QL

611

S’AVICULTURAL

MAGAZINE

2005

THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY

The Avicultural Society was founded in 1894 for the study of British and
foreign birds in the wild and in captivity. The Society is international in
character, having members throughout the world.

Membership subscription rates per annum for 2005 as for 2004: British Isles
£18.00: Overseas £21.00 (plus £6.00 for airmail). (U.K. funds please). 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 HON. SECRETARY AND TREASURER, THE AVICULTURAL
SOCIETY, ARCADIA, THE MOUNTS, TOTNES, DEVON TQ9 7QJ, UK.

Subscriptions and other payments can be made direct to The Avicultural
Society Account, Lloyds TSB Bank PLC, 83 High Street, Sevenoaks, Kent
TN13 1LG, UK. Please quote Account No. 00003950; Sort Code:30 97 49;
and ensure you send your name as the account reference, or else we cannot
match payments. In case of difficulty please contact the Hon. Secretary and
Treasurer at the address above, or e-mail: Paul@pboulden.fsnet.co.uk

Website: http://www.avisoc.co.uk

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, black and white or colour photographs which illustrate a particular
point in the article will be used where possible and should be clearly
captioned. If authors wish their eventual return, they must say so when
submitting the article and write their name on the back of each photograph.
Tables and graphs will also be used wherever possible but authors should be
aware of the constraints of reproduction, particularly regarding the width of
the page which is 105mm.

ADDRESS OF THE EDITOR

Malcolm Ellis, Hon. Editor, The Avicultural Magazine, The Chalet, Hay
Farm, St. Breock, Wadebridge, Cornwall PL27 7LL, England.

E-mail: editor@avisoc.co.uk

Avicultural Magazine

THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY

Vol. 1 1 1 - No. 1 All rights reserved ISSN 0005 2256 2005

The Avicultural Society

FOR THE STUDY OF BRITISH AND FOREIGN BIRDS
IN THE WILD AND CAPTIVITY

OFFICERS AND COUNCIL
As from April 9th 2005

President

MISS R.M. EZRA
Vice Presidents

J.M. DOLAN, Jr., Ph.D. (USA) Dr. H. QUINQUE (France)
MRS. D. HOLLOWAY (Britain) R.L. RESTALL (Venezuela)
C.J.S. MARLER (Britain) R.C.J. SAWYER (Britain)

The Rev. R. NOEGEL (USA) Dr. R. WILKINSON (Britain)

Honorary Editor
M. ELLIS

Honorary Secretary - Treasurer
P. BOULDEN

Members of Council

R. S. ABREY
P. CONVY

M. CURZON MBE
J.A. ELLIS

MRS. L. GARDNER
R.B. GIRLING
A.V. GRIFFITHS

N. R. HEWSTON

S. PYPER
V.P. SARGENT
P. G. SCHOFIELD
J.G. THURLOW
B. TREMLETT
J. TROLLOPE
MS. R. WISEMAN

Chairman C.J.S. MARLER

2

COUNCIL MEETING

A council meeting was held on Saturday, April 9th at Leeds Castle, near
Maidstone, Kent.

The following members were present: Miss R. Ezra (President), C.J.S.
Marler (Vice President and Chairman), R.C.J. Sawyer (Vice President), M.
Ellis (Hon. Editor), Mrs L. Gardner, N.R. Hewston, S. Pyper, J.G. Thurlow,
B. Tremlett, J. Trollope, Mrs Rosemary Wiseman. W. Harrison had resigned
prior to the meeting and R. Abrey was elected to fill the vacancy.

The Hon. Editor reported that he hopes to soon be ready to publish Dr
Quinque’s important account of his many years keeping, breeding and
conserving the Kagu. This will be illustrated by a number of excellent colour
photographs. This apart, however, he has very little material in hand for
2005.

The council agreed that the society should in 2005 again make donations
to The Foreign Bird Federation towards the cost of sending out its Breeding
Register , as well as to the Hombill Research Foundation in Thailand and the
Yellow-throated Laughingthrush project in China. It is hoped that we will
shortly receive a report on The Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust’s satellite tracking
of Lesser Flamingos in the Rift Valley, following which the council will
consider the request for a donation towards research on the Red-breasted
Goose. Laura Gardner suggested that at the President’s Garden Party the
society should hold a raffle to help raise funds for conservation projects.
Rosemary Wiseman offered to assist her organise this. If you would like to
donate a prize, please contact the society.

The President Miss Ruth Ezra presented the society’s medal to
Christopher Marler for the UK first breeding of the American Bald Eagle.
Christopher said the pair has one egg this year and if it hatches and the chick
is reared successfully, he will have bred a total of 30 Bald Eagles.

Following the council meeting there was an AGM. Those present were
welcomed by the Chairman and after his introduction, the Hon. Editor gave
his report, the Hon. Secretary/Treasurer’s report was read out, plans for
supporting conservation projects were outlined and other matters were
discussed. After lunch members and their guests were taken on a guided
tour of the bird collection by Laura Gardner. Notes on the collection will, it
is hoped, be published in a future issue of the magazine.

Members have been invited to Beale Park Day, July 3rd (see p.41), a
group of members and their guests are to visit Dr Quinque’s collection in
France, the President’s Garden Party is to be held Saturday, July 9th (a
booking form is included with this magazine) and it is hoped to hold the
Autumn Meeting on Saturday, September 24th at Paignton Zoo
Environmental Park. Members and their guests may also wish to take the
opportunity to visit Living Coasts at nearby Torquay.

Brotogeris PARAKEETS AND OTHER FERAL PARROTS
IN SOUTHERN FLORIDA

3

by Derian A. L. Silva Moraton

It was barely 6.2 1 am when like clockwork the small flock of Brotogeris
parakeets flew overhead - during the 1 3 weeks in which I recorded the daily
departure of the flock, the time of its departure never varied by more than
three minutes. The parakeets begin to chatter as the sun starts to rise. After
about 1 0 minutes they take short circular flights and return to the stand of
palms that they use for roosting. Then after a few passes the parakeets fly
up and move off in a loose, vocal flock that can be heard from some distance
away. Observing them requires one to have good eyesight (and/or a pair of
binoculars), as they fly very high. They awaken earlier than the other parrots,
flying overhead some 20-30 minutes before the macaws, Amazons, White¬
eyed Conures Aratinga leucophthalmus. Mitred Conures A. mitrata and
Quaker Parakeets Myiopsitta monachus.

Such scenes are played out daily in Central and South America, but my
observations take place almost daily where I live at Miami Beach, Florida,
USA. The feral flocks of parrots feed on the numerous ornamental trees.
The Brotogeris parakeets avidly consume the fruits of Ficus and the flowers
of Bauhinia , amongst others. The birds live amongst a concrete jungle with
an understory of ornamental trees and shrubbery. Here they find security,
food and nesting places. As a result their numbers are swelling, though of
course some are more successful than others. Over the years it has been
possible to witness population changes and a growing number of hybrids.
The latter also breed and I have seen two Amazons, each of mixed parentage,
produce offspring. The birds involved were a Blue-fronted Amazona aestiva
x Orange- winged Amazon A amazonica and a Yellow-napedA auropalliata
x Yellow-crowned Amazon A. ochrocephala.

The Brotogeris parakeets are a particularly interesting group. The original
populations in southern Florida were of White-winged Parakeets B.
versicolurus . The populations grew slowly and were confined to just a few
areas, principally to the south of Miami. With the escape of the more
aggressive Canary- winged Parakeet B. chiriri or B. v. chiriri\ populations
of which are booming and spreading quickly throughout the city, a change
is being seen; populations of the White-winged Parakeet are giving way to
its more outgoing and vocal relative, which has established itself now
throughout Miami Dade. I have seen flocks in North Miami Beach, Little

1 Many authors continue to treat the Canary-winged Parakeet as a subspecies of the White¬
winged; however some, including the present author, regard it as a full species in its own right.
Later in this article he explains his reasons for believing this. - Ed.

4

SILVA MORATON - BROTOGERIS PARAKEETS

Haiti, Coconut Grove and Kendall, amongst other locales. In many areas in
which I used to observe the White-winged Parakeet, the Canary-winged is
now the predominant parakeet.

Visitors to southern Florida interested in observing these birds are urged
to visit Coral Gables, Coco Plum and the grounds of the Baptist Hospital.
During a casual saunter through the latter, I have seen hundreds of these
birds flying from tree to tree. It can be difficult to see them when they are
feeding in the trees, as their plumage blends with the foliage; even when
they are calling, as is typical of these birds, locating their precise whereabouts
is not easy.

Both these parakeets originate from South America, and in addition to
the introduced populations in southern Florida, are also established in
California and Puerto Rico. In South America the White-winged inhabits
riparian woodland, pantanal, savannah, forest, cultivated gardens and parks.
Its diet is composed principally of fruit seeds; the bare skin at the base of the
bill seems to be an adaptation for this diet, keeping sticky fruit from coming
in contact with the feathers.

The Canary-winged Parakeet, which ranges as far south as Paraguay
and northern Argentina, has similar biological requirements to the White¬
winged. The bare skin at the base of the bill is not as extensive and would
suggest that its diet contains fewer wet, mushy fruits, but this is not borne
out by field studies in Miami and South America.

In South America I have only ever seen them nesting in arboreal
termitarium. Here in Florida both prefer Date Phoenix dactylifera and Canary
Island Palms P. canariensis. Typically there is a 30cm-60cm (approx. 1ft-
2ft) long tunnel at the end of which is the nesting chamber. It is not
uncommon for it to have multiple entrances. Typically family parties can
be seen nesting in the same tree; intruders are quickly banished but young
from the previous year will remain with their parents during the first year
and act as helpers and subsequently nest in a cavity of their own. Nesting
occurs very early in the year. I have seen young with pin-feathers in February;
by contrast feral macaws and Amazons in southern Florida nest between
March- April.

Both parakeets have long been regarded as conspecific (see Forshaw,
1989). I am though amongst those who believe they are sufficiently distinct
to justify full species status, especially given that when the two meet they
do not hybridize. If they were conspecific they would hybridize, which is
one of the criteria used by taxonomists to grant a taxa subspecies status.
Even the feral populations in Miami remain segregated. A trapper who
regularly collects chicks from the feral populations told me that he has never
seen hybrids. I have likewise never observed mixed pairs, nor even flocks
of the two actively interacting. Only once have I seen them in the same tree.

SILVA MORATON - BROTOGERIS PARAKEETS

5

and on that occasion they remained separated as if there was a barrier between
them. The same intermixing that one sees amongst species of the genus
Amazona is absent.

In order to better study the differences between the two I have carried
out field observations. I have accompanied a trapper who regularly harvests
from the wild populations. He relies on call birds and is never able to use
one to trap the other. I also maintain both parakeets, which I house side by
side in outdoor enclosures in order to make comparisons. These observations
suggest that the two are very distinct. Though the White-winged would
appear to be strictly frugivorous, I have found that it feeds principally on
seeds; undoubtedly the bare skin at the base of the lower mandible allows
the bird to penetrate deep into fruits to extract the seeds. In contrast, the
Canary- winged is an avid consumer of fruit, even when possible consuming
the peel; when this is not possible, it will clean out all of the pulp, as will a
wasp, leaving just the thin outer skin. I have also noticed that the Canary¬
winged will defend its nest from potential intruders and will nest in tree
cavities and the base of palms in which dead leaves remain. The White¬
winged is more selective, preferring cavities which meet its specific
requirements. The Canary- winged is much fonder of water, immediately
enjoying rain, whereas more than once I have seen White- winged hiding
amongst foliage to avoid a downpour. There are also other dramatic
differences between the two.

Studying parrots in the wild is not easy, especially in their native countries.
Insects, poisonous snakes, plants with razor sharp leaves, the absence of
roads and sleeping accommodation, along with other local conditions, make
field work very difficult. The growing and changing feral parrot populations
inhabit an environment in which it is easier to study these birds. Changes
and adaptations seen here may well provide valuable insights into the lives
of these species. For casual observers, visiting sunny Florida can provide a
similar experience to spending weeks in the field in South America, but
without the usual concerns and with a comfortable hotel room at night.

Bibliography

Forshaw, J. M. 1989. Parrots of the World. Third (revised) edition. Lansdowne Editions,
Melbourne, Australia.

6

THE AZURE- WINGED MAGPIE Cyanopica cyanus
ANTHROPOMORPHIC AND CLIMATIC FACTORS
IN ITS DISTRIBUTION

by Brian A. G. Hill

Natural History

My observations of Azure-winged Magpies during the summer of 2002,
in Beijing, China - that August the venue for the 23rd International
Ornithological Congress - showed them spending most of their time in the
crowns of large trees, from which they made their presence known by their
calling, whilst both in the trees and also when in flight, sometimes several
together flying from one tree to another. Early in the morning, though a
little later than the Tree Sparrows Passer montanus, they called from the tall
poplar trees just across the street and directly opposite my window, probably
whilst searching for insects and/or other invertebrates.

Their calls, the sibilant “ tschreee ” (Goodwin, 1986), their tone and
utterances whilst well hidden in the canopy, sounded very like one of the
calls of Golden Oriole Oriolus oriolus - but not of course its more familiar,
beautifully imploring whistle. Not that I heard or saw Golden Oriole in
Beijing, but I did wonder if there could be antagonism between them where
both occur in China. Tall, mature poplar trees are favoured also by Golden
Orioles.

In Beijing Azure- winged Magpies ranked second to Tree Sparrows, as
the most frequently heard and seen birds. Magpies Pica pica and feral
pigeons ranked joint third. There were few other birds. Only once did I see
Azure-winged Magpies on the ground, that was on the lawn in the park of
Beijing University. They were not feeding, just gathering there and were
soon disturbed by too close an approach by people and traffic.

It was quite apparent from what I saw of this species in Beijing during
the summer of 2002, that there it is a co-habitant of man, equivalent to those
other Eurasian corvids - the Carrion Crow Corvus corone corone , Hooded
Crow C. c. cornix , Rook C.frugilegus, Jackdaw C. monedula , Magpie Pica
pica and Jay Garrulus glandarius - which have adapted to city life. It is
able to subsist, if not actually nest (I was in Beijing when its nesting season
had passed) even away from parks, wherever there are a few big trees,
separated by no more than a few hundred metres (a few hundred yards)
from the next lot of big trees, in streets and quandrangles which from mid¬
morning to late at night are much frequented by many people and vehicles.
In the parks, some of which have controlled access it would, with plenty of
cover and undisturbed, be able to nest.

Of the above corvids, in Beijing it was only the Azure-winged Magpie

HILL - AZURE- WINGED MAGPIE

7

and Magpie which were, quite apparently, co-inhabitants with the human
population. Because there the only other corvid I saw was the Jungle Crow
C. macrorhynchos . I heard it and then spotted it a few times high above the
city. Only on one occasion, at Beihei Park near the city centre, did I see this
corvid as low as the tree-tops, when I saw two resting on the roof-ridge of a
traditional style building.

in winter the Azure-winged Magpie in Beijing may when searching for
food have to behave very much like a European city inhabiting corvid, though
in Beijing it will be competing, amongst other corvids, at most only with the
Magpie. Or, it may disperse to the nearest rural areas, which are intensively
cultivated. Alternatively it may migrate to Oriental China, that is the basin
of the Yangtse-Kiang and further south. I would be interested to know,
preferably based on first-hand experience, how the Azure-winged Magpie
subsists during the long winter in Beijing. I think that the attitude towards
it there is generally benign. 1 have been told by Chinese acquaintances that
it is regarded as a “lucky bird”, though I do not know enough yet of Chinese
lore to know in which sense it is regarded as lucky.

Eurasian corvids are generally regarded as comparatively unpalatable,
and I do not know of any country in which they are now taken much for
eating.

It was hot most days for the two months, mid- July to mid- September
2002, 1 was in Beijing, though the sky was either completely overcast, or at
best with just a scattering of blue breaks between the dense looking clouds.
Several days there was heavy rain, each of many hours duration. Almost
nowhere in urban but leafy Beijing did the soil look other than moist.

The Azure-winged Magpie evidently needs at least a goodly scattering
of big trees, infested with insects and such-like invertebrates, in the humid
warmth of spring and the heat of summer, in which to feed and nest. During
the spring and summer, as I observed, its arboreal habits suggest it is then
primarily an insectivore. However, because the Azure-winged Magpie is
non-migratory, in the sense that there is no mass movement from Palearctic
China - that part of the country north of the Yangtse-Kiang river, which is
the major part of its range - southward into Oriental China, some major
changes in its diet and foraging habits must occur, perhaps even before the
brief Chinese autumn. As a corvid, this it can do, presumably then going on
to eat more in the way of seeds, berries, fruits, nuts and such-like vegetable
matter, both wild and discarded in a processed form by humans (Goodwin,
1986). I would like to make my own observations of it during the Chinese
autumn and winter, or failing that get information from Chinese
acquaintances, ornithological and otherwise.

It was evident from my observations in Beijing that the Azure-winged
Magpie can cohabit with man in China, and presumably has throughout

HILL - AZURE- WINGED MAGPIE

China’s history. Because of its familiarity with man and its ability to subsist
alongside man, this bird would have been a suitable candidate for
introduction, such as to Iberia (Spain and Portugal).

In Iberia

I saw the Azure-winged Magpie for the first time in the wild whilst driving
through a stretch of typical Extremadura country in south-west Spain. I saw
several, quite remote from any village. I saw small groups in flight, from
one clump of trees to another, and heard their calls; as I would five years
later in China.

Cooper and Voous (1999) displayed again the recent map compiled by
Rufino, 1989 and Purroy, 1997 of the distribution of the Azure-winged
Magpie in Iberia. It showed it to be distributed south of about 42°N and
almost entirely west of longitude 4°W.

It is in accordance with my assessment of this species’ need for the most
humid as well as warmest country, especially in the spring and summer
breeding season. Where are most of the main rivers in Iberia, and the humid
influence of the Atlantic - not anywhere along the Ebro, the other major
river, which however flows across the comparatively even drier, in summer,
western Spain eastwards to its outfall in the Mediterranean. I did not see
Azure-winged Magpies in Madrid. Not in the Parque de Retiro, with its
lake and magnificent stands of various deciduous trees, nor in the much
more extensive Casa de Campo, huge as parks go, and seemingly good
habitat.

Had the Azure-winged Magpie been introduced into Iberia, surely the
core of its population then and even now, could reasonably be expected to
have very similar habits and occupy equivalent habitat, in association with
man, to that which it does in China, at least from what I saw of it in Beijing.

So, to reiterate, in south-west Iberia I saw it in country remote from
villages, but failed to find it even in Madrid’s extensive parks, which had
what appeared to be ample good habitat. The general characteristics of
introduced birds have recently been described (Goodwin, 2002 & pers.
comm.). Suffice to say here that the Azure-winged Magpie in Iberia does
not show those characteristics of behaviour and distribution consistent with
it having been introduced there.

There is for example - albeit just within the past 30-35 years - the
introduction of the House Crow C. splendens at Durban, South Africa
(McLachlan & Liversidge, 1978). Even if the House Crow has by now
spread beyond Durban - in addition to frequenting that city, not instead of -
it presumably will be in territory in which there is not insuperable hostility
towards it from indigenous predators, including man.

HILL - AZURE- WINGED MAGPIE

9

Distribution of the Azure- winged Magpie in relation to the climate

The present huge geographical disjunction in the distribution of the Azure¬
winged Magpie has long been well known. Perhaps less well known to
those interested in this species’ world distribution, but not having been
fortunate enough to have made even brief visits to both Iberia and China, as
I have, are the marked differences in the climate of the two, even when
comparing just that part of its range in China, in Beijing and its environs,
with, for example, Barcelona and Madrid, all of which are at about the same
latitude, 40°N.

Mediterranean countries, most relevantly Iberia, present to the casual
visitor (the holidaymaker) in summer a parched appearance (Compared to
northern Europe, i.e. north of about 45 °N dry-bulb air temperature means
and extremes during May-October are much higher, consequent on the higher
insolation.). Though actually relative humidity is not low, as measurable by
comparing the wet-bulb air temperature to that of the dry, then referring to
tables or a nomogram.

However, precipitation in summer is meagre: typically as brief lightning
and thunderstorms, punctuating many days - for several weeks some summers
- of scorchingly hot weather. There is very little precipitation as dew. The
Iberian winter may have days of extremely low temperatures, cold and dry
or cold and wet, depending on the location and altitude, but typically mild
and wet, at least in lowland Iberia, which is the part most relevant here.

The climate of south-west Iberia is very different from that of the parts
of China over which the Azure-winged Magpie now ranges (Goodwin, 1 986),
though in extreme northern and western parts of its of range, viz.
Transbaikalia and Mongolia perhaps less so than in southern and eastern
parts. Overall the summer is long, hot and humid, being more hot and humid
towards the south, than in the Amur basin, the northern limit of the Azure¬
winged Magpie’s range. A more emphatic disparity occurs of course in the
winter: Manchuria having a very cold winter, with not much precipitation,
and as snow rather than rain. Winter in the extreme south is no more severe
than cool. The Azure-winged Magpie’s “northern limit nowhere crosses the
July isotherm of 68°F” (Voous, 1960).

Now, only extreme north-west Iberia is possibly just a bit cooler than
the 68°F July isotherm, so it seems that the lower humidity in summer at
present, compared with China in summer at present, is the factor which has
restricted the Azure-winged Magpie to only a fraction of Iberia that has
adequate tree cover for it.

Since prehistoric times the humidity, though not the heat, has declined
to account for the disjunction. Only at present in south-west Iberia is there
enough humidity, and even there the climate is sub-optimal. Hence at present
there is a population which lacks the dynamics to extend its range even into

10

HILL - AZURE- WINGED MAGPIE

apparently suitable habitat more generally in Iberia.

I have yet to experience a typical Beijing winter, which is preceded, so I
have been told, by a delightfully sunny though brief autumn. Heresay has it
that the winter is long and cold but mostly dry. Such precipitation that does
occur is in the form of snow rather than rain. So, there is not only geographic
disjunction but also the equally abrupt disparity in the climate of lowland
Iberia and lowland China. The climate disparity also would not, of itself, be
insuperable to the Azure-winged Magpie having been introduced to Iberia
hypothesis.

There is the example cited earlier of the House Crow in Durban. Although
by the Indian Ocean, Durban is south of the equator, whereas all of the
Indian subcontinent is north of it. Hence the climates of the two although
having much in common, such as overall heat and humidity, are out of phase.

Had the Azure-winged Magpie been treated by the expatriate Portuguese
and Chinese in anyway comparable to that of the expatriate (presumably
essentially Hindu) Indians in European-African Durban in their treatment
of the there introduced House Crow, surely as a fellow corvid it would have
shown similar adaptation.

Cooper & Voous ( 1 999) in their review of the literature, most pertinently
that of Iberian authors, apparently did not find any reference to the Azure¬
winged Magpie being a frequent and familiar bird in Iberian city parks, as it
now is in China, at least in urban but leafy Beijing, as witnessed by me in
the summer of 2002.

The above paper contains skilfully taken photos by Kevin Carlson in
Portugal in May 1988, compared alongside those taken by Colin Bradshaw
in China in May 1993 and by T. Ishi in Japan (undated), which show the
Chinese form to be paler overall than the Iberian form, and also to have
whitish tips to its tail feathers, which the Iberian form lacks. Although not
much of a morphological difference, it is noticeable in the field, to anyone -
such as me - who has seen both forms in the wild. The photos show-off the
restrained beauty of this bird.

This morphological difference would not be incompatible with the
introduction hypothesis (Goodwin, 1986). The citation given by Goodwin
for the Azure-winged Magpie was Pallas, P. S. 1776, Reisen durch
verschiedene Provinzen des Russichen Reiches , 3, p.694. According to the
account given by Stresemann (1975), Pallas’ expedition of 1768-1774 was
from St Petersburg and travelled east to somewhere between Lake Baikal
and Ulan Bator, Mongolia, nowhere going much south of 50°N. So,
presumably the type specimen is of a Russian form, but I have yet to discover
from precisely where.

Cooper & Voous (1999) in their review of the literature could find no
reference to documentary evidence that the Azure-winged Magpie was in

HILL - AZURE- WINGED MAGPIE

11

fact introduced to Iberia, supposedly “by sixteenth-century Portuguese sailors
returning from voyages in the Far East”. Nor was an earlier review (Goodwin,
1986) able to quote such evidence.

Yet the Azure-winged Magpie could have been introduced to Iberia in
the sixteenth century. It was an era during which the Turkey Meleagris
gallopavo , 1525-1530, and the Muscovy Duck Cairina moschata, about
1540, had been introduced from Central and South America respectively
(■ Gallus gallus, destined to become the domestic chicken, had been introduced
much earlier); and the outstandingly beautiful parrot Amazona leucocephala
had been brought to Europe, “probably by Columbus into Barcelona, mid-
April 1493” (Stresemann, 1975, an English translation from the original
1951 German edition).

The Portuguese made their first appearance at Canton in 1516 (Davis,
1857) and by 1557 Lisbon had a trading station on Macao (Moore et al.
1981). The Azure-winged Magpie is a bird that would have been suited to
introduction to Iberia from China, and this could have been done even in the
sixteenth century, despite the long distance involved and the length of time
such a voyage would have taken. However, the bird’s current behaviour
and distribution in Iberia do not support this. There is an hypothesis that it
may have merely been a recitation of Henry Seebohm’s nineteenth century
assertion that, because of the disjunction in its range, it was “simplest to
assume the Azure-winged Magpie had been introduced into south Iberia”.

Paleontology

Fossilised bones believed to be of this species, found in a cave in Gibraltar
(The currant range map does not show the Azure-winged Magpie as occurring
there now, nor even in the province of Cadiz, of which Gibraltar is
geographically part of) and dated at least 44,000 years old cast doubt on the
hypothesis that this bird was introduced to Iberia (Cooper, 1999, 2000).
She also suggested that even then there was something symbiotic about the
Azure-winged Magpie’s association with man in Iberia; and doubtless then
also in China, from what I know so far (but hope to learn more) of its lore
from Chinese acquaintances. These findings and analyses are consistent
and supportive with those from the bird’s natural history.

Microbiology

According to Koon et al. (2003): “from the first molecular analysis of
the Azure-winged Magpie, screening individuals (using museum specimens
that were over 100 years old) and incorporating representatives of all currently
recognised sub-species: the Iberian population is genetically distinct from
all Asian forms at a basal position in the phylogenetic tree, indicating that
the west European enclave (i.e. Iberian form) is indigenous there.” Again,

12

HILL - AZURE- WINGED MAGPIE

these analyses are consistent with and supportive of those from the bird’s
natural history.

Nomenclature

Their recent paper (Koon et al. 2002) and an article in World Birdwatch
(Vol.24, No.4) went on to recommend that the two populations could be
treated as separate species, with the Asian population remaining as C. cyana
(sic) and the European population becoming C. cooki , with the suggested
English name of Iberian Magpie.

Unless it can be shown that the Iberian and Far Eastern forms are
significantly different in their vocalizations, behaviour and ecology, I would
not go along with these recommendations. That would mean to alternate
from one extreme - the Azure-winged Magpie in Iberia being regarded as
having been merely shipped-in within historical times and thereby liable to
having an extermination campaign whipped-up against it - to being given
full specific status. I would suggest that until more comparative data is
assembled, that the present use of trinomials remains appropriate, though I
would prefer it if the trinomial indicated the range of the subspecies. At
least two of its vernacular names, Azure-winged Magpie and Blauelster ,
reflect its appearance as does its scientific name. Any change would be
confusing and even silly and, in my view, unnecessary.

Past climates and past distribution

I envisage a scenario emerging from this work and earlier conjecture
(Goodwin, 1986), whereby following the Pleistocene glaciations the Magpie
recovered its range much more readily than the Azure-winged Magpie.
Because the former is and presumably always was a corvid that inhabited
the sort of country which would emerge after such glaciation, viz. extensive
open tracts of land, with the merest scattering of trees and bushes sufficing
for roosting and in which to lodge its domed nests, different from the open
nests of the colonial nesting Azure-winged Magpie which, according to
Voous (1960), ranges as far north as the 50° July isotherm. However, in the
latitudinal belt which contains the present range of the Azure- winged Magpie
there was then the warm-hot, humid spring and summer it seems to need.
Since then the humidity, though not the heat, has declined to account for the
disjunction.

Summary

We can now say with a high degree of confidence that the Azure-winged
Magpie was not introduced to Iberia from China by man. There is though a
further outstanding problem, viz. to show that in prehistoric times
intermediate longitudinal zones in the latitudinal belt suitable for the Azure¬
winged Magpie became too dry in spring and summer, hence this is why

HILL - AZURE- WINGED MAGPIE

13

there is now such a vast disjunction in the world distribution of the Azure¬
winged Magpie. Its solution will require the combined efforts of paleo-
climatologists zoogeographers, ornithologists and aviculturists.

References

Cooper, J. H. and Voous, K. H. 1999. British Birds 92:659-665.

Davis, Sir J. F. 1857. China - A general description of that empire and its inhabitants. Two

vols. John Murray, London.

Goodwin, D. 1986. Crows of the World. British Museum (Natural History), London.

Koon, W. F., Wade, C.M., Parkin, D. 2002. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London,
Series B, 269:1671-1679.

Koon, W. F., Wade, C. M., Parkin, D. 2003. Inferring the phylogeny of disjunct populations
of the Azure-winged Magpie from a mitochondrial DNA sequence. Poster presentation at the
23rd International Ornithological Congress, August 2002, Beijing, China.

McLachlan, G.R. and Liversidge, R. 1987. Roberts Birds of South Africa. The Trustees of the
John Voelcker Bird Book Fund, Cape Town, South Afica.

Moore, R. I. (general ed.). 1981. The Hamlyn Historical Atlas. Hamlyn, London.
Stresemann, E. 1975. Ornithology - from Aristotle to the Present. Harvard University Press,
USA.

Voous, K. H. 1960. Atlas of European Birds. Nelson, London.

Brian A. G. Hill is an English ornithologist and aviculturist who now
lives in Greece.

14

BREEDING THE YELLOW-BELLIED SEEDEATER
Sporophila nigricollis

by Robin Restall

The Yellow-bellied Seedeater Sporophila nigricollis is a small finch that
is widespread throughout most of Central America, the Lesser Antilles of
the West Indies, and South America east of the Andes and south to
northernmost Argentina. The male is unmistakable, it has the entire head
black, the upperparts are olive-green and it is pale yellow below. It is a
cheerful songster, but does not have a sufficiently powerful voice to make it
attractive to the bird trappers, and so is seldom kept in cages in South America.
Also, being common and comparatively easy to catch, it is of low commercial
value, which also demeans it in the eyes of the trappers. The female is an
attractive, greenish-olive above and a pale, buffy-yellowish below and has
a horn-coloured bill.

It is normally a resident, particularly in riparian and marshy areas that
are wet all year round. It is very responsive to periods of extended drought,
when the grasses drop their seeds and die. When this happens it will wander
and follow trails and clearings through woodland up to the subtropical zone.
I have found it on grassy trails along the Cordillera del Norte of Venezuela
at a higher altitude than any other Sporophila spp. It has been recorded up
to 2,300m (approx. 7,500ft). I have usually found it in smallholdings and
truck gardens, and it may often be found in areas that were once cultivated
but which have become overgrown with grasses, especially the tall Guinea
Grass Panicum maximus.

Yellow-bellied Seedeaters are usually encountered in pairs or small
groups. The presence of a single adult male with several females in these
groups suggests they are family parties, but I have often seen such groups at
the beginning of the breeding season. Also, most successful nestings seem
to produce a single fledgling, occasionally two, and a group of six or more
birds would obviously be more than a single family. As it may take immature
males more than a year to moult into adult plumage, it is likely that these
groups are composed of several pairs and some juveniles foraging together,
with some males still in cryptic, intermediate plumage.

During a heavy downpour one August in Caracas I watched an irruption
of flying ants. A considerable number of our garden birds, mostly Tropical
Kingbirds Tyr annus melancholicus, Blue-grey Tanagers Thraupis episcopus
and Black-faced Grassquits Haris bicolor , were hawking the insects with
equal skill. What impressed me at the time was the unexpected appearance
of at least a dozen (12) or more Yellow-bellied Seedeaters; at one time I
thought there were 20 of them. They too were hawking the alates. While I

RESTALL - YELLOW-BELLIED SEEDEATER

15

often see the odd individual passing through my garden, I had never seen a
group as large as this. How did they know there was a irruption of flying
ants there? I once saw a male in my Caracas garden hawk a small moth
from the air.

They normally feed by clinging to stems and taking the seeds of grasses
and sedges, buds and leaves. My observations show their preferred food is
the half-ripe seeds of Guinea Grass. They will work their way along paths
through gallery forest, feeding from clump to clump. I was watching them
amongst low-growing weeds on a mountain path in the Henri Pittier National
Park, when some individuals dropped to the ground and hopped about,
apparently picking up something, but I was unable to identify what it was.

The contact call is a sharp slightly querulous chirp, and also a sweet,
slightly rising note. The song is a short but sweet outburst of twittering
rolling notes that for me are rather reminiscent of those of a small, wild
European Serin Serinus serinus. It lasts about one and a quarter seconds
(which may seem astonishingly short to those accustomed to the
comparatively languid song of larger birds, but is pretty typical for this type
of bird). The male in my aviary will fly up to its favourite song perch, raise
its head to an angle of about 45° and immediately utter a burst of song. It
will look around and then utter longer versions, though never of more than
two seconds, often with the wings held slightly away from the body and
occasionally with a slight quiver. During these longer performances the
head is not raised but held at a normal angle. I once saw a full display. The
pair was very excited about a nest site, and it seems that this was part of the
site acceptance process. Both birds travelled at an angle up into the bush,
then out again, returning by the same route. The male was perched for
much of the time in a position where the female passed before and below
him. He spread his wings wide and held them drooped or hooded, and his
tail was raised slightly and spread. He sang the whole while at the female as
she quickly passed up into the crown of the bush, whereupon he followed
her. I was unable to see if copulation followed. This happened twice in
quick succession, and while moving, the female also had her wings slightly
open and fluttering, and her tail slightly cocked and slightly fanned.

In the wild, breeding begins about six weeks after the start of the rainy
season, by which time the grasses have grown to a good height and have
begun seeding. Here in northern Venezuela the rains usually begin in April,
though it is not uncommon for them to begin earlier. From the size of the
gonads of 27 adult males and 16 adult females noted on the labels of these
specimens from Venezuela in the Phelps Ornithological Collection, birds
are in breeding condition from May-October, with an apparent peak in June-
- August. One male in juvenile plumage, collected in June, had fully enlarged
gonads.

16

RESTALL - YELLOW-BELLIED SEEDEATER

In my experience, based on observations of several breedings in my
aviary, it is apparently the female that selects the nest site, although there is
no way of knowing whether the male had previously prospected it and
indicated its desirability to the female. The site may be from about lm (3ft
3 in) to as high as 3m (9ft 9in) above the ground, and it is the female that
starts to build the nest. The male will bring material and attempt to join in
the building within an hour or so. Subsequently, both sexes gather and
carry material to the site and both sexes participate in the construction of the
nest. The finished nest is a deep cup made of grasses, reportedly lined with
soft inflorescences and plant down but in the case of my birds, it was unlined.
The nest looks quite flimsy, as do most Sporophila nests, but is surprisingly
tough and durable. Nests in my aviary have withstood strong winds and
very heavy rain, time and time again - often when there were eggs or nestlings
inside. It is usually built in a small fork of twigs beneath a few leaves, but
may be at the base of a palm leaf. In a detailed observation of a breeding in
Panama (Alderton, 1961), the first few days, possibly even up to the first
eight days of nest building, were spent binding gossamer threads of spiders’
webs to the foundation of the nest before the first strands of fibre were put
in place. This is undoubtably why, despite looking frail, the nest is so well
anchored and tough. It was found by ffrench that the nest takes five to 12
days to build. In my aviary the nests have been built entirely of coconut
fibre and have been bound by tying and rough knotting to the stems of a
Ficus or a small bamboo. The four nests I have measured were 5cm (2in)
across the cup and the inside of the cup was 5cm (2in) deep. They were
invariably finished within a few days and the eggs were laid soon afterwards.

My aviary is attached to the house and goes right up to the roof. The
floor of the aviary is 3.5m x 3.5m (approx. 1 1ft 6in x 1 1ft 6in) and has in the
centre a shallow pond 1 .5m x lm (approx. 5ft x 3ft 3in). In the middle of
the pond is a large tub containing a tall F. benjamina that reaches the roof.
Half of the roof of the aviary is protected by the overhanging eaves of the
house and plate glass over the mesh. The other half is open to the elements.
The floor has heavy duty tiles and around the inside of the mesh sides is a
row of Phyllostachys aurea bamboo and F. benjamina in tubs. These form
a hedge that gives the birds some protection from wind and rain, and provide
suitable sites for nesting.

The female of my pair first chose a plastic mesh canary nest cup that
was attached to the wire, high up under the eaves of the house. She brooded
the clutch, which I was unable to examine, for an incredible six weeks before
abandoning it; the eggs being obviously infertile. During this time the male
would perch nearby and chase away any bird that came near. He would sing
frequently. Having deserted this nest, the female started prospecting for a
new site and chose one in the top of the Ficus , only lm (3 ft 3 in) from where

RESTALL - YELLOW-BELLIED SEEDEATER

17

I sit and work at my computer, looking into the aviary. The female selected
the site, and attempted to tie strands of grass to the stems. Having attempted
this, she would then sit and wiggle as if she was moulding the nest cup, but
the strands would fall away. The male came to this site with a strand or two,
but did not attempt to build. This activity lasted a few days. The base of the
nest was never formed.

The next day, May 12th, I saw the male flying into the Ficus much lower
down. On examination, I found a nest partly built. The complete cup was
constructed within three days and the female started sitting, so she must
have laid almost immediately. Spiders’ webs were not used to bind the
threads. The nest was barely 5 cm (2 in) across and definitely 5 cm (2 in)
deep. It looked really fragile. It was right up under the uppermost leaves of
the F. benjamina, about 1 .5m ((approx 5ft) above the ground. When sitting
in it the female could not be seen.

The clutch usually consists of two, or occasionally three eggs. These
are oval and the ground colour is off-white to buffy (pers. obs. in Venezuela,
including in the case of this breeding), greenish-white (Alderton loc. cit.) or
pale blue-green (ffrench loc. sit.). They are richly marked with a variety of
spots, small blobs and whorls of dark browns that tend to form a halo or cap
at the wider end.

Only the female broods the eggs and nestlings, but both sexes feed the
young. They are fed by regurgitation, but after a few days some food may
be carried in the bill and fed directly. The diet consists of a mixture of small
insects and soft seeds, normally the half-ripe seeds of Guinea Grass. The
nestlings normally fledge at between eight and 10 days. In this case, two
eggs hatched apparently on the ninth day, and the third simply disappeared.
The nestlings were always silent, and even begged silently (in direct contrast
to the noisy estrildid nestlings elsewhere). On two occasions I managed to
photograph the two nestlings and on the seventh or eighth day, as I
approached, a nestling rocketed out of the nest. I caught it, photographed it
and tried to return it to the nest. I failed in this, of course! I never found the
second chick. Both parents could be seen combing the leaves, particularly
the undersides, and all along the metal frame of the aviary, looking for minute
insects. I provided them with baby mealworms, but these were ignored.
The nest was kept immaculately clean, and I never saw any faeces in or
around the edge of it. Again in contrast with estrildid nests.

There were terrible downpours of rain during the day and night, and
how the nest and its contents survived I cannot imagine. I watched the
fledgling as it withstood a downpour a few days after it had fledged. It
faced upwards into the rain, tightly hunched, and slowly edged up the inclined
perch until an overhead leaf gave it some small respite from the drenching.
I believe that as a result of these horrendous rainfalls the previous year, I

18

RESTALL - YELLOW-BELLIED SEEDEATER

Young Yellow-bellied Seedeater seven or eight days after it left the nest possibly

prematurely.

This photo taken 31 days after it left the nest shows the colouring of its underparts.

RESTALL - YELLOW-BELLIED SEEDEATER

19

Another view of the same young bird which shows better the coloration of its

upperparts.

Chick in nest beneath the uppermost leaves of a Ficus benjamina.

20

RESTALL - YELLOW-BELLIED SEEDEATER

had lost fledglings from two subsequent broods of Black- faced Grassquits,
and was prepared to lose this little mite, but it survived. I managed to track
the bird every few days, and found it sitting quietly high in the Ficus , only
a few inches (centimetres) below the roof of the aviary. It called frequently,
but its penetrating “seep” was not at all easy to pinpoint. Yet again, in
contrast to estrildid fledglings, whose chorus of chattering makes them really
easy to find.

In Trinidad, after the nestlings fledged, ffrench (loc. sit.) cut the nest out
of the shrub in which it had been built. The birds returned and started to
build a new nest in the same location eight days later. I intended to collect
the nest in my aviary, but two days after the nestling fledged, the nest had
completely disappeared. Not a single fibre remained; the nest had obviously
been cannibalized by other birds in the aviary for use in building their nests.
Following the above breeding, the Yellow-bellied Seedeaters bred twice
more, and on both occasions behaved almost identically from start to finish.
In every case the nest was dismantled and presumably the materials were
used elsewhere either by the same pair of Yellow-bellied Seedeaters, or other
nest builders, or both.

The juvenile is very similar to the female except that it is slightly duller
and not so yellowish below. By way of a footnote, in mid-September I
caught the youngster from the first nest and banded it (ringed it) yellow-
yellow, to distinguish it from the female which is banded pink on the right
leg. The youngster was fat and healthy and quite vocal whilst I was holding
it in my hand. Its belly was by then a rich creamy yellow, like that of the
female, and was both brighter and richer in colour than that of any of the
specimens in the Phelps Collection here in Caracas. There was no sign of
any black feathering on the head, so it could well prove to be a female.
However, it is not known how long it takes for a male to attain adult plumage,
so assuming that one of the young birds is a male, I should be able to discover
the answer.

References

Alderton, C. C. 1961. The Breeding Cycle of the Yellow-bellied Seedeater in Panama. Condor
63:390-398.

ffrench, R. 1965. The Nesting Behaviour of the Yellow-bellied Seedeater. Caribbean Journal
of Science 5:149-156.

Robin Restall, Caracas, Venezuela. E-mail: restall@cantv.net

21

BREEDING THE RED-AND-YELLOW BARBET

Trachyphonus e. ery throe ephalus

by Colin Scott

My pair of Red-and- Yellow Barbets arrived from North Cornwall Aviaries
in early March 2003, a surprise 40th birthday present from my partner
Pauline. The two birds were in good condition and after being kept in
isolation for a couple of weeks in an unheated spare room were transferred
to my bird room. There the two barbets remained until early summer when
they were moved into an outdoor flight about 6ft 6in x 6ft 6in x 6ft 6in (2m
x 2m x 2m). That year they showed no sign of breeding, although they were
compatible and would often duet. After spending the winter back in the bird
room they were moved to a new block of aviaries. Each of these measure
12ft long x 4ft wide x 6ft 6in high (approx. 3.6m long x 1.2m wide x 2m
high), with access to an indoor area 4ft x 3ft x 3ft (approx. 1 .2m x lm x lm).
A small parakeet nest-box and feeding facilities were provided in the shelter.

Table 1 . Food provided.

Fed daily

Fed frequently

Fed rarely

livefood

apple

pear

tomato

soaked sultanas
thawed (frozen) peas
thawed (frozen) sweetcom
grapes

kiwi fruit

peach (tinned and fresh)
mango

fig

apricot
cooked carrot
cooked swede

banana

orange

pomegranate

All the fruit was finely chopped. Banana and orange were eaten only
after everything else had gone. Livefood consisted of mealworms, crickets
(brown, black and banded) and waxworms. Spiders were also given and
were hunted with relish. Also given daily were soaked Witte Molen low
iron mynah pellets and Beaphar Universal food. A variety of food is always
provided and I am surprised how little these birds eat. I feel that the Red-
and- Yellow Barbet is generally an insectivorous species, whereas many other
African barbets, such as the Bearded Lybius dubius, are mainly fmgivorous
but will take a few insects.

The inside of the nest-box measures 6in x 6in x 1 Oin high (approx. 1 50mm
x 150mm x 250mm high). There is a door in the back through which
inspections can be carried out without the need to enter the aviary. The box
quickly attains a very strong musty smell almost as soon as the eggs are

22

SCOTT - RED-AND-YELLOW BARBET

Twenty-two day old young female, showing large black throat patch.

SCOTT - RED-AND-YELLOW BARBET

23

Twenty-eight day old young male (left), with black crown, and female (right), with
black speckled red crown.

Adult male (left), young female (centre) and adult female (right).

24

SCOTT - RED- AND- YELLOW BARBET

laid. I have never noticed this smell on the birds themselves.

The first two eggs were discovered on June 1 st 2004. No attempt at nest
building had been made, other than a scrape in the shavings that had been
provided. Both eggs were thrown out on June 5th. Just seven days later on
June 12th, an inspection revealed four eggs. These felt cool to touch and
two days later as they continued to feel cool and no incubation appeared to
be taking place, two were removed and placed in an incubator. The next
day, June 1 5th, the remaining two were removed. Three of the eggs were
fertile and one of the second two to be removed pipped on the morning of
June 25th, and hatched that evening after an incubation period of just 10
days. I gave the chick its first feed at 5.00am the next morning and then fed
it every IV2 hours. The food consisted of the insides of waxworms. All
went well until 3.00pm the next day when the chick died after knocking the
scab off its naval and bleeding badly.

Meanwhile the parents were still busy and on June 24th laid the first of
another four eggs. These are laid daily and incubation starts following the
laying of the first egg, as a result of which all four chicks hatch on different
days. The first chick hatched on July 8th and the other three hatched over
the following days, thus giving an incubation period of 12 days. Subsequent
clutches also hatched after an incubation period of 12 days. Although the
softbill food and fruit continued to be provided fresh once a day, for the first
10 days the parents were almost totally insectivorous and were fed up to
eight times a day with livefood. Each feed consisted of 10-15 waxworms,
30-35 small crickets and a few soft white-skinned mealworms. After a few
days my mealworms started to pupate and so a lot of soft pupae were fed to
the parents. These had the added bonus of not escaping from the flight. The
livefood was first cooled in the fridge or freezer before being thrown into
the outdoor flight where the parents would quickly hunt it down. After
about 10 days the parents started feeding softfood to the chicks. At 12 days
old the chicks were covered in pin-feathers and could be sexed. The pin¬
feathers on the forehead and crown of the two males showed black and
those of the two females showed mainly red and less black.

The first chick fledged on August 3rd, with the other three following the
next day. They were duller editions of their parents except that both sexes
had a large black throat patch much larger than that of the adult male. The
young and parents returned to the nest-box each evening to roost. The Red-
and- Yellow Barbets are usually the first birds in my collection to roost each
evening and are also the first up each morning. They have quite loud voices,
which were particularly evident when both the adults and young joined in
the chorus of what sounded not unlike “red and yellow, red and yellow, red
and yellow...”. On August 7th, three days after fledging, the young were
heard joining in the adults’ duet. Interestingly the parents had gone very

SCOTT - RED- AND- YELLOW BARBET

25

quiet for a few weeks before the eggs were laid, leading me to believe that
they had gone out of breeding condition. This behaviour was also noted by
M. D. England (1973), who that year was first to breed this species in the
UK.

On August 9th the parents were seen mating, and on the 1 1th they had
one egg. Again four eggs were laid but one was removed at 1 1 days as it
was clear and had a crack in the shell; another egg disappeared. On the
morning of August 26th it was noted that the male was becoming a little
aggressive towards the young females and was reluctant to allow the young
into the shelter. As bad weather was forecast for that night the decision was
taken to remove the young. It was noted at that time that the females’ black
throat patches were beginning to change to red and in another week the
black had gone completely; the males retained a small black throat patch.
On August 28th the remaining two eggs were thrown out of the box. On
September 2nd there was a fresh egg in the box and subsequently three
more were laid, making up the usual clutch of four. Three of these hatched
and the chicks, two males and a female, were reared. These fledged on
September 14th, 1 5th and 1 6th and just five days later the female had started
another clutch of four eggs. These proved to be infertile however, and the
female showed no further signs of breeding.

Brief diary of events during 2004 breeding season.

June 1st
June 5th
June 12th
June 15th
June 24th
July 8th
August 3rd
August 4th
August 1 1th
August 28th
September 2nd
September 18th
September 19th
October 14th
October 21st

Two eggs.

Eggs thrown out.

Four more eggs.

Eggs removed to incubator.

One egg (three more over next three days).

First chick hatched (three more over next three days).

First chick fledged at 26 days old.

Remaining three chicks fledged.

One egg (three more over next three days).

Last two eggs thrown out.

One egg (three more over next three days).

Two chicks hatched.

Third chick hatched.

First chick fledged (remaining two fledged over next two days).
First of four eggs laid; all proved to be infertile.

Over the course of the breeding season 22 eggs were laid, seven of which
hatched and all seven chicks were reared by the parents. The chick hatched
in an incubator failed to survive.

Reference

England, M. D. 1973. Breeding the Red and Yellow Barbet (Trachyphonus erythrocephalus).
Avicultural Magazine 79,6:194 -196.

26

THE BLUE-SPOTTED WOOD DOVE Turtur afer
IN FIELD AND AVIARY

by Neville Brickell

The Blue-spotted Wood Dove may also be known as the Red-billed Blue-
spotted Wood Dove, Blue-spotted Dove, Red-billed Wood Dove, Metallic-
spotted Wood Dove or Sapphire-spotted Dove.

Introduction

Butler (1910) thought “it was in 1903” that he had purchased what
purported to be a pair of Emerald Doves (= Emerald-spotted Wood Doves
I chalcospilos), the male being the present species and the reputed female,
which proved to be also a male, being T. chalcospilos. The latter species
was first bred in the UK at London Zoo in 1 886. Butler wrote: “The London
Zoological Society purchased two pairs and received a third pair on deposit
in 1866; in 1886 and again in 1887 a specimen was bred in the Gardens...”.

According to Rutgers & Norris (1970) the Blue-spotted Wood Dove
reached captivity in 1845, in which year several pairs were imported by
Amsterdam Zoological Gardens. They stated it was bred in the Jardin
d’ Acclimatation in Paris as early as 1 872, and in London in 1 886, in addition
to which Mr Blaauw had considerable success with it in Holland during
1907-1908. Here in South Africa there are records of it having been bred by
Pieter Viljoen and Chris Luther. It is now available locally at R750 (approx.
£62.50 or US$115) a pair. Interestingly, in Dave Coles’ Breeding Records
(1986 & 2001) there is no record of the Blue-spotted Wood Dove having
been bred in the UK. Presumably he could not substantiate the above
breeding and took the view that the species bred in London in 1886, was in
fact the Emerald-spotted species, bred at London Zoo that year.

Voice

Described by Rowan (1983) as “A series of soft coos in a mournful
cadence”. “A few soft, well-spaced introductory coos leading into six to
eight faster, even notes...” (Zimmerman et al. 1996) .

Description

This species measures up to about 22cm (approx. 8V2in) in length. The
sexes are alike. The upperparts are brown with metallic blue spots on some
of the inner secondaries and wing coverts, and there are blackish bands
across the lower back and rump, which can be seen most clearly when the
bird flies. The forehead is pale grey, the breast is pinkish, fading to huffish,

BRICKELL - BLUE-SPOTTED WOOD DOVE

27

Neville Brickell

This bird has yet to acquire the distinctive yellowish tipped bill.

then buffish-white on the abdomen and vent; the under tail-coverts, except
for the outer ones, are black. The bill is red or purplish-red, with a yellowish
tip. The juvenile is browner than the adult, with buff barring on the
upperparts, smaller, duller spots on the wings and a dull brown bill.

Field characteristics

A fairly small, compact, brownish bird, with conspicuous transverse bands
across the lower back and rump, and an area of rufous on the wings, which
becomes evident when the bird flies. At close range its yellowish tipped,
red or purplish-red bill, quickly distinguish it from the Emerald-spotted and
Black-billed Wood Dove T. abysssinicus.

28

BRICKELL - BLUE-SPOTTED WOOD DOVE

Distribution and status

Senegambia eastwards across central Africa to Ethiopia, southwards in
the west through countries including Nigeria and Gabon to Angola, and in
the east southwards through countries including Kenya, Tanzania, Malawi
and Mozambique to the extreme north-east region of South Africa. It also
occurs on Zanzibar and Pemba Island. It is a fairly common resident and a
local migrant in the north of its range. T. a. mearnsi and T. a. kilimensis are
no longer considered to be valid forms (Gibbs et al. 2001).

Habitat and general habits

Evergreen riparian fringing forest, secondary bush, mangroves,
Eucalyptus plantations, cultivation, often around villages and in gardens.
Usually singly or in pairs, only in small groups in good feeding areas, not in
flocks (Gibbs et al. 200 1 ). Generally inhabits moister habitats than the closely
related Emerald-spotted and Black-billed Wood Doves, which favour drier
habitats.

Feeding

Its staple diet in the wild consists of seeds of grasses, those of Castor Oil
Ricinus and various herbs. It has also been observed feeding on ground that
was no longer being cultivated but on which Cassava Manihot continued to
grow. In addition it is known to consume small snails and alate termites
(Rowan, 1983; Gibbs et al. 2001). In captivity it can be maintained on
commercial seed mixtures (millets and mannas) for foreign finches and
commercial mixtures (red sorghum, brown rice, tares, popcorn and lentils)
for medium-sized species of dove. These can be supplemented with ripe
and milky stage inflorescences of indigenous grasses (Konigkramer pers.
comm.). South African Aviculturisf s Diet Record Cards (ARU, ADRC)
record Teff Grass Eragrostis teff and Giant Millet Sorghum dochna , and
Chickweed Stellaria media as greenfood. Suitable livefood includes mound
and alate termites. It should also be offered crushed limestone and/or
cuttlefish bone and crushed egg shell.

Breeding

It has been recorded breeding in every month of the year (Gibbs et al.
2001). The nest is placed lm-3m (approx. 3ft 3in-9ft 9in) above the ground
on a horizontal fork of a large tree such as the Mango Mangifera indica, an
introduced exotic from India, a leafy tree stump or a sturdy bush on the edge
of a forest. Pairs may sometimes make use of a discarded nest of another
species as the foundation. There are at least two reports of pairs having
utilised discarded thrushes’ nests.

The nest is loosely constructed from available twigs and plant stems and
may eventually vary from 8cm-20cm (approx.3V4in-73/4in) in diameter. In
captivity some pairs will accept artificial nest sites while others prefer to

BRICKELL - BLUE-SPOTTED WOOD DOVE

29

construct their own nests in plant life provided in the aviary. Non-aviary
bred pairs in particular often find it difficult to accept nesting receptacles
such as shallow wooden trays, with raised sides about 6cm (approx. 2V4in)
high to prevent nestlings falling out, attached to a wall of the aviary shelter.
In captivity, nesting materials, to name just a few, have included pine needles,
dried Teff Grass, moss and lucerne stalks.

A clutch of two pure white or creamy white smooth-shelled eggs
measuring about 23mm x 1 8mm are laid and are incubated for it has variously
been reported 13 or 15-17 days (in captivity 16-17 days). Both parents
share the feeding duties and the nestlings have variously been reported as
fledging at 13-14 days or 15-18 days (in captivity 16-18 days or 13-15 days
due to disturbances by other species). Early departures from the nest are
often fatal if young are left without protection during thunderstorms in the
summer months. Fortunately most such nestlings are removed from the
ground by their owners and returned to the nest before nightfall.

Hybrids

Hybrids between this species and the Emerald-spotted Wood Dove are
fertile (Thomson pers. comm.), whereas hybrids between this species and
the Tambourine Dove T. tympanistria are infertile according to Grey ( 1 958).

Parasites

Zumpt (in Rowan, 1983) listed six ectoparasites which have been found
on this species, namely Megninia columbae , Falculifer cameronensis ,
Plerophagus monatrichus , P. similis , Nitzschiella turturis and Pseudolynchia
canariensis.

References

Brickell, N. and Konigkramer, T. (eds.). 1997. African Birds in Field and Aviary. African Bird
Book Publishing, South Africa.

Butler, A. G. 1910. Foreign Birds for Cage and Aviary. Part 2. The Feathered World, UK.
Coles, D. 1986. First Breeding Records for Birds Reared to Independence under Controlled
Conditions in the United Kingdom. Published by Dave Coles.

Coles, D. 2001 . Additions and Corrections to UK First Breeding Records. Avicultural Magazine

107,3:125-135.

Gibbs, D., Barnes, E. and Cox, J. 2001 . Pigeons and Doves - a guide to the pigeons and doves
of the world. Pica Press, UK.

Grey, A. 1958. Bird Hybrids. Commonwealth Agric. Bureau, Famham Royal, UK.

Rowan, M. K. 1983. The Doves, Parrots, Louries & Cuckoos of Southern Africa. David Philip
Publishers, Cape Town, South Africa.

Rutgers, A. and Norris K.A. (eds.). 1970. Encyclopaedia of Aviculture. Vol. 1. Blandford
Press Ltd., Poole, Dorset and London, UK.

Zimmerman, D. A., Turner, D. A. and Pearson, D. J. 1996. Helm Identification Guides Birds of
Kenya and Northern Tanzania. Christopher Helm, an imprint of A & C Black (Publishers)
Ltd., London.

Neville Brickell lives in Durban, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

30

THE WHITE-HEADED MOUSEBIRD Colius leucocephalus
AND ITS BREEDING IN CAPTIVITY

by Herbert Schifter

The mousebirds (Coliidae) are a family of birds with very peculiar habits
and behaviour, that are not closely related to any other birds and are restricted
to Africa south of the Sahara. In the past they were not very popular in
captivity and breeding successes were quite rare.

Courtesy of Dennis Pate

The longest lived of the 1990 specimens at Washington Park Zoo, Portland,

Oregon.

SCHIFTER - WHITE-HEADED MOUSEBIRD

31

The Speckled Mousebird Coitus striatus was bred in captivity for the
first time in Britain in 1912. H. B. Wilson was successful on that occasion
and G. H. Gumey was successful in 1914 (Hopkinson, 1926). The successful
breeding of the Red-faced Mousebird Urocolius indicus (formerly C. indicus )

32

SCHIFTER - WHITE-HEADED MOUSEBIRD

in 1962 and again the following year I have already described in the
Avicultural Magazine (Schifter, 1966). The breeding of other species has
been reported in the meantime and lately mousebirds have become more
popular (Davis, 2001).

The White-headed Mousebird C. leucocephalus is the least known of
the six species. It is restricted to eastern Africa from southern Somalia,
southwards through eastern Kenya to northern Tanzania. It was collected
for the first time by the German explorer Gustav Adolf Fischer (1 848-1 886).
He collected it on October 23rd 1 878 at Kinakomba on the lower Tana River,
Kenya, and it was named in 1879 by Anton Reichenow (1847-1941). The
single specimen taken by Fischer is still kept in the Zoological Museum,
Berlin, Germany. V. G. L. van Someren separated the birds from Northern
Guaso Nyiro as C. /. turneri because of their more whitish or greyish crest,
the somewhat darker barring on the neck and the smaller slightly reddish
breast band. This subspecies is found only to the south-east of Lake Turkana,
Kenya, from the Horr Valley and Marsabit south to Samburu and Shaba
Game Reserves, the Northern Uaso Nyiro River and Isiolo District.

We met White-headed Mousebirds for the first time on July 21st 1973
north of Isiolo, north-east of Mt Kenya, where they were feeding on the
yellow berries of a Solanum. On the same day and later on we observed a
large family group near Samburu Lodge in the Samburu Game Reserve.
The adult birds were accompanied by a smaller subadult with a greenish bill
and much shorter tail; it was still being fed by the adult birds. We never saw
them in the southern part of their range but did find birds of the nominate
form in September 1974 on the lower Tana River near the type locality
where a family group, together with Blue-naped Mousebirds U. macrourus
pulcher and Speckled Mousebirds C. s. mombassicus , had been feeding on
the fruits of Salvador a bushes. When disturbed the birds departed in different
directions showing that they had gathered in the same bush only for the
purpose of feeding and not mixing with the other species. Also in spite of
the fact that it is a bird of the drier areas it does not seem to move far from
water, unlike the free-moving Blue-naped species, and therefore is quite
restricted in its distribution. It is no longer found in some areas where it
was met with before and more recently has been observed several times in
the Amboseli Game Reserve, otherwise its distribution has not changed much
over the years.

The nest and eggs were found first by V. G. L. van Someren in August
1918 near the Taita Hills in south-eastern Kenya. Later on young birds
were collected, mostly between February- August. Otherwise, not much is
known about its breeding habits in the wild. Its behaviour is more similar to
that of the Speckled Mousebird though it is usually much shyer and less
inclined to approach human settlements than the Speckled Mousebird. In a

SCHIFTER - WHITE-HEADED MOUSEBIRD

33

paper published quite a long time ago (Schifter, 1976) I summarized all that
was known about it up until that time, and not much more has been learned
in the meantime.

The White-headed Mousebird was unknown in aviculture until the 1970s
when some were imported into the USA and possibly elsewhere. In 1990
some more were imported into the USA and Houston Zoo, Texas, acquired
four of them from Bellbird, Inc. in Laguna Hills, California, a business that
no longer exists. On May 5th 1990 one of the four was killed by a White-
headed Buffalo Weaver Dinemellia dinemelli housed in the same aviary.
Therefore the surviving three birds were moved to another aviary in a small
building off public view. This aviary measured approximately 1 .5m x 2.5m
x 3m (about 5ft x 8ft x 10ft) and was furnished with a variety of natural
perches. In March 1991 all three birds were observed spending time on top
of a nest-box where one egg was laid. Therefore a nest-basket was placed
on top of the nest-box and the egg was transferred to it. A few days later on
March 15th the female was seen in the nest-basket and did not leave even
when the keeper was cleaning the aviary. Two weeks later two chicks had
hatched and were already approximately three and five days old; on April
1 st a third chick hatched. On April 8th the first chick fledged and was seen
clinging above the nest. April 13th the other two chicks fledged, when the
third one to have hatched was only 13 days old. May 4th 1991 the whole
group was moved to an exhibit in the tropical house. There two of the
mousebirds died of acute bacterial septicaemia and after two more died on
May 1 8th, the remaining two birds were transferred to the animal hospital
for treatment. September 19th the surviving two birds were returned to the
tropical house, where one of them died on January 4th 1993 and the decision
was taken to euthanase the remaining bird due to suspected mycobacterial
disease. I am very grateful to William Todd of Houston Zoo for all the
details given above.

On January 9th 1990 Washington Park Zoo, Portland, Oregon, acquired
some White-headed Mousebirds, only one of which was still alive by 1995.
Later on, in 1998, Disney’s Animal Kingdom in Florida kept three pairs and
several chicks were hatched but unfortunately none of them were reared
successfully (Todd per. comm. 1998). Later Rochelle Plasse, Zoological
Manager at Disney’s Animal Kingdom informed Sherry Branch that White-
headed Mousebirds had been bred not only there but also at Sea World,
Orlando, Florida (Branch in litt. 1999). The last surviving specimen at
Oregon was sent to Sea World in December 1999 and lived there until
November 24th 2001, setting a longevity record in captivity of nearly 11
years for C. leucocephalus . The other specimens kept there and at Disney’s
Animal Kingdom had by then already died (Todd in litt. 2002).

In Europe Berlin Zoo received 10 specimens June 24th 1997 and this
species bred there the following year. The birds were very secretive when it

34

SCHIFTER - WHITE-HEADED MOUSEBIRD

came to nesting and nested in a nest-basket only 7cm (23/4in) in diameter.
Two young hatched in August 1998. One died August 25th just before it
was ready to leave the nest and the second fledged August 28th and was
reared successfully. A youngster hatched in September 1998 died October
25th the same year. In June 1999 the White-headed Mousebirds bred again
in a Yucca plant and two young fledged July 6th. At the time of leaving the
nest they were much smaller than the adults, as is usual with all species of
this family (Reinhard in litt. 1999). All this information was summarized
by me in a paper published the following year (Schifter, 2000). In the same
year two broods totalling five young were reared at Berlin Zoo (, Bongo 31:136
(200 1 )). In 200 1 the mousebirds bred twice and hatched four young (Bongo
32: 106 (2002)). Afterwards the White-headed Mousebirds were transferred
to another aviary, as they were being attacked by other inhabitants, this
disturbed their breeding activities and no more breeding successes were
reported. In 2003 four more White-headed Mousebirds were acquired by
Berlin Zoo (Bongo 34:160 (2004)).

At the same time as the birds were received by Berlin Zoo in 1997,
Jurong BirdPark, Singapore, also received 10 White-headed Mousebirds
but I have no further information about them. Davis (2001) recorded that a
very small number were imported into the USA in 2000 and 2001 but
provided no other information except that “the author and a couple of other
private aviculturists are now working with them to establish domestic
bloodlines”.

Postscript (September 13th 2004)

Very recently White-headed Mousebirds have again been imported into
Germany and specimens correctly identified as belonging to this species
have been acquired by Walter Fuchs a bird breeder living in Austria. So, it
is to be hoped that this species will be bred in Austria before too long.

Acknowledgments

For the information on the breeding of this species I have to thank William
‘Trey’ Todd, Assistant Curator, Birds, Houston Zoo, Inc. and Dr Rudolf
Reinhard, Berlin Zoo, and I have to thank Dennis Pate, General Curator,
Oregon Zoo, USA, for supplying the accompanying photographs of the long-
lived specimen taken at that zoo.

References

Davis, K.J. 2001. Mousebirds in Aviculture . Birdhouse Publications, Sacramento, California.
Hopkinson, E. 1926. Records of birds bred in Captivity. H.F. & G. Witherby, London.
Schifter, H. 1966. Breeding of Red-faced Mousebirds (Colius indicus). Avicultural Magazine
72,3:79-83.

SCHIFTER - WHITE-HEADED MOUSEBIRD

35

Schifter, H. 1976. Unterartgliederung und Verbreitung des Weisskopfmausvogels Colius
leucocephalus (Coliiformes, Aves). Ann. Naturhistor. Mus. Wien 80:291-314.

Schifter, H. 2000. Zucht des Weisskopfmausvogels ( Colius leucocephalus ) in den USA und
Europa. Zool.Garten N.F. 70:70-71.

Until his retirement Dr Schifter was Curator of Birds at the Museum of
Natural History, Vienna, Austria. In the late 1960s he had articles published
in the magazine about breeding the Red-faced, Blue-naped and Speckled
Mousebirds, of which he bred more than 100 young.

In February 2005, Avicultural Society member Phil Cleeton advertised
for sale a number of East African birds, including White-headed Mousebirds.
It appears to be the first time this species has been imported into the UK.
He imported 16, which originated from Tanzania, via Germany. He said
that the males have much bolder heads and he thinks this species is the most
attractive of all the mousebirds. Avicultural Society Vice President Raymond
Sawyer obtained six and hopes to add this species to his long list of UK first
breedings.

Raymond also obtained a number of the other East African birds including
Temmincks Courser Cursorius temmincki, Two-banded Courser Rhinoptilus
africanus, Long-toed Lapwing Vanellus crassirostris, Kittlitz’s Plover
Charadius pecuarius and Three-banded Plover C. tricollaris. - Ed.

* * *

AVICULTURAL MAGAZINE BACK ISSUES

The society has a large stock of back issues mostly from 1935 onwards
but there are also some earlier issues still available. They are priced £3.00
each (including p&p). Please check availability before placing an order.
Overseas members may be able to pay by credit card through a Paypal
invoice, but this service is not available in all countries. All enquiries should
be addressed to: P. Boulden, Hon. Secretary/Treasurer, Avicultural Society,
Arcadia, The Mounts, East Allington, Totnes, Devon TQ9 7QJ, UK or
E-mail: admin@avisoc.co.uk

36

THE VULTURE RECOVERY PROGRAMME

by Nick Lindsay

Since the late 1990s field biologists in India, Pakistan and Nepal have
been concerned about the decline in the numbers of three species of vulture,
the White-backed Gyps bengalensis , the Long-billed G. indicus and the
Slender-billed G. tenuirostris, which were becoming less numerous in all
areas. By early 2000, literally millions of vultures had died, but the cause
remained unknown. A coordinated effort involving scientists from the
Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS), Zoological Society of London
(ZSL), Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and The Peregrine
Fund was undertaken with the aim of identifying the cause of this catastrophic
mortality. The cause of the die-off was traced to diclofenac, a veterinary
drug to which vultures are highly sensitive. A non-steroidal anti¬
inflammatory drug, it is used widely in south Asian countries to treat domestic
cattle and buffalo for a variety of illnesses. During treatment, and for a
short period afterwards, the tissues of the treated animals contain diclofenac,
and if treated animals subsequently die during this time the carcasses can
be toxic to vultures and have fatal consequences.

We estimate that more than 98% of the population of each of the above
three species of vulture has died within the past 10 years at a rate of over
50% per annum. At this rate these species could be virtually extinct within
five years. Although research into vulture mortality continues, the
programme has moved forward with an aim in all three countries to establish
breeding centres into which wild-caught vultures can be placed and breeding
populations established. Vultures are known to do well in captivity and
there is great confidence that the affected south Asian species will thrive in
breeding centres, although the numbers required to ensure a viable population
for the future presents considerable resource and expertise challenges.

An international meeting was held in February 2004 in India to devise
an international recovery plan for the affected vulture species and to ensure
that all the range states work together to avoid possible extinctions. Since
then there has been considerable activity and signs are encouraging that
plans will be well advanced for the coming breeding season.

Although getting the vultures into captivity and, therefore, away from
the risk of contaminated carcasses is of the highest priority, finding a solution
to the continuing use of diclofenac is also urgent. The sooner that this drug
can be taken out of the system and replaced by one safe for vultures and
other wildlife the sooner we will be able to consider releasing birds back
into the wild. Diclofenac is a very effective and economical drug and is
therefore widely used. As yet no suitable alternative is known, but work on
this is ongoing.

LINDSAY - VULTURE RECOVERY PROGRAMME

37

Vultures play an extremely important role in the ecosystems of countries
that support a huge population of cattle. Dead animals are left in the open
for nature to take care of. Vultures strip the carcasses clean, removing
potentially hazardous material from the environment. It has been found
that when vultures do not carry out this important job there is a risk to public
health. Following the catastrophic decline of vultures the number of feral
dogs is increasing and, with this, there is an increased risk to humans of dog
attacks and diseases such as rabies. The cleaned bones are collected for use
in the production of fertiliser and this source of income has now been lost in
many areas.

Andrew Cunningham, Head of Wildlife Epidemiology at the Zoological
Society of London’s Institute of Zoology, has been leading the society’s
involvement with the vulture programme. With funds from the Darwin
Initiative, Andrew, with Dr Vibhu Prakash of the Bombay Natural History
Society and the RSPB, constructed the Vulture Care Centre at Pinjore in the
State of Haryana, north of Delhi. This centre, opened by Elliot Morley MP
in February 2003, currently holds 38 vultures of two species - the White-
backed and the Long-billed - many of which were brought in as sick birds
and survived following successful treatment. These birds will form the
nucleus of a population at the centre. Funds from ZSL, the RSBP and the
National Birds of Prey Trust (NBPT) will enable the centre to be expanded
with the construction of breeding aviaries, both to hold colonies of vultures
(up to eight pairs in each) and single pairs. This work is only possible with
the tremendous commitment of the Forestry Department in the State of
Haryana working closely with the BNHS. This centre will also be the model
for a further five or six centres in India, one in Nepal and possibly two in
Pakistan.

The challenge is now to find sufficient birds to establish the founder
population. Where vultures still occur they are very nervous of humans,
which may be related to the reduced numbers now present at any one site.
The capture of adult birds is going to prove difficult. The alternative is to
take fledglings from nests, which is not an easy task as nests are often high
above the ground in trees or on cliffs. There is also concern that chicks are
dying in the nest as young as four weeks of age, presumably after being fed
contaminated meat. This may force the collection of chicks at a younger
age, making the rearing of the chicks more complex.

The aim is for each centre to hold 25 pairs of each appropriate species.
In most cases this will mean a total of 50 pairs of two species depending on
the centre’s location in relation to the distribution of the three target species.
We are working on a 1 0 year programme, but with a more realistic target of
15 or even 20 years. With vultures maturing at five years of age we hope
the vultures in the breeding centres will increase and we are aiming to double
the captive population over the next 10 years.

38

LINDSAY - VULTURE RECOVERY PROGRAMME

Each vulture breeding centre will have its own dedicated team,
comprising a site manager, a veterinary officer and four or more staff who
will work with the birds on a daily basis. The team of field biologists will
increase the amount of time spent monitoring the remaining wild birds as it
is hoped that some remnant populations will continue to survive. It is also
important to monitor other species that may be vulnerable to the same
problem. Each centre will require a considerable amount of food and the
safest option may be to produce food for the vultures on site to ensure it is
safe and of sufficient quality. All the centres will use local staff and the
Pinjore Vulture Care Centre will be used as the training base for new staff
Not only does this provide an opportunity for ZSL staff to assist with the
training, but also to develop their expertise, both in the training and in the
management of vultures on this scale.

Andrew Cunningham has now received an Extension Grant from the
Darwin Initiative which will enable further expansion at Pinjore as well as
covering the costs for ongoing research and staffing costs for the next two
years. ZSL is committed to supporting the Vulture Recovery Programme
over at least the next two years during which time it will support the
development of new centres in India and Nepal, working with the Bombay
Natural History Society, the Department of National Parks and Wildlife
Conservation in Nepal and Bird Conservation Nepal. The RSPB, NBPT
and The Peregrine Fund are also committed to the programme in the long
term, but more partners and funds are required if we are to meet the required
scale of operation to ensure the survival of these species.

The above account is based closely on A Decade of Decline, The Vulture
Recovery Programme by Nick Lindsay, Head of International Zoo
Programmes, Zoological Society of London, published in Lifewatch (Autumn/
Winter 2004, pp. 10-11), the magazine for members and supporters of the
Zoological Society of London, and is reproduced here by kind permission of
ZSL

Nick Lindsay reports that the signs for 2005 are very encouraging and
they hope that good progress will be possible in India and Nepal, however,
there is a real need for further funds to support this work. If you would like
to make a donation to The Vulture Recovery Programme you can do so
through the Zoological Society of London. Please contact Nick Lindsay,
Whips nade Wild Animal Park, Dunstable, Bedfordshire LU6 2LF, UK or
e-mail: nick. lindsay@zsl. org.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN A CARRION CROW
AND A MAGPIE

39

by Robin Restall

The notes by my old friend Derek Goodwin (2004) on interactions
between Carrion Crows Corvus corone and Magpies Pica pica reminded
me of my own experiences with these two species when I lived in Spain
some 35 years ago. We lived in a house set within a walled garden in an old
artists’ colony on the northern outskirts of Madrid. I maintained an ever
changing collection of birds, mostly locally caught and acquired from the
Sunday morning bird market in the old part of town. The dealers there
knew me as a regular visitor each week and I suspect that occasionally they
would catch birds not normally saleable on the near certainty that I would
buy them. After I had painted and analysed them, most of the birds I bought
were subsequently released. One old couple in particular always had the
most interesting birds, often broods of nestlings, and it was thanks to them
that I hand-reared European Rollers Coracias garrulus , European Bee-eaters
Merops apiaster and other species aviculturally totally new to me. On one
of my sorties however, I returned home with a comparatively prosaic nestling
Magpie.

Like most crows, it was easy to rear and a delightful creature that
undoubtably thought it owned me. I would take it to the office each day in
order to feed it on schedule. It was transported in a shoe box which had a
small window cut out of it, that was large enough to allow it to poke its head
through and not only call to me to demand to be fed, but to observe me as I
went about my work. On one occasion I had to attend a business lunch and,
fearful that the heat of the sun on the trunk (boot) of the car would cook the
bird, I took the shoe box containing the bird into the restaurant and placed it
beneath my chair. Towards the end of the meal we were alerted by a shriek
of fear from a lady at a nearby table. There perched on the back of her chair
and noisily demanding to be fed was the Magpie. I leapt into action and,
moving as fast as I could, grabbed the bird and left the restaurant. Before
the poor thing knew what was happening, I had thrust it into the trunk of the
car and slammed the door closed. Upon my return to the restaurant I was
applauded and presented with a glass of brandy as a reward. Nobody had
realised it was my bird!

A few weeks before I had acquired the Magpie, a friend had come to my
house with a shoe box (the same one) and pleaded with me to save the life of
the poor bird in the box. It was a newly-fledged Carrion Crow that had been
saved from a couple of dogs that had been attacking It. The bird, which at
the time seemed unable to fly, had been cowering, with its beak open, between

40 RESTALL - RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CARRION CROW AND MAGPIE

the roots of a tree, as it faced the dogs. It walked around our garden and ran
to be fed whenever it saw me. We used to sleep with our bedroom window
open and the bird, which by then could fly, would fly up and roost on the
window sill, facing indoors so that it could watch me. Each morning I arose
at dawn and drove out of town to an area of marshland on which the grass
grew tall and lush. There I was able to collect a hundred or so fairly inert -
because of the cold - large grasshoppers. These were taken home and formed
the morning feed for the Nightingales Luscinia megarhynchos and Azure¬
winged Magpies Cyanopica cyanus I was keeping at the time. As soon as I
left the bedroom each morning to go downstairs, the crow would turn around
so as to watch me as I went to the car and drove off to collect the grasshoppers.
Upon my return, it would be waiting on the drive, and as soon as I climbed
out of the car, it would run towards me, begging pitifully, like a starved and
tragic orphan. I would give it a couple of fat grasshoppers, which it would
gobble down, and then the third would be taken, at a run, to the base of a
tree where it would be swiftly buried. The bird would then run back to me
and once more plead pitifully to be fed. It was a great game to see whether
I could get to the door of the house before the crow caught up with me
again.

I soon found myself with two free-flying, hand-reared corvids in the
garden. Both would wander away, but never went very far and never for
more than a few hours at a time. Mostly they preferred to be on the ground
in the garden. Each had a very distinctive personality. The Carrion Crow
always roosted on the window sill. The Magpie slept in one of the trees.
The morning grasshopper-begging routine with the Carrion Crow never
changed. The Magpie was never seen on these occasions. It was during the
day, especially at weekends when I was at home, that their interaction was
most noticeable. The Magpie was a prankster, always playing with things,
with people and with the crow. Playing with the crow was invariably a one¬
sided game for the crow never responded and was seemingly devoid of any
sense of humour.

The crow would walk around sedately and with dignity. It never tired of
begging and whatever it had scrounged would invariably be poorly hidden
at the base of one of the trees near the front door of the house. The Magpie
would follow the crow about, always keeping lm (approx. 3ft) or so behind
it. Then suddenly it would run at the crow and jump onto its back and, as
the crow turned to face it, would jump off and run and hide behind a tree.
The Magpie would peer out from behind the tree, first from one side and
then from the other, and when it was apparent that the crow was not looking,
the Magpie would run out and jump on its back again. If the crows attention
had been successfully diverted, that is to say, it had turned and walked back,
the Magpie would run to where the crow had hidden its latest cache and

RESTALL - RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CARRION CROW AND MAGPIE 4 1

steal it. However, this behaviour was not always, it seemed, aimed at stealing
the crow’s food, at other times it seemed to be simply a form of play. The
children would delight at the “catch me if you can” play of the two corvids.

In Spain there is an old saying, “ Cria cuarvos te sacan los ojos ”, which
loosely translated means, “Breed a crow and it will poke out your eyes”.
Obviously a neighbour believed this, for one morning the crow was not on
the bedroom window sill and when I opened the gate to drive out, I found it
had been laid out dead where I was sure to find it. Following this, I feared
for the safety of the Magpie, and some weeks later when we left for a holiday
in England, we took the Magpie with us and released it in Devon.

Until I read Derek’s notes, I had always regarded the behaviour of the
two corvids as having been friendly and playful. I now suspect that I was
being more anthopomorphic in my interpretation and can now see that the
Magpie might have been indulging in an intuitive attack behaviour that in
the wild would have been reinforced by learning. The Carrion Crow’s fairly
indifferent response, but a reaction nevertheless, could have been equally
genetic in origin but lacking any learned aspect that would have made it
more vicious.

Reference

Goodwin, D. 2004. Magpie rescuing its mate from a Carrion Crow and other crow versus
magpie encounters . Avicultural Magazine 110, 3:104-107.

* * *

BEALE PARK DAY

Dave Coles has written to say that four new aviaries have been opened
at Beale Park. One houses African birds, another houses Australasian birds,
a third houses birds from the Americas and the other houses birds from the
Himalayas. Species on view in these aviaries include the Superb Starling
Spreo superbus , Lemon Dove Aplopelia larvata. Black-headed Weaver
Ploceus cucullatus , Bali Starling Leucopsar rothschildi, Mountain Peacock
Pheasant Polyplectron inopinatum, Collared Hill Partridge Arborophila
gingica , Pheasant Pigeon Otidiphaps nobilis , Wonga Pigeon Leucosarcia
melanoleuca , Bare-faced Columbina cyanopis and Black-winged Ground
Dove Metriopelia melanoptera and Satyr Tragopan Tragopan satyr , plus
several common species.

On production of a current issue of the Avicultural Magazine , members
of the Avicultural Society will be admitted for the concessionary price of
£3, on Beale Park Day, Sunday July 3rd.

42

THE SOCIETY’S VISIT TO BUSBRIDGE LAKES

by Philip Schofield

Last year the Avicultural Society’s Spring Meeting was held at Busbridge
Lakes, near Godaiming, Surrey. Owned by Fleur Douetil, it is home to one
of the more all-embracing waterfowl collections, holding lots of unexpected
forms as well as all the usual ones. Most of the waterfowl are on three
lakes, which flow into each other, each within its own enclosure.

A number of the ‘difficult’ Long-tailed Duck were in evidence on the
elongated ‘canal’ lake by the house, together with a magnificent pair of
Common Scoter which replace a deceased pair of the even more unusual
Velvet Scoter that formerly thrived there. It is hoped that the Common
Scoter will eventually breed, something the Velvet Scoter never quite
managed. Long-tailed Ducks were also in evidence amongst the Eider and
other species. A number of Goosanders, bred there the previous year, were
still available to prospective purchasers. Current year-bred young birds on
view included Black Swans, Egyptian Geese and Australian Shelduck.
Black-necked Swans were incubating. In recent years, increasing numbers
of waterfowl bred at Busbridge Lakes have been parent-reared, and this has
now become the norm. Staff try to have one egg of each clutch in an
incubator. When this starts to chip, the parent duck is confined to her nest
until the brood has hatched. Mother and young are then removed to a rearing
pen, where they are joined by the incubator-hatched young one. With species
where the male assumes a parental role, he is placed in the rearing pen as
well. These outdoor pens have running water and are partly roofed, with a
heat lamp available under the covered end.

Among the more unusual waterfowl and few mutations on view were
blonde Lesser Brazilian Teal. Brazilian Teal always seem to be a ‘poor
relation’ to the more glamous Ringed Teal in collections, and are never kept
in anything like the same numbers. There have been times when the Lesser
Brazilian Teal has lost out numerically to the more robust Greater Brazilian
Teal, an aviculturally less desirable bird because it is more belligerent with
other species.

Among the Mallard-type ducks, two subspecies of the Yellowbill, the
Abyssinian as well as the more usual southern African form, were in evidence.
The distinctions between subspecies are subtle and can be confusing. The
Yellowbills I have are pure South African, as far as I can ascertain.

While it is not collection policy, in line with current UK legislation, to
have exotic species free-flying, local feral Mandarin Ducks were much in
evidence and a delight to see weaving in and out amongst the trees, as they
came in to land on the water. Apparently they cause problems by laying

SCHOFIELD - SOCIETY’S VISIT TO BUSBRIDGE LAKES

43

large clutches of eggs in the boxes intended for Goldeneye. Mallard, not
being such compulsive hole-nesters, do not create this particular difficulty.
A population of large Pike inhabiting the ‘wild’ lake pose a different problem
in waterfowl propagation. Any ducklings whose parents evade the rearing
pen system, and instead take them onto the open water, are liable to be
snapped up by these ever-hungry fish.

Dusky and Richardson’s Canada Geese were on view. The latter, small
and pale, has never been as numerous in collections as the more popular,
small and dark Cackling Canada Goose, and it was nice to see them given a
place in the collection. From a very shaky position a few years ago, numbers
of the medimum-sized Dusky seem to have been rebuilt, but it still deserves
to be more widely kept. The skies may be full of naturalised Atlantic Canada
Geese, but this is no reason not to have the other subspecies in our collections.
At Busbridge Lakes there is also a small group of Orinoco Geese. Numbers
of this charming little shelgoose in UK collections fluctuate wildly according
to breeding success (it is often prolific) and winter weather (it is not entirely
cold hardy).

A large aviary housed what I heard decribed as “a constellation of
Cockatiels”. Every conceivable colour variety was represented and the
impression was that the reason for them being there was to add variety to
the collection; something different to look at for those bored with ducks.
Groups of Archangel and Fantail Pigeons added further variety.

While not as comprehensive as the waterfowl collection, there is on
display a good series of pheasants in attractively planted aviaries. 1 noted
the following pheasants: Golden, Lady Amherst’s, Reeves’, Mikado, Silver,
Swinhoe’s, Nepal Kalji, Edwards’, Grey Peacock and Sonnerat’ s Junglefowl.
An apparently pure Red Junglefowl cock was running loose with some
bantams, as were Blue Peafowl. A few years ago, such a group of relatively
common aviary pheasants would have included Hume’s and Elliot’s. While
showing us round, Fleur Douetil commented on the current difficulty of
finding either species.

Pairs of Demoiselle and East African Crowned Cranes were loose in the
waterfowl enclosure nearest the house. The former had bred, and we saw
two young from the previous year, awaiting transfer to a new home.

Busbridge Lakes, which is U/2 miles from Godaiming off the B2130 on
the Hambledon Road, is open to the public on a limited number of days
each year. Details can be accessed on the well laid out website -
www.busbridgelakes.co.uk - which gives a good idea of two prominent non-
avicultural aspects that I have not mentioned above, the mature plantings of
often rare specimen trees and shrubs, which compliment follies, ornamental
bridges and an ice house cut deep into a hillside. Further information is also
available from Mrs Douetil, Busbridge Lakes Waterfowl & Gardens,
Hambledon Road, Godaiming, Surrey GU8 4AY. Tel/Fax:01483 421955.

44

BOOK REVIEW

BIRDS OF WESTERN AFRICA

Field Guide to the Birds of Western Africa by Nik Borrow and Ron Demey
is described by its publisher Christopher Helm as a new field guide which
uses the plates from the same publisher’s Birds of Western Africa. Several
of these have been reworked and improved according to the blurb on the
back cover, while 10 are said on p.6 to be entirely new and a significant
number have been amended. Birds of Western Africa , published in 2001, is
a 800 plus page hardback, while the present title, the subject of this review,
is a 512 page paperback which was published towards the end of last year.

Illustrated and briefly described are all species, some 1,304 including
some potential species, recorded from western Africa, as well as some that
have been claimed but whose occurrence still requires proof. There are six
new species for western Africa, the Great Blue Heron, Ring-necked Duck,
Sociable Lapwing, Greater Yellowlegs, Moussier’s Redstart and Yellow-
browed Warbler, not in the 2001 hardback, while the Nyanza Swift, Variable
Indigobird and Eurasian Rock Bunting are missing from the present title, as
they are no longer considered to occur there.

Western Africa, as defined for the purposes of this guide, comprises the
23 countries south of the Sahara, from Mauritania in the north-west, to Chad
and the Central African Republic in the east, and Congo-Brazzaville in the
south-east (but not the Democratic Republic of Congo, formerly Zaire), as
well as the Cape Verde and Gulf of Guinea islands. It is a huge chunk of
Africa, which of course also includes bird-rich countries such Senegal,
Ghana, Nigeria, Cameroon and Gabon.

The species accounts are often very brief and are confined to
identification, habitat and, unless the species is mainly silent or its voice is
unimportant for identification purposes, there is a description of its call and
song if it has one, at the end of which are the CD and track number on which
they can be heard on Chappuis’ 15 CD African Bird Sounds series.

Nowhere in the present volume does it seem to say whether Nik Borrow
or Ron Demey, or both, painted the plates. To discover that all 148 colour
plates were painted by Nik Borrow, I had to go to Mark Andrews’ review of
Birds of Western Africa in the Bulletin of the African Bird Club Vol. 1 0, No. 1 ,
pp.38-39, March 2003. The plates, each of which are on the page facing the
relevant text, are of a consistently high standard throughout.

I like the convenience of having the distribution map for each species on
the same page as the relevant text and the colour plate on the facing page.
However, such maps are often woefully small and to have done so in this
guide would have been impracticable. I have to concede that having them

BOOK REVIEW

45

grouped together on the following or previous page as they are, means the
maps are larger and therefore give a more accurate indication of the
distribution of each species.

Although intended primarily for birdwatchers visiting the region and
those resident there, Field Guide to the Birds of Western Africa will certainly
be useful to aviculturists wishing to reach for a handy guide for identifying
species from western Africa, many of which at present continue to be
available to aviculturists. I would loved to have had this guide back in 1959
and 1 960, when I stopped-off at Mauritania, Senegal and Guinea and then
spent several months in Sierra Leone. Bannerman’s two-volume The Birds
of West and Equatorial Africa (Oliver & Boyd, 1953) was far too bulky to
carry about in the bush, besides which, although it was packed with
information, very few of the birds were illustrated in colour, if at all, unlike
the present guide which is both a convenient size to carry about and has
every bird illustrated in colour.

Field Guide to the Birds of Western Africa by Nik Borrow and Ron
Demey, Helm Field Guides , is published by Christopher Helm, an imprint
of A & C Black Publishers Ltd., London. A paperback, it has 512 pages,
148 colour plates and 1,250 distribution maps. UK price £29.99.

Malcolm Ellis

DVD REVIEW

BIRDKEEPING THE SOUTH AFRICAN WAY
THE FINCHES OF AFRICA

Most of the video/DVD titles available seem to be aimed either at the
pet bird market (those keeping talking parrots etc.) or have been produced
on a tight budget and as a consequence have lower production values. This
DVD, filmed by Eelco Meyjes and scripted and researched by Fred Bamicoat
and Eelco Meyjes, rises above such shortcomings providing as it does useful,
accurate information for the aviculturist combined with superb filming of
the birds in a captive environment.

The DVD covers 70 species including waxbills, mannikins, whydahs,
weavers, sparrows, serins and others. It provides information on their
housing, breeding, feeding etc. together with a useful key and distribution
maps, all accompanied by top quality film work which often includes females
and eclipse plumages where appropriate. The parasitic species (whydahs
and indigobirds or combassous) are introduced alongside their host species
which is useful if breeding is to be attempted. The majority of species
depicted are available outside South Africa and some of the ideas included
have certainly got me thinking of ways to apply them in my own aviaries.

46

DVD REVIEW

There is always a fear with productions from a particular location that
much will not be relevant in other parts of the world, however, there is very
little here that cannot be applied or adapted to UK aviculture, or, presumably
aviculture in the rest of the world, although here in the UK we cannot match
the wonderful South African climate and particularly the availability of
termites as livefood. The only problem I found was the lack of scientific
names which would be useful when the names used on the DVD are different
to those used here.

Birdkeeping the South African Way, Part 2, The Finches of Africa, has a
running time of 58 minutes, is multizone format and is also available on
video. The DVD is priced £18 (US$34) and the video £1 5 (USS28). The
video is available only in PAL format. Prices are inclusive of p & p. Part 1
of the series is available only on video and gives an introduction to aviculture
in South Africa with footage of aviaries and private collections. Part 3,
which is in production, will cover non-native finches in South African
aviculture. All purchases can be made by means of a postal order sent to
Birds of a Feather, PO Box 782403, Sandton 2146, South Africa or
alternatively can be purchased online by visiting the website:
www.birdkeeping-the-sa-way.co.za

Paul Boulden

* * *

NEWS & VIEWS

LITTLE KNOWN AFRICAN BARBET

The latest Bulletin of the African Bird Club Vol.12, No.l, March 2005,
included (pp. 50-52) a profile by Claire Spottiswoode, Peter Leonard and
Michael Mills of the Chaplin’s Barbet Lybius chaplini , a little known African
bird and the only bird species truly endemic to Zambia. To have described
it as “black-and-white”, was not entirely accurate, for it is bright red on the
sides of the forehead back to and below the eyes, the wings look to be dark
brown rather than black and the secondaries are edged with yellow. It
measures 18cm- 19cm (approx. 7in-7V2in) in length and looks to be closely
related to the White-headed species L. leucocephalus . It is almost always
found in open savannah with a scattering of trees. It is especially likely to
be found where the Sycamore Fig Ficus sycomorus is plentiful. This barbet
was first described in 1920 and was named after Sir Drummond Chaplin
who was the Administrator of Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) at the
time. Chaplin’s Barbet is considered Near Threatened by BirdLife
International.

47

SIGNIFICANT DISCOVERY IN CAMBODIA

Last year BirdLife International and the Wildlife Conservation Society
(WCS) announced the discovery of a significant number of the highly
threatened Slender-billed Gyps tenuirostris and White-backed Vultures G.
bengalensis in Indochina. More than 120 birds were counted in Sien Pang
District, north-eastern Cambodia, the largest gathering recorded in Indochina
during the past 15 years.

Most significant was the sighting of at least 28 Slender-billed Vultures,
the rarest of the Asian vultures. This was one of the highest numbers recorded
anywhere in the species’ range during recent years, and at least four times
greater than the previous largest single count in Indochina.

Fortunately diclofenac appears to be rarely used in Cambodia, the greatest
threats appear to be from a lack of available food, persecution through
hunting, capture for the pet trade and for their perceived medicinal value.

A working group has been formed by BirdLife International, WCS, WWF,
and the Ministries of Environment and Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
of the Royal Government of Cambodia, with the aim of coordinating
conservation activities and developing specific action and management
strategies to protect vultures across northern Cambodia. BirdLife
International and WCS believe that the immediate priorities are to ban the
distribution and sale in Cambodia of veterinary medicines that contain
diclofenac, the establishment of a monitoring programme to determine
vulture population sizes and trends, and the protection and monitoring of
breeding sites.

* * *

NEW ARRIVALS AT WADDESDON

For much of last year the Aviary at Waddesdon Manor, near Aylesbury,
Buckinghamshire, was hidden by scaffolding as a major restoration project
took place. It is now resplendent in blue and gold, the gilding in homage to
German Rococo pavilions that inspired its design.

New additions to the collection for 2005 include Fairy Bluebird Irena
puella , Chestnut Thrush Turdus rubrocanus, Orange-headed Ground Thrush
Zoothera citrina, Chestnut-capped Laughingthrush Garrulax mitratus, Omei
Shan Liocichla Liocichla omeiensis. Amethyst Starling Cinnyricinclus
leucogaster, Snowy-crowned Robin Chat Cossypha niveicapilla , Luzon
Bleeding Heart Dove Gallicolumba luzonica and Crested Wood Partridge
Rollulus roulroul.

* * *

48

NEWS & VIEWS

INCREASED INTEREST IN THE KEEPING OF SEABIRDS

Last year a pair of Common Guillemots Uria aalge incubated an egg
and raised a chick at Rotterdam Zoo in the Netherlands. The zoo received
20 Common Guillemots and two Atlantic Puffins Fratercula arctica from a
German breeder. A further four Common Guillemots arrived from Madrid
Zoo. The Pacific Kittiwake Rissa tridactyla pollicaris also bred at Rotterdam
Zoo, as did the King Penguin Aptenodytes patagonica. The zoo also received
10 Ruffs Philomachus pugnax,\0 Redshank Tringa totanus and three
Lapwing Vanellus vanellus from Rheine Zoo, just over the border in Germany.

* * *

GOLDEN KEA DISCOVERED

A so-called “Golden Kea” has been discovered living in the wild in
Fiordland, South Island, New Zealand. It is not of course a new species but
a rare colour form of the normal Kea Nestor notabilis. The plumage of the
bird appears to be mainly yellow or slightly orangish-yellow, that is darker
somewhat brownish or more orangish on the forehead and face, the ear-
coverts are slightly greyish and there is orangish or reddish ‘lacing’ on the
hindneck and to a lesser extent on the back and wing-coverts; the secondaries,
except for the two innermost feathers, are a dull slightly greyish yellow and
the primaries look to be mainly dull greyish-white. The cere looks quite
light, the bill appears dark horn coloured and the toes look pinkish or light
horn coloured.

The last time such a bird is said to have been reported was in 1 896, and
on that occasion it was shot and stuffed. The well-being of this bird is being
treated as paramount and its whereabouts remains a secret that is known to
only a few people, amongst whom are staff of the Department of
Conservation.

The above information came from a cutting from a New Zealand
newspaper, which included a large colour photo of the bird and was sent by
Prof. J. R. (Bob) Hodges, a previous Hon. Editor of th e Avicultural Magazine
(1991-1993). Bob was in New Zealand again during February, March and
April last year but unfortunately found little time for birdwatching. However
he did spend one splendid day at Mount Bruce watching many Kaka N.
meridionalis, some of which had been bred in aviaries there and liberated,
coming into the centre for food. Bob also had an enjoyable afternoon in the
Botanical Garden at Palmerston North inspecting several Blue Ducks
Hymenolaimus malacorhynchos which had been bred there as part of a
conservation project.

PARROTS AND PENGUINS

There were some notable breeding successes at Chester Zoo in 2004.
Princess Parakeets Polytelis alexandrae bred there for the first time,
Humboldt Penguins Spheniscus humboldti bred again and other notable
successes included the breeding of the Blue-eyed Cockatoo Cacatua
ophthalmica , Greater Vasa Parrot Coracopsis vasa and Derbyan Parakeet
Psittacula derbiana. The Keas Nestor notabilis laid eggs that hatched but
unfortunately the chicks failed to survive. Sadly this was also the case with
one of the zoo’s pairs of Hyacinth Macaws. Staff feel sure that both pairs
will become successful parents in the future.

In Zoo Life, Spring 2005, Issue 21, p. 5, Team Leader Andrew Woolham,
a son of Frank Woolham, a former Hon. Editor of the Avicultural Magazine
(1994-1995), also reported that the zoo’s recently completed - Magnificent
Macaws enclosure - now houses a spectacular mix of parrot species including
Blue-throated Macaw Ara glaucogularis, Golden Conur q Guar ub a
guarouba. Red-tailed Amazon Amazona brasiliensis, Blue-throated Conure
Pyrrhura cruentata and Golden-capped Conure Aratinga auricapilla.

Following the demolition of the old parrot conservation centre, the
construction of the new off-show breeding centre is well advanced and staff
are looking forward to moving in the birds and participating in the future
conservation of threatened species such as the Red-vented Cockatoo C.
haematuropygia and Blue-throated Macaw.

* * *

LOSS OF LAST KNOWN POO-ULI

The last known Poo-uli Melamprosops phaeosoma , a member of the
Hawaiian Honey creeper family, died November 26th 2004, barely 30 years
after the species was discovered by college students in 1973. The bird, a
male, that was missing one eye, died in captivity. Because he was growing
old and was apparently doomed to a life without a mate, biologists and
conservationists decided to capture him, in the hope that one or two other
individuals then known to remain might also be captured, thus giving the
species a chance to breed, and survive, in captivity. Sadly, however, despite
arduous searching no others were found and it is probable that the Poo-uli is
now extinct.

3 9088 01551

CONTAIN 1 S

298

The Avicultural Society . 1

Council Meeting . 2

Brotogeris Parakeets and other feral parrots in southern Florida
by Derian A. L. Silva Moraton . 3

The Azure-winged Magpie Cyanopica cyanus : anthropomorphic
and climatic factors in its distribution

by Brian A. G. Hill . 6

Breeding the Yellow-bellied Seedeater Sporophila nigricollis
by Robin Restall . 14

Breeding the Red-and- Yellow Barbet Trachyphonus e.
erythrocephalus

by Colin Scott . 21

The Blue-spotted Wood Dove Turtur afer in field and aviary
by Neville Brickell . 26

The White-headed Mousebird Colius leucocephalus and its
breeding in captivity

by Herbert Schifter . 30

The Vulture Recovery Programme

by Nick Lindsay . . . 36

The relationship between a Carrion Crow and a Magpie

by Robin Restall . : . 39

The society’s visit To Busbridge Lakes

by Philip Schofield . 42

Book Review: Birds of Western Africa . 44

DVD Review: Birdkeeping The South African Way:

The Finches of Africa . 45

News & Views . 46

Published by the Avicultural Society, England.
Produced by Data Publishing Service, Cheddar.