any domestic stock, the latter will very soon “revert to type” and produce creatures virtually id¬ entical to their wild ancestors. Now this idea does embody a partial truth. The more distorted breeds of domesticated animals cannot live in a feral state and when domestic dogs, pigs, pigeons or any other creatures are forced or choose to live a feral existence, such monsters as Pekinese, Large Whites or show standard Oriental Frills soon die. To survive -under such conditions, the first generation of ferals must have some generalised resemblance to the ancestral form and there will be further selection in the course of time, leading to some of these resemblances being accentua¬ ted. But this does not usually, if ever, lead to the feral stock becoming phenotypically identical to the wild ancestor either in type or colour pattern. Pariah Dogs and Dingoes may look “a bit wolfish” but no one could mistake them for their wild ancestor , the Wolf; where feral pigeons derived from lost or strayed racing pigeons, they do not “revert” to the head and bill shape of the Rock Dove. At least they have not done so yet; what will happen in the course of the next fifty thousand years, if there are then any dogs or pigeons left alive on the earth, who can say? I must add a caveat that the above paragraph refers only to vertebrate animals. I believe the situation is very different with plants. So far from it being true that unless there is strong selection (by the fancier) in other directions, domesticated birds will “revert” to the wild type and colour pattern; there is circumstantial evidence to suggest that where no deliberate selection is exercised, there is more likely to be some divergence in the direction of larger and coarser-looking birds than the majority of the wild ones. Some species (e.g. Mallard) seem more prone to this than others (e.g. domestic pigeon) but a moderate amount of selection by the breeder in the other direction is all that is needed to keep his stock 90 DEREK GOODWIN - BIRD FANCYING similar to the wild type. I am, of course, not considering here birds that are kept for their flesh or eggs. Obviously in such cases their appearance must be a secondary con¬ sideration and to maintain close similarity to the wild type would be both impossible and (literally) anti-productive in so far as it could be achieved. Though it might be mentioned that show standards have proved equally incompatible with the breeding of chickens, ducks, geese and pigeons for “utility” purposes, as they have with pigeons bred for homing, high flying or peculiarities of flight or voice. However, I will now leave the domestic fowls and the more endearing pigeon and consider how the Fancy has affected, or failed to affect, a few species that are more generally thought of as cage or aviary birds. The Canary Serinus canarius By the latter part (at latest) of the last century, showing, and the dom¬ inance of the showmen’s ideas as to what constituted excellence were well under way. One of the casualties of this and a good example (or rather example) of the way in which true fanciers never rest content but ever push to worse extremes, was the Norwich Canary. Originally this was a shapely bird, not much different from the wild type, and bred for its naturally rich golden-yellow colour (Wallace). Then some fanciers dis¬ covered that feeding moulting birds with red pepper would produce orange plumage, judges gave these artificially orange birds preference over natu¬ rally golden yellow ones and both fanciers and judges favoured the largest birds. The first loss was the bright golden yellow colour (Wallace), the ul¬ timate result was what -we have today ( and have had since at least the early 1930s to my knowledge), the hideous, beetle-browed, “feather dus¬ ter” monster that has replaced the lively, lovely Canary of a century ago. It is, I fear, about 20 years since I last went to the “Crystal Palace” show but it then looked as if the Border Fancy, that at one time had been a lively and shapely little Canary (well, “little” in comparison to such breeds as Norwich and Yorkshires) was set, or had been set by its fanciers, to go the same way as the Norwich went before it. Two things appear, so far, to have stopped the domestic Canary from (as yet) getting past the point of no return to wild type. Firstly, Roller Canaries have long been bred and shown on a basis of their songs alone. Nicolai, who has studied the Canary and allied species very intensively, claims that the soft, sweet song of the Roller is in fact only produced by a combination of selection of the best singers by man and (what would otherwise be) defective feeding and close caging which weaken the con- DEREK GOODWIN - BIRD FANCYING 91 stitution of the bird. Be that as it may, Rollers have remained small Canaries, not very dissimilar to the wild type. Secondly, the production of red factor Canaries, initially through hybridisation with the Red Siskin Spinus cucullatus. This has resulted in many very beautifully coloured Canaries. I am unsure (perhaps some reader could enlighten us) whether or to what extent the red (or more often boiled shrimp pink or deep orange) colour is, even with these birds, the result of careful colour feed¬ ing. All the few such “red” Canaries that I have bought have moulted out yellow flushed with pale apricot or orange, when fed only on seeds, green- food, fruit and egg food.. Be this as it may, most of the many red factor Canaries that I have seen have been of wild type whatever their colour. As long ago as the early 1960s, however, some fanciers were saying that it was about time the red factors were bred for “type” (i.e. unnatural shape or deformity) as well as colour, so perhaps before many years have past even the red factor Canaries will no longer be things of beauty. The Barbary Dove Streptopelia roseogrisea (formerly S. risoria) Though there is some evidence as to when the Barbary Dove was first known in England and western Europe, so far as I know, nothing definite is known as to where or by whom it was first domesticated. The ordinary “fawn” or “blond” variety is a “dilute” version of the wild colour pattern, absolutely comparable with the similarly coloured pale variety of the Collared Dove S. decaocto that has appeared among wild stocks in Britain (Goodwin 1973). For long the white variety, which has dark eyes and the neck ring in “water mark” was the only other colour generally available although a few complete (red-eyed) albinos cropped up (presumably their eyes were “white mouse red”, not the rich scarlet of the “normal” fawn variety). Some minor stir was made about 30 years ago over fawn birds with white breasts but such of these parti-coloured birds that I saw did not impress me. Their white breasts were patchy and by no means uni¬ form in size or extent. In recent years live specimens of the African Collared Dove, the wild ancestral form, have been imported into the USA and, as a result of crossing with domestic Barbaries, domestic birds of the wild colour and some interesting new coloured Barbaries, in soft shades of pinkish and lilac, have been produced. Mrs. Wilma Keppell has kindly sent me feathers of some of these birds, from which it seems that they are very beautiful. However, to get back to the theme of this article. The Barbary Dove having never been a popular show bird and having (until recently across the Atlantic) produced few colour varieties, has been altered relatively 92 DEREK GOODWIN - BIRD FANCYING little from the wild type. So the Barbary stands out as a bird which, though long domesticated, has only to a slight degree lost its original grace and delicacy of outline. This happy situation may not last. I am told that dove addicts in the USA and Canada now propose to set up a “show standard” for the bird. What the standard will be (or now is) I do not know (can some of our trans- Atlantic readers enlighten us?) but I fear the worst. So I would advise lovers of the Barbary Dove as it was and still is to acquire a stock quickly and refuse to entertain any idea of trying to breed them to any show standard, good, bad or indifferent. Unfortunately the Barbary Dove seems very little kept in Britain now (if I am wrong in this assumption, I shall be delighted to be corrected by any of our readers with more up-to-date information). Its close relative the Collared Dove is now so abundant in much of suburbia, and also in many rural districts and towns, that many people naturally prefer the very little trouble (or none at all) needed to keep free-flying Collared Doves around to the greater trouble of keeping “lib¬ erty” Barbary Doves (Goodwin, 1952). While for those who wish to keep doves in aviaries, the now quite domesticated Diamond Dove often seems more attractive. But for those who want a naturally tame bird that is no trouble to keep in cage or aviary and with some trouble can be flown at liberty, and whose cooing is even more pleasing (at least to my ears) than that of the Collared Dove, the Barbary Dove cannot be surpassed. How nice it would be if Barbaries of the wild colour and of the new colours could be imported from the USA and established here. The Zebra Finch Poephila guttata This pretty, interesting, hardy, amusing but acoustically unpleasing little bird has not yet been ruined by the showmen but it may soon be. The standard calls for a bird that is of the “Cobby” type (Rogers) and the present day Norwich Canary shows where that sort of standard may lead. Wild Zebra Finches have bright orange-red eyes (Immelman, pers. obs.) whereas many or most “wild-coloured” domestic Zebra Finches have duller, brownish eyes and these, presumably, are the “dark” eyes deman¬ ded by the show standard (Lynch). Immelmann describes various subtle differences between the plumages of wild Zebra Finches and most wild-coloured domestic specimens. Whilst I am not convinced (after examination of good series of wild specimens in the British Museum) that all the wild Zebra Finches are quite so purely grey on the upper parts or so spotlessly white on the lower breast and DEREK GOODWIN - BIRD FANCYING 93 belly as Immelmann states, I agree whole-heartedly with his appeal to Zebra Finch breeders to try to breed their “wild type” specimens as close to the real wild type as possible. His further recommendation, that show standards for “wild type” Zebra Finches ought to correspond to the attri¬ butes of the real wild type and colour pattern seems, alas, on a par with saying that politicians ought always to tell the truth and to keep their promises; impeccable as a moral maxim but never likely to carry the slightest weight with the ladies and gentlemen at whom it is directed. I have noticed that, whereas up until about 20 years ago, a majority of the Zebra Finches one saw for sale in bird shops, markets and similar “outlets” were wild-coloured ones, of recent years one sees a majority of pieds, and of the self-coloured birds as many of the various dilute shades as of wild-coloured. It, therefore, seems to me that anyone inter¬ ested in the Zebra Finch as it originally was would be doing posterity a service if he or she tried to breed at least some birds of as near the wild type as possible and of the wild colour pattern. It should be remembered that most of the “new colours” are recessive to the wild colour pattern so that if the latter ever became extinct in domestication, it could not be re-obtained by breeding from fawns, creams, silvers, etc. Nor, since Australia has banned all exports of wild birds, will it ever be possible to obtain fresh wild stock. The Budgerigar Melopsittacus undulatus As an admirer of the lively, beautiful, hardy, and naturally little para¬ keet that so charmed our ancestors when it was first imported from Aus¬ tralia, I view with horror the macrocephalous, blotch-faced, sluggish travesties that win on the showbench and the showmen's cast-offs and culls that seem now almost the only Budgerigars to be found for sale. My horror is, however, tinged with a grudging admiration that “The Fancy” has done so much evil in so short a time. For it seems that, judging by what I see in bird shops, public aviaries and similar places, it is only in the past 25 years or so that the show type Budgie has gained the ascendency and very largely ousted the more natural type of bird. Whereas previously, show type Budgies “stood out like a sore thumb” in the dealers' cages or in aviaries in public parks, now when one sees an odd Budgie near to the wild type, with the natural pattern of violet and black face spots instead of blurred blotches (clipped and plucked to make super large spots for the showbench), it stands out like a healthy, clean-skinned thumb among a multitude of swollen, sore ones, amidst its companions. 94 DEREK GOODWIN - BIRD FANCYING It is easy to see how this has come about. Partly because so many people in our insecure, conformist society are willing to believe, or pretend to believe, whatever someone in authority tells them. This attitude makes for an easier life in that it minimises the risk of arousing the spleen of the hordes of officials and semi-officials now licensed to boss us around, but unfortunately it carries over into realms, such as Budgerigar breeding, where (at least as yet) no punishments can be inflicted on those who choose to use their own judgement and to defy the opinions of “experts”. Partly, of course, it is a matter of money. Those who breed wild type Budgerigars are likely to find, and presumably have found, that their surplus birds are worth little or nothing, certainly much less than they would get for “show stock”. So they have little incentive to breed birds in excess of their own needs. On the other hand, for competitive showing of almost any creatures, very many have to be, or at any rate are bred to obtain, a few winners. The large surplus goes “on to the market” and the gullible are told that they are “better” than less unnatural specimens. I must make it quite clear that the above diatribe is not to be inter¬ preted as any attack on the breeding of Budgerigar colour mutations. On the contrary, I think that some of these, such as sky blues, yellow-faced blues, and evenly marked opalines are of great beauty and it would be a pity not to perpetuate them. Some other colours, such as olives, white and yellows, I find less pleasing but can appreciate that others may find beauty in them. What I am against is the large size, unnatural proportions and distorted facial markings that have been bred for, and are now possessed by about 90 Budgies out of every hundred, solely in the cause of showing. As in the case of the Zebra Finch, there is no possibility of ever again obtaining wild Budgerigars from Australia. I gather from the literature, and from the domestic Budgerigars I saw when in Australia in 1965 (when I also saw lots of wild ones in the outback, so am not enthusing over them in ignorance) that English show standards have, unfortunately, been sub¬ scribed to both in Europe and in Australia itself. However, there are certainly some, and in the aggregate perhaps very many Budgies in this country that are fairly near the wild type and have the wild facial pattern. Probably in parts of the world where showing is less popular there are many more. So that if only a number of interested aviculturists would co-operate, there is little doubt that it would be possible to perpetuate wild type Budgerigars (of various colours). With a little publicity as to what they were doing and why, they might even find that there was a demand for their surplus stock. There can be little doubt that in Britain many fewer people now keep either pet Budgerigars in their DEREK GOODWIN - BIRD FANCYING 95 houses or (which is much to be preferred) a number of Budgerigars in an aviary or bird room, than did so 30 years ago. I suspect it Is not by chance that the rise of the show type Budgerigar has coincided in time with a dec¬ line in popularity of the bird as a house or garden pet or ornament. Sheer aesthetic pleasure in the appearance of a bird is often what first starts a person keeping it. And most modem Budgerigars seem less likely to excite an uncorrupted asthetic sense than most of those of 30 years ago. There are many other factors adverse to aviculture in Britain today. I refrain from listing them, here as they are not the point of this article which is to point out to all who admire the natural beauty of the birds they keep, that the showman’s standards, if they are so foolish as to be influenced by them will ultimately destroy that beauty or at least distort it into something very different from, and much inferior to what it origi¬ nally was. REFERENCES GOODWIN, D. 1952. Observations on Barbary Doves kept at semi¬ liberty. Avicultural Magazine , 58: 205-217. ...... 1973. The buff variety of the Collared Dove. British Birds , 63: 373-376. IMMELMANN, K. 1973. Der Zebrafink. Wittenberg Lutherstadt, Germany. NICOLAI, I. 1959. Verhaltenstudien an einigen afrikanischen und p alaarktischen Girlitzen. Zool. Jb. Syst. 87: 317-362. ROGERS, C.H. 1964. Zebra Finches. Iliffe Books, London. WALLACE, R.L. 1903, The Canary Book. L. Upcott Gill, London. 96 SUNBATHING BEHAVIOUR IN FIVE SPECIES OF IBISES (THRESKIORNITHIDAE) AT THE WALSRODE BIRD PARK, GERMANY By Dr. G. WENNRICH (Chief Scientist) One of the great advantages offered by zoological gardens is the oppor¬ tunity to observe animals’ behaviour in far greater detail than would be possible in the wild. The only record of sunbathing in ibises dates back to Wackernagel (1964) who observed this behaviour in the Hermit Ibis. Little work has been done on ibises generally and it is only in recent years that studies have been made of the breeding behaviour of the Hermit Ibis (Oliver, 1979; Schenker 1979, Schenker et al. 1980)and its handrearing (Wennrich in press), as well as the pairing behaviour of the Hadada (Wenn- rich 1981) and other studies (Archibald et al in press; Hirsch 1978, 1979, and 1980). The Threskiornithidae collection at the Walsrode Bird Park is quite remarkable; it consists of: 1 Buff-necked Ibis 2 Australian Black-necked Ibis 8 Indian Black-necked Ibis 24 Sacred Ibis 10 Straw-necked Ibis 9 Hermit Ibis 1 Black Ibis 7 Hadada 10 Puna Ibis 2 Glossy Ibis 24 Scarlet Ibis 5 White Ibis 9 Roseate Spoonbill 7 Spoonbill 4 African Spoonbill Theristicus caudatus Threskiomis molucca Threskiomis melanocephala Threskiomis aethiopica Carphibis spinicollis Geronticus eremita Pseudibis papiliosa Bostrychia hagedash Plegadis ridgwayi Plegadis falcinellus Eudocimus mber Eudocimus albus Platalea ajaja Platalea leucorodia Platalea alba On 2nd and 3rd September 1980 and in spring 1981 1 observed sunbath¬ ing behaviour in five species of our collection - the Hermit Ibis, the Black Ibis, the Hadada, the Puna Ibis and the Glossy Ibis. On 2nd September at midday the Hermit Ibis was resting with both feet standing on a ledge in a large outside aviary exposing its right side to the sun. The posture is shown in Fig. 1. The feathers of the nape and hind DR G WENNRICH - SUNBATHING IN IBISES 97 Fig. 1 Fig. 2 Fig. 3 98 DR G WENNRICH - SUNBATHING IN IBISES neck, the breast and belly were fluffed. After approximately one minute the bird exposed its back and uropygial gland to the sun, squeezed the uropygial gland with its beak and then preened for several minutes. The air temperature was about 22.5°C in the shade. The Hermit Ibis observed by Wackernagel (1964) opened both wings to form a semi-circle and ex¬ posed its underwing coverts to the sun. The Black Ibis (Fig. 2) was seen standing on its left foot on the grass of an outside aviary, exposing its right side and the underwing coverts of the left wing to the sun. The right foot was withdrawn, the body and head were bent a little to the left side. After seven minutes, the bird placed the right foot on to the ground and after a further three minutes, the ibis adopted a normal posture and started to preen. The air temperature was about 22.0°C in the shade. The Hadada was feeding on the grass of our large free flight aviary. The air temperature was about 23.0°C in the shade. The bird suddenly stopped feeding, raised its head and adopted a posure with the right wing fully spread and extended horizontally from the body (Fig. 3). The left wing was dropped so that the primaries touched the ground. The bird was facing the sun. After three and a half minutes the bird moved and adopted a different sunbathing posture (Fig. 4). The bird exposed the left side of its head, neck, back, right wing and part of its left wing to the sun. The right wing was displayed and more extended from the body than the left wing which was closer to the sun. After sunbathing in this posture for about three minutes, the Hadada erected its feathers, adopting a normal posture, shook its tail and continued feeding. The Puna Ibises were kept together with the Black Ibis and some other ibis species. When sunbathing occurred, the air temperature was 22.5°C in the shade. The bird stood with its feet in the grass in the middle of the outdoor aviary, bent its head and body to the right side, erected its neck feathers and raised its left wing fully upwards (Fig. 5). In this position the sun’s rays reached the left side of the head, the neck, chin, throat, breast, belly, left underwing coverts and part of the right underwing coverts. This lasted for one to two minutes; often it was less than a minute. The withdrawal of the extended wing took about four to five seconds and was slower than the initial spreading. After withdrawing the wing, the bird often continued sunbathing for several minutes. During this period one wing might be raised again. During a period of 15 minutes, wing-raising (Fig. 5) occurred five times. After sunbathing, the bird started to preen and often resumed sun¬ bathing behaviour again. DR G WENNRICH - SUNBATHING IN IBISES 99 100 DR G WENNRICH - SUNBATHING IN IBISES The Glossy Ibises were kept together with the Hermit Ibises. These birds were very often seen sunbathing this spring at quite low tempera¬ tures of about 17°C in the shade. The sunbathing behaviour of the Glossy Ibises (Fig. 6) was very similar to the sunbathing of the Puna Ibis except that sometimes the Glossy Ibises stood on one leg. It is strange that we have not observed sunbathing in the other ibis species to date. We hope to learn more about this behaviour and its importance for the ibises in the near future. REFERENCES ARCHIBALD, G., S.D.H. LANTIS & L.R. LANTIS. 1980. Endangered ibises and their future in the wild and captivity. Int. Zoo Yearbook, Vol. 20. In press. HIRSCH, U. 1978. Artificial nest ledges for the Bald Ibises. Endangered Birds. (Ed. S.A. TEMPLE), 61-69, Madison. - — _ - - 1979. Hilfe fur den Waldrapp. Wir und die Vogel, 11, 12-15. — - — - 1980. Der Waldrapp Geronticus eremita, ein Beitrag zur Situation in seinem osthchen Verbreitungsgebiet. Vo gel welt, 101, 219-236. OLIVER, W.L.R. 1979. Observations on the reproductive behaviour of a captive colony of Bare-faced Ibis Geronticus eremita. Dodo Journal of the Jersey Wild¬ life Preservation Trust, 16, 11-35. SAHIN, R. 1980. Erfolgreiche Volierenbrut der Waldrappen in der Turkei. Orn. Mitt. 32, 72-74. SCHENKER, A. 1979. Beobachtungen zur Brutbiologie des Waldrapps Geronticus eremita im Zoo Basel. Zool. Garten N.F. Jena 49, 104-1 16. SCHENKER, A. et al 1980. Keeping and breeding the Waldrapp Ibis. Int. Zoo News, 27, 9-15. WACKERNAGEL, H. 1964. Brutbiologische Beobachtungen am Waldrapp Geron¬ ticus eremita im Zoologischen Garten BaseL Orn. Beobachter, 61, 49-56. WENNRICH, G. 1981. Paarungszeremoniell beim Hagedasch Hagedashia hagedash. Die Voliere 4, 27-29. — - - — - Junger Waldrapp Geronticus eremita beisst wahrend der Handauf- zucht sich selbst. Die Voliere. In press. 101 THE BOSWELL PARROT COLLECTION By F. BARNICOAT (Johannesburg, South Africa) Brian Boswell is the fifth generation of the famous Boswell circus family to be actively engaged in that field. Currently he is the managing director of the Natal Lion Park at Umlaas Road. Animals are his vocation and birds, especially parrotlike, are his hobby. His huge collection is not open to the general public, but he is often willing to take bom fide enthu¬ siasts to his home to view his parrot collection. He is married to Jane Stockley who comes from the seventh generation of the equally famous circus family of Chipperfield, which is particularly well known in England, and she is highly successful at hand-rearing baby macaws and cockatoos, some of which she is busy training for a circus act. There are fewer lorikeets in the collection than some years ago but, on my recent visit, I saw a pair of Dusky with three lusty chicks on the perch, a pair of Chattering had one chick, bringing their total to ten, a pair of Moluccan or Red has produced 14 chicks in four years, and a pair of Black has bred successfully. The impressive run of cockatoos includes a male Palm, one pair of Galahs, still juvenile, two male and one female Leadbeater’s from which have come ten eggs without issue, one Greater Sulphur-crested, one pair of Medium Sulphur-crested, two pairs of Triton Blue-eyed from which a single chick was bred in 1979, two pairs of Timor Lesser Sulphur-crested which breed regularly and had two currently bred chicks, one pair of Cit¬ ron-crested which produce one or two chicks annually, one pair of Salmon-crested or Moluccan which got as far as hatching chicks, as have the two pairs of White or Umbrella, one pair of Goffin’s which has bred for four years, usually two at a time, one pair each of Little Corellas and Slender-billed Corellas which have produced nothing in four years, and a single Red-vented Cockatoo. The Boswell collection has been concentrated on the parrots not freely available and consequently the Australian parrakeets are not strongly represented. Of the Rosellas, there are pairs of Golden-mantled and the mutation with the red belly, the Yellow Rosella and a pair of Pennant’s which produced two, then six, then five chicks last summer. One pair of Amboina Kings has long failed to breed, and pairs of Red-capped or Pilea- ted Parrakeets, Barnard’s and Rock Pebblers either made no attempt to breed or laid infertile eggs possibly because they were first season birds. A pair of Princess of Wales did better with five chicks. Three pairs of 102 F. BARNICOAT - THE BOSWELL COLLECTION Eclectus produced four chicks. A pair of African Grey Parrots made an attractive sight with their latest two babies. Their previous breeding record is good:- 1977-1, 1978-2, 1979-2, 1980-3. There is also a pair of the distinct Maroon-tailed or Tim- neh subspecies, which has not started to breed yet. A pair of our local Brown-headed Parrots has surprisingly made no attempt to nest. The only Ring-necked Parrakeets that Boswell keeps is the African sub¬ species, which is smaller than the Indian and has a blacker and neater beak. To me it is the more attractive of the two forms and it breeds as easily. Fortunately in this collection there seems to be a viable breeding stock of them. I noticed an extremely prolific breeding flock of pure Black-cheeked Lovebirds. In contrast, the Grey-headed or Madagascars have practically died out. It is in the field of American parrots, the Amazons in particular, that this collection shines and where the most interesting breeding results are to be reported. In macaws, the Boswells own what is thought to be the only Lear’s in the country, a male, a pair of Hyacinthine of which the hen has laid eggs four times with no result possibly because the male is not mature enough, a pair of Blue and Yellow with the following breeding record: 1979 - 1, 1980 - 3, and two are now nearly successfully hand-reared, three pairs of Green-winged from one pair of which two chicks have just been fully hand-reared, four Scarlets which regrettably have proved to be all males, hopefully a true pair of the extremely rare Red-fronted, a pair of Illiger’s which has just produced two offspring, and a good breeding pair of Yellow-collared with the following record: 1979 - 3, 1980 - 2, and 1981-3. Pride of place among the conures is surely held by the two magnificent Queen of Bavaria’s, which it is hoped will prove a pair. There is a breeding colony of Black-headed and much breeding success has also attended a colony of eight Patagonian Conures. In fact, two or even three hens have reared successfully together in one nest. A pair of Golden-capped has pro¬ duced eggs, two pairs of Sun Conures have bred prolifically for years, as have two pairs of the delightful little Green-cheeked from a single pair of which no less than 32 young have so far been obtained. A particularly noteworthy success has been the repeated breeding of the Thick-billed Parrot, that gorgeous creature from Mexico, its deep red forehead like the richest velvet and contrasting so wonderfully with its dark green body. This avian jewel is now an endangered species. The pair first bred two in 1978, lost their chicks in 1979, reared two in 1980 and F. BARNICOAT - THE BOSWELL COLLECTION 103 one in 1981 which I saw shortly after it left the nest. It had the colours of the adult, but a white beak. A “pair” of youngsters further down the row has made no attempt to nest and could prove to be two males. This species is not sexually dimorphic. Surprisingly, they are autumn breeders here. Another noteworthy success is with the delightful docile little Pileated Parrot Pionopsitta pileata from South-east Brazil. A green bird with bright scarlet head, it has the added advantage of being readily sexable as the hen is entirely green. Such dimorphism has the result of making the species extremely attractive as a pair. They do not appear at all aggressive and a trio of two males and a female in one aviary had four young just out on the perch. Two other pairs had also bred well over the past three years. Black-headed Caiques seem possibly to breed best in a little colony. They are difficult to sex. A trio of three adults had three young and they have produced five over the last four years. A pair on their own had got no further than laying eggs. There are three White-bellied Caiques in the col¬ lection, but they have not bred. It is easiest to record the results the Boswells have obtained with the genera Pionus and Amazona in tabular form. Species Offspring reared to maturity - male/female 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 Blue-headed Parrot 3 2 1 2 Maximilian’s Parrot 3 2 3 1 2 White-capped Parrot - 1 5 1 Blue-fronted Amazon ■ infertile eggs female died 2 Green-cheeked Amazon Finsch’s (Lilac-crowned) 1 3 2 2 Amazon ■ infertile eggs chicks died 1 Spectacled (White-fronted) - Amazon - female died 2/2 chicks died Yellow-cheeked Amazon - - seen mating 2 Double Yellow-headed Amazon _ • " pair mated The second generation of Blue-headed Parrots bred in 1980. The Spec¬ tacled Amazon is one of the very few species of Amazon which is readily sexable, the male having red primary coverts and the female green. 104 An infinite variety of nest boxes is used to suit the needs of this large collection. However, it is worth mentioning that extensive use is made of hollow stumps of the sisal plant which are obtainable from farmers in this country. These large stumps make very attractive nesting sites for many parrotlike birds and contribute towards achieving success, especially with a species like the Black-headed Caique. Feeding is kept as simple as possible. Sunflower seed is the basic diet but soaked dog biscuits are fed wet every day. Fruit such as apples, oranges and pears, is fed liberally as are carrots and spinach. The numerous successes being achieved in this great collection must prove that the birds are receiving a balanced diet. CRANES IN ASIAN ZOOS, 1981 By Dr. GEORGETTE K. MAROLDO (Texas Lutheran College, Seguin, Texas, USA) Many species of Asiatic cranes are endangered in the wild, especially the Eastern Sarus Grus antigone sharpii, Siberian Grus leucogeranus , Red- crowned or Manchurian Grus japonensis , Black-necked Grus nigricollis and Hooded Crane Grus monacha (Scott, 1974). The Common Grus grus, White-naped Grus vipio and Demoisell eAnthropoides virgo are less threat¬ ened. As the cranes’ native habitats dwindle, zoos and other refuges may prove to be their only chance of survival. Wild Habitats Like those of cranes everywhere, the habitats of Asian cranes have been reduced in recent years because of human expansion and settlement. To make matters worse, tourists have begun to invade even the remote terri¬ tories of these seclusive birds, with the result that current breeding and wintering grounds are hard to locate. In the past, Eastern Sarus flourished from West Pakistan to distant Indochina; now, their status is unknown. Si¬ berian Cranes were found in East and West Siberia and now, since they are DR GEORGETTE MAROLDO - CRANES IN ASIAN ZOOS 105 generally threatened throughout the area, international co-operation be¬ tween the USSR, North and South Korea, China, Japan and India has been inaugurated. The Avicultural Magazine (1931, p.186) reported that Flint had discovered 26 Siberian Crane nests in the tundra of Yakutia. A late 1980 count, says Freeman (1981) lists 16 birds in Iran, 34 have survived in Afghanistan, and 100 have been cited in the marshes near the Yangtze river in China. Red-crowned Cranes continue to nest in a small area from the Ussuri northward in Manchuria. Another group remains in Hokkaido, Japan. Some may still be found in the Amur region, and in Korea. On 26th June 1981, the Hongkong Standard disclosed that Red-crowned Cranes were breeding in marshlands in western Jilin province, and in Zalong Nature Reserve, China. The Black-necked breed in Tibet, from Ladakh to Lake Koko Nor, Tsinghai plateau in northern China, and, according to Taylor (1981), they were found recently to winter in Kweichou province. Lake Koko Nor Refuge has been designated a protected area for these cranes. However, discoveries of oil in the Koko Nor basin have led to grow¬ ing industrialisation. Makatsch (1972) reports that Hooded Cranes breed from the steppes between the Irtysh and Ob rivers in western Siberia, east¬ ward to the Amur region. The Brolga Bugle (1981) reported the 1980 win¬ ter count: 4,200 Hooded Cranes in Izumi, Japan. Asian cranes ranging in height from just less than 150 cm (Eastern Saras) to 115 cm (Hooded) are vulnerable birds. Because of their size, they are especially in peril during migration when weather, power lines, and hunters reduce their numbers. In wartime, too, they are easy targets. Zoos Although it is becoming accepted that some form of captivity is neces¬ sary to safeguard endangered cranes, only certain species can be located at certain of the world's zoos and sanctuaries. Walsrode Bird Park in West Germany exhibits all crane species except the Whooping Grus americana and Black-necked, Maroldo (1980) could not find Siberian, Red-crowned or Black-necked Cranes in North American zoos but they are to be found in Asian zoos, closer to their original habitats, and during the summer of 1981 I observed Asian cranes at principal zoos in Taiwan, Hong Kong, China, Okinawa and mainland Japan where concerted efforts are being made to preserve species in captivity. The Taipei Zoological Gardens were recovering from several days of heavy spring rains in late May. The only Asian cranes observed were three Saras in a centrally located aviary. They appeared to be in good health, in spite of crowded conditions. 106 DR GEORGETTE MAROLDO - CRANES IN ASIAN ZOOS Nothing unusual was observed at the enclosures of the Hooded and White-naped Cranes during a first visit on 2nd June to the Hong Kong Zoological and Botanical Gardens. Heavy foliage at the rear of their enc¬ losure made it difficult to observe the behaviour of the White-naped Cranes. Several weeks later, these cranes were seen hovering over a healthy- looking rusty chick about one-week old. The parents were very active, jabbing at the earth, picking up tidbits, and offering them in turn to their offspring. These procedures were all carried out with ease, beak to beak. White-naped Cranes were seen swimming swan-like across a lake at Ocean Park Ltd., in Hong Kong - such swimming is a rare sight at any zoo. Deeper into the park, Sarus and White-naped Cranes shared a lake at Waterfall Gardens, and a pair of Hooded Cranes were seen there in a grassy enclosure. The Peking Zoological Gardens, like zoos everywhere, had good and bad enclosures and construction underway. Moreover, this zoo, like others in China, seemed intent on the conservation and economic use of water against frequent dry spells. This was evident in the overall design and lay¬ out of the zoo, which incorporated much planned foliage and forestation, and in enclosures requiring constant water supply. A peninsula jutting out into a large lake at the centre of the zoo contained eight species of crane: Sarus, Siberian, Red-crowned, Black¬ necked, White-naped, Common, East African Crowned, and Demoiselle. There appeared to be a good number of each species intermingling and sharing the same space, although they tended to cluster from time to time according to kind. Apart from relatively free groupings, several cranes were enclosed: some Black-necked, White-naped and East African Crowned. Throughout the peninsula, a pecking order could be discerned, beginning with the Sarus chasing the Red-crowned and following with the White- naped driving off the lone Black-necked. As expected, size was the deter¬ mining factor, most cranes tending to be aggressive, territorial and solitary. Unison calling was frequent and widespread, aggravated by the number of cranes in a relatively small area. Three very rare Black-necked Cranes were viewed in an enclosure divi¬ ded by a partition, through which they moved freely. One of them tended to stand apart, occasionally beak fencing with one of the other two, an obvious pair. However, if they are the same birds observed by Archibald (1980) in 1979, which he reports as female, sexual pairing was not taking place. At the end of my visit, a White-naped Crane was observed flying to an island in the middle of the lake. The next step was the (Jinan) Tsinan Golden Bull Park zoo in mid- DR GEORGETTE MAROLDO - CRANES IN ASIAN ZOOS 107 Peking Zoo Red-crowned Cranes at Peking Zoo June. Although there was some construction in progress elsewhere in this zoo, the crane enclosures (5m x 5m x 3m) were old and inadequate. A pair of Red-crowned Cranes shared a half full bucket of water in a con¬ crete-floored cage. Their plumage was dirty and dull, probably because of the scarcity of accessible water. Corn was scattered throughout the area, and there was a bowl of fish bits nearby. Other Asian cranes were in simi¬ lar enclosures, with the exception of three Common and one White-naped roaming around a central lake. 108 DR GEORGETTE MAROLDO - CRANES IN ASIAN ZOOS It was impossible to determine what cranes were kept at the Qingdao Zhushuishan Park because half of the zoo was under expansion and new construction. Cranes, at the Shanghai Xijiao Park zoo, were housed in concrete- floored aviary type enclosures, with depressions in the forward area that could be filled with water. A Black-necked and a Demoiselle quietly shared one enclosure, while about ten Common Cranes moved about restlessly in another nearby. Straw mats covered the entire front part of the Red- crowned Crane enclosure, possibly to accommodate one of the cranes with an obvious leg and gait disorder. Several White-naped Cranes were seen elsewhere. All of the cranes at this zoo appeared to be in good condition. The behaviour of an East African Crowned Crane at the Okinawa Zoo¬ logical Park, at the end of June, proved remarkable. It charged and pursued relentlessly pairs of Common, Sarus and Demoiselle Cranes throughout the large walkthrough flying cage. Most of the cranes at the Ueno Zoological Gardens in Tokyo were exhibited in typical aviary-type enclosures with grass and foliage and small pools. The only Asian cranes were a pair of Red-crowned, several lone White-naped and a pair of Hooded Cranes. At the Higashiyama Zoological Gardens in Nagoya in mid-July, Red- crowned, White-naped and Sarus were observed. Pairs of Common and Hooded Cranes, gifts from China, were in apparent high spirits, though one Hooded had an eye missing. Kyoto Municipal Zoo, in a woodland setting, proudly exhibited two rust -coloured Red-crowned chicks, hatched on 31st May and 20th June. In the vicinity, Sarus Cranes were brooding an egg on a few straws. The Asa Zoological Park in Hiroshima had a few non-Asian cranes - Stanley Anthropoides paradisea and Crowned. The older Fukuoka Municipal Zoo housed several Sarus, Common, and Demoiselle Cranes in a mountainous, rustic setting. Two Crowned Cranes were seen standing on the upper branches of trees, which is a rare sight (they are the only cranes which do this). At the Hirakawa Zoological Park in Kagoshima, in the last week of July, several Sarus, Hooded, Common and Demoiselle cranes were obser¬ ved in a large aviary (flying cage). Common and White-naped Cranes were exhibited elsewhere in smaller makeshift structures. All appeared healthy despite some shagginess. One White-naped had parts of its upper bill missing, but this did not deter pecking. A return to Taiwan in August involved a visit to Peacock Park at Sun Moon Lake. Here a lone Common Crane was noted among several pea- 109 fowl. The crane seemed to be dirty and in poor condition in an open area which lacked available water. REFERENCES ARCHIBALD, G. China opens to ICF. The Brolga Bugle: International Crane Foundation Quarterly Newsletter, February 1980, p. 2. FREEMAN, S'. Report from Russia. The Brolga Bugle : International Crane Foun¬ dation Quarterly Newsletter , October 1981, p.3. MAROLBO, G.K. Opportunities for crane research at North American zoos. Zoo Review, April-June 1980, pp. 4-6. MAKATSCH W. Cranes. In B. Grzimek (Ed.), Grzimek’s Animal Life Encyclo¬ pedia. (VoL 3). New York. Van Nostrand & Reinhold, 1972. “NEWS & VIEWS”. Avicultural Magazine, July-September 1 981 , p. 186. SCOTT, P.M. (Ed.) The World Atlas of Birds. New York. Random House, 1974, p. 177. TAYLOR, K. China update. The Brolga Bugle: International Crane Foundation Quarterly Newsletter, October 1981, p.3. “Teachers make a ‘crowning success”. The Hongkong Standard, June 26, 1981, p. 5. 1980 Winter Counts. The Brolga Bugle: International Crane Foundation Quarterly Newsletter, January 1981, p.4. NOTES FROM LONDON ZOO, 1981 By P.J. OLNEY (Curator of Birds) 1981 was a typical year in many ways with its normal quota of frustra¬ tion and success. A breakdown in an incubator at a critical period which caused the deaths of a number of developing embryos was the greatest disappointment. Even so, a considerable number of eggs were successfully incubated artificially and many young were subsequently reared. They in¬ cluded Black-footed Penguins, Sacred Ibis, Grey-headed Gulls, Grey-headed Gallinules, ducks, pheasant and quail Among the species which successfully reared their young, the most noteworthy included Night Herons, Abdim’s Storks, Jerdon’s Imperial Pigeon, Dusky Lories, RuppelPs Parrot, and many owls - 3 Snowy Owls, 2 Great Eagle Owls, 4 Abyssinian Spotted Eagle Owls, 1 African Spotted Eagle Owl, 1 Tawny Owl, and 3 Boobook Owls. The breeding colony of Chilean Flamingos is one of the most attractive 110 PETER OLNEY - NEWS FROM LONDON ZOO displays in the gardens, and normally in the summer there are a number of young being reared by their parents. In 1981, to our horror, all seven young were killed by a predator. They were taken after they had left the vicinity of the nest, and almost certainly were killed by Herring Gulls. These gulls recently began to nest close to the Zoo, and certain individuals have developed the habit of killing and eating young birds. It is a problem which is likely to recur, and one which is going to be difficult to solve. A number of useful exchanges have been made with other collections, and we have received 2 Long-legged Buzzards, 2 Rusty Barred Owls, 2 Teng- m aim’s Owls, an Egyptian Vulture, and a Fraser’s Eagle Owl. Other interes¬ ting species brought into the collection have included Least Seedsnipe, Black-bellied Seedcrackers, Gold-billed Ground Doves, African Thrushes, Great Green Leafbirds, Black-throated Laughing Thrushes, a Chestnut- capped Laughing Thrush, and a Silver-beaked Tanager. Two Eastern White Pelicans were presented, probably with some relief, by the Department of the Environment. They had caused embarrassment and some horror by eating live birds in St. James’s Park. Now they have joined our colony of pelicans, they do not have the opportunity to carry on their unpleasant feeding habits. The old Cockatoo Aviary, now called the Clock Tower Aviary, has been landscaped and renovated. It will contain birds of the Australasian region. The oldest bird in the Zoo is a Sulphur-crested Cockatoo named “Cocky” who was presented in 1925. It has now been established, via members of the family who gave “Cocky” to the Zoo, that he had been with the family since the beginning of the century. He is, therefore, at least 80 years old. Though he is now definitely showing signs of age, he still talks, loves company and is reasonably active. For the present, he is living “behind the scenes” where he has the constant attention and com¬ pany of the keepers. Ill NEWS FROM THE BRONX ZOO, NEW YORK By CHRISTINE SHEPPARD (Assistant Curator) Joseph Bell, Curator Emeritus of this Department and special scientific assistant to the Director, retired in June; his knowledge and experience will be difficult to replace. Dr. Donald Bruning is now Curator of Birds. This year marks the 10th anniversary of the Lila Acheson Wallace World of Birds. The most recent addition to this building is our Bird Nur¬ sery, a modern rearing facility which is partially open to public viewing. In 1981, we handreared 191 birds representing 52 species, a list of which follows: Crested Tinamou Sarus Crane Bushland Tinamou Black-breasted Hemipode Grey Rhea White-quilled Black Bustard Black-necked Swan Inca Tern Bar-headed Goose Spur-winged Plover Hooded Merganser Black-winged Stilt American Goldeneye Andean Condor Ruddy Duck Malayan Peacock Pheasant European Pochard Palawan Peacock Pheasant Red-crested Pochard Satyr Tragopan Bahama Pintail Hill Partridge Patagonian Crested Duck Koklass Pheasant South African Shelduck Bornean Argus Pheasant Laysan Teal Congo Peacock Wood Duck Crested Quail Dove Mandarin Duck Lorikeet Marbled Teal Red-crested Touraco Chestnut-breasted Teal Tawny Frogmouth Green-winged Teal Indian Shama Cape Teal Malayan Banded Pitta Indian Pigmy Goose Lilac-breasted Roller Ringed Teal Purple Glossy Starling Paradise Crane Rothschild’s Grackle Crowned Crane Golden-breasted Bunting White-naped Crane Southern Blue Tanager Wattled Crane Green Wood Hoopoe 112 CHRISTINE SHEPPARD - NEWS FROM THE BRONX ZOO Many other species reared their own young, notably Scarlet Ibis, Lady Ross’s Violet Touraco and White-naped Cranes. Most notable among our acquisitions was a pair of Congo Peacocks, on loan from Antwerp Zoo. These remarkably calm birds have settled in to our African jungle exhibit. Last year, we reared two chicks from a total of 12 eggs in three clutches. The hen produced four eggs in early 1982 and we are currently rearing two chicks. Our experience with this species dates back to 1949, when four males and a female were imported. Unfortunately the female was elderly and soon assumed male plumage. The last of this group remained in the collection until 1968. We are very pleased to be able to work with this species again and to co-operate with the Antwerp Zoo. We obtained a dozen Humboldt’s Penguins and two pairs of Argentin¬ ian Ruddy Ducks to inhabit our outside flight cage along with Inca Terns, Silver Gulls, Andean Gulls and Guanay Cormorants. The flight cage, built in 1898, has just been redeveloped as a sea bird island, modelled after colonies on the Argentine coast. Once again, we reared young Andean Condors without human contact, using condor-head puppets. These birds were not, however, sent to join the four handreared Condors released last year near the Peruvian coast and now flying free with wild Condors. It was feared that the release process for new birds might interfere with the growing independence of last year’s birds. This year’s young birds will enter captive-breeding programmes. Our most recent acquisitions were collected in Bolivia, and include Round-tailed Manakins, White-eared Solitaires, Blue-shouldered Mountain Tanagers, Blue-necked, Bay-headed, Spotted, Golden and Golden-eared Callistes, Varicoloured Barbets and Cock of the Rock. 113 When the following article was received from Alastair Morrison, a member of this Society for over fifty years, Council members felt that, whilst they disagreed fundamentally with most of the sentiments ex¬ pressed, the subject was so important that the article should be published but that two experts should be asked to reply to the points raised. Their comments follow the article and other members of the Society are invited to add their opinions, on either side of the debate, for future publication A DISSENTING VIEW ON AVICULTURE By ALASTAIR MORRISON (Canberra, Australia) I was sorry to read the article on Breeding the Horned Parrot by Dr. H. Quinque in the October/December 1980 issue of the Avicultural Magazine. In my opinion, this is not a species that should be kept in captivity at all. Although the nominate form is not listed as endangered in the Red Data Book of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, it is potentially endangered. I am sure that the French Govern¬ ment would never permit an equally rare and unique bird to be kept in captivity if it were confined to the mountains of the Auvergne. And it needs to be remembered that New Caledonia is not a newly independent third world country but a Department of France. The article refers to the Uvaean subspecies being kept in captivity in Europe. It is monstrous that this should be so. It is a critically endangered bird. The total population was estimated at no more than 200 in 1974. Attempts to transplant the form to other islands in 1925 and 1963 have been unsuccessful. Despite its rarity, the bird has quite recently been the subject of scandalous depredation by wealthy German aviculturists. I am well aware that the response of some aviculturists will inevitably be that owners of Horned Parrots are really protecting the birds by main¬ taining stocks in captivity. It is all for their own good. Aviculturists have been saying this sort of thing for the last half century. The argument may be true in the case of a few easily kept animals and birds though domesti¬ cation often leads to mutation so that the captive birds become very different to their wild ancestors. But generally when I have looked into it, it have found that this is a very weak argument, seeking a philosophical and pseudo-scientific justification for a form of personal aggrandisement that is morally and scientifically indefensible. This particularly applies to 114 ALASTAIR MORRISON - DISSENTING VIEW OF AVICULTURE species that are difficult to keep and/or breed in captivity and no more so than species such as the Horned Parrot and the various large Antillean Amazon Parrots. Except in a very tiny number of cases where propagation in captivity has been undertaken as part of a co-ordinated operation to reintroduce captive-bred birds to the wild, I am sure that the only hope for such birds is for viable populations to be maintained and protected in protected natural habitats. If that cannot be achieved, they will become extinct. And the deplorable thing is that not only can avicultural demand lead to a reduction of numbers in the wild, but that the phoney conservation- through-aviculture argument can lead to reduced effort to maintain dwindling natural habitats. Leaving aside these aspects of the situation one can perhaps make out a theoretical argument for maintaining endangered species permanently in captivity. But the argument to be effective presupposes three things: Equal skills of the highest order on the part of those holding the birds, That this factor should be matched by complete continuity, and Unlimited financial resources. These provisos are unattainable nor are the possessors of endangered species necessarily interested in doing anything of the sort. A much more dominant motive is that of the collector seeking rarity and primarily impelled by pride of possession. This is a fairly harmless motive when it comes to the honest acquisition of paintings or porcelain, netsuke or primitive African art or other inanimate desiderata. Indeed the public often benefits because pride of possession may be perpetuated by the bequest of collections to public institutions as memorials to the public spirit/acquisitive instincts of the collector. But this is simply impossible with live animals and especially rare parrots. I speak as one with a life long interest in aviculture. I owned my first foreign birds at the age of 11. As a schoolboy and university student, I used to scour the London bird shops in search of the unusual. I was fascinated by the careers of the great collectors - Goodfellow and Frost, Webb and Shaw-Mayer - and sought, not without some modest success, to become a collector myself. I set out to specialise in South American waterfowl and was on my third expedition - to Peru- when the war put paid to all thoughts of such a career. My collecting activities were fol¬ lowed by a long residence in Asia. I have been a member of the Society for over 50 years. In pre-war days, rare birds too were in demand but rarity generally ALASTAIR MORRISON - DISSENTING VIEW OF AVICULTURE 115 did not mean the same as it does today. Few species were endangered in the wild and rarity generally meant that the bird came from somewhere inaccessible or lacking any trade in birds. At a very early age I came to realise that the question of rarity posed a problem in semantics com¬ pounded by ignorance on the part of those buying allegedly rare birds and sound commercial instincts on the part of those selling them. Alleged rarity was a valuable selling point and no doubt still is. The situation today is very different to what it was in the Thirties. The greed of those who keep animals and birds has enormously increased while population and business pressures have resulted in appalling habi¬ tat destruction. The vast colonial empires of Britain, France and Holland have been replaced by a proliferation of new states where colonial ideas of fauna preservation no longer apply. The most dramatic example of this is the case of the Gorilla. When in the Thirties the London Zoo ob¬ tained the pair named Mok and Moina, there* were only about half a dozen of these animals in captivity in the entire world. Large feral popu¬ lations were strictly protected by the British and French colonial powers. Nowadays the competitive greed of zoos and the decline in standards of conservation in Africa has led to the total in captivity becoming several hundred - most of them involving the slaughter of the animal’s mother - while the number in the wild has been catastrophically reduced. The number of species under threat has grown enormously. Rarity now means absolute rarity. While the greed of those who keep animals and birds has bounded ahead, air transport has made importation much easier. The trade in live animals and birds has become big business. It always was a cruel trade - the mortality is very high. How many aviculturists can honestly say that they have never been guilty of callousness - picking out the healthy birds in a dealer’s cage while leaving the rest to die miserably? Is not the time long overdue for the Avicultural Society and its members to take candid stock of the situation? Why in fact do we keep birds? Primarily I would say because of the pleasure that we gain from the closer company of beautiful living things and the satisfaction that we derive from caring for them. There have, of course, been cases where aviculturists have made useful contributions towards the study and understanding of bird behaviour but such activities are unusual. And some may genuinely believe - though the belief is subsidiary to pride of possession - that they are performing a worthy conservationist role. But aviculturists should realise that they are viewed with much distaste by ornithologists and by many members of the public. If they are to con- 116 REPLIES TO A DISSENTING VIEW OF AVICULTURE tinue to enjoy a pleasant hobby, it is essential that they should play an ac¬ tive and positive role both in conservation and improvement to the trade in birds. If the Society is to enjoy respect it should have positive and clearly stated policies in these matters. At the very least, the Society should publish in the Magazine a list of bird species held to be endangered by the IUCN. Except as part of a co-ordinated conservation programme endorsed by the International Council for Bird Preservation, the possession of such species should be firmly discouraged by the Society and the sub¬ sequent importation of such species should result in expulsion from the Society. The Society should be active in urging overseas governments to protect the habitats and remaining wild stocks of endangered species. And the British Government and other western governments should be urged to tighten up drastically on the importation of birds. Importation should be by licence only including movement between countries in the EEC and should be under the strictest conditions. Such policies would not spell the end of aviculture. Apart from enhan¬ cing the standing of the Avicultural Society, its result would be to make even common species more difficult to obtain and more desirable in the eyes of those who want to keep them. There would be far more interest in the propagation of easily bred stocks in captivity. This has happened to some extent in Australia where a number of foreign species are still avail¬ able though their importation has been banned for years. Many more would be available if Australian aviculturists had responded to the bans promptly. But unless aviculturists take and support positive initiatives they will continue to be held in a wide measure of disrepute. They will be regarded in the world of conservation and ornithology as selfish and egotistical and as direct contributors to the destruction of bird life and the extinction of some of the most marvellous handiwork of our Creator. From Professor J.R. Hodges, Royal Free Hospital School of Medicine, London. I have a great respect for the views of Alastair Morrison whose articles in the Avicultural Magazine I can remember reading with great interest when I first joined the Society more than 30 years ago. However, I do not agree with his didactic statement that the Horned Parrot is “not a species REPLIES TO A DISSENTING VIEW OF AVICULTURE 117 that should be kept in captivity at all” any more than I did with his opinion (Avicultural Magazine 82, p. 117, 1976) that the Hooded and Golden-shouldered Parrots should rank high on a list of species unsuitable for aviculture. Recently I saw specimens of the Homed Parrot in aviaries on the continent where they were breeding successfully and, with their tameness, confidence and beauty, appeared to be ideal subjects for avicul¬ ture. In their behaviour they resemble Cyanoramphus parrots which, through the efforts of aviculturists throughout the world, are now well known in captivity although they are not very common in their natural habitat. Those ornithologists who take a disparaging view of aviculture frequently state, without a shred of evidence, that the survival of this or that species is threatened by aviculture. In the 1930s, Cayley attempted to explain the rarity of the Splendid, Turquoisine and Bourke's Parrot on the activities of bird trappers and yet these three species are now not only very common in captivity but have also reappeared in the wild. It is man's exploitation of their environment which will lead to the disappearance of numerous avian species. Surely, it is better to preserve those we can as breeding stock in aviaries than as preserved specimens in museums. * * * From Rosemary Low, New Barnet , Hertfordshire. Much of what Mr. Morrison has written would have been true 20 years ago. He does not reside in Europe and it seems that he is out of touch with the current avicultural climate here. Let us consider the various points he has made. First, the “monstrous” fact of the Uvaean Parrakeet Eunymphicus comutus uvaeensis being kept in captivity in Europe. I find it more monstrous that until legislation pre¬ vented it in the early 1970s, many of these parrakeets were taken from the nest for the local pet trade. These birds were denied the chance to breed, whereas breeding would be the only aim of any European aviculturist in possession of this species. “Conservationists” who attempted to preserve Uvaean Parrakeets by “transplanting” them to other islands showed an as- toundingly poor knowledge of their behaviour: the birds simply flew back to Quvea. Had some of those parrakeets, which spent their lives as pets, been 118 REPLIES TO A DISSENTING VIEW OF AVICULTURE available to responsible European aviculturists, I believe that a thriving captive-bred population would exist now. The Eunymphicus species are very closely related to the Cyanoramphus parrakeets - and Dr. Quinque has produced hybrids between the two. There is every reason to believe that they would prove as free-breeding as their New Zealand counterparts . One of these, the Red-fronted Kakariki C. novaezelandiae , is officially classified as endangered. However, within the space of a single decade, in European aviculture their status has altered from an almost unknown rarity to an inexpensive and free-breeding species. As an example of the efficiency of aviculturists, in 1958 there were 103 Red-fronted Kakarikis in collections in New Zealand, after authorities there decided to issue permits to allow a few aviculturists to keep them. In six years, breeding was so successful that the number had increased to 2,500. I sincerely believe that pairs of Uvaean and Horned Parrakeets in cap¬ tivity are the best insurance against the species’ extinction. I state this ad¬ visedly because I do not believe that it is true of all bird species. Secondly, Mr. Morrison speaks of the desirability of protecting endan¬ gered species in their natural habitat. Of course, this is desirable - in a Uto¬ pian world - but we have reached the point where we can no longer delude ourselves that this is feasible where many forest-dwelling species are con¬ cerned. Their forests are being felled at a terrifying rate - including those on Ouvea. Mr. Morrison’s statement that aviculture can lead to a reduction of numbers of birds in the wild is absolutely true. It is something that must be guarded against. Aviculturists must take a responsible attitude - and if it is true that wealthy individuals have offered large sums for endangered species, this can have far-reaching consequences on dwindling wild popula¬ tions. In addition, they can throw the whole of aviculture into disrepute, nullifying the efforts of the most dedicated aviculturists. I do not believe, however, that the “phoney conservation-through- aviculture argument can lead to reduced efforts to maintain dwindling natural habitats.” Possibly it might be given as an excuse by countries in which conservation takes a very low priority if, indeed, there is any conservation programme at all. But as a general argument, it would not be very convincing, since in any avifauna, only a small percentage of species are held in aviculture. (We must consider the fact that the number of bird species kept in captivity is but a minute percentage of the total. Repre¬ sentatives of many, many genera are entirely unknown in captivity.) Mr. Morrison believes that the possessors of endangered species are REPLIES TO A DISSENTING VIEW OF AVICULTURE 119 primarily impelled by pride of possession. This is no doubt true of some individuals - usually those whose interest in anything is maintained for but a short time. However, this statement does a grave injustice to the many genuine aviculturists whose desire to build up captive stocks of rare or endangered species far exceeds that for any personal recognition. At the outset, pride of possession may be very strong, but this soon gives way to a feeling that the only justification for keeping such birds is that one is laying the foundations for future generations - of that species and for aviculturists. Again, I agree with Mr. Morrison that a disadvantage of the possession of endangered species by private aviculturists can be found when we look at the question of continuity. But this is not insurmountable. It is vitally important that all who keep rare and endangered species should nominate a zoo, or other organisation, or a responsible aviculturist, to receive all the birds in the event of his death. In all cases the individual or organisa¬ tion must be one that has experience of breeding the species in question, or one which is closely related. Dispersal of a breeding group of an en¬ dangered species could mean the end of a valuable breeding programme. Mr. Morrison spoke of the appalling worldwide habitat destruction of new states whose colonial ideas of fauna preservation no longer apply and of the increasing number of threatened species. Unfortunately, we all know that they can only continue to increase and that in some areas the natural habitat of a species has simply ceased to exist. When this happens there are only two alternatives: a species either becomes extinct or it is maintained in captivity. As recently as the past decade, veterinary and technological develop¬ ments have resulted in the captive breeding of birds being elevated from a hobby to a science. Rapid inauguration of techniques, such as surgical or faecal analysis sexing, spectral analysis and the careful formulation of commercial diets, have vastly increased the efficiency of aviculture. This is only the start: future developments will remove much of the risk ele¬ ment from captive breeding. We must now lay the foundation for that era, in the near future, when many birds will be more secure in captivity than in the wild. 120 J.O. DEATH .CORRESPONDENCE J.O. (JACK) DEATH The news of the sudden death of Jack Death, from a heart attack, has come as a sad shock to his many friends in the Avicultural Society, of which he had been a member since 1953. He served several terms of office as a Council member and was elected a Vice President in 1973. His wit and wisdom were much appreciated in his skilful chairmanship of Council meetings, as was his valuable financial advice. He made several excel¬ lent films in colour of wildlife in East Africa and one of west Spitz- bergen, all of which were shown at Society meetings. As a young man some 50 years ago, he established what is now the oldest private waterfowl collection in Britain at his home in Barnet, Hert fordshire, and over the years he kept some 90 species, achieving outstand¬ ing breeding results with many of them. (Rosemary Low wrote an illustra¬ ted account of this collection in Volume 86, No. 2, 1980, of the Avicul¬ tural Magazine). His interest in horticulture was as great as his knowledge of waterfowl and the 25 acres of landscaped gardens at his home contain many beautiful and rare flowering trees and shrubs, providing a lovely setting for the birds and a lasting tribute to Jack Death’s skill and taste. He is missed very much. H.J.H. CORRESPONDENCE Modem Farming Methods and their possible effect on Bird Life Mr. Stoodley writes in Vol. 88 (1) of our Magazine about problems arising from modern farming methods and asks for comments. As I see it, there are really two separate issues: the first, what is the long term effect of changes in crops and management on wild life; the second, what are the direct effects of the operations themselves - he mentions stubble burning and the application of agricultural chemicals. If Mr. Stoodley can remember farming in the depressed 1930s, he will have seen fields of cereals in which the yield would not have greatly ex- CORRESPONDENCE 121 ceeded the sowing. Weeds and pests abounded. Nowadays it is rare to see even the beautiful poppies, but yields have increased many-fold. Although it is by no means the whole story, it is reasonable to expect species that are dependent, like the Partridge, on weed seeds and insects, to decrease locally. This sounds a very bleak picture but the subject has been dis¬ cussed at length by those more competent than I and most people agree that a variety of practical measures can contribute to maintaining wild¬ life stocks. Stubble burning, judging by reports in the national press, is supposed to be regulated and the National Farmers’ Union can be expected to be sensi¬ tive on the subject. Did Mr. Stoodley get any response to his complaints? I know rather more about the ways in which agricultural chemicals are con¬ trolled. There is an elaborate and expensive mechanism which has been de¬ vised to try and ensure safety to people, domestic stock and all kinds of wildlife from the original manufacture in the factory to the final applica¬ tion. Aerial application is particularly carefully controlled and the pilots fly uncomfortably low to keep a narrow swath. There is no question but that agricultural chemicals are not released for use until a wide range of specialists (including those with an interest in birds!) are satisfied that their use appears safe. This is not to say, of course, that mistakes, both operational and more fundamental, may not occur. If Mr. Stoodley’s premises have been bombarded from the air, this is obviously totally wrong. At the least (fertiliser pellets?) he deserves an ap¬ ology. If he has suffered loss (herbicides clipping his hedge?), he deserves compensation. Personally I would have been on the telephone before the second pellet fell. As with the smoke nuisance, it would be useful to know if he complained and what sort of response he got. Swift action should ensure that the problem is resolved. The more fundamental issue is whether, somewhere down the line, something is wrong with the safety controls and this is where Mr. Stoodley can help not only himself but those who are trying to ensure that we have not only a prosperous farming industry but also a healthy countryside. If what appears to be a poisoning incident occurs, then it is imperative that it should be reported (farmer, aircraft operator, Ministry of Agriculture, or any one of the conservation organisations) and if dead birds are picked up, they should be sent at once for analysis. Weir Cottage Bridge Road, Chertsey, Surrey. S.B. Kendall 122 NEWS AND VIEWS NEWS AND VIEWS Hopes for the survival of the Black Robin Petroica traversi have been raised by the development of a new management technique. It has been found that Chatham Island Warblers Gerygone albofrontata will accept and incubate eggs of Black Robins and rear to eight days (but not to fled¬ ging). The robins too proved exceptionally tolerant and would readily accept week-old chicks even though the adults were still incubating eggs. Although capable of rearing two chicks per clutch, the robins seldom do so, due to infertility and loss during incubation. The new technique involves transferring the robin eggs to warbler nests, so inducing the robins to lay further clutches while the warblers hatch their eggs. The chicks hatched by the warblers are then fostered back so ensuring that each pair of robins raises two chicks. Using this technique during the 1980-81 season, ten robin eggs were produced (five clutches) by the two pairs; six hatched, two nestlings were lost perfecting this technique but four chicks fledged. However, one died later. The three chicks survived the winter - a record number. The population now stands at seven individuals, including three pairs. Fears of mal-imprinting in the fostered chicks have been dispelled, for the chicks have mated - with Black Robins. (Royal Australian Ornithologists’ Union Newsletter). * * * Bryan Reed writes to enquire if members knowing of longevity records pertaining to any species of sunbird or tanager in captivity would contact him. Genuine records only are required in order that the collated informa¬ tion be accurate and if enough is forthcoming, it will form the basis of an article in the Avicultural Magazine. Data required: English and scientific names, when received or bred, sex, whether adult or immature when received and whether the bird is still living, been disposed of or whatever. Diet contents would also be welcomed. Bryan Reed can be contacted at 4 St. Andrews Drive, Tividale, Warley, W. Midlands B69 1PR. * * * Paul Webb, Curator of Birds at Al-Areen Wildlife Park and Reserve, Bahrain, writes to say that he is currently looking into the possibility that the small extinct race of the Ostrich O.c. syriacus was imported into Aus¬ tralia and South Africa in the early 1900s and may still exist in a semi- NEWS AND VIEWS 123 domesticated or feral population. Two reliable sources in recent months have told the same story of Arabian birds being shipped to these two countries, and some of the old staff at Al-Areen remember seeing young Ostriches at Port Muharraq, Bahrain, awaiting shipment to somewhere. This has in no way been substantiated yet, but Paul says he is trying hard to obtain clear facts. * * * The annual volumes of the International Zoo Yearbook (published by the Zoological Society of London) provide a small but varied amount of material relating to birds. The latest, Volume 21, contains articles on breed¬ ing Marabou Stork, Ruddy Duck, Bald and American Golden Eagle, Road- runner, Sparkling Violet-eared Hummingbird and Seaside Sparrows. Other subjects covered include experimental incubation techniques with Moluc- can Scrub Hen eggs, artificial incubation and hand-rearing of cranes, hand¬ rearing Nicobar Pigeons and White-necked Picathartes. Inhibiting flight in captive birds by removal of a wing tendon is also outlined. * * * The newsletters put out by the International Council for Bird Preser¬ vation outline conservation projects and news items from many parts of the world. The last two issues contain notes on the discovery of the Cres¬ ted Ibis in China, national parks in Indonesia, population of the Seychelles Magpie Robin, proposed radio-tracking and capture of Californian Condor and notification of a preliminary list of 279 candidates for a Red Data Book on African birds. The I.C.B.P. do valuable work and members wish¬ ing to offer support in the form of membership should contact their offices at the British Museum (Natural History), Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD. * * * The Association for the Study and Propagation of European Birds in Aviaries has been in existence for about eighteen years during which time an extremely valuable and comprehensive “Data Book” has been built up from the study, keeping and breeding of European birds. Members of the Avicultural Society are offered reference facilities, and expert advice on all 124 NEWS AND VIEWS matters pertaining to a wide range of birds would be made available upon request and receipt of a stamped, self-addressed envelope. Enquiries should be forwarded to:- F. Meaden, Hon. Secretary, A.S.P.E.B.A., “The Vine¬ yard”, Chequers Comer, Ladys Drove, Emneth, Near Wisbech, Cambs. * * * Letters from Fred Bohner always contain interesting items of news from his collection at Happy Valley, South Australia, and that of Adelaide Zoo, plus some of his observations “out bush”. Somewhere in the corres¬ pondence mention is usually made of Black Cockatoos and the latest is no exception, the added bonus this time, however, being that he proved his observations with slides of wild Gang Gangs and Glossy Blacks. His Red-tailed Blacks are again breeding and after many years of trying, he has a White-tailed Black C. funereus baudinii chick in the nest which he says is due to leave shortly. No other details were forthcoming. However, he also reports that a private breeder and Adelaide Zoo have also reared the species recently. Among other successes at Adelaide Zoo are White-winged Wren, Austra¬ lian Bustard and Mallee Fowl. The latter hatched six naturally in their mound but the chicks were removed for fear of aggression by the male, and hand-reared. * * * As a result of the atrocious weather conditions in December and Jan¬ uary, two unusual casualties were brought to the Padstow Bird Gardens in Cornwall. The first, a Little Auk, survived for only a couple of days but a Bittern, despite having to have a wing amputated, is faring better, even if it is proving a little difficult to accommodate while alternative arrangements are made. Being a small establishment, accommodating such a bird is a problem, especially when the occupants of the only suitable flight prove apprehensive of a bird that remains motionless all day, and they refuse to feed. The problem has been solved by giving the Bittern partial liberty. At night he is retained indoors and fed early the following morning. After a good feed he is released into the duck enclosure where he makes for the thick cover of bamboo in the far corner, promptly climbs up it to the point where he can get over the wall and settles for the day in one of a row of ornamental pines from whence he is easily caught in the evening. Only NEWS AND VIEWS 125 occasionally has be wandered during daylight, once being found in our new live butterfly display after obviously having enjoyed a paddle in a recently constructed pond. Fortunately, neither were stocked with their respective livestock. It is hoped that now his health is fully restored, he will either be released on a reserve known to contain the species, or, failing that, be sent to a collection able to cater for his needs better than we can. * * * Mr. Mats Tell, in Sweden, has sent his breeding results for 1981 : “This last breeding season must be regarded as a poor one - in fact, it is many years since the number of young birds reared to maturity was so small and only involved three species: the Crested Black Bunting (4), Bourke’s Parrakeet(14) and the Siy Parrot (4). On the other hand, only two species did not attempt to nest at all - the Orange-breasted Waxbill and the Nonpareil Bunting - while another two species simply were not permitted to do so - Azara's Conure and Eclectus Parrot. Three species had infertile eggs - White-collared Seed-eater, Blue- crowned Hanging Parrot and Western Rosella Parakeet One species, the Silver-eared Mesia, experienced “dead in shell” and finally three relatively “easy” species hatched chicks but did not rear them - Bluish Seed-eater, Virginian Cardinal and Sun Conure. A fine cock Diademed Weaver Euplectes dkdamtus built at least 10 nests, using green grasses, and my single cock Chestnut Sparrow Passer eminibey carried nesting material about the aviary, as did my “widower” Parrot-billed Seed-eater and Red-faced Crimson-wing. A good result was achieved by my friend A Lindblad whose pair of Rainbow Buntings Passerina ledmchmt reared three young, two cocks and a hen. At the time of writing (October 1981) they are almost through their first moult. I must say they are marvellous birds. Their first clutch was in¬ fertile but the female unexpectedly laid another three eggs in the same nest ” * * * The Wildfowl Trust are initiating four studbooks. Species covered are Bewick's Swan, Aleutian Canada Goose, Spotted Whistling Duck and White-winged Wood Duck, but the list is being examined and a possible addition could be the New Zealand Brown Duck. Known owners have 126 NEWS AND VIEWS been circulated with questionnaires. Those not notified should contact Ralph Hodgson, Research Department, The Wildfowl Trust, Slimbridge, Gloucestershire GL2 7BT, England. * * * W.D. Cummings writes from Durban, South Africa: “I was very in¬ terested to read Malcolm Ellis’s article in the April/June 1980 issue of the Avicultural Magazine on the nesting of African Starlings. He quotes from an article that I wrote from Keston on breeding the Amethyst Starling Cinnyricinclus leucogaster in 1958 when I first bred these beautiful little starlings, with their strange wing display, raising first one wing then the other over their back. Two young were successfully reared that year but we lost one when 4-5 months old. The other moulted out in its first year to be a cock and was paired to an adult hen. Neither pair reared young again but what remains in my memory the most is the beautiful little nest they made of green privet leaves. It was spherical in shape like a plate, and similar in design to a spider’s web with row upon row of leaves with each leaf over-lapping the other, continued round until a depression in the centre was reached to hold the eggs. It was so neat and unusual that it has remained uppermost in my mind to this day.” * * * No. 17 of the Jersey Wildlife Preservation Trust’s Annual Report, The Dodo , contains a paper on the effect of Hurricane Allen on the status of the St. Lucia Parrot Amazona versicolor. Following the hurricane which caused extreme damage on 4th August 1980, the Government of St. Lucia requested the help of the Jersey Wildlife Preservation Trust to assess the effect on the parrot population. Although it had not caused a significant decrease in numbers (216 sightings), other factors, such as loss of nesting sites might ultimately affect the status in the long term. The Editor does not accept responsibility for opinions expressed in articles, notes or correspondence THE INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BIRDS proudly presents the JEAN DELACOUR/IFCB SYMPOSIUM ON BREEDING BIRDS IN CAPTIVITY February 24-27, 1983 at the Sheraton-Universal Hotel in Universal City (Hollywood), California Over fifty prestigious speakers from around the world join in honouring Dr. Jean Delacour one of the hosts for this event and an active member of the I.F.C.B. The programme will emphasise natural history as it applies to the future of captive birds, their husbandry and management Because the interest in this Symposium is worldwide, and because registration capacity is limited, reservations will be accepted on a first-come, first-served basis We advise a prompt response * * * For more information regarding this important event and for a registration form, send your name and address to: DELACOUR/IFCB SYMPOSIUM c/o Gary Schulman 11300 Weddington Street North Hollywood, California 91601 (213) 980-9818. Telex: 686119 Schulman LSA ' f ■ MEMBER’S ADVERTISEMENTS (10 p. per word - minimum charge £3,00) The Association for the Study and Propagation of European Birds in Aviaries invites and welcomes individuals whose pursuance in keeping birds is orientated towards farthering man’s knowledge by the principles of captive breeding and studying. Individuals who wish to participate on, or with the creation of study programmes are invited to apply to that effect stating their interests. Please contact P. Adams, 90 Holland Road, Little Clacton, Essex. THE AVietJLTURAL SOCIETY OF QUEENSLAND welcomes new members. An Australian Society catering for all birds both in captivity and in the wild. We put out a bTmontWy magazine on all aspects of aviculture and conservation. For membership details please contact Ray Garwood, 19 Fahey’s Road, Albany Creek, 4035 Queensland. Annual subscription: 14.00 Aus. dollars surface mail, 20,00 Aus. dollars airmail BIRD WORLD Magazine. Interesting, informative, well-illustrated. Dedicated to the presentation of quality information. Eight to ten articles each issue, including veterinary articles. Annual subscription (US dollars only): 12.00 (six issues). Postage extra: 8.00 surface mail, 12.00 airmail. Box 70, N. Hollywood, Calif. 91601, USA. AMERICAN CAGE- BIRD MAGAZINE features timely and interesting articles on canaries, finches, hook bills, and other birds by leading breeders and fanciers. All show dates and show information are also published. Monthly subscription 12.00 US dollars, American Cage-Bird Magazine, 3449 North Western Avenue, Chicago Illinois 60618, USA. fell' Printed in Great Britain by Unwin Brothers Ltd., The Gresham Press, Old Woking, Surrey THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY The Avicultural Society was founded in 1894 for the study of British and foreign birds in freedom and captivity. The Society is international in character, having members throughout the world. Membership subscription rates per annum: British Isles £8.00; Overseas - £9.00 (20.00 US dollars). The subscription is due on 1st January of each year and those joining the Society later in the year will receive back numbers of the current volume of the AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE. The subscription rate for non-members is: British Isles and Europe - £9.00; outside Europe -£10.00 (25.00 US dollars). Subscriptions, changes of address, orders for back numbers, etc., should be sent to: THE HON. SECRETARY AND TREASURER, THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY, WINDSOR FOREST STUD, MILL RIDE, ASCOT, BERKSHIRE SL5 8LT. NEW MEMBERS Major T.J. Ades, Weapons Branch REME, Ha-Ha Road, Woolwich, London SE1 84QE Dr. R.P. Adlam, 3 Bathwick Rise, Darlington Road, Bath, BA2 6RE. Mr. F.D. Allsopp, 25 The Nooks, Gildersome, Leeds, Yorks. LS27 7EF Miss V. Anderson, 28 Reynolds Drive, Edgware, Middx. Mr. G.P.S. Bailey, Oaklands Park Farm, Newdigate, Dorking, Surrey. Mr. D.B. Bendall, 87 Goshawk Drive, Chelmsford, Essex CM2 8XP Mr. B. Blackman, 121 Addison Road, Caterham, Surrey CR3 5LW Mr. N.D. Churchill, 18 Willersey Road, Badsey, Evesham, Worcs. Mr. D. Cook, Old Farm, Penshurst Road, Bidborough, Kent. Mr. S.W. Cooke, BVSc., MRCVS, The Veterinary Surgery, Ralphs Ride Bracknell, Berks. Ms. J.C. Davis, Exotic Hookbill Society, 39594 Kona Court, Fremont, Calif. 94538, USA. Ms. S. Gallatin, Danbury, Nebraska 69026, USA Mr. C. Garnham, 30 Albion Grove, Colchester, Essex C02 7RZ Mr. D.E. Hahn, Box 1004, Cottonwood, Arizona 86326, USA Mr. S.C. Horne, 43 Nicholas Road, Irthlingborough, Northants. Mr. W.G. Howarth, Tarrens, Perks Lane, Prestwood, Bucks. HP16 0JD Mr. J.J. Human, 24 Totias Street, Marlands, Germiston 1401, S. Africa. Mrs. Cynthia L. Johnson, 14928 Chorley Avenue West, Rosemount, Minnesota 55068, USA Mrs. J. Kildaw, 2608 Donald Street, Oklahoma, Oklahoma 73127, USA Mr. R. Krohe, Adams Road, Box 18, RR No. 2, Smithers, British Columbia, VOJ 2NO, Canada. Mr. B.K. Kurtz, 5 Beach 105 Street, Rockaway Park, N.Y.11694, USA Mr. Fred E. Lohrer, 1409 Adams Avenue NE, Lake Placid, Fla. 33852, USA Mr. G.W. Lye, 29 Oolite Road, Odd Down, Bath, Avon. Mr. Charles Martin, Westside Aquarium, 4483 Gandy Boulevard, Tampa, Fla 33611, USA Mrs. J.A. Myers, Route 2, Box 241-T, Valley Centra, Ks. 67147, USA Mr. F. Nielsen, Gartnervej 6, DK 7657 Fakse Ladeplads, Denmark Mr. T.A. Ottaway, 56 Station Road, Chertsey, Surrey. Ms. B.L. Pierzakowski, R.D. No. 2, Box 258, Annandale, NJ 08801, USA Mr. J.C. Price, 819 Tollis Parkway, Broadview Heights, Ohio 44147, USA. Mr. N.F. Ramsay, “Littleways”, Baillieswell’s Road, Bieldside, Aberdeen. Dr. Charles W. Richard III, 100 West Sixth Avenue, Apt. 5, Columbus, Ohio 43201, USA Mr. R.H. Sales, 4 Kingsdown Road, Trowbridge, Wilts. BAH OLA Mr. D.J. Spittall, Currumbin Bird Sanctuary, Currumbin Beach, Queens¬ land, 4223, Australia. Mr. T.J. Standbridge, 7 Felbrigge Road, Seven Kings, Ilford, Essex. Mr. W.R. Steele, 12 Andries Pretorias Street, Eastleigh 1610, South Africa. Ms. Anna Marie Stevenson, Caribbean T’s, POB 970440, Miami, Fla. 33197. Mr. J.A. Thomas, The Zoological Trust of Guernsey, La Villiaze, Guernsey Cl Mrs. Gill du Venage, Glenwoods Farm, P.O. Box 568, Brits. 0250, South Africa Mr. D. Wardell, Clapton Row, Chardwar Close, Bourton on the Water, Glos. Mr. John H. Watts, 340 East 207th Street, Bronx, N.Y. 10467, USA Mr. G. Wearn, 12 Tanners Ridge, Purbrook, Portsmouth, Hants. Mr. G. Zietsman, 28 Price Road, Wychwood, Germiston 1401, South Africa. CHANGES OF ADDRESS Mr. P.G. Bell to 22 Marbury Road, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 4DJ Dr. B. Benedict to 2805 Hilgard Avenue, Berkeley, California 94709, USA Dr. Nicole Duplaix to c/o Dr. Herbert Zim, 88835 Old Highway, Tavernier, Florida 33070, USA Mr. G.K.G. Illsley, to The Robins, 34 Northway, Thatcham, Berks RG13 4BX Mr. P. Jorgensen, to Vesterled 25, DK 3650 Olstykke, Denmark. Dr. K. Kolar to Haselwanderweg 18, A-1220 Vienna, Austria Mr. Raymond P. Kotz to 129 Park Avenue, Barrington, Ill. 60010, USA Mr. Bent Lindhardt, to Tiphedevej 1, DK 6823 Ansager, Denmark Mr. M.J.C. Nelson, to Comb Cottage, Roberts End, Hanley Swan, Worcs. WR8 ODL Mr. R.W. Phipps to Mitre House, 2 Bishop Court, Maidenhead SL6 4EX Mr. P.V. Player to North Ridge, Rye Road, Hawkhurst, Kent TNI 8 4EX Mr. P.B. Pugh to 35 Fulmer Drive, Gerrards Cross, Bucks. SL9 7HG Mr. P.G. Schofield to la Chesil Spray, Higher Lane, Portland, Dorset. DONATIONS The Society is most grateful to the following members for their generosity Mr. E.S. Andersen Mr. R. Basso Ms M. Baum Mr. M. Carlton Mr. Eric Clewlow Mrs. D. Cooke Ms W. Duggan Mr. E.H. Down Mr. W.G.E. Griggs Mr. J.F. Harris Mr. Brian Higgs Prof. J.R. Hodges Mr. K.W.S. Kane Mr. F.W.S. Mayer Mr. Harold Montgomery Mr. N.O’Connor Mr. A. Platt Mr. P.V. Player Dr. H. Quinque Mr. M.E.M. Tell Mr. J. Trollope Mr. F. White Mr. Jesse D. Willmott Published by the Avicultural Society, Windsor Forest Stud, Mill Ride, Ascot, England 5*?8,ao5-Hai a. AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE VOLUME 88 Number 3 1982 CONTENTS Keeping Asian White Storks at Vogelpark Walsrode by Dr. Gunter Wennrich (with plates) . 127 Breeding the Senegal Parrot by Eric Callaghan . 130 Breeding the White-crested Jay Thrush by L. Gibson . 135 j Breeding Ramphocelus Tanagers in captive conditions by Dr. Johann Ingels . . 142 Inbreeding depression in Mandarin Ducks: a preliminary report on some continuing experiments, by Guy A. Greenwell, Carolyn Emerick and Maxeen Biben . 145 Breeding the Red-breasted Blue-bill by P. Lowe . 148 Birds of Prey bred at Wassenaar Zoo, Holland, 1982 by John Rens (with plates) . 150 Nesting of the Speckled Hummingbird by Christopher Carter . 151 Nest-building of a female Speckled Humming Bird by R.J. Elgar (withdrawing) . 153 Notes on the Yellow-faced Parrotlet by R. Girdler and G. Austin . 156 The 50th Anniversary of the Splendid Grass Parrakeet in Aviculture by F.C. Barnicoat . 159 Free flying Barbary Doves - my introduction to them by P. Speakman . 163 News and Views . 171 Reviews . 174 Correspondence . 179 THE AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE welcomes original articles that have not been published elsewhere and that essentially concern the aviculture of a particular bird or group of birds, or that describe their natural history. Articles should be preferably typewritten, with double spacing, and the scientific names as well as the vernacular names of birds should be given. References cited in the text should be listed at the end of the article. Line drawings should be in Indian ink on thick paper or card; photographs (preferably in black and white) which illustrate a particular point in the article will be used where possible and should be clearly captioned. ADDRESS OF EDITOR Mary Harvey, Windsor Forest Stud, Mill Ride, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 8LT, England. The Editor does not accept responsibility for opinions expressed in articles, notes or correspondence !§ v ; . Young Asian White Storks (at about 35 days old) after their arrival at the Walsrode Bird Park Avicultural Magazine THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY VoL88-No.3 - All rights reserved JULY - SEPTEMBER 1982 KEEPING ASIAN WHITE STORKS Ciconia ciconia hoyciana AT VOGELPARK WALSRODE, GERMANY By Dr. GUNTER WENNRICH To help implement the important first step of a long-term conservation programme developed between the USSR and the USA, the Vogelpark Walsrode, headquarters for the German branch of the International Crane Foundation, has been sent 1 2 young Asian White Storks Gconiac. boyciana. An historic agreement which will help bolster international environ¬ mental protection was signed on 15th August 1979 by Russian scientists Dr. Vladimir Flint, Chief of Fauna Section, Central Laboratory for Nature Conservation in Moscow, and Dr. Svyatoslav Priklonski, Director of Oka State Natura Reserve: (USSR), and American conservationist Dr. George Archibald of the International Crane Foundation (ICF), Baraboo, Wiscon¬ sin (USA). Through the terms of the agreement, the Crane Foundation was to receive from Russia several prefledged chicks of the Asian (Oriental or Eastern) White Stork, a species currently threatened with dwindling popu¬ lations. These birds will be used to establish a captive breeding colony of this species, as has been done successfully for the White Stork C. ciconia ciconia at Vogelpark Walsrode. Soviet helicopters were used to search for nests of the wild population of Asian White Storks, and approximately 200 breeding pairs were located in the Lower Amur River area. Several prefledged chicks were collected from each of several stork nests and the chicks were individually trans¬ ported to Moscow where the Director of ICF (Germany), Mr. Wolf Brehm, Director of Vogelpark Walsrode, and other Foundation representatives met the birds. The first two chicks born in 1980 were accompanied by Mr. Brehm from Moscow to Vogelpark Walsrode, arriving on 3rd July 1980. The other 10 chicks reached the Vogelpark on 14th June, 1981. This group consisted of eight nestlings born in 1981 and two three-year-old storks, the latter coming from Moscow Zoo. All Asian White Storks remain the property of 128 DR GUNTER WENNRICH - ASIAN WHITE STORKS the International Crane Foundation which has placed the storks on breed¬ ing loan to Vogelpark Walsrode with the aim of breeding this species in captivity and eventually restocking Japan and Korea. The eight young birds (hatched in 1981) were reared in a group in a glass house in an inside pen measuring 480 x 300 cm; the outdoor aviary measures 1680 x 300 cm. The two oldest chicks (hatched in 1980) were reared together in a wooden box measuring 140 x 100 x 45 cm in the Vogelpark rearing house. After four weeks they were transferred to a pen in the glass house as described above. The young storks were fed minced beef heart, fish and day-old chicks from which the head, wings and legs were removed. Supplementary minerals and vitamins were provided. After the birds reached adult size they were fed primarily day-old chicks and some fish. Recently the ten storks mentioned above were transferred to a newly established breeding centre which was built next to the crane breeding station in an area which is partly marshy, a natural environment for the captive birds. The enclosure measures 32 x 14 x 3.8 m and consists of four pairs of opposing aviaries, each of which is 14 x 8 m. Each aviary has a wooden shelter which is about 400 x 300 cm in size. The shelter heights vary from 230-210 cm. On opposite sides there are two glass windows, each measuring approximately 60 x 75 cm. The windows are 60 cm above the pen floor, which consists of pure sand. The birds and keepers can enter the pen through a sliding door measuring 80 x 175 cm. A second door of the same size is next to the windows opening to the aviary. The group of eight storks is kept in two aviaries; the other two storks of 1980 are kept in a third aviary. Birds in different aviaries maintain visual contact. The surrounding fence is wire mesh covered in green plas¬ tic. The mesh size is 4 x 4 cm. The welfare of the birds is of critical importance for the captive prop¬ agation programme for this threatened stork species. It is hoped that the favourable environment provided at the Vogelpark will stimulate success¬ ful breeding next year of the oldest storks from this group. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to thank Charles Luthin and the staff of the International Crane Foundation for their assistance with this manuscript. DR GUNTER WE NNRICH - ASIAN WHITE STORKS 129 G. Wennrich Part of the new breeding centre at Walsrode Bird Park showing two neighbouring groups of storks G. Wennrich Two young storks born in 1980 in front of their pen 130 BREEDING THE SENEGAL PARROT Poicephalus senegalus By ERIC CALLAGHAN (Co. Dublin, Eire) My original two Senegal Parrots were obtained in May 1975. They con¬ sisted of one of the Yellow-breasted subspecies P.s. senegalus and one of the Orange-breasted subspecies P.s. mesotypus. The two birds were unsexed adults. They were housed in a 3 ft box cage with a nest box attached. Both birds spent long periods in the nest box over the next few months, but as a result of observed mating attempts it was eventually discovered that the “pair” consisted of two cocks. In the autumn of 1976 a true pair of the Orange-breasted subspecies was obtained. About a year later the hen had started to use the nest box provi¬ ded when unfortunately she managed to escape by chewing a hole in the wire mesh front of the cage, the door of the room being open at the time. The cock made no attempt to follow her. In September 1978 two birds, both believed to be hens, were bought; one of each subspecies. At this stage the original two birds were separated and the hen of the Yellow-breasted subspecies was introduced to the Yellow-breasted cock. From this point, these birds are referred to as Pair A. The hen Orange -breasted was introduced to the “widower” Orange-breasted cock - these are referred to as Pair B. In both cases the birds proved com¬ patible almost immediately and within moments in each case an extensive session of mutual preening began. Previously, no attempt at mutual preen¬ ing had ever been witnessed between the two cock birds, nor for that matter has it often been witnessed with the true pairs since. By contrast, inadvertently attempting to pair two cock birds at a later date resulted in strong aggression and it was a long time before the two birds could be persuaded to share a cage. Housing Both pairs are housed indoors under artificial lighting which is turned on automatically at 7.30 a.m. and turned off manually, usually at about 9.00 p.m. Although the room is not heated the temperature rarely drops below 45 °F. Pair A is housed in a cage measuring 66 inches x 18 x 30 high with a nest box which measures 22 inches x 10 x 1 1 high fixed to the out¬ side. Pair B is housed in a cage which is a 30 inch cube with a nest box which measures 17 inches x 10 x 12 high fixed to the outside. Pieces of dry wood were placed in each box. These the birds eventually chewed into ERIC CALLAGHAN - BREEDING THE SENEGAL PARROT 131 a fine layer on which the eggs were laid. Permanent companions in the room were a potential breeding pair of African Grey Parrots, a cock African Grey, a hen Blue-fronted Amazon Parrot and two cock Senegal Parrots, one of each subspecies. During the winter months the room is also used to house a collection of small foreign seed-eating birds. Feeding The birds receive a basic diet which is made up of approximately three parts sunflower seed plus one part each of canary seed, white millet, a mixture of small seeds intended for pigeons and, twice weekly, corn which has been soaked for 24 hours previously. Extras in the form of peanuts, apple, orange, grapes, Cheddar cheese and spinach beet leaves or other greenfood in season are provided regularly. Sexing A difference in head size is very obvious between the members of Pair A, the head of the cock being much broader and stronger looking. This difference is much less obvious with Pair B. The extra Yellow-breasted cock has a head structure which appears almost identical to that of the hen of the Yellow-breasted pair, so it would appear that head structure is not an infallible guide to sexing. In both pairs, although none of the birds is tame, the cock is less timid than the hen. The stance of the bird on the perch also appears to be significant. The cocks tend to sit fairly upright on the perch whereas the hens tend to stand with the body more inclined towards the horizontal across the perch. Perhaps the most definite indication of the sex of an individual is threat behaviour. I have only ever been threatened by a cock bird, never by a hen. Threatening behaviour consists in the bird leaning backwards slightly, shrugging the wings outwards at the shoulder while doing so, this being accompanied by a raising of the head feathers, gaping the beak and pro¬ ducing a crackling sound within the beak. Even newly fledged young have been tentatively sexed from the fact that those which appeared more mas¬ culine-looking in other ways have threatened me when approached too closely whereas a believed young hen has never done so. Threatening beha¬ viour in this case has consisted merely in stretching the head forwards and gaping. It may be of relevance here to mention that on the occasions when another bird has been loose in the room, only the cock of each pair attempted to drive it away from their cage. The pairs, once formed, have been completely compatible, even to the 132 ERIC CALLAGHAN - BREEDING THE SENEGAL PARROT extent of sharing food, one member of the pair allowing the partner to take pieces from a food item which it is holding. At the same time, court¬ ship feeding has never been observed. This Is in contrast to the African Grey Parrots where the cock will forcibly remove a titbit from the hen if necessary, only to feed it back to her later. No real courtship behaviour has ever been observed, for the birds tend to cease whatever they may be doing immediately I enter the room. Breeding The first signs of a breeding attempt were in August 1979, when the hen of Pair B began to spend time in the nest box - approximately one year after being introduced to the cock. On 15th August an egg was found in the nest, a second appearing on the 17th and a third on the 19th. All three of these eggs were fertile and two hatched after an incubation period of 26 days. Both of these young died at two days old apparently not having been fed, although closely brooded by the hen. There then followed a frustrating period with numerous eggs being laid by both hens, none of which appeared to be fertile, although Incubated for the normal period (see Table below for details). It is interesting to see the high degree of synchronisation In laying be¬ tween both hens. As the two cages face one another across the room, per¬ haps there is some degree of social stimulation. It is also interesting to see that up to the last successful nesting, the birds have always been winter nesters in spite of relatively uniform conditions of light throughout the year. After so many abortive nesting attempts, I received the suggestion in correspondence with George Smith, that perhaps the fault lay, not in in¬ fertility, but rather in non-viable embryos as a result of a dietary defic¬ iency. It should perhaps be mentioned that all the birds appeared to be in top condition, with no outward sign of trouble. Starting in February 1981, the birds’ diet was supplemented as follows: V-Mix, a proprietary poultry vitamin mixture was supplied in the drinking water, mixed according to the manufacturer’s instructions, for five days every second week; SA-37, a vitamin-mineral powder was sprinkled on the food twice each week. The birds were also offered cooked chop bones with a little meat at¬ tached every couple of days. These were eagerly taken from the beginning by Pair A which have continued to eat them ever since. In contrast, Pair B would not touch the bones for a long time and even now will just occa- ERIC CALLAGHAN - BREEDING THE SENEGAL PARROT 133 sionaUy take a little. To my surprise Pair B had one egg in the nest on 21st May 1981, the first egg ever to be laid during the summer months. This proved to be the first egg of a clutch of three. Equally surprisingly, the hen of Pair A fol¬ lowed suit, producing the first egg of a clutch of four on 9th June. On 26th June, one egg in the nest of Pair B hatched, the other two eggs being apparently infertile. On this occasion the hen began to feed the chick properly. On 8th July the first egg of Pair A hatched, being followed on the 10th by a second. Unfortunately the following day this chick was found dead in the nest with a crushed abdomen, possibly as a result of the cock spending a lot of time in the nest with the hen. The third egg of the clutch hatched, on the 12th, the fourth egg proving infertile. This egg measured 28 x 24 mm, the only egg which I have measured. This is slightly smaller than the 29.6 x 26.4 given in For shaw’s “Parrots of the World”. The newly hatched chicks were sparseiy covered with white down and had noticeably fleshy swellings to the lower mandible. After the first two days they could be clearly heard calling for food. At this stage both cocks became extremely aggressive and could often be seen clinging to the front of their cages threatening each other. The cock of Pair A, which is the tamer of the two, would also stand at the en¬ trance to the nest box and threaten me whenever I opened the cage to feed them. The different characters of the two hens were revealed at this stage also. While the hen of Pair A would sit calmly on the perch while I inspected the nest, the other hen would rush back into the nest box as soon as I entered the room and would stay there as long as I remained, not even moving if I lifted the lid slightly in order to inspect the nest contents. Food supplied while the young were in the nest consisted of the usual seed mixture, all being soaked for at least 24 hours. Dry seed was comple¬ tely ignored. In addition, bread and milk, cheddar cheese, spinach beet leaves and whatever fruit was available were offered daily and were taken. On 31st August the Orange-breasted chick left the nest for the first time, at the age of 9 weeks and 4 days. It returned to the nest that evening and did not emerge again for a further two days. The first Yellow-breasted chick emerged on 12th September, also at the age of 9 weeks, 4 days, while the second chick came out on the 15th at the age of 9 weeks, 5 days. All the young returned to the nest regularly during the following few days and all slept in the nest at night for the next week or so, being accompanied by the hens. Begging calls could be heard from the chicks for five to six days after fledging although all the young were seen to eat soaked sunflower seed 134 ERIC CALLAGHAN - BREEDING THE SENEGAL PARROT within two days of fledging. They were first seen to eat dry seed about ten days after fledging. They did not appear to touch the other foods available at this time. On fledging the young closely resembled the adults in colouring, al¬ though the green area of the upper breast extended further down the breast and the orange of the Orange-breasted chick was very pale. In addition to a dark eye, all the fledglings showed a pale, horn coloured patch at the base of the upper mandible. The young were separated from the adults on 4th October when the youngest was just over 12 weeks old. PAIR DATE OF FIRST EGG CLUTCH SIZE B A A B A B A 13th March 1980 31st March 1980 31st August 1980 6th September 1980 5th November 1980 8th November 1980 1st January 1981 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 Products mentioned SA-37 Nutritional Supplement. Intervet Laboratories Ltd. V-Mix Soluble vitamin mixture. Fisons Ltd. 135 BREEDING THE WHITE-CRESTED JAY THRUSH Ganrulax leucolophus By L. GIBSON (Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada) This handsome bird is well known and is the most readily available of the large family of Laughing Thrushes. It is found from the Eastern Himalayan foothills down through Indo China, where small family parties of about six birds are a familiar sight, scrounging around villages in typical babbler fashion. They weigh about 105 g, with seven captive birds ranging from 99 g to 116 g. Because of their size and aggressive nature, they are difficult to house with other birds and are far better kept in an aviary by themselves. They are extremely territorial and, probably for this reason, make short work of any smaller birds but never attempt to eat them, as is sometimes reported. The first birds I ever kept were two leucolophus. When first obtained they were dirty, thin and in quite the most threadbare condition that I have ever seen in any bird. The first thing they did on arrival, in spite of being hungry, was to have a bath. They bathe regularly and are quite meticulous. Then they began to eat. They ate everything that was put in front of them, including the cranberry sauce with turkey scraps. This went on for about two months before they eased off. For the first few months they were kept in a spare room. The food and water was put in an aquarium on a stand in the middle of the room. They became tame enough to sit on the aquarium while I changed the news¬ papers on the bottom. However, these birds quickly revert to the wild state if left alone for a short while. They moulted beautifully shortly after acquisition. Health They were found to be riddled with parasites (at least six) and as there was no cure for all of them, they were put in quarantine. The worst was Coccidia but after two months it had dropped from a very heavy to a light infection. The birds were kept under rigidly controlled conditions, but ex¬ actly one year later, the Coccidia was still there. The experiment was then terminated as the birds were boarded out for the holidays. Most birds I have seen in zoos have invariably suffered from overgrown beaks, one bird having its top mandible a full 2.5 cm (1 inch) longer than the other. They are prone to beak damage, and one of the original birds showed a healed fracture on the top mandible. They panic rather readily N.B. The use of Ganrulax in these notes refers to this species only and not to the genus as a whole which is, o f course, quite a large one. 136 L. GIBSON - WHITE-CRESTED JAY THRUSH at night if frightened by a cat, etc., and will fly into the wire. Two birds which I boarded out suffered broken beaks within a short time. Unfor¬ tunately both had the top mandible broken almost at the base and they could only eat with great difficulty. They were pensioned off and died within two years. Ideally they should be kept in a large aviary, but even in my 10 metre flight the hen has badly skinned her “nose” in two successive springs. Even better would be a conservatory without wire. Apart from this beak trouble, nothing else bothers them and I have had one which lived to at least 15 years in captivity. These birds become quite relaxed when the owner is around (except when nesting) but remain suspicious of strangers. They are good watchdogs and set up a cackle when they hear a strange noise. The hen in this article was at least nine years old when she nested. They were free of parasites when sent to the zoo but one had a light infection of capillaria (probably one worm) when returned. This was successfully treated. Background The original pair of birds was donated to the local zoo in 1972, a year after acquisition, and remained there until the spring of 1980. Two years before, I had obtained another two birds, one of which died in 1979. I thought that it might have been a hen, but a post-mortem examination proved it to be a male. It was then evident that I had two males. The original two were brought back and all three were put together. One of the original birds had plucked the other about the neck for eight years. The feathers simply stopped growing and the bird kept its head pulled down to keep warm. There was an obvious difference between these two with the plucker having white all the way from its throat to its vent, while the plucked one only had a white breast. This was initially thought to be a sex indicator, but it is simply a subspecific difference. Sexing On putting the three together, the largest unplucked zoo bird immedi¬ ately paired off with my remaining one. The odd one was chased away from the pair but was otherwise unmolested. The large bird was a hen being slightly larger than the other two. The male had a brighter chestnut colouring in his mantle. The band of reddish-brown bordering the white is less extensive on the hen so the brightness of colour, or lack of it, may just be relative. The odd bird with the white breast was a much duller brown. The birds have to be in good condition and well fed to see the difference in colour. If poorly fed, they become dull brown and in extreme cases L. GIBSON - WHITE -CRESTED JAY THRUSH 137 show off-white streaks in the brown feathers, especially on the wings and tad. One of my two birds showed this when bought but it moulted out fine and I do not know if it is the remaining male or not. When in good shape, their rufous colouring can be very bright and attractive, even in the hen, but it takes only a moment to tell them apart. Behaviour is of no help for, as with ah babblers, any two birds will sleep together and behave socially. The sex of the odd bird is still in doubt. Of five birds kept some years ago, the largest was a hen of the white¬ breasted form. The sex of the others was in doubt, except for two that paired off, but it was not known which was which. Both attacked the known hen possibly because it was the only other female. The (?)hen of the pair was just desperate to get at it, even trying to get it through the wire separating the aviaries. This would suggest careful introduction of new birds. No courtship behaviour was noted, and neither fed the other, although one would call the other to fresh food. They indulged in mutual preening the year round. Calls The birds have a rather musical call They use the first two notes of this when nervous. They use a cluck when they get fed which serves to attract attention to the presence of food. They sang at dawn and dusk, with half¬ open wings. The odd bird with the white breast had a different, slightly more limited and somewhat less attractive call. When it was removed to an inside cage all three continued to call back and forth. The hen even called while sitting on eggs, so the third bird was removed from the premises. When the chicks hatched they fell silent. Feeding The adults were maintained and moulted on a simple diet of bread and peanut butter and rice pudding. They also got chopped, cooked chicken, including skin, three or four times a week. A dish of dry food was always present. This was either dog chow powder, insectile food, or chick starter crumbs. They ate it if very hungry but mostly they just scattered it. No fruit or berries were eaten, except that the hen ate a few grapes. They would not eat scrambled egg at all, or small birds5 eggs. Neither did they show any interest in small dead chicks. In the light of these observations, reports of Garrulax eating chicks must be regarded as speculation. Because chicks are missing does not mean they were eaten. Apart from anything else, even newly-hatched chicks are far too big to be swallowed. And, far 138 L. GIBSON - WHITE-CRESTED JAY THRUSH from destroying chicks when disturbed, the parents put up a spirited de¬ fence of the nest each time it was examined. The original pair was in such poor shape when obtained that their eating habits can be discounted. Housing The original birds were first kept in a small aviary at home and then in a small one in the zoo, in the company of pheasants. They were brought back in February 1980 and put into a 10 metre flight as described for Arrow-marked Babblers (Avicultural Magazine 1979, 112), to which their habits are practically identical. As noted, the beak is the weak point with these birds. Keeping them on an earth floor is not sufficient to keep the beak in good shape. They should be supplied with a pile of stones about 5 cm (2 inches) in diameter. They spend hours sifting through these and it keeps the beak in good shape. Eventually the stones are all dispersed and have to be gathered up again. They bathe regularly and were supplied with a water dish under a dripping tap. This was on stones about 15 cm (6 inches) off the ground. Food was placed on concrete blocks just inside the door at a height of 60 cm (2 feet) in the shelter end. One-third of the aviary was roofed over. The birds roosted in exactly the same position all year; this was in a Wistaria and was quite exposed to view in winter. If Garrulax are kept in an unroofed aviary, they do not seek shelter but will sleep in the most exposed situations, so perches should be arranged with this in mind. Nests Two nests were built. One was used three times and the last one once. The first was built in a Weigela bush, 1.5 metres above ground, near the top, in almost the same spot used by Mousebirds the year before. As with the Arrow-marked Babblers, nesting was a leisurely process. The first nest was started on 27th May and the eggs were laid 15 days later. Both birds shared in the building, as they did with all other activities. The nest measured 9.5 cm (3 3A inches) inside diameter, 15 cm (6 inches) outside diameter, 6.5 cm (2 Vi inches) inside depth and 10 cm (4 inches) outside depth. This was deep like all babbler nests and only the bird’s head and tail stuck out when incubating. Rather coarse material was used con¬ sisting mainly of long grass and small twigs. It rested on a base of thick twigs . The nest was unlined and was almost identical to that of the Arrow- marked Babbler. The first nest had a thick Weigela twig across the inside just above the bottom and crossing about a third of the area. This was cut out. As with L. GIBSON - WHITE -CRESTED JAY THRUSH 139 all other nests, I shored it up with a pile of dried grass, but it had less need of this than any other. This nest was used twice in succession. A second nest was built in an open cardboard box 1.5 metres up in a Wistaria at the end of the shelter, just where the Arrow-marked Babblers had built a year earlier. Like the babblers , the Garrulax added to the nest until the box was full. The hen did most of the incubating and also brooded the chicks for the first few days. She was on at night while the cock took regular but lesser spells of duty. Eggs Fourteen pure white eggs were laid in clutches of three, four, four and three, of which twelve hatched. Most hatched in 13 days and within a few hours of each other. They are relatively small for the size of the bird, being about 6.5 g. - 7% of the female’s body weight. Two of the first clutch were laid in the nest on 1 1th and 12th June, and a third egg was found on 15th June at the far end of the aviary. This egg weighed 7.1 g and measured 28x 22 mm. It was replaced in the nest but did not develop. The last clutch was laid on 2nd-4th October in the cardboard box. There was frost on the two nights before hatching. Chicks When the chicks hatched, the parents became quite aggressive. As with the Arrow-marked Babblers it was the hen which was most active in defence. The cock was not so tame and when he was off duty he hid in the bushes. When I examined the chicks I was regularly struck in the face by the hen’s claws, so much so that I had to wear a hat. On one occasion she clung to the back of my neck and was carried out of the aviary. She sat on the open door screaming abuse. Then she flew to an apple tree and back again to the door. After what seemed like an eternity, but was actually about a minute, she went back in to the chicks. Thereafter I backed out of the aviary and also hung a plastic sheet over the door. The chicks are large and vigorous. They are downless and greyish pink with a yellow-rimmed beak, but no inside gape colour. They beg at the slightest provocation and can easily take a whole mealworm pupa. When the first clutch hatched, it was cold being about 14-1 5°C (58- 59°F) during the day and about 12°C (54°F) at night. Both parents sat very tight. When one brought food, the other merely stood up until the chicks were fed. The chicks were peeping by the second day. 140 L. GIBSON - WHITE-CRESTED JAY THRUSH All chicks were hand fed with scrambled egg from day one - at great risk to my person, as I was attacked each time. Both parents set up such a clamour when the nest was approached that it is a wonder any chicks sur¬ vive in the wild. The parents fed steadily using mealworms, pupae, spiders and leather- jackets. Small earthworms and a little rice pudding were used when the chicks were about six days old. As with the babblers, no food was broken up, but fed whole after being killed. One would think that at this stage such large chicks would be easily raised but it was not to be so. Every¬ thing went smoothly for the first five days. The sixth day was very hot and the hen stood on the nest and fanned the chicks with one wing. The smallest had difficulty in swallowing its scrambled egg. The next day it regurgitated it and died the following day. It had no food in it stomach but did^have three pieces of eggshell. Cultures from the stomach and in¬ testine both grew the bacillus Clostridium perfringens, the significance of which was not clear. On the same day the other chick was a good deal larger at 25 g, began to have difficulty swallowing. It was started on antibiotics (Cephacosporin) but gradually went downhill and on the tenth day it was taken in and placed in an incubator. It had some feathers opened and was most comfortable at 86-88°F. It was fed about every two hours but was breathing with some difficulty. A throat swab yielded a heavy growth of the yeast Candida. A culture of the faeces showed Candida and Enterococcus but no Clostridium , which was to be expected as it was on antibiotics. Gentian violet, and later Nystatin were given to try to counteract the yeast. The abdomen was swollen and red. Despite treatment, it died nest day aged 1 1^4 days. An immediate examination revealed at IVi mm lesion on the liver which gave a pure culture of Candida albicans , as did a lesion in the right main air sac. The intestine was crammed with food, indicating that digestion had stopped some 30 hours earlier. The feathers had opened and it had reached 32 g and looked just like its parents. The second next had four chicks. By 48 hours the third chick to hatch was dead and the fourth died the following day. The first to die was too far gone for a post mortem when it was found. It had been discarded only 1 metre from the nest. Its stomach was full. The next to die was riddled throughout with Enterococcus but I was not sure how long it had been dead. The two remaining chicks were taking about half a teaspoonful of egg per day. They were started on antibiotics on the second day, consisting of a dose of Septra (Sulphonomide and Trimethoprim) in the morning and L. GIBSON - WHITE-CRESTED JAY THRUSH 141 Veflex (Cephacosporin) at night. This continued for five days until they were six and a half days old. They were much more advanced than the previous chicks, the eyes opening on the sixth day. The parents continued to feed well, preferring mealworms and spiders and at one point the hen took eight mealworms at once to the nest. Strangely they did not like crickets and did not use them unless there was nothing else, not even eating them themselves. Scrambled egg left on the nest rim was not fed to the chicks. The parents just ate it, as they did with the chicks’ droppings. On the morning of the twelfth day, the smaller chick was found dead in the nest. It .weighed 36g and was well feathered. The larger was found running about on the ground. It weight 47Hg. When replaced in the nest left immediately. It was unable to fly but was well developed and remained hidden for almost two weeks. However, the parents shrieked whenever I approached it. Thereafter raising was uneventful. The chick continued to beg long after it was self-supporting and was still fed by its parents until somewhere between five and six weeks old. It was the only chick reared and was also the only species reared here so far where the chick was iden¬ tical in colour to its parents. In fact, the mantle was such a bright chestnut that it was surmised to be a cock. All three birds lived together peacefully after nesting. The dead chick was examined and the only lesions seen were a sub¬ surface spot on the tongue and another at the top of the throat at the edge of the epiglottis. Both were excised and found to be quite hard. They were crushed and cultured and again gave a pure growth of Candida albicans. Two other clutches of three hatched (one egg failing to do so) and the chicks were all dead within two and a half days. All had their stomachs crammed with food. They were again given antibiotics, but only when they were showing signs of distress. This was all most perplexing. To have Candida lesions in young chicks like this suggests an inherited deficiency, and I believe it is the youngest age in which this infection has been noted. One can expect Candida in birds that are just about to die of old age, and I found this several times. The parents, and indeed all Garrulax , have a lot of Candida in the intes¬ tinal tract and the faeces. It is virtually impossible to treat if it sets in sys¬ tematically like that. It is unaffected by antibiotics. I am now sorry that I did not pursue treatment more aggressively as I had so few chicks to work on. However, it is significant that two chicks on antibiotics reached twelve days and were better developed at the same age than the others. I have never had any other species reach such a late stage of development and then die. 142 BREEDING RAMPHOCEL US TANAGERS UNDER CAPTIVE CONDITIONS By Dr. JOHANN INGELS (Destelbergen, Belgium) From the general literature on the adaptablity of tanagers to captive conditions, we concluded that Ramphocelus were the most suitable for avicultural purposes (Ingels, 1982). They readily adapt to confinement and accept suitable food; moreover they reproduce fairly readily and are attrac¬ tive birds. However, their natural shyness and nervous disposition and their aggressive nature during the breeding season can cause problems (Norgaard- Olesen, 1973-74). The following survey summarises our knowledge of the reproduction of Ramphocelus tanagers under controlled conditions. It is based on reports of successful and unsuccessful breeding results which have appeared in the Avicultural Magazine, Foreign Birds, The Foreigner (England), De Vogelwereld (Belgium) and Onze Vogels (Holland). Personal observations and breeding results with six Ramphocelus species are also included. The choice of aviary may contribute greatly to a successful breeding attempt. If possible, pairs should be housed in individual flights; the best results being from those housed in fairly large, planted aviaries. An area of some 10 square metres (approximately 100 square feet) appears most suitable. Vegetation (shrubs and small trees) will not only offer suitable nesting sites, but will also attract insects. In communal aviaries, other inmates can cause continual disturbance, for the breeding pair will try constantly to chase intruders from the nest¬ ing area. Other inmates will compete also for the available supply of insect food when the Ramphocelus need it to rear their young. Finally, other inmates may be responsible also for the disappearance of eggs and/or nest¬ lings. Due to the pronounced sexual dimorphism, selecting a true pair of Ramphocelus is not difficult at all. However, birds purchased in immature plumage may prove to be males. Man-formed pairs are not always com¬ patible, often resulting in constant bickering. Usually, changing one part¬ ner solves this problem. An important initial problem to deal with when establishing a breeding pair is to overcome the natural nervousness of Ramphocelus. Successful breeding results are often thwarted by nervous females not sitting tightly thus causing eggs and/or young to chill; moreover, a nervous pair will all too easily desert their nest. Pairs of Ramphocelus in captivity for several Dr JOHANN INGELS - KAMPHOCEL US TANAGERS 143 years may loose their innate restlessness and learn to accept a broad choice of substitute food Items, two important factors for successful breeding results. Ramphocelus are prone to building loose, untidy nests when building in natural nesting sites, one of the main causes being the provision of unsuitable nesting material Therefore, it is essential that a breeding pair be supplied with materials of different textures, e.g. for the bulk of the nest, coarse grasses, fibres, bamboo leaves, twigs, pine needles, etc. Problems are often encountered when a natural nesting site is chosen as nests located in such sites often deteriorate rapidly. It is preferable, there¬ fore, if a nesting pair can be persuaded to take to a wire nest basket or nest box. Clutch size varies between one and three eggs, with a preponderance of two eggs. Females are able to produce up to four clutches in one breeding season; clutches laid in quick succession tend to contain one egg only. Eggs are pale blue with a few brown specks and flecks on the broad end. Clear and/or thin shelled eggs are not usually encountered when breeding Ramphocelus tanagers. Young hatch after approximately twelve days of incubation. They leave the nest approximately 14 days later; the nestling period thus rang¬ ing from 12 to 16 days, depending largely upon the amount of live food available. The first days after the young hatch are of the utmost importance. The parent birds should be offered a wide range of insect food, e.g. “white” mealworms, crickets, cockroaches, ant pupae, spiders, maggots, flies, mealworm and maggot chrysalids, etc. In planted aviaries live insects will be foraged for in the vegetation, but as already mentioned, in communal aviaries there will be considerable competition for the insect food avail¬ able. Under these circumstances, young rarely reach maturity. The parent birds may be stimulated to feed the young by offering food several times daily and at different sites in the aviary. Females will do most of the feeding in the early days, although males will help more as the young grow older. After about one week, the parents will begin gradually feeding their more usual diet to the young. Young usually leave the nest before their plumage is fully developed, thus causing them to be poor flyers. Open standing water must, there¬ fore, be covered at this stage to avoid drowning. During a severe rain shower fledglings may become waterlogged if they are unable to find a sheltering place, causing them to chill and die. When attempting to rear young to independence in communal flights, the other inmates may 144 Dr JOHANN INGELS - RAMPHOCELUS TANAGERS cause problems by attacking the Ramphocelus fledglings. Although parent birds will usually protect their offspring, this task may become too much to contend with. In this same period the parents may also show extreme aggression, and in some cases may even kill other inmates. If all goes well, the young will progress rapidly, flying well within a week of leaving the nest. At the age of 20 to 25 days, they will be fully feathered and already feeding themselves. Should the parent birds begin a second round, they will continue to feed their offspring, even when the female is incubating. To avoid aggression from the male, it is preferable to remove the young once they are fully independent. Ramphocelus can prove to be prolific breeders as shown by the results of Dr. R.E. Brown (Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia. 1954), who, after the importation of all birds into Australia was banned, bred 35 young to the seventh generation from an original pair of Brazilian Scarlet Ramphocelus bresilius and one female Silver-beaked Tanager R. carbo. At the age of 19 the original female Silver-beaked Tanager was still breeding and rearing young successfully. A rough analysis of the results in public collections, as published in the International Zoo Yearbook (volumes 1-17, 1959-75), illustrates the breeding possibilities of these tanagers. In the period covered by this publication, 19 pairs of Ramphocelus produced 78 young in 40 breeding seasons, or on the average each pair reared a total of four young during two seasons, or two young a year. Although on the average each pair was only active for two breeding seasons, prolific pairs bred during five suc¬ cessive seasons, rearing up to nine young in this period. Species most often seen and/or bred in public collections are: the Brazilian Scarlet R. bresilius % the Crimson-masked R. nigrogularis , the Silver-beaked R. carbo and especially and Flame- and Lemon-rumped Tanagers R. flammigerus flammigerus and R. f. icteronotus respectively. REFERENCES BROWN, Dr. R.E.B. 1954. A flock of Fruit Pigeons and some tanagers. A vicultural Magazine ,6 0 : 107-108. INGELS, J. In prep. On the adaptability of tanagers to captive con¬ ditions. NORGAARD-OLESEN, E. 19734. Tanagers (I and II). Skibby (Denmark) Skibby Books, Vol. II, p. 8. 145 INBREEDING DEPRESSION IN MANDARIN DUCKS: A PRELIMINARY REPORT ON SOME CONTINUING EXPERIMENTS By GUY A. GREENWELL, CAROLYN EMERICK & MAXEEN BIBEN (Conservation & Research Center, Smithsonian Institution, Virginia, USA) Background As aviculturists working with wild forms, our problems are distinct from those of breeders of domestic animals. In their field, inbreeding and line breeding have been necessary tools for establishing breed characteris¬ tics and fixing them for the future. In our case, we must assume that some product from our breeding may be re-introduced into the wild. We reason that the ideal form for survival is that which came from the wild. We can¬ not improve on it for it has become the ultimate in adaptation to its envir¬ onment during the eons of its development. We can and do lose some characteristics which may be essential to the species’ wild survival. What is lost by inbreeding? Does it really affect the production of wild birds? These questions have not been answered to our satisfaction. Here at C.R.C. we attempt to hatch and rear young from eggs of birds held at the National Zoological Park in Washington, DC, as well as from any laid here. During the 1979 breeding season we began to suspect that our problems in rearing ducklings from Zoo eggs were not all management orientated, but might be genetic in part. We had on hand that winter two male and three female Mandarin Ducks which we had reared in 1979. It was one of several species which seemed to exhibit poor hatchability. After examination of the Zoo records revealed that no new Mandarin Ducks had come to the National Zoo since 1967, we decided to use those five birds for some experiments. The records showed that two males had come in from Mr. Kenneth Sather of Round Lake, Minnesota, on 20th January 1966. Two more drakes had been received from the Edward Marshall Boehm aviaries near Trenton, New Jersey, on 3rd April 1967, and the last sue birds, which were siblings, had arrived from the Cleveland Zoo on 20th October, 1967. Methods We used covered rearing pens with concrete pools. In March 1980 we installed a pair and a trio of our siblings each in a separate pen so that we could measure the production. One pen received one nesting box, the other was given two. All eggs were numbered with a soft pencil as they 146 GREENWELL, EMERICK & BIBEN - INBREEDING IN MANDARIN DUCKS were laid. They were gathered as clutches after the female had lined the nest with down signifying the completion of the clutch. The eggs were cleaned of any faecal material, dipped in a Betadyne solution at about 100°F and set in a Petersime self-turning incubator at 99.75°F.D.B. The eggs were candled at seven-day intervals. Those in which we were not certain of the time of death of the embryo were opened later and the state of development was determined. Discussion Possible variations were encountered during the first half of the 1980 incubation period, the eggs obviously were not losing moisture at the normal rate. A new room air conditioning controller was installed on 1st May. By mid-May the condition had stabilised and thereafter incubation seemed to be normal. Another factor in addition to the erratic moisture conditions we experienced during the 1980 season and which could have limited hatching was a misreading of the strength of one of the fumigant components. The incubators were not being adequately fumigated but that condition was corrected in 1981. However, neither of those factors should have influenced the high percentage of fertile eggs which did not die until late in incubation. Therefore, we felt that we must look elsewhere for an explanation. We determined to try outbreeding with some unrelated Mandarins but the question was from where? We concluded that those farthest away in the U.S. had the best chance of being unrelated. We knew that the delays involved in permits and quarantines for importing birds would make any effort for 1981 impossible. We asked the San Diego Zoo for two pairs of Mandarins. They had no individuals that were easy to catch so they borrowed four birds from Sea World at San Diego and sent them to us. Of the four San Diego birds, one female was lost, the other proved too wild to breed in the rather exposed conditions in our new Hardy Birds Yards. Therefore only two pairs demonstrated the results of outbreeding. All eggs were handled as in 1980, all eggs in the incubator were candled as before, and doubtful ones were opened later. Results During 1980 the very low levels of hatchability (18.3%) and viability (53.3%) were an indication that our problems might be due to inbreeding. Poor reproductive output is characteristic of highly inbred domestic mammals and birds, but has rarely been investigated in wildlife^. A fur- GREENWELL, EMERICK & BIBEN - INBREEDING IN MANDARIN DUCKS 147 ther indication that this was a genetic, rather than a management -related problem was the fact that a significantly greater percentage of our embry¬ onic deaths occurred in the last third of incubation (40) than in the first (6) or second third (21)5. While poor egg handling usually results in early embryonic death, embryonic mortality due to inbreeding has greatest effect late in incubation*^. Eggs from the 1981 outbred birds had very significantly greater hatching success than linebred eggs produced that same season (96.2% against 44.6%). In addition, youngsters of unrelated parents fared better after hatching, with 80.0% still living after 90 days. Inbred 1981 offspring showed 52.0% survivorship past 90 days; 1980 birds, 53.3%. Again, embry¬ onic deaths in linebred eggs occurred significantly more often late in incu¬ bation (2 early, 6 middle, 23 late). Conclusions These results illustrate two advantages of introducing new genetic stock into a population whose ability to live has been declining: increased hatch- ability and viability. According to Romanoff^, when embryonic mortality reaches over 70%, extinction of the line is likely. Introducing new genetic stock may forestall such an unfortunate eventuality. As was discussed earlier, the timing of embryonic deaths adds credence to the belief that low hatchability and viability may be indicative of in- breeding depression. A third advantage of mixing new blood is the money saved. From the three pairs of outbred birds we obtained 26 fertile eggs and reared 20 young. From four pairs of inbred birds we got 26 good eggs and reared only 13 young, and this comparison includes troubles with two of the pairs of unrelated birds. Recommendations The evidence presented here strongly suggests that waterfowl breeders (and perhaps others) who have noticed a decline in hatchability of eggs should find a colleague at some distance whose birds are not known to be related, and exchange male flocks. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study would not have been possible without the dedicated care and devo¬ tion of bird keepers Linwood Williamson, Virginia Fristoe, and Corwin Witt; tempor¬ ary keepers D.D. Parks and Elizabeth Powell; and volunteer Annie Marshall. 148 REFERENCES 1. BYERLY, T.C., KNOX, GW. and TULL, E.M.A. 1934. Poultry Science, 13: 230-238. 2. RALLS, K., BRUGGER, K. and GLICK, A. 1980. International Zoo Year¬ book ,20: 137-146. 3. RALLS, K., BRUGGER, K. and BALLOU, J. 1979. Science, 206: 1101- 1103. 4. ROMANOFF, A.L. and ROMANOFF, A.J. 1972. Pathogenesis of the Avian Embryo. 5. Ibid, p. 39. * * * PLEASE NOTE: Tables showing the detailed results of these experiments have been supplied and copies can be obtained on application to the Editor (with stamped addressed envelope, please). BREEDING THE RED-BREASTED BLUE-BILL Spermophaga haematina By P. LOWE (West Country Wildlife Park, Cricket St. Thomas, Somerset) The Red-breasted Blue-bill cock has a deep crimson breast and lower abdomen. The rest of the plumage is black. The hens differ in having white spots on the flanks. This species of Blue-bill or Seedcracker occurs in eastern Africa, inhabiting dense forest areas and feeding on the edge of forests. It prefers to keep to low bushes. During the past twelve months or so, a number of these birds have been imported and it has been reported that they have not proved to be good aviary subjects. In November 1981 four male and six female Red-breasted Blue-bills were introduced into our Tropical House which is 100 ft x 50 ft x 24 ft P. LOWE - BREEDING THE RED-BREASTED BLUE-BILL 149 and is thickly planted. The birds seemed to settle well and a good seed mixture was scattered all over the floor of the house, much to the annoy¬ ance of the gardeners when the seed eventually sprouted! However, I believe this action was initially essential to the survival of the birds who were extremely shy. Gradually the Blue-bills have become bolder and now it is a common sight to see a flash of bright crimson flit by or to see one sitting in a bush a few feet away. On 15th March 1982 I noticed a hen Blue-bill carrying nesting material in the form of puppy fluff from my St. Bernard’s dog. I did not see exactly where the bird took this material, nor did I see any further signs of nesting as time was short for lengthy close observation. On 5th April I noticed a small seed-eating bird, plumage black, with a tuft of grey fluff on top of the head, also a distinct orange gape was very noticeable. It appeared to me that this bird could be none other than a Blue-bill fledgling. The only other species of seed-eater in the house is a group of Orange-breasted Waxbills. I did not see this bird again until it was picked up dead by one of our gardeners on 9th April and it was a pity that we did not keep the corpse. After returning from holiday I had a pleasant surprise. Another Blue- bill fledgling appeared - an older looking bird and appearing very strong. I did notice a definite rapport between a pair of Blue-bills and the young bird but since the youngster appeared to be completely self-supporting, I saw no effort by the supposed parents to feed it. I can only suppose that a pair of Blue-bills nested in a horizontal basket 1 ft long and 4 inches in diameter and open at one end. At this time of year I do not probe amongst the vegetation and so possibly valuable infor¬ mation could be lost but I am more interested in leaving well alone and hopefully seeing young birds being fed by the parents on the “sticks”. I would be most interested in comparing notes with other aviculturists who have had similar experiences with this very attractive species. BIRDS OF PREY BRED IN WASSENAAR ZOO, HOLLAND, 1982 By JOHN RENS (Curator) A King Vulture was hatched on 26th March 1982. This is a rare event in captivity but the fifth time that these parents have bred at Wassenaar. Unfortunately the parents tried to eat the first chick and so it and subse¬ quent chicks have been removed and handreared. A special diet is used consisting of mouse intestines mixed with pepsine and hydrochloric acid which is a substitute for their natural diet of predigested meat regurgita¬ ted by the parents and our chicks thrive on this substitute. As well as the King Vulture, the Caracaras and the Cinereous Vultures bred at Wassenaar this year; unfortunately, the young Cinereous Vulture died after three days but the Caracara is growing well. King Vulture chick at Wassenaar Zoo NESTING OF THE SPECKLED HUMMINGBIRD Adelomyia melanogenys 151 By CHRISTOPHER CARTER (Grove, Oxon) The Speckled Hummingbird has a fairly extensive range, being distribu¬ ted from Venezuela, through Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Bolivia to northern Argentina. It is a shining bronzy green above, while underparts are dull white with throat and breast speckled dull green. It has a buff streak behind the eye and dusky cheek patches. The tail is bronze-purple with all but the central tail feathers tipped buff. I purchased a pair of these beautiful hummingbirds in September 1979 and as I was in the middle of building a new bird-room, they were housed temporarily in a planted flight inside a 10 ft x 8 ft cedar wood shed. They arrived in excellent condition and no problems were encountered in estab¬ lishing them. The new bird-room was completed in January. Built against the side of the house, it consists of part-brick construction with conservatory glass panels at each end and for part of the roof. It measures 25 ft x 8 ft x 6 ft and is furnished with various plants and has a small water fountain in which the birds love to bathe. Altogether ten birds of various species moved to the large bird room where they soon settled down. The hen Speckled Hummingbird was well into her moult but showed no ill effects, consuming large quantities of fruit flies. The high fly content in the new building soon brought in the spiders and the webs they spun proved very useful during nest- building. As the hen finished her moult, she became increasingly fit. Her first attempt at nest-building left her covered in cobwebs and apparently upset at her failure. After a few days she had mastered the art of trailing the cobwebs behind her and the nest seemed to grow daily. The nest was constructed solely by the hen and along with cobwebs, she pulled dried moss from an old log found in a nearby wood and lined it with hair. It took about a week to build and was completely enclosed when finished. Looking at the nest it appeared to be just a ball of moss and cobwebs but there was a small entrance hole facing into the corner of the bird room. The construction made it difficult to inspect for eggs and seeing inside was almost impossible. During the week of nest- building, the cock would often dance and float in front of the hen, continually singing. One evening, as I changed the nectar tubes, I saw the hen puffed up and not looking at all well. 152 CHRISTOPHER CARTER - NESTING OF SPECKLED HUMMING BIRD I left her alone, feeling that she might be about to lay, and next morning, looking less ruffled, she entered the nest several times and for some morn¬ ings after, she would be sitting in the nest. I began to suspect that she had laid as an increasing amount of time was now being spent inside the nest. Only occasionally did she leave the nest, but I did have a brief opportunity to check, using a hand mirror. To my delight, I saw two tiny white eggs. I soon moved out of the bird room and did not disturb her again. As no mating had been witnessed, I was unsure whether the eggs were fertile. Incubation was going well until one morning I noticed a Fork¬ tailed Woodnymph hen taking material from the Speckled Hummingbird’s nest to build one of her own. I put in more moss and hair in the hope of discouraging her from doing so. During the afternoon, my wife telephoned me at work to say that the two hens had been fighting and that the nest was looking a little dilapidated. When I returned, both eggs containing fully formed chicks were on the floor broken and the nest had been tom apart. The Woodnymph proceeded to lay two single eggs at a five week inter¬ val. She laid in a shallow depression in the remains of the Speckled Hum¬ mingbird’s nest but there was not sufficient rim and both fell to the ground and smashed. Shortly after the above communication was received, Mr. R. J Elgar also sent in a report about the nesting of this species and, whilst there was naturally some repetition which has been edited out, it was felt that the detailed information given concerning the construction of the nest and the accompanying illustration were of great interest and should be published in conjunction with Mr. Carter’s article. NEST-BUILDING OF A FEMALE SPECKLED HUMMING BIRD Adelomyia melanogenys 153 By R.J. ELGAR (Manchester) Adelomyia melanogenys is a subtropical forest humming bird. It is usually found at altitudes of 4.500 ft to 8,500 ft., preferring cloud forest, coffee plantations, etc. Its vertical distribution is from ground level to a height of six feet, but is more likely to be observed below three feet, feed¬ ing from low growing shrubs and herbage in the undergrowth. Adelomyia is not basically territorial (Snow, 1980) but appears to trap- line over considerable distances mainly to flowers with small amounts of nectar which would be uneconomic for larger trap-lining humming birds to visit. Perhaps I should explain here that trap-lining is a term used to des¬ cribe a non-territorial humming bird that has adopted a non-territorial feeding strategy, visiting flowers over a distance of several miles but usually returning to its starting point to rest or roost before going on another feeding trip. Trap-lining humming birds can be further divided into high and low reward trap-liners. High reward trap-liners are species with particularly long or curved bills which have cd-evolved with certain plant species that offer a high nectar reward per flower, for example, sword-billed humming birds Ensifera feed almost exclusively on the flowers of Passiflora mixta and Datura, the nectar being inaccessible to shorter- billed species. Low reward trap-liners are smaller, shorter-billed species which are excluded from larger flowering areas by territorial species and instead visit smaller flowering areas that would be uneconomic for a territorial species to defend. The Speckled Humming Bird falls into this category. Territorial humming birds are usually large, heavy-bodied birds with shorter wings and tend to be more manoeuvrable but less efficient at covering large distances. These species usually come off better in any aggressive encounter with trap-lining birds and thus can defend an area of flowers for their own use, for example members of the genus Boissoneaua ( Coronets) and Heliangelus (Sun Angels). A fourth category consists of humming birds that are so large or aggressive that they can feed with impunity within the territory of any species. When related to aviculture, the category to which a humming bird belongs can determine the best way in which to house it, a rough guide being that most trap-lining humming birds tend to be solitary and do best in cages, whereas territorial species usually do better in a mixed flight. 154 R.J. ELGAR - NEST-BUILDING OF SPECKLED HUMMING BIRD R.J. ELGAR - NEST-BUILDING OF SPECKLED HUMMING BIRD 155 When my female Adelomyia melanogenys was first acquired in Septem¬ ber 1979, it had completed its moult during the initial seven-week quaran¬ tine period. When it arrived at my home it was released immediately into the communal humming bird flight with approximately ten other occu¬ pants, all being medium to large species. It settled in very easily, but for the first few days proved to be extremely aggressive, especially when I was dimming the lights in the evening. It would land on the backs of roosting humming birds, going through false mating and vent pecking pro¬ cedure. There were numerous attempts at nest-building in various positions within the flight but due to disturbances from other females no nest was ever completed. Over the course of the winter 1980-81 a small outside flight was attached to the communal flight; it measured 15 ft x 4 ft and 7 ft high, it was covered in inch wire netting and on top of this was flat translucent plastic which gave some protection from extreme weather con¬ ditions. Two windows were incorporated, measuring 3 ft x 2 ft for good ventilation in hot weather. The floor is earth and I planted this flight with several species of Clematis, Fuchsia, Passiflora, friiphofia and Salvias well as a grapevine. By early summer 1981 all the plants were in full bloom. At the end of July 1981, the female A delomyia started carrying large amounts of sphagnum moss and attached the moss to the central stems of a Clematis montana , using spiders’ webs to bind it together. Within a few days I realised that the nest was not to be cup-shaped as with most hum¬ ming birds’ nests that we know of, but domed. Most of the work on the nest was achieved by the female from the inside of the dome pushing more sphagnum moss and spiders’ webs into the roof. I rarely observed her on top of the dome. The interior cup was lined with cotton wool and plant down from the Great Willow Herb Epilobium angusti folium. The nest was completed in just over a week. Although she never laid any eggs she roosted in the nest in the evening throughout the summer. On a visit to West Germany in November 1981 I observed two nests of Aglaiocercus species in collections of T. Kleefisch of Bonn and L. Peikert of Gaggenau both of which were domed. REFERENCES SNOW, D.W. and B.K.. Relations between Humming Birds and Flowers in the Andes of Colombia. British Museum. Vol. 38, No. 2. 156 BIBLIOGRAPHY CHAPMAN, Distribution of Bird Life in Ecuador. 1929. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. KLEEFISH. Beobachtungen zum Nestbau v o m Aglaio cercus coelestis. Trochilus. 1980. Mag. 1 , pp. 4-5. MAYER DE SCHAUNSEE. 1954. Birds of Colombia. Wynnewood. . 1970. The Birds of South America. Oliver & Boyd. . 1978, A Guide to the Birds of Venezuela. Princeton University Press, New Jersey. SCHUCHMANN, Karl L. Kolibris, Haltung und Pfluge. PETERS . 1945. Check List of the Birds of the World. Vol. 5. Cambridge. Mass. ACKNOWLE DGEME NT My thanks to Mr. D. Alker for his fine drawing of the nest of Adelomyia NOTES ON THE YELLOW-FACED PARROTLET Forpus xanthops By ROY GIRDLER (Curator) and GRAHAM AUSTIN (Keeper) Midland Bird Garden, Shropshire The Yellow-faced Parrotlet is the largest member of the genus Forpus. When compared with other members of the same genus xanthops is pre¬ dominantly grey green with a yellow face (cheeks, throat and crown). The sexes can be easily distinguished by the colour of the lower back and rump which is cobalt blue in the male and powder blue in the female. These parrotlets come from north-western Peru. The first of a recent series of small consignments of these birds to reach the U.K. was offered for sale in October 1979. We purchased a total of 12 birds (eight cocks and four hens) from this shipment. One pair was housed in a private collection and the remaining 10 birds were placed on loan to the Midland Bird Garden. Initially the 10 birds GIRDLER & AUSTIN - YELLOW-FACED PARROTLET 157 were housed in a small holding cage inside but without very much in the way of heat. Overcrowding had obviously been a problem during the days prior to their purchase as was indicated by the plucked heads of certain individuals and probably for this reason one of the cock birds died very shortly after arriving with us. A further male was killed during December. With the number reduced to eight the aggression, which had been obvious, decreased. The birds remaining, however, were very nervous while caged. A range of cages for South American parrots was completed at the Midland Bird Garden during the spring of 1980 and the group of parrotlets was moved in alongside a colony of 18 Green-rumped Parrotlets Forpus p, passerinus and a pair of Hawk-headed Parrots Deroptyus a . accipitrinus . The aviary was constructed of rustic poles and Vi inch (12 mm) plastic coated mesh and measured approximately 5 m deep by 2 m wide and 2.3 m. high at the front, and was built into a grassed bank at the rear. It was planted with the Peruvian Lily Alstromeria . A small shelter was provi¬ ded at the back of the flight and this was also used as a feeding station. This shelter was never used for roosting, the birds always remaining out¬ side, whatever the weather conditions. Once in their new aviary the birds settled in very quickly, becoming far steadier than they had been while caged. The food provided was of a 50/50 mix of our standard parrot mixture consisting of mixed sunflower, peanut kernels, pine nuts, whole wheat, whole maize and paddy rice, together with a finch mixture comprising a 50/50 Budgerigar mixture plus paraoum millet. Fruit was provided in the form of apple, pear, banana and orange. Only apple was eaten even though all the others had been eaten whilst the birds were housed inside. Cuttle fish bone was also available. Four Budgerigar-type nesting boxes were placed on one side of the aviary. These were lined with wood pulp. Interest was shown in the boxes straight away. A good deal of bickering took place to start with and the pairs began to occupy distinct areas. One pair in particular commandeered most of one comer and whilst they allowed other individuals to perch nearby and to feed unhindered, they kept them well clear of their nest box. It soon became apparent that this pair was taking over all the boxes and so a further she boxes were provided. After much inspection and re-arranging of wood pulp and a certain amount of bobbing and chattering from the male, presumably a courtship, an egg was laid on 19th June, 1980. The female was observed in the nest box for long periods of time on 20th June and she was sitting tight on the 21st. A second egg was seen on the 22nd and had probably been laid on the previous day since a third egg was in evidence on the 23rd. A total of six eggs was laid. 158 GIRDLER & AUSTIN - YELLOW-FACED PARROTLET Rearing food in the form of brown bread soaked in a mixture of con¬ densed milk with soaked corn and currants, chopped cabbage, “Prosecto” insectile food and apple sprinkled with S.A. 37 Vitamin Powder was provided for the birds to get used to before any chicks hatched. No interest was shown in this food until the 13th July when the first chick hatched after an incubation period of approximately 23 days. From this date all the foods offered were sampled, particular interest being shown in the soaked bread. All six eggs had hatched by 20th July and the chicks fledged at about 30 days. All had fledged by 30th August. The young could easily be sexed whilst still in the next box by their rump colour; they proved to be four females and two males. The juvenile coloration was a slightly paler version of the adults with a dark line on the upper mandible which was not obvious in the parents. The young were completely independent of the parents in a fairly short time and nesting was once again underway by mid-September. Three eggs were laid and these measured 21.5 (21-22) mm x 16.8 (16.5-17) mm. These were abandoned on 25th September and there was a short-lived outbreak of fighting on the 27th. All three adult females laid during October but only three young were hatched. These unfortunately were not reared and to prevent further failures and also because of the approaching cold weather, the nest boxes were removed at the end of November. One young male was found dead, apparently killed by other members of the group, and this left six males and seven females at the end of the season. The pair of birds housed separately showed interest in their next box but no serious attempt was made at nesting. The colony of birds remained in unheated quarters throughout the winter and, as previously mentioned, roosted outside at all times. We took the precaution of removing all branches which we felt were too exposed but an attempt to try to make the birds use the shelter, by removing all the outside perches, only resulted in them trying to roost on the wire and so the more sheltered perches were returned. Products mentioned “Prosecto” insectile mixture supplied by John E. Haith, Cleethorpes. S.A, 37 manufactured by Intervet Laboratories Ltd, Cambridge. 159 THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE SPLENDID GRASS PARRAKEET IN AVICULTURE By F.C. BARNICOAT (Johannesburg, Republic of South Africa) The Splendid was one of the last grass parrakeets discovered and was first described by Gould in 1840. It seems that it was not exactly unknown in mid-Victorian aviculture, and there is a definite record of the purchase of a pair by the Zoological Society of London in 1871 and of a further single specimen from the famous dealer, A. Jamrach, in 1872. It was stated that the dealer received the pair off a vessel coming direct from Adelaide. After this, the species was not seen again for 60 years. When Seth-Smith visited Australia in 1908 the ornithologists there considered it extinct and by 1930 there must have seemed about as much chance of ever finding one again as today there seems of sighting a Paradise Parrot! Forshaw has explained that the nomadism of this rare parrot lessens the chances of sighting it, and that irruptions of it occur at long and irregular intervals. Suddenly late in 1931 one such irruption occurred and a very few pairs were trapped and taken to Adelaide. The event was sensational enough for the Australian Governor to acquire a pair to be presented to the King of England, George V, whose love of parrots was well known. A triumphal note appeared in the Avicultural Magazine (February 1932) announcing the safe arrival of this rara avis on English shores on 9th Jan¬ uary, 1932. They were housed at Royal Lodge, Windsor Great Park, under the care of a Mrs. Fetherstonhaugh, who graciously allowed David Seth- Smith the privilege of seeing them and afforded E.J. Boosey of the Keston Foreign Bird Farm his “first and never-to-be-forgotten sight of these won¬ derful little parrakeets, which turned out to be far more brilliantly coloured than ever imagined from reading descriptions”. No doubt Mrs. Fetherston¬ haugh was also seeking advice from the top aviculturists. of the day. It would be nice to know what became of this sensational pair, but I can trace no record. The Avicultural Society acquired an excellent coloured plate of the Splendid Grass Parrakeet from the famous Australian ornithologist and artist, Neville Cayley, which was published with an article by Seth-Smith in the Magazine for April. The original was framed and presented to King George V. In the May issue it was announced that “His Majesty the King has been graciously pleased to grant his patronage to the Avicultural Soci¬ ety”. Back in Australia the enterprising aviculturist, Simon Harvey, acquired 160 F.C. BARNICOAT - SPLENDID GRASS PARRAKEET pairs of these rare birds, which wisely included stock from the three widely scattered areas where the few birds had been trapped. He under¬ took a journey to a remote farm, where he purchased a hen which had been caught by a hawk but luckily saved by the farmer, and he spent a fortnight travelling over 1,500 miles through sparsely populated districts largely on unmade bush tracks in the hope of sighting more of these birds but to no avail. However, from one of the pairs he had purchased he reared five youngsters, which left the nest in October 1932, making him the first breeder of this species. By the end of 1932 he had reared ten, which prompted his remark in the Avicultural Magazine (January 1933) that “these results should prove that there is no harm in allowing aviculturists to keep these rare parrakeets in their aviaries”. Late in 1933 the Duke of Bedford imported a pair from Australia and graciously put them in the hands of the Keston Foreign Bird Farm, so that the honour of being the first breeder outside Australia fell to E.J. Boosey in 1934. The story of how he succeeded despite the counter efforts of X or Old Nick has been charmingly told in the Avicultural Magazine (No¬ vember 1934) and in his book “Foreign Bird Keeping”. The Society’s Medal was awarded in December 1934. The Keston Foreign Bird Farm subse¬ quently managed to build up a really fine breeding stock of what Boosey called “this matchless little bird” and they had five or six excellent breeding pairs “when the War broke out in 1939 and put paid to all one’s endea¬ vours”. The year 1939 also saw another sudden and this time far greater irrup¬ tion of the Splendid Grass Parrakeet in South Australia and 500 to 1,000 of them were trapped. The morality of trapping such large numbers of such a rare bird was debated. However, the avicultural market was flooded, the prices fell and from that time the bird became commonplace in Austra¬ lian aviculture. After the War when things became more or less normal again and before Australia totally banned the export of her native birds in 1959, freely breeding stocks were sent abroad to Europe, USA and South Africa, where in due course Splendid Grass Parrakeets have been bred in their hundreds. They were imported into South Africa in the late 1950s and from the beginning they bred easily and in large numbers. They sold at between £250 and £300 (R600) per pair, which was then worth considerably more than the equivalent sum today, but currently they change hands for less than a tenth of that sum, which brings them within the reach of any bird keeper. This parrakeet thrives with the most modest of housing and feeding. F.C. BARNICOAT - SPLENDID GRASS PARRAKEET 161 So much has been written on the management of them, that any recom¬ mendations here would be superfluous. It seems that they have become steadier through the years, because the elaborate procedures advised in the 1930s such as heated shelters and putting up string netting within the flights to prevent them from flying headlong into the wire and breaking their necks, have long been totally unnecessary. Even 20 years ago in South Africa the breeders found them prone to death through being start¬ led by some disturbance, especially at night, but the pair I have had since 1979 are as tame as Barbary Doves! Their spectacular colouring in green, yellow, red and blue ensures their great popularity and they are well known enough not to need description, but it should be mentioned that their attractive appearance is much en¬ hanced by the unusual waxlike sheen especially in the blue areas of the face and head. No coloured plate can capture this feature and therefore the bird has to be seen in the flesh and in sunlight to be fully appreciated. Their true value as aviary birds He sin their extraordinarily gentle nature. They may be kept with any small seedeaters without trouble, and in marked contrast to many parrotlike birds, even small species like the love¬ birds, they do not have the habit of nipping off the toes of other birds in their own or adjacent aviaries if single wired. A male will, however, usually see another male of the same species as a rival and conflicr will arise between two breeding pairs, so that they are best housed in separate aviaries for breeding unless the enclosure is large. All the Grass Parrakeets are highly accommodating in aviary life and in this as in other respects the Splendid is superlative among all the species. The Rev. H.D. Astley cleverly described the behaviour of the Bourke’s Parrakeet in 1911 and I quote his remarks because they are even more applicable to the Splendid which, of course, Astley never knew. “It is altogether an extremely gentle, quiet little bird, and his gaiety is very inoffensive and restrained. He is never boisterous: he is almost dull at times. If he could suddenly become incar¬ nated in a human body, I feel he would suddenly join a body of old- fashioned Quakers, and certainly never kick over the traces, or appear in connection with any society scandal!” (Bird Notes, February 1911). Their soft, sibilant chirrups must make them about the quietest of all parrotlike birds to keep and no neighbour could possibly be disturbed by them! They also indulge in an unparrotlike low-pitched piping reminiscent of the Bullfinch. I have heard a male piping away contentedly to himself while being transported many miles by car to a show. Yet another advantage to them is that they are readily sexable, the female in her muted tones of green and blue being a charming foil for her 162 F.C. BARNICOAT - SPLENDID GRASS PARRAKEET colourful mate. Young Splendids more or less resemble the hen on leaving the nest, but I have found it possible to sell them immediately in pairs with reasonable certainty. The young cocks tend to be bigger especially with regard to the head and feet. On several occasions when I had left the ringing of a batch of babies whose feet had become too big for the ring to be slipped on subsequently turned out to be males, while those whose feet were still small enough for the rings to be slipped on, although not the youngest, proved to be females. The young cocks also seem to have slightly longer tails. Furthermore colour is the main distinguishing feature. In the males the blue on the wings is wider and brighter, especially the dark blue on the primaries, and the blue on the face is more extensive and of a darker, cobalt shade in contrast to the female’s turquoise shade. Males also have a brighter yellow on the belly, which extends higher up than in a female, and far brighter yellow under tail coverts. Females are generally more olive green and males more of a grass green especially on the rump. I have found it surprising that recently in South Africa the popularity of Grass Parrakeets generally has been eclipsed by the craze for mutation lovebirds but I have no doubt that they will have their turn again. I, for one, am glad that after 50 years in aviculture the Splendid Grass Parrakeet has not, despite inevitable inbreeding on a large scale, undergone a confusing plethora of colour mutations. To my knowledge only the Blue Mutation has so far been established. A beautiful coloured plate of it, painted by R. David Digby, was published in the Avicuitural Magazine for April- June, 1975. 1 have not seen this mutation in South Africa yet. The many Splendid Grass Parrakeets in our aviaries today are practi¬ cally identical to the sensational pair presented to King George V 50 years ago. That is how it should be, and the fact that there are now more of them in captivity in many different countries the world over than in the wild state, where they seem to be in a precarious position, is a satisfying conclusion to one of the greatest avicuitural success stories of our time. 163 FREE FLYING BARBARY DOVES - MY INTRODUCTION TO THEM By P. SPEAKMAN (Nr. Canterbury, Kent) In ‘Animals for Schools’ Terry Mills and Jill Kealing considered that Barbary Doves were aviary birds and were not ideal for free flying as they were far too trusting and likely to walk up to the nearest cat with dire re¬ sults. Surely this must apply to all cage and aviary birds living for genera¬ tions in a totally sheltered environment. And yet, one hears of birds whose natural habitat is vastly different from anything to be found in this country, escaping and breeding to the extent of becoming a nuisance to fruit farmers. I have read that there are apparently thriving communities of Barbary Doves in some places which, if true, must mean that they have learnt to put not their faith in felines. They have learnt that lesson, I suspect, through seeing some of their number fall victims to predators. Of my eight adult Barbaries the three oldest have survived freedom for more than three years. The next oldest will have been flying free for three years this summer, two were hatched last summer and a ninth is about to leave the nest. But if they have learnt to distinguish friend from foe, I, too, have also learnt a great deal in the process. If my ignorance had not been so abysmal initially, I doubt if I would ever have contemplated keeping them. A master at the school I went to in the twenties made a pole dovecote out of a barrel and got a pair of Barbary Doves to put in it. Their fate was in all probability a dire one, but I never heard what happened to them and so I grew up with the idea that Barbary Doves were highly suitable doves for a dovecote. When I returned home to the Wye Valley after the war, I decided to have pigeons again. I had had various kinds before the war so I made a dovecote and fixed it on a pole, only this time, I thought it would be nice to have Barbary Doves in it, like that master at my school. After the fortnight’s incarceration I released them and they promptly vanished into the adjacent wood and were never seen again. There were a lot of Tawny Owls about and after dusk a dove roosting on an exposed branch would not have much chance of survival. After that experience I built a wire netting aviary around the dovecote and got some more Barbaries. They were safe now, but they flung themselves in terror against the wire whenever owls came near, their fear being, presu¬ mably, instinctive. At dusk one evening a dove managed to escape under the netting, but the owl caught him before he had gone twenty yards, and then flew to the top of a nearby Cypress and hooted in triumph, just as I arrived on the scene. I would never have thought it possible for an owl to catch an 164 P. SPEAKMAN - BARBARY DOVES escaping dove which is surely a faster and more agile flyer. A year or two later I married and went abroad so I had to return the doves to the petshop that I had bought them from. Initial Casualties We settled here in Kent 22 years ago. In the summer of 1976 I was given three Barbary Doves. I accepted them gratefully, happy at the thought of having some Barbaries again. It so happened that I had an empty aviary which I had made to house Red Squirrels. I had wanted English ones in preference to European Red Squirrels but had not been able to get any. Soon it became apparent that three doves were one too many and to save the youngest from further suffering I released it. I vanished almost immedi¬ ately. Some weeks later the hen escaped while the door was open. She, too, was never seen again. By now there was a fledgling which became the sole survivor when the male got killed by a weasel - the one inch mesh was not small enough to keep it out. I transferred my one remaining dove to the stable and the following spring obtained two females and a male but the latter died soon after. It was bullied to death, I believe, by my own dove. The casualties so far had been heavy but they were entirely due to my own ignorance, not the doves. I now had a pair and an unmated female. I released them from the stable and they became my first free-flying Barbary Doves. By the end of the summer they had two pairs of offspring making seven altogether - but not for long. By now the parents were nesting and roosting in the garage. The young roosted on the exposed branches of a nearby tree which became more exposed as the autumn progressed. One night I heard owls hooting and next morning there was only one young dove left out of the four. The time had come, I decided, to shut the parents up in the stable for the winter although I allowed the one young bird to remain at liberty. It went into the garage at night and I was not able to shut it up during the day. Later that winter, rats got into the stable and killed all three doves. Once again, I had just one survivor and the end of another winter. This time, I got a single companion and the two became very attached although it soon became clear that they were both males. Again I turned to my suppliers, who are better than the doves themselves at telling males from females, and they sent me two more females. It was probably just as well that both males had had a chance to get to know the locality before their new mates joined them. One couple quickly paired off, and to avoid friction I shut the other pair in the stable. I opened the window only after they had started nesting in the P SPEAKMAN - BARBARY DOVES 165 stable. That winter I let them remain free since one pair roosted each night in the garage and the other roosted in the stable and the only youngster to have reached maturity roosted in dense Hawthorns. Somehow he had learnt the unwisdom of roosting on exposed branches and although owls were often around at night he was always alive and well the following morning. And for my part I had learnt to make the stable more rat -proof. Behaviour Put two males together in the same confined space such as our stable and the younger will be slaughtered, I have discovered. The dominant dove is also the elder, the one I had bought in the spring of 1978 to be a mate for the ‘female5 1 had bred the previous summer. Of the two new females, the one which I took to be the elder mated right away with my bought male who was already a mature male when my own was still of indeterminate sex. They ‘took over’ the garage. A small win- down was left permanently open and a Berberis bush beneath it stopped cats from jumping up. The younger pair, as I have already mentioned, were confined to the stable until I felt it was safe to let them go free. The older male has been the dominant male ever since. He never loses a battle. Even Collared Doves and pigeons concede victory to him. His method, after pre¬ liminary wing boxing, is to jump on their backs and peck their heads with an agility they cannot match. This male’s first offspring, my third male, takes after his father. All three males associate me with food and will come to me when hungry without bothering to see if there is food on their trays or not. First Male very soon acquired the habit of landing on my head and staying there while I walked to the garage and put food on his tray. Then, and then only, would he condescend to fly down onto the tray. Second Male, at about the same time, acquired the habit of flying onto my shoulder and staying put until I had given him his food on the tray in the stable. If he should fly onto my shoulder anywhere near First Male’s extensive territory, First Male will attack him and take his place. Third Male’s territory is the house into which he is forever coming and doing nest-site cooing from the tops of cupboards. He is a pest and I have today shut him up in a cage in the stable with a new mate (his old mate, I discovered, was infertile). At first, he resented her intrusion and tried to kill her but accepted her with resignation after an hour or two. In a couple of days, judging by past behaviour, he will have happily accepted his new mate and will have forgotten his ertswhile spouse. His feeding technique is quite different from the other two. He will 166 P SPEAKMAN - BARB ARY DOVES only fly onto my wrist if I have a food bowl in my hand. At other times he lands at my feet and walks with me to his food tray - unless the porch door is open when he will go straight into the porch and find the food bowl that I keep there, or he will go into the kitchen to see if there is any dog biscuit in the dog bowl. None of the females associates me with food but only food places. If one tray is empty they will scout around until they find a tray with food in it. They seem unconcerned about ‘territory’. When it comes to roosting, they have various favoured trees around the perimeter of this small holding, usually dense Hawthorns and Hollies. They seem to realise that exposed branches are unsafe. The roosting places can be a long way from their respective territories which seem to centre on feeding areas and nest sites. Curiously they never go outside the perimeter as if they sensed that beyond it was alien territory. On wet, windy winter nights I have known them all to come inside, with five or more roosting amicably together at one end of the garage. Though First Male is a tiger by day and will send any intruder packing, he seems quite docile at dusk. At sunset yesterday I saw him with two other males, all three sitting peacefully together, side by side on the electricity cable. They are quite extraordinarily trusting towards our dog. She knows they are sacrosanct and will step around them. A couple of days ago, two doves were lying drowsily in the sunshine on a garden path when Teddie came trotting along. They were not much more than a foot apart but neither moved a muscle as she trotted between them. With cats, however, it is a different matter. One day, two doves were perched four or five feet above ground by the back door, when a black and white cat stalked by beneath them. They froze into total immobility and watched the cat closely with a side-eye scrutiny. The cat continued on its way without seeing them. The slightest movement on their part would have drawn his attention to them. They always seem nervous of strangers - which includes me if I happen to be wearing something different. They relax as soon as I speak, they seem to know the sound of my voice better than my appearance. Their own voices are quite different from one another. First Male has a very deep ‘coo’, a bit like an owl hoot. Second Male is fairly high pitched and Third Male adds on a couple of ‘cooks’ at the end, making his a four- syllable ‘coo’. He likes to fly onto our bedroom window and ‘coo’ at 5.30 in the morning, which is another good reason for shutting him up! First Male, who is paler than all the others and produced white offspring P SPEAKMAN - BARBARY DOVES 167 from time to time, one would expect to be the most ‘domestic’ and the least ‘wild’ of them all, yet his display flights are of the most spectacular. He glides with wings and tail spread in a 20 yard diameter circle back to his favourite cooing post, the top of the electricity pole. Second Female bears the closest resemblance to her wild ancestor Streptopelia roseogrisea , being a much darker brown with more pale blue- grey feathers on her wing leading edges. She is very nervous and is off like a flash if alarmed. Her mate responds likewise if he has not seen what has scared her. If he has seen the cause of her alarm, a too hasty movement of my hand perhaps, then he takes no notice of her behaviour. In flight also she differs from the others since her wing beats are more rapid and she twists and turns in flight with extreme rapidity. Feeding and Diet The males will deny younger males from feeding in their territory and deaths have resulted. I lost my youngest male a couple of months ago, because the two other males who were happily “mated” to each other, would not let him feed. He would come to me and feed from a bowl held in one hand while with my other, I fended off the other two. He was also a single dove with no companion. Barbaries seem to ‘mate’ quite happily with another of the same sex but will go off in search of a mate if they have no companion. One day, this youngest dove was away all day. The next day he appeared briefly. I never saw him again. It would seem that each pair needs a separate feeding place, preferably off the ground, within their chosen territory and that a single dove should be kept in a cage until a companion can be provided. Until a month ago, I have been feeding the doves on the same food that I have been giving to the pigeons - wheat and barley. The doves I had after the war used to have millet and my pigeons always used to get the usual pigeon mixture. Then as the various items became more expensive and my birds increased in number, I gave them increasing quantities of wheat and barley until eventually they got wheat and barley alone, damped with sea water. The reason for the latter I will explain later. When the doves arrived, they got wheat and barley like the pigeons, it seemed quite unnecessary to give them millet but I have just recently dis¬ covered that they must have millet particularly those with squabs to feed. Last summer I lost two females, both with fledglings which were after¬ wards raised to maturity by the father. The females with young and some of the males would leave full trays of food here and go off to a neighbour’s house to pinch the mixed grain he gives his chickens. The one item they 168 P SPEAKMAN - BARB ARY DOVES needed must have been cracked maize. I have had a lot of young birds dying before they had left the nest and I believe now that the reason was inade¬ quate diet. The house they went to is out of sight from us and it was quite a feat on their part to discover they could get the food they needed there. The people there own a cat and a feral ginger is a frequent visitor. A dove scratching around for left-over grains would be an easy prey. I discovered my error a month ago, when I happened to have a packet of wild bird food and I thought I would try it on the second pair in the stable. They had (and still have) a squab, their second this season. Their first had sickened and died just before it was fully fledged. Both parents fell upon this wild bird seed with great eagerness. I noticed that they were carefully picking out the millet. I had earlier tried them on lentils and they would not touch them. Crushed maple peas and tick beans were also rejected. This was very strange for though Second Female would have had millet before I bought her three years ago, Second Male was bred by me and had never seen millet. Yet now that he had been given it, he would not touch the wheat. Every time I put wheat on the board, he flies from my shoulder on to the board, takes a quick look and flies back to my shoulder where he stays until I put millet on the board. If his offspring pesters him for food while he is eating, he will fly back on to my shoulder, as if to say “Remove that brat, he’s spoiling my appetite’. I accordingly oblige. Another food they are very fond of is crushed dog biscuit, they prefer it and millet to cracked maize, the latter is much preferred to- wheat. So now I hope that as long as I can keep up the supply of their chosen food, they will not try to find food elsewhere. There will also, I hope, be fewer squab deaths. A few days ago, I was wetting the pigeons’ food with sea water in a bucket in the garage, when First Male left the millet on his food tray and flew down on to the bucket I was holding. He then hopped down into the bucket and started drinking the sea water at the bottom of the bucket. I had not previously given the doves sea water, although it was always avail¬ able to them in the pigeons’ food as a natural prophylactic. Illnesses Since I started keeping pigeons again, sixteen years ago, my birds have suffered from one disease only, which was diagnosed years ago as “crop mycosis”. It was always fatal if untreated and only a few that I treated with Nystan recovered. Then one day I noticed pigeons pecking around P SPEAKMAN - BARB ARY DOVES 169 the bowl of sea water I put out for the geese. I experimented and arrived at a dosage of two cubic centimetres of sea water night and morning, given by pipette. It has proved an infallible cure. Sometimes the doves have shown mycosis symptoms and I have given them 1 c.c. night and morning. They have recovered often after one day. A squab once broke a wing bone somehow in a fall from the nest. I found a pigeon wing feather and cut the feather part from the spine which I used as a splint. This I stuck on with Plastic Padding and held it in place until it set. Within a few days the bird was flying, not quite as well as its sibling, but well enough. I was very interested to see if it would eventually be able to fly normally but alas one windy night when owls were around, the garage door blew open and both young birds disappeared. More recently, one of my two ‘mated’ males appeared one afternoon with a ghastly wound. Its whole chest and crop were exposed, the skin having been completely ripped off. Upon investigation, I found that the skin had an L-shaped tear a full inch in each direction and more than a square inch of flesh was exposed. Yet it was ‘cooing’ and behaving quite normally, totally unaware of its wound and not apparently in any pain. I was able to catch it because it came into the kitchen, and I soaked the whole area in warm salt water to clean the wound and soften the skin, then while I held it and drew the skin together with tweezers, my wife stitched it up. It seemed to feel no pain and was no less tame after¬ wards. In fact, no medication has ever made them less tame or less trust¬ ing. That bird has fully recovered, the feathers have grown over the area and it might never have happened. Nests My first free-flying doves started nesting in thick hedges using old Blackbird nests as a basis for their nests. The first nest was abandoned when the female was badly clawed by some animal - a rat, I suspect - the second nest was raided and the culprit this time was probably a magpie. Thereafter, they nested in the garage, they made two nests which were used alternately. That pair was killed by rats the following winter but their two nests have been used by their successors for three years. The pair in the stable have their nest at the back of a hen coop that I have fixed against the wall about five feet from the floor. They have used the same nest for three years, they do not add to it much and it is like reinforced concrete, a mixture of twigs and droppings. The garage pair choose nesting material with infinite care, every piece must look like a piece of fine wire somewhat bent. In fact, upon investi- 170 P SPEAKMAN - BARB ARY DOVES gation, I found one of their nests contained seven pieces of wire. Unfortunately, in spite of all that care, the result is terrible. They have no skill whatever. First Male has site-called in a variety of places in and outside the garage but his three mates have always used the same two nests. One of his nest-sites was at the end of a shelf just below the roof, so I made them a nest using wiry strands of honeysuckle with a pad of hay in the bottom. I wired it securely in place and within minutes he was in it ‘cooing’ with approval. For the next week, the pair tried out each nest in turn before finally according my nest the ultimate accolade of their approval in the shape of an egg. Very civil of them! Conclusion It is now nearly five years since I was given those three doves, I bought six more, I now have ten including two recently hatched, but I have lost nineteen, which seems a very large number of casualties and that does not include nestlings that have died before leaving the nest. From now on, I sincerely hope to lose far fewer and that many more young birds will reach maturity. If I was starting again from scratch, I would have two aviaries and keep a breeding pair in one and use the other to house the young. I would wait until I had at least six young ones before releasing them. Having the stable and garage available to house two breeding pairs is a great asset, since it enables me to have a measure of control and still allow the parents to be free-flying. The young are all too prone to flutter down from the nest before they can fly. Since it happens in a building, they are fairly safe, and I can put them back in their nests. I think it will be some time before they raise young successfully outside. They are not really much trouble and they are worth it many times over. 171 NEWS AND VIEWS DX Spilsbury writes: “1981 was a very poor year for breeding with our Amazon parrots. Eggs were laid by A rnazona aestiva, A. autumnalis autumnalis (two pairs), A. a. salvini (two pairs), A. a. lilacini, A. collaria, A, finschi, A. ochrocephala oratrix (two pairs), A. ventralis, A. vinacea and A. viridigenalis. Of these, single young from A. autumnalis autumnalis, A. viridigenalis and A. finschi viridigenalis and A. finschi were hatched and hand-reared from six, 22 and eight days respectively. Two hybrid A aestiva x A. panamensis were reared by their parents.” Of these young, perhaps the most interesting was autumnalis which hatched after 23 days’ incubation (I do not conclude by this single example that 23 days is normal for this species!). The egg was taken from the par¬ ents when the hen began to neglect her duties at 12 days and placed under an A. aestiva hen whose eggs were later dead in shell.” * * * A recent press release by the Research Institute for Avian Medicine, Nutrition and Reproduction, Lake Worth, Florida, outlines details of what is believed to be the first psittacine produced by artificial insemination. Dr. G.J. Harrison’s interest in this reproductive method began when he and Dr. George Gee, reproductive physiologist at Patuxent Wildlife Research Centre, went to Puerto Rico in the spring of 1981 to experiment with this procedure in the endangered Puerto Rican parrot and the Hispaniolan. Although semen was collected from these species with a technique Dr. Gee had used on cranes at Patuxent, the trials were not successful as the quality and quantity of the sperm were not satisfactory. Back at Lake Worth, Dr. Harrison continued to train tame and imprin¬ ted birds for semen collection. On 12th October 1981, the attempts were successful with a male Budgerigar and the semen was immediately trans¬ ferred with a PCV tube to a female who had been housed alone. After re¬ peated collections and inseminations, the first fertile egg was laid on 5th December and hatched in 17 days in an incubator (Petersime Model 1) at 99°F, 85°F wet bulb. It was reared to two days old by foster parents when it was lost from the nest. In the meantime, two cinnamon Cockatiel hens that had been housed together for three months began to lay. Since initial attempts at semen 172 NEWS AND VIEWS collection from Cockatiels produced no results, cross-species fertilisation with a Budgerigar was attempted. Eggs proved to be infertile. On the 8th and again on the 12th February, 1982, an albino male Cockatiel produced a sample that from colour and microscopic evaluation appeared to be of high quality, even though the volume was only half that of the initial Budgerigar sample and only one-tenth that of subsequent samples from a trained Budgerigar. The semen was transferred to one of the cinnamon hens by inserting the PCV tube XA inch into the cloaca and depositing it towards the approxi¬ mate location of the vaginal opening, as direct observation was not possible. Eggs laid on 13th, 15th and 17th February were fertile but those laid later were not. The first egg was cracked on 28th February, repaired with paraffin wax and hatched on 2nd March in an incubator at 98.75°F, 80°F wet bulb. “Alpha” weighed 3 grams and was’ reared by foster parent Budgerigars for the first six days, then brought into the Propagation Centre and hand reared. The other two eggs hatched on 5th and 7th March respectively. Fertile eggs have been produced by Eclectus using AT. at Patuxent and the press release concludes by pointing out that only the Pearly Conure has produced a semen sample at the Institute - attempts with Queen of Bavaria’s Conures, Cayman Island Amazons and three species of macaw - Blue and Gold, Scarlet and Green-winged - have not yet been successful. * * * The Japanese Crested Ibis Nipponia nippon can no longer be observed in the wild. Scientists plan to start a captive breeding programme with the last five birds caught on the Japanese island of Sado ( British Birds , Vol.75). * * * One of the most frequent enquiries we get at Padstow Bird Gardens, in Cornwall, when the late spring has produced good weather, usually con¬ cerns whether we have had a humming bird escape. This year has proved an exceptional year for “humming birds” and most days several are seen within the gardens. The creature concerned is the day-flying Humming Bird Hawk Moth, a migrant to these shores and to the layman, I suppose, easily mistaken for its avian counterpart because of its fast wing beat, sheer speed in flight and its mode of feeding from blossom. NEWS AND VIEWS 173 The results of a census on cranes kept in British collections in 1980, undertaken by J. Blossom is published in Ratel, the journal of the Associa¬ tion of British Wild Animal Keepers. Thirteen species, totalling 405 indi¬ viduals, were recorded with Demoiselle, East African Crowned and Sarus being the most plentiful. Details of the year’s breeding activities are out¬ lines as are diets, longevity and early breeding records. * * * The Yellow-fronted Gardener Bowerbird Amblyornis flavifrons , long known from three skins sold to the Tring Museum by a plume merchant in 1895, has been rediscovered. Professor Jared Diamond, working for the World Wildlife Fund in the Foja (Gauttier) Mountains in Irian Jay a loca¬ ted the species again. No specimens were obtained but detailed descrip¬ tions of male, female and juvenile plumage were made, also of display behaviour and bower construction. Detailed notes appear in Science , 23rd April 1982, Vol 216, No. 4544, and I am grateful to Professor Dia¬ mond for forwarding a copy to review for this column. The Foja Mountains peak at 2,200 metres, are heavily timbered with a light covering of moss above 1400 m, and a heavy moss cover above 1900 m. The adjacent lowlands contain a sparse human population but in the Foja Mountains there is no evidence, other than the existence of the other three specimens, that the area has ever previously been visited by humans. A national park encompasses the area so the population, which Professor Diamond, estimates at several thousand, would seem to be safe. * * * Four species of Bush Quail occupy the genus Perdicula, three of which are recorded as having bred in the United Kingdom. Winged World reared the Painted P. erythrorhyncha , I believe, for the first time in 1976 but de¬ tails of the event were not published. First breeding accounts of the Ar- goondah Bush Quail P. argoondah by W.E. Teschemaker in 1910 and the Jungle Bush Quail P. asiatica by J.H. Reay in 1964 are documented in Bird Notes , 1910, 315, 363, and the Avicultural Magazine, 1965, 2, res¬ pectively. More recently, J.W. Thornhill reared P. asiatica, an account of which appears in the World Pheasant Association’s Journal for 1980-81, p. 53. 174 REVIEWS In recent years the quality of bird books produced in Australia has been very impressive, not only in content but in the paper, reproduction and binding. Two newly available volumes from Rigby Publishers Ltd. (Adelaide) are no exception. ‘‘Birds of Australian Gardens” by Tess Kloot (Archivist to the Royal Australasian Ornithologists® Union) and Ellen M. McCulloch (Secretary of the Australian Bird Observers’ Club) covers all the bird species seen in Australian urban areas. One hundred and seven species are included and the various names, description, voice, food, distribution and instructions for spotting and recording are given with each. Eighty species are illustrated by very beautiful full page colour plates painted by Peter Trusler, the ori¬ ginals of which have been purchased by the National Bank of Australia to form a permanent collection. Their importance is undoubted; the colouring and the precise depiction of each bird and its typical background flora are exquisite. Peter Slater, author of “Rare and Vanishing Australian Birds” (96 pp. £10.0) points out that few Australian birds have become extinct since the arrival of European settlers but that is no reason for complacency. A number of birds have come close to extinction, several species have not been sighted for many years and some are listed as rare. This book is a scholarly and eloquent plea for the preservation of Australia’s endangered species of birds. The text covers the problems facing Australia’s bird life and the cause of the decline in numbers of the 53 rare and vanishing species described in this book, particularly the ground feeding and ground dwelling birds. The story of their original discovery is also told. Each species is illustrated in colour by the author. Both these books can be obtained from the publisher’s London office or from the Sladmore Gallery, 32 Bruton Place, London W.l, where a permanent display of the leather-bound, limited edition bird books also produced by Rigby, may be seen. Groom Helm publish some very interesting and unusual bird books, some of which are translations of Scandinavian productions. Amongst recent issues are:- “Mountain Wildlife” by Richard Perry (177 pp., 19 black and white photographs, £6.95). An account by this well-known ornithologist of the mammals and birds to be found on mountains all over the world and their adaptation to this specialised environment. REVIEWS 175 “The Breeding Birds of Europe” by Manfred Pforr and Alfred Lim- brunner. Volume I - Divers to Auks (327 pp., £14.95), Volume II- Sand- grouse to Crows (387 pp., £17.95). Described as photographic handbooks, these volumes will be purchased mainly for their superb colour illustra¬ tions, four for each species showing the bird in its environment, in flight, the young and the nest with eggs. They must constitute the most com¬ prehensive collection of colour photographs ever made of Europe’s breed¬ ing birds. The brief information given for each species is not remarkable being that found in many other guides and the accuracy of some of the maps is doubtful, but the camera cannot lie and the illustrations will give many hours of pleasure and instruction. “Wings and Seasons” by Gunnar Brusewitz (119 pp, £12.95) is a most attractively produced book that would make an acceptable present. The author is one of Sweden’s most popular nature illustrators and here describes the progress of the year in the wild in northern Europe, from the far South right up to the shores of the Arctic. This personal account is illustrated by the author’s attractive water colours. A group of Scandinavian artists have also illustrated Blandford’s “The British Ornithologists’ Guide to Bird Life”, edited by Jim Flegg (309 pp, 300 colour illustrations, line drawings. £10.95). Though too big to be carried in the pocket and therefore not a true field guide, much more in¬ formation is given for each species than is normally possible in such vol¬ umes. Very adequate instructions for field identification are given. “The Conservation of New World Parrots” edited by Roger F. Pasquier (485 pp. £8.00 including postage and packing, from the International Council for Bird Preservation, 2 19c Huntingdon Road, Cambridge CB3 ODL) is the Proceedings of the ICBP Parrot Working Group which met on St. Lucia in 1980. It contains definitive papers on the distribution, population and conservation status of Amazona parrots of the Caribbean islands and on all mainland parrot species of the New World. Also included are papers on importation and general management and three papers delivered at the Conference on Parrots of Australia and New Zealand. Depressing reading on the whole but it is encouraging to note, in the introduction by Joseph Forshaw, chairman of this Group, “Though mindful of the expertise and significant achievements of private avicul- turists, the Working Group unanimously adopted the policy of supporting captive propagation only when it is an integral component of a compre¬ hensive conservation program based on sound management principles and 176 REVIEWS carried out by, or under the auspices of, appropriate government agencies,” ; certainly a more progressive view than the blanket condemnation of avi- culturists propounded by some conservationists. A pity that some of the species in “The Doomsday Book of Animals” by David Day, published by Ebury Press (275 pp. £14.95) were not bred in captivity before they became extinct in the wild. In this very readable and original book the author documents the extinction of almost 300 species and subspecies over the last 300 years, describing each animal’s appearance, behaviour and habitat, as well as its last days. The book is beautifully illustrated by Tim Bramfitt, Peter Hayman, Mick Loates and Maurice Wilson, all of whom have made a first-class job of reconstructing their subjects in colour. Very good value. The author of “Quail. Their Breeding and Management”, published by the World Pheasant Association (108 pp. Ulus. £6.95) is Gary Robbins, a founder member of the Quail Group of the WPA and a member of the Avicultural Society whose articles on Quail have appeared in our own Magazine. As one would expect, it is a very comprehensive and authorita¬ tive guide to this rather neglected family and covers all aspects of Quail management from aviary design to feeding and rearing. All 44 species are included. The Fauna of Tasmania Cofnmittee’s Handbook No. 2 is a “Tasmanian Bird Atlas”, compiled by David Thomas. Each bird of Tasmania and its offshore islands is accorded a separate and highly detailed distribution map which also includes information on its status, habitat, food and manner of foraging, as well as its distribution. This very useful addition to the litera¬ ture on Antipodean birds may be obtained from the Fauna of Tasmania Office, University of Tasmania, Box 252C, GPO Hobart, Tasmania, Aus¬ tralia 7001. The price most recently quoted, including postage and packing, was 4.00 Australian dollars but it might be wise to enquire first. “Cage and Aviary Birds” by Richard Mark Martin, published by Collins (paperback, 256 pp. £3.95) is a good introduction to the subject and has general notes on housing, feeding and management and a useful bibliog¬ raphy for further reading. The main part of this book is devoted to a des¬ cription of all the species that are likely to be available to aviculturists and each is excellently illustrated in colour by Malcolm Ellis, a well-known con¬ tributor to the Avicultural Magazine and the artist of the Rothschild’s Grackle on our cover. A very useful guide at a modest price. REVIEWS 177 “Diets for Birds in Captivity”, published by Blandford (222 pp. £19.95) is written by Kenton C. Lint and Alice Marie Lint. K.C. Lint, Curator of Birds at San Diego Zoo for 28 years, wrote this book with his wife when he retired and it is the distillation of an enormous amount of practical knowledge acquired at one of the greatest zoos in the world. It fills a vital gap in the avicultural bookshelf because all orders of birds kept in captivity are covered in the one volume. Each family is described generally with an indication of natural food preferences followed by a detailed daily diet, the amounts to be given and the times at which they should be fed. Alter¬ natives are suggested for different parts of the world and there are useful appendices listing commercial products, vitamin and mineral supplements and the propagation of live foods. There is a very good bibliography. The only thing wrong with this book is the price which, considering its length and total lack of any illustrations, is rather stunning. A pity, for it ought to make a significant contribution to good husbandry and better breeding results. M.H.H. * * * THE FALCONS OF THE WORLD by Tom J. Cade, Plates by R. David Digby. Published by Collins. 1 88 pages, 4T plates with numerous black and white sketches. 1982. Price £15. Like many books on avicultural subjects, there has been a tendency in some of the more recent ornithological monographs for the authors not to be totally conversant with their subjects. One notable case left the reader seeking an out-of-print volume for many of the details on the family’s biology, after spending over £60 on the monograph. Many tricks have been used by publishers to raise the price - large lettering, broad borders and limited editions being amongst them - and generally they have been able to get away with it because the plates have been superb. It is not until a publishing company with Collins’s reputation for quality and value for money produces such a volume as this one, that one appre¬ ciates what can be achieved. Omit the large lettering and broad borders, thus giving the text on less pages, and produce it in sufficient numbers to allow quality reproduction of the plates at a reasonable cost and one is a third of the way to producing a very good book. 178 REVIEWS The author, Tom Cade, may not be too familiar to readers of this Magazine save for several news items, but as Professor of Ornithology at Cornell University, he is responsible for the highly successful breeding programme for the Peregrine Falcon and has carried out much research over the years on falcons, making him a foremost authority on the sub¬ ject. He combines both an authoritative and readable text which makes this volume not only a valuable ornithological work but a good “read” for those with only a passing interest. Quite technical terms are explained in everyday language and as such, not only is it a must for the ornithologist interested in wild falcons but indispensable for the aviculturists who main¬ tain these birds in captivity. Whatever one’s interest in falcons, or for that matter in good bird books, this is a valuable addition to any library. Like most monographs, each species is illustrated by a painting, in this case by R. David Digby, an artist familiar to most readers of the Avicul- tural Magazine. The plates are excellent and cannot fail to impress with their quality, as one would expect from one of the world’s foremost artists. The text is divided into two sections. The first covers the general biology of falcons; specific data are discussed more fully in the second section which deals separately with each of the 39 species of the genus Falco. The whole is interspersed with line drawings and a map for each species, except Falco kreyenborgi , is to be found at the end. A detailed bibliography and an index round off what is a truly magnificent and thoroughly recommendable volume. All monographs published in the future should be compared with this volume for quality of production, text and plates at this price. I wonder how many will measure up? D.C. 179 CORRESPONDENCE Unusual Cockatoo Feeding Habits In the January-March 1979 issue of this magazine, I published a brief note on an unusual habit of a Lesser Sulphur-crested Cockatoo which used to pick up seeds with one of its feet, passing them to the bill. I can now quote another case which refers to a Bare-eyed Cockatoo Cacatua sanguinea, a male bom here four years ago from parents of Aus¬ tralian origin. The other day I had temporarily left a bucket filled to the brim with moistened maize, at about 10 cm from the flight in which the above-men¬ tioned bird was housed. Coming back to collect the bucket I noticed that the cockatoo was sticking one of its legs through the wire mesh, desperately trying to grasp at the rim of the bucket. I then put a few grains on the ground, 5-6 cm from the wire, and immediately the bird proved itself able to get at them using the same method. A Red-tailed Black Cockatoo, in the same compartment, and a pair of Hyacinthine Macaws in the adjoining one had attentively watched these curious “fishing” operations but, though they had been put in identical experimental conditions, they proved unable to solve the problem in the same brilliant way. Centro per lo Studio Professor Paulo Bertagnolio e la Conservazione degli Psittaciformi, Via Aurelia km 24,300, 00050 Torrimpietra, Rome, Italy. * * * Dr. H. Quinque’s reply to “A Dissenting View of Aviculture” by Alastair Morrison (Avicultural Magazine, Vol. 88 No. 2, p. 113) It is regrettable that Mr. Morrison did not communicate with me first before writing this aggressive article for he has made several statements which must be corrected. Our readers must excuse me for replying subjectively but I hope that in so doing, I will be the spokesman for all conscientious and responsible aviculturists and ornithologists. 180 CORRESPONDENCE Firstly, the most serious assertion, made in a magazine with an inter¬ national circulation, concerns the means by which I obtained the Horned Parrots Eunymphicus c. cornu tus, and here Mr. Morrison is totally in¬ correct. New Caledonia is not, as he has said in error, a Department of France though it is linked to France by its language, culture and highly developed legislation. The Governments of New Caledonia and of France both gave me permission to obtain the birds, which were given free of any charge, and to import them into France mindful, I think, of the quality of my accommodation and experience. Moreover, the New Caledonians are delighted with the results that I have obtained with their native birds. The letters received from the various administrations concerned and the many newspaper cuttings that I have collected are convincing testimony of this. Furthermore, the most recent article to appear in the New Caledonia press was an account of my success with Drepanoptila holosericea, the Cloven-feathered Dove, which I have reared repeatedly, although all attempts to do so in New Caledonia have failed. I strongly refute the assertion that aviculturists are callous and that on some occasions in their lives they have been insensitive to the suffering or death of an animal. This is not say that cruelty to animals does not exist and we must struggle against it. I recall, with sorrow, an account brought to me several years ago by one of the members of the French team for clay pigeon shooting which was invited to Australia. After the championship, the Australians invited the French delegation to a “parrot hunt”. The means used to attract the birds within rifle shot was a wounded parrot which was thrown into the air to make it scream. I would not be so stupid or cruel as to indite Australia, the country in which this happened, but I think that perhaps Mr Morrison should have much to occupy himself with on Australian soil, before turning to New Caledonia or France. According to Mr. Morrison, ornithologists regard us aviculturists with contempt. I would like to point out that I have been the pupil and friend of exceptional men who have been as much aviculturists as ornithologists Firstly, M. Aime Decoux, licenciate of Medieval English Literature, and also a great ornithologist and able aviculturist. He published many articles and participated in the famous treatise “Aviculture”, in three volumes, under the direction of Dr. Delacour. Now dead, he taught me to appreciate and to breed the most difficult birds during the last thirty years. He devo¬ ted his entire fortune to them and he died almost in poverty having given everything to his birds. He is devoutly thanked for this. CORRESPONDENCE 181 I have equally the honour of having been the pupil and friend of our President, Dr. Jean Delaeour, ornithologist of the greatest international reputation who is not ashamed of being amongst the most able avicul- turists hi the world. I am equally grateful to my friend, Dr. Etienne Beraut, a Frenchman living in Brazil, a great friend of Dr. Delaeour, who gave me, in the field in the Amazon and the interior of Brazil, moral and technical lessons which I shall never forget. I have benefited equally from the teaching of numerous other great ornithologists, from France and from other countries, which has allowed me, without great merit, to become what could be called a well-informed amateur. When I say that aU the birds having lived with me, in pairs, have repro¬ duced themselves without exception, and that all my income as a surgeon is devoted to birds in danger, I do not think that ornithologists will hold me in contempt or find my activity “monstrous”. They will perhaps even feel that Mr. Morrison is mistaken in creating this division between aviculturists and ornithologists for their work is mutually complimentary rather than exclusive. As to ideas concerning the conservation of habitat and of the biotope, we have, of course, held them for a long time but unfortunately reality asserts itself and dreamers achieve nothing. As man progresses, he des¬ troys the natural life which surrounds him. The most prolific terrestrial mammal, after the rodents, man’s feeding needs and his ancestral way of life force him to deforest and to cultivate to survive. The aborigines have had their way of life since time immemorial Often with little understand¬ ing we try to impose our methods on them which they resist, occasionally very strongly. I have seen the burning of millions of acres of African scrub to cultivate in one season a small piece of land 2,000 m square. Year after year, animals disappear irrevocably; this is even more critical for island fauna, by definition limited and with no possibility whatsoever of readapting by themselves to another territory. New Caledonia Mid the islet of Ouvea in the Loyalty archipelago are obvious examples. No one will persuade the Kanakas that the parrakeets are rare, given that this is the only bird that they see nearly every day. They do not im¬ agine that the bud’s disappearance is possible though they are, in fact, nearer the truth than the total of 200 parrakeets quoted in 1974. The recent census that I followed with interest revealed that there are, happily, 182 CORRESPONDENCE more than 500 pairs. Also I had the opportunity to see that the nests were recorded and attributed to each family. In spite of all the efforts, often as praiseworthy as derisive, the habitat of the Ouvean Parrakeet will not, for many years, be able to resist the pressure of human population and the destruction of nature which this en¬ tails. Concerning Eunymphicus c. comutus of the Grande Terre, Dr. Jean Delacour, author of “Guide des Oiseaux de Nouvelle Caledonie”, whom I have just consulted, confirms that 20 years ago, this subspecies was much more widespread in the forests of the mountains and that almost no birds were captured. He thinks that the only real danger is the destruction of the forests, the birds’ indispensable environment, and this is progressing very rapidly. Endangered species of birds should be regarded as historic monuments left to us by our ancestors; we are their inheritors and keepers. Protection of habitat and maintenance in captivity doubles the chances of survival of species in danger of extinction. Protection of habitat alone, relying on man’s goodwill or on repression, is too uncertain and must be supple¬ mented by the safeguard of captive maintenance. I prefer to hand on to our descendants birds that are living well in captivity in spacious, attractive aviaries, than send them to see dusty skins in the glass cases of museums. I would like to add that since the publication of my first article on rear¬ ing the Horned Parrot, I have reared many more, particularly second generation birds, all in perfect health and not showing the slightest sign of degeneration or mutation. It would be very desirable if any other breeders of this species could communicate their breeding results, as this would contribute to a better knowledge of this parrot’s biology and, thereby, its conservation. It is much easier to make precise observations of birds in captivity and this is particularly important for birds about which we know almost nothing in the wild. It is not with hostility and the threat of sanction that we shall obtain what is necessary. For my part, I intend to publish soon certain very interesting breeding results when I have time. * * * I am most grateful to the Council of the Avicultural Society and to the Editor of the Avicultural Magazine for having allowed me to reply to this attack and I hope that I have justified what we are all trying to do and to CORRESPONDENCE 183 show that no one can reproach us. Lastly, I thank very much all those who work for the Avicultural Maga¬ zine , totally unpaid. They work for the preservation of birds. Mrs. Mary Harvey, who works ceaselessly in the cause of aviculture, is the worthy continuer of her eminent predecessors. For which she is thanked here publicly. Clinique Ambroise Pare Dr. H. Quinque. 2 Avenue Jean Moulin, 93140 Bondy, France. ♦ * * Rare Birds and Aviculture In 1975 ( Avicultural Magazine No. 4, p. 237) Mr F.C. Barnicoafs letter on the smuggling of rare Australian parrots appeared and in it he explained the system operated by the Transvaal Provincial Administration which, from a fauna station near Pretoria, supplied certain species of native birds to approved aviculturists - provided that the breeding season had been successful and, naturally, only species that were suitable for avicul¬ ture. He claimed that “once a legal source of birds became available, the illegal trapping that had defied the law for decades virtually disappeared”. He suggested that this would also happen in Australia if the Department of Conservation operated a carefully controlled scheme on similar lines. Mr Alastair Morrison replied in 1976 {Avicultural MagazineNo. 2, p. 1 17) with hostile criticism of Mr Barnicoafs views and in his letter he said that the Hooded and Golden-shouldered Parrakeets “had no serious natural predators”. If that is correct, what is it that controls their numbers? In a stable population the death rate must approximate to the birth rate and so if a pair of these parrakeets reared three young in a season, the total of five would by the next breeding season be back to two - not necessarily the same two, of course. No doubt prolonged drought and floods would take a toll of the birds, but presumably it must be the food supply that is the controlling factor and so, if in a normal breeding season a few of the young were taken when they were independent of the parents, it would seem that no harm would be done to the population as a whole, and though probably such a course would be quite impracticable, Mr Barnicoafs suggestion is not so wicked after all. Professor Hodges in the subsequent correspondence said that in 184 CORRESPONDENCE Australian and European collections both Hooded and Golden-shouldered were being successfully bred and if that is so, there should be no need to take any more from the wild, even legally. In 1980 ( Avicultural Magazine , No. 2, p. 108) Mr Morrison wrote on the Rothschild’s Grackle, Starling or Myna and claimed that aviculturists will bear a heavy load of guilt if this species becomes extinct on its native Bali. His photograph, with the caption saying that it depicted the habitat of Rothschild’s Starling, showed a scene that would strike dismay into the heart of any starling except perhaps Acridotheres tristis, the Common Myna or Stumus vulgaris the Starling, for there were only a few straggling trees to be seen. If the Balinese authorities are no more efficient at the management of large areas of natural forest than they evidently were a few years ago at preventing the catching and export of this starling when large numbers appeared on the (presumably Singapore) market, then the future of Leucopsar rothschildi is gloomy indeed, for how many species of insectivorous passerine birds have been bred even to the second generation in aviaries? Plainly much more needs to be known about the dietetic re¬ quirements of insectivorous birds. Incidentally the bird-keeping as evi¬ dently practised in Indonesia is not what most members would consider aviculture. In the case of the Horned and Uvean Parrakeets whose record in cap¬ tivity has been mostly one of. failure, although Dr. Quinque’s recent suc¬ cesses are promising, it is difficult to tell whether they could be propa¬ gated generation after generation in aviaries. Obviously it is better to have the aviaries in the native country rather than in some inhospitable climate, but the care and standards of hygiene would need to be of the very best. In some cases there is much to be said for putting some specimens on suitable islands provided that food and nesting places are there and preda¬ tors not a serious problem. Many ornithologists are opposed to any such introductions, but it is also happening naturally, the most remarkable case in our lifetime being the spread of the Collared Dove from southern Asia to north-western Europe. The Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis has spread from tropical and sub-tropical parts of the Old World to tropical South America and to Australia and there are other instances of species spreading success¬ fully when a niche is available to them. There is a lot of emotive talk about depleting the wild stocks, but they are being depleted all the time by natural agency and the only time when augmentation takes place is, of course, the breeding season. The greatest threat to all but the most adaptable of plant and animal life is the alarming CORRESPONDENCE 185 rate of increase of the human population of the world with the resultant destruction of natural habitat. Binstead, J-J- Yealland Isle of Wight. * * * Simulation Hybridisation As pointed out by Derek Goodwin in his excellent article “Bird Fancy¬ ing, Foe of Aviculture” in the last issue, there are many other factors ad¬ verse to aviculture in the world today. I am writing now to elaborate on just one of those unfavourable practices, namely simulation hybridisation. I will also briefly discuss my views on hybridisation in general. In recent avicultural history, with the increased number of psittacines being bred, there has grown an intense interest in producing hybrids be¬ tween certain species, and even inter-generic mixtures. This interest, more often than not, stems from a strong desire to produce a first-ever cross, whether it be for avicultural recognition or simply capital gain for an unusual looking hybrid. I choose the word “unusual looking” to describe these avian mongrels, although there are those who claim they hybridise in order to produce a more beautifully coloured specimen. Sighting few such instances, I tend to disagree. How can one expect to produce a more striking beauty by crossing a Hyacinthine Macaw or a Sun Conure to anything else? ! Furthermore, some aviculturists claim to be hybridising in order to produce a facsimile of an extant species, e.g., breeding large specimens of Orange-winged Amazons to Greater Antillean Amazons in the hope of duplicating the extant St. Vincent Amazon, endemic to the island of St. Vincent in the Lesser Antilles. To say the least, this idea is ludi¬ crous, how can man duplicate a creature that has evolved over many thous¬ ands of years? It would appear, avicultu rally speaking, that more time and effort should be spent on establishing psittacine species - since less than 20% of the entire family has captive self-sustaining numbers. We cannot afford ourselves the luxury of housing rare species collectively merely for the self-satisfaction of being recognised as the “first breeder” of a particular species. What sense of accomplishment can a person feel in being the first and only to have bred a certain rare species, if they themselves 186 CORRESPONDENCE are alone in owning this species because of avariciously procuring all available specimens? Surely years of spent time and effort could be saved if we work together towards our goal of avian preservation and worry less about self-recognition? We need to prove to everyone that avicultural study must persist in order to assure the prevention of further avian ex¬ tinction. The subject of hybridisation brings me to my main theme which I refer to as “Simulation Hybridisation”, although actually it is not hybridi¬ sation per se. But the product is similar, and in many cases more striking in appearance than true hybridisation, hence the term. In essence, simula¬ tion hybridisation is the bleaching of innate feather pigments to create artificial feather pigments in order to simulate a desirable hybrid or a so-called “mutant”. Examples come in all sizes, from parrotlets to macaws. Simulation hybridisation is most often executed by using varying strengths of a hydrogen peroxide (^C^) solution in order to obtain the desired pigment. Frequently it is used to bleach green pigments to yellow, however, any shade lighter than the original can be attained. The results can be so impressive that even a fairly experienced aviculturist can be deceived if not previously acquainted with this bleaching practice. Although simulation hybridisation is employed on all types of psittacines, the fore¬ most victims are the smaller ones. By bleaching the head feather pigment from green to yellow, a Petz’s or Mexican Green Conure can be made to simulate a small version of a Mexican Double Yellow-headed Amazon (disregarding the tail). So specious is this practice that some of the Petz’s Conures I have seen are reminiscent of the extinct Carolina Parrakeet, once native to eastern USA. The former example is, of course, directed towards the commonly ignorant, impulsive bird buyer who sees a chance to purchase a most desirable baby Amazon at a seemingly low price. There are also examples which can be mistaken as true hybrids. A hybrid Double Yellow-headed Amazon can be simulated by bleaching the head feathers on a Finsch’s or Green-cheeked Amazon from green to yellow. With imagination one can dream up endless combinations. Usually bleaching does not cause detrimental results if performed properly (the bleached area is replaced by original pigment during sub¬ sequent moult). However, if the solution is too concentrated, blind¬ ness and even shock may ensue, eventually leading to local paralysis or death. Being familiar with the slight stinging effect that a 3% ^2^2 anti' septic solution can give, one can well imagine what a more concentrated CORRESPONDENCE 187 solution can cause. From an ornithological aspect, simulation hybridisa¬ tion can also present a problem. Imagine a new species or mutation being described, when in reality it is merely a feral population of escaped simu¬ lation hybrids. This might seem incredible, but it could happen and cause considerable embarrassment to the unfortunate ornithologist. Simulation hybridisation, via bleaching, is practised almost exclusively in Latin America, whereas dyeing is the preferred method in other parts of the world, particularly Asia. Dyed finches are still a fairly common sight in bird consignments to U.S. quarantine stations. Strangely enough, even though there are a greater number of simulation hybridisers who use bleaching, it is rare that a bleached simulation hybrid is encountered in a bird consignment from Latin America. The main channels of introduction of these simulation hybrids to the USA are via smuggling and pet bird imports. The origin of this practice probably arose soon after it was discovered that pigments could be bleached by employing certain chemical solutions. Where it originated is more difficult to pinpoint, although I strongly believe that it was Mexico or Central America, since this region supports the majority of practitioners and is the most lucrative location. Having visited many Latin American bird markets, never has there been an ab¬ sence of a simulation hybrid, be it parrotlet, conure, Amazon parrot or macaw. Being an aviculturist myself, I view the practice of simulation hybridi¬ sation as pure vanity, and I am wholeheartedly opposed to it. But where a demand is made (for hybrids, that is) consequently a supply will meet that demand. Perhaps if an increased demand is made for rare, endangered and hard to capture species, a good, healthy supply will result. I feel that bird traffic is best kept at a reasonable minimum and that it is not so much the quantity of birds in a collection that is important as what is accomplished with them. As I said before, avian preservation is a goal which can only be realised by avicultural co-operation , not by avicultural isolation. 3017 Vine Avenue McAllen, Texas 78501, USA Daniel Gonzalez Jr. AVAILABLE NOW! CAGED BIRD MEDICINE: Selected Topics C.V. STEINER, Jr., D.V.M., Wickham Road Animal Hospital, West Melbourne, Florida R.B. DAVIS, D.V.M., M.S., Department of Avian Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia This new book presents the common problems that a small animal practitioner will encounter when working with caged and aviary birds, and provides the basic information required to diagnose and treat the common disease conditions of pet birds. Caged Bird Medicine not only gives diagnostic and therapeutic information but also lists drugs and dosages for common problems. 1981 285 x 215 176 pp 51 illus £18.50 BIRD DISEASES L. ARNALL, B.V.BSc., M.R.C.V.S. I.F.KEYMER, Ph.D., F.R.C.V.S., M.R.C.Path., F.I.Biol. Two of the foremost veterinary authorities on birds have written a comprehensive text which provides a highly practical guide to birds in health and illness with the emphasis on prevention, diagnosis and treatment of disease. 1976 238 x 165 528 pp 78 illus 1 01 colour plates £25.00 ■xg' To: Your Bookseller Please send me: ORDER FORM Or to: B.T. Distribution Centre, 8 Trident Way, Southall, Middlesex. . . Copies of Steiner & Davis CAGED BIRD MEDICINE at £1 8.50 per copy. .... copies of Arnall & Keymer BIRD DISEASES at £25.00 per copy. + £1 .50 postage per copy. CZXheque/Postal Order enclosed £ . . . . payable to Bailliere Tindall l _ 'Debit my Access/Diners Club/American Express/Barclaycard Card No . . . Signature . . . (all Credit Card orders must be signed) Name . . . . . . Address . . . . . . Please allow 28 days for delivery S&D 0 7020 0888 5 A&K 0 7020 0591 6 BAILLIERE TINDALL Greycoat House, 10 Greycoat Place, London SW1 P 1SB TO BE PUBLISHED SOON! Diseases of Cage and Aviary Birds Edited by MARGARET PETRAK, V.M.D., Staff Member, Angell Memorial Animal Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts The initial publication of this book was received as THE authoritative reference on diagnosis and treatment of specific disease conditions in cage and aviary birds. This new, second edition is really superb, with contributions from an impressive group of international authorities providing valuable knowledge from a wide range of fields. Contents: Part 1 - NON-CLINICAL ASPECTS. Common types of cage birds - Caging and environment - Behavioral aspects — ' Avian genetics — Anatomy of the Budgerigar - some physiological attributes of small birds - Nutrition - Orphan birds. Part 2 - CLINICAL CONSIDERATIONS. Clinical examination and methods of treatment - Clinical laboratory examinations — Anaesthetic and surgical techniques - Avian radiology - French Molt — Conditions involving the integumentary system - Disorders of the skeletal system — Diseases of the respiratory system - Diseases of the cardiovascular system, blood and lymphatic system - Diseases of the digestive system - Diseases of the urinary system — Diseases of the reproductive system — Diseases of the nervous system — Diseases of the endocrine system — Diseases of the organs of special sense — Infectious diseases — Parasitic diseases — Mycoses - Neoplasms - Metabolic and miscellaneous conditions - Poisoning and other casualties — Bird-borne diseases in man - Index 1982 680 pp illustrated (including 19 colour plates) £72.00 BAILLIERE TINDALL Greycoat House, 10 Greycoat Place, London SW1P IBS Leaflet Request Form To: Bailliere Tindall, Greycoat House, 1 0 Greycoat Place, London SW1 P 1 SB Please send me a fully descriptive leaflet of Petrak/CAGED BIRD MEDICINE Name . . . . . . . . Address . Please send me a prospectus for the first important monograph about Amazon Parrots 28 species and sub-species painted in full colour by ri Elizabeth Butterworth. Text and maps by Rosemary Low. ^ Published by Rodolphe d’Erlanger in collaboration with the Basilisk Press Ltd | 500 copies. £395 now. £525 after publication. n Name H Address ioj Post to The Basilisk Press Ltd, 32 England’s Lane, Hampstead ; London NW3 1YB Telephone 01-722 2142 L! THE INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BIRDS proudly presents the JEAN DELACOUR/IFCB SYMPOSIUM ON BREEDING BIRDS IN CAPTIVITY February 24-27, 1983 at the Sheraton-Universal Hotel in Universal City (Hollywood), California Over fifty prestigious speakers from around the world join in honouring Dr. Jean Delacour one of the hosts for this event and an active member of the I.F.C.B. The programme will emphasise natural history as it applies to the future of captive birds, their husbandry and management Because the interest in this Symposium is worldwide, and because registration capacity is limited, reservations will be accepted on a first-come, first-served basis We advise a prompt response * * * For more information regarding this important event and for a registration form, send your name and address to: DELACOUR/IFCB SYMPOSIUM c/o Gary SchuLman 1 1300 Weddington Street North Hollywood, California 91601 (213)980-9818. Telex: 686119 Schulman LSA Bird World SUBSCRIBE NOW ?"»fl north Hollywood, ca gieos ARTICLES ALREADY PUBLISHED: The MAGAZINE FOR - BIRD ENTHUSIASTS Picking a Parrot Breeding Bose/las Taming Parrots Show Preparation Parasites in Birds Hand-Raising Surgical Sexing Training Birds to Perform Nutrition in Parrot Types The African Grey Grooming Parrots Color Feeding Pacheco's Disease Avian Pox The Norwich Canary A Germ -Free Aviary Softbi/ls Orange Weavers Talking Birds Squawking Birds Moult Budgie Colors Parrot Toys Traveling with Birds Indoor Aviaries Flock Disease & Immunity Color in Canaries THE CHOICE OF THOSE WHO KNOW Bird World AMERICAN AVICULTURISTS GAZETTE APR1LMAY 1978 CHARTER ISSUE If there are titles above that might have interested you, think of how much more there will be in future issues. □ 3 YEARS . . . $30.00 CH2 YEARS . . . $22.00 □ 1 YEAR . . . $12.00 CANADIAN & OVERSEAS PLEASE ADD $5.00 PER YEAR. FOREIGN PAYMENT MUST BE IN U.S. FUNDS IN THE FORM OF A POSTAL MONEY ORDER OR BANK DRAFT. . . . OR: PHONE IN YOUR SUBSCRIPTION ON VISA/MASTER CHARGE (213) 769-61 1 1 — 10:00 A.M. - 4:00 P.M. MON.-FRI. THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY The Avicultural Society was founded in 1894 for the study of British and foreign birds in freedom and captivity. The Society is international in character, having members throughout the world. Membership subscription rates per annum: British Isles £ 8.00; Overseas - £9.00 (20.00 US dollars). The subscription is due on 1st January of each year and those joining the Society later in the year will receive back numbers of the current volume of the AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE. The subscription rate for non-members is: British Isles and Europe - £9.00; outside Europe - £10.00 (25.00 US dollars). Subscriptions, changes of address, orders for back numbers, etc., should be sent to : THE HON. SECRETARY AND TREASURER, THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY, WINDSOR FOREST STUD, MILL RIDE, ASCOT, BERKSHIRE SL5 8LT. NEW MEMBERS Dr. R.P. Adlam, Charlcombe Cottage, Lansdown Road, Bath, Avon. BA1 5TD. Ms. B. Andrews, Route 1 , Box 6 2, Raiford, Florida 32083 , USA. Mr. C. Blackwell, 6 Centre Court, The Oval, Brookfild, Middlesbrough, Cleveland TS5 8HP. Mr. AlBroadbest, 3325 W. Citrus Way, Phoenix, Arizona 85017, USA. Mrs. E.P. Brusson, P.O. Box 458, Honeydew 2040, S. Africa. Mr. J.G. Buckland, 45 Merafield Drive, Plympton, Plymouth, Devon PL7 3TP. Mr. C. Campbell, 41 Western Avenue, Bath, Maine 04530, USA. Mr. I. Cashmore, c/o Midland Bird Garden, Stanmore Hall, Stourbridge Road, Bridgnorth, Shropshire WV15 6DT. Mr. E.K. Fox, 12 Devonport Lane, Christchurch 1, New Zealand. Mrs. M.K. Fuentes, 30 Fleetwood Drive, Daly City, California 94015, USA. Ms. P. Goles, 606 Lake Avenue, Wilmette, Ill. 60091, USA. Mr. E. Griffin, 101 1 N.W. Third Avenue, Florida City, Florida 33034, USA. Ms. Janet Taslijian Hanson, 3110 Kelton Avenue, Los Angeles, Calif. 90034, USA Mrs. Alan Hochschild, 2517 Broadway, San Francisco, California 94115, USA Mr. D.G. Irwen, 112 Bants Lane, Northampton. Mr. Edward J. Locke, 12960 114th Avenue, North Largo, Florida 33540, USA. Mr. G. Lourie-Fraser, Woodhen Project, Lord Howe Island, N.S.W. Australia 2898 Mr. R. Massa, Lab. Biologia & Zoologia Generate Istituto di Farmacologia, Via Vanvitelli 3 2, 201 29, Milan, Italy. Mrs. Mary Ann Mercer, 417 Murphy Drive, Romeoville, Illionois 60441, USA. Mr. John Meyer, Angel Aquarium Inc., 31-50 Steinway Street, Astoria, New York 11103, USA. Mr. T. Morciglio, Calle 9 Black 4-G-19, Monte Brasis, Fajardo, Puerto Rico 00648 Mr. S.G. Moss, P.O. Box 701, Gainesville, Texas 76240, USA. Mr. M. Nunez, 90 Ashwood Road, Port Washington N.Y. 11050, USA. Mr. A. de la Parra, La. Cda. de M.A. de Quevedo No. 32, Delegacion Coyoacan, 04000, Mexico DF. NEW MEMBERS (Contd.) Mr. S.L. Phillipson, P.O. Box 1 1012, Dorpspruit 3206, South Africa. Mr. B.C. Stockdale, MRCVS, 44 Berkeley Road, Loughborough, Leics. LE11 3SJ Mr. R.F. Rayner, 50 Wandle Road, Morden Surrey. Mr. R.T. Todd, 13 Mortimer Street, Ipswich, Queensland 4305, Australia. Ms Jill Varnum, 1710 S. Jen Tilly No. 30, Tempe, Arizona 85281, USA. Dr. G. Wennrich, Am Rotelbach 6, D-3 032 Fallingbostel 1, Germany. CHANGE OF ADDRESS Mr. R. Barnden to 24 Vicarage Street, Frome, Somerset BA11 3PU. Mr. G.K. Booth to Flat 3, 78 Thorne Road, Doncaster. W.O. I.A.S. Harris, to HQ P + SS (G), RAF Rheindahlen, B.F.P.O. 40. R.W. Hawkes, to Araluen, Box 6 8 Parndana, Kangaroo Island, S. Australia 5220 Mr.Thomas J. Klonowskito 6 356 MeadvilleRoad, Middleport, New York 14105, USA DONATIONS The Council is most grateful to the following members for their generosity Mr. M. Albek Mr. P.C.C. Duijzend Mrs. R.H. Grantham Mr. Guy A. Greenwell Mr. J.F. Harris Mr. H.H. Jacobsen Mr. Fred E Lohrer Mrs. F.D. Lovelett Mr. Van Praet Lucas Mr. A.J. Mobbs Dr. T.D. Nichols Dr. K.C. Parkes Mrs. F.M. Poe Dr. H. Quinque Mr. W. Todd, III MEMBERS’ ADVERTISEMENTS (10 p. per word - minimum charge £3.00) THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY OF QUEENSLAND welcomes new members. An Australian Society catering for all birds both in captivity and in the wild. We put out a bi-monthly magazine on all aspects of aviculture and conservation. For membership details please contact Ray Garwood, 19 Fahey’s Road, Albany Creek, 4035 Queensland. Annual subscription: 14.00 Aus. dollars surface mail, 20.00 Aus. dollars airmail. BIRD WORLD Magazine. Interesting, informative, well-illustrated. Dedicated to the presentation of quality information. Eight to ten articles each issue, including veterinary articles. Annual subscription (US dollars only): 12.00 (six issues). Postage extra: 8.00 surface mail, 12.00 airmail. Box 70, N. Hollywood, Calif. 91601, USA. AMERICAN CAGE-BIRD MAGAZINE features timely and interesting articles on canaries, finches, hook bills, and other birds by leading breeders and fanciers. All show dates and show information are also published. Monthly subscription 12.00 US dollars. American Cage-Bird Magazine, 3449 North Western Avenue, Chicago Illinois 60618, USA. Published by The Avicultural Society, Windsor Forest Stud, Mill Ride, Ascot, Berkshire, England 5i&.ao5*& fl'W 'Birds CULTURAL MAGAZINE VOLUME 88 Number 4 SOFTBILL ISSUE SPECIAL ISSUE ON SOFTBILLS Jointly edited by D. Coles and M. Harvey CONTENTS Breeding the Splendid Starling, by R.C.J. Sawyer (with coloured plate) . . . 189 Breeding the Red-winged Starling, by J.J. Mare . 191 Breeding the Crimson-rumped Toucanet at Padstow Bird Gardens, by K. Evans and D. Coles (with plate) . . 193 Additional Notes on Breeding the Blackbird in Captivity By Dr. M.A. Schlee (with plate) . 198 Breeding Touracos at the Houston Zoological Gardens, By R.J. Berry and W.W. Todd . 205 Observations on the Nightingale, by M. Taylor . 210 Humming Birds: their Care and Management, By R.J. Elgar (with line drawings and plate) . 213 Captive Management of the Hoopoe, by D. Coles (with plate) . 226 On the Adaptability of Tanagers to Captive Conditions By Dr. J. Ingels . . . . 235 Management Methods of a Back-Garden Collection, By R.E. Oxley . 239 Notes on Shamas and the Magpie Robin contributed by L. Gibson L. Hervouet, Dr. Lai, D. Lewis, R. Oxley and B. Woodley (with plate) . . 243 THE AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE welcomes original articles that have not been published elsewhere and that essentially concern the aviculture of a particular bird or group of birds, or that describe their natural history. Articles should be preferably typewritten, with double spacing, and the scientific names as well as the vernacular names of birds should be given. References cited in the text should be listed at the end of the article. Line drawings should be in Indian ink on thick paper or card; photographs which illustrate a particular point in the article will be used where possible and should be clearly captioned. ADDRESS OF EDITOR Mary Harvey, Windsor Forest Stud, Mill Ride, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 8LT, England. ■Richard Daniel Avicultural Magazine THE JOURNAL OF THE A VIC ULT URAL SOCIETY Vol. 88 - No. 4 - All rights reserved OCTOBER-DECEMBER 1982 SOFTBILL ISSUE BREEDING THE SPLENDID STARLING Lamprocolius splendidus splendidus By R.C.J. SAWYER (Cobham, Surrey) It is almost twenty years since I saw for the first time living specimens of the Splendid Starling. They formed part of a magnificent collection of African birds brought to this country from Kenya by the late David Roberts. I obtained a single pair which remained in my collection until recently. The outstandingly beautiful Splendid is the largest and one of the finest species of the short-tailed Glossy Starlings. The male has the fore¬ head, lores, wing coverts and flight feathers black. Most of the upper parts are metallic blue with an iridescent green wash. The under parts, from the chin to the belly, are metallic violet merging into copper and the sides of the chest, the lower belly and the under tail coverts are metallic blue. The female lacks some of the violet and tarnished copper of the male. The species has been imported rarely and my pair were probably among the first to reach this country alive. However, a few more birds were sent over subsequently by Mr. and Mrs. T. Barnley. Presumably these have all come from Kenya but the species is widely distributed and occurs from Nigeria to Ethiopia and in Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Zambia and Angola. The pair were housed in a small aviary at my home in London until 1972 when I moved to Cobham. They were then transferred to an enclo¬ sure, 24 ft. x 12 ft. x 8 ft. high, consisting of a flight liberally planted with conifers, rhododendrons, ericas, etc., and an artificially heated shelter, THE SPLENDID STARLING Lamprocolius splendidus splendidus Painted by Richard Daniel from life and from studies made in the wild breeding grounds near Kitale, western Kenya Colour plate. donated by Palaquin Fine Arts 190 R.C.J. SAWYER - BREEDING THE SPLENDID STARLING which they shared with a few other birds, including a Cock of the^Rock. Here the characteristic swishing noise produced by their wings in flight was obvious. Not only did they indulge in a variety of calls and whistles but they also exhibited a remarkable ability to mimic the human voice and persistently called me in- the voice of my father! The birds were adult when imported and I thought that they were probably too old to breed but in 1976 they nested for the first time. They chose a natural log, with an entrance hole 4 inches in diameter, which had been placed horizontally high in the aviary flight. I never saw them enter the log but I thought that they were nesting when they became aggres¬ sive to other birds (particularly the Cock of the Rock) when they approached the log. Their behaviour prompted me to examine the log when I found that they had made a crude nest of grasses, bits of heather and feathers. The nest contained three eggs which were blue with brown markings. Since the hen came off the nest when anyone was in the vicinity of the aviary, it was difficult to determine the incubation period with certainty but it appears to be about 18 days. Three chicks left the first nest 18 days after hatching. They were dull editions of the parents but their plumage already showed some iridescence. The breeding performance was repeated during the following year when four chicks were reared from two nests and in a third year when another three youngsters were reared. Unfortunately all except one of the young birds were males. Their sex is evident as soon as they leave the nest for, although young cocks are duller editions of the parents, young hens have blackish brown under parts with no blue gloss. Like most Glossy Starlings they are not difficult to keep in captivity. Their diet consists of a proprietary insectile mixture to which is added hard boiled egg, minced ox heart and “Vionate”. They also eat most insects and readily take crickets, mealworms and grasshoppers. However, mine have never been keen on gentles which, in any case, I have stopped feeding to my birds because of the danger of botulism. When they were feeding their offspring the parents were provided with live food every few hours. They were shy in their behaviour when they were breeding and were always reluctant to take the food to the chicks in the nest box until I had left the aviary and was apparently out of sight. They were aggressive when nesting and killed one of the young birds of the previous year which had not been removed from their aviary after reaching independence. I thought the opportunity of breeding the Splendid Starling had gone for ever when the adult pair, which must have been at least 17 years old, were stolen. However, I still have three young males, one of which I have J.J. MARE - BREEDING THE RED-WINGED STARLING 191 arrays d to exchange for one of the females which my friend, Dr. K.C. Searle of Hong Kong, obtained from Kenya and so I hope that the enjoy¬ ment of raising this lovely species will continue. As described above, the Splendid Starling Lamprocolius splendidus splendidus has been bred by Mr. R.C.J. Sawyer. This is believed to be the first success in this country, but anyone knowing of a previous breeding in Great Britain or Northern Ireland, or any other reason that would dis¬ qualify the claim, is asked to inform the Hon. Secretary. ^ ^ ^ BREEDING THE RED-WINGED STARLING Onycognathus morio By J.J. MARE (Roodepoort, Republic of South Africa) The Red-winged Starling is an attractive, indigenous species in South Africa. Many fanciers claim to have bred them, but to my knowledge no account of a specific breeding has yet been published. My birds were acquired in 1979 and no attempt at breeding occurred until 1981 when the hen began to disappear for long periods. By watching carefully I discovered that she was visiting a sisal stump, which was origi¬ nally hollowed out by Meyer’s Parrots. The exterior dimensions of the stump are 0.91 m long and 0.3 m approximately in diameter at the widest part. It is placed under roofing on a ledge about 2.1 m above the ground and is in semi-darkness. The aviary is 7.3 m. square and houses a mixed collection of birds including barbets, weavers, ducks, pheasants, Glossy and Pied Starlings, Meyer’s Parrots and Peach-faced Lovebirds. By carefully listening on the 13th day after the hen had first disap¬ peared into the sisal stump, I heard the presence of young, and a nest inspection on the 20th day revealed two chicks and a pale greenish-blue egg spotted with irregular brown markings, which proved to be infertile. The cup-shaped nest had been built approximately halfway down the stump with sticks and grass plastered together with mud and lined with 192 J.J. MARE - BREEDING THE RED-WINGED STARLING coir and feathers. During the breeding period the cock bird was never seen to be in the nest; therefore it is presumed that incubation was entirely by the hen, with the cock just keeping guard. Since these birds are inclined to be ner¬ vous and became quite aggressive and dived at one’s head whenever their nest was approached, inspection of the nest was kept to a minimum. At 21 days old the chicks were seen sitting in the entrance of the nest waiting for food, and at 25 days they were seen perched on the top of the sisal stump, but they soon hid behind it on the ledge. The young birds were practically fully grown at this stage and were a dull black in colour with no indication of their sex. The adult male is predominantly an iridescent black bird with reddish brown flight feathers, while the female has a grey head, somewhat streaked with a darker shade. Food consisted of termites (preferred at the flying stage), fruit such as pawpaw, pear, banana, apple, grapes, sultanas, etc., unbaked peanuts, dog meal dampened with water, vast quantities of mealworms and every cater¬ pillar, millipede, earthworm, cricket, locust or beetle that could be found. A nectar mixture made of honey, brown sugar, a multi-vitamin syrup and water was given fresh every day. A light was left burning for about an hour after dark to attract insects. Not only did the Red-winged Starlings enjoy this experiment, but so did all the birds in this and the adjoining aviary. 193 BREEDING THE CRIMSON-RUMPED TOUCANET Aulacorhynchus haematopygus AT PADSTOW BIRD GARDENS (Cornwall) By KEVIN EVANS and DAVID COLES Although various ramphastids are frequently seen in collections in Britain, this is believed to be the first complete breeding success in the British Isles with any member of this interesting South American family, though species have reared in Europe and fairly often in America. There is, however, a record of London Zoo almost breeding the Spot-billed Tou- canet Selenidera maculirostris as long ago as 1913 but the chicks from at least two nests failed to survive. In recent years, the Pale-mandibled Ara- cari Pteroglossus erythropygius , Curl-crested Aracari P. beauharnaesii, Laminated Hill Toucan A ndigena laminirostris and Toco Toucan Ramphas- tos toco have been reported as laying but, to the best of our knowledge, none has hatched. This species, also known as the Chestnut-billed Toucanet, is widely distributed in north-western South America from the Perija Mountains of Venezuela, through Colombia to the subtropical zones of Ecuador. Measuring 15 inches it is the largest of the toucanets. The most distinc¬ tive characteristics are the blood red rump and the chestnut beak which has a broad white stripe at the base. The body is mostly grass green, diffused with blue across the breast, more so in the male than in the female. The tips of the tail feathers are chestnut. The beak is about four inches long and slightly longer in the male. Other differences between the sexes are the overall larger size of the male and the difference in pitch of their calls, the male’s being louder and deeper while the hen’s is more plaintive. The call is an oft repeated throaty croak which the male utters for long periods during the breeding season, the female to a much lesser extent. Some duetting takes place. In March 1980 two males and one female were obtained. Two were already paired and these were placed together in a small hospital flight. The third was caged separately and they were all kept inside for a short period of observation. Food consumption was good and, having shown no signs of distress after their journey, the pair was released into an outside aviary. The flight was a corner one with Cornish stone walls on two sides and measured 4 m x 3.5 m with a height sloping from 3m to 2.5 m. The roof is half covered lengthways with corrugated perspex. The enclosure has part 194 K. EVANS & D. COLES - CR1MSON-RUMPED TOUCANET earth, part grass floor with Soft-shield Fern Polystichum setiferum grow¬ ing along one wall. A large Himalayan Honeysuckle Leycesteria formosa dominates the centre and a smaller one grows against the back wall. Common Ivy Hedera helix and Pennywort Umbilicus rupestris cover the walls. The leaves from the latter are occasionally eaten. In June a hollowed-out log, 1 m long, was placed in the angle of the stone walls, 1.5 m from the ground. Two-thirds were filled with a mixture of wood chips and forest bark. Growing alongside the entrance hole was a small Sycamore tree Acer pseudoplatanus, the branches of which allowed the adults to perch before going into the nest. The male, which was in breeding condition, inspected the log immediately but apart from this and some interest again shown by him in 1981, it was not until May 1982 that the hen started to take an interest in either the log or the male. During 1981 the male frequently called for long periods but the hen was still rather observed around the 23rd and always was still rather ragged in appearance and tended to sulk for most of the time. Twice last year (16th February and 10th April) his frustration boiled over and he pursued the female relentlessly, necessitating his removal for several days on each occasion. The diet given to the pair consisted of half a bowl of chopped apple, a quarter of a bowl of insectile mixture and a quarter of a bowl of mixed soft fruits (tomatoes, bananas, oranges, soaked sultanas, etc.). Mealworms and blow-fly maggots were sometimes offered but they were never eaten. During January two nest cavities were made in the rear aviary wall, as possible alternatives to the log, and filled again with the wood chip and forest bark mixture. Subsequently these were ignored and when both came into condition in May following the very hot spring, much time was spent in the natural log, throwing out the forest bark and wood chips. Mating was first witnessed on 4th June on a rotting branch alongside the pond. The male was seen tapping at the base of the hen’s bill until she adopted the mating position, which was squatting low across the log, head pointing towards the ground and held very rigid. The tail was held out straight and quivered when mating was about to take place. On the 5th and 6th the hen was busy in and out of the log, chipping at the inside from early morning to early evening. Chips of wood removed from the chamber were deposited at the furthest possible point from the nest. The weather in mid-June was not very good and only the occasional attempt at mating was seen, the majority being around midday. Mating was increasingly observed around the 23rd and always took place on the log at the side of K. EVANS & D. COLES - CRIMSON-RUMPED TOUCANET 195 the pond. The female started spending more time in the log and was suspected of having laid when a quick check was made of the log on the 27th. Two eggs were present and a third was laid next day. The pair shared incubation which started with the first egg; the male spent shorter periods on the eggs than the hen, probably because he had to come off to feed whereas the hen was fed on the nest by the male. The female incubated at night. Incubation lasted 16 or 17 days and young were first heard on 13th July when faint squawks were audible, presum¬ ably made as they were being fed. No eggshells were found. A varied diet was given when young were due, and most of the items offered were fed to the young. The basic fruit mixture comprised apple, seedless grapes and tomatoes, finely chopped, which was given daily. A selection of other soft fruits were given daily but what was offered depen¬ ded on what was available - soaked raisins and sultanas, cherries, plums, peaches, oranges, bananas, pears, blackberries, black currants, strawberries and nectarines. Cooked carrots and rice, cucumber and courgette were also given. All items were finely chopped. Livefood was offered but little was taken. Maggots were ignored completely and only a slight interest was shown in mealworms and crickets. Grasshoppers were taken in limited numbers but generally insects did not form an important part of the rearing diet and could have been dispensed with. On the third day the hen was seen eating a very large garden slug, tearing it apart and swallowing it to feed to the chicks. After feeding she spent the next five minutes cleaning the slime from her beak. Later in the day we offered her a snail which was eagerly accepted. This was taken to a particular perch and shelled, the first of many. The mollusc was worked in her beak until a weak spot was found, then crushed until bits of the shell started to fall off. It was then rubbed against the perch until clear of any shell fragments. If small, it was swallowed whole but normally it was placed under the foot and ripped into several pieces. The male also placed it under the foot to remove shell but found it awkward because of his extra bill length. Thereafter, snails formed a large proportion of the diet fed to the young with a dozen or so given daily to start with but, as the chicks grew, this was increased to between two and three dozen a day, divided between two feeds, one early morning and the other in the late afternoon. The male would spend time picking the ripening berries from Leyces- teria, often balancing precariously on the outer stems to reach the caramel- scented berries. These were also picked from other bushes around the gar- 196 K. EVANS & D. COLES - CRIMSON-RUMPED TOUCANET dens and provided as an additional item to the diet. All progressed well for three weeks with both sexes taking their share in rearing duties. Then the male pursued the female relentlessly and, ah though in a lull in the chasing the female would fly to the feed bowl and try to take the food up, as she approached the nest, the male would con¬ tinue his aggression. Consequently he was removed to an outside holding cage out of sight of the hen. During the course of the period when he was aggressive, he made the occasional visit to the two wall cavities, indicating that he may have been showing an interest in nesting again. We had reservations as to whether the hen would rear alone but our worries were unfounded for she proved to be a very industrious mother in caring for her unknown number of young. She continued to feed a large number of snails and an increasing amount of soaked puppy meal, as well as quantities of fruit. Droppings were removed to the furthest point from the nest and, being of a fairly runny consistency, they mixed easily with the wood chips to facilitate easy removal. The hen continued to chip at the inside of the log thus helping to add to the absorbent nest material and keep the nest dry. When the nest was checked after fledging, there was only an inch or so of nesting material left but it was reasonably dry and not at all sour as may have been expected. We feel that the provision of a nesting receptacle, such as a log, is most important for species like this, otherwise the base medium of wood chips, etc., would have soon been taken out and the chamber would have become very dirty quickly as happens with some lories and lorikeets. When six weeks old, young were seen at the entrance hole for the first time and it was quickly ascertained that there were two young which confirmed our thoughts from listening to the chicks in the nest. The female would feed the chicks at the entrance while clinging to the side, occasionally reaching down inside to feed one that had gone back in. To take food up she would eat three or four pieces of fruit then fly up with a piece in her beak. This she would feed^then regurgitate the other pieces, one at a time. From the point of the young’s first appearance at the nest entrance, the consumption of snails dropped appreciably and stopped once they had left. An increasing amount of soaked puppy meal and apple was now being fed. The first young left the log on 26th August and was smaller than the second which left the following day. Both were extremely steady and resembled the hen in plumage with the exception of the white stripe on K. EVANS & D. COLES - CRIMSON-RUMPED TOUCANET 197 Juvenile Crimson-rumped Toucanet, aged seven weeks, at the Padstow Bird Gardens the bill. The tails were short but still capable of being held erect while roosting. Both had gained confidence within a couple of days and began to follow the hen, begging for food.They began picking at food within a week of leaving the nest but were still fed by the hen for some time. Both were virtually independent of the hen for food at about nine weeks. The tail growth was rapid and the white band at the base of the bill began to show on the bottom mandible at nine weeks and is now (early October) fully showing on both mandibles. Apart from the bluish hue on the chest, they are indistinguishable from the adults. Both are full of life and very mischievous, taking great delight in pestering the hen, pulling at her tail and trying to bite her feet. Both love a spray and when bathing from the pond, all three stand on the side and take it in turn to have a dip. What little sun we had in the early days after they left the nest was greatly appreciated and both were sunbathing the day after leaving the nest - this they do by leaning to one side and erecting the feathers of 198 Dr. M. SCHLEE - BREEDING THE BLACKBIRD the rump and neck. Both young are still with the hen; the male is still separated and will remain so until the early winter. As described above, the Crimson-rumped Toucanet Aulacorhynchus haematopygus has been bred at Padstow Bird Gardens and this is believed to be the first success in this country. Anyone knowing of a previous breeding in Great Britain or Northern Ireland, or any other reason that would disqualify the claim, is asked to inform the Hon. Secretary. * * * ADDITIONAL NOTES ON BREEDING THE BLACKBIRD Turdus merula IN CAPTIVITY By Dr. M.A. SCHLEE (Museum of Natural History, Paris, France) This paper reports the outcome of the second breeding season of the Blackbird in captivity, an account of the first season (1980) having been published previously in th e Avicultural Magazine . Differences in behaviour between the reproductive seasons will be emphasised and the conditions necessary for assuring successful breeding will be discussed. Case 1 : The established nesting pair This pair comprised a five-year-old, hand-reared male and a two-year- old female which had successfully reproduced in captivity during the summer of 1980. The birds were living in the same greenhouse aviary as last year (Schlee, 1981). Two nesting attempts were carried out, but only the second one was successful. First nesting attempt On 11th May 1981, the male Blackbird adopted the “pear-shaped” courtship posture, inspected the nest site (the same as last year) and inclu¬ ded elements of the “strangled” song in his vocalisations. The female built the nest on 14th and 15th May. Only two eggs were laid, the clutch being Dr. M. SCHLEE - BREEDING THE BLACKBIRD 199 inferior to last year’s even though it was laid nearly a month earlier. The first egg hatched on 31st May, the second egg two days later. The female remained on the nest most of the day of the second hatching and was fed by her mate. In addition to last year’s diet of earthworms, coleopterans, lepidopterans and dictyopterans, about 40 Stick Insects Cuniculina impi- gra were made available on the third and fourth day after hatching. How¬ ever, both nestlings died within the three days that followed. It is quite probable that their death was brought about by the ingestion of the Stick Insects; nevertheless, a small number of these insects had occasionally been fed to the parents without causing any bad side effects. This year the male bird did not stand guard over the nest, but any attempt to approach it provoked an aggressive display. Whenever I tried to touch the nest, the male immediately dived at my head; maybe he remembered that last year I had caused the disturbance that terminated in the disappearance of his offspring. This behaviour was observed during both nesting attempts. Second nesting attempt Numerous aggressive encounters and some serious fighting took place between the pair during the three days that separated the nesting periods. Then, on 10th June, the female relined her old nest and four days later started brooding. The clutch contained three eggs which hatched on 27th, 28th and 30th June respectively. The diet of the nestlings had the same components as last year, but some 20 Silkworm moths Bombyx mori were also supplied. The parents showed a clear preference for these lepidopterans which were fed intact to the young. The total number of prey consumed was inferior to that of last year, for the parents continued to eat com¬ mercial feed, but the offspring were not fed the pellets until 22-23 days old. The first young bird left the nest on 10th July at the age of 13 days; the other two by early morning on 12th July. I was able to feed the first and third fledglings during their first three days out of the nest. The male bird threatened me when I first approached but thereafter remained near¬ by and surveyed. However, when I tried to feed the second fledgling, the mother immediately perched on an overhead branch, stared at me and gave piercing alarm calls. No. 2 then looked at me, gave alarm calls and took flight. During this time the father gave the warning “pook pook” call, which indicates to the young that they should keep still and quiet, and clearly searched for the cause of the disturbance which he did not associate with my presence. Neither the second nor the third fledgling 200 Dr.M. SCHLEE - BREEDING THE BLACKBIRD paid attention to their mother’s alarm calls, but stayed quiet, as indica¬ ted by their father. After this incident, I could never approach the second fledgling without arousing the mother’s defensive behaviour and causing the immediate flight of the youngster. On 12th July it was evident that the parents had divided the offspring between them: the first and third fledglings were cared for by their father in the front half of the aviary, the second fledgling by its mother in the back half. However, their organi¬ sation of fledgling care broke down when the young birds started freely moving about in the aviary a few days later, and the parents started to feed their offspring indiscriminately. At that time the first and third fledglings began reacting to their mother’s alarm calls. The young were independent by 3rd August and the mother no longer defended them. The sex of the young birds became evident after the moult in September - the first and third were males, the second a female. The young Blackbirds had to be treated for gapeworms, but since they were too wild to be repeatedly boxed or caged without seriously injuring themselves, an initial treatment by inhalation of barium anti- monyl tartrate powder was followed up by the administration of thia¬ bendazole in the drinking water for 7-10 days. Case 2: First -year pair An abortive nesting attempt was carried out by the young male born in captivity during the summer of 1980 and a year-old, hand-reared female which was found in the suburbs of Paris at the age of seven days. These two birds, as well as last year’s captive-born female and a Starling, were all reared and housed together until 10th April 1981, when the captive-born female was killed and the Starling removed from the cage (1 x .82 x 1.53 m). No agonistic behaviour was observed between the pair, and they were often perched close to one another. This gave the impression that pair-formation had occurred. Nest-construction On 22nd April, since the female was seen carrying pieces of wet paper in her beak, I attached a commercial pigeon nest in the upper corner of the cage. Sporadic gathering of nest material (straw and strips of paper) was observed until the middle of the following month. During that time two additional aviaries were constructed in the greenhouse: one (3 x 1.5 x 4 m) was built around the birds’ cage in order to facilitate releasing the pair. On 18th May the nest was full of straw and the female was settled in it. I left Dr. M. SCHLEE - BREEDING THE BLACKBIRD 201 M. Schlee Environmental setting of the established nesting pair. Note dense ground cover. Nest-site is located in the upper left corner. the cage door open to allow the birds access into the aviary. That after¬ noon I found one broken egg on the floor and both birds were highly agi¬ tated. On 19th May the female left the cage, and the next day the male ventured out. Both birds showed intense agonistic behaviour towards each other; this continued until 26th May when the female resumed nest¬ building. On 29th May the nest was lined with mud, transported in part by the male, and the next morning it appeared to be finished. On 1st June the female became the dominant partner. Behaviour during incubation Four eggs were laid between 3rd and 7th June. On 9th June, the Star¬ ling which lived in the adjoining aviary slipped through a hole into the territory of the established pair. Up until that time, the year-old male regu¬ larly threatened and fought with the Starling along the boundary of his territory. But once his rival had gone, he became extremely aggressive with 202 Dr. M. SCHLEE - BREEDING THE BLACKBIRD his mate, chasing her off the nest and out of the cage, and then barring access to the feeding dish. His aggressiveness did not diminish when the Starling was returned to its own aviary a few days later. The year-old male was seen standing guard over the nest only at the end of the incubation period. Hatching and care of offspring The first egg hatched on 19th June. There was considerable agonistic behaviour between the parents and, as a result, the feeding routine, as well as the preparation of the food, was not properly carried out. The male often did not allow the female to go to the nest. On 21st June, two dead nestlings were found on the floor. The younger one had apparently died at hatching, but the elder one showed severe haematomae on the head and neck. It may have been killed as a result of a disturbance in the greenhouse which may have prompted the male bird to jump against and into the nest - a behaviour he had already shown on several occasions but which was never observed in the female. A check revealed the pres¬ ence of another young bird and one egg in the nest. Aggressive behaviour continued between the parents and on 24th June I found the body of the third nestling which showed signs of massive cerebral haemorrhage. The remaining egg was infertile. Behaviour following nesting failure On 25th June I removed the nest from the cage, and four days later the birds showed signs of moulting. Their mutual aggressiveness declined at that time but did not disappear. The male was clearly the dominant partner. On 19th September the metal cage in which they had nested was removed from the aviary, after which the birds became noticeably more calm. In the middle of December the female slipped into the adjoin¬ ing aviary with the Starling. Both of the Blackbirds were visibly more at ease when separated. The female re-entered her own aviary for the third time on 27th January 1982. Agonistic encounters occurred as usual, but in addition, the male showed a curious “stalking” attitude in which he did not seem to pay attention to the female’s submissive postures. That evening he killed the female. Conclusions In order to breed Blackbirds successfully, the physical environment has to be arranged in such a way as to allow for the expression of the strong territorial and aggressive tendencies that characterise this species. In Dr. M. SCHLEE - BREEDING THE BLACKBIRD 203 nature, the size of the territory depends above all on feeding conditions and the amount of cover, the densest populations of Blackbirds being found in urban parks and gardens. A territory in the Oxford Botanical Gardens, for example, averages about half an acre (Snow, 1958), in an urban park in Lausanne, Switzerland, about one-third of an acre (Ribaut, 1964). The pair that successfully nested in captivity had a ground surface of 15 square metres and special accommodations had to be made to prevent aggressive encounters as follows: 1) enough ground cover so that the male and the female were not always in sight of one another when carrying out general maintenance activities; 2) enough space around the nest-site so that the parents did not have to cross each other’s path when transporting food to the young; 3) food items distributed in at least two different places so that separate foraging sites were available. Aggressive tendencies also have to be taken into account when mem¬ bers of the same family are kept together over a period of time. Although the parents generally tolerated their grown offspring in their territory, from October onward the agonistic behaviour between the young became quite intense and often gave way to violent fighting. The young female was most often attacked and several times had been pinned to the ground in prolonged combats. The plant cover in the aviary, however, was sufficient to allow her to escape without being seriously injured. I first removed the dominant male (the first fledgling) and then I was obliged to separate the other two young birds. It was only then that violent fighting broke out between the two females, for the young one tried to take possession of her mother’s territory. I do not know if these examples of behaviour are typical, but they should be taken into consideration when breeding the Blackbird in captivity where physical conditions do not always allow for the normal dispersal of the young to new territories. There are surely many reasons for the nesting failure of the year-old pair, but these can probably be grouped into two main categories - inade¬ quate accommodation and general incompatibility of the pair. The aviary had only 4.5 square metres of ground surface available and this was even more restricted by the presence of the large metal cage. It should be noted, however, that the nest site was the pair’s choice, for other sites, and even a pigeon nest, were available. The limited amount of space and plant cover surely kept both birds in a state of constant nervous tension, the frequency of reciprocal interruption of maintenance activities being quite high. When there is no way to escape or to increase social distance, crowding or proxi¬ mity stress (Fox, 1974) is created and often results in hyperaggression. Parental behaviour was further disrupted by the fact that there was only 204 Dr. M. SCHLEE - BREEDING THE BLACKBIRD one small entrance (39 x 48 cm) to the cage, thus obliging the birds to come face to face when carrying food. This always seemed to be inter¬ preted, at least by the male, as direct aggression. In addition, or perhaps as a result of constant stress, the pair-bond did not seem to be firmly es¬ tablished. In nature the female becomes the dominant partner after pair- formation occurs, and in old pairs she remains slightly dominant over the male but with little aggressiveness on either side (Snow, 1958). This clearly was not the case for the yearling pair whose reproductive activities may have been brought about solely by the forced cohabitation. If the pair-bond is non-existent or poorly established, the “partner” would become an intruder in the territory and thus release aggressive behaviour (which in turn inhibits the expression of parental behaviour). The actual reasons for the apparent lack of a pair-bond are unknown, but some social factors were probably involved. The aviary of the Blackbirds was separated from that of the Starling by a nylon protecting net, and all three birds constant¬ ly remained near the boundary. The male Blackbird carried out territorial defence while the female spent much time watching the Starling which directed courtship displays to her; but she was never observed soliciting him. The complex social relations brought about by the continual presence of the Starling, with whom the Blackbirds had been reared, may well have hindered pair-formation. REFERENCES FOX, M.W. 1974. Chapter on “Madness - an ethological perspective”, pp. 179-208. In: Experimental Behaviour : A Basis for the Study of Mental Disturbance. ED. J.H. Cullen. Irish University Press, Dublin. RIBAUT, J.-P. 1964. Dynamique d’une population de Merles noirs Turdus mem la L. Rev. Suisse Zool. 71(42): 815-902. SCHLEE, M.A. 1981. Breeding the Blackbird in Captivity. Avicultural Magazine. 87: 125-129. SNOW, D.W. 1958. A Study of Blackbirds. George Allen & Unwin Ltd, London. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author wishes to thank Mr. Pierre Bourricaud for his assistance in caring for the birds. 205 BREEDING TOURACOS AT THE HOUSTON ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS, TEXAS, USA By ROBERT J. BERRY (Curator of Birds) and WILLIAM W. TODD (Supervisor of Outdoor Exhibits) Touracos (family Musophagidae) are an interesting and spectacular group of softbill birds which range over scattered portions of the African continent. These pigeon -sized relatives of the cuckoo are also commonly known as Go-away Birds, Plantain-eaters, or Louries. They are extremely popular as avicultural subjects due to the relative ease of their captive maintenance, the brilliant coloration exhibited by many species, and their active behaviour. Undoubtedly, no one with a basic interest in softbills would fail to be familiar with these appealing birds. A review of the literature indicates that there is some disagreement over their true taxonomic status. Traditionally they have been listed in the order Cuculiformes. More recently, however, they are placed in a sepa¬ rate order - the Musophagiformes. Depending on the reference, five or six genera are generally recognised and these are divided into 19 or 20 species. Morony et al (1975) lists five genera representing 19 species. Readers who are interested in problems of relationships, distributions and descriptions of the birds are referred to published material by Moreau (1958) and Chaplin (1963). While a number of species have apparently been bred successfully in European collections, there are few published accounts of their success¬ ful reproduction in the United States. The fact that the majority of the reported breeding successes occurred in relatively large, heavily planted aviaries may have led many aviculturists to believe that they could not be easily bred in lesser facilities. This is not true. Even though our initial breeding success with this group at the Houston Zoo did, in fact, occur in a large indoor conservatory aviary measuring 80 ft. long, 50 ft. wide and 20 ft. high, our most successful production has occurred in a range of relatively small outdoor exhibits. Each of these units measures IVi ft. wide and 15 ft. deep with a 7 ft, height in the open flight and a 10 ft. height in the covered shelter. Of the 1 1 species currently maintained in the collection and housed as individual pairs in these facili¬ ties, nine have been successfully bred: Lady Ross’s Musophaga rossae, Hartlaub’s Tauraco hartlaubi, White-crested T. leucolophus , Guinea or Gold Coast T. persa , Schalow’s T schalowi , Violet-crested T. porphy- reolophus. Red-crested T. erythrolophus , White-cheeked T. leucotis , 206 R.J. BERRY & W.W. TODD - BREEDING TOURACQS and Grey Corythaixoides concolor. The two remaining species, the Violaceous Plantain-eater Musophaga violacea and the White-bellied Go- away Bird Corythaixoides leucogaster have only been paired in the collec¬ tion within the last year and we remain hopeful that these two species will also respond to our husbandry techniques. Since the inception of our breeding programme for musophagids in 1977, a total of 132 chicks have been reared to independence (19 May 1982). We are, of course, extremely gratified by this initial success. Our long-range goal is to establish three unrelated breeding pairs of each species maintained in the programme in order to achieve a degree of genetic diversity in future generations. This is imperative if we are to make a significant contribution to establishing these birds as self-sustaining captive populations. In this direction we now have several pairs of F j birds paired and breeding. In order to assist others interested in working with the captive propaga¬ tion of these birds, we provide the following information on the data we have obtained to date and the husbandry techniques we have developed in the project. Actually, our basic husbandry programme is quite simple and, as indica¬ ted earlier, our facilities for housing these birds are modest and certainly no more sophisticated than the average “backyard” aviary. Indeed, the units currently housing the touraco collection were originally built in the 1930’s as a pheasantry and, as such, offer little more for their inhabitants than an outdoor aviary with a sheltered section into which the birds can retreat during inclement weather. To enhance the appearance of the exhibits, the earthen bottoms are covered with several inches of fine gravel and each unit is planted with a couple of shrubs. Due to the extremely territorial behaviour of adult pairs in breeding condition, we do not recommend attempting to breed touracos in colonies. We feel that the major factor contributing to our success was the segrega¬ tion of specimens into individual pairs. Accurately sexing touracos can present some problems, since the vast majority of species are not dimor¬ phic (only one of the species we maintain, the White-bellied Go-away Bird, is obviously dimorphic -black mandibles in the male and green in the fe¬ male). For making tentative determinations of sex in monomorphic species we rely on behavioural interactions and pairing in group situations. By banding, or otherwise identifying individuals in a group, the selection of true pairs is relatively easy. There are, however, always odd individuals which remain a question. For this reason, laparoscopy (surgical exposure of the gonads) has proved a very valuable tool. In the hands of a skilled clinician, the surgical risks are minimal, and the procedure is quick and R.J. BERRY & W.W. TODD - BREEDING TOURACOS 207 conclusive. As touracos reach sexual maturity during their first year, all of our juvenile specimens are now sexed by this method at between six to eight months old. The earliest we have had eggs produced was from a nine-month old Red-crested Touraco 71 erythrolophus . In contrast, it is also interesting to note that our breeding female Lady Ross's Touraco, on loan from San Diego Zoo, is known to be over 20 years old. The majority of our pairs appear to nest almost randomly throughout the year with peak breeding activity occurring from December through July. Both adults share in the incubation process. With the exception of the members of the genus Coiythabc aides , which usually lay three eggs, the normal clutch is two eggs for the species which have bred. Our records indicate that incubation for the genus Tauraco generally lasts 22 days; for Corythabcoides 26 days; and for Musophaga 24 days. The young are quite advanced, being covered in a dense coat of sooty black or grey down when they hatch, and are fed by regurgitation. Observations indicate that the first feeds are in a liquid state with the consistency increasing in coarse¬ ness with the chick's age. The young develop rapidly and, surprisingly, leave the nest before they are fully fledged. During this critical period, they are closely tended by the adults as they clamber about in branches near the nest. At this age, except for the vivid red wing bars across the flight feathers in Tauraco , their sombre juvenile plumage gives little hint of the dazzling adult coloration that is gradually acquired during their first few months of life. Although some pairs will tolerate relatively close observation during the incubation and rearing cycle, this practice is generally discouraged especially with less prolific species. Aggression between members of a pair, often sudden and unpredictable, is the greatest threat to continual successful breeding. Unnoticed in a confined space with minimal cover, it will inevitably result in the death of one member of the pair, usually that of the female. While agonistic beha¬ viour may occur in pairs of long standing and with a successful breeding history, it is more likely encountered between recently introduced birds. Gradual acquaintance, beginning with separate adjacent caging to monitor signs of compatibility, such as courtship feeding, will help to decrease but cannot eliminate this danger. Due to limited space it is necessary to house pairs of touracos in adjacent flights. The housing of pairs of conspecifics next to one another is avoided, and although some interspecific fighting occurs through the wire, it is rarely serious and does not appear to inhibit reproductive beha¬ viour. On the contrary, continuous breeding of individual pairs may be enhanced by the close proximity of other birds in clearly delineated terri- 208 R.J. BERRY & W.W. TODD - BREEDING TOURACOS tories. Diets are identical for all species in all seasons. Being primarily frugi- vorous, foods consist of a mixture of freshly diced fruits such as apple, banana and papaya, as well as whole grapes, chopped greens and soaked raisins. These items are sprinkled twice weekly with a vitamin/mineral supplement. Soaked Purina dog chow, dry mynah pellets and game bird crumbs are also provided. Non-breeding birds are fed once daily. When young are being reared, a second feeding is offered and a few mealworms and small pieces of Zupreem Bird-of-Prey Diet are added to their regular ration. Nest-building in touracos is reminiscent of pigeons and doves as they devote little effort or detail to nest construction. For this reason we pro¬ vide them with a sturdy nesting platform. After experimenting with several types of nesting structures, we have found that there are definite advantages in using shallow wooden trays which have at least 3 inch lips on the sides. This type of structure helps prevent eggs or young from falling from the nests and seems to provide the incubating birds with a sense of security. Standard produce “flats” work quite well for us. These are lined with hay and mounted in a corner of the shelter approximately 7 ft. above the ground. After adding a few twigs of their own, the birds seem totally satisfied with this arrangement. To avoid aspergillosis or other disease problems, the nests are cleaned and new nesting material is added between clutches. While a number of female touracos hatched in Houston have produced eggs in the latter part of their first year, successful breeding does not usually occur until they are in their second year. Several second-generation pairs appear to have experienced “trial nesting”. In these cases, eggs might be laid from perches or other inappropriate sites and incubation not be completed before settling into a normal and successful routine. Eggs re¬ trieved from these situations and artificially uncubated or placed with surrogates have generally proved to be fertile. Once established, most pairs continue breeding attempts throughout the nesting season, frequently beginning another nesting before the previous chicks are fully independent. On several occasions we have observed juveniles from the previous clutch assisting with brooding and rearing of their younger siblings. Removing the young once they are independent is usually necessary, however, due to aggressive behaviour which often develops in the adults once they begin to recycle. Because of our relatively mild climate, we are able to house these birds outside throughout the year. During the winter months, a single infra-red R.J. BERRY & W.W. TODD - BREEDING TOURACOS 209 heat lamp is provided in each shelter. Under these conditions, the adult birds have proven quite hardy and have endured brief periods of freezing weather (down to 1 S°F at night) without any apparent ill effects. As a safety precaution, we have on occasion removed chicks for hand¬ rearing during the winter months and have found them very easy. Our hand-rearing diet consists of: 1 part Purina Cat Chow, 1 part fruit mix consisting of equal parts of papaya and apple. This is blended to near liquid consistency for initial feedings and warmed prior to administration. Although initial feedings are by eyedropper, once the chicks have become conditioned to handling, they begin to eat readily from a spoon. By the time they are three to four weeks old, they are usually eating by themselves. Whilst they become extremely tame when hand-reared, touracos are not really suitable as cage birds and can only be fully appreciated in aviaries that are large enough for flight. With proper care and attention, there is no reason why these fascina¬ ting birds cannot become established as self-sustaining populations in our aviaries. REFERENCES CHAPLIN, J.P. 1963. The Touracos: an African Bird Family. The L iving Bird ,2: 57-6 7 . MOREAU, R.E. 1958. Some Aspects of the Musophagidae. Ibis, 100: 6 7-112, 23 8-270. MORON Y . I . E . , ROC H W alt e r J., and FARRAND, John. 1975. Reference List of the Birds of the World. American Museum of Natural History. 210 OBSERVATIONS ON THE NIGHTINGALE By MALCOLM TAYLOR (Alresford, Hampshire) The Nightingale Luscinia megarhynchos is a summer migrant to Europe and arrives in England during the third week in April. This bird measures about 6 Vi inches in length. The whole of the upper part is russet brown, the tail being rich chestnut brown. The chin and throat are whitish, breast and sides of the body are pale brown. The under tail coverts are buff and the belly white. The legs and feet are greyish brown, and the eyes dark brown. Male and female are similar in appearance. Juveniles have a speckled appearance, very much like young Robins but with the chestnut brown tail. I do not consider the Nightingale to be a bird which is easily kept in confinement, as its needs^to keep it in good health and condition through¬ out the year> have to be watched closely, particularly throughout the winter and during the spring moult. Nightingales should be fed on a good proprietary brand of fine grade insectile food. I currently use products from the Orlux range of Belgian manufactured bird foods, marketed in England by Fromeview Ltd. of Bristol. I consider this brand to be the best available. To this basic insec¬ tile food I add some grated stale cheddar cheese, grated carrot, finely minced raw ox heart, fruit in the form of ripe apple and pear heavily scored, a few well-soaked raisins, not forgetting several mealworms per bird each day, together with ants’ eggs, earwigs, woodlice, and any other form of livefood that can be procured. I have purposely excluded maggots or ‘gentles’, as some aviculturists used to call them, because unless the breeding source is reputable, it is very likely that one’s stock of birds will be almost wiped out due to an attack of botulism. One year my own stock suffered such an attack and I vowed never to feed another maggot to any birds in my care. To substitute maggots as a useful form of livefood, I use chopped mealworms and “ants eggs” or larvae of the Wood Ant Formica mfa. Variety of food is very important in keeping any insectivorous bird in good condition throughout the year, but I feel that this applies in particular to the Nightingale. When spring arrives, it is always a delicate situation to obtain com¬ patibility between the male and female, as the bird selected as the breeding mate would no doubt not be the choice of the male in the M. TAYLOR NIGHTINGALE 211 wild. This applies to many insectivorous species, and if the weather is reasonable I like to place each bird of a pair into a separate aviary during the third week in April, and generally speaking it is only a matter of a week, or two before one observes the female carrying a leaf about the aviary. It Is then usually safe to transfer the male into the same aviary as the female. Such an aviary must be well planted with shrubs to form a dense undergrowth with sufficient light and shade to resemble the wild breeding habitat. I feel that fund slung an aviary according to the habitat considerably assists the study of the species in captivity and goes towards ensuring a successful breeding result, plus the added attraction of caring for a collection of birds in miniature natural environments. That is why I believe that a working field knowledge of all species in confinement is absolutely essential if one hopes to breed from them. Their habits must be studied at length in the field and where this is impossible, such as with species from another country, then it becomes essential to scan the literature for any available information about the species in one’s care. It Is now generally known that any aviary used for breeding birds should be fairly thickly planted and be provided with two feeding areas out of sight of each other. Oak trees are generally within the Nightingale’s breeding territory as it is the caterpillars of the Oak Roller Moth Tortrix viridana which form the bulk of the food of the nestlings in the wild. The nest, which is placed on or very close to the ground, is constructed of dead oak leaves and lined with grasses and a leaf or two. The usual clutch of eggs is five, although four are not uncommon, and they are olive brown In colour. In 27 years’ experience I have kept many Nightingales but have only had one true pair which were compatible, and In an aviary measuring 9 ft. x 6 ft. x 7 ft. high this pair built a nest but did not continue any further that year. However, the following year In May they built a nest in some very low bramble just clear of the ground. This nest was constructed from a large quantity of oak leaves from leaf litter in their aviary, together with some grasses which formed the lining and a little -horse hair. The female laid four olive brown eggs and appeared to have done all the nest building. She began Incubating after the third egg was laid. I never witnessed any display taking place. During this time the male bird was singing almost continu¬ ously but its song, although very pleasant, was nothing like the song pattern of wild Nightingales. After 14 days’ incubation, three eggs 212 M. TAYLOR - NIGHTINGALE hatched, the fourth being clear. The adults were supplied with greater quantities of ants' eggs just prior to the hatching, and until the three nestlings were 10 days old, they were fed on nothing else to my knowledge, which says much for the food value of ants’ eggs. From 10 days onwards, I fed mainly ants^eggs and chopped mealworms and these were dusted with Phillips Yeast mixutre and Squibbs Vionate to prevent rickets occurring. Each time anyone approached their aviary, the adult birds would make loud croaking noises of alarm. The three nestlings grew rapidly and fledged at 12 days when they hopped about in the undergrowth, more often heard than seen. At 21 days they were not quite so shy and could be observed more easily. By this time they showed great interest in ants’eggs and mealworms. The ants’ eggs were a great favourite and a good standby until I was able to remove the three young birds at four weeks to a bird room where they were housed separately in large flight cages and gradually accustomed to a basi¬ cally static diet. It is important that the greater part of their diet should be static rather than live, as the limited amount of live food which we are able to give, compared to what the birds can obtain in the wild, does not supply enough vitamins. From the time the eggs hatched, the male Nightingale ceased singing as is customary in the wild, because by that time he has no time to sing, being too busy feeding the nestlings. Juvenile Nightingales do not moult their wing or tail feathers until the next spring, when first winter birds can be distinguished from older birds by pale buff spots on the tips of the greater wing coverts. At six weeks old my birds moulted from their speckled plumage and resembled the adults. At that time two of these birds became very aggressive and I assumed them to be males. Male Nightingales can generally be housed with other birds if so desired but not with their own kind or they will disagree. Females can be housed with others of the same species. They are single brooded. Apart from the wonderful song which is the main distinguishing feature, it is possible for an experienced eye to sex Nightingales with a reasonable degree of accuracy when in confinement. I find that the male birds are larger than females, have flatter heads, whiter throats and give the appearance of having longer legs by showing more of the tibia than the female. Males tend to carry their wing tips lower than the root of the tail which sometimes “cocked” higher than that of the female. Males also tend to croak more deeply, although other call and alarm notes are similar to the female Nightingale’s. Both sexes tend to rock when stationary RJ. ELGAR - HUMMINGBIRDS 213 momentarily. The wonderful song commences as soon as the birds arrive on our shores. The Nightingale sings during the day, with more pauses between song, but it can be appreciated more during the quiet of a warm May night when continuous song can be heard, particularly when several males are singing against each other. A Nightingale seems to enjoy singing against noise, whether it be during a thunder storm or a jet aeroplane flying overhead, the cracking of a twig underfoot on its territory, or, in captivity, competing against the noise of a motor mower. Young males do not Inherit the beautiful song pattern but perfect this whilst in their winter quarters in tropical Africa, in areas which are heavily populated with Nightingales. * * * HUMMING BIRDS: THEIR CARE AND MANAGEMENT By R.J. ELGAR (Blackley, Manchester) Humming birds are perhaps the most specialised birds known to avi¬ culture and can present a great challenge to anyone wishing to maintain them. For many years, because of similar characteristics, they were placed along with Swifts (Apodidae), in the order Apodiformes, both having underdeveloped short legs, greatly enlarged pectoral muscles and lengthened primary feathers. As well as many similarities there are numerous differen¬ ces: while swifts are represented in the Old and New World, there is no doubt that the humming birds evolved in the New World and only occur in the Western Hemisphere; where swifts are capable of staying airborne for extended periods and seem completely aerial by nature, humming birds, because of their high energy expenditure, measure out their day be¬ tween flights for feeding and resting periods, thus conserving energy; when swifts pair, both sexes perform the parental duties, whereas only the female humming bird builds the nest and cares for the eggs and the young. No other bird can match the humming bird’s manoeuvrability in flight, and 214 R.J. EGAR - HUMMINGBIRDS their ability to fly backwards, sideways or to hover motionless. In view of these differences, humming birds have been placed by some in an order of their own (Trochiliformes). The humming bird family is the second largest in the Western Hemis¬ phere, containing over three hundred and twenty species. In the last few years, several new species have been discovered, three from Peru - Koepcke’s Hermit Phaethornis koepckeae , the Royal Sunangel Heliangelus regalis and the Nebline Metal-tail Metallura odomae - and from Colombia the Colourful Puffleg Eriocnemis mirahilis. With the changing political climate, it is difficult to predict whether there will be any more humming birds available to the aviculturist. At present only Peru will allow small numbers of humming birds to be ex¬ ported and under supervision from the authorities whose control is strictly enforced. The birds can only be collected from the western side of the Andes, but with many South American countries the situation may im¬ prove or deteriorate. It is, of course, open to debate whether humming birds should be exported from their country of origin but if they are available in Britain, I feel that aviculturists should derive as much know¬ ledge of these birds as they can and maintain them in the best possible way. Transport It is always wise to collect humming birds personally as transporting by rail can sometimes prove hazardous. The journey home and how it is completed can determine the health of the bird on its arrival. If a large cage is used, the humming bird will spend the greater part of the journey flying up and down and, with the movement of the car, they have great difficulty in feeding and usually arrive exhausted. The most satisfactory container is a small cardboard box, approximately 8x6x6 inches deep. Newspaper should be placed on the bottom to absorb any nectar or droppings. Four holes should be punched into the sides through which two perches can be inserted, one just above the floor of the box leaving room to wedge a plastic nectar bottle (the type used by exporters from Ecuador), and the other perch placed approximately 2 inches from the floor of the box for the humming bird to perch on whilst travelling. The top flaps of the box should be cut off and replaced with polythene, one edge of which should be left loose so that the bird can be placed in the box and secured after. I have found that they soon adjust to travelling in this manner and even after long journeys, they remain calm and well rested. It is most important that only one bird is packed in a box. R.J. ELGAR - HUMMINGBIRDS 215 Housing It is advisable to cage all newly-imported humming birds individually for several weeks to assess whether they are suffering from any diseases or fungal infections. This time spent alone will give the birds a chance to make up any weight lost during quarantine. I now keep my new birds caged in this way until they have completed their first moult, because it is only then that one can decide what sort of accommodation will suit a particular species (see illustration). To be successful with humming birds one cannot rely on one form of housing. It is very pleasant to have all the birds in one tropical flight but there is no control of the birds in this housing. If a particular specimen is extremely aggressive or timid it will usually mean a death. Some species of humming birds will not mix at all so it is best to be versatile when housing a collection of them, depending on the amount of room and finance available and whether the construc¬ tion is to be placed out or indoors. If a spare room in the house is used, a bank of boxed cages can be placed on one wall to house the timid and aggressive humming birds, whilst on the other wall an indoor flight can be constructed depending on the room available. An ideal indoor flight would be 12 - 14 ft. long, 6 ft. high and 3 ft. wide. A frame can be made of 1 x VA inch softwood and the front of the frame covered in Vi inch weld mesh. The frame and the wire mesh should be painted matt black and the top, back and sides should be covered with heavy duty polythene or flat transparent plastic for extra light. Small shelves, attached to the downwards part of the frame, will accommodate eight to ten medium sized house plants, as well as three or four saucers of water for bathing, and the addition of some natural perches will make a most attractive and inexpensive indoor flight which, with careful selection of species, should be capable of housing up to ten medium-sized humming birds (see illustration). If humming birds are to be housed outdoors and a greenhouse or conservatory is to be used, care should be taken in warm weather to keep the inside temperature down and the air fresh inside. As the majority of species available in Britain are from subtropical up to paramo zones, this type of accommodation is unsuitable. An ideal temperature for maintain¬ ing captive specimens is probably between 55-65°F. The ideal form of outdoor housing is probably a bird room with cages to house small timid and aggressive birds individually, plus an indoor flight with access to an equivalent outside flight. The number of humming birds for this type of accommodation should be calculated on the size of the indoor flight so that there is no overcrowding when the outside flight is not in use. The 216 R.J. ELGAR - HUMMINGBIRDS A selection of housing ideas for humming birds R.J. ELGAR - HUMMINGBIRDS 217 condition of the occupants should be monitored daily and if any individual is over-aggressive or stressed, it should be removed and caged separately for a few days before being re-introduced to the flight. If the problem persists, It will have to be caged indefinitely. Cages The ideal cage should be box type, thus giving the humming birds a sense of security (see illustration). Wherever possible the cages should be placed in the bird room in a position where the birds will receive some sun¬ light through the course of the day. The stock cages that I use are constructed of chipboard and hardboard with Vz inch welded mesh fronts. The interiors are painted pale green and furnished with a natural perch at either end. I also place a perch high up, close to the wire. I find that a number of my caged humming birds prefer to roost on a perch in this position and it discourages them from sleeping whilst clinging to the wire and thus damaging their tails. The wire mesh and the exterior are painted matt black which aids good vision of the birds. For the floor covering I use newspaper which is ideal for absorbing the birds5 droppings. In the centre of each cage I place an upturned jam jar on top of which is placed a saucer of water for bathing - the water should be changed daily. Into the back corners of each cage I place empty plastic margarine tubs which are filled with sliced fresh bananas to attract fruit flies into the cages. I change the banana weekly when cleaning the cage and changing the newspaper. The size of the stock cage should be as large as possible. I suggest a minimum of 40 inches long by 16 inches high by 16 inches deep, which is adequate for one small humming bird. It is bad policy to have more than one bird per cage as humming birds in general are ex¬ tremely pugnacious and in such confined conditions, it would almost certainly result in the death of one of the occupants. I have several cages over 7 ft. long in which I have housed pairs of some of the small humming birds from the genera Popelairia and Acestrura, etc., without any trouble but as a rule it is best to cage humming birds individually. Plants suitable for a humming bird flight Although it would be practically impossible to furnish sufficient flowering plants to maintain a collection of humming birds in nectar, the inclusion of a number of plants to a humming bird flight has numerous advantages. First, they are pleasing to the eye and can only complement 218 R.J. ELGAR - HUMMINGBIRDS the humming bird which will also use them to roost in at night and to nest in. They are also a sanctuary to a humming bird when being chased by another bird or when moulting. Nowadays the selection of house plants available is considerable but I have found the following to be useful: Philodendron species especially P. scandens, P. elegans and P. hastatum are all easy to care for. P. scandens is particularly suitable for nesting sites. Ficus species are ideal plants for the larger flight - F. benghalensis , F. elastica, F. lyrata and F. benjamina which is tree-like in appearance, a small-leaved plant, ideal for inclusion. Several more tree-like plants that I have grown with success are Schefflera actinophylla and Heptapleurum arboricola. Climbing plants such as Rhoicissus rhomboidea, Gssus antarctica, Syngonium vellozianum, Hoya carnosa , Tetrastigma voinerianam and Scindapsus aureus all make good additions. Lastly one can include one or two spectacular looking plants such as Platy cerium alcicome, Anthurium andreanun and perhaps a bromeliad such as Neoregelias carolinae tricolor. Plants to be used out of doors must be assessed on the climate and position of the flight and whether it will be in use for the whole year or just in the summer. I have a small outside flight to which some of my humming birds have access all the year round. Although it is covered in flat plastic sheets, there are two large windows that are open throughout the warmer months. The floor is of earth and I have planted it with several species of Clematis, Fuschia, Passiflora caerulea. Salvia, Thunbergia and Ipomoea, etc. Nectar The diet for captive humming birds can be divided into halves, each of equal importance to maintain them in good health, and the first of these is a good basic nectar mixture. A nectar mixture for humming birds has been a most controversial subject over the years and many diets have been discussed. I had fairly good results for many years using super hydramin, pollen and white sugar, but after a conversation and advice on humming bird diets with Herr K.L. Schuchman, I decided to change my diet and, with the help of Mr. M. Clifford, a new diet was formulated. The results have been outstanding , many difficult species having been established without any problems, and several breedings and numerous breeding attempts in my collection and those of several other enthusiasts R.J. ELGAR - HUMMINGBIRDS 219 in Britain who use this diet. Firstly, the most important part of the diet is to keep the sugar con¬ tent down to a maximum of 10%. If a higher volume of sugar is used, the consequences could be disastrous. A build up of sugar within the body will result in fungus infections of the bill, tongue and digestive tract. A higher sugar percentage will result in dehydration of the muscle tissue and a complete breakdown of the liver, leading eventually to the bird’s death. To make one litre of nectar, the mixture should be: 100 grams of white sugar, 3 grams of plant pollen, 3 grams of torula yeast and 4 mis of Min amino. To make the mixture, first add the yeast, sugar and ground pollen (grind the pollen in a coffee grinder), mix dry and then dissolve with lukewarm water. Add the Minamino and when all the ingredients are mixed together, top up to one litre with cold water. To this nectar, I add several drops of Becosymand twice a week I add a small pinch of Stress, a calcium and phosphorus product. Plastic utensils must be used as metal ones can have a detrimental effect on the vitamins, especially the B Complex. m 1. Porter small glass drinker 2. Glass drinker for Swordbill Humming Bird 3. Biotropic 60 ml tinted drinker 4. Biotropic 100 ml tinted drinker 5. Birdland plastic drinker 6. Birdland Sunbird drinker sui¬ table for Sicklebill Humming Bird 7. M. Clifford glass drinker 8. Flat plastic nectar bottle for trans¬ porting humming birds '» ■« Various drinkers available for humming birds 220 R.J. ELGAR - HUMMINGBIRDS A list of the products and their manufacturers is given at the end of this article, but the following is a brief description of their ingredients: Torula Yeast is a very fine yeast developed in West Germany and now manufactured by British Grains. It is relatively tasteless, high in amino acids and the vitamin B Complex. Minamino Compound is manufactured from animal by-products con¬ taining vitamins, amino acids, minerals and biologicals (e.g. liver ex¬ tract, spleen extract). This is an excellent product that remains sus¬ pended in the nectar mix for long periods. Pollen is a natural food that I find of great benefit to my humming birds. In addition to the three main nutritional ingredients, I also add very small amounts of Abidec, one drop per litre. This is a multi-vitamin pro¬ duct. I also add several drops of Becosym, a vitamin B Complex. Cytacon is a vitamin B 1 2 syrup that is useful when encouraging sick birds to take more nectar. Care must be taken with amounts of vitamin B used as it draws on the calcium reserves in the body. Live Food Live food is just as vital a part of the diet as a well-balanced nectar mix. An adequate supply of live food keeps the digestive tract in good order and provides protein, carbohydrates, fibre, calcium and phosphorus. Live food can best be supplied in the form of fruit flies Drosophila. From their arrival in Britain to completion of the quarantine period, it is un¬ likely that any newly imported birds will have received a sufficient number of fruit flies as it is very difficult for the importer to breed the large number required for a lot of humming birds. Ne\yly acquired specimens need an abundant supply of these insects, especially the more difficult species. For the first few days a newly acquired humming bird will usually spend long periods of the day taking quantities of these insects, but once it has settled in, the number taken is usually reduced and some species show little interest, taking only the occasional one throughout the day. Immed¬ iately preceding the moult, the captive humming bird will need large quantities of fruit flies and will carry on taking numbers of these insects throughout the period of its moult. It goes without saying that if a female goes to nest, vast amounts of fruit flies must be available. If the eggs are fertile it is wise to increase the fruit fly cultures, especially in a communal flight where the female may be competing with other humming birds for the flies available. The life cycle of fruit flies can be divided into four stages: the adult R.J. ELGAR - HUMMINGBIRDS 221 fly, egg, larva stage and chrysalis. To breed fruit flies successfully, fresh slices of banana are necessary and the more banana, the more flies will be bred. I use empty plastic icecream tubs in which I place crumpled newspaper, on top of which I then add two to three inches of sliced banana. The paper absorbs the moisture from the bananas and allows an efficient and quick hatching of the chrysalides. The adult fly will lay its eggs on the banana and the eggs hatch into larvae which, after consuming the fruit, turn into chrysalides. The young fly will usually appear between two and three weeks after starting a new culture. It is wise to have fresh cultures starting every week so that there is a continual cycle. It must be remembered that once the flies have hatched, the old bananas are of no use and a fresh supply of fruit is needed each week so that there is always an abundant supply of flies. Torpidity A humming bird has the physiological capability of lowering and raising its body temperature thus lowering its metabolic rate, and this is known as torpidity. There are a number of circumstances when a humming bird will become torpid. If the temperature drops below 93 °F at night, the humming bird has two options - either to sleep normally to conserve energy or to go torpid and thus effect an even greater conser¬ vation of energy. Some wild and captive humming birds will go torpid every night, sometimes only for one or two hours, then raise their body temperature and sleep normally before awakening at dawn. I have en¬ tered my bird room on several occasions in the early hours of the morn¬ ing to observe this, when approximately one-third of my collection can be torpid, and the other not. On these occasions I have again visited the bird room just before dawn and when the lights were turned on, I found all the humming birds sleeping normally. In the wild, species that live at high altitudes such as the Andean Hillstar Oreotrochilus estella usually nest in caves or abandoned mineshafts or other protected spots where the temperature will remain a few degrees above freezing. If the temperature drops below freezing, the humming bird’s body will come out of torpidity and the bird will start to awaken and to sleep normally, and thus become warm-blooded. A torpid humming bird cannot withstand freezing temperatures. In the case of tropical and temperate zone species, intense feeding before dark usually results in the humming bird sleeping normally for most or all of the night, but if this feeding activity is stopped by sudden darkness, a rainstorm or the health of the bird, these species 222 R.J. ELGAR - HUMMINGBIRDS may go torpid. With the coming morning and the heat of the sun, the energy saved will be needed to raise the body temperature to normal and thus arouse the individual. In aviculture, if a humming bird remains torpid in the morning, the bird has probably not fed the previous night. On entering the birdroom it will be found in a deep sleep and fails to respond to any disturbance. When removed carefully from the perch the bird feels cold to touch and moves its limbs feebly. I have found that the safest way to revive a tor¬ pid humming bird is to cup it in my hands and breathe heavily on it. The extra heat will immediately start to raise the body temperature. Awakening a humming bird can take between 10 and 30 minutes. When the eyes begin to open and the tongue starts to protrude, the tip of the bill should be placed in a nectar feeder. The humming bird will usually start to feed. It should be allowed a long drink, care being taken to see that it does not choke. This intake of nectar will speed up its awakening. When it has woken up fully, the bird should be carefully examined for any reasons that may have caused its torpor. Most importantly, the interior of the bill and mouth should be examined and if there is a cream coloured, cheese-like growth on the tongue or in the groove of the mouth, it is suffering from the fungus infection Candida albicans. This infection is the greatest single problem with captive humming birds and action should be taken immediately. Ill Health There are several publications which give information on the treatment of sick birds generally, but here I will mention the more common prob¬ lems that may affect humming birds. As with all birds, prevention is better than cure. Because of their high metabolic rate, humming birds are easily stressed and when ill, they usually deteriorate very quickly and action must be taken immediately. If the bird is in a mixed flight, it should be removed to a cage where an assessment of the cause of illness can be made. The fungus Candida albi¬ cans , for many years the scourge of the humming bird keeper, can now be cured with care. The correct way to treat it is by using “Nystan Oral Sus¬ pension” for which a prescription from a veterinary surgeon is needed and it is wise to keep a bottle in hand so that the bird can be treated imme¬ diately. The correct way to treat the bird is to put one or two drops of Nystan on to a cotton bud and wipe over the infected area four or five times a day for three days, then discontinue the treatment for two days. If the con- RJ. ELGAR - HUMMINGBIRDS 223 Rufous-breasted Hermit in typical postures of a healthy, sick and torpid humming bird 224 R.J. ELGAR - HUMMINGBIRDS dition persists, then the treatment should be continued for a further three days. If the infection is local and restricted to the tongue, one drop of Nystan should be put on to a small piece of kitchen tissue, the bird’s bill should be opened and then held closed on the tissue. The tissue should be gently pulled over the tongue and out of the closed bill. The texture of the tissue will remove the fungus from the tongue and the Nystan will treat the infection. The Nystan must not be swallowed as this can be very dangerous. If consumed it will destroy the digestive mucus in the crop as well as accu- late in the stomach, eventually causing bleeding which is then found in the bird’s droppings. When it reaches this stage, death usually occurs within a few days. I have found that most deaths of captive humming birds are the result of a fungus infection. Conjunctivitis. This exists in two forms; the non-infectious symptom of this disease is recognised by a watery discharge and can easily be cured by a few drops of proprietary eye lotion into the affected eye. The con¬ tagious form has different symptoms. In humming birds there is a watery discharge, followed by a mucus discharge which clogs the eyelids. The infected bird must be removed from the birdroom to a place away from the rest of the collection. The bird may be saved if the infection is checked early enough with the use of Chloromycetin ointment, but generally humming birds suffering from this infection are unable to feed and deteriorate very quickly. Constipation. This may occur with newly-acquired humming birds or after changing to a fresh diet, and can prove fatal but the problem can be solved by replacing the nectar for several hours with a mixture of three drops of syrup of buckthorn in a tablespoon of 10% sugar water. If the problem persists, the treatment should be repeated for several days. If a sick bird refuses its nectar, then rather than let it go torpid or starve to death, it should be tried with a solution of 10% sugar water plus a few drops of Minamino. Every day, when the other humming birds’ nectar is changed, the sick bird should be persuaded to take the nectar mix. If it will not, then it should be put back on the sugar water. Usually as a sick bird improves, it will take its nectar readily. There are numerous problems that can affect captive humming birds but if they are housed hygienically with plenty of fresh air (I open the windows even in midwinter for half an hour in the morning and again in the evening), there is no reason why they should not do well and some individuals live for many years. RJ. ELGAR - HUMMINGBIRDS 225 PRODUCTS MENTIONED Torula Yeast. Manufactured by British Grains. Can be ordered from Mr. M. Clif¬ ford, 48 Chailemont Avenue, West Bromwich. Minamino Compound. Manufactured by Deleon Wrexham. Can be ordered from any good pharmacy. 100 and 500 ml bottles. Pollen. Manufactured by Rowse Honey Ltd., Ewehne, Oxford. Or Cooperative “France MM”, Boite Postal© 5, 39330 Mouchard, France. Becosym Syrup. Manufactured by Roche Products. Available in 100 ml bottles. Cytacon Liquid. Manufactured by Glaxo Laboratories Ltd. Available in 200 ml bottles. Abidec. Manufactured by Parke, Davis & Co. Multivitamin drops in box of twox 25 ml bottles. Nystan Oral Suspension. Manufactured by E.R. Squibb & Sons, Hounslow, Middlesex. Ready mixed in 30 ml bottles. Biotropic - Yerlag GMBH - Blochmatt 7, Postfach D - 75 70 Baden Baden 1 1, West Germany, produce the tinted nectar tubes as well as a comprehensive list of products for the humming bird enthusiast. AC KNOWL E DG E ME NT I would like to thank David Alker whose drawings illustrate this article. 226 D. COLES - HOOPOE CAPTIVE MANAGEMENT OF THE HOOPOE By D. COLES (Padstow, Cornwall) Ten races (Howard and Moore) of the Hoopoe spread eastwards from. Europe, through Africa, India and areas of China, southwards through Indo-China, Malaysia and Sumatra. While the nominate race Upupa epops epops has undoubtedly been kept in captivity, the most frequently seen in collections is the race U.e. longirostris which is found in the Malay Penin¬ sula with most having Thailand as their country of origin. The bird needs little description for softbill enthusiasts but briefly it is a rufous colour on the head, neck, back and underparts. The erectile crest feathers are tipped black and white. Tail and wings are barred black and white. The beak is long and thin with a slight downwards curve. An excellent coloured plate of this species, painted by David Reid Henry, appeared in the January/ March 1976 issue of the Avicultural Magazine (Vol. 82, No. 1). Sexes are similar but the slight differences that do exist are discussed under the relevant section. Hoopoes have been kept at Padstow Bird Gardens for twelve years and have bred for nine. The information gained in this time is set out In the following article and, with notes from other authors, it is hoped that most important points in the management of this fascinating species are covered. Housing Under no circumstances should Hoopoes be confined to a caged exis¬ tence except if they are ill and needing medical treatment, and thee only if treatment is impracticable in a flight. Aviaries are the only type of acco¬ modation suitable for these birds and good housing will contribute as much to their well-being as a good diet. Types of aviaries vary but they can be divided into two categories: the indoor aviary as provided by many bird gardens and zoological collections; and the outside enclosure provided by many fanciers. From my experience, they do better having access to fresh air, although they will thrive and breed in most situations if some thought is given to the surroundings. A large percentage of this species’ time is spent foraging on the ground so this should be made as interesting as possible, with areas of turf, soil, leaf litter, small stones and rotten wood all providing an irresistable temp¬ tation to search and turn debris for items of food. Open ground should be turned frequently and tame individuals will follow the spade, consuming anything edible that is turned up. Aviaries should be planted with shrubs D. COLES - HOOPOE 227 and creepers which, apart from pleasing the eye, will attract many insects. Branches need only be minimal, allowing adequate perching space but not needlessly cluttering up available flying space, although they are very adept at avoiding obstacles when in full flight. A pond should be provided but little use is made of it. A dry area is essential as these birds spend time most days dustbathing - a patch of soil seems to be the preferred medium.They are also fond of sunbathing and adopt such strange postures when laid on the ground with head back, beak open and wings and legs all over the place that the visiting public get quite concerned for the birds’ well-being. Compatability More than one pair should not be kept together - sexually mature birds of the same sex will squabble which is likely to become serious if a pair is formed. Young from one season can be left until the onset of the next but it is always best to separate them immediately they are self-sufficient as it cuts down competition for livefood if the parents nest again. They can be mixed in relative safety with other softbiU species but ideally should have an aviary to themselves or, if mixed, companions such as waders or doves are ideal as they give little or no competition. Hoopoes are generally not aggressive towards others but the odd alter¬ cation will occur if provoked, although they are not against prodding another bird if it gets in the way. The only trouble encountered towards another species I have seen involved, and was initiated by, a solitary female Spur-winged Plover which was becoming broody and tweaked the tail of a passing male Hoopoe. He objected, turned around and with a short hop landed on the Plover which soon fled. Hoopoes are inquisitive by nature and will probe in the nests of other species if accessible and invariably damage the contents. Diet Hoopoes require as varied a diet of live food as it is possible to offer when they are first imported, but it cannot be over-emphasised that they should be coaxed to take inanimate foods as soon as possible after acqui¬ sition, simply because of the many hazzards which govern the supply and culture of the various forms of livefood. Getting Hoopoes to take other foods is not a simple matter and can present many problems as livefood will always be consumed in preference to anything else offered, but this can be overcome by decreasing the live food during the day, once the birds are in excellent health, and eventually other foods will be picked at and 228 D. COLES - HOOPOE eaten. However, an adequate supply of live food must be given in the even¬ ing to ensure that they are not deprived of a good feed to last the night, until it is absolutely certain that enough food is being taken. Some indi¬ viduals take more readily than others but all will accept it eventually. Other forms of acceptable food are limited but minced beef or hard- boiled egg are the most beneficial, and should be mixed with a high quality insectile mixture to a crumbly consistency which can be eaten readily. Hoopoes throw their food back so items other than live food must be of a suitable size and texture to allow this. Feeding a fine insec¬ tile mixture on its own is useless. Strips of ox heart in water (to prevent drying)can also be given and the odd bird will take a little soaked puppy meal - this latter was an acquired taste by one breeding male. The kinds of acceptable live food are varied: blowfly maggots being the most readily available can form the bulk - personal experiences and thoughts may dictate here but from a reliable source and properly cleaned, maggots are an important part of the diet. Apart from the nutritional value and moisture content of the grub itself, it can be coated with liquid vitamins and dusted with various powdered preparations and still survive whereas mealworms, the other main avicultural live food will soon die if given the same treatment. In addition to the maggots, blowflies and their pupae are also taken. Three states of Tenebrio molitor - the mealworm, pupae and beetle - are taken avidly. Crickets, grasshoppers, various instars of locust, spiders, moths, earthworms, pink mice (up to three days old), leatherjackets and a whole host of procurable creatures are taken. Lizards, tadpoles, small frogs, woodlice and ants are recorded as taken in the wild. If provided with a natural earth floor with areas of turf and leaf litter, many hourse will be spend probing for insects. Water appears not to be important but should always be available. I have never seen a Hoopoe drink, all moisture being derived from the food they eat but Benson (1968) indicates that some individuals hand-reared by hum drank a small but adequate amount and Lint (1964) says the female of a breeding pair at San Diego Zoo left the nest only to drink. Neither is water used for bath¬ ing as dust bathing takes precedence. Hardiness Housed indoors, there is very little to worry about even if in unheated quarters. Outside, once acclimatised, they are reasonably hardy and in a mild sheltered area should be able to over-winter without problems - over¬ wintering birds here at Padstow have actually hatched young over the Christmas/New Year period. Provisions must be made for winter quarters D, COLES - HOOPOE 229 in areas susceptible to hard weather, preferably attached to the flight so the birds can be shut away if necessary and given liberty when the weather is not so bad. Too much heat “softens” up the plumage and is not bene¬ ficial A perspex covered area should be provided, not just the roof but the aviary sides also as the birds dislike a chilly wind very much and precau¬ tions must be taken against it. Accommodating in a sheltered area is not enough as wind can come from a direction other than that which normally prevails. Health Hoopoes seem fairly resilient to disease once established, if given proper conditions and attention. Keeping birds of any description in unsuitable conditions is asking for trouble and there is no exception. Because they spend a considerable time probing the ground, it is a good policy to worm them periodically, although I have never personally encountered such problems. A few drops of Thiabenzole suspension, or similar preparation can be applied to maggots and given after witholding their food for several hours. Air sac mite has afflicted nestlings only and has proved difficult to shift because affected birds have had to be removed from the nest and, besides medication, needed hand rearing. I think it was stress as much as anything that contributed to their death. The problem has been solved by changing their nest site from a wall to one which can be cleaned more easily. Splayed legs have been a problem but this is discussed more fully under “Nest Sites”. Longevity Records of longevity are practically non-existent. One of our initial pair of birds, which were among the first reared at Winged World in 1970, is still alive and well at 12 years old. Both birds proved to be males, the other died aged 10. Females, especially breeding females, are shorter lived - the longest one of our hens has lived was six years and she died showing signs of senility towards the end. Females generally seem to be more deli¬ cate. Sexing The main visual criteria of size and colour for sexing has only a limited application where Hoopoes are concerned for there is much variation be¬ tween individuals and races. I have seen females which are brighter in colour than proven males and of the breeding pair owned by Stamps (1978) 230 D. COLES - HOOPOE the female was larger than its mate. There are, however, several other apects which can be used for sexing, a combination of which should prove a bird’s sex beyond doubt, especially if comparisons can be made. The crest is usually larger in the male and Everitt (1964) says that males have nine pairs of black-tipped feathers as opposed to seven pairs in the female. The neck in the male is thicker and the black and white barring is more clear cut (England). The beak is generally longer in the male but this is not al¬ ways so - the female of our breeding pair was 1.5 cm longer in the beak than her mate. Vocalisation in the breeding season is a good indicator. Males will re¬ peatedly utter their characteristic “hoop-hoop” over long periods during the day while females generally remain silent. I have only heard females “hoop” on two occasions, their more usual utterance being a growling “kaar” when alarmed or excited. A male’s call will carry for some distance and apart from this, his general behaviour should make sexing simple at the onset of the breeding season. Courtship There is no courtship display as such but males become very vocal, perched for long periods uttering their characteristic “hoop-hoop”. Court¬ ship usually starts with the male offering the female an item of live food. Early in the year she does not always accept it as frequently the male is in condition in advance of the hen. However, once she attains condition, any choice morsels of food, either given to the male or unearthed by him, is taken up to her. Only when she has had her fill will he eat. Occasionally the cock will flutter excitedly around the hen, uttering a growling “kaar” but generally there is very little to courtship other than the ritual feeding of the hen by the male which cements the pair bond. On the occasions when mating has been observed, it has taken place on a perch, never the ground. Nest Sites Males come into condition earlier than females and therefore do most of the prospecting for a site, calling the female over to any possibility, fluttering excitedly about in the vicinity. In the wild, a wide range of sites are used and holes of most descriptions are utilised, ranging from crevices in walls, old buildings, heaps of rubble, deserted termite mounds, hollows in trees and apparently not infrequently underground among rocks and tree roots. In captivity it is not impossible to recreate sites utilised in the wild although it is not very practical to have a nest cavity which cannot be D. COLES - HOOPOE 231 cleaned readily, as was the case with the site used by the original pair at Padstow Bird Gardens. This was situated in a Cornish stone wall on to which most of our aviaries back. A hole was made and the front built up with slate to leave just the entrance hole and the nesting cavity. All pro¬ gressed well for several years but then young began to become afflicted with air sac mite so it was blocked off and a more conventional type of nest box used. No hard and fast dimensions exist as to size of nest box - if a pair is in breeding condition, nothing will stop them from laying if a box is present. Obviously it must not be too small as it may have to acco¬ modate up to six young. Natural logs are ideal and can be easily adapted to facilitate easy of cleaning. Once one site is used, it seems to have prece¬ dence over all others. One important aspect is the medium to be used for a base on which the female will lay her eggs. Under no condition should it be peat. Chicks are susceptible to splayed legs which was initially thought to be due to a vitamin deficiency but it failed to respond to additional preventatives and calcium and multivitamins were already given. It was eventually traced to the peat which was thought to give little support to the chicks’ feet causing them to splay. Chips of rotten wood were used as a replacement and eradicated the trouble. These chips had to be replaced or added to perio¬ dically as they tended to break down. Eggs and Incubation Hoopoes are unusual amongst hole-nesters in that clutch size is so variable. One old account records 11 in a nest; whether this is the effort of a solitary female or the work of two (sexually mature females will visit a nest of a breeding female if she vacates) remains a mystery. Clutches of one or two are frequently reported but three to five seems to be the normal number. Clutches of siz have been laid on at least two occasions at Padstow„and on one occasion all six hatched but subsequently died. Eggs are laid at daily intervals. The species is multi-brooded with the number of broods dependent on the age of the birds, success rate of previous broods, amount of live food fed (Hoopoes cannot be expected to breed if encouraged to feed solely on artificial food with only minimal amounts of live food available at the onset of the breeding season; live food should be fed ad lib. from the end of February), location and climate. If all conditions are right, the first clutches of the year are larger and decrease in number as the year pro¬ gresses. Four or five broods can be reared in a season if an early start is made and the broods small. However, three broods are about normal but 232 D. COLES - HOOPOE I suspect that pairs kept in tropical houses could be continuous breeders. Eggs vary in colour from light blue to stone and are unmarked. A clutch of five that were measured ranged from 23.5 mm x 18 mm to 25.5 mm x 18 mm (average 25 mm x 17.7 mm). One egg measured by Stamps was 24 mm x 16 mm. Incubation is undertaken solely by the fe¬ male which rarely vacates the nest and is fed by the male with live food, very rarely soft food. Incubation starts nearly always with the laying of the first egg but may be delayed until the second egg and lasts for 18 days. Some reports give 21 days but I suspect that this is guided by the thought that incubation does not start until the last egg is laid, or the data is derived from a clutch with only one fertile egg, maybe the last bird that hatched after the female had been incubating for three weeks. Our breed¬ ing pair, housed outside in a sheltered aviary, nested over a three-week period in December and January (the nestlings died) but such attempts are rare. More often it was early to mid-March before nesting started. Stamps’ pair started in June. Nestling Period Brooding of young is carried out by the female and she is fed in the nest by the male which meticulously kills and morsels of food before taking them up - she then feeds the chicks. An abundance of live food must be offered at this time - if this is done, even large broods of four or five will be reared without the brood throwing a runt. Some food given must be coated with a multi-vitamin preparation and with calcium. I use a liquid multi-vitamin Adexolin which is applied to maggots, followed by calcium. Needless to say, as wide a variety of live foods as possible must be offered at this stage and from about six days even pink mice will be taken. These the male kills and works over until most bones in the body are broken and it is fairly limp. Young have sizeable gapes and can manage large items. From about eight days, females assist with feeding and it is then given direct. When large broods are reared, it is almost a continual shuttle service between food pot and nest box. Conflicting reports exist about the odour of a nest with young. Our many broods rarely smelled and although I only saw the hen clean the nest on two occasions, it was fairly clean when vacated. The hen does have a strong body smell produced by oil from the preen gland which seems to be the usual odour from a nest. I suspect that this odour, which reputedly is at its strongest in the breeding season, is an aid to protecting the young - it would have to be a brave, stupid or exceedingly hungry predator that poked its beak into a Hoopoe nest! D. COLES - HOOPOE 233 D. Coles Four Juvenile Hoopoes hatched at Padstow Bird Gardens The period in the nest varies but can last between 20 and 25 days (young with splayed legs have been longer, but this is no guidance), and depends a lot on the weather. Small broods tend to vacate on the same day but larger ones are spread over two. On fledging young are similar in coloration to the adults but are smaller with shorter beaks and crests. The young start feeding themselves at about five weeks but continue to accept food from parents for some weeks and it is probable that the hen will again be incubating before total independance is achieved - the cock solely feeding the young once the female starts to lay again. Hand-rearing Personal experience with this species is very limited and confined to sick nestlings which did not have a good survival rate. Benson (1968) gives an account of the hand-rearing of wild-taken nestlings. The diet used was fresh, raw minced beef and ground hard-boiled egg to which was added calcium powder and cod liver oil. Live food, being difficult to obtain, was rarely fed but if the need arises to hand-rear Hoopoes in captivity, live food 234 D. COLES - HOOPOE should be given and the minced beef dusted with a high quality insectile mix. Anyone finding the need to hand-rear should refer to Benson’s article details of which are given below under ‘References’. Maturity Although yearling females have laid, and even paired to a mature male, the eggs have been infertile. Sexual maturity is attained in the second year, at least for females. I have never paired a yearling male to a mature female but suspect that some could be fertile although really a young pair should not be expected to breed until their second year and this also applies to wild-caught birds obtained from a dealer. However, a pair which has been accustomed to captivity should at least make some attempt in the first year of acquisition. REFERENCES BENSON, W. 1968. Hand-rearing the Thailand Hoopoe. Avicultural Magazine , 74:15 9. ENGLAND, D. 1969. The Hoopoe. . Birds of the World.5 :part 8. I.P.C. Magazines. EVERITT, C. 1964. Breeding the Hoopoe. Avicultural Magazine. 70:163 . . . 1973. Birds of the Edward Marshall Boehm Aviaries. Lakeside Press. HOWARD, R. and MOORE, A. 1980. A Complete Checklist of the Birds of the World. Oxford University Press. LINT, K.C. 1964. Breeding the Thailand Hoopoe. Avicultural Magazine . 70:119. MEADEN, F. 1979. A Manual of European Bird Keeping. Blandford. ROOTS, C. 1970. Breeding the Thailand Hoopoe at Winged World. Avicultural Magazine. 76:189. STAMPS, D. 1978. Choice Softbills Worth Breeding. Cage and Aviary Birds. March 23rd, 1978. 235 ON THE ADAPTABILITY OF TANAGERS TO CAPTIVE CONDITIONS By Dr. JOHAN INGELS (Destelbergen, Belgium) Tanagers rank high among the most beautiful birds and many have a very striking colour pattern. Aviculturists requiring exotic colours are unlikely to find more appealing birds. I only mention here the well-known Paradise Tanager Tangara chilemis , a small tanager of incomparable beauty, exhibiting an amazing combination of exquisite colours. When, at the end of the 19th century, aviculture, in the true sense of the word, became a reality, only tanagers found in the eastern half of the South American continent were available. Up until World War II avicultur¬ ists concentrated their efforts on those tanagers brought to the Western World by maritime transport. The Violaceous Euphonia Euphonia violacea, the Seven-coloured or Superb Tanager Tangara fastuosa and the Brazilian Scarlet Tanager Ramphocelus bresilius were typical of these so-called “Brazilian” tanagers. Breeding results as early as 1 888 with another Brazilian tanager, the Green-headed Tanager Tangara seledon are mentioned in litera¬ ture. This success most probably represents the first breeding of a tanager in captivity (Hopkinson, 1926). In the late 1950s, with the development of aerial transport, tanagers from the Andean parts of South America, and to a lesser extent from Cen¬ tral America, became available to an increasing number of aviculturists. The Golden Tanager Tangara arthus , the Blue-headed Tanager Tangara cyanicoliis , the Blue-winged and Scarlet-bellied Mountain Tanagers Anisog- nathus flavinuchm and Anisognathus igniventris respectively, and the Flame-ramped Tanager Ramphocelus flammigerus are typical of the so- called “Andean” tanagers. Whereas the Silver-throated and Golden-masked Tanagers Tangara icterocephala and Tangara larvata respectively are typical of the Central American tanagers. In the second half of the 20th century, tanagers became a common • sight in private aviaries, bird gardens and zoological collections. True avi¬ culturists, both amateurs and professionals, have always justified their keeping of birds under controlled conditions by studying their behaviour and by breeding from them. The- fast -growing awareness among avicul¬ turists, that merely keeping birds in captivity was not enough, but that every effort should be made to breed from them, has helped substan¬ tially to increase our knowledge of tanagers under captive conditions. Unfortunately, however, the number of breeding results is in no way com¬ parable to the number of tanagers Imported throughout the past years. 236 Dr. . INGELS TANAGERS The number of species imported rose steeply in the early 1960s, but has now begun to fall off due to various export, import and quarantine tine regulations. This has forced aviculturists to evaluate carefully their keeping of tanagers in confinement. I shall restrict this paper to those genera or groups of tanagers which have always played an important role in aviculture; by these I mean Chlorophonia, Euphonia, Tangara, Ramphocelus, Thraupis, Tachyphonus, and Anisognathus. The main questions I shall consider are: 1) availa¬ bility, with regard to the continually declining wild populations; 2) adap¬ tability to captive conditions, with special regard to the change over to artificial foods; 3) reproduction under controlled conditions. Availability In New World habitats where human activity is present, avian popula¬ tions have decreased at an alarming rate. Unfortunately, it is almost impos¬ sible to estimate the exact damage to avifauna brought about by destruction or alteration by man of a natural habitat (Buechner& Buechner, 1970). Most tanagers rely upon undisturbed environments for food and reproduc¬ tion. However, several genera are to a certain degree able to adapt to man- altered areas. A pronounced decline of a given species through loss of original habitat and/or its ease in adapting to secondary forest or cultivated areas should be considered when evaluating its “availability”. Only species able to main¬ tain stable populations in their continually changing habitat, without regard to their being in great demand for avicultural purposes, can be con¬ sidered as potential aviary birds. Chlorophonia, Euphonia and Anisogna¬ thus are among those tanagers suffering severely from contacts with a man-dominated environment. Tangara, Ramphocelus, Thraupis and Tachy¬ phonus are less vulnerable, through their relative adaptability to man-altered areas. Adaptability The nervous nature of most tanagers renders them unsuitable as cage birds. They are, however, suitable aviary subjects, adjusting themselves more readily to spacious, planted flights. In adapting to captivity, nutritional requirements play a most impor¬ tant role. Most tanagers are less frugivorous than is accepted generally, relying to a great extent upon insects as a substantial part of their daily food requirements. This insect-dependency is less easy to substitute than is fruit and nectar. Dr. J. INGELS - TANAGERS 237 Today, most bird parks and zoological gardens can offer a well-balanced and studied diet to their so-called omnivorous birds. Private aviculturists mostly rely upon experience to find a satisfactory feeding method. How¬ ever, fruit flies, maggots, blowflies, crickets, locusts and mealworms must form a substantial part of the daily food ration for tanagers. A feeding method based upon fruit, e.g. apples, oranges and bananas, will most certainly cause nutritional deficiencies, during the long term. The more omnivorous genera that accept readily a substitute diet are: most Tangara, Ramphocelus, Thraupis and Tachyphonus. In their natural habitat these have been observed to come readily to feeding tables con¬ taining fruit (Skutch, 1971). Adaptation to “artificial” food has been recorded to be most difficult among Chlorophonia, Euphonia and some Tangara (Ingels, et al , 1976). An adequate daily diet will directly influence longevity of tanagers in captivity. Longevity will indicate, therefore, the efficiency of an artificial diet as a substitute for natural food. Longevity has been best in Rampho¬ celus, Thraupis and Tachyphonus species; these being the most omnivor¬ ous under natural conditions. Reproduction To have healthy, well-established tanagers is not necessarily a guarantee of successful breeding results. An important problem to cope with is determining the appropriate sex of a given bird. Sexes are distinguishable in genera such as Chlorophonia, Euphonia, Ramphocelus and Tachyphonus. Problems occur when attemp¬ ting to sex Tangara and Thraupis. However, male tanagers of these two groups, when in good condition, are more nervous, aggressive and noisy than the females. Usually, provision of suitable nesting facilities is no problem; sites readily chosen are nest-boxes and wire nest-cups. All artificial structures and natural nest sites in small trees and shrubs giving sufficient support to a nest, are suitable. Material offered to nesting tanagers is of crucial impor¬ tance. The choice of nesting material must be comprehensive, allowing construction of a firm nest. In the wild, tanagers use large amounts of cob¬ web to attach their nest to nearby supports. Cobweb being difficult to supply, may be replaced with soft, flexible materials, e.g. plant roots, weed stems, fibres, etc. Coarser material for building the nest structure is more easily provided. Usually, fertility is not a problem when breeding tanagers. In genera such as Chlorophonia and Euphonia , which produce more than two eggs 238 Dr. J. INGELS - TANAGERS per clutch, clear eggs may occur, contrary to the two (rarely three) eggs per clutch producing genera such as Tangara, Ramphocelus and Thraupis. Parent birds that accept a wide choice of food items will more easily rear young than pairs relying upon a restricted diet. Live food is vital in bringing young through their first days, and at such times some parent birds will accept food items which normally they would refuse. Competition with other aviary inmates for the live food offered may prove fatal to the young. Therefore, a pair of tanagers certainly stand a better chance of rearing young if housed on their own. Offering food several times a day will stimulate parent birds to bring food to the nest. Presenting live food at different sites in the aviary will encourage them to forage. In captive tanagers, males will almost always help in rearing their offspring. However, a lone female will be able to rear two nestlings to independence. Conclusion From the above account of the general suitability to captivity of tanagers, one can draw some definite conclusions. Ramphocelus, Tachyphonus and Thraupis are, without doubt, most suitable for avicultural purposes; they readily accept captive conditions and substitute foods and they will easily reproduce. Ramphocelus are attractive aviary birds; however, their natural shyness and aggressive manner, especially during the breeding season, can cause problems. Tachyphonus and Thraupis are less colourful; also the latter are diffi¬ cult to sex. For an aviculturist attempting to establish captive breeding strains, those three genera of tanagers must be the most challenging. They have sufficient positive qualities to guarantee a fair chance for success. Tangara species, considered for long as the ‘"easy” tanagers, are too insectivorous and difficult to sex to rank high among those tanagers best suited to aviculture. Euphonia, Chlorophonia and Anisognathus are too specialised (food, habitat) and are, therefore, suited only to the really experienced aviculturist. The relative importance of the different groups of tanagers in public bird collections is best illustrated by analysing the breeding results with tanagers as published in the International Zoo Yearbook (Volumes 1-17, 1959-1975). For those 17 seasons, 60 success¬ ful breeding results are reported, and are as follows: Euphonia - 1 (1.5%); Tangara - 7 (11.5%); Ramphocelus 32 (54%); Thraupis - 19 (31.5%) and Tachyphonus - 1 (1.5%). Another important feature of tanager reproduction under captive R.E. OXLEY - BACK GARDEN COLLECTION 239 conditions is revealed by the International Zoo Yearbook. The unsuccess¬ ful results compared to the successful ones for the different groups are as follows: Euphonia -3/1; Tangara - 5/7 ; Ramphocelus - 1/32; Thraupis - 4/19 and Tachyphonus - 0/1. REFERENCES BUECHNER, H.K. and J.H. 1970. The Avifauna of Northern Latin America: a Symposium held at the Smithsonian Institution, 13-15 April 1966. Smiths. Contr. Zoology, No. 26, p. 77. HOPKINSON, E. 1926. Records of birds bred in captivity. London H.F. and G. Witherby, p. 48. INGELS, J., MAROY, J. and NORGAARD-OLESEN, E. 1976. Notes on estab¬ lishing and breeding Euphonias. Avic. Mag. , 82: 8-11. SKUTCH, A.F. 1971. A Naturalist in Costa Rica. Gainesville (USA): University of Florida Press, p. 149. * * * MANAGEMENT METHODS OF A BACK-GARDEN COLLECTION By R.E.OXLEY (Hornchurch, Essex) Whilst I do not suppose that my methods of maintaining softbills differ greatly from those of the majority of other birdkeepers, I was happy to agree to write this article, mainly I hope for the benefit of those people who have not yet experienced the challenge of maintaining these birds in their collections. Since the quarantining of imported birds from overseas was made com¬ pulsory by the British Government early in 1976, and with many countries restricting the export of their native fauna, many species which were once freely available are now virtually unobtainable. However, at the time of writing (July, 1982), many species, some unusual ones amongst them, are still obtainable, although the cost of purchasing them is now unfortunately out of the reach of many people. 240 R.E. OXLEY - BACK GARDEN COLLECTION It has always been the duty of birdkeepers to allow the species in their care the opportunity to reproduce in confinement. With the exception of a handful of well-known aviculturists, very few people have successfully reared softbills in captivity, and of those that have been raised, only two or three species have reproduced past the first generation. Nowadays I believe that many more softbill owners are encouraging their birds to breed but most of these people are not prepared for the headaches and heartaches that go hand-in-hand with softbill breeding. Over the years I have had more than my fair share of successes on the showbench with my birds but my greatest ambition has always been to breed from the species in my possession. All my birds have been purchased with this foremost in mind. Like the majority of birdkeepers, I have been guilty in the past of keeping too many birds and have not always been able to devote an aviary completely to an individual pair of birds. This I believe is essential if softbills are to successfully rear young in captivity, and the aviaries I now have were erected primarily to house separate “pairs” of birds, with breeding being the ultimate aim. Housing Living as I do in a built-up area on the outskirts of London and having only an average sized garden, I am restricted, like the majority of other birdkeepers, as to the number of aviaries that I can have and comfortably maintain. Apart from anything else, having too many enclosures can prove a difficult and time-consuming chore when one has to feed a collection before leaving home for a day’s work, rather than the pleasure that it should be. Although I am still keeping more birds than I should, the known true pairs in my collection are housed wherever possible on their own during the breeding season. My accommodation comprises a range of flights each measuring 3m x 1.7 m x 2 m high. Most of them are planted with a variety of shrubs and bushes and are suitable for the species that I keep, the largest of which is the Indian Tree Pie Dendrocitta vagabunda. How¬ ever, active species such as touracos should be housed in larger flights on account of their agility. If an aviary is of exceptionally large dimensions, it may be possible to house more than one breeding pair of softbills together, but care must be taken as the competition for live food may result in a dominant species persecuting the others with fatal results. Parrakeet nest-boxes and hollow logs are provided for hole-nesting birds whilst wicker baskets and open fronted boxes of various sizes are placed in suitable positions for other species. Whenever possible, I leave R.E. OXLEY - BACK GARDEN COLLECTION 241 my birds in their aviaries the whole year round as they are able to come naturally into breeding condition with the lengthening of days in early spring. I have found that those birds which are put into heated indoor quarters for the winter months often take time to settle in when put out again in the spring, often resulting in the loss of a month or two of the breeding season. I do not consider myself to be an “authority*5 on breeding spftbills in captivity by any stretch of the imagination, far from it, as I claim to have successfully reared only three species to maturity in over 25 years of keeping softbills. Many other species have nested, laid eggs and hatched young with me in the past but for one reason or another have failed to rear young to independence. It is my belief that successful breeding claims should only be substantiated once the species in question has successfully moulted into adult plumage and over-wintered in captivity. Feeding The softbill mixture that I feed to all my birds is one which I mix myself and is used widely by many other birdkeepers throughout the world. The recipe for this softfood has appeared in print in many other publications over the years but for the benefit of those who have not seen it before, I list it again here: Ingredients 1 lb. self-raising flour 1 lb. granulated sugar 6 eggs 2 lbs. honey 250 ml rosehip syrup 1 lb. beef dripping 2 lbs. peanuts 2 lbs. cheese 1 lb. raisins or sultanas 4 lbs. canary-rearing food 1 lb. soya flour 1 tablespoon Phillips Yeast Mixture Method 1) Mix the self-raising flour, sugar and eggs (including shells) together into a batter. Pour into a baking tin and bake in an oven (177°C/Gas Mark 3) for about 1 % hours until hard right through. When cool, grind it 242 R.E. OXLEY - BACK GARDEN COLLECTION into as fine a flour as possible. 2) Grind the peanuts, cheese and raisins/sultanas in a grinder and mix together with the canary rearing food in a large container. Warm the honey and melt the beef dripping and pour onto the above mixture, adding the rosehip syrup. Mix thoroughly. 3) When the above mixture is cold, add the cake mixture (1), soya flour and the Phillips Yeast Mixture. Mix thoroughly. This mixture should keep indefinitely if placed in a plastic container with an air tight lid and, in my experience, birds of every size and descrip¬ tion will eat it avidly. In addition to the above, all my birds receive diced fruit, usually con¬ sisting of apples, pears, bananas and grapes when in season. Soaked sulta¬ nas are given when grapes are unobtainable and various other soft fruits are also given to some species when in season. I also make up a nectar mixture which is given to those birds which require it and a well-known brand of Madeira cake, moistened with the nectar, is also given to some species. Minced meat and finely grated hard-boiled eggs are given to all the birds and, having acquired the taste, they all take these foods with relish, even the nectar feeders. Live food is given to all birds in small quantities throughout the year. Until recently I fed maggots (blow-fly larvae) ad lib. to all my birds. How¬ ever, recently I have discontinued feeding maggots as I have been unable to obtain a reliable supply locally. Mealworms and crickets now form the basic live food which I feed to my birds as these are easily obtainable from commercial sources nowadays. Both mealworms and crickets are easy to keep and breed and are kept in large plastic containers (plastic dustbins are ideal). Unfortunately, when young birds are in the nest, the amount of crickets and mealworms that I am able to breed is insufficient to provide to the parent birds so additional supplies have to be purchased during the breeding season. On occasions I use locusts for feeding to some of the larger birds and also small mice to those species which are able to con¬ sume them. During the time when chicks are in the nest, whenever possible I try to collect wood ant pupae which I throw on to the floor of the aviary for the parents to collect - ants as well. In addition, any invertebrates that I find in the garden are consumed with the exception of slugs, snails and, strangely, earthworms by some species. In the past I have propagated fruit- fly, white worm and wax moth cultures but the birds that I keep nowa¬ days are generally too large to appreciate them. NOTES ON SHAMAS AND MAGPIE ROBIN 243 Conclusion As stated previously, I believe that more and more “back-garden” en¬ thusiasts are attempting to provide the conditions which are necessary for complete breeding success. However, I do wish that those persons with odd birds would attempt to pair them up with birds of the opposite sex, either by selling, loaning or exchanging with other individuals. I would like to record my thanks to those other members of this Society who, in the last two years, have loaned valuable birds to me on breeding terms when I would have had difficulty in purchasing them elsewhere. Softbill keeping is certainly a very rewarding hobby but before success¬ ful breeding results are achieved, a lot of headaches and heartaches are experienced by the keeper. Seeing a pair of softbills bring up a nest of young successfully is a very rewarding experience. * * * NOTES ON SHAMAS AND THE MAGPIE ROBIN This paper is an amalgamation of notes forwarded independently by various authors for publication in this special issue. For obvious reasons, all the articles could not be printed in full, and because of the similar man¬ agement and breeding biology, the notes have been grouped to form one informative article which it is hoped covers most husbandry aspects of the species concerned. The editors express their appreciation to the authors for agreeing to this and hope that the finished article more than compen¬ sates for the trouble and time involved in preparing their original papers. L. Gibson provides the bulk of the notes on the White-rumped Shama Copyschus malabaricus which bred with him for five years, and it is to this species and author that uncredited notes apply; additional notes are sup¬ plied by Loic Hervouet. Dr. Lai, of Sabah, contributed on hybrid White- crowned x White-rumped Shamas C. stricklandii x C. malabaricus which he first reared in 1971 and has done so frequently since. L. Gibson also contributes on the Magpie Robin C. saularis as does R. Oxley, D. Lewis and B. Woodley. 244 NOTES ON SHAMAS AND MAGPIE ROBIN The name Shama is perhaps from the Portuguese verb “chamar” (pro¬ nounced “shamar”) which means to call or whistle. In Singapore and West Malaysia Shamas are simply called Long-tails and in Sabah are known as Yellow-necked Robins. Dhyal is the Indian name for C saularis (it is pro¬ nounced “Dh-yal”), and the apt name Magpie Robin is self-explanatory. The latter is a favourite of Chinese fanciers and is common in the bird markets of Taiwan and Hong Kong where It is called “knows the time bird”. It also has a popular colloquial name, the politest rendering of which is “pig dung bird”. The Magpie Robin is the more “domestic” of the two and is commonly seen in large gardens, parks and suburbs in close proximity to man. The Shama is more reticent and prefers a drier habitat. Both are thicket birds and spend most of the time in or under low cover. However, Gibson has seen a cock Shama singing from the top of a high tree, right above the traffic’s roar, in the small and busy botanical gardens in the middle of Honolulu. But even in Hawaii, where it has been introduced, Shamas pre¬ fer the quieter spots at the drier ends of the island. The long tail of Copsychus gives the bird an advantage when moving through thickets, enabling it to change direction instantly while keeping its wings half-closed and it also acts as a balance in the start-stop manoeuvres in dense bush. Gibson has never found Shamas to be dangerous to his other birds, des¬ pite many reports to the contrary. They are certainly bossy, and have had terrible power struggles with his Chloropsis but usually they ended up by backing down. Dhyals are even more pushy, probably due to their heavier build and they fought Chloropsis to a draw. Lesser birds had to wait their turn at the food tray, but were never harmed. Some care must be exercised when mixing Shamas with other species. Both Gibson and Hervouet had their Shamas separated and the former considers it unwise to house them together outside the breeding season; usually the cock will attack the hen but sometimes the latter is dominant. They should be introduced with care at the beginning of the season at a time when they can be observed close¬ ly for most of the day. Preferably they should be in sight of one another for a few weeks first. This Is best done In adjacent aviaries, where their behaviour can be judged better. When In breeding condition, an armed truce prevails and this state can be determined when either bird is allowed to approach the feeding dish, unmolested by the other. They should be separated at the end of the season, as soon as they quarrel over food. Chicks are equally intolerant of each other and should be separated at not ■later than six weeks of age. A three-month old youngster got attacked in- NOTES ON SHAMAS AND MAGPIE ROBIN 245 stantly by its mother when she accidentally got into its cage. The above aggressive patterns may not apply in a very large aviary where there are several feeding stations. Both Lewis and Woodley over-wintered pairs of Dhyals together but caution must prevail. Copsychus are hole-nesters, although exceptions have been reported but these were perhaps due to lack of suitable nesting holes. They are easy to cater for, being mostly insectivorous. They regularly cough up beetle casings and other chitinous objects, and for this reason they are difficult to dose with medication, especially with pills. Health All Copsychus obtained by Gibson had some intestinal parasites. The one they all had in common was Dwarf Tapeworm Hymenolepis spp. Nearly all other ground feeders examined also had this worm. This in¬ cludes 100% of Blackbirds Turdus merula and all Garmlax. These worms are easily removed by dosing with one-eighth of a tablet of Yomesan. Other parasites included Coccidia, Capillaria and Strongyloid worms. The only consistent , though minor problem was with moulting. About every second moult, one or other bird had several defective tail feathers. If these are bad, they are usually dropped and regrown before nesting starts. Birds bred by Gibson have not been troubled with it so far. This is dietary in origin and although birds get the same diet, it is perhaps significant that the domestic-bred ones have been free of it. One old Magpie Robin male got very twisted and thickened defective feathers for the last two years before he died, but in retrospect this was just an ageing process. Once Copsychus have got safely over the import period, they prove to be tough and long lived. Gibson had a hen Shama aged at least seven years old, and still nesting. Chicks were lost mostly through males throwing them out of the nest in both species. The last brood of Shamas for 1980 with Gibson was lost through carelessness by the hen which crammed day-old chicks with whole mealworm pupae and choked them. Lai reports a female regularly eating her newly hatched chicks. Lai reports a high mortality in hybrid Shama nestlings, mostly from un¬ explained causes but found the incidence greater in the rainy season. Post mortems carried out on chicks which refused food and showed signs of respiratory distress found Pseudomonas aeroginosa infection. This was des¬ pite giving them prophylactic antibiotic such as Ampicilin and Sulphur. Gibson found that on a number of occasions one chick in a nest did not 246 NOTES ON SHAMAS AND MAGPIE ROBIN grow like the others, and died before leaving the nest. The cause was not determined. A potentially serious problem with both adults and chicks is their penchant for swallowing long stringy objects such as grass, hair, rubber bands and lengths of plastic, which they bang about for ages before suddenly gulping them down. Gibson lost one hen Magpie Robin this way. She was building her second nest when she suddenly went apathetic and ill. She sat on the ground and vomited any mealworms she had swallowed. She died next day and her stomach was found to be impacted with a single piece of grass which, when unwound, proved to be 33 cm (13 inches) long. Later a Shama chick was found to have a horse hair sticking from its mouth. This was worked out and came up with the chick’s last feed, tan¬ gled in the end. The hair was 18-20 cm (7-8 inches) long. In the same nest on the same day, another chick was found half-strangled with a horse hair tightly wound around its neck. It was removed and the chick survived. Two days later, in the same nest, another chick (possibly one of the above two) was seen to swallow yet another horse hair, which apparently did no harm. This shows the danger of using horse hair as a material for nest con¬ struction. Another time a newly weaned, tame Shama was heard to bang some¬ thing about in its cage. It was being kept in a small cage in the kitchen for observation, as it was the only softbill chick to have been plucked. It was devoid of feathers on the back of the head and breast and was the lone survivor of a brood that had been choked with mealworm larvae. Out of curiosity, a check was just in time to see a 10 cm (4 inches) rubber band disappear down its throat. This was quickly and uneventfully retrieved with tweezers before it all went into the stomach. Feeding Livefood forms a large part of the diet and this is discussed later. Gib¬ son feeds a basic diet of equal parts of chopped cooked chicken and scrambled egg. Lewis and Oxley feed the home-made insectile mixture out¬ lined by Oxley in the paper on his management techniques, published in this issue, as well as raw beef. Woodley’s basic diet is Stimulite No. 1 insectile mixture, small amounts of grated cheese and occasional items of fruit in the form of soft apples and peeled dried grapes. Dr. Lai writes of his dry food as follows: “My mixture is made in the proportion of 3 kilos of toasted ground nuts, mixed with 300 grams of ground shrimps, mixed with six to eight whole eggs, depending on the size. Some 100 grams of sugar is added to the egg before being mixed. This mixture is dried in the NOTES ON SHAMAS AND MAGPIE ROBIN 247 sun on top of old newspaper or absorbent white paper so that most of the oil from the nuts is removed. It takes about three or four days for the mixture to be ready. During the drying process, the mixture is toasted once or twice to make sure that any bacteria are killed. When ready, the mixture is kept in small packets together with some drying agents. Prior to use, some vitamin-mineral powder is added. As I use prenatal capsules for pregnant mothers in my practice, I find it is equally good for the birds. When feeding the newly hatched I use a more liquid mixture consisting of bean curd with a lot of egg yolk, fully boiled. Some ground shrimp is also added. The mixture is to provide extra liquid for the young as the heat in the tropics causes a lot of water loss.” Gibson’s birds took any kind of live food, except slugs, and had the habit of eating the tiniest ants and flies that were too small for little waxbills to bother with. Sham as were the only birds of his to patiently eat enough fruit flies to fill themselves. One bird, a hen, which he watched in the wild on the Hawaiian island of Maui during the mango season, hawked the myriads of fruit flies that gathered over the rotting fruit that carpeted the ground. These she took one at a time by jumping up in the air. Although they will eat medium to small worms, the preferred food is a crunchy chitinous insect. Speeding insects trigger a lightning response and are usually snapped up in a split second. Mealworms are gulped down, but eating is more leisurely when only a single bird is present. In a mixed aviary the competition made the Shamas the fastest dispatchers of insects which are given only a perfunctory squeeze and then swallowed. Assorted aquatic creatures are eaten and Magpie Robins in particular loved small aquatic pond snails. Shamas have a habit,, if they get the chance, of shaking cater¬ pillars, etc., from rolled up leaves. They do this by banging the leaf about, detaching it if necessary. This has been done by chicks only a month old. The various authors give a wide range of live foods which must be given in some quantity daily. Most varieties are accepted and the bulk seems to be of the type which is most readily available in their areas. Lai feeds chiefly grasshoppers and mealworms. Most authors use a commercially produced live food of some type but Woodley did not feed maggots, other authors did. A consistent finding with Gibson is that cock Shamas always ate twice as much as the hens except when the latter were laying. This is strange because the male is not much bigger, being about 4-5 grrns heavier than the hen. Males range from 24-35 grms and females about 24-32 grms. The upper range is for birds kept outside; the subspecies vary quite a bit in size. 248 NOTES ON SHAMAS AND MAGPIE ROBIN Newly imported birds are invariably thin, and those near 20 grms or under have little chance of making it. In fact, choosing by weight is a good way of picking birds that have a good chance of surviving. Magpie Robins are slightly heavier, males being 30-38 grms and females 25-33 grms. They also have a heavier beak and legs. Housing These birds can be managed in a relatively small area provided that they have some cover. The size of aviaries given to their birds by the authors varies considerably. Length ranged from 7 to 12 feet, width from 3 to 6 feet and height from 6 to 8 feet. A width of 3 feet may seem small but, in fact, the pair of Magpie Robins housed in this flight, which was 12 feet long, proved the most prolific breeders of any in the accounts. This partic¬ ular pair, belonging to Woodley, also had the most privacy and protection - a privet hedge ran along the side of one length and the side of the house along the other. Flights in all cases were planted and Woodley’s had a deep leaf litter floor over a base of paving stones. All provided shelter, either in the form of a covered portion of the flight or an inside area of a shed. Gibson’s aviary had the roof completely covered. These birds are fairly hardy - Woodley’s Dhyals were over-wintered in the atrocious weather of the 1981-82 winter and nested earlier the follow¬ ing spring than in previous years, with the first egg being laid on 28th April. Gibson’s Shamas were miserable when cold, especially if windy and wet, and they never nested before the weather warmed up in the summer. Only Gibson mentions bathing facilities and he provided a dish on the ground under a dripping tap but they did not bathe nearly as much as some of his other softbills. Sexing and Calls There is, of course, no problem in sexing these birds. The black of the male is replaced by grey in the female. This is discernible when chicks have moulted at 3 months. Males are fine singers, although the ability varies considerably from one invididual to another. When singing, cock Shamas sit bolt upright and fluff out the white patch on the back from between the wings. They also use this patch in threat display, and in any other cir¬ cumstances where they are highly excited. Magpie Robins do the same but are not quite so obvious about it. The saularis has less of a range but has a longer song than malabaricus The Sham a also has a definite short song, which is usually repeated at NOTES ON SHAMAS AND MAGPIE ROBIN 249 dawn and dusk. The female often repeats the same song, more especially at dawn. Apart from song, the male has a wide repertoire which includes all kinds of bird calls. It can even be taught to whistle simple tunes. Prac¬ tically any noise, such as a vacuum cleaner, will trigger off a song, as will simply whistling at a bird. They will also occasionally make other sounds of a high pitched nature. A particular call is usually forgotten if it is not heard for a while. Both male and female of each species utter a “chat” when excited, which is usually accompanied by an upward jerk of the tail. Display and Mating Only Woodley gives notes on the display of the Dhyals. The male di- played to the hen by settling alongside her, puffing out his breast feathers and shimmering his wings rapidly in the half closed position, which dis¬ played his white wing bars to the full extent. In early attempts at mating when the female was not yet in condition, she would open her beak and threaten him as he approached. In Lai’s hybrids, the female became domineering at mating time, to the extent of chasing the cock when competing for food. The male sat on a high branch prior to mating (hjs flight aviaries are a minimum of 7 feet high for this reason), sitting very quietly with his feathers slightly puffed, occasionally making clacking sounds when he did fly. He did not sing as much as usual. On the four occasions when mating was observed, the male flew from a height and on to the female below and mating took place. No mention is made of a display. Two other pairs of Dhyals with Woodley failed to breed despite having almost identical conditions. This was attributed to two factors: incompat¬ ibility and, in one pair, the male could see the “old hen” across the garden and constantly sang and displayed to her. Nests A female Dhyal built a cup nest in the inside quarters which is attached to an outside flight with Oxley but all other authors’ birds built in a box of some description. Two authors (Hervouet and Woodley) used budgeri¬ gar nest boxes with enlarged entrance holes. Either cardboard or wooden half-fronted boxes were the most common receptacles provided, the size of which seemed unimportant. Those used by Gibson measured 6V2 x 6 Vi x 10 inches. The box used by Lai was not so simple - a wooden box with wire mesh covering the top was placed into another metal frame with some roof. The inner box could be removed for cleaning. He also used tree trunks, bamboo and even old tin cans as possible nesting sites. A hollow 250 NOTES ON SHAMAS AND MAGPIE ROBIN log was used by Lewis’s Dhyals on several occasions. The height of nest sites provided varied somewhat and does not seem to be critical. Fine, dried grass was the most commonly used material for nest con¬ struction with fine roots and horse hair also being used - the latter, how¬ ever, was discontinued when problems arose of chicks either swallowing or becoming entangled in it. Nests were lined with fine material. Construc¬ tion, where noted, was mainly done by the hen, with only occasional assistance by the male. One pair of Woodley’s Dhyals took only three days to complete a nest. Eggs and incubation Gibson’s Shamas laid a great many eggs. They weighed about 2.75 grms and ranged in size from 22-23 mm by 15-16.5 mm, with the average being 22.5 x 16.25 mm. The eggs are pale green and almost covered with dark brown markings. Four was the normal clutch (Hervo net’s pair laid three) but one hen laid six eggs and fledged all the chicks. This was the only departure from four out of the many clutches. Often the first clutch of the season was clear, as the cock had not been introduced to the hen on time, but invariably all others hatched. Eggs are not always laid early in the morning. Sometimes one, especially the last, is laid in the afternoon. The incubation time is 13 days but all usually hatch on the same day, the normal pattern being two in the morn¬ ing and two in the afternoon, so the fourth egg often hatches in 12 days. Occasionally I have had the last egg hatch in 1 1 days. Times are, of course, from when incubation commences, which is usually with the third egg. Eggs were laid and incubated over a wide range of temperatures, but the Shamas were invariably the last birds to nest, after the weather had warmed up. The earliest clutch commenced on 19th April and the last on 22nd August. However, all nests were outside, none being in a conservatory which was a little warmer. The breeding season in Canada lasts up to four months but is usually only two, making it the shortest season by far of all Gibson’s birds. Lai’s hybrids usually laid three eggs and only once did a hen have a clutch of four. While some clutches hatch on the same day, more often they hatched on consecutive days after an incubation of 13 or 14 days. The younger siblings from a staggered hatch usually died unless given extra help by hand-feeding. Dhyal clutches are either four or five and take 12 or 13 days to hatch. Eggs are blue-grey or greenish, heavily marked with reddish spots and squiggles and, although much rounder, had the appearance of a Rook’s egg NOTES ON SHAMAS AND MAGPIE ROBIN 251 B. Woodley Juvenile Magpie Robin and was not dissimilar to those of some Blackbirds. The first clutch of five laid by Woodley’s birds in 1980 had a protracted hatching period - two on 23rd June, two on the following day and the fifth at lunchtime on the 26th. Clutches laid in the following two seasons were more synchronised. The number of clutches per season obviously depends on a number of circumstances being favourable at the right time and the success rate of earlier broods. Woodley’s original hen was on her third brood for the season at the time of writing his notes (July 1982) and had reared eight from the previous two broods. Chicks With the exception of Mousebirds, Gibson found Shamas the easiest of his softbills to raise. This is due to the fact that they will eat just about any kind of insect or invertebrate. They will eat small earthworms which are easily obtained and the chicks seem to be much tougher than most 252 NOTES ON SHAMAS AND MAGPIE ROBIN others. The first meal one of the broods got was a 2 inch ferocious looking Violet Ground Beetle larva. The hen pecked it into the tiniest pieces before feeding it to the chicks. During the first three days, Hervouet found the best foods to be ant eggs or small moths from bee hives; often it was possible to add maggots, earwigs and small crickets. When the birds are 10 days old, maggots and mealworms are accepted. Generally, most forms of livefood are taken when rearing. Both authors remove the cocks when chicks are due. Gibson, however, replaces them once the young are a week old to help with the feeding. Males are removed for three reasons: wanting to nest again when the chicks are only a few days old, the serious risk of the cocks murdering the chicks when quite small, and to conserve live food if stocks are in short supply. Gibson's males fed little while the young were in the nest but fed them regularly after they came out. The hen did nearly all the cleaning, eating most of the faecal sacs meticulously, until the chicks left the nest. The first clutch bred by Gibson - the one with six eggs - all had rickets. Thereafter all chicks got supplemental hand-feeding. Chicks were simply lifted out and stuffed with scrambled egg and margarine. The hen sat nearby clucking her annoyance but always returned immediately to the nest. This was overdone at first, at least four feeds being given a day. The chicks were bulging when they left the nest and weighed up to 26.5 grms. This was almost the weight of the mother (29 grms). Later chicks weighed 20-21 grms. Eyes opened at six days and fledging took place at 11-13 days, with an average of 12 days. Chicks could fly immediately they left the nest and could manoeuvre quite well. When they have left the nest, the chicks give a long musical note to solicit food. Shama chicks are grey and reddish brown with lighter spots on the back and wings. The tail is scarcely through when they leave but grows fully in about a month. Within three days of leaving, chicks can be seen to cock their stumpy tails, “chattering” all the while. The parents often nest again when the chicks are about a month old, but the latter are always removed at this age anyway as they are always self-supporting. Chicks have often been seen to feed themselves at only 20 days, although of course the parents are still feeding them. One chick was seen to bathe at 24 days old. At about 50 days old, males begin to sing rather shakily while females will give a shorter burst of song. They will also start to fight seriously at this time and should be separated. This was not done with the first brood and the male was killed at 55 days by his sister. NOTES ON SHAMAS AND MAGPIE ROBIN 253 The chick’s quills burst open at eight days and they begin to moult at about three months, although there is quite a variation. One chick started to moult in September at 15 weeks and another, from a later brood, at 63 days. Both chicks were kept indoors and one moulted in February, while the other did not. The chick which moulted built a rather crude nest in a box and laid two eggs, at one year old. She was egg-bound with the second but it was passed in a heated cage set at 30°C, and she recovered uneventfully. This was the only case of egg-binding encountered by Gib¬ son in his softbills. A hen also nested when only 10 months old. Only one chick reared in four seasons turned out to be a male. The hybrid Shamas (White-crowned x White-rumped) when mature do not have any white spot on the head, or only a few specks of white if present at all. The reverse parentage throws offspring which seem to be more variable, as some are completely black on the head, and one cock showed a nearly complete white crown as in the Sabah species, and also had quite a long tail which was not previously the case. Young from the same pair can vary in their characteristics. Woodley experienced little problem with rearing Magpie Robins. The adults are marvellous feeders, the cock participating from the outset. They took only live food which was to be expected. Items most favoured were ants’ eggs and chopped mealworms (whole mealworms after the first few days). Various preparations were used as additives to the diet for the first broods but later only powdered cuttlefish “bone” was sprinkled over the mealworms. The adults fed the young by standing in the entrance hole and reaching downwards. A low clucking noise was uttered by the adults to urge the young to gape. As they grew older other types of food were offered, in¬ cluding small clean earthworms (which were never taken), together with spiders, moths and centipedes, all of which were greatly relished. Woodlice would be taken on occasions but generally they were totally disinterested in them. Before the nestlings feathered, they were jet black with a shiny polished appearance. Feather growth was rapid after a week and by the eleventh day they were well feathered. Fledging then took place within a day or two. Upon leaving the nest, young were marked like the hen, with grey on the head, back and tail and with white underparts. The breast was speckled. In bright sunlight, the head, nape and back of some young have a dis¬ tinctive charcoal greyish-black, as opposed to the battleship grey of the others. The darker ones turned out to be males and the lighter ones females. It is also noticeable that the young hens have a browner edge to their pri- 254 NOTES ON SHAMAS AND MAGPIE ROBIN mary feathers. There is a definite tendency for males to outnumber females - out of 27 reared in three years the ratio has been 17:10 (1980, 2:3; 1981, 7:3; 1982, 8:4). Three birds reared by Lewis in 1981 all proved to be cocks. Two of three Dhyals reared by Gibson were females. The Editor does not accept responsibility for opinions expressed in articles, notes or correspondence MEMBERS’ ADVERTISEMENTS (10 p. per word - minimum charge £3.00) SURPLUS: Bronze-tailed Peacock Pheasants, White Eared, Koklass, Ijima Copper, Nene, Cereopsis, Emperor, Carolina, Marbled Laysan - many others. WANTED: Brush Bronzewing Pigeons (exchange of blood), also any inter¬ esting foreign birds. W. Harrison (0939) 33604. WANTED URGENTLY: A breeding pair of Crested Bronzewing Pigeons. Please contact I. Trevelyan, 4 Mount Pleasant, Westleigh, Nr. Tiverton, Devon, or phone Fenacre Quarry, Burlescombe, Nr. Tiverton - Greenham 672-206. THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY OF QUEENSLAND welcomes new mem¬ bers. An Australian Society catering for all birds both in captivity and in the wild. We put out a bi-monthly magazine on all aspects of aviculture and conservation. For membership details please contact Ray Garwood, 19 Fahey’s Road, Albany Creek, 4035 Queensland. Annual subscription: 14 :00 Aus. dollars surface mail, 20.00 Aus. dollars airmail. AMERICAN CAGE-BIRD MAGAZINE features timely and interesting articles on canaries, finches, hook bills, and other birds by leading breeders and fanciers. All show dates and show information are also published. Monthly subscription 12.00 US dollars. American Cage-Bird Magazine, 3449 North Western Avenue, Chicago Illinois 60618, USA. INDEX Appreciations: J.O. D’Eath . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 L. Hill . . . . . . . 56 Aviculture, A Dissenting View on, . . . . . . . . 113 Back-garden Collection, Management of, 239 Bird Fancying, Foe of Aviculture . . . . . 88 Birds of Prey, Bred at Wassenaar Zoo............................... . . . 150 Birds in some London Parks, Notes on, . . . . 39 Blackbird, Breeding in captivity . . . . . 198 Blue-bill, Red-breasted, Breeding . . . . 148 Controlled Environment aviaries................................ . 36 Correspondence . . . . . . . 65, 120, 179 Cranes in Asian Zoos . . . 104 Doves, Barbary, Free-flying.......... . 163 Duck, Mandarin, Inbreeding depression...................................... 145 Hoopoe, Captive Management... . . . . . . . 226 Hornbill, Black and White Casqued, Breeding..... . . . 15 Human and other predation on birds, Some aspects . , 52 Hummingbirds, Care and Management . . 213 Hummingbird, Buffy, Observations....... . . . . . 81 Hummingbird, Speckled, Nesting. . . . . . 151 Hummingbird, Speckled, Nest-building of female........ . . 153 Hummingbirds, Violet-eared, Notes . . . . . 26 Ibises, Sunbathing behaviour in five species . . . . . 96 Incubators and Hand-rearing in Aviculture........... . . . 74 News and Views 58,122,171 Nightingale, Observations on................. . . . . . . . 210 Parrakeet, Splendid Grass, 50th Anniversary in Aviculture..... . 159 Parrot, Amazon, Red-topped, Breeding.. . . . . 12 Parrot, Amazon, Spectacled (White-fronted), Breeding.. . 71 Parrots, Boswell Collection of..... . . . . . . 101 Parrot, Cape, Breeding . . . . . . . . . 1 Parrot, Senegal, Breeding............ . . . . . . 130 Parrotlet, Yellow-faced, Notes on . . . . . 156 Pelican, Dalmatian, Breeding . . . . . . . 33 REVIEWS: Wildlife and Nature Photography . . . . . . 63 Birds of East Africa . . . . . . . 64 The Breeding Seasons of East African Birds...... . . . 64 Birds of Africa . . . . . . . . . 64 A Field Guide to the Birds of East Africa . . . . . 64 INDEX (Contd.) Birds of Australian Gardens . . . 174 Rare and Vanishing Australian Birds . . . . 174 Mountain Wildlife. . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 The Breeding Birds of Europe . . . . . . . . 175 Wings and Seasons . . . . . . 175 The British Ornithologists’ Guide to Bird Life............ . . . . 175 The Conservation of New World Parrots.... . . . . 175 The Doomsday Book of Animals . . . . . 176 Quail, Their Breeding and Management . . . 176 Tasmanian Bird Atlas . . . . . . . . 176 Cage and Aviary Birds . . . . . . . . . 176 Diets for Birds in Captivity . . . . 177 The Falcons of the World... . . . . . . . 177 Robin, Magpie, Notes on . . . . . . . . 243 Shamas, Notes on. . . . . . . . . . . 243 Spoonbill, African, Breeding . . . . . 69 Starling, Red-winged, Breeding . . . . . . . 191 Starling, Splendid, Breeding . . . . . . . . . . . . 189 Storks, Asian White, Keeping . . . . . . . . 127 Tanagers, Adaptability to Captive Conditions . 235 Tanagers, Ramphocelus, Breeding... . . . . . . 142 Thrush, White-crested Jay, Breeding. . . . . . . . 135 Toucanet, Crimson-rumped, Breeding . . . 193 Touracos, Breeding.... . . . . . 205 Waterfowl, Vent Sexing and Pinioning . . . . . 84 Zoos, Notes From: London, 109; Bronx 111 THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY The Avicultural Society was founded in 1894 for the study of British and foreign birds in freedom and captivity. The Society is international in character, having members throughout the world. Membership subscription rates per annum: British Isles £8.00 ; Overseas - £9.00 (20.00 US dollars). The subscription is due on 1st January of each year and those joining the Society later in the year will receive back numbers of the current volume of the AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE. The subscription rate for non-members is: British Isles and Europe - £9.00; outside Europe - £10.00 (25.00 US dollars). Subscriptions, changes of address, orders for back numbers, etc., should be sent to: THE HON. SECRETARY AND TREASURER, THE AVICUL¬ TURAL SOCIETY, WINDSOR FOREST STUD, MILL RIDE, ASCOT, BERKSHIRE SL5 8LT, ENGLAND. NEW MEMBERS Mrs. R. Airey, “Picket Piece”, Hampton Poyle, Oxfordshire, OX5 2QA. Mr. T. Birt, Dept, of Zoology, Memorial University, St. John’s, Newfoundland, Canada, A1B 3X9. Mr. Charles B. Fourong, 681 Euclid Avenue, El Centro, Calif. 92243, USA. Mr. Cory A. Gardiner, 1723 8th Street, Berkeley Calif. 94710, USA. Mr. S. Fowler, 7 Highfield Lane, Cedar Grove, New Jersey 07009, USA. Mr. A. Geddes, Thorntrees, 16 Laurey Drive, Stranraer, Scotland. Ms. D. Klashinsky, Box 390, Breton, Alberta, Canada, TOC OPO. Mrs. A. Kropotkin, c/o Prof. G. Del Gaudio, Via Appia Nuova 572/F, 00179 Rome, Italy. Mr. R. Lesti, Via di Capanne 1, 56020 Montopoli V/A, Pisa, Italy. Mrs. J. Hastings Mack, 3908 Murry Highlands Circle, Murrysville, Pennsylvania 15668, USA. Mr. Alfred McEwen, 100 Merafield Road, Plympton, Plymouth PL7 3SH Mrs. M. Merdian, 22723 Meridian East, Graham, Wa. 98338, USA. Mr. Thomas D. Miller, 71 North 2nd West, Logan, Utah 84321, USA. Mr. M. Newbury, 21 Burnett Close, Saltash, Cornwall PL12 4LL Mr. P.N. Raison, Farncombe Hill, Broadway, Worcs. Mr. G. Sahora, 770 Kingston Avenue No. 307, Oakland, Calif. 94611, Mr. C. Solomon, 36 Manor Drive, Ivybridge, South Devon, PL21 9BE. Mr. Spear, 5500 S.W. 105th Street, Miami, Florida 33156, USA Mr. C.W. Stevens, Monks Cottage, Preston Crowmarsh, Benson, Oxon. Mr. Colin C. Wintle, c/o Brechin Estates, P.O. Box 1405, Harare, Zimbabwe. CHANGE OF ADDRESS Major T.J. Ades, to 7 ARMD, WKSP, REME, BFPO 38. Mr. D.G. Irwen, to 73 Knightscliffe Way, Duston, Northampton. Mrs. Cynthia L. Johnson, to 20440 S.W. 92nd PL, Miami, Fla. 33189, USA Mr. R.I. Killingback, to 2 Kingsway, Ware, Hertfordshire, SG12 OQT. Mr. P.H. Maxwell, to 92 The Holcombe Hotel, Heene Road, Worthing, Sussex. Dr. T.D. Nichols, to P.O. Box 2066 San Benito, Texas 78586, USA. Mr. C.H. Peacock, to The Flat, Little Waldingfield Priory, Sudbury, Suffolk, CO10 OSY. Dr. W. Sachsse, to Carl-Zuckmayer Strasse 13, 65 Mainz-Drais, Germany. Mr. P.G. Schofield, to Turning Point, 5 Caledonian Close, Weymouth, Dorset. Dr. H. Wunsch, to Hauptstrasse 12, 7213 Dunningen, West Germany. DONATIONS The Council is most grateful to the following members for their generosity Mr. J.C. Barlass Mr. T.T. Barnard Mr. Don Bleitz Mr. T.R.M. Brosset Mr. R.P. Girdler Mr. F.S. Hogg Mr. W.G. Howarth Mr. P.H. Maxwell Mr. J.M. Ridgeway Mr. A.A.J. Stoodley Mr. J.D. Warren Published by The Avicultural Society, Windsor Forest Stud, Mill Ride, Ascot, Berkshire England. !AR I ES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIXrUIXSNI NVINOSHXIWS S3 I a Vi w „ _ ^ Z \ in z W 2 v > 2 C/5 2 VARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIinillSNI NVINOSH1IWS S3 I H VI oo fllliSNI NVINOSHJLilNS S3ldVUai1 LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITU “ S r~ Z r- m ^ 2 “ Z^>oX 2 m XfSg VARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIlfUllSNI NVINOSHIIINS S3IUV* v> _ _ _ z > co z co < V E s xrsgx ~ ^ Z H wE/#S- 2 /SfctWSv H o i WxWj o O " ^ i i vy I** ' nxixsNi_NviNOSHXims‘°S3 1 a va a n\i b rar i es^smithsonian jnstitu 1 /tiffin ^ jl|v 1 ^ ,v\ - iz W!?Wk- 3 LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIlfUllSNI NVINOSH1IIAIS Sj 2: o NOliniliSNI NVINOSHIIINS S3IHVdan LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN IN Z __ W Z - ■ Z E , < Ac E /^Tx — */ Ass z ~H ASgfto&bi z LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIlfUllSNI NVIN0SH1IWS S3 NOIlfUllSNI NVIN0SH1IIAIS S3IUVBan LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN IN C > z r~ Z f~ h” m g m LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN” INSTITUTION^NOIirUllSNI- NVINOSHlIIMs” S j co ^ ^ — mWs/ss z /xkft«\ H X CO z /Vs-" t \My s/ aVlM0SHllWS~S3 IHVd8llZUB RAR I ES^SMITHSONIAN^IN c